You are asking a question that you already know the answer to.

 

It's a rhetorical question. :

 

Its called being politically correct. The TSA will rape grandma in a wheel chair but let a muslim go through with a tactical nuke in their carry on just to be politically correct...

 

I can guarantee they'll be searched before they come over. Glad I could ease your worries :thumb:

 

Like all the south americans that crossed the southern border ?

Kinda like how all the MS 13 gangs were all searched so that none of them ever set up shop in the good old US of A ?

 

Medieval Man - I wish you had started a thread to just ask basic questions about how/why people think about various (more general) issues concerning muslims and muslim migration.

The reason I say that is that I would like to understand a number of things about why people who promote this influx are truly unconcerned about things like 'taqiyya' and its relevance to how we should view the overall muslim population. It is so hard to trust anyone when one knows that their chosen books of reference specifically promote the idea of lying in the name of their leader who was a liar of the worst kind it seems. How do they explain this away?

I would also like to know why people seem unconcerned that most of the imports will be 'undocumented' young males (and what they might wonder about where the families of those males are and why they might have been left behind). We all know it is a lie to say that most of the migrants admitted will be women and small children. Why is it ok to know that these young men left their families behind and do you view them as cowards or what for doing so to supposedly 'save' themselves?

I have no prejudices against good people of any colour, creed, religion, etc. but how can we know they are good people even when they do speak up to protest the massacres, ISIS, etc. if they are bound to follow an ideology that appears to sanction (or worse, dictate) that they lie to us about what they really think and support?

And if extremists (as many pieces I have read written about muslims say) are the only ones who do not adhere to what people say is true Islamic doctrine which includes the concept of taquiyya and if those extremists always tell the truth - and that truth is that they wish to subjugate and murder anyone who is not of their particular ideology - then what does that say about the so-called masses of muslims who claim to be moderate and who DO follow their faith 'religiously'?

Today I read about a man who was beaten cruelly by Muslims in his British neighbourhood because years ago he converted to Christianity (and for that reason he was forced to leave his native Pakistan as well). How can we know that all the muslims around him (except those few hoodlums who beat him) really DO accept that he has the right to do what he wants with his own life, to believe what he wants to believe - when the scriptures they believe in so fervently apparently say the opposite?

I would love some who are on the O thought train side to address issues like this (rationally - let's not have a political war here) ... tell me what YOU really think about these things and why you really want these people here in the west at this point.

But, I digress .. you asked, as Red* Lion said, a question to which you already know the answer - and I don't really think that you connected those two things very well at all either in that the latter is something that is done to all by an unscrupulous ineffective group of people (who I don't trust either!) and I doubt that will change one way or the other if millions of muslims come to this country.

 

Here is why Im not worried. We have historically been a nation of charity and a nation of immigrants. To block these immigrants because we are scared of getting hurt is more damaging to us than to accept them and then to be hurt if there are terrorists.

I think we should accept them, and if there happen to be terrorists in the mix, we will lay waste to the ones that spawned them.

The crying and hand wringing by the right about fear of muslims is similar to the liberal handwringing about fear of gun violence.

We have done more damage to ourselves from 9/11 than the terrorists.

 

:

Why does Obama's Transportation Security Agency (TSA) insist on pat searching women and 3 year olds at every airport in the country?

Because they're all closet rapists and pedophiles? Just asking!

 

Two things to note.

Women have been suicide bombers.

Obama has no problem dropping bombs on Syrians were they live, no matter if male or female, and no matter their age. He doesn't necessarily care about them if they're anywhere close to a target he approves of taking out. If he cared, he wouldn't put up with the level of collateral damage drone strikes have on the Syrian civilian population and infrastructure. So he's rather hypocritical on the issue. Someone here not wanting refuges isn't nearly as bad as him being part of the cause they are refuges in the first place.

 

Apparently he does. Report today that US air strikes are bringing their ordnance back to base 75% of the time. Obama wants zero civilian casualties is the stated excuse. Doing just like Lyndon Johnson during Vietnam. Stupidest policy imaginable - all it does is stretch out the period of conflict, so in the end you have MORE casualties, not less.

