[quote]Lawmakers in the U.S. House voted to essentially halt a program aimed at resettling thousands of Syrian refugees fleeing their war-torn homeland — a move that could potentially complicate President Obama's Middle East policy efforts.[/quote]
[quote]The bill has a veto proof majority and 47 Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the measure. It is unclear if the Senate will take up the measure after they return from Thanksgiving recess.
"It's a security test, not a religious test. This reflects our values. This reflects our responsibilities. And this is urgent," Speaker Paul Ryan told reporters at his press conference on Thursday prior to the vote..[/quote]
[url]http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/paris-terror-attacks/u-s-house-votes-halt-syrian-refugee-resettlement-program-n466456[/url]
The bill: [url]http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c114:H.R.4038:[/url]
Heres to hoping the senate sinks it
Good. We're laughably incapable of dealing with our own poor and homeless. What are we supposed to do with Syria's?
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147568]Heres to hoping the senate sinks it[/QUOTE]
Why.
If it only suspends the program, then I see absolutely zero issue with this bill.
If Europe can take care of a couple hundred thousand refugees I'm sure the US can as well.
Europe can take in a couple hundred thousand, being able to deal with it is an entirely different question
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;49147600]Good. We're laughably incapable of dealing with our own poor and homeless. What are we supposed to do with Syria's?[/QUOTE]
That mindset, no country should take in refugees. Turkey and Lebanon are way poorer than western europe and USA.
[QUOTE=Exploders;49147608]If Europe can take care of a couple hundred thousand refugees I'm sure the US can as well.[/QUOTE]
No one in Europe is very happy about it, either.
[video=youtube;3KSJY0c8QWw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSJY0c8QWw[/video]
The United States already has crime problems, food and infrastructure issues, we don't need this.
[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49147641]That mindset, no country should take in refugees. Turkey and Lebanon are way poorer than western europe and USA.[/QUOTE]
No country should drag itself down with others for human rights. I don't trust the government and its capabilities to handle this well right off the bat.
Seriously guys, isn't USA like, the most wealthy, powerful country on the planet? Why should it all fall to Turkey and Lebenon, countries that haven't done shit to the region and haven't been bombing the fuck out of it for the last 10 years or so.
[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49147658]Seriously guys, isn't USA like, the most wealthy, powerful country on the planet? Why should it all fall to Turkey and Lebenon, countries that haven't done shit to the region and haven't been bombing the fuck out of it for the last 10 years or so.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying we should never take them in, but claiming this is a knee-jerk reaction like I've seen others do, is as much of a knee-jerk reaction as the people you claim are being ridiculous.
The refugees have often proven volatile and down right ungrateful. Countless videos show them complaining about the food they're being [I]given[/I]. We have our own homeless we can take care of for now, and we have a lot of them.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147601]Why.
If it only suspends the program, then I see absolutely zero issue with this bill.[/QUOTE]
Because we already have a background process that takes 18-24 months to get through which has not failed in the history of the refugee resettlement program.
This bill, and the political horse and pony show by governors, is all knee-jerk to the Paris attack. France, the victim of the attack, has already came out and pledged that it will continue to take refugees (3x the amount that the US pledged to take).
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147706]Because we already have a background process that takes 18-24 months to get through which has not failed in the history of the refugee resettlement program.[/QUOTE]
Citation needed.
Where the hell are you getting that from. What does "failed" mean to you?
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147645]No one in Europe is very happy about it, either.
The United States already has crime problems, food and infrastructure issues, we don't need this.
No country should drag itself down with others for human rights. I don't trust the government and its capabilities to handle this well right off the bat.[/QUOTE]
I know, thats why I want to see the rest of the world suffer.
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;49147600]Good. We're laughably incapable of dealing with our own poor and homeless. What are we supposed to do with Syria's?[/QUOTE]
It's not that your government is incapable of dealing with your own poor and homeless, it's just that it decides not to, and the people are fine with that. The money is there to house them and help them find work, just as the money is there to help refugees.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147645]No one in Europe is very happy about it, either.
[video=youtube;3KSJY0c8QWw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSJY0c8QWw[/video][/QUOTE]
Europe: The World's Homeless Shelter. :v:
[editline]19th November 2015[/editline]
But DON'T YOU DARE SAY THAT OUT LOUD, IT'S RACIST!!!1!11111
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitposting" - Big Dumb American))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147714]Citation needed.
