COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Republicans rush to shut U.S. borders to Syrian refugees

137 Comments
By ERICA WERNER and ALICIA A. CALDWELL

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

137 Comments
Login to comment

Hard to believe the author did not mention that splendid job of "vetting" the Tsarnaev brothers by the FBI...and this was after Russian intelligence warned us about them. Also, let's not forget Mohammod Youssuf Abdulazeez, son of Palestinian immigrants, who murdered four Marines and a sailor back in July. Whether they are refugees, immigrants or even born here such as Nidal Hasan who murdered 13 at Ft. Hood, we clearly have a problem of some Muslims in the US becoming radicalized and committing terrorist acts. Maybe a single Syrian refugee, now or in the future, will never commit a terrorist act but to naively believe it will never happen is something no one can guarantee...ever.

13 ( +18 / -5 )

the small numbers making their way here so far are being thoroughly investigated...

With no ID or other papers, no functioning criminal database available, little access to Syrian records, few witnesses or supporters; it must be very difficult to investigate thoroughly.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

That would be as crazy as saying all gun owners are responsible for gun violence. Right?

8 ( +21 / -13 )

It's more of a human thing to do. The survival instinct and the desire not to be responsible for the slaughter of another 129 innocent people in the name of Allah. It's the kind of rational thinking that political correctness prevents.

7 ( +23 / -16 )

Not just Republicans but also many Democrats who are also wanting a hold on refugee's. Article is misleading.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Shutting the borders is less about security and more about pandering to bigots and a party that was already anti-immigrant.

5 ( +20 / -15 )

Don't we have enough immigrants in the country already?

Yeah, everywhere you go, there are white people everywhere. Why don't they all go back to Europe where they came from?

5 ( +17 / -12 )

because some minute fraction might be radicals?

A minute fraction blew away 129 people in the space of an evening. And France isn't even Number One on ISIS' hate list.

Closing the borders until safeguards are put in place to protect the public isn't cowardice. It's simple, common sense.

I absolutely believe the U.S. should give the Syrian refugees safehaven. It's a moral imperative. But acting on willful ignorance is not. That's just plain stupid.

(Sweet Petunia... My world is upside down today. In one post, I've both agreed to some degree with Republicans and paraphrased Donald Trump. The sun still rises in the east, right?)

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Yet most Americans are more at risk from gun-toting yayhoos, courtesy of the NRA and their puppets. Guess the right wing doesn't do irony very well.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

Y'all hear about the Texas representative who notices war refugees could buy guns in Texas, and duly freaked out?

"According to Fox7 Austin, State Representative Tony Dale (R-Cedar Park) sent a letter to Governor Greg Abbott (R) saying that current Texas laws, combined with how the federal government grants rights to refugees, would allow the newly arrived Syrians to arm themselves immediately."

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/texas-gop-lawmaker-keep-syrian-refugees-out-of-our-state-because-its-too-easy-to-get-a-gun-here/

These guys are such dopes.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

There is a reason why Saidis Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and Jordan refusing to take the Syrian "refugees". America doesn't want or need them.

4 ( +15 / -11 )

Considering the treat ISIS just gave that they are planning to do the same to Washington, it's understandable the U.S. takes cautious measures. But what if people who are sympathized with ISIS dogma are already in the U.S.? That thought just gives me chills up my spine.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

I understand the concerns this raises, but it would be a truly bleak world if the countries of the world closed off their borders to everyone and became more reclusive like it was in ages past. Giving in to these knee jerk weak emotions means that the terrorists have won. It's time for the Repubs to stop cowering and grow some

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Obama as usual being the adult in the room:

At first, they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of 3-year-old orphans. That doesn’t seem so tough to me. ... I cannot think of a more potent recruitment tool for ISIL than some of the rhetoric coming out of here in the course of this debate. ... If there are concrete, actual ideas to expand the extraordinary screening process in place, we’re open to hearing actual ideas, but that’s not what’s been going on this debate.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Do we really need those people on US soil?

What an odd question. Do we really need you, Wc626, on US soil? What does it mean to need a human being in this context?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"What I find hypocritical is the conservatives.."

You got that right. Since you don't know, conservatives have always disliked like the biblical Jesus, with all his love thy neighbor, help the poor hippie crap.,

So they made up another one.

In America, Republican Jesus hates the poor, the gays, and the hippies, is fully armed, and rides a dinosaur.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

For sure. As long as people are armed, they can stop suicide bombers.

But the real question is if suicide bombers can get bombs even though they are illegal, then why aren't bombs legal? With bombs being illegal only criminals have bombs.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

so now liberals are for our government being influenced by religion?

No, just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who would claim to follow the teachings of Jesus.

The government should most definitely not be religious.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Republicans are cowards. They blaber a lot. About a lot of things. Like defending freedom. And being strong. And when the time comes to defend freedom and being strong, they whine like a bunch of babies. "ohhhhh, there could be meany, wheeny Muslim under my bed.!"

You even understand what you are babbling about. The Arabs managed to build a name for themselves as many of them used their "refugee" status to commit killings in the same place that gave them shelter.

Apparently there are many more who are getting tired of the continuous violence associated with them, and just in case you didn't realize yet, the locals also have rights.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Dude, you really need to be able to distinguish between the TSA and this type of screening.

If the TSA is slipping up, then its prob reasonable to suggest other US agencies are slacking off too. Remember how easy it was for that dude to hop the white house fence?

Even some democrats are contradicting how effective the screening process is.

Republicans rush to shut U.S. borders to Syrian refugees

They're doing the right thing. The refugees are not welcomed. US has enough foreigners, for better or worse.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Obama also said,

We are not well served when, in response to a terrorist attack, we descend into fear and panic. We don’t make good decisions if it’s based on hysteria or an exaggeration of risks. When individuals say we should have a religious test and that only Christians, proven Christians should be admitted, that’s offensive. I cannot think of a more potent recruitment tool for Isil than some of the rhetoric that’s been coming out of here during the course of this debate. Isil seeks to exploit the idea that there’s war between Islam and the west, and when you see individuals in positions of responsibility suggesting Christians are more worthy of protection than Muslims are in a war-torn land, that feeds the Isil narrative. It’s counter-productive. And it needs to stop. And I would add, these are the same folks who suggested they’re so tough that just ‘talk to Putin’ or staring down Isil [will work] … but they are scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion. At first they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans. That doesn’t seem so tough to me.

Politics or real-world compassion. Apparently, the GOP has scheduled a vote on this in the House for Thursday. We will see on which side they choose.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

If terrorists want to get here, they will get here. The end.

I really can't see how Republicans have really thought this through yet. We can take Christians and not Muslims? What do we use, a lie detector test? Will we be banning all Muslims or just ones from Syria? Or Muslims from a handful of countries? What about Muslim students...no more visas?

What kind of comprehensive plan are they planning, or is this just Syria? Because the arguments they are using can't really be tied to one country only. When you say things like, "they come here and refuse to assimilate" and "their views just wouldn't fit in here" you aren't just talking about one nationality. And I'm guessing countries like Iran use similar thinking when they justify harassing Christians.

What I'm seeing is typical, which is the freak out, and GOP members try to one-up their statements so they can turn around and say the other members are weak. And lots of bullshit. Breitbart.com is running a story with the title, "Why Hillary and Obama Prefer Islam to Christianity" and Ben Stein just went on TV to say the problem is that Obama hates America. Nothing at all of substance, just the usual, "I know what they are really thinking" garbage that passes for good decision-making.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Texas A&M AggieNov. 18, 2015 - 08:46PM JST

up this morning to hear that Dianne Feinstein disagrees with Obama's assessment that ISIL is not "contained".

When even a senior democrat agrees that protecting American lives isn't Islamophobic; it's just plain smart, proves that Obama could care less about the safety of our country . . .

