ADVERTISEMENT

Cruz to introduce bill to bar Syrian refugees

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,364
62,380
113
And the Islamophobic paranoia on the right continues. It's quite disheartening to see these hyper-patriotic types turn their backs on American values so blithely:

CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Sen. Ted Cruz, who has said that the United States should not allow Syrian Muslim refugees into the country but should provide safe haven to fleeing Christians, plans to introduce legislation that would bar Syrian refugees from entering the country.

Cruz (R-Tex.) said after a campaign event here that the legislation is still being drafted and wouldn't offer details of exactly what it would say. According to reports, Cruz told CNN that it would bar Syrian Muslim refugees from entering the United States.

Cruz has said numerous times in the past few days that Muslim refugees from Syria should be resettled in majority Muslim countries in the Middle East while Christian migrants should be allowed to enter the United States.

"There is no meaningful risk of Christians committing acts of terror. If there were a group of radical Christians pledging to murder anyone who had a different religious view than they, we would have a different national security situation," Cruz said Sunday in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

[Cruz: ‘No meaningful risk’ of Christians committing terrorism]

Cruz has said it is "nothing short of lunacy" to allow Syrian Muslim refugees into the country, particularly after Friday's Paris attacks.

President Obama said in response to Cruz and others Monday it is "shameful" to bar refugees based on religion.


"That's not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion," Obama said.

[Obama calls idea of screening Syrian refugees based on religion ‘shameful,’ defends White House strategy]

Cruz responded on CNN Monday.

"It's not surprising that Obama is attacking me personally," the Texas senator and 2016 Republican presidential candidate told CNN's Dana Bash. "I'll tell you what's shameful is that the president after seven years still refuses to utter the words radical Islamic terrorism [and] claims that somehow [it's] a religious test. [It's] not that at all. It is understanding the nature of the evil we face."

The Texas Republican often mentions how his father fled Cuba for the United States as a young man. Cruz was asked on CNN Monday how he could bar refugees from the United States given his father's story.

"If my father were part of a theocratic and political movement like radical Islam that promotes murdering anyone who doesn't share your extreme faith or forcibly converting them, it would make perfect sense not to let someone in who a embraces political philosophy and theology that says murder the infidels," Cruz said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/16/cruz-to-introduce-bill-to-bar-syrian-refugees/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-politics:homepage/card
 
The Texas Republican often mentions how his father fled Cuba for the United States as a young man. Cruz was asked on CNN Monday how he could bar refugees from the United States given his father's story.

"If my father were part of a theocratic and political movement like radical Islam that promotes murdering anyone who doesn't share your extreme faith or forcibly converting them, it would make perfect sense not to let someone in who a embraces political philosophy and theology that says murder the infidels," Cruz said.
Then why do Cruz and Bush want to let in Christians. Plenty of scripture about killing infidels in Christianity. As long as you are going to discriminate against all individual Muslims whether they sanction killing infidels or not, shouldn't you apply the same metric to everybody, and extend your ban to Christians?

Good thing we don't apply this standard within the US. We'd be booting out 90% of the population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
What happens if he does?

That's the latest and silliest criticism of Obama that the right has come up with yet. Right up there with the pretense that there was any significance as to when and where the Benghazi attack was precipitated by an anti-Muslim film.
 
Then why do Cruz and Bush want to let in Christians. Plenty of scripture about killing infidels in Christianity. As long as you are going to discriminate against all individual Muslims whether they sanction killing infidels or not, shouldn't you apply the same metric to everybody, and extend your ban to Christians?

Good thing we don't apply this standard within the US. We'd be booting out 90% of the population.

I don't want radical middle eastern Christians over here. Not with the current state of Starbuck's Christmas cups that is.
 
This is not about Christian and muslim and terrorists it's about getting masses of hungry people here wanting freebies to destroy the usa and the west
 
A smart person would try to understand their enemy. It makes it easier to defeat them.

I agree.

Except you don't understand the enemy.

You advocate "not doing what ISIS wants", no matter what.

The objective is to defeat ISIS, not worry about what they want or don't want.
 
This is not about Christian and muslim and terrorists it's about getting masses of hungry people here wanting freebies to destroy the usa and the west
We'll just send them to the red states. The red states are already the main "takers" so they'll fit right in.

I wonder if the Syrian refugees in Texas would want their kids taught evolution or accurate history? How about prayer in school?

I mean if these Muslims are the radical types, they could be natural allies for the idiots in Texas.
 
I'll openly admit that I am fearful of letting them in myself.

The two biggest problems I have are, 1) The stress on the poor and middle class is already out of control, and just from an economic issue, you are going to cause some real social problems by bringing them in...and 2) There is no way that some of these people aren't militant Arab plants, just like they were in France. With western meddling, over the last 70+ years, causing an extreme amount of animosity, you're really playing with fire here.
 
