Lie about what motivates Islamist terrorists. It's purely ideological, they are not motivated by circumstances, except as they are taught to pretend to be to deceive leftist kooks.
Their own propaganda, the tools they use to radicalize people, utilizes circumstances to drive a sense of outrage. Is this to fool 'leftist kooks' too? That seems a little peculiar.
When the infidel is strong and aggressively opposes them they retreat rather than seeking to do the harm that Islam requires of them.
Peculiarly this would be in opposition to what they believe Islam requires of them. And indeed, since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq Islamist terrorist threats and attacks have grown more frequent.
Poor silly PC-crippled Europeans who tolerate all their raping
No, they don't.
invite them to express their evil Sharia Law
No. They do give people the freedom to settle civil disputes using religious mediation if all parties consent to so doing. But that's true in America, too.
and weep big tears as if it's their own fault when these ideologically driven people do what their ideology drives them to do.
The point is that their ideology is driven by politics and religion, not just religion. Political attacks against them strengthens their resolve and is and has been used as a recruitment tool. That's the whole point of terrorism. Terrorism has never militarily defeated a powerful nation - let alone a union of them, but it has worked to change those nations for the worse, cost them disproportionate amounts of money and so on. It has only ever been stopped by understanding the underlying grievances and seeking their resolution and thereby removing most of the emotional motivation to do anything violent. Naturally - fundamentalist religious folk of all stripes are notoriously intransigent and resistant to compromise.
Turning their mothers, sisters and baby brothers away so that they have to live in warzones, or dangerous camps merely gives the young adult males motivation to want to *something*, and to feel anger and outrage. It is this desire to do something, coupled with their fury that Islamist recruiters exploit to get new bodies for their reign of terror.
Injustices (real or merely perceived) drove the people to the IRA and their offshoots, they drove people to Irgun, and they are driving them to ISIS.
Lie about the sane rational objective understanding of the supporters of the ban. a) Call us fearful.
So you aren't afraid Muslim terrorists are going to kill American citizens? You should change what you are saying, then, because it sounds like it to everybody else.
That is, YOU are scared of a Muslimj sittin gon the fence who might become violent if anyone dares to oppose their will.
Yes we are (sort of, I don't agree with your characterisation completely). Fear is not shameful. Fear is not cowardice.
However, the tactics of terrorism need to be understood in our response to it. The tactic isn't to kill everybody. It's to make scared people support politicians making policy that benefits them. The question is, what tactics benefit terrorists more? For recruitment purposes, those that seem to target 'our Muslim brothers and sisters' are a godsend. Sure, allowing refugees in might increase the probability of people that want to commit terrible acts getting in - though there are easier ways than through refugee process (though if they can get in that way, and then cause chaos, it serves their purposes of inhibiting refugees (ie., potential slaves/soldiers) fleeing them). I say, let them come here and kill themselves.
Let's say there are 200,000 members of ISIS. They all come to Europe, and they all kill 100 people in suicide attacks. It's terrible that 20,000,000 (+200,000) people just died - but ISIS just wiped itself out and very probably destroyed any will by others to join them. And it won't have made much of a dent in the European population. A 3% loss is merely a minor strategic setback - Europe has suffered and survived considerably worse in the last 150 years. It would be a complete victory against ISIS though. And looking at the terrorist attacks that they've managed to mount so far, 100 deaths each seems VERY ambitious. More like 10 at a huge push, if we discount all those that don't get past the planning stage before arrest or accidentally killing themselves.
Their violence isn't a threat to our society.
And those millions of people are more likely to be thankful for not freezing to death, drowning, being raped, mugged and so on in the numbers they were and are less likely to be swayed by Islamists. Also, we get to propagandize/proselytize to their kids, they will see our culture first hand rather than the lies they were being fed. Those that return will be motivated to replicate our internal stability and peace in their own lands - and the worst nutters are all dead so that makes it easier.
Finally, it is a dereliction of duty. America has a duty to share the burden. By refusing this duty, they are pushing the problem on other nations. Increasing the density of immigrants/refugees elsewhere increases racial tensions elsewhere, increasing anger and giving recruiters an easier job. It also means the 'demographic war' you fear will be easier for Muslims to win as they disproportionally go elsewhere. If they take Europe, Faith, America doesn't stand a chance.
™ Version 4.2
(1)