orogenicman
RMem
Old enough to remember how to make stone tools
Posts: 189
|
Post by orogenicman on Nov 17, 2015 14:39:10 GMT -6
I kinda agree, stopping things now before anything major happens may sound cruel but I think it's necessary. I'm sure most of you have seen on T.V. where the Governors of several states want to put an end to Syrian Refugees settling in their state. I think there is a real reason for concern. More people die every year in this country due to domestic violence than have ever been killed in this country by terrorists. That includes violence across state lines. The efforts we have made to secure this country since 9/11 surpasses any other country that isn't totalitarian in nature. As for the governors, if they were truly concerned about their citizens, then ensuring their liberties certainly should be their primary goal, as indicated by the oath they took for office. Per the U.S. Constitution, jurisdiction over immigration matters falls solely with the Federal government. The states have no jurisdiction on this matter.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 17, 2015 20:44:07 GMT -6
The mistaken notion here rests partly with the idea that it is "a few." "A few" without weapons is nothing much. A few with primitive atomic power bombed Hiroshima. Hi CP. Atomic power is anything but primitive. And those bombs weren't smuggled in, nor did they arrive at their target via the arrival of refugees. They were dropped at high altitude by the armed forces of another country in an effort to stop the war. We allowed thousands of Iraqis into this county, as well as people from Afghanistan. Suddenly Syrian refugees are an issue? The vast majority of Syrian refugees are families (mostly single parents and their children) and the elderly. If we can vet thousands of Iraqis, certainly we can vet Syrian refugees in the same, or more stringent way. Aww.... Come on. Compared to today, atomic power in the mid-1940's was primitive. (At least part of the Manhattan Project happened in my home town, so I may be a shade more aware than others.) And, those first bombs certainly arrived in secret. The point is, it was done by a few, and the ultimate backing is immaterial. "Syrian refugees" are not the issue. That's a "catch phrase." Obviously it's inaccurate since much of what has been crossing the Mediterranean is from North Africa, and admittedly some of that is refugee, too, so it isn't even "refugee" that's the issue. It's the infiltration. And, there are just loads of videos showing the masses of people which show that much of the mass is able-bodied young men regardless of how much the standard media focus is on little kids. Does mama have on the draping? It shouldn't particularly be needed for safety once the people hit a Greek or Italian island.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 17, 2015 20:49:05 GMT -6
I kinda agree, stopping things now before anything major happens may sound cruel but I think it's necessary. I'm sure most of you have seen on T.V. where the Governors of several states want to put an end to Syrian Refugees settling in their state. I think there is a real reason for concern. More people die every year in this country due to domestic violence than have ever been killed in this country by terrorists. That includes violence across state lines. The efforts we have made to secure this country since 9/11 surpasses any other country that isn't totalitarian in nature. As for the governors, if they were truly concerned about their citizens, then ensuring their liberties certainly should be their primary goal, as indicated by the oath they took for office. Per the U.S. Constitution, jurisdiction over immigration matters falls solely with the Federal government. The states have no jurisdiction on this matter. The states have jurisdiction via Congressional action.
|
|
|
Post by lowell on Nov 18, 2015 0:42:05 GMT -6
Jihad is a not a word that has a modern Christian parallel. Tindalus. I agree with carpathianpeasant that there are more than a few that support jihad. I reiterate that my plan would end Islam and therefor end the deaths through jihad of the people who presently identify as Jihadist Muslims, and the "infidels" who in addition to other Muslims are their victims.
I maintain that saving those thousands of lives every year for the next 10,000 years, far outweighs the benefit of keeping Mecca around.
This plan will probably need a bit of secrecy to succeed. The Muslims might move the Black Rock if we openly announce it.
|
|
orogenicman
RMem
Old enough to remember how to make stone tools
Posts: 189
|
Post by orogenicman on Nov 18, 2015 0:54:51 GMT -6
More people die every year in this country due to domestic violence than have ever been killed in this country by terrorists. That includes violence across state lines. The efforts we have made to secure this country since 9/11 surpasses any other country that isn't totalitarian in nature. As for the governors, if they were truly concerned about their citizens, then ensuring their liberties certainly should be their primary goal, as indicated by the oath they took for office. Per the U.S. Constitution, jurisdiction over immigration matters falls solely with the Federal government. The states have no jurisdiction on this matter. The states have jurisdiction via Congressional action. What congressional action would that be?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2015 6:07:42 GMT -6
I kinda agree, stopping things now before anything major happens may sound cruel but I think it's necessary. I'm sure most of you have seen on T.V. where the Governors of several states want to put an end to Syrian Refugees settling in their state. I think there is a real reason for concern. More people die every year in this country due to domestic violence than have ever been killed in this country by terrorists. That includes violence across state lines. The efforts we have made to secure this country since 9/11 surpasses any other country that isn't totalitarian in nature. As for the governors, if they were truly concerned about their citizens, then ensuring their liberties certainly should be their primary goal, as indicated by the oath they took for office. Per the U.S. Constitution, jurisdiction over immigration matters falls solely with the Federal government. The states have no jurisdiction on this matter. If Syrians are allowed to come into this country. Their children born here would be American Citizens....say they become radicalized, and some of them would, that would be the worse case scenario. Imbedded, Lone wolf terrorists would become part of every day life here. It could happen and it will happen if it's not stopped now.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 18, 2015 6:34:23 GMT -6
More people die every year in this country due to domestic violence than have ever been killed in this country by terrorists. That includes violence across state lines. The efforts we have made to secure this country since 9/11 surpasses any other country that isn't totalitarian in nature. As for the governors, if they were truly concerned about their citizens, then ensuring their liberties certainly should be their primary goal, as indicated by the oath they took for office. Per the U.S. Constitution, jurisdiction over immigration matters falls solely with the Federal government. The states have no jurisdiction on this matter. If Syrians are allowed to come into this country. Their children born here would be American Citizens....say they become radicalized, and some of them would, that would be the worse case scenario. Imbedded, Lone wolf terrorists would become part of every day life here. It could happen and it will happen if it's not stopped now. "Syrian" is not an "operative" word. Much of that mass of people is NOT from Syria. And, of those that are, it can safely be assumed many are Christian, so not people to be "radicalized." Furthermore there are already many "Syrian-Americans" who have been American Citizens all their lives and since their grandmother's day.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 18, 2015 6:42:38 GMT -6
The states have jurisdiction via Congressional action. What congressional action would that be? Change the law, give the state authority.