This doesn't make sense. These are people fleeing the conflict and refusing to become radicalized in order to survive. Even if ISIL manages to infiltrate a few operatives into the millions of refugees, they are probably still LESS radical than a random population.
Read Nolesoup's reply. Ditto for me.
 
You don't think we have a responsibility?
We who?

It's not as if you or I are being consulted here. Did the actions of the US Government, over the course of many decades, help create this situation? Absolutely. Is taking them in our country progress, or helping to solve or fix that situation? I'm not entirely sure it does, no. Nolesoup pretty much nailed it. I'd like to keep a Paris-type event from occurring here to a minimum.
 
And the Islamophobic paranoia on the right continues. It's quite disheartening to see these hyper-patriotic types turn their backs on American values so blithely:

CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Sen. Ted Cruz, who has said that the United States should not allow Syrian Muslim refugees into the country but should provide safe haven to fleeing Christians, plans to introduce legislation that would bar Syrian refugees from entering the country.

Cruz (R-Tex.) said after a campaign event here that the legislation is still being drafted and wouldn't offer details of exactly what it would say. According to reports, Cruz told CNN that it would bar Syrian Muslim refugees from entering the United States.

Cruz has said numerous times in the past few days that Muslim refugees from Syria should be resettled in majority Muslim countries in the Middle East while Christian migrants should be allowed to enter the United States.

"There is no meaningful risk of Christians committing acts of terror. If there were a group of radical Christians pledging to murder anyone who had a different religious view than they, we would have a different national security situation," Cruz said Sunday in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

[Cruz: ‘No meaningful risk’ of Christians committing terrorism]

Cruz has said it is "nothing short of lunacy" to allow Syrian Muslim refugees into the country, particularly after Friday's Paris attacks.

President Obama said in response to Cruz and others Monday it is "shameful" to bar refugees based on religion.


"That's not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion," Obama said.

[Obama calls idea of screening Syrian refugees based on religion ‘shameful,’ defends White House strategy]

Cruz responded on CNN Monday.

"It's not surprising that Obama is attacking me personally," the Texas senator and 2016 Republican presidential candidate told CNN's Dana Bash. "I'll tell you what's shameful is that the president after seven years still refuses to utter the words radical Islamic terrorism [and] claims that somehow [it's] a religious test. [It's] not that at all. It is understanding the nature of the evil we face."

The Texas Republican often mentions how his father fled Cuba for the United States as a young man. Cruz was asked on CNN Monday how he could bar refugees from the United States given his father's story.

"If my father were part of a theocratic and political movement like radical Islam that promotes murdering anyone who doesn't share your extreme faith or forcibly converting them, it would make perfect sense not to let someone in who a embraces political philosophy and theology that says murder the infidels," Cruz said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/16/cruz-to-introduce-bill-to-bar-syrian-refugees/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-politics:homepage/card
Well there's one thing I like about Cruz.

The guys on the left are just wrong on this one. I don't want anybody getting into our boarders that want to kill us...and many of them do.
 
This doesn't make sense. These are people fleeing the conflict and refusing to become radicalized in order to survive. Even if ISIL manages to infiltrate a few operatives into the millions of refugees, they are probably still LESS radical than a random population.
Your guarantee of that fact is based on what?
 
This doesn't make sense. These are people fleeing the conflict and refusing to become radicalized in order to survive. Even if ISIL manages to infiltrate a few operatives into the millions of refugees, they are probably still LESS radical than a random population.
And you are willing to risk American lives on this assumption? Because I am not.
 
And you are willing to risk American lives on this assumption? Because I am not.

Of course. It's a minuscule risk for upholding our American values and not giving in to the terrorists. The Islamophobia you're seeing demonstrated on this board and elsewhere is exactly the reaction the terrorists want us to have and it plays right into the hands of their propaganda machinery..
 
  • Like
Reactions: BelemNole
Of course. It's a minuscule risk for upholding our American values and not giving in to the terrorists. The Islamophobia you're seeing demonstrated on this board and elsewhere is exactly the reaction the terrorists want us to have and it plays right into the hands of their propaganda machinery..

YOU think it's a minuscule risk, and you have nothing to back it up. This isn't even about just the risk to violence in this country. It's about the added economic strain as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strummingram
What happens if a half dozen of these immigrants are actually plants by Isis. Down the road they walk into a major college football game with machine guns and shoot until they run out of ammo?

It is very possible with Paris being a prime example. Do you just ask them at the relocation station if they are nuts and take their word for it?

When it happens here and it gets traced back to this onslaught of immigrants I think very few will be happy with the choices made today.
 
