Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Explosions hit Brussels airport,


docyabut2

Recommended Posts

Latest Bombing targeted Christians at a Easter event.

It IS a religious war. Only thing is, only one religion is fighting, and everyone is their enemy. Time to wake up and do something about it.

Obama still hasn't called them terrorists so not likely that we will get any further action from him beyond 100,000 Muslim refugees http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/europe/us-to-increase-admission-of-refugees-to-100000-in-2017-kerry-says.html with a smattering of Christians who are the target of genocide http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/17/john-kerry-isis-genocide-syria-iraq . If Kerry and Obama want another 100K refugees from Iraq and Syria then why not make them all christian refugees since ISIS has declared genocide for them?

Edited by Merc14
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article regarding terrorism vs other causes of death in America. We're spending 50,000 times the amount of money to fight terror than any other cause of death. http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/false-sense-of-insecurity/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama still hasn't called them terrorists so not likely that we will get any further action from him beyond 100,000 Muslim refugees http://www.nytimes.c....html  with a smattering of Christians who are the target of genocide http://www.theguardi...cide-syria-iraq . If Kerry and Obama want another 100K refugees from Iraq and Syria then why not make them all christian refugees since ISIS has declared genocide for them?

First link didn't work.

Edited by Likely Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just google obama 100,000 refugees,, there are hundreds of stories

Is this the article? http://www.nytimes.c...a-refugees.html

It mentions 100,000 refugees world wide and that 10k of those would be from Syria and Iraq. Not exactly what you suggested.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Kerry and Obama want another 100K refugees from Iraq and Syria then why not make them all christian refugees since ISIS has declared genocide for them?

It makes perfect sense to only accept the most persecuted refugees such as christians. This is what our PM has aimed for.

But of course there is always going to be opposition - such as those who feel there should be equal consideration given to christians and other ­re­lig­ious and ethnic groups when ­deciding which refugees will be ­accepted.

"You don't ask a drowning person what your religion is before you save them" which ironically had come from an Islamic community leader here.... of course you always have the do gooders who would agree with him in kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the article? http://www.nytimes.c...a-refugees.html

It mentions 100,000 refugees world wide and that 10k of those would be from Syria and Iraq. Not exactly what you suggested.

His twitters on the refugees

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/obama-on-twitter-were-increasing-number-of-syrian-refugees-to-us-by-100000-in-next-2-yrs/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His twitters on the refugees

http://www.thegatewa...-in-next-2-yrs/

"We're also increasing the number of Syrian and other refugees we admit to the U.S. to 100,000 per year for the next two years."

My bolding.

Well, it appears that what he wrote is slightly misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We're also increasing the number of Syrian and other refugees we admit to the U.S. to 100,000 per year for the next two years."

My bolding.

Well, it appears that what he wrote is slightly misleading.

The man hasn't told the truth sine he entered office and sesm to not have our best interests in mind so he is capable of anything. No president has exemplified executive overreach http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/05/obamas-legacy-will-be-executive-abuse/ like the incompetent the democrats rammed into office on a raft of lies. What amazes me is teh man has done so poorly with his decisions yet still feels he knows best!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be precise, these are the actual number of Syrian refugees that have are are to be admitted to the U,S.

"Syrian Resettlement

The refugee crisis caused by the conflict in Syria is the worst the world has witnessed in a generation, with more than 4 million refugees in the region. The U.S. government is deeply committed to assisting the Syrian people and is providing more than $4.5 billion in humanitarian assistance since the start of the crisis, more than any other donor. While the vast majority of Syrians would prefer to return home when the conflict ends, it is clear that some remain extremely vulnerable in their countries of asylum and would benefit from resettlement. The Administration is committed to increasing Syrian resettlement in 2016 and beyond. The United States is one of 28 countries that have agreed to accept referrals from UNHCR as part of its ambitious international effort to secure permanent or temporary resettlement for 130,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016. As of mid-2015, UNHCR has referred more than 15,000 Syrian refugees to the United States and these individuals are being screened to determine whether they are eligible. We expect to admit some 1,600-1,800 Syrian refugees in FY 2015. In FY 2016, we project we will admit at least 10,000 Syrians."

My bolding

Source: Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2016: Report to the Congress

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/docsforcongress/247770.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be precise, these are the actual number of Syrian refugees that have are are to be admitted to the U,S.

