Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
LOUISVILLE, Kentucky (AP) — From a Kentucky college town, two Iraqi refugees plotted to send sniper rifles, Stinger missiles and money to al-Qaida operatives waging an insurgency back home against U.S. troops. The scheme was foiled and both are in prison, but the case has left jitters about whether extremists might slip in among Syrian refugees resettling in the U.S.
The two men had been involved in insurgent attacks in Iraq before arriving in Bowling Green, Kentucky, in 2009 as part of a U.S. program to help displaced Iraqis. Their plan unraveled when they teamed up with an FBI informant, leading to their 2011 arrest.
Neither Waad Ramadan Alwan nor Mohanad Shareef Hammadi was charged with plotting to launch attacks inside the U.S., and authorities said their weapons and money never made it to Iraq. But their plotting in a middle-American city of 61,000 has given ammunition to opponents of allowing Syrian refugees into the U.S. following the deadly attacks last week in Paris.
Sen. Rand Paul, who is vying for the Republican presidential nomination, pointed to the case in his hometown this week while touting legislation to block President Barack Obama's goal of bringing 10,000 additional Syrian refugees to the U.S.
Some lawmakers pointed to a Syrian passport found with the body of one of the Paris suicide bombers as a reminder of the risks, but a top German security official later said the passport might have been a fake intended to stoke fears about refugees.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, also of Kentucky, said the case proves that "the ability to vet people coming from that part of the world is really quite limited. And so that's why I, for one, don't feel particularly comforted by the assertion that our government can vet these refugees."
Hey, dumbass, nobody ever said that this is not a possibility! Of course it is! However, you can't refuse safe haven to thousands only because one or two or five of them might be massmurdering fuckheads!
Also, observe that this story is about IRAQI refugees and this story is from 2011.
For fuck's sake already.
Of course they're dragging this story up right now just to FEAR MONGER a little more! That is what the American press does. Well, most press around the world. Fear = readers = business.
I have news for you, sparky: You are not safe when you wake up in the morning, you are not safe when you cross a street and you're DEFINITELY not safe when you're driving down the highway.
Deal with it.
You all say freedom is not free - you Americans love to say that - yeah and it's true. It is not free. If you want to be free, you have to accept a certain amount of danger, uncertainty, lack of control. If not, go ahead and wall yourselves in, be the world's biggest pussies so that everyone loses any speck of respect for you. What you do not seem to understand though, is that way you're also giving up that precious freedom of yours - that way you are willingly becoming prisoners of FEAR.
One thing that you - whatever 'you' are (I don't want to sack you all into a 'conservative' category) keep IGNORING is that all of this is a DIRECT result of US imperialist actions over the past century or two. The same thing goes to Europe. I'm not saying what is happening is justified - it's not justified - but it could have been expected. You can't do what Europe and US have done in Middle East and NOT face any consequences - that is just not the way the motherfucking cookie crumbles.
Receiving Syrian refugees is the LEAST you can do to try to at least minimally make up for the horrors your past governments have helped to cause over there. You are a democracy, all that was done in your name. You are enjoying cheap oil so now you get to face the consequences of that cheap oil = fear and uncertainty, and refugees.
Get it? Probably not. I just spent five minutes talking to a wall. Of course.
You can refuse refuge to anyone for several reasons. One of them is, do they pose a threat to the host nation? Is their religion even compatible with the laws of the host nation? Are they willing to become a member of that host nation's society, or are they going to create little enclaves inside that nation to create their own society? Despite what you think, there are immigration laws that prevent anyone from legally coming here, regardless of how screwed up the circumstances in their home nation are.Hey, dumbass, nobody ever said that this is not a possibility! Of course it is! However, you can't refuse safe haven to thousands only because one or two or five of them might be massmurdering fuckheads!
Also, observe that this story is about IRAQI refugees and this story is from 2011.
For fuck's sake already.
Of course they're dragging this story up right now just to FEAR MONGER a little more! That is what the American press does. Well, most press around the world. Fear = readers = business.
I have news for you, sparky: You are not safe when you wake up in the morning, you are not safe when you cross a street and you're DEFINITELY not safe when you're driving down the highway.
Deal with it.
You all say freedom is not free - you Americans love to say that - yeah and it's true. It is not free. If you want to be free, you have to accept a certain amount of danger, uncertainty, lack of control. If not, go ahead and wall yourselves in, be the world's biggest pussies so that everyone loses any speck of respect for you. What you do not seem to understand though, is that way you're also giving up that precious freedom of yours - that way you are willingly becoming prisoners of FEAR.
One thing that you - whatever 'you' are (I don't want to sack you all into a 'conservative' category) keep IGNORING is that all of this is a DIRECT result of US imperialist actions over the past century or two. The same thing goes to Europe. I'm not saying what is happening is justified - it's not justified - but it could have been expected. You can't do what Europe and US have done in Middle East and NOT face any consequences - that is just not the way the motherfucking cookie crumbles.
