ADVERTISEMENT

Condoleezza Rice: I Get The Security Concerns, But The US Should Accept Refugees

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,434
62,537
113
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday (in a room with a governor who said he'd refuse refugees) that she understood the concerns over the security risks, but that the United States needed to accept refugees, as reported by AL.com.

Rice made the remarks at the 38th annual Southeast U.S.-Japan conference, in Birmingham, Alabama, according to the publication.

Among those in attendance was Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) who had released a statement Sunday that said he would not "stand complicit to a policy that places the citizens of Alabama in harm’s way." He was one of 13 governors to release statements to that effect.

Rice acknowledged Bentley at the conference, but said the country needs to be "open and welcoming" to refugees.

"I fundamentally understand that you in a position of authority, like you, governor and others, in addition to having compassion for others, you have to be safety conscious for your people," Rice said, nodding at Bentley. "What the United States has done is to be open to people who are fleeing tyranny, who are fleeing danger, but we have done it in a very careful way that has worked for us."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/condoleeza-rice-refugees-security
 
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday (in a room with a governor who said he'd refuse refugees) that she understood the concerns over the security risks, but that the United States needed to accept refugees, as reported by AL.com.

Rice made the remarks at the 38th annual Southeast U.S.-Japan conference, in Birmingham, Alabama, according to the publication.

Among those in attendance was Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) who had released a statement Sunday that said he would not "stand complicit to a policy that places the citizens of Alabama in harm’s way." He was one of 13 governors to release statements to that effect.

Rice acknowledged Bentley at the conference, but said the country needs to be "open and welcoming" to refugees.

"I fundamentally understand that you in a position of authority, like you, governor and others, in addition to having compassion for others, you have to be safety conscious for your people," Rice said, nodding at Bentley. "What the United States has done is to be open to people who are fleeing tyranny, who are fleeing danger, but we have done it in a very careful way that has worked for us."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/condoleeza-rice-refugees-security

I've posted this 4 places already, but here goes again, so people can start to actually understand the differences.

Wahhabi Muslims from Saudi Arabia attacked us on 9/11.
Wahhabi Muslims from Belgium attacked Paris.

The issue is not 'all Muslims', it is the Muslim sects that produce extremist views. ISIS and the Taliban are Wahhabi, or are influenced by them. It is time for us, and the Muslim world, to stand up to and stamp out the Wahhabi influences. That means some tough pills to swallow, because Saudi Arabia and that area are all Wahhabi.

Iran is Shia and is a direct enemy of the Saudis and Wahhabi. Iran is absolutely a supporter of terrorism in the ME, but they have not attacked the US mainland or Paris. Wahhabis did.
 
I've posted this 4 places already, but here goes again, so people can start to actually understand the differences.

Wahhabi Muslims from Saudi Arabia attacked us on 9/11.
Wahhabi Muslims from Belgium attacked Paris.

The issue is not 'all Muslims', it is the Muslim sects that produce extremist views. ISIS and the Taliban are Wahhabi, or are influenced by them. It is time for us, and the Muslim world, to stand up to and stamp out the Wahhabi influences. That means some tough pills to swallow, because Saudi Arabia and that area are all Wahhabi.

Iran is Shia and is a direct enemy of the Saudis and Wahhabi. Iran is absolutely a supporter of terrorism in the ME, but they have not attacked the US mainland or Paris. Wahhabis did.
however iran, as a nation, has stated their main goal is to wipe out the usa and Israel and the west, right? is this shia iran?
 
however iran, as a nation, has stated their main goal is to wipe out the usa and Israel and the west, right? is this shia iran?

So, if your choice is the nation that talks a big show, but has never, ever attacked our mainland or Europe, vs. the nation/group that HAS attacked us (on 9/11) and is continuing coordinated attacks on Western , who would you prefer to negotiate or align with?

Iran can shout 'Death to America' all day long, so long as they don't actually act on their rhetoric (and they haven't - they DO coordinate terrorist attacks in the ME, however).
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I've posted this 4 places already, but here goes again, so people can start to actually understand the differences.