Glad to read your post. I guess I am with Dianne Feinstein on this. We need to play SMART not just for today. I have been very skeptical about refugee immigration policy in Europe. Currently, there are over 750,000 refugees from Syria, Afganistan and Iraq. I do not know what they are going to do with these refugees.They cannot send them back.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Who says anything will work? Look at Timothy McVeigh. I think McVeigh's records were also quit legit.

@ nishikat: Yes they were. And he was stopped initially by a cop who had pulled him over and had noticed his strange behavior and had not learned about the bombing that he had just done. The cop went on instinct and gut feeling that something wasn't right, and by doing the follow up, McVeigh was able to be caught and held responsible for his crime.

But in this case, a border patrol or cop pulls over an Arab looking person, what do we get? Cops are racist and are using racial profiling against minorities, and this is a violation of their civil rights, and all of the rest of it that goes along with that whole song and dance. We are unfairly targeting Muslims, etc.

Screenings do work, but you can't just "wish them all in" and not do due diligence to find the bad ones from the good.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

This is a conundrum. On the one hand, I think that VP Joe Biden has a valid point and is correct in saying that the terrorists have won if we don't accept these unfortunate refugees who are, as Obama recently pointed out, also the victims of terrorism. On the other hand, there is very real concern that ISIS could use refugees' status as a cloak to conceal their extremists bent on waging jihad against United States. It's interesting but not all that surprising that even Massachusetts, the home state of the Kennedy family, is not welcoming the Syrian refugees and has shut its doors, which is almost certainly due to that state's own experience with Islamic terrorists/immigrants and the cruel bombing they inflicted at the Boston Marathon.

If looked at in terms of national security, then the uncomfortable answer is yes as in yes these refugees should not be granted entrance. This problem is even more accute in the EU where the refugees look as though they're going to accomplish what the Moors had failed to do.

In the future, if Japan has fewer or none of these sorts of Islamic terrorist problems than the rest of us, does that also mean that Japan's way of enhancing and promoting national security for its own citizens is more effective? This is any national government's first priority, isn't it?

One of my Japanese students was talking about this issue with me and telling me how unfortunate it was that the EU and the US weren't accepting more of these Syrian refugees, to which I asked her, "How many of these refugees do you think Japan should accept?" This question was answered with silence but it says a lot.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

It's more of a human thing to do. The survival instinct and the desire not to be responsible for the slaughter of another 129 innocent people in the name of Allah. It's the kind of rational thinking that political correctness prevents.

the EU should import some politicians from the US. good to see that some people still have common sense left!

What are you two talking about? Have you forgotten that it was the republicans that are responsible for this mess in the first place?? This wouldn't have happened if they hadn't invaded iraq.

If you burn someone else's house down you are obligated to let him move into yours.

You break it you own it

2 ( +15 / -14 )

Can't they detect fake passports? If not, they should get some lessons from the Germans.

BTW, who (and why) would plant a fake Syrian passport at the scene of the Paris attacks?

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Wc626: what happened to compassion, helping others? What would Jesus do? Or the Conservatives live with Christians principals or they don't. Again, hypocrisy...

2 ( +11 / -9 )

Not really a Christian thing to do.

So what do you call the Japanese for doing literally the same thing?

Well I certainly don't call them Christian, but neither do they.

2 ( +10 / -8 )

Any person that thought that leaving Saddam in charge of that country was a good thing is really off in the deep end.

Look what removing him did - created ISIS. All so that the Americans could get their hands on those WMDs. Good thing they found so many of them!

2 ( +10 / -8 )

Bush and Cruz have gone on record saying we should accept refugees from Syria....if they are Christian. I guess every other religion need not apply.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

"Christians love life" But it says to kill gays in the Bible. If Christians don't kill gays they are not christian and will go to hell. In the timeline of history Christians killed many people not too long ago. They have a higher kill body count than Muslims. Also, the evangelicals annoy me especially since they want to put ridiculous scientific "facts" in textbooks like the earth was created like 2,500 years ago. What's this Sharia law? No, the Christian Scientologists are doing the damage already. They are threatening my rights as an American.

"So then why is it that the liberals never learn from that lack?" Why always say Liberals? The Republicans invented Obamacare.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Japan is not accepting "refugees" and I think everyone on this site is happy about that.

Speak for yourself.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

lucabrasiNov. 18, 2015 - 03:42PM JST

@globalwatcher

You state openly that you don't want to live with Muslim refugees; fair enough.

But don't then claim you "work hard for ... equality."

You clearly don't.

Do not forget that terrorists do not qualify for justice, freedom and equality we value in the western world. They are criminals. I draw a line. Do not mix up apple butter to s--t.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Elizabeth Warren - not a presidential candidate (yet), had this to say:

People in America and throughout the world are fearful. Millions of Syrians are fearful as well -- terrified by the reality of their daily lives, terrified that their last avenue of escape from ISIS will be closed, terrified that the world will turn its back on them and their children. We are not a nation that delivers children back into the hands of ISIS murderers because some politician doesn't like their religion, and we are not a nation that backs down out of fear. ...This must be our choice -- the same choice that has been made over and over again by every generation of Americans. This is always our choice, It is the reason ISIS despises us, and it is the reason we will defeat them.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Pres. Hollande commits to taking 30,000 refugees in next 2 years; says France has duty to honor that commitment. “Life must go on.”

Meanwhile, pearl-cluthching Republicans freak out over 10,000.

Such cowards.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Again? What are they wearing

Its their mindset I'm worried about. Their possible hidden agendas. Like the other refugees / asylum seekers had. @ SenseNotSoCommon, LoL- I am not interested in their clothes.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"Dems keep defying the wishes of the people" Who invented ObamaCare? (Nixon) Who restricted guns? (Reagan) Who wants to raise taxes? (Trump) Who wanted to take away handguns? (Nixon) Who inked 3M green card amnesty? (Reagan)

OK so you are OK with refugees coming to the USA.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Actually, 47 democrats have joined the GOP, which means that Obama cannot veto the resolution.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Not really a Christian thing to do...

1 ( +16 / -15 )

the EU should import some politicians from the US. good to see that some people still have common sense left!

1 ( +11 / -10 )

The US have quite a tradition to refuse entry to refugees (ironic if we consider that the US was build by refugees in the first place) http://www.floridahistorynetwork.com/june-4-1939---jewish-refugee-ship-turned-away-from-florida-coast.html

There is not one proven link between the Terrorists from last Friday and Syrian refugees. The terrorists were all french or belgium citizens. It would only be consequent if they would refuse entry to all citizens from this two countries.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

I actually get what both of you are saying. You are saying it's not a Christian thing to do, and Wc626 is saying that it is. I actually think he's right - it's what Christians do these days. But what you are talking about is the spirit of Christianity, which is to help those in need. Many (most?) Christians these days don't actually follow Jesus' teachings, they just like to say they are Christian. This is a prime example of it. Jesus would have preached helping the Syrians. Today's Christians preach saving their own only.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

We have enough gun owners to protects us. Right?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

There is not one proven link between the Terrorists from last Friday and Syrian refugees. The terrorists were all french or belgium citizens. It would only be consequent if they would refuse entry to all citizens from this two countries.

That they were French citizens is true, but they were also ethnically from Syria and North Africa and still clung to their radical beliefs. Remember back in January this year and the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, and how some news outlets were reporting that the attackers lived in a part of Paris that even the authorities didn't want to go in, and here on JT as well as other sources people said that rumors of "bad lands" were just that rumors being spun by the right wingers.

Well, what have we learned so far about that is going on in Belgium? The Belgium government has said that the still at large person as well as his brothers all lived in an area in Brussels that was one of these "bad lands" where the authorities didn't venture in, and it is being run by the more radical segments of the population. Large influx of people from one area of the world, banding in one large concentration area and not trying to assimilate but still cling to their own sets of beliefs and trying to impose them on the surrounding areas is not what the term "melting pot" refers to. These guys lived in an area of Belgium that shunned outsiders, and the Belgium authorities were so bent on not being seen as "racist" or whatever term is in vogue that these people were allowed metastasize and become a cancer on society.