Where the hell are you getting that from. What does "failed" mean to you?[/QUOTE]
That over 750,000 refugees have been accepted into the U.S. post 9/11 and not a single one has been charged with domestic terrorism??
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147673]I'm not saying we should never take them in, but claiming this is a knee-jerk reaction like I've seen others do, is as much of a knee-jerk reaction as the people you claim are being ridiculous.
The refugees have often proven volatile and down right ungrateful. Countless videos show them complaining about the food they're being [I]given[/I]. We have our own homeless we can take care of for now, and we have a lot of them.[/QUOTE]
Most refugees aren't like that, maybe the ones who are fake but people who are legit fleeing warzones aren't going to be ungraceful dickheads.
I agree more should be done on making sure the people who come should be checked more often and that more effort should be put in separating fakes from genuine Syrians, but if USA, the world's fucking sole superpower with immense wealth can't take in refugees. Who can? Many consider Turkey to be poor as fuck, yet they go out of their way to take in almost 2 million. Lebanon is half Syrian now and pretty poor too.
Also, USA fucked up Iraq to the point ISIS could be founded, it has responsibilities to face regarding the matter and that includes taking in the people who's country you have indirectly ruined beyond repair.
[QUOTE=Exploders;49147723]I know, thats why I want to see the rest of the world suffer.[/QUOTE]
I don't even know what you're talking about.
When you can formulate arguments past blatant strawman I'd like to know. I've already stated I'd be happy to see the proper refugees get in, but the vetting program is not going to work as usual because we have[I] practically no data in that country[/I]. We can't figure out who is a liar, or who threw out their papers, from the actually deserving families that need help.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;49147736]That over 750,000 refugees have been accepted into the U.S. post 9/11 and not a single one has been charged with domestic terrorism??[/QUOTE]
That's because we've had data on the people entering in most cases. Not a flood of people claiming asylum.
This is a good thing. Pre-9/11 we had tons of people here from other countries on expired visas. They needed to go. It's time to secure our own borders before more shit happens.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147706]Because we already have a background process that takes 18-24 months to get through which has not failed in the history of the refugee resettlement program.
[/QUOTE]
Boston Marathon Massacre was caused by two people from a Asylum status family. This was the result of a delayed motivation the two brothers had, but even with rigorous background checks and interviews, not to mention recorded history for radicalism, we failed to prevent something that seems more obvious now.
Suspending the plan to take in refugees is a good thing, we can take them in when we actually thought out this process and reevaluate procedure.
[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49147738]Also, USA fucked up Iraq to the point ISIS could be founded, it has responsibilities to face regarding the matter and that includes taking in the people who's country you have indirectly ruined beyond repair.[/QUOTE]
Past actions do not justify possibly dangerous ones in the future. That usually turns into a snowball effect.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;49147714]Citation needed.
Where the hell are you getting that from. What does "failed" mean to you?[/QUOTE]
failed meaning a terrorist dubbed as a refugee has entered the US. Not a single terrorist event has been linked to the terrorist entering under false-status as a refugee.
How do we know this? Because by a significant margin domestic terrorism is more prevalent than foreign and of those foreign attacks, none of them were "refugees" to gain access to the US.
Citation 1:
[URL="http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/factsheets/2013/210135.htm"]US Department of State FAQ[/URL] - "Worldwide, the average processing time is about one year to 18 months. But every case is different, and processing times vary."
Citation 2:
[URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34848248"]BBC [/URL]- "If a refugee is cleared to be considered by the US, the process for approval is lengthy - 18-24 months, said one senior administration official.
Refugees are admitted at about a 50% acceptance rate after being subjected to "the most rigorous screening of any traveller to the US," an official told reporters in a conference call."
Citation 3:
[URL="http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21674694-america-should-reclaim-its-role-beacon-those-fleeing-persecution-and-war-yearning"]The Economist[/URL] - " They undergo investigations of their biography and identity; FBI biometric checks of their fingerprints and photographs; in-person interviews by Department of Homeland Security officers; medical screenings as well as investigations by the National Counter-terrorism Centre and by American and international intelligence agencies. [U]The process may take as long as three years, sometimes longer[/U]. No other person entering America is subjected to such a level of scrutiny."