Wahhabi Muslims from Saudi Arabia attacked us on 9/11.
Wahhabi Muslims from Belgium attacked Paris.

The issue is not 'all Muslims', it is the Muslim sects that produce extremist views. ISIS and the Taliban are Wahhabi, or are influenced by them. It is time for us, and the Muslim world, to stand up to and stamp out the Wahhabi influences. That means some tough pills to swallow, because Saudi Arabia and that area are all Wahhabi.

Iran is Shia and is a direct enemy of the Saudis and Wahhabi. Iran is absolutely a supporter of terrorism in the ME, but they have not attacked the US mainland or Paris. Wahhabis did.

I've heard nothing from Obama that mentions Wahhabi Muslims.
 
I've heard nothing from Obama that mentions Wahhabi Muslims.

I've heard nothing from ANY politicians that mentions them.

And that's unfortunate, because it is THAT group which preaches the intolerance and extremism which gives rise to groups like the Taliban and ISIS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I've heard nothing from ANY politicians that mentions them.

And that's unfortunate, because it is THAT group which preaches the intolerance and extremism which gives rise to groups like the Taliban and ISIS.

Jesus, you have never met a Nebraska fan. So much to address and you're stuck on Wahabis.

Did you get my "conversation"? I don't know if I did it right, but I was asking if you'd look at something for me.
 
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday (in a room with a governor who said he'd refuse refugees) that she understood the concerns over the security risks, but that the United States needed to accept refugees, as reported by AL.com.

Rice made the remarks at the 38th annual Southeast U.S.-Japan conference, in Birmingham, Alabama, according to the publication.

Among those in attendance was Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley (R) who had released a statement Sunday that said he would not "stand complicit to a policy that places the citizens of Alabama in harm’s way." He was one of 13 governors to release statements to that effect.

Rice acknowledged Bentley at the conference, but said the country needs to be "open and welcoming" to refugees.

"I fundamentally understand that you in a position of authority, like you, governor and others, in addition to having compassion for others, you have to be safety conscious for your people," Rice said, nodding at Bentley. "What the United States has done is to be open to people who are fleeing tyranny, who are fleeing danger, but we have done it in a very careful way that has worked for us."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/condoleeza-rice-refugees-security

Interesting, but I didn't see the words Syria or Syrian in that story anywhere.

Is anyone arguing that we should not accept ANY refugees? If so, then I would guess that 99%+ of Americans would disagree.
 
I've heard nothing from Obama that mentions Wahhabi Muslims.

I've heard nothing from ANY politicians that mentions them.

And that's unfortunate, because it is THAT group which preaches the intolerance and extremism which gives rise to groups like the Taliban and ISIS.
Jesus, you have never met a Nebraska fan. So much to address and you're stuck on Wahabis.

Did you get my "conversation"? I don't know if I did it right, but I was asking if you'd look at something for me.

I did....I started a post back at you yesterday. I don't have the ability to reply to the Conversations directly, so you can send me an email address thru that function if you want.
 
Good for her. A little late to be a credible commentator after she helped the US go into Iraq under false pretenses.
 
I've posted this 4 places already, but here goes again, so people can start to actually understand the differences.

Wahhabi Muslims from Saudi Arabia attacked us on 9/11.
Wahhabi Muslims from Belgium attacked Paris.


The issue is not 'all Muslims', it is the Muslim sects that produce extremist views. ISIS and the Taliban are Wahhabi, or are influenced by them. It is time for us, and the Muslim world, to stand up to and stamp out the Wahhabi influences. That means some tough pills to swallow, because Saudi Arabia and that area are all Wahhabi.

Iran is Shia and is a direct enemy of the Saudis and Wahhabi. Iran is absolutely a supporter of terrorism in the ME, but they have not attacked the US mainland or Paris. Wahhabis did.
To jump off of this, if the attackers were from Saudi Arabia and Belgium, then why did the Republicans point fingers at Iraq and Syria? Why isn't anybody talking about this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
To jump off of this, if the attackers were from Saudi Arabia and Belgium, then why did the Republicans point fingers at Iraq and Syria? Why isn't anybody talking about this?

You really are that dense.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT