View original postAn article on The Guardian.com triumphantly proclaims that "None of the Isis(sic)-linked suspects who have ever been charged in the United States came from Syria and the overwhelming majority were born in the US...". The article quotes the director of a special interest group saying "The current rush to suspend America's asylum program is 'misguided'". In the immediately preceding paragraph, this same individual, one Karen Greenberg, cites those arrested as ISIS supporters as "They are young, they are spread over a wide geography, they are impervious to profiling in many ways,”

View original postYou know, except for mostly being Muslims...

View original postThis is an age old debate tactic of the Left. The Right cites an example of a systemic or widespread problem, the left treats it as occurring in a vacuum. In this case, the problem the Right has long had with immigration is that while their kids might learn English, bringing them in the country en masse from foreign cultures impedes assimilation, and stalls the process of them identifying as Americans first over their connection to their former countries. The excuse of the left, here and now, is that the refugees are not the sort to commit terrorism, and they point out how few refugees are actually terrorists. But that's not the problem! People have not been raising serious demographic questions about the immigration issue over the last 20 years on the basis that immigrants are going to conceal terrorists among their numbers, they have been concerned about importing a dissident class that doesn't share out values and beliefs, the "idea" of America, in numbers too large to assimilate. And that's where we get "American-born terrorists.". Sure none of them came from Syria, now. But it's not like Syria has historically been the problem. A number cited were born in Bosnia, but twenty years ago, any objection to taking in refugees from the fighting in the Balkans undoubtedly met with a huffy proclamation that there have never been any Bosnian terrorists, the Bosnians did not bomb the Stark or the Marine barracks or seize any airliners of cruise ships. If we take in thousands of Syrian refugees, they are going to form Syrian enclaves, and at BEST, they are going to stay here, be very prosperous, have comfortable lives, and their children are going to grow up not being allowed to hear anything bad about militant Islam without a disclaimer about the religion of peace, but their textbooks and teachers are going to teach them all about the evils of Western civilization and the exaggerated or imagined atrocities of the Crusaders, and some of them will wander into the wrong mosque or madras, and get an earful of the glories of jihad, and when they are arrested or killed fighting for militant Islam, they will be cited as American-born terrorists, and not at all relevant to the issue of admitting Indonesian refugees from the latest round of fighting provoked by an explosion at the Sydney Opera House.

View original postThe left projects bad motives to everything the right does, and argues that straw man position. No one objects to feeding and caring for the refugees. We have a problem with them staying here and raising foreigners in America under the false identity of American. The liberals love to claim that America is not tied to an ethnic group (but it's just coincidence that 42 of 44 presidents have been WASPS, and the two exceptions were a Protestant and a white man descended from UK subjects), that America is an "idea" or a "dream" but they persist in encouraging people who don't share that idea or dream to live here and collect taxpayer largesse in exchange for voting Democrat, while raising children whose ideas are not rooted in 13th century Britain or 1st Century Rome, but 6th century Arabia, and whose dream is to live in a Caliphate or at least kick some infidel ass.

View original postAnother, less highlighted argument is to point out that militant Islam is mostly targeted at moderate Islam and secular Islam... you know, exactly the kind of people they want us to bring here. Regardless of which side is true, they want us to bring in shooters or targets. And the more moderate and secular refugees we bring into this country, the less likely the sorts of "American-born terrorists" the article cites as aspiring to go abroad to fight for the jihad are going to NEED to go abroad to fight their Islamic foes.

View original postIt's really too bad about what's going on in Syria, but people get the government they deserve. We are under no obligation to bring those same people here, lest they bring their problems with them.