Syrian Refugees

This was my post on Facebook, of which I've taken a lot of heat for.

100% of the Oklahoma City bombers were white American males. We must stop white American males from entering our state. Yes, that's what you sound like when you don't understand how statistics work.

I don't believe in the open faucet type of immigration policy many libertarians do but I'm also not a scared little coward afraid of people who don't look like me. There are nearly 6 million refugees trying to flee ISIS, trying to flee a dictatorship and just trying to survive. If you don't understand why we should help them then quit calling yourself a Christian, quit saying you support the Constitution and sure as hell don't pretend that you're some badass because you're obviously scared of everything.

I'm still waiting for Ebola to sneak in with the Africans and some Mexican to rape my dog and steal my job... I don't have time to be afraid of your next ridiculous, politically based, fear mongering attempt.
 
sturg33 said:
This was my post on Facebook, of which I've taken a lot of heat for.

100% of the Oklahoma City bombers were white American males. We must stop white American males from entering our state. Yes, that's what you sound like when you don't understand how statistics work.

I don't believe in the open faucet type of immigration policy many libertarians do but I'm also not a scared little coward afraid of people who don't look like me. There are nearly 6 million refugees trying to flee ISIS, trying to flee a dictatorship and just trying to survive. If you don't understand why we should help them then quit calling yourself a Christian, quit saying you support the Constitution and sure as hell don't pretend that you're some badass because you're obviously scared of everything.

I'm still waiting for Ebola to sneak in with the Africans and some Mexican to rape my dog and steal my job... I don't have time to be afraid of your next ridiculous, politically based, fear mongering attempt.
Click to expand...

This looks like a pretty solid post to me.
 
The good points I've read include:

It is far more beneficial to help them in their home country than it is to bring them over here. We are picking off the cream of the crop, which leaves Syria in even worse shape that it was. When you take the good apples away from Syria, what is left?

I think resources are better spent by helping them in their home country. All we are doing is helping a small fraction of people, hurting the ones left in that country, and costing us all more money.
 
My wife said as a Christian we should let them in, but she has a devious mind as well. I don't know if Okie can see my wife's Facebook, she got a lot of heat in accepting them until she borrowed a theme of mine.

If you don't like someone, try to change them into your image.

So I suggested to re-educate their women and children, especially the kids in school with the caveat to be either agnostic or atheist until you understand the life of Islam is and what a Christian or the lesser religions or none at all. The females should really pay attention because if you go down that dark road of Islam, there is no turning back unless you will be missing a limb or dead.

All the military age males would be monitored, all purchases monitored, even attempt to befriend for sting operations.

These are necessary for the safety of our country because we can not let a few slipped through and then sow the seed of discord and then another Boston Marathon massacre.
 
Gutsy posts sturg33 and AA's wife. Not sure on the rapidly forced assimilation angle suggested by AA, but it's better than what I am hearing from some quarters. It would be kind of like forcing the Irish to abandon Catholicism when the hit the shores in the 1840s.
 
The House bill seems reasonable. I don't see the problem with it. Just take a step back for a minute and make sure the vetting process is good enough.
 
weso1 said:
The House bill seems reasonable. I don't see the problem with it. Just take a step back for a minute and make sure the vetting process is good enough.
Click to expand...

I agree this is very important but considering the DUMASs who always make these sorts of decisions I"m not sure how they'd go about it
 
50PoundHead said:
Gutsy posts sturg33 and AA's wife. Not sure on the rapidly forced assimilation angle suggested by AA, but it's better than what I am hearing from some quarters. It would be kind of like forcing the Irish to abandon Catholicism when the hit the shores in the 1840s.
Click to expand...

It's called preventiv defensive measures. They have subverted some of my friends growing up in Paducah Kentucky, Cairo, Mounds City, Tamms Ilinois, then up to Cape Girardieau Mo. They were totally brainwashed. I got into a heated conversation with one about Islam and Christianity and they brought up the dark ages and I eda simple question, why the beheadings, cutting off the wrists, stoning adulterers, females, females having no rights?

By the will of allah they always said. And my response is always, tell Allah to wake the hell up and tell your people they are still living in the 6th century. And I am not a nice person to people that still think be-headings and stoning people publicly to death is cool.

Look we don't have certain laws that Islam has or even Mexicans for that matter, or China, or any other nationality that brings their culture over. They have their own means of dishing out justice and we tend to look away if they deal with their own. But some of those people get in here undetected might do some damage but I assure you they will be watched and besides, re-educating their children to the western way of life have giving some of their faith an understanding of how free women are and how you can still worship without the bloodshed that can accompany it.
 