We can't even get the people in the USA who came to the southern border and were given documents to appear in immigration courts after we checked them in to come back to courts to their hearings (DOJ reported that 84% absconded, and only 4% self deported), and now we are supposedly going to be able to tell the good ones from the bad ones in a matter of minutes?

the problem America a hand in creating

Long before there was a USA or a Europe that wasn't a bunch of warring kings, the schism between Sunni and Shia Muslims had started. These so called refugees, are they fleeing from US and European and other Western nations bombing their homes and cutting off their heads, of did they leave Syria and other countries because one group of their religion has taken things way too far and have carried out a war that has been internal to their religion for at least 1200 years. ISIL is trying to reclaim their caliphate, that they believed was theirs long before America came on the scene.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Headline reads: "Republicans rush to shut U.S. borders to Syrian refugees". Suddenly, comments section gets filled with Christian vs. Anti-Christian vitriol.

"It's more of a human thing to do. The survival instinct and the desire not to be responsible for the slaughter of another 129 innocent people in the name of Allah. It's the kind of rational thinking that political correctness prevents." Wolfpack nailed it. And before certain commenters on this thread jump to the "racism" card, no, it's not racism. It's prevention. How many radicals does it take to take another life? One. How many refugees are flooding borders from Syria, the stronghold of Daesh? Thousands. Unless each and every single refugee is meticulously screened, similar to what those applying for Permanent Residency or Citizenship go through, none should be allowed to enter another country.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Dude, you really need to be able to distinguish between the TSA and this type of screening. And why take care of any refugees? They're only humans scrabbling to survive in bombed-out cities due to no fault of their own. As they saidin "Airplane!", "I say, let 'em die!"

1 ( +3 / -2 )

First of all, we should get the terminology straight. People are "refugees" when they flee an immediate danger. Once they are safe and move from safe country to safe country, they are not "refugees" any more. In addition, refugees flee as families. When only young men flee, leaving the women, aged, and children back home, by definition you are not talking about refugees.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's not actually the how 'refugee' is defined.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The refugees are not welcomed. US has enough foreigners, for better or worse.

Time to dismantle the Statue of Liberty and ship it back to France, I see.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

For the cost of 'thoroughly investigating' and flying over 10,000 Syrian refugees, how many refugees could be supported in place, in Hungary or Germany?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

In the case of the USA, it's a 'you broke it, you bought it' type scenario. They created the conditions that allowed for ISIS, they should take some responsibility for the people who cannot live in their country anymore as a result.

Now that was by far the absolute worst answer I have ever heard. That made NO sense whatsoever. Obama created ISIS

As I said, the US created the conditions that allowed for ISIS. You placed the blame on Obama, then said that my comment made no sense whatsoever, yet failed to provide any kind of reasoning behind it.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

"I do not want to see any Muslim refugees coming to my state." Is that even possible? Once they are in (the US) they are in. What's stopping them from moving anywhere they want?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Hillary says:

We've seen a lot of hateful rhetoric from the GOP. But the idea that we'd turn away refugees because of religion is a new low.

Bernie says:

We will not be terrorized or live in fear. During these difficult times, we will not succumb to Islamophobia. We will not turn our backs on the refugees who are fleeing Syria and Afghanistan. We will do what we do best and that is be Americans – fighting racism, fighting xenophobia, fighting fear.

That other guy (O'Malley?) says:

There are women, there are children dying, They are fleeing the same sort of carnage that was unleashed on the people of France. ... I don't think it's too much to ask of us that we do our part here.

Which face is America: Brave and forward-facing, or weak and reactive?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

they were warn by Russian and Syrian direction whereas to leave by X hour or be shelled by Russians fly over dropping bombs/missiles and be killed,.. so if that is so let Putin take all them Syrian refugees into safe haven and like our Obama trying to get his feet wet on the expense of the American people;...doesn't the USA have more then enough of their own neglected homeless and now we spread our domestic hand out abroad and like don't send them to Hawaii cause they sure have a homeless problem there at the moment;...looks like Pulitzer Peace award went to Barry's puka head?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@globalwatcher

Glad to read that we are on the same page on this issue. This is about America first, political affiliation second.

The way I see it, the EU letting the hoard of "refugees" into their countries without any proper screening is a recipe for disaster. If anything, only women and children should have been allowed in. The men should have been sent back to fight for (or against) their country.

The Paris attack by jihadis is just a prelude of bad things to come in that part of the world. We need to keep an ocean between us and that insanity. . . .

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Wc626: what happened to compassion, helping others? What would Jesus do? Or the Conservatives live with Christians principals or they don't. Again, hypocrisy...

Being "conservative" has NOTHING to do with religion.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The Islamic State wants you to hate refugees

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/16/the-islamic-state-wants-you-to-hate-refugees/

These fearmongering congressmen, Ryan, Schumer, McConnell, these Governors, Hassan, and their supporters are ISIS's version of useful idiots. Their America is small, mean, petty, and full of fear.

"The reality is that most of these refugees are already receiving a pretty rough welcome in the West. Syrian refugees who arrive in the United States face remarkable scrutiny from multiple government agencies, including the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the National Counterterrorism Center and the Defense Department. The screening process can take years, leaving legitimate refugees in limbo. It's worth remembering that making that welcome worse may be exactly what the Islamic State wants."

"That's not American," he said. "That's not who we are. We do not have religious tests to our compassion." -Obama

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Republicans are playing right into ISISs hands and they know it....but they just can't stop themselves.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

"And Clinton's as well." But more Americans died under Bush. Many many more.

What's the name of the Conservative who allowed thousands of Americans to die on 9/11?

"Obama is doing well This is your quote. Unemployment is low. Gas prices are low. Stock market recovered. Rate of uninsured is lower. Yes, he is doing well.

What can the governors do legally to keep them out of their states. Of course if I were new to America I would not want to move to a conservative trashy state like Miss. or Alabama anyway. But really, what could any Governor do. They are just talking up their base.

"Once they are in then they are in. How can they legally block them from coming into their states." You didn't answer this question.

Under Obama less Americas have died and the American Muslim population has integrated in the American lifestyle better than any president in history.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

For those who say that the screenings will work, anyone remember the Brothers Tsarnev and the Boston marathon bombing? These two had immigrated to the USA, and had official legit records, and yet they went back to Chechnya, learned a skill at building bombs, and managed to come back to the USA all being screened even though at one point that had been flagged for further look, and yet they were able to do what they did.

So now with the background checks that were in place for those guys, and we (the US government) failed to stop them, what makes you think people who are leaving with probably no records on them, and we have to just "accept" what they tell us and no real way to go and do a records check in Syria on them, are we supposed to say that these are "good guys" and just let them in? They are not even letting in Syrian Christians who are not Muslim for some reason and they haven't been going around blowing things up or killing people, yet we are going to allow the more radical ones into the USA.

Screen them or better yet, build a camp for them in Syria, protected by the UN (since they say we should) and then vet them there or better still wipe out ISIS and let them go back to their homes.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Who says anything will work? Look at Timothy McVeigh. I think McVeigh's records were also quit legit.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Everyone, stop discussing HISTORY to "justify" whatever your bias and priorities may be. And most of all stop "idealizing" your personal values and preferences. You have your right to think, believe and say what you wish. However, this is a regreligious and racial war. They have no regional, territorial or political boundaries. It is by nature a question "how we as humans wish to live." For now because the religions have turned from private and personal practice and way of life to that of "forcing" others do the same and actually by physical force, LIVES are at stake.

When your lives are stake. And as a political or and or a leader of a group that wishes to "survive" and "live by how it wishes to live", that political leader has the right and must take action to protect that on behalf of the population. That may involve restricting entry of the unknown and the undesirables into a defined area or territory within which he.she may be able to control and protect. That was the purpose of all the castles and walls built all over the world for centuries.

