What Exactly Is "Hysterical Fear" After Muslim Terrorist Attacks in Paris and Mali?

[ChrisL]

Here's another one for the ignoramuses:

Christian Identity

And another:

Aryan Nations

Who cares? This has nothing to do with the REAL problems immigration causes. We are currently lacking good jobs, a lot of our own people are suffering right now with 35% of them collecting some form of social services support. Why would we take in immigrants at our own peril? That is nothing but stupid.

 

[ChrisL]

Let their oil rich Arab neighbors take them in.

 

[idb]

Here are the leading causes of death in the US:

ISIS didn't make the list.

Neither did Muslims.

Neither did Ebola.

Neither did Obama.


In fact, you are way, way, way more likely to be shot to death by someone you know than to be killed by ISIS.


So...yeah. Hysterical fear. Yes. Definitely.

So should we just open our borders and let in every radical who has declared Jihad on the USA?

Nope. But we should let in the refugees who are seeking protection from those radical jihadists.

Why does this not penetrate your thick skull?

Why?

The people who died on 9/11 and in Paris might take issue with your attitude, if they were still here.

Only if they were as retarded as you are. I think most of them would know there is a huge difference between a jihadist and a refugee, unlike you.

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

67% of refugees referred to the US by the UN are children under the age of 12 and women.

Your figure of 62% male refers to refugees in Europe.

 

[daws101]

Here are the leading causes of death in the US:

ISIS didn't make the list.

Neither did Muslims.

Neither did Ebola.

Neither did Obama.


In fact, you are way, way, way more likely to be shot to death by someone you know than to be killed by ISIS.


So...yeah. Hysterical fear. Yes. Definitely.

So should we just open our borders and let in every radical who has declared Jihad on the USA?

Nope. But we should let in the refugees who are seeking protection from those radical jihadists.

Why does this not penetrate your thick skull?

Why?

The people who died on 9/11 and in Paris might take issue with your attitude, if they were still here.

Only if they were as retarded as you are. I think most of them would know there is a huge difference between a jihadist and a refugee, unlike you.

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

 

[bripat9643]

So should we just open our borders and let in every radical who has declared Jihad on the USA?

Nope. But we should let in the refugees who are seeking protection from those radical jihadists.

Why does this not penetrate your thick skull?

Why?

The people who died on 9/11 and in Paris might take issue with your attitude, if they were still here.

Only if they were as retarded as you are. I think most of them would know there is a huge difference between a jihadist and a refugee, unlike you.

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

I haven't seen anyone debunk it.

 

[idb]

Nope. But we should let in the refugees who are seeking protection from those radical jihadists.

Why does this not penetrate your thick skull?

Why?

Only if they were as retarded as you are. I think most of them would know there is a huge difference between a jihadist and a refugee, unlike you.

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

I haven't seen anyone debunk it.

"The origin of the Republicans' claim is a statistic showing that 62% of immigrants and refugees who arrived in the EU by sea during 2015 were male. That is true, but the statistic does not claim that 62% are "military-age," just that they are male, so that includes children and older men as well. And, of course, 62% is not 72%. Also, that is not a statistic about Syrian refugees. That statistic is about all immigrants arriving by sea. Half of the immigrants were from other countries. Over the summer, large numbers of migrants from Africa attempted to enter the EU by crossing the Mediterranean. The migration from Africa was major news culminating in the horrible capsizing of a Portuguese merchant vessel in which over 800 migrants died. The reason that slightly more (62%) than half of the migrants arriving in the EU by boat were male is presumably related to a slightly highly willingness to risk the dangerous journey from Africa in overloaded and low quality boats, not anything to do with Syria.

The actual numbers, shown on the right, come from the United Nations, which has performed an exhaustive study of 2.1 million Syrian refugees. 51% of the Syrian refugees are children, which is slightly more than in the Syrian population as a whole. While 25% are adult males, we do not have data on what portion of that 25% are "military-age." Presumably a significant portion of that orange slice is men who are older than "military-age."
Syrian Refugees Are Not Military-Age Men

 

[daws101]

Nope. But we should let in the refugees who are seeking protection from those radical jihadists.

Why does this not penetrate your thick skull?

Why?

Only if they were as retarded as you are. I think most of them would know there is a huge difference between a jihadist and a refugee, unlike you.

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

I haven't seen anyone debunk it.

because you have not looked, even if you did you'd scream it's a lie or some other shit to avoid admitting you were talking out your ass.
,

 

[bripat9643]

the problem is that no one can tell them apart. BTW, where are the women and children and old people in the so-called refugees? Why are the vast majority of them men in their 20s and 30s?

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

I haven't seen anyone debunk it.

because you have not looked, even if you did you'd scream it's a lie or some other shit to avoid admitting you were talking out your ass.
,

Why would I bother looking for your evidence? You don't seem to understand how a debate works.

 

[daws101]

The vast majority are children under the age of 14, women, and older men. A male, 20 - 30 years of age, is an obvious red flag in the screening process and most have not made it through.

You're obviously an idiot because 62% of the so-called "refugees" are males of military age.

False! there at least 2 posts that debunk that bullshit.

I haven't seen anyone debunk it.

because you have not looked, even if you did you'd scream it's a lie or some other shit to avoid admitting you were talking out your ass.
,

Why would I bother looking for your evidence? You don't seem to understand how a debate works.

wrong al you have to do is read the thread .
instead you proved my point :" even if you did you'd scream it's a lie or some other shit to avoid admitting you were talking out your ass."
thanks for again putting you idiocy on public view!

 

[Redfish]

LOL, from the Washington post and "senior administration officials". and you are so fricken naïve that you believe it. sad, truly sad.

