House votes to block Syrian refugees


No where in the article does it say they weren't charged - in fact, they've been arrested. Looks like our intelligence/security system works well.
Pipe down. People are serial-denying a variety of things.

1. Assholes like you and that retard kiwi denied that refugees had been charged with crimes. So I posted (repeatedly) the link about the refugees arrested in the US. I've been posting the same shit over and over, apparently you pigs who demand the verification never read it, which tells me you already know about it and you just lie through your teeth anyway.

2. You also have demanded verification that the current admin has relaxed the rules for criminals and terrorists, while tightening down on Christians. Then you started in with with the demented "PROVE THAT THEY WEREN'T ARRESTED!" garbage, lol...And so here's the information about THAT:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway." Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants

Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Nowhere does this show a "tightening down" on Christians. In addition - asylum seekers are not all muslim or even mostly Muslim.

Refugees and Asylees in the United States
The Religious Affiliation of U.S. Immigrants: Majority Christian, Rising Share of Other Faiths

The refugee system is one of the most tightly vetted systems, other avenues of entry like the asylum process is riskier. None show a deliberate persecution of Christians in the process.

Nobody said that they were all muslim. Irrelevant, doesn't deserve a response.
No, it doesn't show a tightening down on Christans, I never said it did. Also irrelevant.

I already showed that the admin was waving in terrorists and criminals, while rejecting Christians. By posting about this:


Raymond Ibrahim: Obama Throws Christian Refugees to Lions

and this:
Administration eases restrictions on asylum seekers with loose terror ties | Fox News -

and then showing you this:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway."
Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Your post claimed the Obama administration was "tightening down" on Christians. I assumed your link was part of that.

So where is the evidence that they are tightening down on Christians? Your source doesn't even get it's terminology right - those Iraqi Christians are not "refugees" - they are asylum seekers that have already recieved asylum and citizenship in Europe.
I provided the evidence. He's sending middle East Christians back and prosecuting them for "lying" on their applications..but muslim and Mexican immigrants who lie on their apps and are caught are given a green light. See the above. Again.
 
"...advocates who work with Christian refugees from Iraq and Syria say Christians are terrorized in U.N. refugee camps — that should have a better system to protect religious minorities — and thus stay away, living instead with private charities or families while on the move. As a result, the advocates say, they are unfairly excluded from the U.N. process."

"Chris Seiple, who works with groups on the ground in Iraq, said he has personal knowledge of cases in which Christians were not given the same access as other religious minorities at the U.S. consulate in Erbil, Iraq."

Why the question of Christian vs. Muslim refugees has become so incredibly divisive
 
"...advocates who work with Christian refugees from Iraq and Syria say Christians are terrorized in U.N. refugee camps — that should have a better system to protect religious minorities — and thus stay away, living instead with private charities or families while on the move. As a result, the advocates say, they are unfairly excluded from the U.N. process."

"Chris Seiple, who works with groups on the ground in Iraq, said he has personal knowledge of cases in which Christians were not given the same access as other religious minorities at the U.S. consulate in Erbil, Iraq."

Why the question of Christian vs. Muslim refugees has become so incredibly divisive

Meanwhile, Obama says...

No religious test...despite the fact that

"...some religious groups–Yazidis and Christian Arabs in particular–have been singled out for slaughter, slavery, and expulsion. Unlike Sunni and Shia Muslims, who theoretically have support from neighboring states, the Yazidis and Christians have no one to save them and nowhere to go.
"As others have pointed out, U.S. law already asks applicants to prove they are victims of religious persecution. The appropriate solution for other people fleeing war-torn countries is to provide temporary shelter and humanitarian relief until the war is over.
"The left has resorted to comparing the Syrian refugees to Jewish refugees fleeing Europe before the Holocaust. (I have debunked that analogy elsewhere.) But saving the Jews of Europe would have required applying a religious test. Jews alone were singled out for extermination. If the U.S. had agreed simply to accept a general group of refugees from Europe, including but not prioritizing Jews, that would have meant saving fewer Jews, by definition. (In fact, after the war, the U.S. prioritized Jewish refugees.)
"Obama chose the term “religious test” because it comes from the Constitution, which prohibits a religious test for public office. But the Constitution does not prohibit a religious test for refugees–and, indeed, without it our policy would be less compassionate.

"In the present crisis, we can and should prioritize Christian and Yazidi refugees, as well as Iraqis of all faiths who helped the U.S. during the war, whom the Obama administration shamefully abandoned. We could also admit Muslim refugees who can show that they qualify for that status due to religious persecution, and perhaps for other compelling reasons."

"A religious test for refugees is not bigotry–and saying so merely poisons public debate, as President Obama, sadly, does so often."

We Absolutely Need a Religious Test for Refugees - Breitbart
 
"...Simply put, some 98% of all refugees belong to the same Islamic sect that ISIS does. And many of them, unsurprisingly, share the same vision—such as the “refugees” who recently murdered some 120 people in France, or the “refugees” who persecute Christian minorities in European camps and settlements."

"As for those who are being raped, slaughtered, and enslaved based on their non-Sunni religious identity—not by Assad, but by so-called “rebel” forces (AKA jihadis)—many of them are being denied refuge in America.
"Thus, although Christians were approximately 10 percent of Syria’s population in 2011, only one percent has been granted refuge in America. This despite the fact that, from a strictly humanitarian point of view—and humanitarianism is the chief reason being cited in accepting refugees, Obama’s “compassion”—Christians should receive priority simply because they are the most persecuted group in the Middle East.
"At the hands of the Islamic State, which supposedly precipitated the migrant crisis, Christians have been repeatedly forced to renounce Christ or die; they have been enslaved and raped; and they have had more than 400 of their churches desecrated and destroyed."