AerchAngel said:
It's called preventiv defensive measures. They have subverted some of my friends growing up in Paducah Kentucky, Cairo, Mounds City, Tamms Ilinois, then up to Cape Girardieau Mo. They were totally brainwashed. I got into a heated conversation with one about Islam and Christianity and they brought up the dark ages and I eda simple question, why the beheadings, cutting off the wrists, stoning adulterers, females, females having no rights?

By the will of allah they always said. And my response is always, tell Allah to wake the hell up and tell your people they are still living in the 6th century. And I am not a nice person to people that still think be-headings and stoning people publicly to death is cool.

Look we don't have certain laws that Islam has or even Mexicans for that matter, or China, or any other nationality that brings their culture over. They have their own means of dishing out justice and we tend to look away if they deal with their own. But some of those people get in here undetected might do some damage but I assure you they will be watched and besides, re-educating their children to the western way of life have giving some of their faith an understanding of how free women are and how you can still worship without the bloodshed that can accompany it.
Click to expand...

Winning a debate with a Muslim is tricky but usually breaks down into two categories. Are they really sincere in their beliefs and just think that way is the right way? If so there is one fairly sure fire way, PM me if you want to know what it is. If they're the usual arrogant moronic ahole type you can't win an argument with them on what day it is. Then you just bring up "the Satanic verses" and be ready for them to try and light into you. Of course my way for #1 will also piss them off so that's always a plus, unless they have a sword or a rocket launcher.
 
I agree with gilesfan. I have no problem offering aid to refugees. What's going on in Syria is scary. And the same Americans that want to deny assistance to these refugees would not have an issue if these were refugees from France and were Christians.

The main issue I see is that this in only putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. Syria would benefit far more greatly if these refugees stayed there and acted as voices of change and took arms against their invaders and even their own leaders as needed. And our efforts would be better spent assisting these people to achieve these goals in their own country.
 
the Greek island of Lesbos.

LGBT tourism

Main article: LGBT tourism

"One meaning of the word lesbian derives from the poems of Sappho, who was born in Lesbos and who wrote with powerful emotional content directed toward other women. Due to this association, Lesbos and especially the town of Eresos, her birthplace, are visited frequently by lesbian tourists.

In 2008, a group of Lesbos islanders lost a court case against the Gay and Lesbian community of Greece. The Lesbos islander group had requested a legal injunction to ban groups from using the word "lesbian" in their names, which the petitioners claim violated their human rights as it is "insulting" and disgraces them around the world."

:Bowman:
 
I'm fine with accepting them. I think it's crucial we do have some kind of security component to make sure no one is slipping in as a disguise. Seems like I heard somewhere a sizable portion were young male adults, which is a little odd.
 
gilesfan said:
The good points I've read include:

It is far more beneficial to help them in their home country than it is to bring them over here. We are picking off the cream of the crop, which leaves Syria in even worse shape that it was. When you take the good apples away from Syria, what is left?

I think resources are better spent by helping them in their home country. All we are doing is helping a small fraction of people, hurting the ones left in that country, and costing us all more money.
Click to expand...

^^^ That's the only good anti-refugee argument out there and the only one that really makes me pause. But I'm still with sturg on this one.
 
It makes little sense, even out of humanitarian concerns and/or compassion, to accept a big throng of refugees from the ME considering the current immigration (political) and terrorism (actual) issues that we can't make any progress on. We already have growing problems with the poor, uneducated and unemployed. The infrastructure is overloaded and broken already. Bureaucrats on the state and local level do not want or need an new influx of brown skinned people.

But America should be front and center trying to protect and find a place for them. How about Israel? Isn't that the refugee relocation zone?

They may not be terrorists now but after they get screwed over and spit on in America they'll be on the ISIS sign up list soon.
 
I don't buy the thought that we can't bring in even up to 250,000 refugees, vetted thru the extensive vetting program already in place and improve on helping Vets, the poor, or whatever group we'd want to add, at the same time.

I also don't think allowing refugees in precludes us from seeking to support safe harbors in conjunction with Jordan an Israel especially. The Golan Heights already has settlements of Druze throughout. I'd think that might be a possible place for the Yazidi and other non-Muslim groups.

The following link explains an interesting angle to this issue - and one that needs addressing, imho.

Link
 
Friend shared this on his Facebook wall, and I shared it also.

A Pastor/Immigration Lawyer in Ohio wrote this.

Scott Hicks
November 19 at 9:54am · Edited ·
Most of my friends know I practice Immigration law. As such, I have worked with the refugee community for over two decades. This post is long, but if you want actual information about the process, keep reading.

I can not tell you how frustrating it is to see the misinformation and outright lies that are being perpetuated about the refugee process and the Syrian refugees. So, here is a bit of information from the real world of someone who actually works and deals with this issue.

