Yet..........more "reasons" why people need to stop freaking out over Syrain refugees

Most of the complaints in here and everywhere have been about a possible lack of security.

People are asking questions like: "who is going to do the vetting", who is going to interrogate & perform background checks on the refugees", "what type of questions will be asked", "where & how will the answers be verified", "how long will the refugees be detained", "what happens to them after that process", etc. etc. etc.

All good questions & all good concerns, as nobody wants there local theatre or football stadium to be blown up.

I, like many of you think its extremely important to fully screen these Syrians, and I am absolutely against giving them any free passes just because of all the hell they've been through.

I've stated in many threads & post's that I do not disagree with this process, and that I do not wish to see any harm come to anybody...anywhere, and for me it doesn't matter which county that may be.

I'd like for all of you to take a minute and open this link and then read the contents.

If after you've read this and you still feel uncomfortable then I am truly out of gas trying to open your minds & hearts because if this article doesn't give you some modicum of relief, nothing will.

http://time.com/4116619/syrian-refugees-screening-process/

I'll post a snippet of the article here:


"Our government performs its own intensive screening, a process that includes consultation from nine different government agencies. "


Nine people...............nine different agencies that have done this sort of thing for many years and they are very good at what they do. This is not your typical airport screening process where they walk through a monitor, are asked a few stupid questions and let go.

I suspect many of you have this vision and that's why your all freaking out......

 

I don't have any fear regarding the refugees.

 

That is the best insight into the vetting process i have seen. Thank you

As all the major players for the democratic nomination for president are on the record as supporting the program they have to realize that if this vetting process fails they have handed the presidency to the republicans.

 

I don't think anyone's freaking out, but I think people are concerned enough to want to know more about what exactly "vetting" means and to have someone show them and prove it's effective. I was provided this example today and it made me think: (I posted this in a different thread, and that thread apparently was deleted.)

You are told you must eat a bunch of grapes. However, you know two grapes in that bunch MAY BE poisonous, and if they are poisonous you will die horribly. Your government says, don't worry, we'll check it out, but won't tell you who or what they will do to find those poison grapes, nor will they tell you how, when, or where they will look --- all you hear is "Just trust us".

Here are the grapes: You going to eat it?

 

This is the second time I have seen this analogy. Where is this analogy coming from?

Anyway, Grapes cannot talk. If they could, in a bunch of 100 grapes, 98 grapes would be the perfect police to weed out the two possible poisoned grapes because those two grapes also poisoned and destroyed the vine that was home to the 98 grapes. These nice grapes will be angry at the poisonous grapes, and if they find out who are the two poisonous grapes, they will report them. On that friendly vine, only 98 grapes survived the poisoning, the other 1000 grapes died due to poisoning by the poisonous group of grapes.

 

The 100 grapes don't know anything about each other, even if they could talk. You think all these refugees know everything about each other? Where did that assumption come from?

 

3 govt agencies have said they aren't and can't be adequately screened.

They can't exactly call up Assad and confirm, can they?

 

I agree about the Democrat candidates and it is precisely why they should be considered prime election material, they haven't given in to the fear and paranoia presented by the other side. The other side are nativists, it's quite clear by their stance on any kind of immigration reform. They'd rather build walls and deport millions - what chance do refugees have against this stance? Fear is a terrible thing, those who promote fear are even more terrible, the far right is only interested in telling people what to be scared of and who to blame for it....only my opinion.

 

Then thank goodness there's six more to pick up the slack....

 

As if its decided by consensus.

 

Brilliant analogy. This is no time for be all touchy-feely liberal, because they're much smarter than we are. We must not let our guard down because once we there's no going back.

 

So still no answer on what will be done with those with fake passports or those from countries other than Syria. So here you are starting more threads promoting an unsound and undemocratic policy.

 

Instead of worrying about refugees, why not quit nurturing the jihadis that are causing them to leave in the first place?

No jihadis ..... no civil war.

No civil war ....... no refugees.