"Syrian Resettlement

The refugee crisis caused by the conflict in Syria is the worst the world has witnessed in a generation, with more than 4 million refugees in the region. The U.S. government is deeply committed to assisting the Syrian people and is providing more than $4.5 billion in humanitarian assistance since the start of the crisis, more than any other donor. While the vast majority of Syrians would prefer to return home when the conflict ends, it is clear that some remain extremely vulnerable in their countries of asylum and would benefit from resettlement. The Administration is committed to increasing Syrian resettlement in 2016 and beyond. The United States is one of 28 countries that have agreed to accept referrals from UNHCR as part of its ambitious international effort to secure permanent or temporary resettlement for 130,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016. As of mid-2015, UNHCR has referred more than 15,000 Syrian refugees to the United States and these individuals are being screened to determine whether they are eligible. We expect to admit some 1,600-1,800 Syrian refugees in FY 2015. In FY 2016, we project we will admit at least 10,000 Syrians."

My bolding

Source: Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2016: Report to the Congress

http://www.state.gov...ress/247770.htm

I think he'd like to bring in 100,000 and will try and the screening process is a ****g joke. There are no records worth looking at as we both know and there is little doubt, I'll say zero doubt, that ISIS and Al Qaeda will have infiltrated many of their terrorists into this crowd. Therefore scattering them across the country makes no sense and is very dangerous but that is their plan.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he'd like to bring in 100,000 and will try and the screening process is a ****g joke. There are no records worth looking at as we both know and there is little doubt, I'll say zero doubt, that ISIS and Al Qaeda will have infiltrated many of their terrorists into this crowd. Therefore scattering them across the country makes no sense and is very dangerous but that is their plan.

You, of course, can think and believe whatever you want.

As far as 'zero doubt' - the families that are usually at the head of the lists have been in the refugee camps the longest. Do you really think that ISIS was crafty enough to construct this Trojan horse five years ago? With their wives and families? Most of the refugees in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon will be repatriated to Syria and Iraq once ISIS is destroyed (hopefully soon).

Anyways, I don't care to carry on this thread derailment much longer. Perhaps, if you wish, you could start a thread about refugees in the "U.S. and the Americas" part of the forum. I'd be much happier discussing this issue there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep - everything that Orban had expressed is what most Europeans think and probably also want to say.

Gone are the days of open arms and the cheerful 'you are welcome here' slogans by countries who were once happy to take them in.

It truly is a mess on a monumental scale. I can understand why countries are clamping down on taking in any more of these people.

Most are already aware of the 'home grown variety' of Muslims who have either been raised or born into Western countries - who have then turned on the very countries that adopted / hosted them.

But what is the answer ? - do countries start deporting them ? - where do they send them to ?

Once the walls / fences go up to keep them out - where do they go ? - back to where they came from ?

Then there are those who have already settled in Muslim communities - how many can be trusted as not to help and give protection to terrorists on the run from authorities - (as had recently happened in Paris)

What the hell is the answer ?....it's a vicious cycle :hmm:

Well, that is obvious. Break the circle then, and don't get involved in those areas where you have nothing to do with.

No Afghans, Iraqi, Libyans and Syrians wanted to migrate on this scale before foreign involvement on this scale.

There is no logic in Isis, and there is still less logic in how Western allies want to tackle the issue.

If you really want Isis to vaporize in Syria, one shouldn't have come up with the charicaturesque picture of the Evil Assad in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that is obvious. Break the circle then, and don't get involved in those areas where you have nothing to do with.

No Afghans, Iraqi, Libyans and Syrians wanted to migrate on this scale before foreign involvement on this scale.

There is no logic in Isis, and there is still less logic in how Western allies want to tackle the issue.

If you really want Isis to vaporize in Syria, one shouldn't have come up with the charicaturesque picture of the Evil Assad in the first place.

Sure - I sort of touched on our past Western involvement in regards to the ME some pages back.

http://www.unexplain...c=292790&st=165

Edited by Astra.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that is obvious. Break the circle then, and don't get involved in those areas where you have nothing to do with.

No Afghans, Iraqi, Libyans and Syrians wanted to migrate on this scale before foreign involvement on this scale.

There is no logic in Isis, and there is still less logic in how Western allies want to tackle the issue.

If you really want Isis to vaporize in Syria, one shouldn't have come up with the charicaturesque picture of the Evil Assad in the first place.

You say what shouldn't have been done. Since we can't go back in time and undo anything, what do suggest we do now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say what shouldn't have been done. Since we can't go back in time and undo anything, what do suggest we do now?

Bring our boys and our dollars home. Find homes for those our greed has displaced. Move on with life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In thinking about the whole Muslim problem as it relates to terrorism, it occurs to me that in addition to any physical reaction or intervention, we also need a major attitude adjustment. We won't make much progress in combating terrorism as long as being suspected of racism is more of a stigma than being suspected of terrorism. We hear in Public Service Announcements "if you see something, say something" but if you say something based on observing suspicious activity by Muslims you risk being labeled racist. The consequences of this label are so great that many people probably suppress their suspicions, preferring to wait and see what happens rather than risk their own good name or career.

