RE: Paris under attack

RE: Paris under attack (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 10:42:10 AM)
I hope you are not aligning me with those that oppose taking in refugees in the US... But as I have always said... there is a significant risk and the vetting process needs to be stringent. This all started with an earlier thread where I made two comments... The first was how it struck me how many fighting aged men where among the refugees and I stated they should be fighting for their homes and families... I stand by that. The second was that I thought people were understating the danger of embedded terrorists and this has already come to pass. I have never advocated NOT taking in some refugees... But i believe there needs to be rules that would make it tough on terrorist trying to hide among refugees. I thought the demands for immediate asylum were and are foolhardy. Butch

thompsonx -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 10:43:17 AM)
If we did that in WW2, we'd all be labelled as yellow-bellied cowards! The history books say that is exactly what you did and exactly what you/chamberlain were/are called to this day. Now if you had ever actually read a history book written for someone beyond the fifth grade you would have known this and would not have stuffed both feet in your mouth at the same time.

mnottertail -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 10:45:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic bullshit. really utter bullshit. on top of bullshit mountain. Mrs. Clinton said her statement, issued the night of Sept. 11, that appeared to attribute the violence to “inflammatory material posted on the Internet,” was actually meant to be a warning to others not to blame the video — something that came to pass anyway. Republicans were incredulous at that explanation, saying her official statement was belied by an email she sent to her daughter and a phone call she made to the Egyptian prime minister, where she said the attack was perpetrated by al Qaeda. “State Department experts knew the truth. You knew the truth. But that’s not what the American people got. And again, the American people want to know why,” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/22/clinton-benghazi-hearing-gowdy-dead-deserve-truth/?page=all Lie on top of lie. If ya want to see bullshit mountain just google "lies - Hillary - Benghazi". Uh, yeah nutsuckers sites all have lie upon lies they tell, like Sun Myung Moons propaganda organ here. http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/10/25/media-dismantle-rep-jim-jordans-smoking-gun-evi/206414 And yet, as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pointed out in questioning Clinton, on the night of Sept. 11 she had issued this statement: "Some have sought to justify the vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet." For ignorant nutsuckers unfamiliar with the English language, well, since nutsuckers are unfamiliar, there is no sense explaining this. They can see nutsuckerism from their house.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 10:46:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx If we did that in WW2, we'd all be labelled as yellow-bellied cowards! The history books say that is exactly what you did and exactly what you/chamberlain were/are called to this day. Now if you had ever actually read a history book written for someone beyond the fifth grade you would have known this and would not have stuffed both feet in your mouth at the same time. Maybe that's what you call us from over there. But I've never heard it said this side of the pond nor when I lived in the US for nine months either. Incidentally, it was the French that turned tails, not the Brits. And..... I never did history at all, ever, in my schooling.

tj444 -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 10:46:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic “They are personally interviewed and thorough background checks are performed by Homeland Security and the FBI,” Legomsky said. “No competent terrorist would choose the U.S. refugee process as a preferred strategy for gaining entry into the U.S.” bears repeating, imo

thompsonx -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:01:14 AM)
ORIGINAL: kdsub This all started with an earlier thread where I made two comments... The first was how it struck me how many fighting aged men where among the refugees and I stated they should be fighting for their homes and families... If they do not support either side why would they join in the conflict? I stand by that. Why? The second was that I thought people were understating the danger of embedded terrorists and this has already come to pass. Just where has it come to pass except in your mind? I have never advocated NOT taking in some refugees... But i believe there needs to be rules that would make it tough on terrorist trying to hide among refugees. I thought the demands for immediate asylum were and are foolhardy. And yet we have never heard you complain about the wet foot dry foot policy towards cuba. Would it not be just as easy for the "commies" to infiltrate the usa via the open door in florida?

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:01:21 AM)
The picture below is from the headline of your story... this is what I am talking about and the figures that they are giving are dead wrong...I circled some of the MEN... one hell of a lot more than 2 percent. Now they can say what they please but all the images i see of the refugees tell a different story. Butch [image]http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k69/Daviskw2004/Untitled-1_zpsldi1dohb.jpg[/image]

Lucylastic -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:03:04 AM)
ooooooooooooooh eeebil refugee men Learn to read and not concentrate on the pretty pictures to form your particular idea of facts..

tj444 -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:04:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I hope you are not aligning me with those that oppose taking in refugees in the US... But as I have always said... there is a significant risk and the vetting process needs to be stringent. This all started with an earlier thread where I made two comments... The first was how it struck me how many fighting aged men where among the refugees and I stated they should be fighting for their homes and families... I stand by that. The second was that I thought people were understating the danger of embedded terrorists and this has already come to pass. I have never advocated NOT taking in some refugees... But i believe there needs to be rules that would make it tough on terrorist trying to hide among refugees. I thought the demands for immediate asylum were and are foolhardy. Butch what rules are needed that you dont have already? do you want them to be waterboarded to see if they are telling the truth before being accepted as a legit refugee? [8\|]

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:09:01 AM)
OK Lucy...I understand... Photoshop... that's what it is...damn Republicans... Butch

Lucylastic -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:09:49 AM)
quote: I hope you are not aligning me with those that oppose taking in refugees in the US why not, you aligned me as justifying the muslim butchers of the paris attack. cant take it dont dish it out.