The French and especially the Russians are going to do the job right, leaving the USA with no influence in the region whatsoever.

 

Trust, but verify.

Nobody I know or have talked to wants to let all these refugees in without any checks, searches, or subsequent follow ups and surveillance. Only the caricature of liberals created by right wing extremists who don't try to understand the other side, but are instead only interested in creating a straw man they can burn, suggest such blatantly ridiculous notions.

This thread is not a sincere attempt at a conversation. It is obvious trolling.

 

Where is the outrage for all the other displaced people of the world ?

Talk about straw-man , why are we diverting the focus to Syrian refugees at all ?

Lets talk about why these people have to leave home in the first place. Because Obama created a monster that is running them out of their country. Hilliary's Benghazi weapons are destroying their homes so they have no where to live.

That is the real strawman argument

 

A woman can be just as deadly as any man ever has been. Funny how once again the left shows its disdain and discrimination against women.

Notice how the left never believes that women can compete with men ? That they are inferior to men in every way.

Notice how the left never addresses the issue, just tries to divert by poking fun and rolling eyes.

Yea women and children are never a threat

 

Libs' Talking Points: " Widows and Orphans..." - Dana Perino, Beautiful and Waaay Smart, sez: They wouldn't have Been Widows and Orphans iBut For Obama's policies Seven Years Ago!!!

Lib Talking Point: Julie Roginsky sez Repubs are telling Refugees that have been trying to get in that "There is No Room at the Inn" That's Rich! An irreligious Lib, Using Bible Quotations against Conservatives!!!

 

Pat them all down with pitchforks...

 

You can never be too safe [emoji23]

https://youtu.be/4L62b92Prk0

 

I would post a bunch of links to news items from around the world where women and children have been used as suicide bombers and to stab and shoot soldiers, but those links would be too graphic for liberals to handle.

Even though they are factual news reports.

 

One of the Paris suspects was female. Guess she decided to blow herself and the rest of the apartment up, so they had to use DNA to determine it was a female. Yuck!

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3324930/Female-suicide-bomber-France-one-history.html

 

Several years ago I was flying during a real cold spell I was leaving NO LA flying back to SA TX. I had a thick scarf on as I had traveled to NO before the cold spell hit and had 0 warm clothes. I bought a scarf and a cap in the hotel gift shop . I am a short small white woman. I was about 45 at the time. They pulled me aside and told me I was suspicious because of the scarf and hat. Meanwhile the same flight had 3 women in burkas who were asked nothing.
About 5 years later we were flying from Texas to Oregon to attend a wedding. We had our octagenerian mothers and our toddler grandsons with us. Our entire family got searched they even took the babies empty sippy cup apart to inspect it. That flight also had multiple traditional Muslim people who were not searched.
This was during the Bush years so cant really blame Obama just Americans trying to hard to be PC.

 

If Obama really cared about Syrian women and children, then he would have helped them out by bombing Assad after he crossed Obama's red line. Obama sat there and watched Assad gas the Syrian women and children. He doesn't care about them. The liberals don't care about them either because they didn't want Obama to take out Assad.

I also didn't want Obama to take Assad. I could care a less what he does to the Syrian people. All I know is that I don't want any Syrian refugees in the USA. We've already let in enough illegal aliens from Mexico.

 

If Barry really believes they are harmless he should lead by example. Dismiss his Secret Service details and let 3 Syrian refugee families who have not been checked in any way move into the White House with his family. We'd all feel better then.

 

Many of these "liberals" are actually intelligent people and they clearly understand that iSlam is the problem. They cannot be reasoned with. They are perfectly willing to foster the complete destruction of our way of life in the name of "progressivism".

The DWL (disingenuous white liberal) is a truly dangerous individual.

 

Let me erode away at your stereotype.

Islam is the most violent religion of our time and is based on a doctrine that promotes violence, misogyny, rape, murder, and world domination. Holding onto these ideas is not "progressive" at all.

OTOH, I value religious freedom, and don't believe religion should be surpressed, as long as it doesn't entail breaking the law. That's the kicker. You can hold ****ty beliefs and not break the law.

Islam needs a reformation.

