The horrific complicity demonstrated by Dems during the Obama Administration is really hitting home.
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrites.
So . . . sad
Are you able to discuss this topic without some variation of "libs were silent when Obama did things"? Goodness.
Sure, but topical hypocrisy is relevant, as is selective outrage.
understood but my God you've posted the exact same thing like 50 times. Point made, maybe add something new to the conversation? You're a creative guy, I'm sure youth can come up with something.
Sure. I find it hilarious that so many libs and related are acting like this is a permanent ban on all Muslims, and cannot discuss this situation based on actual facts. Instead, they'd rather consistently propagate unhelpful and harmful rhetoric and choose to act out for purely partisan reasons which at their core have nothing to do with actually caring about the plight of refugees. If they actually cared about refugees (particularly from worn torn Muslim countries), they should have been marching en mass on the White House four or five years ago when the Obama Administration began a course of regime change without any plan or intent to deal with aftermath on any level that even resembled stabilization of the impacted country. One many levels, it could easily be argued that U.S. indifference to the refugees created during U.S. direct and proxy wars was intentional.
It is absolute fact and admitted by ISIS/ISIL/AQ that they have embedded terrorists into the immigrant population.
“Since at least 2014, ISIL has been working to build an apparatus to direct and inspire attacks against it’s foreign enemies, resulting in hundreds of casualties. The most prominent examples are the attacks in Paris and Brussels, which we asses were directed by ISIL’s leadership. We judge that ISIL is training and attempting to deploy for operatives further attacks. ISIL has large cadre of western fighters who could potentially serve as operatives for attacks in the West. The group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including in refugee flows, smuggling routes and legitimate methods of travel. Furthermore, as we have seen in Orlando, San Bernardino and elsewhere, ISIL is attempting to inspire attacks by sympathizers who have no direct links to the group. Last month, for example, a senior ISIL figure publicly urges the groups followers to conduct attacks in their home countries if they were unable to travel to Syria and Iraq. At the same time, ISIL is gradually cultivating the global network of branches into a more interconnected global organization.”
(John Brennan, CIA, June 16, 2016).
So, we have to hang on every word of the CIA in regards to the Russians, but when it comes to ISIL? Well, let's hold the fort here, people!!
I find it hilarious (if not concerning) that so many libs and related chose to ignore the real security threat that exists, and chose to roll out completely unrelated domestic crime statistics.
I find it concerning that so man libs and related continue to propagate the myth that a stabilizing border wall means the end to movement between Mexico and the United States and an end to immigration between the two countries (while also ignoring that Obama, Biden and Clinton all voted for an act to build a wall). While totally ignoring that a Border Wall potentially ends the process of some of the worst people in the world preying on the innocent, poor and weak. It's also a concern that so many don't recognize that huge parts of Mexico are now ceded to some the most dangerous people on the planet, legalizing drugs (except maybe Pot) isn't the answer, unless you want even more coked/meth'd/herion'd out people running around then we already have (and don't use some European countries as an example, because those are small countries, with relatively non-diverse populations, and in many cases have clamped down harshly on immigration, particularly from Middle Eastern countries).
There are actually people out there who think that Sharia law, as long as, you know, they keep in "in house" isn't such a bad thing. So let's think about this, a religion operating its own set of laws, of which many directly and purposely circumvent the law of the land, is fine?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358625/Inside-Britain-s-Sharia-courts-EIGHTY-FIVE-Islamic-courts-dispensing-justice-UK-special-investigation-really-goes-doors-shock-core.html How could this possibly be a good thing? Judeo-Christian entities (and others) who have practices that are similar (yet far more tame in most instances) are decried, mocked and targeted in the U.S. and elsewhere (as they should be if they practice anything remotely similar, particularly in regards to the subjugation of women). Can't happen here? Really? So a G7, first world country has over 80 Sharia Courts, but it "can't happen here." Fascinating.