Just as you would, if you were that kind of a person, to protect yourself and your family from harm, defend. Or are you not willing or protect because of your idealistic beliefs?

There are those willing to spend billions of your money to protect the whales. You are talking about protecting human lives with just a change in simple policy and procedures. And you are arguing about right and wrong, good and bad. Or about how the USA and democratic way of life "should" be and MUST act.

The actual plan is to wait... regardless of the lives of Syrians. That is because although the responsibility of man is to all humanity, the leaders of a nation is to protect and defend THEIR own FIRST and PRIMARY, idealism aside. Words and negotiation cannot defend physical people in mass movements or attacks during a war. Only ACTION can.

Are you willing to defend and protect yourself and your family and your way of life?

This is what it is all about. PERIOD.....

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It's common sense to pause the rush to import Europe's Syrian refugees to the US. We saw what happened in France - let's not get stupid - a delay and stricter vetting procedure is in order.

Helping hand: Democrat. Middle finger: Republican.

Good example of how the Left under Obama has created an ideological cold war in America. Obama (and Clinton) do not even pretend to hide their belief that their enemies are fellow Americans who consider themselves Republicans.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As some of you have rationally and pragmatically answered, this is not a political or idealistic values issue, it is about survival and avoiding unnecessary casualties.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Republicans rush to shut U.S. borders to Syrian refugees

Rush faster to close those borders. Thanks to Turkish Radicals in cockpits, they've blasted a Russia out the the sky. Bet lots of syrian IS sympathizers are happy right now.

Like another poster said . . . Turkey is ISIS and their pilots are al Qaida's de facto Air Force. Keep them all out please.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

This is ridiculous. If the US and other countries start rejecting Syrian immigrants isn't it the same as pushing them more towards extreme measures for survival and embracing ISIS as a result? If confronted with making life or death, most people would choose survival and the one with open arms however evil this entity might be.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Cowardice.

Ugly, naked, cowardice. Let us not forget the role we had in creating the problem. Now we refuse to help those in need because some minute fraction might be radicals? What's next? Would the Republicans have us seal our boarders against any and all Muslim immigration? Stupid question - of course they would.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

America doesn't want or need them.

Yes, we do. Since you forget: our country was in no small way founded by people fleeing religious oppression.

That is exactly what is going on in Syria. With ISIS.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Strangeland: yes, I know what Wc626 is saying. What I find hypocritical is the conservatives touting how virtuous they are and yet not abiding to basic principals in their faith...

That said, playing geopolitics, displacing population and not taking responsibility for it. There will be more gun deaths than from terrorists attacks on US soil (none of them is better than the other one). Most of the refugees are economic refugees.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

the problem America a hand in creating

Much more than just a hand. They created it. Saddam never would have let this happen. But good thing the Americans got rid of all the WMDs he had.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Wc626:

If that is true, Then why did Germany & Netherlands just cancel a Soccer Game- Amid serious plans for explosion, terror threat.

The extremists already there in europe, are changing how normal eurpoeans live. Soccer Games never used to suddenly get "cancelled."

Yeah, it's sucks to live in fear of being attacked during your everyday's life. Note I'm against taking so many refugees in when many are not "refugees" in the first place.

What I'm proving is the hypocrisy of the conservatives and their virtuous principals.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Bass4funk: Thank you! We did a full circle to my post at the top! What Christian principals? Nobody said they have to abandon their faith.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Three points:

Repubs are hedging there bets with their familiar "We're not against this per se - we just don't trust this administration" (Read: "Obama will purposely flood the country with ISIS terrorists.")

Repubs fail to distinguish between the refugee flood hitting Europe, which basically consists of anyone ambulatory, and those invited to the US - who must pass through multiple levels of biographical and biometric screening and are further monitored after arrival.

The former fit in with the "politics of terror," often employed by Repubs as a way to say, "Squirrel!" - instead of reasonable alternatives, they ratchet up the fear level. Remember Ebola? - the former two examples were well on display there.

Use your brain. Do not succumb to fear.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Land of the free, home of the whopper

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Giving in to the fear and being politically naive are two entirely different things.

Not in your posts.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Only those that are not directly involved and affected by immigrants can be "idealists" and tout principles, rights, theories that may make sense but often not realistic or practical.

Europe opened their arms to take in refugees, only to find it impossible to accommodate more than what they can share and assist. Combined with crime, abuse and now terror threat, one must "protect" him/herself "before" others. In essence, one must be in a "position with the ability" to assist and share with others to be meaningful, effective and worthy, but provided that such assistance and sharing does not "harm" him. Otherwise both the provider and the receiver will suffer and ultimately hurt each other.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"Because Obama wanted the Muslim would to love us and accept us and that will NEVER, EVER happen"

That's not true:

"Islam is peace" GWB

The Republicans declared Muslims are good people. Of course not the terrorists. But their general population loves the USA. In fact Muslims assimilate much better in the USA than they do in Europe. It's good that Obama has done so much for the Muslim community. Any state would be lucky to have these fine people since...

"America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect.." GWB

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"a few" That's right. Obama is better at protecting Americans against terrorists than Bush. Thanks for confirming. The numbers prove it and this is established. Obama is doing well with Muslims because they are generally more successful in the USA than in other parts of the world.

"stick to the president that is in office now." But Obama's performance has been so much better than GWB's.

"Sorry, I look at the Jihadists." No, who has kept America safer. Eight years of Bush or (almost) eight years of Obama. Numbers!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

America wants these refugees. Why? The ones who could escape did escape? They had the wealth, the education, the connection. They escaped because they were successful where they came from and will continue to do so (or at least their kids will when they grow up) at their destinations. It's sad that the ones without the means will be forced to stay, but that's how things work in the world. Wealth wins. Wealth has options- unfair but true.

There were a couple of people saying states could just refuse these people? How? Once you are in then you are in and you can move about anywhere in the United States. How exactly can anyone restrict any refugee to just certain states? Is that possible? Really?

"I do not want to see any Muslim refugees coming to my state." Well....tough

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Why should the USA and Europe accept them?

Because it is the right thing to do.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Triumvere. It is what it is. Open the doors and bad things might happen.

Look what's going on in Paris, France. Heck, the German-Netherlands game was cancelled. Did friendly sporting games, between 2 European countries ever used to get "Canceleed" all of a sudden?

Don' know about you, but I never want to see an america where a superbowl or world series might be "cancelled" amid severe security concerns.

Because it is the right thing to do.

I disagree. Keep them out. The women too, are potential extremists. The children- yes help them. The young bearded healthy islamic men shouting "God is Great" are the WORST !

0 ( +3 / -3 )

From around the webiverse:

Pretty amazing the lengths conservatives will go to in order to let Daesh know that they are berry, berry, berry scared.-- LOLGOP

Yeah. I'd say I'm sick of the party of 'strong national security' crapping the bed everytime something bad occurs in this wicked world. -- @TomLevenson

Congressional Republicans unveiled a new strategy Tuesday morning to defeat the Islamic State: We will kill it with clichés -- Dana Milibank

Ted Cruz doesn't want religious fanatics to immigrate. I guess his father will have to self-deport. -- Unknown

Monologue: As Your Governor, I Will Protect You From Mass Shooters If They Are Syrian. --Timothy McSweney

FYI: We take longer to vet Syrian refugees than we did to plan the Iraq War that has led the to the refugee crisis. --LOLGOP

If you're looking for evidence someone could fake being a Christian, I recommend you watch a recent GOP debate. --LOLGOP

Refugees can prove they're Christian by denying poor people health insurance. -- Jeb Bush

0 ( +4 / -4 )

young bearded healthy islamic men

Wow, this has become quite a fetish, hasn't it?