 

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogs...=Feed:+MishsGlobalEconomicTrendAnalysis+(Mish's+Global+Economic+Trend+Analysis)

"Here's a dose of math reality. The EU let in a million refugees, if just 1/10 of 1% of them are terrorists, that's 1,000 terrorists the EU has to deal with."

 

And wile we are on the subject, There was another well established culture that once roamed this great country of ours. They witnessed a mass influx of refugees who were escaping political and religious persecution. It did not turn out well for them, just ask some Native Americans how that influx of refugees worked out ?

History the greatest teacher of all.

 

It has been my observation that you cannot tell a left leaning progressive anything. They will support bad idea after bad idea, believing each time that if implemented, it will result in utopia. The only thing that will change that support is when they are directly and personally impacted by the results...which we have seen time and time again.

As long as we have this president and this Congress (refusing to take a stand to stop him) terrorists will have the freedom to keep coming while American citizens keep losing our so-called inalienable rights. What happened in Paris is going to happen here. If and when it directly and personally impacts the left-leaning progressives, they will scream louder than all of the rest of us. Don't look for a different narrative until after the terror has taken place.

In the meantime, while they are crying over "triggers" and "safe spaces", keep your eyes open and stay away from target rich environments. That's the best I've got right now. We are going to have to learn the hard way, sadly.

 

The only thing you left out is the left will blame 'us' for whatever happens.

They are, and will forever be, blameless.

 

Bingo, 13ella!

I know all this - never fear. I sometimes just enjoy the academic exercise of responding to ludicrous questions. It helps to keep my aging brain agile. It is part of my 'survival regimen'.

 

Bingo, 13ella!

I know all this - never fear. I sometimes just enjoy the academic exercise of responding to ludicrous questions. It helps to keep my aging brain agile. It is part of my 'survival regimen'.

:thumb::thumb::thumb: appears to be pretty agile to me!

Same here. I've learned more history after researching and responding to 'legitimate' arguments on this forum than I ever did in school.

One of my favorite authors said:

“Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.”

 

the libs could be allowing islam to get a strong hold in America to abolish all religions and then the state is your leader. When the SHTF with islam folks will be crying to abolish all religions. I dont see any other reason the libs are on there side. Islam is the definition of everything the libs hate , yet they are embracing it.....NWO here we come...

 

The progressives worship the alter of the state with as much zealotry as any disciple of the "one god"

 

Full Moon - I don't necessarily think that Engel himself is a 'troll' either. But, I do think he was 'trolling' with that particular set of questions. In other words, his mind is made up and he just wanted to have fun watching me try to explain a word or two that I used even though he knew what I meant. I bit once because I felt like it but I don't let someone do that twice to me on a single page.

 

Understood Teslin. Engel gets called a Troll in many of the Threads he posts in, so I was more responding to that. No offense towards you meant. Of course, people have a right to feel he is, I just don't share that view. I get what you were saying in your situation though.

 

The left thinks it is 'using Islam' for its purposes (as described by salvation696sps above). Islam thinks it is 'using the left' for its purposes. They are 'fr-enemies'. They figure (if they are thinking at all) that they will fight it out 'later'. Each side is sure they will be the ultimate winner. Seems pretty stupid to me but it is dangerous for the rest of us right now.

 

That is the ultimate danger of the "left" its damn big heart gets it into trouble.

Its like the parents of a drug addicted child, the keeps facilitating its child addiction because they can't stand to see their child suffer.

The progressives (communist) know this and abuse it well.

Yes on paper this socialist utopia sounds wonderful, no hungry children, everybody sits around in drum circles singing Kumbaya or I like to give the world a coke. Everybody has a government job.... yada yada.

But the hard cold facts is it never works, because humans are animals with a nature for survival of the fittest, so there will always be greed.

No matter how hard you try to change human nature, you will always fail.

 

Maybe Libs are just much more agreeable to 6 year old girls being married, and taken to the "husband's" home at 9 years old. Or maybe it's that married women once kidnapped are no longer considered to be validly married once they have a menstrual cycle. After perusing some of the hadith I really don't know how else to explain it.

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/

 

Nah, we're not. Islamic doctrine is downright foul. I don't agree with it.