Here is what I don't understand about the Syrian refuge bill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

Because their families came to those countries as refugees or immigrants and now their children are becoming radicalized. Belgium and France have the most Isis fighters in Europe.

[Anonymous]

We are in more danger from radicalized Americans than we are from these refugees who are fleeing terror themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

I think that is what happened with Timothy McVey. Wait, that doesn't sound right . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

Because blood is thicker than water. While citizenships are acquired and relinquished freely, the cultural background is the baggage that stays with you till death.

How positively Shakespearean. But I'm pretty sure citizenships aren't actually acquired freely. By the way, can you identify the cultural background gene for us? Thanks.

What are you talking about? Gene? You need to look up cultural?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

How many Syrians have you met?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

How many Syrians have you met?

Probably 100s. Maybe even more. My earliest memory of meeting a Syrian was when I was introduced to my grandmother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

How many Syrians have you met?

Not a pp, but a met some. In the camps near Petra and Jerash. i also what they left after themselves in Hungary. Scary.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

So any attack on America by a Syrian will be our fault?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

How many Syrians have you met?

Not a pp, but a met some. In the camps near Petra and Jerash. i also what they left after themselves in Hungary. Scary.

What did they leave?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

So any attack on America by a Syrian will be our fault?

If you accept responsibility for every unjustified gun death in the US, I'll accept responsibility for attacks by Syrian refugees.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

So any attack on America by a Syrian will be our fault?

If you accept responsibility for every unjustified gun death in the US, I'll accept responsibility for attacks by Syrian refugees.

You specifically said that the Syrians will assimilate unless we are not racist. Are you saying that it will be our fault if a Syrian refugee turns on us, yes or no.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

So any attack on America by a Syrian will be our fault?

If you accept responsibility for every unjustified gun death in the US, I'll accept responsibility for attacks by Syrian refugees.

You specifically said that the Syrians will assimilate unless we are not racist. Are you saying that it will be our fault if a Syrian refugee turns on us, yes or no.

Define "turns on us".

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that we know that two of the people involved in the Paris attack are citizens of France and one is a citizen from Belgium. They have a Syrian passport for one of the people, but they have confirmed that it was stolen or a fake; thought they do know that this man entered Europe via Turkey and claimed to be a refugee.

So why are we trying to keep Syrians out when the wrong doers are citizens of France and Belgium. Even the "shoe bomber" was traveling on a British passport. If you are concerned about terrorists coming to America, isn't this legislation too narrow?

You have correctly identified my objection to importation of refugees. It's not that I think the refugees are terrorists, almost none of them are. It's the children of Muslim immigrants who are radicalized. I have zero desire to replicate the failure of Europe in absorbing large numbers of Muslims. And yes, I am aware how politically incorrect that sounds, and that it is only a small percentage of horrific apples ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful Muslims.

i was about to write the same thing, but not as articulately. we need to look at the long term consequences and not make rash decisions to grow a population thst will be very difficult to assimalate (sp).

I can only assume that those of you who believe Syrians will be hard to assimilate have never met an actual Syrian. These folks will assimilate quite easily, at least as long as they don't encounter a solid wall of prejudice, fear, and hatred.

So any attack on America by a Syrian will be our fault?

If you accept responsibility for every unjustified gun death in the US, I'll accept responsibility for attacks by Syrian refugees.

You specifically said that the Syrians will assimilate unless we are not racist. Are you saying that it will be our fault if a Syrian refugee turns on us, yes or no.

Define "turns on us".

If one of the refugees attacks a westerner without being provoked to do so.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:If one of the refugees attacks a westerner without being provoked to do so.

No, that would not be our fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We are in more danger from radicalized Americans than we are from these refugees who are fleeing terror themselves.

I am a PP who objects to refugees from radicalized Middle Eastern countries, and I agree with you that the threat of local violence is far greater than terrorist violence. There is a much higher chance of me dying in a car crash than airplane crash. We have more car travel than airplanes. But it doesn't mean we aren't going to try and make plane travel safe.

Which, by the way, the only reason I have to take my shoes off at the airport is because of home grown Islamic terrorists.