[video=youtube;muw22wTePqQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muw22wTePqQ[/video]
The West can't provide Western quality of life to everybody.
[url]http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/19/testing-gates-syrians-nabbed-south-border-stoke-terror-fears/?intcmp=hpbt4[/url]
This is why we need to secure our fucking borders.
[QUOTE]Two separate reports of groups of America-bound Syrians detained below the U.S. southern border and the arrests of six other Middle Eastern men nabbed with smugglers in Arizona in recent days are raising concerns that Islamic State militants could be probing security – and stoking fears some may already be here.
On Monday, five Pakistani nationals and one Afghan were nabbed in Arizona along with two suspected smugglers, a Department of Homeland Security official confirmed. Then, on Tuesday, Honduran authorities arrested five Syrians they said were headed for the U.S. with stolen or doctored Greek passports, but later said the men were college students fleeing war at home. On the same day and 1,800 miles north, two Syrian families were taken into custody at a border checkpoint in Texas.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Tudd;49147763]Boston Marathon Massacre was caused by two people from a Asylum status family. This was the result of a delayed motivation the two brothers had, but even with rigorous background checks and interviews, not to mention recorded history for radicalism, we failed to prevent something that seems more obvious now.
Suspending the plan to take in refugees is a good thing, we can take them in when we actually thought out this process and reevaluate procedure.[/QUOTE]
Tamerlan entered the US in 2002 as an asylee. He then became radicalized [I]within the US[/I] in 2008. His brother entered in 2007, US citizen in 2012, was again radicalized within the US.
Neither were terrorists when they entered. Both became terrorists in the US.
Where's all the Americans that supported immigration in the EU threads? We need your comments here.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49147842][url]http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/19/testing-gates-syrians-nabbed-south-border-stoke-terror-fears/?intcmp=hpbt4[/url]
This is why we need to secure our fucking borders.[/QUOTE]
The Oathkeepers and USCrow militia branches in Arizona and Texas have been warning people about this for years. You guys may not know this, but those groups act as auxiliaries to the US Border Patrol, and have been doing so since 2009, with state sanctions.
They have been finding the drug cartels have been working with Islamist to transport weapons and shit into the United States. What's worse is that the Islamist militia groups we have in the states are actually terrified about this, and are going southward to aid the fucking far-right Christian militias.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147853]Neither were terrorists when they entered. Both became terrorists in the US.[/QUOTE]
I honestly don't believe that in it's entirety. The beliefs were probably there, just without a catalyst.
All those sources you cited are fine and dandy, but there are fake documents being made with Syria's own equipment. This means you can have all paperwork needed. Nothing in the history of the program can compare to the complications this time around.
I have no issues with a delay or suspension of the program.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147795]quotes about how long the process is and how through it is claimed to be[/QUOTE]
It isn't about how long it takes, it's about how effective it is.
You stated:
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49147706]Because we already have a background process that takes 18-24 months to get through which has not failed in the history of the refugee resettlement program[/QUOTE]
and defined failed as:
[quote]failed meaning a terrorist dubbed as a refugee has entered the US. Not a single terrorist event has been linked to the terrorist entering under false-status as a refugee. [/quote]
Yet your first two sources don't mention the statistical effectiveness, and the third even contradicts your statement:
[quote]Of the 745,000 refugees resettled since September 11th, only two [B]Iraqis in Kentucky have been arrested on terrorist charges, for aiding al-Qaeda in Iraq[/B].[/quote]
A quick search shows that charged went to confirmed:
[quote]The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later [B]admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq[/B][/quote]
Source: [URL]http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131[/URL]
Mind, that's a good success rate, but not 100%. Further, that's the detected failure in the system; who is to say what the real failure rate is?
That's so america, bomb countries to oblivion then turn away the refugees created
Arrested for activities [I]outside[/I] the US, mind you. We are talking about foreign terrorists who entered under a false-flag as a refugee and completed, or attempted (I guess) a terrorist attack in the US.. in which there have been none.
There is heavy recruiting of teens in MN of a certain demographic that are then sent overseas to perform terrorist attacks against others including the US.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