|
|
|
Post by tindalus on Nov 18, 2015 10:45:35 GMT -6
I just wish all Americans had the fortitude that France has. They have clearly stated that they will continue to accept if not increase Syrian refugees. They have no intentions of allowing the terrorists to dictate their way of life.
We are suppose to be a democratic society supposedly with Christian values. The kind of thinking I have heard about refusing Syrian refugees is exactly what happened in 1939 when we refused Jews from entering into this country and sent them back to the concentration camps to die in Germany. Isn't it time that we show that we have compassion and love for our fellow man? Do we have to lower ourselves to the hate that terrorists have continued to show the world?
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 18, 2015 11:18:31 GMT -6
I just wish all Americans had the fortitude that France has. They have clearly stated that they will continue to accept if not increase Syrian refugees. They have no intentions of allowing the terrorists to dictate their way of life. We are suppose to be a democratic society supposedly with Christian values. The kind of thinking I have heard about refusing Syrian refugees is exactly what happened in 1939 when we refused Jews from entering into this country and sent them back to the concentration camps to die in Germany. Isn't it time that we show that we have compassion and love for our fellow man? Do we have to lower ourselves to the hate that terrorists have continued to show the world? Repeat: "Syrian" is not an "operative" word. Much of that mass of people is NOT from Syria.
|
|
|
Post by tindalus on Nov 18, 2015 11:28:23 GMT -6
How do you know? They could be from either Syria, Iraq, or any of the surrounding nations that have been attacked by by ISIS. Either way, they aren't terrorists. They are people who are seeking help and safety from the violence in the middle EAST. They deserve to be treated with respect and help.
I will also point out that we do have rigorous background checks where as in Greece there is little to none. Also they are dealing with hundreds of thousands were as we are only discussing 10,000. We should accept more, but that isn't my decision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2015 12:37:26 GMT -6
I just wish all Americans had the fortitude that France has. They have clearly stated that they will continue to accept if not increase Syrian refugees. They have no intentions of allowing the terrorists to dictate their way of life. We are suppose to be a democratic society supposedly with Christian values. The kind of thinking I have heard about refusing Syrian refugees is exactly what happened in 1939 when we refused Jews from entering into this country and sent them back to the concentration camps to die in Germany. Isn't it time that we show that we have compassion and love for our fellow man? Do we have to lower ourselves to the hate that terrorists have continued to show the world? I think everyone would like to be fair minded when it comes to these poor souls, however it's really sticking your neck out. Things may change later on but for right now NO. The fortitude of the French......They are the most wishy washy people on the planet. Very quick with the white flag.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 18, 2015 12:56:18 GMT -6
How do you know? They could be from either Syria, Iraq, or any of the surrounding nations that have been attacked by by ISIS. Either way, they aren't terrorists. They are people who are seeking help and safety from the violence in the middle EAST. They deserve to be treated with respect and help. I will also point out that we do have rigorous background checks where as in Greece there is little to none. Also they are dealing with hundreds of thousands were as we are only discussing 10,000. We should accept more, but that isn't my decision. So, you think the people from North Africa are from Syria, Iraq and surrounding nations making their way a few hundred miles to North Africa when they can cross to Europe via Turkey? Doesn't make sense to me, and that's apart from media reports.
|
|
|
Post by tindalus on Nov 18, 2015 13:29:36 GMT -6
We were actually talking about the ones coming in from Greece, but either way, they find the path that they think they can escape. The path can be circuitous or straight, depending on how they feel they can successfully escape the onslaught in the current battle grounds and they do appear to be mainly, though probably not solely, from Syria. But, I haven't seen any statistics estimating the percentages Not knowing enough about why different escape routes were chosen you would need to either find some additional information or ask them why.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on Nov 18, 2015 14:30:34 GMT -6
We were actually talking about the ones coming in from Greece, but either way, they find the path that they think they can escape. The path can be circuitous or straight, depending on how they feel they can successfully escape the onslaught in the current battle grounds and they do appear to be mainly, though probably not solely, from Syria. But, I haven't seen any statistics estimating the percentages Not knowing enough about why different escape routes were chosen you would need to either find some additional information or ask them why. Sorry, but according to my fairly reliable sources' video news reports (Ruptly is one media source) a hefty percentage of the "refugees" are actually economic migrants. Wikipedia Description Ruptly is a video news agency financed by the Russian government,[1] specializing in video on demand belonging to the Russian based RT televised news network based in Berlin, Germany.
|
|