North Carolina Joins Call To Restrict “Syrian” Refugees

One of the problems is that, according to at least one report, only 20% of the “refugees” entering Europe are actually from Syria. Some 80% are coming from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, Albania, Libya, and other nations not called Syria. And a good majority are young men of fighting age. North Carolina governor McCrory joins the growing call to stop the in-flow to the United States, and puts his call in a way that puts anyone who wants unfettered immigration of these “refugees” on the hook

(WRAL) Gov. Pat McCrory says he has asked the federal government to stop sending Syrian refugees to North Carolina until more is known how those fleeing the war-torn country are vetted.

Citing last week’s Paris terrorist attacks, McCrory joined at least 10 other governors from around the country in asking the federal government to provide more information about those being resettled from Syria.

“I empathize with these people who are dealing with unimaginable atrocities from ISIS,” McCrory said during a hastily called news conference in Charlotte. “But what worries me is some of these people might be ISIS.”

How are they vetted? Supposedly, this is a process that takes two years on average. Yet, these “refugees” seem to be arriving quite quickly in the United States. Are they being thoroughly vetted? Of course, quite a bit of the information on the refugee comes…..from the refugee. We’re relying on them not lying. “Both Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and FBI Director James Comey raised the challenge of being unable to vet all Syrians against existing intelligence information.”

And we all trust that the government isn’t making mistakes, taking shortcuts, ignoring protocol, etc, right?

(CNN) More than half the nation’s governors — 27 states — say they oppose letting Syrian refugees into their states, although the final say on this contentious immigration issue will fall to the federal government.

States protesting the admission of refugees range from Alabama and Georgia, to Texas and Arizona, to Michigan and Illinois, to Maine and New Hampshire. Among these 27 states, all but one have Republican governors.

OK, send them to those other states. Let them deal with the fallout (well, not really, we should be fully vetting all, including to see if they are believers in hardcore Islamism. It’s not just the violent ones we need to worry about). The thing is, according to Gov. McCrory, los Federales are not providing any information on the Syrian refugees (well, refugees from all over the Islamic world) to the government on North Carolina, besides the number imported. We don’t know who they are or where they are being relocated to.

Of course, this all leads to calls of Islamophobia from un-indicted co-conspirator CAIR

Nonetheless, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a civil rights group, says the governors’ announcements are indicative of growing Islamophobia among many in the US.

“We believe these governors are succumbing to fear and Islamophobia,” Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director of CAIR, told Al Jazeera.

CAIR is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, “an Islamic supremacist organization that pioneered 20th century Islamic terrorism and sanctions violence against civilians.” They very much attempt to use our laws, Constitution, and social mores against us in pushing their hardcore Muslim beliefs.

Finally, it should be no surprise that Liberals are up in arms over anyone wanting to stop the flow of unvetted and unknown refugees into the country. Just looking at the nations two main papers, the Washington Post and NY Times, we get

That last one from the NY Times Editorial Board is a pip. After starting with how Republicans and some EU nations are looking to stop the flow we get

These responses are wrong. Confusing refugees with terrorists is morally unacceptable and, as a matter of strategy, misguided. Stemming the exodus of refugees from Syria must be an important part of any comprehensive plan to end the Syrian war. Building new barriers to keep them out with the absurd argument that Muslims are inherently dangerous could provide propaganda benefits to the Islamic State. The group, also known as ISIS, has drawn recruits around the globe by offering a cause and a home to Muslims who feel marginalized and scorned.

Good grief. They actually think that people are joining ISIS because their feelings have been hurt.

Mr. Obama hit just the right note at the Group of 20 summit meeting in Antalya, Turkey, on Monday. “Many of these refugees are the victims of terrorism themselves, that’s what they’re fleeing,” he said. “Slamming the door in their faces would be a betrayal of our values. Our nations can welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety and ensure our own security. We can and must do both.”

Perhaps if Mr. Obama had shown a spine early in the war, and even as far back as the Arab Spring, this would be a moot point. He set red lines, then ignored them. Is it really our duty to take in people who do not share our values, and could be potentially not just terrorists, but the type of Islamist who will, again, use our laws and societies against us in pushing their hardcore Islamist agenda?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

9 Responses to “North Carolina Joins Call To Restrict “Syrian” Refugees”

  1. john says:

    Many Syrians and Iraqis just don’t understand that we are dropping bombs on them to HELP them.
    Teach LIVE THE LIFE !! volunteer now to go over and fight them, don’t be like those despised “warmists” who tell other people to alter their lifestyles and then don’t go 100% pure.
    The rightwing also found many reasons NOT to allow Jewish refugees in before WWIIThe rightwing likes to harp on our country having Judeo-Christian values, how does that square up with their treatment of these refugees? Leviticus 19:33-34

    “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

    Matthew 25:35 ESV

    For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
    These were from Open Bible

  2. Dana says:

    Let’s assume that the security process is 100% effective, and not a single jihadi or Islamist sympathizer gets through. This will still mean that we are admitting 10,000 people — and the Democratic presidential candidates want to increase that number several fold — the vast majority of whom speak little or no English, and have few, if any, skills that apply to the American labor market. They will all require food, clothing and shelter, and have very few means to pay for those things themselves. We will be admitting thousand s upon thousands of welfare recipients, at a time when many American citizens are poor, and we are running half a trillion dollars in budget deficits.

    Even if we ignore the security questions entirely, there is simply no good reason to do this!

  3. david7134 says:

    Once again, your stupidity and refusal to read and learn has tripped you up. FDR was responsible for not allowing Jews into the US, not Repubs. His contention was to reduce the supply of gold being brought in during the depression, which he was actively trying as hard as possible to lengthen, just like Obama. But, in reality, FDR was an avid anti-Semite, just like Obama. Now, I have no problem with putting a stop to refuges in the US. Why, they should be in place to return home. They are better protected in place. They know their environment better and would be happier. They are a risk to our security considering the very poor job that our government is doing in everything. And, finally, I have Syrians living beside me and they suck.

  4. Jeffery says:

    If we close our borders and deport all Muslims is there any reason to invade Iraq/Syria and destroy ISIL?

  5. gitarcarver says:


    Please just stop trying to use references that you neither understand or put any credence into. Your lack of knowledge in trying to use the Bible as a source of authority only serves to illustrate to all how much of a troll you are.

  6. drowningpuppies says:

    Perhaps if Mr. Obama had shown a spine early in the war, and even as far back as the Arab Spring total withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, this would be a moot point.

  7. gitarcarver says:

    If we close our borders and deport all Muslims is there any reason to invade Iraq/Syria and destroy ISIL?

    Yes, because we have agreements and treaties with other nations (NATO) that says when one nation is attacked, the other nations will respond to defend the others and deal with the threat.

    Secondly, there is also the idea that as a people, we should help those that are being oppressed. Perhaps that moral idea is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you are willing to say “we shouldn’t worry about women and children being raped and killed in other places,.” but that sentiment reflects more on you than others.

  8. drowningpuppies says:

    David Burge – ‏@iowahawkblog

    If America is so full of stupid violent xenophobes, why do you want Syrian refugees to come here? Sounds like they’d be better off in Sweden.

  9. Jl says:

    John-“Teach, volunteer now and go over and fight them.” John-volunteer right now to have several refugees take up residence in your basement. Give them clothes, water and food. As you say “live the life!” And the blatant hypocrisy of you using Bible verses to support your position doesn’t go unnoticed.

Pirate's Cove