Stop it at once, you young bearded healthy islamic men!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

young, bearded, healthy, Islamic men

Again? What are they wearing, WC: any preference?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

These are the same morons that will fight tooth and nail against any kind of restrictions on firearms. Guns that are used to murder about 12,000 Americans annually. And this doesn't include suicide or accidental gun deaths, just outright murder. That's four times the number of people murdered on 9/11, year in and year out.

I wonder how different the world would be (or the US economy) if the family of Abdulfattah Jandali, from Homs in Syria, had been rejected by US immigration because they feared a terrorist behind every bush? His son, Steve Jobs, would likely never have founded Apple Computers, and changed the world.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

what happened to compassion, helping others? What would Jesus do? Or the Conservatives live with Christians principals or they don't. Again, hypocrisy...

Okay so it's hypocrisy. But I'm not a christian. I just don't think it is in the interest of national security to allow for tens of thousands of droves of islamic refugees.

I hope ordinary citizens form up something similar to that of PEGIDA in Germany.

What would Jesus do?

Render to Ceasar what is Ceasar's. And render to god what is god's.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

What I'm proving is the hypocrisy of the conservatives and their virtuous principals.

And I already acknowledged the hypocrisiy you've pointed out.

Okay so it's hypocrisy. But I'm not a christian. I just don't think it is in the interest of national security to allow for tens of thousands of droves of islamic refugees.

Note I'm against taking so many refugees in when many are not "refugees" in the first place.

K. & I'm sure there are some german citizens might have agreed with you before the islamification of Eastern Europe. Merkel and her top cabinet officials were supposed to be in attendance @ that Soccer Game.

Heh, looks like Merkel got to see the chickens coming home to roost first hand as she and the football fans quietly departed the stadium.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Bass4funk: if they tout they are living by Christian principals and the guardian of the Christian tradition then they should do it. Just showing hypocrisy, that's all.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

First of all, we should get the terminology straight. People are "refugees" when they flee an immediate danger. Once they are safe and move from safe country to safe country, they are not "refugees" any more. In addition, refugees flee as families. When only young men flee, leaving the women, aged, and children back home, by definition you are not talking about refugees. Or you talk about "refugees" with zero morality, because they all murder their family. Take your pick.

I haven´t seen the demographics of Obamas Syrian "refugees" yet, but if Europe`s experience is anything to go by, you are talking about almost exlusively young men, who mostly come from camps in Turkey, a safe country.

So can we finally stop using this polemical "refugee" label?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Keep everyone out at the moment at the moment. Very wise to not accept the refugees.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@globalwatcher

You state openly that you don't want to live with Muslim refugees; fair enough.

But don't then claim you "work hard for ... equality."

You clearly don't.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Religion aside, Japan is not accepting "refugees" and I think everyone on this site is happy about that. Why should the USA and Europe accept them? Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc (the eminently logical countries to do so) don't want them, citing very real security concerns. Meanwhile Europe sleepwalks to its own self- destruction.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Anybody notice that Bobby Jindal just dropped put of the GOP nomination race? Inevitable, of course, but the timing is telling: imagine this child of Indian immigrants forced to defend general immigration chances for people of his ancestor country (Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims) with the rabid xenophobia currently consuming Repubs.

Cruz and Rubio must go along (and even fuel) this GOP zeitgeist - but what of their own ancestors? Are you not aware of how deep the tentacles of Cuban crime have enwrapped America, and the economic and mortal results this has involved? http://interactive.sun-sentinel.com/plundering-america/

America is strong because of immigrants and because of justice and compassion - always has been and hopefully always will. In a few months, as few will remember this violation of American principals as those who remember that Ebola brouhaha today.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Woke up this morning to hear that Dianne Feinstein disagrees with Obama's assessment that ISIL is not "contained".

When even a senior democrat agrees that protecting American lives isn't Islamophobic; it's just plain smart, proves that Obama could care less about the safety of our country . . . .

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

"The law-abiding ones, yes" Yes, 99.99999% are. They love the USA. You agree. I agree. Obama agrees. So does GWB. What's the problem.

"I know you libs are desperate" But the Republicans said that Muslims are good people first. Just like the Republicans invented ObamaCare first.

"And as a Christian (supposedly)" If it's not, then so what?

"That doesn't mean there there aren't individuals" GWB said Islam is a society of "peace"

"the two idiot Jihadists" Two or two million. Again you are talking about .000000001%.

I don't get it. First the Republicans fell in love in Muslims under GWB when they killed 3000 Americans - actually may more during the Iraq war. Then they have killed how many Americans during the Obama Presidency? Why do Republicans hate all Muslims now? They are jealous because Muslims have killed less people (a lot less) under Obama than the Republicans. The Rebubliancs don't want to admit defeat that Obama is very good with Muslims.

Numbers. Look at the Numbers.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

People here attacking U.S. politicians for not wanting Syrian refugees in are the same ones complaining about too many entering Europe.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Muslims do intergrate better in the US cuz they're here to make money. That's their motivation. Religion is second.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Their America is small, mean, petty, and full of fear.

and posting on JT:

Right, compassion. Tell that to all the slaughtered people in Paris.

Pathetic.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"a few" That's right.

But that doesn't mean you have to be blind. Who are the people that are causing this and want to kill us? Fundamental Jihadist, that's it and there is no other way to put it. Either deal with it or live in the land of unicorns.

Obama is better at protecting Americans against terrorists than Bush.

No, we were just lucky that nothing happened under Obama, but the procedures that were implemented after 9/11 from increased surveillance creating the Homeland security, the sharing of information between the CIA and FBI, locked doors on planes. The only thing that I will give him credit for is that he ratcheted up the spying surveillance which many Democrats were objecting to. That is one good thing the guy has done, besides getting OBL.

Thanks for confirming.

Glad to clarify.

The numbers prove it and this is established. Obama is doing well with Muslims because they are generally more successful in the USA than in other parts of the world.

I could care less if Obama is doing well with Smurfs, that is not what the majority of the Americans feel. All they care about is, they want the country safe and what Obama is doing is far from it.

"stick to the president that is in office now." But Obama's performance has been so much better than GWB's.

When it comes to foreign policy, Obama looks is the biggest joke since the Spruce Goose.

"Sorry, I look at the Jihadists." No, who has kept America safer. Eight years of Bush or (almost) eight years of Obama. Numbers!

I'll take Bush, at least whether you love him or hate him, his enemies did fear him, Putin wouldn't be doing what he's doing, the same goes for the Chinese and there wouldn't this capitulation and constant excuse of being dishonest of being a coward.

America wants these refugees. Why? The ones who could escape did escape? They had the wealth, the education, the connection.

Most people don't want these refugees, if any, at least make sure the persecuted Christians and other minorities are cared for first.

They escaped because they were successful where they came from and will continue to do so (or at least their kids will when they grow up) at their destinations.

So then let the other Arab nations take them in. They have a lot of land and money are are also...get this, Muslims!

It's sad that the ones without the means will be forced to stay, but that's how things work in the world. Wealth wins. Wealth has options- unfair but true.

Let them wait.

There were a couple of people saying states could just refuse these people? How?

27 Governors don't want these refugees, that's basically a NO. And that NO is getting louder. But this president with the ears that he has, just is not listening.

Once you are in then you are in and you can move about anywhere in the United States. How exactly can anyone restrict any refugee to just certain states? Is that possible? Really?

If you care about security, anyone can and should say, NO and approach this with the most extreme caution.

"I do not want to see any Muslim refugees coming to my state." Well....tough

Yeah, I keep forgetting, we have a president that cares only what he thinks, forget about working for the people, he believes in working for himself. But that's what Tyrants do. So I don't think anyone is surprised. 355 more days until this joke of a guy is finally gone. At least some relief and joy will come to us.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Wow, this has become quite a fetish, hasn't it?

Yeah, call it whatever. I call it nonsense. They're not welcomed in the US.