Lucylastic -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:11:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub OK Lucy...I understand... Photoshop... that's what it is...damn Republicans... Butch Its a fucking video...

mnottertail -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:20:41 AM)
So laura koran explains vetting and there is a picture on the story. Where is the picture, who are in it, are these people vetted and on their way here? Is it a photograph of central park or what? These are not BY DEFINITION Syrian refugees in America..........DUCY? Now, lets open a bag of m and ms. In Europe, they may eat from the bag, here, we only select the green ones. I could throw up a picture of my cock, and say..........looking at the average cock (the girls would know better, and the boys would feel uncomfortable). It isn't necessarily an average cock, but it is a cock. It isn't to be taken out of context. Butch, I remember seeing pictures of you in pantyhose. I also note you were a Major in the Army (or was it the suck?) in any case it is non-sequitur to say that it is the Army uniform of a Major, since there are 2 sentences independently true of your picture...............there is no ergo id est here, no conflagration of the three..... I dont understand the brainclog at all on this.

thompsonx -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:30:26 AM)
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 ORIGINAL: thompsonx If we did that in WW2, we'd all be labelled as yellow-bellied cowards! The history books say that is exactly what you did and exactly what you/chamberlain were/are called to this day. Now if you had ever actually read a history book written for someone beyond the fifth grade you would have known this and would not have stuffed both feet in your mouth at the same time. Maybe that's what you call us from over there. But I've never heard it said this side of the pond nor when I lived in the US for nine months either. Oh my a britt who never heard of nevil chamberlain. Incidentally, it was the French that turned tails, not the Brits. The history books note that the french surrendered on june 22. The evacuation of dunkirk was complete by june 4 leaving the 40,000 french, who protected the britt retreat, to the tender mercies of the germans. And..... I never did history at all, ever, in my schooling. That would explane why you have both feet in your mouth and your head up your ass.

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:30:40 AM)
Many of the proper vetting procedures are already in place...I just do not want these procedures to be put aside to accommodate the rush of refugees. The process may take up to 2 years or longer and I would not release them to the general population until the process was complete... This would mean long term refugee camps. First... I would want proof that they are refugees who face a reasonable certainty that they would be in mortal danger if they remained in their country of origin. Second... Each member of the family undergo multiple background and security checks involving the National Counterterrorism Center; the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center; Homeland Security; and the State Department. Third... for long term, not short term asylum, they are employable and able to reasonably support themselves. Fourth... that they voluntarily produce or sign a legal financial statement listing their resources for eligibility for government aid. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:33:57 AM)
No... I was using satire and just giving back what I receive all the time...and I have no problem taking what is dished out... I have a lot of practice.. strong shoulders and a hard head. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:39:42 AM)
Yes but do you deny...those were men... come on... makes no different if a video or still. It is absolute proof... at least for that group. I have never seen a picture OR video of a large group of refugees with just 2 percent men... If you can show me one with just 2 percent men I can show you hundreds with a hell of a lot more than 2 percent. That figure is wrong and miss leading to anyone that opens their eyes to reality... This lie is not a reason to deny refugees asylum but it sure as hell is not a reason to allow it either. Butch

Lucylastic -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:41:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Many of the proper vetting procedures are already in place...I just do not want these procedures to be put aside to accommodate the rush of refugees. The process may take up to 2 years or longer and I would not release them to the general population until the process was complete... This would mean long term refugee camps. First... I would want proof that they are refugees who face a reasonable certainty that they would be in mortal danger if they remained in their country of origin. Second... Each member of the family undergo multiple background and security checks involving the National Counterterrorism Center; the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center; Homeland Security; and the State Department. Third... for long term, not short term asylum, they are employable and able to reasonably support themselves. Fourth... that they voluntarily produce or sign a legal financial statement listing their resources for eligibility for government aid. Butch Someone would be happy with refugee camps, like the facilities at the borders perhaps? no one has suggested they would be vetted less severely; NO ONE. YOU want proof? no...doesnt work like that, You have already been given a list of the screening activities and its more stringent than your list. DO you expect them to have to report every day to their employer or a ICE/ FBI/CIA person daily as well? These people come over with the clothing on their backs, what do they have that is proof of their eligibility?????

mnottertail -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:42:44 AM)
reply to the Butch post #455. I think they have been sitting in refugee camps in Jordan for quite some time the ones we would take. I doubt with the heavy chicken little stuff going on in America, anything will speed up. In fact, wading thru the nutsucker Governors roadblocks will slow it down.

kdsub -> RE: Paris under attack (11/18/2015 11:47:57 AM)
I see nothing wrong with slowing things down... but... however many we allow apply there must be proper humane areas for them to live during the screening process. I wonder if anyone in the government is figuring how to pay for it and where the camps would be? Butch

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875