Say “No” To Refugees In America

By Joshua Kincaid

Should refugees that want to kill us come to America? Let’s start with this premise:  If the number in row 1 doesn’t =0, we’ve failed as a Nation.


[The above chart is supposedly an “average over a 10 year period.” And inaccurate at that because it doesn’t include the San Bernardino killings, or anything past 2014. Liberal statistics used for their own purposes.]

Newest liberal asinine thought: “They haven’t done anything yet.” Although intelligence tells us the probability does not work in our favor.

Every week, the newest round of imbecile theory makes its way through social media.  This weekend was no exception.

Using this theory, it can be said that we deserved 9/11.  So how do we use revisionist history and placate the issue? LET EVERYONE IN, OPEN THE FLOOD GATES SO I FEEL BETTER ABOUT MYSELF!  IT’S A MATTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS!

So let’s play devil’s advocate: you’ve raised uneducated children, so most of you failed.  If you can’t raise a child with a correct belief system, we’re not talking stocks and bonds or anything else for that matter, you’ve failed miserably.

It’s almost comical, how this is considered progressive and not just plain stupid.  Every single one of these people gain self-assurance through the thought of being “Human Rights activists.”

I want to write each of them a letter stating, “Thank you for supporting us, a Syrian refugee will be coming to live in your home on Monday. Just to give you fair warning, they have no tolerance towards women’s rights or children.”


How in the world we’ve reached a point in which current natives of the land are the enemy for wanting to protect what those that came before us died to preserve.

All there is to say is they’d “better stop poking the bear.”   They didn’t learn in November, and obviously that taught them nothing.

Personally, some of the deportation agendas are misdirected from a funding perspective.  If you don’t trust them in a foxhole, you don’t trust them on your front porch, that is a military mantra, not exercised in the civilian world.

Post election, we should have the thought of taking out the garbage before bringing more in.  This isn’t rocket science, bleeding hearts.

You’re against my nation, but for your cause?  And too parochial to understand that they’re the same thing.  But one should hold more value at all costs.

An excerpt from Benjamin Studebaker:

Security Arguments–the refugees pose a security risk to western societies that justifies rejecting them.
Scarcity Arguments–the refugees will consume resources that are already in short supply (e.g. money, housing, etc.), and that justifies rejecting them.
No Benefit Arguments–we only have duties to accept refugees where this benefits us, and refugees are not beneficial.
No Responsibility Arguments–we are not to blame for the political conditions in the Middle East that have caused these people to be refugees, so we are justified in rejecting them irrespective of the benefits or harms involved.

The point of this excerpt, is that it is time to stop policing the world, and clean up our own nation.  Letting the poison inside our borders is counterproductive to this plan of action.  If more Americans treated their homeland with the same respect they treat their own homes, many of the issues threatening us today would eventually disappear.