.........by European border control or they could be forced to show up at a local police station and be served a healthy plate of chitlins, pork ears, bacon, ham, pig feet etc. This is a guaranteed fail proof test
We, USA, stand with you!
United, we will not let fear control us! The terrorists will not defeat us!
Vive la France!!
Maybe it time to start requiring that all the Muslim immigrants flooding into Europe convert immediately to Christianity, Atheism, Buddhism or any other non violent religion. I bet hordes of Islamic immigrants would head back to their home countries. It is quite telling that none of the Sunni led countries such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Kuwait etc. have refused to take in any of these refugees in huge numbers.
But that would be discrimination wouldn't it? But it might be the only thing that works. You might have to make them eat pork to prove it as well. And not allow tourists from Muslim countries either. I don't think you ll ever see it happen or even that it's the right thing to do but to truly stop it there aren't many options. Turning the whole Middle East into a big piece of glass is something I ve heard for years...
If there are more of these terrorist attacks all around Europe, you can be sure people will demand Muslims be prevented from entering or migrating into Europe. These types of attacks serve only to strengthen right wing pro nationalistic groups all around Europe. The Islamists main aim is to convert the entire European continent into an Islamist Nation, and we all know that will never happen. At least not in our life time.
The U.S. is officially taking at least 10,000, the last time I counted. I'd like to know exactly how they are going to be effectively vetted as I don't believe it's possible. For that matter, I'd like to know how we vetted the ones already here.
From a pure national defense posture, the best thing do to is put a moratorium on all immigration and student visas from specific locations and nationalities. Hire boatloads of new FBI (no pun intended). Then use the breathing room to properly vet those already here. Of course we should have done that years ago and the present crisis makes it so much more difficult now.
In the long term I think we are actually far better off allowing as many "good" Muslims to immigrate as possible, thus creating higher concentrations of "good" and "bad" ones in different locations. Of course "good/bad" is too black and white (depending on one's definitions of good/bad of course). We need to find ways to turn up the volume of the "good" Muslim voices. This means supporting them, helping to increase their numbers, helping to allay their fears because at present they know they are in the minority. The only long term solution is the reformation of Islam.
This latest Paris attack is probably intended to prevent or slow down the mass emigrations underway
........after saying previously "accepting illegal immigrants is truly an act of love." You can bet Trump will have a field day repeating this Bush quote over and over again in his campaign speeches.
but the fact of the matter is it does, and it always does.
I would say this does Lindsay Graham the most good, but his campaign is so over and has been for months for anything to breath any life into it.
The fact of the matter is Bush was wrong and as politically incorrect as Trump is, he's right about this. Forgetting about illegal Mexican and Central American immigration for just a moment. Some people were in favor of taking in hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees. Hopefully that plan is off the table now.
I don't know who suggested it first, but I would be a supporter of women and children only where it comes to refugees, and even then most of these people don't want to assimilate. We don't OWE these people anything, if they don't want to adapt to American ways, stay the fuck home.
..........in the U.S. The WH wanted to resettle a more modest number of Syrian refugees, 10,000, but congressional Democrats went all out to try and outdo the administration. I guarantee this Syrian resettlement program will be shelved permanently.
Dozens of House Democrats are calling for the Obama administration to dramatically increase the number of Syrian refugees allowed into the U.S.
In a letter on Friday, 72 lawmakers said that the country could easily support the resettlement of as many as 100,000 refugees — a 10-fold increase from the White House’s plan.
The U.S. should “resettle a minimum of 200,000 refugees by the end of 2016, including 100,000 Syrian refugees,” they wrote to the White House. That would be in line with a recommendation from a coalition of 20 refugee organizations called Refugee Council USA.
“It is our moral duty, as a nation founded on the principles of equality and freedom, to do what we can to assist our brethren who are in desperate turmoil, and are searching for the slightest gesture of goodwill,” they wrote.
The letter was spearheaded by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.).
