Jump to content


Immigration Ban


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

 

I’m not sure what part of this is so difficult to understand. There is nothing to vet them against or identify them with. We can interview them. They can claim to be Mickey Mouse or Osama bin Laden. Either way, we have no objective data to prove otherwise. So the process is a joke.

You don't suppose that officials go a little deeper than a criminal background check and ask them if they hate America do  you?

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2015/11/16/politics/syrian-refugees-u-s-applicants-explainer/index.html

 

Quote

And refugees from Syria actually go through another layer of screening, called the Syria Enhanced Review process.

"With the Syrian program, we've benefited from our years of experience in vetting Iraqi refugee applicants," a senior administration official recently told reporters. "And so the partnerships we have today and the security checks we have today really are more robust because of the experience that we've had since the beginning of large-scale Iraqi processing in 2007."

Another senior administration official noted that the refugee screening process is constantly refined.

 

 

How many terrorist attacks since 9/11 have been committed by these refugees in the US?

Edited by ZRod
Link to comment

3 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

The simple fact is that we can’t take in everyone who wants to come here. What person or family from a third-world country or violence torn region wouldn’t rather be here? So we have tough decisions to make.

 

Another simple fact is that everytime we let in a group of refugees, most of whom undergo very limited vetting, we take a risk that we’re letting in terrorists pretending to be refugees. So we have to be careful.

 

I didn't say we should take everyone that wanted or needed to come here. I said we should take more, which is decidedly different from the current administration's stance that we should take less.

 

As to the bolded, @Landlord has posted an infographic showing the vetting process for refugees on this board many times. It takes well over a year to immigrate to the U.S. as a refugee. This is some instructive reading if you want some insight. The bolded statement is just plainly incorrect. We ARE careful - if people show even a hint that they might come here to do harm, they don't get in. The background checks are very thorough. The refugees that come here are largely women and children looking to escape war torn areas and derelict conditions in refugee camps.

 

Given that many of the recent attacks on U.S. soil (including school shooters) were carried out by people that became radicalized within our own shores, I'm wondering if we need to focusing more on initiatives here to keep America safe.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Syria is a failed state. To the extent there is any government, it hates us and wishes us harm. So if we have a group of people who are purported;y from Syria and who claim to be refugees, how do we ‘vet’ them? 

 

There are no reliable records that can be used. They don’t have passports, birth certificates, or drivers’ licenses. Any government paperwork they do have can be easily forged or falsified. There is no government office in Syria that can be called or emailed to verify someone’s identity.

 

Read the article I linked to again. The ‘experts’ can call the process whatever they want and claim it’s as robust as they want, but the stone cold reality is there is no government office or identifying documents that can be relied on to truly tell us who most of these people are. We can interview them, observe them, have intelligence folks visit with them, and that’s of some help. But we are ultimately assuming a high degree of risk by allowing them admittance.

Edited by Ric Flair
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Syria is a failed state. To the extent there is any government, it hates us and wishes us harm. So if we have a group of people who are purported;y from Syria and who claim to be refugees, how do we ‘vet’ them? 

 

There are no reliable records that can be used. They don’t have passports, birth certificates, or drivers’ licenses. Any government paperwork they do have can be easily forged or falsified. There is no government office in Syria that can be called or emailed to verify someone’s identity.

 

Read the article I linked to again. The ‘experts’ can call the process whatever they want and claim it’s as robust as they want, but the stone cold reality is there is no government office or identifying documents that can be relied on to truly tell us who most of these people are. We can interview them, observe them, have intelligence folks visit with them, and that’s of some help. But we are ultimately assuming a high degree of risk by allowing them admittance.

 

Logically, your argument makes some sense. Some of it is covered in this Politifact article about how we vet immigrants. But they mention it's much easier for terrorists in Syria to immigrate to Europe, with much laxer immigration laws, THEN come here, than it is to try to immigrate directly to the U.S., wait 2 to 3 years and likely fail to get approved to come here at all.

 

Ultimately we just disagree on this. I trust the extensive vetting problem we have, even for all the ways some of these countries make their task more difficult. I sleep more easily at night if the U.S. is a beacon to the rest of the world that says "we still take your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." That we are still here to help rather than cower in fear of what may be. Trump would call that being "smart" or "tough" - I disagree. I think it's morally imperative. 