Exposed: Obama’s Love for Jihadi Muslims and Hate for Persecuted Christians
ISIS has committed no such atrocities against fellow Sunnis, they who are being accepted into the U.S. in droves.
 

No where in the article does it say they weren't charged - in fact, they've been arrested. Looks like our intelligence/security system works well.
Pipe down. People are serial-denying a variety of things.

1. Assholes like you and that retard kiwi denied that refugees had been charged with crimes. So I posted (repeatedly) the link about the refugees arrested in the US. I've been posting the same shit over and over, apparently you pigs who demand the verification never read it, which tells me you already know about it and you just lie through your teeth anyway.

2. You also have demanded verification that the current admin has relaxed the rules for criminals and terrorists, while tightening down on Christians. Then you started in with with the demented "PROVE THAT THEY WEREN'T ARRESTED!" garbage, lol...And so here's the information about THAT:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway." Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants

Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Nowhere does this show a "tightening down" on Christians. In addition - asylum seekers are not all muslim or even mostly Muslim.

Refugees and Asylees in the United States
The Religious Affiliation of U.S. Immigrants: Majority Christian, Rising Share of Other Faiths

The refugee system is one of the most tightly vetted systems, other avenues of entry like the asylum process is riskier. None show a deliberate persecution of Christians in the process.

Nobody said that they were all muslim. Irrelevant, doesn't deserve a response.
No, it doesn't show a tightening down on Christans, I never said it did. Also irrelevant.

I already showed that the admin was waving in terrorists and criminals, while rejecting Christians. By posting about this:


Raymond Ibrahim: Obama Throws Christian Refugees to Lions

and this:
Administration eases restrictions on asylum seekers with loose terror ties | Fox News -

and then showing you this:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway."
Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Your post claimed the Obama administration was "tightening down" on Christians. I assumed your link was part of that.

So where is the evidence that they are tightening down on Christians? Your source doesn't even get it's terminology right - those Iraqi Christians are not "refugees" - they are asylum seekers that have already recieved asylum and citizenship in Europe.
Stick this up your terrorist loving asshole. Asshole!
Sen. Sessions Reveals 12 Refugee Jihadis To Shrink Obama's 2016 Refugee Budget
 
No where in the article does it say they weren't charged - in fact, they've been arrested. Looks like our intelligence/security system works well.
Pipe down. People are serial-denying a variety of things.

1. Assholes like you and that retard kiwi denied that refugees had been charged with crimes. So I posted (repeatedly) the link about the refugees arrested in the US. I've been posting the same shit over and over, apparently you pigs who demand the verification never read it, which tells me you already know about it and you just lie through your teeth anyway.

2. You also have demanded verification that the current admin has relaxed the rules for criminals and terrorists, while tightening down on Christians. Then you started in with with the demented "PROVE THAT THEY WEREN'T ARRESTED!" garbage, lol...And so here's the information about THAT:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway." Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants

Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Nowhere does this show a "tightening down" on Christians. In addition - asylum seekers are not all muslim or even mostly Muslim.

Refugees and Asylees in the United States
The Religious Affiliation of U.S. Immigrants: Majority Christian, Rising Share of Other Faiths

The refugee system is one of the most tightly vetted systems, other avenues of entry like the asylum process is riskier. None show a deliberate persecution of Christians in the process.

Nobody said that they were all muslim. Irrelevant, doesn't deserve a response.
No, it doesn't show a tightening down on Christans, I never said it did. Also irrelevant.

I already showed that the admin was waving in terrorists and criminals, while rejecting Christians. By posting about this:


Raymond Ibrahim: Obama Throws Christian Refugees to Lions

and this:
Administration eases restrictions on asylum seekers with loose terror ties | Fox News -

and then showing you this:

"At least 70 percent of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, according to a secret 2009 internal government audit that found many of those cases had been approved anyway."
Audit finds asylum system rife with fraud; approval laws broken with surge of immigrants - Washington Times

Your post claimed the Obama administration was "tightening down" on Christians. I assumed your link was part of that.

So where is the evidence that they are tightening down on Christians? Your source doesn't even get it's terminology right - those Iraqi Christians are not "refugees" - they are asylum seekers that have already recieved asylum and citizenship in Europe.
Stick this up your terrorist loving asshole. Asshole!
Sen. Sessions Reveals 12 Refugee Jihadis To Shrink Obama's 2016 Refugee Budget
She knows, she lies. If she returns now it will be to argue a point that was never made....something like 'that doesn't prove that Mexican immigrants bring disease' as if that was something you asserted it would confirm. Also, she will hit other threads, say the exact same things and if you contest, demand verification and pretend it's the first time she's seen it, and say all the exact same things in the same way. Ah, to be a mindless hack.
 
Facebook post, who knows.

Does anyone know if this is correct?

.
12241397_1217207048305949_4759630911189383180_n.jpg
 
I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one
what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.
This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.
No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Things change and you have to think ahead.
If one were to think ahead, there are only 2 options. Stop accepting refugees and forget about the concept of "give me your tired, and your poor"...or accept them.

Or just not accept the Syrians I guess.
 

Forum List

Back
Top