In response to my questions I have received a response from a loyal reader who has certainly been one vocal voice from within my liberal friends. Here are his answers backed by his extensive experience while working in the region for many years--It's well worth reading too!

I thought I would give you my opinion and try to answer your questions. As a note, I have a Syrian friend whose families are caught up in the cross fire.  Newar has taken in his wife's family into their home in Riyadh, his family are still [in] Syria.  Newar and his familiar [family are] living a horror we can never imagine.

Can someone please explain the following regarding the Syrian refugees arriving in European destinations from worn torn origins?

1/ How come they all seem to have endless supplies of money to pay the people traffickers?

A) Many of the people interviewed were professionals and business owners.  This is probably not a random representative sample, but you can assume those who have the money will try to leave.

B) The refugees hoc'ed [hocked] their life's possessions to leave. Gold jewelry and coins are used frequently as a means to save and can be easily converted to euros.  When I was in the Middle East I was surprised to see how many places you could buy gold and number of non-wealthy middle easterners a buying gold.

C)  Family is huge with Muslims.  Relatives are likely helping each other to get out of harms [sic] way.

2/ Why do most refugees appear to have working mobile phones?

Cell phones are as common as sandals In the Middle East.  The lowest paid Indian laborer on my project making less than $500 per month had a cell phone.  

3/ How do most refugees appear well dressed and fed and do not seem to be suffering the effects of malnutrition?

 Food is available; this is not the trail of tears. [Well said]

 4/ Why are most of the fleeing refugees men of military age? They all seem to be able-bodied men who would be fighters taking back their homelands in Syria. (Need to add Iraq and Afghanistan)

 I disagree with your assertion that more than 50% of the refugees are able bodied men, but that's an argument for another time.  Currently the ground situation is a mess and begs the question who would the untrained men fight for or with, the Syrian, Iraqi or Iranian military fighting ISIS and their own people, the Kurds, Shia or Sunni militias or with a local tribal unit?  Alliances within the Middle East are very fluid, the enemy of my enemy is my brother is how alliance are formed and go back hundreds of years. [excellent points] 

The alliances are based upon religion, sect, clan and family and not country. This is not unlike how the U.S. was like in 1861 when Robert E Lee turned down the command of the Union Army and said he could not raise his sword against Virginia.

5/ Why are other Muslim nations not helping their fellow Muslims? (Saudi, Kuwait, U.A.E. Indonesia, but to name a few) 

Agreed, Saudi claims they have taken in 2.5 million Syrians, but most are guest workers and not refugees. The GCC countries have contribute [sic] some money, but could do more.  Jordan has been overrun by refugees. In 2013 I was in Jordan and saw several camps run by the UN and at that time Jordan was hosting over 500,000 people. 

Their is a simple reason the refugees are not going to Saudi Arabia, it's Saudi Arabia. [Great insight point]

6/ How come the two boys and their mother drowned off the Turkish coast can be returned for burial to the place they fled so quickly, what is believed to be I.S.I.S. held territory?

Photos are powerful and can be a change agent.  Khobani was the home of the mother and child and was the center of heavy fighting,  but was liberate [sic] by the PKK earlier this year.  Remember family and home are very important to Muslims.

7/ Could it be they are being paid to come to Europe as a way to increase the Muslim population and get I.S.I.S. fighters embedded in Europe? We all know life is cheap from an I.S.I.S. viewpoint so the loss of a few lives along the way has no meaning for them as long as it benefits their cause. 

Yes this is a distinct possibility, but do you throw the baby out with the bath water.  We also have home grown terrorist inspired by ISIS and others. Not all Muslims are terrorist.    

What you didn't mention was the migration of North Africans crossing the Mediterranean to Italy. Thousands have drown making the crossing.  The desire to make a better life for yourself and family is powerful and you will risk death to achieve this goal.  This refugee crisis should teach us that securing our borders and managing immigration is much more complicated than building a wall and 15 second sound bites. Remember, in the eyes of the Native Americans we are illegal immigrants.

[NOTE: Although European colonists were technically illegal immigrants to the "indigenous Indian" tribes [not Native Americans], they were in fact also immigrants too. Many tribes' accounts also describe coming from elsewhere by boat, far earlier in time than the Bering Strait theory claims. Others migrated long distances, such as Athapascans coming from what is today Alaska to the southwest, where they became Apaches and Navajos. So who was first means it's genealogy is muddled as all those who followed are immigrants to that first tribe's land.]  

My comments: These all are strong reasons for the whys of a Syrian immigration, however unlike in the days of yore no income taxes were levied on sovereign citizens of the host country to support hoards of wandering peoples. Those who came made their own way, under their own resources and without any government largess to support their vagabond dreams for a new life. Furthermore, there were no municipal or public facilities built to house any refugees. These immigrants were expected to embrace their new homeland and government if even allowed to become citizens while many of these peoples over the centuries have been turned out and pushed back into returning to their home countries.

Realistically these Muslim nomads carry within themselves a religious zeal to absolutely refuse other religions from freely practicing theirs according to their Islamic teachings. The only true believer is a Muslim, others are infidels who must convert or submit as a second-class of people under Islamic Dhimmitude by paying a tax to work and live or be stoned to death.

Will this burgeoning swell of Muslim humanity bloat host countries with their religious intolerances to cause religious Sharia Law to topple secular Civic Law? These, after all, are real consequences created as it's happening now throughout Europe. In England these two parallel legal universes coexist as Islamic law has blossomed to take precedence over English jurisprudence.

Take a look at who led aggressions in religious battles: