It’s also five months old. Not that it’s no longer relevant, but the situation has moved on a lot since then in a variety of ways.
Since microcephalic poster Morgenstern brought it up, for the record, I think that North American governments have been handling background checks and vetting of refugees quite competently so far.
With new developments, there may need to be a stepping up of checks on refugees, to ensure that nobody unwanted is slipping in.
Another thing I believe is that we should not be taking our immigration policy directly from the terrorist scum leadership of ISIS. Of course, those like Morgenstern and other terrorist supporters want to do exactly what ISIS tells them to do. They actually agree with ISIS. They want us to obey ISIS, and do as we are told.
Either that, or they are pants-wetting pig-ignorant cowards, who are afraid of imaginary boogeymen, and let use this to let their inherent racist attitudes come to the fore.
Well, OK, how about we just take in the babies and orphans? Not a lot to vet there, they haven’t been alive long enough. We take them, raise them in the true Christian faith, just as soon as our nation’s religious leaders settle on which variety it is. Whichever, doesn’t matter to me much, don’t have a dogma in this fight.
To expel them we would first need to have some, and we hardly have any (which I think is a shame).
Nope, nope.
You gotta keep up with the program.
Five year old orphans would be too scary, says Republican presidential hopeful Christie.
I mean, who’s gonna look after them, huh? Nobody wants an orphan. It’s like getting a used kid.
What, like jannisaries?
That didn’t end well.
You must be mistaken. If there weren’t a bunch of refugees in France then how did the attacks in Paris happen? Huh? Huh?:smack:
Well, you have at least the same token figure that Obama is proposing to let in and which a group of Republican governors assure us will be the end of America.
Not letting in refugees when it is already known that most of them are terrorists in disguise is common sense, not fear.
Let me draw you an analogy. I offer you a bowl with hundreds of M&Ms in it. You know that a large number of them have been laced with a deadly poison. Are you going to dive right in and snarf down a big old handful of them?
I just love how libs take anything that has to do with common sense or reality and twist it into something perverted if it goes against what they want.
Gotta cite for that?
I too would love to see a citation for the assertion that greater than 50% of refugees are terrorists in disguise.
Leaping to the conclusion that most refugees are terrorists is pure cowardice, you craven fuck.
Isn’t it normal for a turtle to retreat inside his shell at the first sign of danger?
Do you get this from the ISIS newsletter? Or are you in more direct communication with your ISIS leaders?
You seem to parrot their propaganda so well. I can only assume that you are such a great supporter of ISIS that you are one of their more important supporters in North America.
Fucking terrorist supporter.
Let me guess. It’s the brown M&Ms.
Just like George Castanza’s penis in a cold pool.
I know abstract thought is tricky for you but maybe you should try an analogy that bears some resemblance to the issue we’re discussing. Or perhaps you could provide a citation for your presumed belief that “a large number” of Syrian refugees are ISIS operatives.
Considering that ISIS is estimated to have somewhere around 30,000 fighting men, it would be pretty impressive if they’d managed to incorporate 166% of their forces into US-bound refugees while still keeping up the fight on the home front.
Count me among those who would like to know the basis for this claim, my chelonian chum.
Outsourcing? Do Blackwater do local rates?