Christie: Protecting us from orphan toddler terrorists....

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/11/christie_reverses_earlier_call_to_accept_syrian_re_1.html#incart_most-read_politics_article

It takes a real man to take a firm stand against orphaned toddlers....

He's a real, mans man, that guy.   Straight up coward.

what an Ass!

Since all these guys running for President are sure that any and every Syrian is a member of ISIS maybe Christie should ask in a debate for Senators Rubio and Cruz to prove that their parents weren't Communist agents from Cuba. The arguments are identical. We nearly went to war in 1962 over missiles in Cuba so we treated Cuba a bit differently than how we treated Canada. If the US government did back then what some of these guys are saying we should do now, then these wonderful gentlemen (sic) would not be blathering now as their parents would not have ever been here. We could have built a wonderful compound for Cuban refugees in some wonderful place in Central America and Trump's father could have had the contract. 

I am reminded of the isolationists efforts to keep Jews fleeing the Holocaust from resettling in the United States in the years leading up to World War II.  

Well, in all fairness, he was FOR toddlers before he was AGAINST toddlers. 

Klinker said:
I am reminded of the isolationists efforts to keep Jews fleeing the Holocaust from resettling in the United States in the years leading up to World War II.  

This is exactly what comes to mind when I hear this B.S. from our politicians. It's a devastating realization at how far we have NOT come. I wonder if we actually ever do learn from history. The world has collectively made so many grave mistakes against humanity. Will we ever adapt to being more humane humans?

FYI: Steve Jobs father was Syrian if it matters to anyone.

The below poll is from Fortune magazine right before the start of WWII.

I thought as I read that, that he must not be in his right mind. They might start recruitment early, but not that early!!

As I said on another thread, con pols are never more despicable in their rhetoric than when something tragic like Paris happens.

I would have expected him to imprison refugees in a plastic bag as he did with the ebola woman.

Klinker said:

I am reminded of the isolationists efforts to keep Jews fleeing the Holocaust from resettling in the United States in the years leading up to World War II.  

http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/voyageofthedamned.htm

Christie and his bretheran pander to people's worst fears by fanning the flames of paranoia and hatred, like true demagogues. The forged Syrian passport has not even clearly linked to a terrorist, and all the rest of the terrorists had French or similar EU citizenship. Bullies always need scapegoats, and Syrian children are some more on a long list for Christie.

Jasmo said:

all the rest of the terrorists had French citizenship. 

In other words, they could have freely entered the US on a tourist visa.  

I guess we should end tourism.

For anyone fed up with Christie and others of his ilk, you can use this link on the IRC website to send an email to your government representatives asking them to support Syrian refugees:

http://cqrcengage.com/theirc/app/write-a-letter?6&engagementId=146418#.Vky40f5tcYA.facebook

^thanks cmarym

Well thank heaven we've apparently closed the flaws that allowed "several dozen" bomb makers and a couple guys with a MANPAD settle as refugees way way way back in the old days of.....2009-2012.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/terrorists-refugee-program-settle-us/story?id=35252500

But hey, kudos to ISIS for allowing for Americans to identify and attack the real enemy- Republican presidential candidates, climate deniers, bible thumpers, and 2nd amendment advocates. 

Jackson_Fusion said:

 hey, kudos to ISIS for allowing for Americans to identify and attack the real enemy- Republican presidential candidates, climate deniers, bible thumpers, and 2nd amendment advocates. 

Yeah, that's it!

Jackson_Fusion said:

Well thank heaven we've apparently closed the flaws that allowed "several dozen" bomb makers and a couple guys with a MANPAD settle as refugees way way way back in the old days of.....2009-2012.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/terrorists-refugee-program-settle-us/story?id=35252500




But hey, kudos to ISIS for allowing for Americans to identify and attack the real enemy- Republican presidential candidates, climate deniers, bible thumpers, and 2nd amendment advocates. 

The attackers in France seemed to be mostly citizens and mostly born in France or Belgium.

If France is still taking in 30,000 refugees after these attacks, I feel like NJ could maybe step up.  

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/18/france-says-it-will-take-30000-syrian-refugees-while-u-s-republicans-would-turn-them-away/

dave23 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

 hey, kudos to ISIS for allowing for Americans to identify and attack the real enemy- Republican presidential candidates, climate deniers, bible thumpers, and 2nd amendment advocates. 

Yeah, that's it!

It is, buddy. Go read the "Paris" thread and get yourself up to speed. 

Sorry if the facts disturb you. They disturb me as well. 

The Ledger ran an opinion piece yesterday bashing Christie. They used a photo of the child who died after drowning as the graphic. Classy. 

I dislike Christie for other reasons, but pretending that anyone opposed to mass resettlement are acting out of evil and racist intent is just repellant. 