Receiving Syrian refugees is the LEAST you can do to try to at least minimally make up for the horrors your past governments have helped to cause over there. You are a democracy, all that was done in your name. You are enjoying cheap oil so now you get to face the consequences of that cheap oil = fear and uncertainty, and refugees.
Get it? Probably not. I just spent five minutes talking to a wall. Of course.
You can refuse refuge to anyone for several reasons. One of them is, do they pose a threat to the host nation? Is their religion even compatible with the laws of the host nation? Are they willing to become a member of that host nation's society, or are they going to create little enclaves inside that nation to create their own society? Despite what you think, there are immigration laws that prevent anyone from legally coming here, regardless their screwed up circumstances in their home nation.
America is supposed to be a melting-pot, not a group of nations under one roof. That's the UN.
Which means what?You can refuse refuge to anyone for several reasons. One of them is, do they pose a threat to the host nation? Is their religion even compatible with the laws of the host nation? Are they willing to become a member of that host nation's society, or are they going to create little enclaves inside that nation to create their own society? Despite what you think, there are immigration laws that prevent anyone from legally coming here, regardless their screwed up circumstances in their home nation.
America is supposed to be a melting-pot, not a group of nations under one roof. That's the UN.
I have one word for you: Chinatown.
Hey, dumbass, nobody ever said that this is not a possibility! Of course it is! However, you can't refuse safe haven to thousands only because one or two or five of them might be massmurdering fuckheads!
Also, observe that this story is about IRAQI refugees and this story is from 2011.
For fuck's sake already.
Of course they're dragging this story up right now just to FEAR MONGER a little more! That is what the American press does. Well, most press around the world. Fear = readers = business.
I have news for you, sparky: You are not safe when you wake up in the morning, you are not safe when you cross a street and you're DEFINITELY not safe when you're driving down the highway.
Deal with it.
You all say freedom is not free - you Americans love to say that - yeah and it's true. It is not free. If you want to be free, you have to accept a certain amount of danger, uncertainty, lack of control. If not, go ahead and wall yourselves in, be the world's biggest pussies so that everyone loses any speck of respect for you. What you do not seem to understand though, is that way you're also giving up that precious freedom of yours - that way you are willingly becoming prisoners of FEAR.
One thing that you - whatever 'you' are (I don't want to sack you all into a 'conservative' category) keep IGNORING is that all of this is a DIRECT result of US imperialist actions over the past century or two. The same thing goes to Europe. I'm not saying what is happening is justified - it's not justified - but it could have been expected. You can't do what Europe and US have done in Middle East and NOT face any consequences - that is just not the way the motherfucking cookie crumbles.
Receiving Syrian refugees is the LEAST you can do to try to at least minimally make up for the horrors your past governments have helped to cause over there. You are a democracy, all that was done in your name. You are enjoying cheap oil so now you get to face the consequences of that cheap oil = fear and uncertainty, and refugees.
Get it? Probably not. I just spent five minutes talking to a wall. Of course.
You can refuse refuge to anyone for several reasons. One of them is, do they pose a threat to the host nation? Is their religion even compatible with the laws of the host nation? Are they willing to become a member of that host nation's society, or are they going to create little enclaves inside that nation to create their own society? Despite what you think, there are immigration laws that prevent anyone from legally coming here, regardless their screwed up circumstances in their home nation.
America is supposed to be a melting-pot, not a group of nations under one roof. That's the UN.
I have one word for you: Chinatown.
Numbnuts thinks Chinatown in a few American cities is doing the same as what Muslims always do when they have sufficient numbers to create an enclave in a host country, cutting themselves off from the rest of that society. There are parts of France that have been taken over by Muslims. You wouldn't be safe to walk the streets in those areas if you're a non-muslim. Multiculturalism on parade: French police can’t enter 750 Muslim enclavesYou can refuse refuge to anyone for several reasons. One of them is, do they pose a threat to the host nation? Is their religion even compatible with the laws of the host nation? Are they willing to become a member of that host nation's society, or are they going to create little enclaves inside that nation to create their own society? Despite what you think, there are immigration laws that prevent anyone from legally coming here, regardless their screwed up circumstances in their home nation.
America is supposed to be a melting-pot, not a group of nations under one roof. That's the UN.
I have one word for you: Chinatown.
What do Chinese people have to do with radical islam?
Timothy McVeigh was an agnostic.Well, let's see, Timothy McViegh and Terry Nichols were rightwingnut extremists. Therefore, we should lock up all American rightwingnut extremists because they might blow up another building. After all, two of them have done that, already.
Tim turned into an atheist that hated capitalism. YOU do the math..Well, let's see, Timothy McViegh and Terry Nichols were rightwingnut extremists. Therefore, we should lock up all American rightwingnut extremists because they might blow up another building. After all, two of them have done that, already.
Well, let's see, Timothy McViegh and Terry Nichols were rightwingnut extremists. Therefore, we should lock up all American rightwingnut extremists because they might blow up another building. After all, two of them have done that, already.