The refugee screening process is multi-layered and is very difficult to get through. Most people languish in temporary camps for months to years while their story is evaluated and checked.

First, you do not get to choose what country you might be resettled into. If you already have family (legal) in a country, that makes it more likely that you will go there to be with family, but other than that it is random. So, you can not simply walk into a refugee camp, show a document, and say, I want to go to America. Instead, the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees) works with the local authorities to try to take care of basic needs. Once the person/family is registered to receive basic necessities, they can be processed for resettlement. Many people are not interested in resettlement as they hope to return to their country and are hoping that the turmoil they fled will be resolved soon. In fact, most refugees in refugee events never resettle to a third country. Those that do want to resettle have to go through an extensive process.

Resettlement in the U.S. is a long process and takes many steps. The Refugee Admissions Program is jointly administered by the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) in the Department of State, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and offices within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) within DHS conducts refugee interviews and determines individual eligibility for refugee status in the United States.

We evaluate refugees on a tiered system with three levels of priority.

First Priority are people who have suffered compelling persecution or for whom no other durable solution exists. These individuals are referred to the United States by UNHCR, or they are identified by the U.S. embassy or a non-governmental organization (NGO).

Second priority are groups of “special concern” to the United States. The Department of State determines these groups, with input from USCIS, UNHCR, and designated NGOs. At present, we prioritize certain persons from the former Soviet Union, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Iran, Burma, and Bhutan.

Third priority are relatives of refugees (parents, spouses, and unmarried children under 21) who are already settled in the United States may be admitted as refugees. The U.S.-based relative must file an Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) and must be processed by DHS.

Before being allowed to come to the United States, each refugee must undergo an extensive interviewing, screening, and security clearance process conducted by Regional Refugee Coordinators and overseas Resettlement Support Centers (RSCs). Individuals generally must not already be firmly resettled (a legal term of art that would be a separate article). Just because one falls into the three priorities above does not guarantee admission to the United States.

The Immigration laws require that the individuals prove that they have a “well-founded fear,” (another legal term which would be a book.) This fear must be proved regardless of the person’s country, circumstance, or classification in a priority category. There are multiple interviews and people are challenged on discrepancies. I had a client who was not telling the truth on her age and the agency challenged her on it. Refugees are not simply admitted because they have a well founded fear. They still must show that they are not subject to exclusion under Section 212(a) of the INA. These grounds include serious health matters, moral or criminal matters, as well as security issues. In addition, they can be excluded for such things as polygamy, misrepresentation of facts on visa applications, smuggling, or previous deportations. Under some circumstances, the person may be eligible to have the ground waived.

At this point, a refugee can be conditionally accepted for resettlement. Then, the RSC sends a request for assurance of placement to the United States, and the Refugee Processing Center (RPC) works with private voluntary agencies (VOLAG) to determine where the refugee will live. If the refugee does have family in the U.S., efforts will be made to resettle close to that family.

Every person accepted as a refugee for planned admission to the United States is conditional upon passing a medical examination and passing all security checks. Frankly, there is more screening of refugees than ever happens to get on an airplane. Of course, yes, no system can be 100% foolproof. But if that is your standard, then you better shut down the entire airline industry, close the borders, and stop all international commerce and shipping. Every one of those has been the source of entry of people and are much easier ways to gain access to the U.S. Only upon passing all of these checks (which involve basically every agency of the government involved in terrorist identification) can the person actually be approved to travel.

Before departing, refugees sign a promissory note to repay the United States for their travel costs. This travel loan is an interest-free loan that refugees begin to pay back six months after arriving in the country.

Once the VOLAG is notified of the travel plans, it must arrange for the reception of refugees at the airport and transportation to their housing at their final destination.
This process from start to finish averages 18 to 24 months, but I have seen it take years.

The reality is that about half of the refugees are children, another quarter are elderly. Almost all of the adults are either moms or couples coming with children. Each year the President, in consultation with Congress, determines the numerical ceiling for refugee admissions. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, the proposed ceiling is 85,000. We have been averaging about 70,000 a year for the last number of years. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)

Over one-third of all refugee arrivals (35.1 percent, or 24,579) in FY 2015 came from the Near East/South Asia—a region that includes Iraq, Iran, Bhutan, and Afghanistan.
Another third of all refugee arrivals (32.1 percent, or 22,472) in FY 2015 came from Africa.
Over a quarter of all refugee arrivals (26.4 percent, or 18,469) in FY 2015 came from East Asia — a region that includes China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)

Finally, the process in Europe is different. I would be much more concerned that terrorists are infiltrating the European system because they are not nearly so extensive and thorough in their process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top