Jump to content

Refugee Crisis in Europe


Recommended Posts

 

I've had enough neo-Nazi bull **** the past several days to last a lifetime. Hell, I've studied actual Nazis for a lifetime, and it's only in the past few days that I've gotten sick of Nazi ****.

 

I can't even enjoy the irony that neo-Nazis are exactly the types of people the Nazis killed. That's right, Ozy, you dumb bucket of ****...in Nazi Germany, your nonsense would have gotten you executed - not "imprisoned," not "put in a camp," but killed outright - as an asocial element. You're not a race warrior. You're not a revolutionary. You're a bag of dicks that the Nazis purged.

 

Well, the nazis wouldn't exactly have been the nazis without the brownshirts. An army of what, two million thugs can do wonders to move a nutcase into the spotlight.

But your point is legitimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was interesting:

 

Refugee camp translator reveals how German migrants ‘despise’ Christians and want to ‘Islamise’ the country

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2206253/refugee-camp-translator-german-migrants-despise-christians-islamise-country/

 

 

But it's racist to make sure any refugees coming here are thoroughly vetted, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was interesting:

 

Refugee camp translator reveals how German migrants ‘despise’ Christians and want to ‘Islamise’ the country

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2206253/refugee-camp-translator-german-migrants-despise-christians-islamise-country/

 

 

But it's racist to make sure any refugees coming here are thoroughly vetted, right?

 

Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure about that?

Do you ever speak in anything other than vague riddles?

 

I don't know, probably some kook somewhere is talking about letting everybody in right away with no vetting. But the consensus in both parties seems to be that we should definitely weed out terrorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anonymous is taking on Soros due to links to funding terrorism and international crimes.

 

Anonymous after anyone is not good; claims of immigrant manipulation and soros pissing off Russia/Putin, too.

 

But, using immigrants Soros and Clinton...under attack. Rothschild and Asia have been a focus already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anonymous is taking on Soros due to links to funding terrorism and international crimes.

 

Anonymous after anyone is not good; claims of immigrant manipulation and soros pissing off Russia/Putin, too.

 

But, using immigrants Soros and Clinton...under attack. Rothschild and Asia have been a focus already.

 

Good, hope they bring the hammer down on that !@#$

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever speak in anything other than vague riddles?

 

I don't know, probably some kook somewhere is talking about letting everybody in right away with no vetting. But the consensus in both parties seems to be that we should definitely weed out terrorists.

Well the current commander in chief has allowed many to enter the country with very poor background info. I guess you missed the part where a member of Obama's cabinet said publicly months ago that we lacked information on the backgrounds of these people but Obama pressed forward anyway and the left was crying race all over the place when it was suggested we limit refugee numbers. You may have also missed where Hillary wanted to increase the refugee numbers with no commitment to better background checks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever speak in anything other than vague riddles?I don't know, probably some kook somewhere is talking about letting everybody in right away with no vetting. But the consensus in both parties seems to be that we should definitely weed out terrorists.

the closest I've come to understanding this is banging a chick who runs a non profit to bring in women and girls who have been abused in the middle East, more specifically rhe Asian/middle East ring. The women come here. Two or three years later become citizens and bring their husbands/brothers/etc. This is an issue and they are facing defunding issues because of this.

 

There are a million loopholes to get in to this country. And we all want to welcome abused, hungry and poor women and children. Its what those women bring that is the issue

Something tells me Barry's ego will not let him quietly sit on the sidelines (like Bush did).

 

 

I, for one, will welcome this.

 

there is a good chance he will give legal residency to all those in the country right now. Border patrol standing down under BO's oders. Combined with increased numbers coming across the border believing this... This will end well
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something tells me Barry's ego will not let him quietly sit on the sidelines (like Bush did).

 

 

I, for one, will welcome this.

 

If that happens (and in all probability it will), I look forward to Trump slapping that jug-eared stuttering doofus in the mouth from the Bully Pulpit of the Presidency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who the hell is taking that position? Nobody.

 

I've heard quite a bit of blowback against the notion of our taking a closer look at the Syrian refugees we're talking about bringing here, not to mention the ones already settled here recently. Have you not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever speak in anything other than vague riddles?

 

Does the cowpea bend under the weight of a stinkbug?

I don't know, probably some kook somewhere is talking about letting everybody in right away with no vetting. But the consensus in both parties seems to be that we should definitely weed out terrorists.

 

Yes...but here's the thing. Groups disagree basically on two things: the timing of the vetting, and the depth of the vetting. Republicans and Trumpster Divers argue that the vetting should be more in-depth and occur before refugees enter the country (or at least American public life.) Democrats argue that the refugees should be brought into the country while vetting is occurring, and such vetting should not be too onerous so as to not exacerbate the refugee problem.

 

The issue is that political discourse is currently dominated by total !@#$ing !@#$s who only see extreme black-and-white. Thus, the Democrats' position is falsely presented by opponents as "Libtards want to bring terrorist in to the country!" And the Republican's and Candied Yammers' position falsely presented as "Nazis want to ban Muslims from the country!"

 

So...yeah, kooks are talking about that. But only in misrepresenting the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was interesting:

 

Refugee camp translator reveals how German migrants ‘despise’ Christians and want to ‘Islamise’ the country

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2206253/refugee-camp-translator-german-migrants-despise-christians-islamise-country/

 

 

But it's racist to make sure any refugees coming here are thoroughly vetted, right?

 

If that article is true , good grief

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't want me to post here anymore that badly?

 

You know when we'll know you've taken Joe's advice?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When we see your head rolling down a flight of stairs that's when

 

<just in case 4merper4mer misses this>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If that article is true , good grief

 

 

I don't doubt for a second that it's true, but I think I need to point out that the problem is as much a cultural one as it is a religious one, if not more so. Western culture allows for the open practice of religion within a primarily secular society, which is completely different than it is in many middle eastern countries where religious doctrine forms the basis for their societal structure. While people in the US and Europe are comparatively open-minded and tolerant of cultural differences, they're not nearly so.

 

I don't have the ability to explain my point as well as I'd like, but I think that despite the fact that the refugees in Germany are being said to target Christians, what they're attacking is as much 'westernism' as it is people of a differing faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't doubt for a second that it's true, but I think I need to point out that the problem is as much a cultural one as it is a religious one, if not more so. Western culture allows for the open practice of religion within a primarily secular society, which is completely different than it is in many middle eastern countries where religious doctrine forms the basis for their societal structure. While people in the US and Europe are comparatively open-minded and tolerant of cultural differences, they're not nearly so.

 

I don't have the ability to explain my point as well as I'd like, but I think that despite the fact that the refugees in Germany are being said to target Christians, what they're attacking is as much 'westernism' as it is people of a differing faith.

 

 

In other words, it's not just Christians they attack, it's everyone and anyone who isn't Muslim. Hmm...looks more like a religious problem, than a cultural problem to me.

Edited by HoF Watkins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is one of about, oh a billion such images easily find-able of arabs/muslims protesting the US.

 

A billion? Ok got it Because that's one massive anti-US/Israel demonstration you posted there. I counted what, 20 people there. So that means there are 20 billion of them? That's impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

In other words, it's not just Christians they attack, it's everyone and anyone who isn't Muslim. Hmm...looks more like a religious problem, than a cultural problem to me.

 

 

That's not even close to what I said, but if that's an easier way for you to look at it, then by all means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...