People on the left and right are thinking we may not want to venture into this. I met a vet yesterday who spent 2 years over in Afghanistan and said the cultural differences are too many to list. He was in intelligence and said keeping track of folks is almost impossible because there are no records to look at.

That enough to convince me that it wasn't a good choice.

If you are all for getting out of the ME all together and letting them handle it not sure why you are wanting to take on the refugees??
 
What happens if a half dozen of these immigrants are actually plants by Isis. Down the road they walk into a major college football game with machine guns and shoot until they run out of ammo?

It is very possible with Paris being a prime example. Do you just ask them at the relocation station if they are nuts and take their word for it?

When it happens here and it gets traced back to this onslaught of immigrants I think very few will be happy with the choices made today.

When did Americans become such sniveling pussies? We won't help tens of thousands of people fleeing from war torn areas because we're afraid some bad folks might sneak in with them? Sounds like the same brave thought process that allowed the holocaust. Geez, we don't' want to piss off those Nazi's, they haven't done anything to us yet...let's just stay out of this one. Those people aren't our problem!

You want to know something? Letting women and children suffer won't keep the terrorists from trying to hurt you and until you chicken littles have your way international travel is still pretty easy.
 
We who?

It's not as if you or I are being consulted here. Did the actions of the US Government, over the course of many decades, help create this situation? Absolutely. Is taking them in our country progress, or helping to solve or fix that situation? I'm not entirely sure it does, no. Nolesoup pretty much nailed it. I'd like to keep a Paris-type event from occurring here to a minimum.
This is the curse of living in a (more or less) democratic society. Our government acts in our name. Even if we voted for Jill Stein or Bob Barr, we are complicit. Even if we refused to vote, we are complicit. That's the nature of our compact. It's like a credit card agreement: if you choose to exercise your citizenship, you agree to its terms.

Hard for me to imagine that you disagree with this principle.

Similarly, it's hard for me to imaging that you disagree that the US played a big role in creating these refugees. Not that we did it all by ourselves. But we played a part - both in the destabilization of Syria and in the formation of ISIS. And we just keep upping the ante.

So the only question I have is if you think we have any moral obligation to help those we harmed. And, again, it's hard for me to imagine you shirking that responsibility even if, like me, you opposed the policies that got us here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Well there's one thing I like about Cruz.

The guys on the left are just wrong on this one. I don't want anybody getting into our boarders that want to kill us...and many of them do.
Pretty sure nobody wants that.

How do you suggest meeting our moral and humanitarian obligations without letting people in - and taking the risk that some may be bad guys?

Do you have an alternative course of action? Or are you suggesting we shirk our responsibility?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
When did Americans become such sniveling pussies? We won't help tens of thousands of people fleeing from war torn areas because we're afraid some bad folks might sneak in with them? Sounds like the same brave thought process that allowed the holocaust. Geez, we don't' want to piss off those Nazi's, they haven't done anything to us yet...let's just stay out of this one. Those people aren't our problem!

You want to know something? Letting women and children suffer won't keep the terrorists from trying to hurt you and until you chicken littles have your way international travel is still pretty easy.
Nailed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
When did Americans become such sniveling pussies? We won't help tens of thousands of people fleeing from war torn areas because we're afraid some bad folks might sneak in with them? Sounds like the same brave thought process that allowed the holocaust. Geez, we don't' want to piss off those Nazi's, they haven't done anything to us yet...let's just stay out of this one. Those people aren't our problem!

You want to know something? Letting women and children suffer won't keep the terrorists from trying to hurt you and until you chicken littles have your way international travel is still pretty easy.

There is a difference between being a sniveling pussy and courting danger. And no one has still had anything to say about the economic and social problems that this will cause. Do we need to create even more animosity in this country? For all your "lets just love one another" talk, you dems sure do your damndest to make sure it never happens.
 
Of course. It's a minuscule risk for upholding our American values and not giving in to the terrorists. The Islamophobia you're seeing demonstrated on this board and elsewhere is exactly the reaction the terrorists want us to have and it plays right into the hands of their propaganda machinery..
MINUSCULE????????????? NO! Tell that to the families of the victims in France. It's a significant risk. Nothing good will come of allowing refugees into the USA. What was written on the Statue of Liberty doesn't address groups of people who want to kill you. We are at the point where a line needs to be drawn. I care more for you and your family than I do the refugees. Times are changing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkeyenuts66
Pretty sure nobody wants that.

How do you suggest meeting our moral and humanitarian obligations without letting people in - and taking the risk that some may be bad guys?

Do you have an alternative course of action? Or are you suggesting we shirk our responsibility?

It isn't our responsibility. We can't take care of our responsibilities on our own soil. Yeah...let's bring in more problems. Especially people who will bring nothing to enhance American society. Stop being potatoes. This crap has been going on my entire life. Why bring headaches from the middle east into America. It would just be a stupid thing to do.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT