French - let immigrants int your homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was an article in the new york times a couple of weeks ago about how a lot of Canadians are very enthusiastically taking in Syrian refugees.

Did you see the additional article about the ISIS sympathizer killed before he could detonate a bomb in Canada?

How is that relevant? Canada has a very open immigration policy, period, but they appear to have less violence than our country period.

It's very relevant, given ISIS has stated they would do just this and are succeeding.

But... we're the country that terrorists have attacked successfully, not Canada. So their immigration policy appears to have little to do with it.

Further, maybe their hospitality is actually preventing people from following that ideology.

Oh, and also Syrian =/= terrorist. Syrian people are not all ISIS supporters. I think it is very sad and offensive that they are being looked at that way.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was an article in the new york times a couple of weeks ago about how a lot of Canadians are very enthusiastically taking in Syrian refugees.

Did you see the additional article about the ISIS sympathizer killed before he could detonate a bomb in Canada?

How is that relevant? Canada has a very open immigration policy, period, but they appear to have less violence than our country period.

It's very relevant, given ISIS has stated they would do just this and are succeeding.

But... we're the country that terrorists have attacked successfully, not Canada. So their immigration policy appears to have little to do with it.

Further, maybe their hospitality is actually preventing people from following that ideology.

Oh, and also Syrian =/= terrorist. Syrian people are not all ISIS supporters. I think it is very sad and offensive that they are being looked at that way.

We are not concerned about Syrians being terrorists. There's a two-fold problem here:

1) ISIS stating they will hide amongst refugees and our inability to vet them properly
2) Muslim refugees around the world assaulting and raping women in groups and alone, because their culture allows it.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

If he believes in Sharia, if he supports, Sharia, he would support it being implemented in the US. That's common sense. I am not suggesting he would overthrow our current system to implement it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was an article in the new york times a couple of weeks ago about how a lot of Canadians are very enthusiastically taking in Syrian refugees.

Did you see the additional article about the ISIS sympathizer killed before he could detonate a bomb in Canada?

How is that relevant? Canada has a very open immigration policy, period, but they appear to have less violence than our country period.

It's very relevant, given ISIS has stated they would do just this and are succeeding.

But... we're the country that terrorists have attacked successfully, not Canada. So their immigration policy appears to have little to do with it.

Further, maybe their hospitality is actually preventing people from following that ideology.

ISIS is apparently successful at attracting sympathizers there as well. It doesn't take too many to create chaos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

If he believes in Sharia, if he supports, Sharia, he would support it being implemented in the US. That's common sense. I am not suggesting he would overthrow our current system to implement it.

I don't think Sharia means what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

If he believes in Sharia, if he supports, Sharia, he would support it being implemented in the US. That's common sense. I am not suggesting he would overthrow our current system to implement it.

I don't think Sharia means what you think it means.

I know it is in opposition to our Constitution, and if someone comes to a country with their own set of laws, they adapt to that set of laws. We don't adapt to their's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was an article in the new york times a couple of weeks ago about how a lot of Canadians are very enthusiastically taking in Syrian refugees.

Did you see the additional article about the ISIS sympathizer killed before he could detonate a bomb in Canada?

How is that relevant? Canada has a very open immigration policy, period, but they appear to have less violence than our country period.

It's very relevant, given ISIS has stated they would do just this and are succeeding.

But... we're the country that terrorists have attacked successfully, not Canada. So their immigration policy appears to have little to do with it.

Further, maybe their hospitality is actually preventing people from following that ideology.

Oh, and also Syrian =/= terrorist. Syrian people are not all ISIS supporters. I think it is very sad and offensive that they are being looked at that way.

We are not concerned about Syrians being terrorists. There's a two-fold problem here:

1) ISIS stating they will hide amongst refugees and our inability to vet them properly
2) Muslim refugees around the world assaulting and raping women in groups and alone, because their culture allows it.

There is clearly a problem in the Muslim world regarding treatment of women, I will not argue that.

We also have a crazy death cult terrorizing the world, I will not argue that.

But, neither of these are reasons to close ourselves off to suffering and starving people. They are excuses, and pathetic ones. ISIS is going to find a way to attack us one way or another. It already has. It is the product of a perverse ideology that inspires lone actors almost anywhere in the world.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

If he believes in Sharia, if he supports, Sharia, he would support it being implemented in the US. That's common sense. I am not suggesting he would overthrow our current system to implement it.

That is not common sense to anyone who actually has even a minimal understanding of Sharia. In fact, it is not really common sense to anyone who has common sense. However, even accepting what you say, I don't understand the issue. Are you supporting thought control now? How can you reconcile your allegation that he has a "backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values" while simultaneously suggesting that he is actually living in accordance with liberalized western values (i.e. not going to overthrow current system)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was an article in the new york times a couple of weeks ago about how a lot of Canadians are very enthusiastically taking in Syrian refugees.

Did you see the additional article about the ISIS sympathizer killed before he could detonate a bomb in Canada?

Did you see the article about a white DC metro cop who was arrested for helping ISIS? He also had a stockpile of guns. He apparently made contact with another white ISIS sympathizer from VA who was also arrested. We should not allow in anymore white people in this country either, apparently, and we should keep tabs on all white men, just in case.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/dc-transit-officer-charged-with-aiding-isis/

[Anonymous]

We also need to keep tabs on mateen's wife, apparently. I'm the pp who was interested in that discussion earlier in this thread. Googled it, and yeah...I was always wondering why she should not be charged. Loretta Lynch confirmed, they lost her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the first step towards making it mandatory. Mark my words.

It's not mandatory yet in Sweden? I haven't followed, but they were openly heading that way.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:We also need to keep tabs on mateen's wife, apparently. I'm the pp who was interested in that discussion earlier in this thread. Googled it, and yeah...I was always wondering why she should not be charged. Loretta Lynch confirmed, they lost her.

Here is the quote from Loretta Lynch:

"Right now, I don't know exactly the answer to that," Lynch replied. "I believe she was going to travel but I do not know exactly her location now."

What that means is that Lynch herself didn't know at that moment where Noor Salman was at that moment. That doesn't mean that nobody at the Justice Department or FBI knew where she was at that moment or that they couldn't locate her quickly if wishing to do so.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We also need to keep tabs on mateen's wife, apparently. I'm the pp who was interested in that discussion earlier in this thread. Googled it, and yeah...I was always wondering why she should not be charged. Loretta Lynch confirmed, they lost her.

Here is the quote from Loretta Lynch:

"Right now, I don't know exactly the answer to that," Lynch replied. "I believe she was going to travel but I do not know exactly her location now."

What that means is that Lynch herself didn't know at that moment where Noor Salman was at that moment. That doesn't mean that nobody at the Justice Department or FBI knew where she was at that moment or that they couldn't locate her quickly if wishing to do so.

There's a good chance the precise wording is just her PR spin on the fact that they lost her.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Yes. He's a proponent of Sharia. His son was the hero, not him.

If you are suggesting that he believes Sharia should be implemented in the US, then I hope you can supply a source for your allegation. I have seen no evidence to suggest this and I know from experience that you often make false allegations. Why would you tell lies to besmirch this man's character?

If he believes in Sharia, if he supports, Sharia, he would support it being implemented in the US. That's common sense. I am not suggesting he would overthrow our current system to implement it.

That is not common sense to anyone who actually has even a minimal understanding of Sharia. In fact, it is not really common sense to anyone who has common sense. However, even accepting what you say, I don't understand the issue. Are you supporting thought control now? How can you reconcile your allegation that he has a "backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values" while simultaneously suggesting that he is actually living in accordance with liberalized western values (i.e. not going to overthrow current system)?

Currently living