I can't think of any previous wars, and this is a war, where we were so loathe to name the enemy for fear of insulting the innocents among them. We have fought Germans, Japanese, Russians, Koreans and Vietnamese, often using slurs such as Kraut or Gook, without constantly having to remind ourselves that "they're not all bad". We knew that. We still do. But now were more afraid of offending anyone than we are of being attacked. Until this changes the attacks will continue.

Edited by Big Jim
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bring our boys and our dollars home. Find homes for those our greed has displaced. Move on with life.

And this will stop the terrorist attacks?
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In thinking about the whole Muslim problem as it relates to terrorism, it occurs to me that in addition to any physical reaction or intervention, we also need a major attitude adjustment. We won't make much progress in combating terrorism as long as being suspected of racism is more of a stigma than being suspected of terrorism. We hear in Public Service Announcements "if you see something, say something" but if you say something based on observing suspicious activity by Muslims you risk being labeled racist. The consequences of this label are so great that many people probably suppress their suspicions, preferring to wait and see what happens rather than risk their own good name or career.

I can't think of any previous wars, and this is a war, where we were so loathe to name the enemy for fear of insulting the innocents among them. We have fought Germans, Japanese, Russians, Koreans and Vietnamese, often using slurs such as Kraut or Gook, without constantly having to remind ourselves that "they're not all bad". We knew that. We still do. But now were more afraid of offending anyone than we are of being attacked. Until this changes the attacks will continue.

And this will stop the terrorist attacks?

We're not at war. Toddlers killed more americans last year than terrorists did http://www.snopes.com/toddlers-killed-americans-terrorists/. There is not an entire nation trying to wipe us out as there was in WW2. There is not a reason for us to bond as a people in our desire to kill a particular group as there was in WW2. There is NO COMPARISON between the threat of terrorism and the threat of a mighty empire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this will stop the terrorist attacks?

No but it will lessen them. What it will also do is keep US weapons out of the hands of people who otherwise would be impotent in their rage. What it won't do is create more people who hate our nation because we bombed them. It will also free up manpower and finances to secure our nation which is the damn military's supposed purpose anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most important of all , it will allow a cohesive Islamic front to fight these idiots on all fronts , Religious AND Military ... it does not help any to label this as a War on ISLAM ~

~

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No but it will lessen them. What it will also do is keep US weapons out of the hands of people who otherwise would be impotent in their rage. What it won't do is create more people who hate our nation because we bombed them. It will also free up manpower and finances to secure our nation which is the damn military's supposed purpose anyways.

By what means will it lessen them? Most terrorist attacks are carried out with home made devices, not US supplied weapons. They hate us because the Koran tells them we must submit or die, not because we bombed them. Our homegrown terrorists have never been bombed. The only thing they have in common with others is their religion. We have plenty of resources already being applied to secure our nation.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More on Obama's refugee plans http://www.washingto...article/2586899

Most important of all , it will allow a cohesive Islamic front to fight these idiots on all fronts , Religious AND Military ... it does not help any to label this as a War on ISLAM ~

What do you label a fight against people who kill in the name of their religion?

Edited by Merc14
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More on Obama's refugee plans ( link snip )

What do you label a fight against people who kill in the name of their religion?

You do NOT acknowledge them as the authoritative representation of the religion nor yield to their maniacal claims as one would in accordance to whomever that makes such claims regardless of whatever the Religion being in question ...

It is not so complicated ... but some sectarian interests are hijacking this fight for advantage of their preferred faiths ... and that is the distastefulness of the complicity ~

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By what means will it lessen them? Most terrorist attacks are carried out with home made devices, not US supplied weapons. They hate us because the Koran tells them we must submit or die, not because we bombed them. Our homegrown terrorists have never been bombed. The only thing they have in common with others is their religion. We have plenty of resources already being applied to secure our nation.

ISIS has been able to secure and hold land using US weapons. That land is then used to train terrorists for their missions.

For many muslims its about defending the faith, not mindlessly killing infidels.. Stopping the attacks in islamic places which have no baring on the safety of the United States would end the need to defend against those attacks. It's not as black and white as they want us all dead just because we're not muslim, theres over a billion of them if that were the case we'd be dead by now.

Ive told this in other areas of the forum but just after Katrina I had a chance to host a Muslim for a couple of months. I was able to learn quite a bit, he was a well off british citizen of pakistani descent and the one thing he couldnt argue with in regards to islamic terrorism was the demand to defend the faith. It was interesting to speak with him and pick his brain, it was very interesting watching him struggle over that bit of his faith. This guy was the moderate muslim everyone is always asking about.

I'm afraid you, and in your defense many on this board, are the victim of some serious propaganda. Don't get me wrong Islamic terrorism is a real threat,its just not the threat the people making money off the situation want you to believe. It certainly isnt a threat big enough to spend 50,000 times as much money on as any other cause of death in this nation: http://thinkbynumber...-of-insecurity/

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.