Tjohn, I don't know if that's so or not, but domestically, ABC was looking at refugees.

Now, if the response is "this is an acceptable risk- people are dying" that is a perfectly morally defensible position. But that's not the argument being made. What is being done is a purely political attack, on one hand ignoring recent history entirely while at the same time trying to damage political enemies.

Not good.

Kind of sad.  If the extremists manage a Paris style attack here, most Americans will line up at the nearest voting booth to exchange their civil liberties for the illusion of security, and Osama Bin Laden can posthumously celebrate a win.

Jackson_Fusion said:

dave23 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

 hey, kudos to ISIS for allowing for Americans to identify and attack the real enemy- Republican presidential candidates, climate deniers, bible thumpers, and 2nd amendment advocates. 

Yeah, that's it!

It is, buddy. Go read the "Paris" thread and get yourself up to speed. 

Sorry if the facts disturb you. They disturb me as well. 

The Ledger ran an opinion piece yesterday bashing Christie. They used a photo of the child who died after drowning as the graphic. Classy. 

I dislike Christie for other reasons, but pretending that anyone opposed to mass resettlement are acting out of evil and racist intent is just repellant. 

Yeah, I've read it and understand that there's a lot more to it than that skewed oversimplification. I don't know about racism, but Christie's flip-flop is based on fear, xenophobia and short-term, small-minded politicking. 

tjohn said:

Kind of sad.  If the extremists manage a Paris style attack here, most Americans will line up at the nearest voting booth to exchange their civil liberties for the illusion of security, and Osama Bin Laden can posthumously celebrate a win.

Well, note the articles today that are screaming that "2000 terrorists" were able to buy firearms over the last 10 years. 

They were able to buy them because they're not felons- as most of the 700,000 (SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND!) people on the terrorist watch list aren't felons, or even connected to terrorism- someone in their family or that they're associated with may be.

Imagine if the Tea Party or members of BLM got declared security risks, and with no due process, no appeal, and lost their civil right to own a firearm. People would go nuts!

But the stories today? "NRA zealots protect terrorist's right to own firearms."

So yeah, some aren't letting the current tragedy go to waste.

Dave23, so is your position that you're willing to let terrorists into the country to help refugees? Again, a morally and logically defensible position- but it sounds like you view the contra position, that one could be unwilling to do so to help refugees, can ONLY be driven by politics and racism. 

How can that be? 

I think the logic is closer to the thinking behind our justice system that it is better to let 10 criminals go free than to convict one innocent person.  Now, in the new United States of Fear, we don't think like that any more.

Right now, we are more like the Army officers who allowed Korean civilians to be gunned down at No Gun Ri by our soldiers for fear of N. Korean infiltrators.

we vet the refugees as thoroughly as possible and let them in when they pass the review.   period end of story.   if one or two of the 10,000 turns out to be a terrorist, its no worse than our own home grown terrorists and the police and FBI will handle it.   

im not afraid and I wont live my life scared to assist people who have no hope. 

Jackson_Fusion said:

Dave23, so is your position that you're willing to let terrorists into the country to help refugees? Again, a morally and logically defensible position- but it sounds like you view the contra position, that one could be unwilling to do so to help refugees, can ONLY be driven by politics and racism. 

How can that be? 

I think you've lost any standing to call anyone out, such as the Star Ledger, for ugly rhetoric.

To TJ and Hoops- then that is fine. If the argument is "I am willing to risk terrorists settling in the United States to allow refugees access" then that's the argument- and a forthright one it is.

Acting like anyone who disagrees is "afraid"- well, of course they are. They're afraid that American citizens, whom they are in this case sworn to protect, may die in their own country if they allow refugees. If you believe that fear is unreasonable, you may argue that- but keep recent events in mind and you do.

Accusing them of being racists or xenophobes or of grandstanding is just deplorable. There are perfectly defensible and moral reasons for being opposed to resettlement. 

And a lot of it has to do with racism, xenophobia and the closing act of 500 years of white, male, Christian supremacy.

Campaigning on fear worked for the GOP in the 2002 and 2004 elections, they're hoping they can rekindle the magic.

dave23 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

Dave23, so is your position that you're willing to let terrorists into the country to help refugees? Again, a morally and logically defensible position- but it sounds like you view the contra position, that one could be unwilling to do so to help refugees, can ONLY be driven by politics and racism. 

How can that be? 

I think you've lost any standing to call anyone out, such as the Star Ledger, for ugly rhetoric.

Cite specifics or strike your tent, sir. My pointing out political hackery masquerading as compassion does not count.

And you didn't answer the question. Is opposition to refugee resettlement always based on racism, xenophobia, and short term political considerations? Given the fact that terrorists (dozens, according to ABC) beat the screening process in the last few years, how can that be so?