The Democrats’ demand would be a dramatic increase from the Obama administration’s pledge this week to let an additional 10,000 refugees into the country over the course of the next year. To this point, the U.S. has accepted roughly 1,500 of the 4 million Syrians who have fled the country since civil war broke out there in 2011.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/253418-house-dems-call-for-10-fold-increase-of-syrian-refugees
-- Modified on 11/14/2015 5:17:11 PM
I still say we need to put a moratorium on all immigration and student visas from specific locations and nationalities. Hire thousands of new FBI. Then properly locate and vet those already here.
In the long term I think we are actually far better off allowing as many "good" Muslims to immigrate as possible, thus creating higher concentrations of "good" and "bad" ones in different locations. Of course "good/bad" is too black and white (depending on one's definitions of good/bad of course). We need to find ways to turn up the volume of the "good" Muslim voices. This means supporting them, helping to increase their numbers, helping to allay their fears because at present they know they are in the minority. The only long term solution is the reformation of Islam.
I believe this latest Paris attack is probably intended to also prevent or slow down the mass emigrations underway.
BTW, it's a sad day when we are now going to rely on France to take the lead in our defense.
-- Modified on 11/15/2015 12:35:07 PM
I doubt we will see many Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. Probably if any are admitted they will probably be Syrian Christians or members of PResident Assad's minority tribe, who are mostly secular/moderate Muslims.
United, we will not let fear control us! The terrorists will not defeat us!
Vive la France!!
-- Modified on 11/14/2015 12:45:16 PM
l'inquietude pour les peuples d'Iraq, Syria, Rojava, Lebanon... seulement quand les victimes sont blancs.
Less than one month ago, "The first American soldier to be killed in Iraq since 2011 was during a mission to free approximately 70 hostages who faced imminent execution by ISIS terrorists, American officials confirmed."
The daily atrocities carried out by ISIS in the Middle East are not ignored but the constant and continuing violence and the constant and continuing protests are reduced to background noise. Protests will not put an end to ISIS violence in the Middle East. The governments in the Middle East have to step because the US, the UK, France and other countries can't do it alone.
An out of the ordinary event such as the Paris attacks produces an out of the ordinary response.
What do you think will happen next? Something or more of nothing
J'ai dit- ne demontrer pas l'inquietude; 'we don't demonstrate/express concern' (for POC in non-Western countries).
When Boko Haram kidnapped the girls in Nigeria, when suicide bombers blew up the mosque in ??? there were protests all over the world. When the Japanese guy was beheaded by ISIS, it was much bigger news in Japan than in the US. When more evil stuff happens in regions where we have no control and limited presence, the evil becomes part of the background, theirs and ours: "The Banality of Evil."
(Boko Haram is STILL running amok in Nigeria, murdering and pillaging. Suicide bombers are STILL blowing up each other and bystanders in the Middle East.)
Even with coverage by mass media, the initial shocks wear off and the normal, evil rhythm of horror stories fades into the background. We become tired and accustomed to such news and it slips into the background of the lives of most people (other than professional journalists, professional activists, and so on). For the rest of us, we need to get about our normal lives: working, shopping, studying, ... and NOT always anxiety free.
Heaven forbid, but if the Paris atrocities were an everyday occurrence, they, too, would fade into the background and cease to be a mass media top story. "Another suicide bomb in France? Ho, hum. The government should really do something about that, you know. Is there a football game tonight?"
Has peace been declared in the Ukraine? I haven't seen anything in the news lately. Must have been
Quite right. Witness the complete absence from American news of the massacre in Kenya perpetrated by al Shabab just the day before the attacks in Paris. The number of victims was about the same.
You've lost me. The al Shabab attack on Garissa University was in APRIL, not November. It was in the news recently by way of comparison to Paris, not because it took place the day before the Paris attacks. IT WAS headline news in April.
Americans, new and old, learn about the close relation between France and the US going back to colonial times (1600s-1700s). The French helped the colonies in the Revolutionary War to win independence from England (and promote their own self interests, of course). French principles (Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite!) are similar to our own principles of liberty and equality. OF COURSE, there is an immediate identity with and sympathy for France and the French people. We UNDERSTAND them.