As it is, Syrians are beginning to return to Syria. Quit fueling the fire. Let the Russian coalition clean up the jihadi wonderland that we helped create. They're doing a much better job than we pretended to do anyway.

 

"Most of the complaints in here and everywhere have been about a possible lack of security."
True.but wrong!
Many people, over time, have fought and died for liberty. Liberty for themselves, their fellow countrymen and their country. These Syrians are no different!

I say take EVERY able bodied Syrian man AND woman back to the Syrian border, hand them a rifle and tell them to fight for their country!
But, that would be against the yellow bellied, liberal agenda of filling this country, which was created by the same fight for liberty in which MANY of our forefathers fought and died for, with more yellow bellied liberals!
You Participation Trophy liberals whining wieners crack me up. Ain't a ball among any of you.............

 

One could just as easily use your grape analogy to justify the killing of all humans because some of them are serial killer grapes. Would you eat such a grape? I doubt it.

That's not how we've decided society ought to work. There is a presumption of innocence, and the state tries to demonstrate otherwise with proof. While I agree that immigration is an area Congress has authority over, it still makes very little sense to... for instance, end all Muslim immigration. That's only slightly less absurd than ending all immigration entirely.

I also sympathize with your perspective on immigration, as it being a way for the poor around the world to come to Western nations and get a bunch of free stuff. But that's not their fault - it's us who have implemented these moral hazards. The path to fixing immigration is altering domestic policy. In the absence of entitlements, each immigrant is a boon on society. In voluntary trade, both parties benefit.

But this has been obscured by domestic social policy. All we see is the few dollars which are stolen from our wallets via taxation each time an immigrant arrives.

 

Ok, lets try this....

I provided a link that explains how the government screens refugees.

That link expressly details how the process is done and also explains how there are a total of 9 different government agencies that collectively "work together" to collect data, and process refugees from the Middle East.

These agencies have been dong this roughly since 9/11 when they were formed (on Bush's watch) and they happen to be very good at what they do.

They have a track record of catching many terrorist that try to sneak through and they've stopped many potential terror events.

I, nor you have any control over any of the directors that may publicly come out and proclaim that they don't have 100% confidence with the process, fair enough.

But the fact that there are a total of 9 agencies (that collectively do this together as a team), and the fact that they have been doing this for quite some time gives me much more confidence than you.

How's that, better?

 

Yet in FBI testimony before Congress.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-challenges-in-screening-refugees-from-syria/

 

Understood, and thanks for the link.

These paragraphs were taken from that link:

"Several high-level administration officials have warned in recent months just how challenging this can be. While they say U.S. security measures are much better than in the past, vetting Syrian refugees poses a quandary: How do you screen people from a war-torn country that has few criminal and terrorist databases to check?

The United States has resettled more than 3 million refugees since the mid-1970s, and the screening system in the post-9/11 era includes multiple background checks, screenings against FBI and other databases and an in-person interview. Debate over the program has intensified since the deadly terrorist strikes in Paris blamed on the Islamic State, though each attacker identified so far whose nationality has been confirmed has

“I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees, so that’s a huge concern of ours,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said at a security industry conference in September, using another name for the Islamic State. He added that the government has “a pretty aggressive program” for screening refugees but that he is less confident about European nations.

FBI Director James Comey added in congressional testimony last month that “a number of people who were of serious concern” slipped through the screening of Iraq War refugees, including two arrested on terrorism-related charges. “There’s no doubt that was the product of a less than excellent vetting,” he said."

Ok, here we go............



Challenging: does not mean impossible, it means challenging, but we're the United States of America, we eat challenging for breakfast.

Are much better than in the past: means exactly that, and it's pretty sad that many of you don't share the same faith the rest of us do.

The United States has resettled more than 3 million refugees since the mid-1970s: I wonder how many people from those 3 million were terrorists that were able to slip through that actually went on to blow stuff up? Well I guess if you count the 3 or 4 events we've had over the last 30 or 40 years, that's a pretty damn good ratio of slim to none.