As opposed to someone named Redfish on the internet. I'll take Mr. Milbank, the Post, and Time with an unnamed quote in every instance.

its a free country, you can believe whatever you want. I really don't give a shit what you believe. your opinions have no value or credence, but I support your right to state them.

But....but I thought it was 'fricken naive' to quote unnamed sources. And yet you do it regularly.

What happened to your mantra of 'prove them wrong' when we asked you to back the drivel spewed by some random WordPress blog post you cited?

Sigh......'fricken naive' indeed.

everyone on this silly message board is posting their opinions. Anyone can find a cite to support their opinions, so claiming that one is valid and another is not is bullshit.

And it was citing unnamed sources that you found 'fricken naive'. Yet you do exactly that. And with sources far less credible than the Washington Post: random WordPress blogs.

And yet when asked to back the narrative you presented from the blog with actual evidence, you shriek "prove its wrong!!". Wouldn't that standard apply just as fully to the 'senior administration officials'?

Or do your standards not apply to you?

did you bother to read my post or are you intellectually ignorant?

 

[Redfish]

Christians do not believe in murder, neither do conservatives. The KKK was neither Christian or conservative. nor was it liberal, but it was made up primarily of democrats.

spin that however you like. David Duke was not a Christian or a conservative. He was, and is, a white racist Nazi. He represents no one but himself and a tiny minority of idiots.

bullshit! if Christians don't believe in murder why the **** do they do so much of it?
the they are not real Christians ploy will not wash .they are just as Christian from there pov than any other.
stop rationalizing .

Other than the crusades, when have Christians killed in the name of Christianity?
Do you know anything about the crusades? Do you know why Christian Europe decided to rid the world of Islam? Do you know how much territory and how many millions the muslims killed before stopped by the crusadrers?

like all libs, you rant and rave from ignorance. you are quite pathetic.

Which of the world wars was waged in the name of Jesus?

When did a murderer ever scream "praise Jesus" before blowing himself up and killing innocents?

rationalize this much over what you had for dinner too?

What I said was true, no rationalization needed.

David Duke lived about two miles from me and worked out at the same health club that I belong to. He was, and is, an asshole. He is as far right as anyone could possibly be.

What I said about the KKK of the past being made up of mostly democrats is true, and it was during that time that the KKK lynched and burned. Today's KKK is a bunch of idiot rednecks who are too stupid to even know how stupid they are.

I know you lefties want to tie the conservative movement to the KKK, but it won't work.

Klansmen were and are extreme right wing. Always have been, always will be.

A simple fact of life you can't swallow.

Another fact you can't swallow is that the Democratic party once had a lot of right wing conservatives in it. Especially in the South.

In fact, that is exactly why JFK was visiting Dallas on November 22, 1963. The right wing members of the Democratic party were going to cost him the 1964 re-election, and he was there to woo them.

correct, the KKK was extreme right fringe and the dem party has become extreme left fringe.

for the record, JFK was not shot by a klansman. He was shot by an America-hating liberal.

 

[Redfish]

ISIS has learned our pants shitters are ******* terrified of them. ISIS has learned they only need to kill a few Westerners and we curl up in the fetal position.

This is pathetic.

the solution is easy. blow them all into tiny pieces. Putin and Hollande and the king of Jordan understand this, obozo and you libtards never will.

 

[daws101]

ISIS has learned our pants shitters are ******* terrified of them. ISIS has learned they only need to kill a few Westerners and we curl up in the fetal position.

This is pathetic.

the solution is easy. blow them all into tiny pieces. Putin and Hollande and the king of Jordan understand this, obozo and you libtards never will.

ok! you be the first to volunteer

 

[Redfish]

ISIS has learned our pants shitters are ******* terrified of them. ISIS has learned they only need to kill a few Westerners and we curl up in the fetal position.

This is pathetic.

the solution is easy. blow them all into tiny pieces. Putin and Hollande and the king of Jordan understand this, obozo and you libtards never will.

ok! you be the first to volunteer

We have a volunteer military. They are ready and able to eliminate ISIS if only obozo would let them do it.

 

[g5000]

ISIS has learned our pants shitters are ******* terrified of them. ISIS has learned they only need to kill a few Westerners and we curl up in the fetal position.

This is pathetic.

the solution is easy. blow them all into tiny pieces. Putin and Hollande and the king of Jordan understand this, obozo and you libtards never will.

We have done more than France and Jordan and your hero Putin have done combined, useful idiot.


After ISIS is blown into tiny pieces, it would require at least ten years of occupation to prevent another terrorist organization from filling the vacuum. I have yet to hear any of you pants shitting chickenhawks say we should commit the next two or three presidents to such a thing.

You whined your pointy little heads off when Obama committed the US to an anti-nuclear agreement with Iran for the next ten years. I just don't see you tards rogering up on him committing our military to an occupation of Syria for ten years.

You blame Obama for ISIS for not keeping up troop levels in Iraq. Well, it would require massive troop levels in Syria after we blew ISIS to bits.

You dumb shits have gone and painted yourselves into a corner. You want to destroy ISIS? Tell the country we will have to stay there for ten years, and see where that gets you.

 

[daws101]

ISIS has learned our pants shitters are ******* terrified of them. ISIS has learned they only need to kill a few Westerners and we curl up in the fetal position.

This is pathetic.

the solution is easy. blow them all into tiny pieces. Putin and Hollande and the king of Jordan understand this, obozo and you libtards never will.

ok! you be the first to volunteer

We have a volunteer military. They are ready and able to eliminate ISIS if only obozo would let them do it.

Just as I thought you're a chicken shit .
Do you always start shit that you are too much of a coward to finish?