The widows and young children deserve our help temporarily, but then should be deported back to Turkey, Syria or another regional nation.

Its outrageous. How obama, following terrorist attacks in europe, Is willing to let in lots of those young, bearded, healthy, Islamic men into the US. The one who shou, "God is great."

Even female suicide bombers are among the ranks. And teens willing to stab & slash Isrealis in european streets. No thanks!! Don't come to the USA.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

What's the name of the Conservative who allowed thousands of Americans to die on 9/11?

Better question would be which president allowed OBL to live that would eventually burden the conservative president and which president was the one that could've taken out OBL, but decided NOT to?

"Obama is doing well This is your quote.

I never said that.

Unemployment is low. Gas prices are low. Stock market recovered. Rate of uninsured is lower. Yes, he is doing well.

We will revisit that unrealistic bubble in another thread.

What are you talking about?

What can the governors do legally to keep them out of their states. Of course if I were new to America I would not want to move to a conservative trashy state like Miss. or Alabama anyway.

I feel the same about California and New York and I'm from California, but it's now a very trashy place.

But really, what could any Governor do. They are just talking up their base.

No, they are listening to their instincts and the people. The Democrats are talking to their base because anyone with common sense can understand the risks involved here.

"Once they are in then they are in. How can they legally block them from coming into their states." You didn't answer this question.

How about sending the majority of the refugees to the White House lawn, put tents there, I'm all for it. Then Obama can embrace the people he loves so much.

Under Obama less Americas have died and the American Muslim population has integrated in the American lifestyle better than any president in history.

That doesn't mean we need to be foolish and let everyone in. We should take our time, but as I always say, the Dems keep defying the wishes of the people, they'll pay for it at the polls, which is fine by me.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

@globalwatcher

lucabrasiNov. 18, 2015 - 03:42PM JST

@globalwatcher

You state openly that you don't want to live with Muslim refugees; fair enough.

But don't then claim you "work hard for ... equality."

You clearly don't.

Do not forget that terrorists do not qualify for justice, freedom and equality we value in the western world. They are >criminals. I draw a line. Do not mix up apple butter to s--t.

You've labeled all refugees as a terrorists in one fell swoop. Good job.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Most of the mess in the middle east has been created by USA and Russia. Please take your part of the disaster!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Helping hand: Democrat. Middle finger: Republican.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Not really a Christian thing to do...

Yes it is. Because the republicans are protecting other christians who call america home.

There is a reason why Saidis Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and Jordan refusing to take the Syrian "refugees". America doesn't want or need them.

Yeah, that's right they're unwelcome. Especially the young healthy bearded men who want to plot.

That would be as crazy as saying all gun owners are responsible for gun violence. Right?

No, allowing islamic refugees would be crazier. There are enough armed wackos in the US. But now adding the"extremist" element to the population mix just ups the ante. Enhancing more possibilities for violence within our borders.

Shutting the borders is less about security

Wrong it is about security. Look at what happened in Paris. Are the French suddenly a bunch of "racists" just because they lock-downed their borders? Certainly not.

more about pandering to bigots and a party that was already anti-immigrant.

Right. Especially the criminal elements from Mex. and the South America's slums. The druglords and their henchmen assassins. The ones who exploit the US and taking advantage of relaxed immigration policies. & Now the administration wants to bring in syrians?

It's complete nonsense.

-2 ( +12 / -14 )

So Europe gets to take one for the team for the problem America a hand in creating seems fair not.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

this kind of "war on terror", panic reaction, ramping up spending on useless military measures when economies already deep in debt, throwing up the barriers, closing the doors, inter religious and racial division is all exactly what ISIS is trying to achieve. and out useless pols in "the West" play right into their hands......

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

No refugees from Syria. As a matter of fact, I do not want to see any Muslim refugees coming to my state..

I have to think about my family's safety first. I pay my tax, I work hard for my justice, freedom and equality. These refugees cannot just come to our place and demand our value. They have to earn them. In US, guns are too available. Bad refugees and guns are pretty bad mix, I believe.

I am very surprised about myself to say this. I feel terrible and I am not even a Republican voter.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Why should the USA and Europe accept them?

In the case of the USA, it's a 'you broke it, you bought it' type scenario. They created the conditions that allowed for ISIS, they should take some responsibility for the people who cannot live in their country anymore as a result.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc (the eminently logical countries to do so) don't want them, citing very real security concerns.

I doubt that the reasons are security concerns. They just don't have compassion towards the refugees.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Right, compassion. Tell that to all the slaughtered people in Paris.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Most of the mess in the middle east has been created by USA and Russia for oil control. Please take your part of the disaster!

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

"No, we were just lucky" No, Bin Laden kicked GWB's butt. Then it was Obama who hunted down BL. I repeat. What is the body count of GWB vs Obama? Who is the one who killed BL? I rest my case.

"I could care less if Obama is doing well" OK, but you are now confirming he is a good president.

"27 Governors don't want these refugees, " They are just saying that. Once they are in then they are in. How can they legally block them from coming into their states?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

How about a trade? No refugees allowed to the US for no drone strikes in the rest of the world? Both potentially can save many innocent lives.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

SOOOOOOOOOO who has been Bombing Syrians? where the heck are they supposed to go with so many countries hurling bombs at them.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

but also many Democrats who are also wanting a hold on refugee's. Article is misleading.

Yeah, and there are lots of dems saying the screening process (of the refugees) will work, while other dems saying that there are holes.

Scary, when in fact our TSA cannot even properly screen passengers inside US airports.

We have enough gun owners to protects us. Right?

Yeah, but those gun owners reside in red states, where their Governors are trying to block the refugees. The lib states and those lawless masses who acquire guns will have to fend for themselves.

Most of the refugees are economic refugees.

If that is true, Then why did Germany & Netherlands just cancel a Soccer Game- Amid serious plans for explosion, terror threat.

The extremists already there in europe, are changing how normal eurpoeans live. Soccer Games never used to suddenly get "cancelled."

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

and those invited to the US - who must pass through multiple levels of biographical and biometric screening and are further monitored after arrival.

Dude, the TSA cannot even proficiently screen ordinary american passengers flying in & out of US cities. How is the administration going to do it?

Use your brain. Do not succumb to fear.

Okay. But the administration has (or should have) a responsibility to the safety of its citizens. So why even go there? Why enact a policy of accepting these islamic refugees. Especially at a time when ISIS is going full throttle?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

As I said, the US created the conditions that allowed for ISIS. You placed the blame on Obama, then said that my comment made no sense whatsoever, yet failed to provide any kind of reasoning behind it.

For starters, Obama estimated the power of the jihadists, he said Al Qaida is on the run, ISIS was a JV team, he said that they are contained, he never questioned or followed on ANY of his senior military advisors recommendation as to how to handle ISIS, he wouldn't listen to Gates, Panetta, Brennan and others. The guy has completely lost it and has become a huge liability for the country and even what happened in France, he still is in denial, he still will not admit to what it is we are dealing with! He will not say, radical Jihadists. Hollande does, Cameron does, everyone else does and this lunatic will NOT! There is something fundamentally and mentally wrong with this guy. Imagine if we would have left Japan and Germany, how well would have those countries turned out? Obama didn't help anyone, us or the region by taking out every soldier in that country and now we will without a shadow of a doubt, if now,Cohen later, return and fight a bigger enemy and more powerful than before and why? Because Obama wanted the Muslim would to love us and accept us and that will NEVER, EVER happen. Thank God, he only has 356 more days left, I don't think the country can handle much more of this guy. The man has shown to be THE absolute worst president since the founding of this country.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

One is a worrying #. I don't know how many muslims there are now in US, But since they are already here and not radical, its all good . . . its the questionable wave of them syrian masses which are raising (even among the democrats) eyebrows.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev a refugee?