He added that the government has “a pretty aggressive program” for screening refugees: So which one is it, that he does or doesn't think we'll do a good job of screening these people. He knows damn well that we'll do a good job but he has to make these statement to cover his ass for that 0.0000001% chance that one bad guy might slip through.

“a number of people who were of serious concern” slipped through the screening of Iraq War refugees, including two arrested on terrorism-related charges.: people that have slipped through European detention & processing centers......................NOT American.

I'm here all day if you like to keep at this but I think my work here is pretty much done.

 

I agree.....

 

Yes because in this instance I and several others have provided information about how the vetting process is going to take place yet everybody seems to want to ignore the links I keep providing.

Here, check it out for your self: http://time.com/4116619/syrian-refugees-screening-process/

- - - Updated - - -

Very well said....

 

I don't think it's a brilliant analogy, an analogy to make you think, yes, brilliant, not so much.

Let me ask you this question that I asked somebody else in another thread:

What do we do with all Muslims.........? (as if we have the right to make that call)

Kill every single one of them on the planet, commit a mass genocide, stop their women from reproducing, collect all the millions of Muslims from all over the world and put them in prisons or concentration camps, poison there food & water so that they all die, perform lobotomies on every single one of them, re-educate them, take away and/or destroy every Mosque on the planet?

Exactly what do we do with a group of people that were born on this planet, belong to this planet, belong to the human race, and have just as much right to be here as anybody else?

 

Ok John Wayne......

My grandfather fought in WWII, my uncles fought in the Korean war, and I served in the Marines back in the 80's during the Grenada debacle.

I'm a democrat but I'm not an extremist of any kind, and I'm actually really bothered by the fact that the republican party has all but destroyed itself by becoming the is extreme party of "we hate everything that isn't American or Caucasian".

It would take me months to educate you on the culture of the Middle East that negates the probability of what your suggesting from ever happening on the scale your suggesting.

Add to that, there are millions of Syrians "already" fighting back but I guess you didn't hear it from Hannity or Limbaugh so it must not be true.

Do yourself a favor, go educate your self of what's really going on in Syria, get a clue, and please try to stop posting these incredibly biased posts that make you look one-sided with no understanding or depth.

 

No, not at all.

I have no idea what to do about fake passports that have been made................since passports have been invented, but how fair of you to suggest that I would have the end all, be all answer for that decades old problem.

This thread was meant to share information about the vetting process, that's all.

 

I have to admit that there is something to what your saying, but for whatever reasons we - as well as many other countries have decided to abandon Syria.

I think the best solution here would have been to nip all of this in the bud a long time ago but our president didn't want to start any more wars or have that on his legacy going out so there you go.

The other issue here is Americans always want it both ways.

You can't ask your politicians to not get us into anymore wars on Monday and then turn around on Tuesday to blast them for not going to war on Wednesday...........happens all the time in this country.

 

Uh-huh... and yet "all the king's horses and all the king's men" of our wonderous "intelligence" agencies couldn't figure out what the reality of the WMD situation was in Iraq, could they? And they didn't figure out until it was too damned late what a bunch of murderous Muslims were planning on 9-11, now did they...?

But now, this hooptie "screening" that Obama is so enthusiastic about is supposed to be trustworthy? Based on WHAT? There are no 'databases' in Damascus or any of these other backward 3rd-world toilets that can give anybody any useful information in the first place! Or do you suppose that we have massive databases on old "Abdul" and "Jamal" buried in the NSA computer complex in Utah? In two words: bull (*)(*)(*)(*)!

You know who has his head screwed-on straight? Vladimir Putin! You don't see him making an effusive ass out of himself, gushing out all this reckless, irresponsible , sob-sister crap about letting waves of Muslims into Russia, do you...?

Bottom line -- the whole stinking situation, with both "refugees" from the Middle East AND Mexico/Central America has become so dangerously out-of-control that we should declare an airtight moratorium on ALL immigration into the United States until we can exert some sensible control over it. The other bottom line? We don't OWE any of these people ANYTHING!