 

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

Logically, your argument makes some sense. Some of it is covered in this Politifact article about how we vet immigrants. But they mention it's much easier for terrorists in Syria to immigrate to Europe, with much laxer immigration laws, THEN come here, than it is to try to immigrate directly to the U.S., wait 2 to 3 years and likely fail to get approved to come here at all.

 

Ultimately we just disagree on this. I trust the extensive vetting problem we have, even for all the ways some of these countries make their task more difficult. I sleep more easily at night if the U.S. is a beacon to the rest of the world that says "we still take your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." That we are still here to help rather than cower in fear of what may be. Trump would call that being "smart" or "tough" - I disagree. I think it's morally imperative. 

 

 

I’m sympathetic as well. I’d like to admit as many good, decent, hard-working folks who want to be Americans as we can. But we need to take precautions as well. We have to balance our desire to help with our need to protect ourselves from those who wish to do us harm.

Link to comment

Having realistic fear based on facts is extremely important and make decision with rational thought. 

 

The problem is, this administration has done nothing but fabricate fear based on totally made up crap to build support for their extreme policies. 

 

That should be called out and they should not be rewarded for it by supporting them. 

Edited by BigRedBuster
  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
13 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Another simple fact is that everytime we let in a group of refugees, most of whom undergo very limited vetting

 

 

Ric Flair, you are wrong. What you said isn't true. You are either lying, or misinformed. This is false.

 

wh_blog_refugee_workflow_1125.jpg

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Ric Flair, you are wrong. What you said isn't true. You are either lying, or misinformed. This is false.

 

wh_blog_refugee_workflow_1125.jpg

 

 

I know people from countries we're not overly concerned about. They had to go through vetting just to visit. E.g. they won't let you visit if you don't have something good to come back to in your home country; a job, a spouse, kids, etc.

Edited by Moiraine
Link to comment
49 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Ric Flair, you are wrong. What you said isn't true. You are either lying, or misinformed. This is false.

 

wh_blog_refugee_workflow_1125.jpg

 

Most of these people have no identifying documents. If they do, those are easily forged. There is no database in their home countries to check fingerprints or any biometric data against. Nor is there any way to check and see if they have criminal histories or convictions, etc. I’m just not sure how I can make this any clearer.

 

Let’s say we’re screening a purported refugee who claims to be from Syria. He says his name is Abdul. He claims to be from Damascus, a good guy, fleeing the Assad forces, and who loves America. How do you suppose we go about checking that out to make sure any of it is true? Do you think we call the DMV in Damascus and ask? Or just place a direct call to Assad’s goons to check it out? 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Most of these people have no identifying documents. If they do, those are easily forged. There is no database in their home countries to check fingerprints or any biometric data against. Nor is there any way to check and see if they have criminal histories or convictions, etc. I’m just not sure how I can make this any clearer.

 

Let’s say we’re screening a purported refugee who claims to be from Syria. He says his name is Abdul. He claims to be from Damascus, a good guy, fleeing the Assad forces, and who loves America. How do you suppose we go about checking that out to make sure any of it is true? Do you think we call the DMV in Damascus and ask? Or just place a direct call to Assad’s goons to check it out? 

 

How do you think Syria keeps track of their own citizens?

 

Suggesting that they have no system in place whatsoever seems unfathomable. Do you have anything that explains how little identifying information is available and why it is such a problem?

Link to comment

what immigration policies did our forefathers set up in the declaration of independence.   i am sure with their infinite wisdom they thought of everything and had it down pact and we can't think about changing anything from that original document.  and if any bad guys do get in we have our guns to protect ourselves.  right?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, commando said:

what immigration policies did our forefathers set up in the declaration of independence.   i am sure with their infinite wisdom they thought of everything and had it down pact and we can't think about changing anything from that original document.  and if any bad guys do get in we have our guns to protect ourselves.  right?

We cannot stray from the document. Stop border control now! Because immigration was wide open and legal until the 20th century. Conservatives confuse me sometimes. Isn't the whole idea to preserve the ideals of the constitution? 

Link to comment
On 4/8/2018 at 9:44 AM, Ric Flair said:

 

These are puff pieces advocating for letting in more refugees. Where are the descriptions of the actual vetting?

You clearly didn't even read the first of the links that explains the vetting process for Syrian refugees step by step.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...