I think his family just came here, but sought asylum because everyone wants to come to America. Tsarnaev will be pushing up daffodills after he's rightfully executed.

Republicans are playing right into ISISs hands

But where is obama in all of this? Oh he's in the PI "demanding" that China stop building more artificial islands in the South China Sea. LMAO! & so are the chinese I bet. What a character our president is!

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Not really a Christian thing to do...

Heh, so now liberals are for our government being influenced by religion? Seems like a strange position for the perpetually upset to take since they constantly throw temper tantrums about religious values influencing U.S. government decisions and/or policies.

Oh, the hypocrisy . . . .

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Land of the free, home of the whopper

That says it all. Thank you.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

No refugees from Syria. As a matter of fact, I do not want to see any Muslim refugees coming to my state.

Wow! I almost never agree with you on anything, but on this point, you are 110% correct!

I am very surprised about myself to say this. I feel terrible and I am not even a Republican voter.

Doesn't matter which political party or ideology you support, you are using reasonable and logical common sense.

But don't then claim you "work hard for ... equality."

So now because the man is only concerned about his state and his country in this particular sensible regard, he is now all of a sudden a traitor or a sell out? He has to tow the liberal line always? He's not to say a personal opinion that's not in line with the progressive ideology movement? If liberals really and truly cared about equality, they would want a tighter and tougher and more strict policy when it comes to the vetting process of foreign refugees.

Politics or real-world compassion. Apparently, the GOP has scheduled a vote on this in the House for Thursday. We will see on which side they choose

If they're smart, they'll choose safety first, which would be the sane thing to do.

Religion aside, Japan is not accepting "refugees" and I think everyone on this site is happy about that. Why should the USA and Europe accept them? Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc (the eminently logical countries to do so) don't want them, citing very real security concerns. Meanwhile Europe sleepwalks to its own self- destruction.

Exactly! You get it, you understand it and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out, it's a NO brainer! By far the smartest post of today. So libs, if you are a compassionate group of people as you all claim to be, how about pushing Japan to take in a few hundred, you all would be cool with that? Let's all be loving, kind and caring.

In the case of the USA, it's a 'you broke it, you bought it' type scenario. They created the conditions that allowed for ISIS, they should take some responsibility for the people who cannot live in their country anymore as a result.

Now that was by far the absolute worst answer I have ever heard. That made NO sense whatsoever. Obama created ISIS and if I may add is compounding the situation by sitting on his hands, hiding in the corner like a sniveling helpless and pathetic child. Hey, when you have msnbc pundits like Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews (of all people) thinking the president is really wrong on this issue and speak out about it, you know the s*** has most definitely hit the fan!

doubt that the reasons are security concerns. They just don't have compassion towards the refugees.

No, the Saud family doesn't want to take any chances of having refugees come in and under the radar plot something that could challenge the power of the royal family or that they could be ousted or even worse be executed which ISIS would like.

Bush and Cruz have gone on record saying we should accept refugees from Syria....if they are Christian. I guess every other religion need not apply.

First, what would an Atheist know about Christianity and second, how do you know, they are not being a Christian? The bible doesn't say allow "thyself to become a foolish martyr in case you encounter a jihadist."

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

The U.S. has admitted roughly 2,500 Syrians since the civil war erupted

2,500. There that's enough. All it takes is one "asylum seeker" to get in and go wrong. Does anyone remember that's how the Boston Marathon Bomber got in? The next bomber will be a suicide bomber in somewhere like Times Square, NY.

Do we really need those people on US soil?

Some argue . . . what about the women and children? Look @ Saint-Denis Paris Police Raid, where even the women are "blowing themselves up."

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

"2,500" This is a worrying number? With how many millions of Muslims in the USA now?

Also, was Dzhokhar Tsarnaev a refugee?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

No, Bin Laden kicked GWB's butt.

And Clinton's as well.

Then it was Obama who hunted down BL.

You mean SEAL Team 6 that was recommended to him by Bush, they hunted OBL. What was the name of the Conservative that killed him again?

I repeat. What is the body count of GWB vs Obama? Who is the one who killed BL? I rest my case.

He wasn't an Obama supporter that's for sure.

"I could care less if Obama is doing well" OK, but you are now confirming he is a good president.

For the record and since you know me, I have never, ever said that. One for the archives!

"27 Governors don't want these refugees, " They are just saying that.

I had no idea, you had physic insight all of their minds. Silly me, I keep forgetting about the liberal omnipotent powers they possess. ROFL

Once they are in then they are in. How can they legally block them from coming into their states.

Well, we all know libs could care less what their constituents want. The more Dems jump off the cliff with their Stazi tactics, the more Trump looks reasonably and completely sane.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Cowards

Republicans are cowards. They blaber a lot. About a lot of things. Like defending freedom. And being strong.

And when the time comes to defend freedom and being strong, they whine like a bunch of babies. "ohhhhh, there could be meany, wheeny Muslim under my bed.!"

Cowards.

-5 ( +18 / -23 )

The Arabs managed to build a name for themselves as many of them used their "refugee" status to commit killings in the same place that gave them shelter.

Yeah, & we're tired of their double-standard. How they criticize the west for mourning Paris and not the attacks in Beirut, Turkey or Baghdad. Then they seek asylum in the west instead of rich Gulf Nations.

. . . Worse, once their "settled" in those western societies, they still hold grudges or even hatred against the west. The once "average" muslim, then changes into radical muslim. This is what is scary.

This another reason why obama should rescind this policy.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Typical Republican knee-jerk reaction, and misplaced blame. They could fall off their bicycles and they'd blame immigrants, and god knows we already read about gun-massacres on a daily basis in the US. Do they rush to ban guns? nope -- instead many automatically assume, without any information, that it was "terr'st Mulsims" or "blacks". They do anything but look at the root and take effective measures. Here, again, we see that same kind of lack of logic.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

"Because Obama wanted the Muslim would to love us and accept us and that will NEVER, EVER happen"

That's not true:

Of course it is.

"Islam is peace" GWB

"The sweetest call is the call to prayer"-Barack Hussein Obama

The Republicans declared Muslims are good people.

Has nothing to do with the DNC or the GOP saying there is nothing wrong with Muslims, neither side said it, however, the GOP understands the difference between peaceful Muslims and violent Jihadists, something that the Democrats don't seem or want to understand.

Of course not the terrorists. But their general population loves the USA.

That doesn't mean there there aren't individuals that hate it or want to wage Jihad on it. Look at France. And you had a Belgium citizen that swore to align himself with ISIS.

In fact Muslims assimilate much better in the USA than they do in Europe.

Because they know we don't play around. Remember the two idiot Jihadists that tried to shoot up the Muhammad drawing cartoon exhibit and look what happened to them before they could even get out of the car.

It's good that Obama has done so much for the Muslim community. Any state would be lucky to have these fine people since...

And as a Christian (supposedly) he did nothing to help bring in the Christians that are being brutalized, slaughtered and beheaded as well as Yazidis. Well, at least we know where he stands on helping persecuted religious minorities, speaks volumes of what the guy is or where his loyalties are.

"America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country.

The law-abiding ones, yes.

Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect.." GWB

Of they live by our rules and try not to impose Sharia on any facet of the American lifestyle, they should be treated like anyone else, if not, they need to leave.

imagine this child of Indian immigrants forced to defend general immigration chances for people of his ancestor country (Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims) with the rabid xenophobia currently consuming Repubs.

I know you libs are desperate, but getting that deep in the gutter, even I didn't think you would go there.

Cruz and Rubio must go along (and even fuel) this GOP zeitgeist - but what of their own ancestors? Are you not aware of how deep the tentacles of Cuban crime have enwrapped America, and the economic and mortal results this has involved?

So.....uh....what does that have to do with trying to scrutinize and closely check out EVERY Muslim refugee that comes in?

America is strong because of immigrants and because of justice and compassion - always has been and hopefully always will. In a few months, as few will remember this violation of American principals as those who remember that Ebola brouhaha today.

Same thing. You get sick flying off to foreign countries and you have one of the most deadliest viruses in your body and even as an American citizen, I'm sorry, but you know the risks. We will give you food and aid that you need, but you can't come back until you are virus FREE otherwise you are not allowed to enter the States.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

"The law-abiding ones, yes" Yes, 99.99999% are. They love the USA. You agree. I agree. Obama agrees. So does GWB. What's the problem.

Has nothing to do with the Syrian refugees or the other Muslims that could potentially feel the need to become radicalized and want to continue the Jihad, so we should monitor all the Mosques IMHO.

"I know you libs are desperate" But the Republicans said that Muslims are good people first. Just like the Republicans invented ObamaCare first.

What does that have to do with anything?

"And as a Christian (supposedly)" If it's not, then so what?

So you agree, the Christian persecuted Syrians should be allowed to come in first and the Muslims should wait to be properly vetted, so we are indeed on the same page. Good to know.

"That doesn't mean there there aren't individuals" GWB said Islam is a society of "peace"

GWB is not the president now, stick to the president that is in office now.

"the two idiot Jihadists" Two or two million. Again you are talking about .000000001%.

I don't care if it's 1 and a half. You don't just let anyone in, particularly a group of people that swear to destroy the West and wants to slaughter all Christians, Jews and infidels and we have to avoid vetting these people because a bunch of progressive looney libs want to feel good?? Spare me. With each passing day knowing that this creep will soon be out of office gives me so much comfort and satisfaction, I can hardly contain myself.

I don't get it. First the Republicans fell in love in Muslims under GWB when they killed 3000 Americans - actually may more during the Iraq war.

You mean, the sectarian violence, just to help clear up the confusion.....

Then they have killed how many Americans during the Obama Presidency?

a few and if possible when taking in 15,000 I would like to keep that level the same, possibly avoid any attacks and to do that, I think we don't necessarily need to bring all these people here, we don't need to hurry, let's take our time.

Why do Republicans hate all Muslims now?

Why do Democrats cowardly fear radical terrorism?

They are jealous because Muslims have killed less people (a lot less) under Obama than the Republicans.

No one is jealous, we all don't want another Paris or 9/11 or a Benghazi or Madrid......being careful has nothing to do with being jealous, it has everything to do with being smart.

The Rebubliancs don't want to admit defeat that Obama is very good with Muslims.

Or maybe Obama doesn't want to admit he hates Christians and Jews.

Numbers. Look at the Numbers.

Sorry, I look at the Jihadists.

Glad to read that we are on the same page on this issue. This is about America first, political affiliation second.

The way I see it, the EU letting the hoard of "refugees" into their countries without any proper screening is a recipe for disaster. If anything, only women and children should have been allowed in. The men should have been sent back to fight for (or against) their country.

The Paris attack by jihadis is just a prelude of bad things to come in that part of the world. We need to keep an ocean between us and that insanity. . . .

100% agreed and 110% spot on!

Elizabeth Warren - not a presidential candidate (yet), had this to say:

Liz Warren can take a hike....a long one!

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

if they tout they are living by Christian principals and the guardian of the Christian tradition then they should do it. Just showing hypocrisy, that's all.

Even if that means, Christians should be suicidal in doing that. Christians love life and they're NOT Jihadists.

Typical Republican knee-jerk reaction, and misplaced blame. They could fall off their bicycles and they'd blame immigrants, and god knows we already read about gun-massacres on a daily basis in the US.

Yeah, uh-huh and look at France because they didn't have a knee-jerk reaction.

Do they rush to ban guns? nope

Not that same issue. What other excuse do you have?

-- instead many automatically assume, without any information, that it was "terr'st Mulsims" or "blacks".

So now you want to say the stats lie, change them to suit the liberal narrative?

They do anything but look at the root and take effective measures.

I wish, really wish the liberals would do that once in their life.

Here, again, we see that same kind of lack of logic.

So then why is it that the liberals never learn from that lack?

Repubs fail to distinguish between the refugee flood hitting Europe, which basically consists of anyone ambulatory, and those invited to the US

Who invited them?

who must pass through multiple levels of biographical and biometric screening and are further monitored after arrival.

Yes, as they most definitely should.

Use your brain. Do not succumb to fear.

Giving in to the fear and being politically naive are two entirely different things.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas. Not.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

{Not really a Christian thing to do.

So what do you call the Japanese for doing literally the same thing? You libs are really something else. You guys caution Japan about letting any foreigners into the country, but you all expect the US to open the flood gates and let everyone in knowing that the majority of refugees are Muslim men and the people if any, that we should take in as top priority should be the people that are being severely persecuted and that would be the Christian or the Yazidi minorities.

And of course, the Muslims should be vetted, if you think that it's racist to make sure that you don't have any jihadists mixed in with the refugees like what happened with Greece, then so be it. Enough of being politically correct, that's not going to keep anyone safe and if they pass the vetting process, by all means, let them in, I wouldn't have a problem and I don't think most Americans either. But if liberals want to call the GOP a bunch of racists, then the liberals are careless, heartless hypocrites that don't care about the country if they want to be so irresponsible in allowing anyone in without being properly and thoroughly vetted.

-7 ( +11 / -18 )

Don't we have enough immigrants in the country already? The illegals come, fade into society and some take advantage of the USA generosity. Aren't taxpayers overtaxed as is?

-8 ( +12 / -20 )

Nobody said they have to abandon their faith.

From the rhetoric the libs are spewing, it sure seemed like that.

-8 ( +8 / -16 )

Y'all hear about the Texas representative who notices war refugees could buy guns in Texas, and duly freaked out?

To kill Americans in massive numbers that's a possibility over the one lunatic that goes on a suicidal rampage or the occasional jihadist that wants to impress the other radical jihadists. So yes, it's alarming of the possible and potential outcome it could have if you blindly allow anyone to come in.

These guys are such dopes.

The biggest one is sitting in the White House confused as hell.

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

So Europe gets to take one for the team for the problem America a hand in creating seems fair not.

I never thought it was a good idea for the Europeans to take in so many refugees, of course not! That doesn't mean the US should make the same mistake.

Much more than just a hand. They created it. Saddam never would have let this happen. But good thing the Americans got rid of all the WMDs he had.

Any person that thought that leaving Saddam in charge of that country was a good thing is really off in the deep end.

Heh, so now liberals are for our government being influenced by religion?

So which is it? Should conservatives act like Christians or should they just give up Christianity all together? What is it you libs want? To only patronize Christians?Should they Abandon their religious principles or embrace them, the Bible should be dismissed or it should be respected and followed or are liberals being their usual selective, cherry-picking partisans that they are known to be.

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Yes, we do.

That's not even close to entirely true. In fact, it's just pretty much BS!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/syrian-refugee-poll_55f83d62e4b0c2077efc16c9

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/calls-allowing-syrian-refugees-grow-article-1.2437617

Since you forget: our country was in no small way founded by people fleeing religious oppression.

How long ago was that again?

That is exactly what is going on in Syria. With ISIS

As long they pass the vetting process and we give priorities to the persecuted minorities, I'm ok with allowing these people to come in, they should always be monitored, but we should be compassionate.

Also, libs STOP trying to make this a religious issue, you guys aren't giving them any guilt trips, you can forget that.

Yawn... Why isn't Palau or Chili isn't sharing the burden?

Good question or even Brazil or the Philippines for that matter.

You got that right. Since you don't know, conservatives have always disliked like the biblical Jesus, with all his love thy neighbor, help the poor hippie crap.,

What the.....LOL

So they made up another one.

Oh, they did? Or is it just another GOP conspiracy theory?

In America, Republican Jesus hates the poor, the gays, and the hippies, is fully armed, and rides a dinosaur.

They really do hate the hippies, oh, yeah!

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites