DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Obama opens the borders to Syrian refugees (terrorists?)

U.S. Congress questions plan to admit Syrian refugees


(Reuters) - The Republican-led House Committee on Homeland Security is challenging an Obama administration plan to admit Syrian refugees to the United States, saying it could allow potential terrorists to sneak into the country.

In a letter sent to the White House, Michael McCaul, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee and Peter King and Candice Miller, who chair subcommittees, said the administration's plan "raises serious national security concerns."

The letter, dated Wednesday, said the United States lacks the resources to fully investigate the backgrounds of refugees from Syria, a base for Islamic State militants, before they are admitted to the country.

Anne Richard, an Assistant Secretary of State, said on Dec. 9 that the United States resettled nearly 70,000 refugees from nearly 70 countries in 2013 and that the administration's refugee plans would lead to "resettling Syrians as well."

Richard said the United States was already reviewing around 9,000 Syrian refugee cases referred by a United Nations agency and was receiving "roughly a thousand new ones each month."

Ned Price, a National Security Council spokesman, said all refugees including those from Syria would be rigorously screened.

"Our screening protocols for refugees are rigorous, continually refined, and build on years of experience vetting individuals coming to the United States from around the world," he said in an e-mailed statement. "They permit us to proceed in a way that seeks to both safeguard public safety and serve our mission of providing refuge to some of the world's most vulnerable people."

A State Department official said that the United States was likely to admit 1,000-2,000 Syrian refugees this government fiscal year and a few thousand more in Fiscal Year 2016. The official said that Syrian refugees applying for admission to the United States will "undergo additional screening specific to this population."

The official said that the Department of Homeland Security, which had no immediate comment, had sole authority to grant refugees admission to the United States.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/us-usa-syria-refugees-idUSKBN0L22WX20150129

What's New?????

We've opened up to plenty of different refugee groups from several high profile areas over the course of our history.

so what's the problem?

They're not white.

and they're muslim. double whammy. We can't have that here in Good Ole Boy country.

Oh xenophonia...

I don't see the issue. We have a ridiculous security screening force through the NSA and CIA. They probably know enough about everyone.

Was the CIA in any way responsible for the reports that said Iraq had massive stockpiles of WMD's? If so, I'm not sure how much we can count on them.

Touché

You really don't see a problem with this?

Letting in refugees as long as they are vetted doesn't sound like a bad idea.

I'm not so sure they actually believed Iraq had massive stockpiles of WMD's, but rather what needed to be said to push for a war.

Good point. Which begs the question: is the CIA now doing the same thing? Reporting/saying what the president wants them to say?

I have no idea. I have no problem with refugees coming here. Let's face it, the bad guys are already here. I hardly think ISIS, or al queda need refugees to "sneak" in to the u.s. because, as I said, I'm sure they are already here.

CIA and vetting? They do a heck of a job, but they aren't perfect, by any stretch.

I don't like this, It only took 19 people to kill almost 3,000 last time.

But let's not forget, there are people who want to leave here to go join them over there. So what's to say they don't just stay here and form a cell?



Are you capable of learning from history or no?

I'd be willing to bet any of the posters you're aiming that smoking pile of foolishness at would've welcomed any one of the hijackers here as a guest and encouraged them to enjoy all the opportunity our country had to offer before the towers fell.

There's no 'fool me twice' when it comes to this.

wow, thank god the boards weren't invented when my grandfather and such came over here from Turkey.

such hostility. guess he would've been branded a terrorist sleeper cell too.

Citizens from a country openly hostile to the USA should never be allowed to set foot in our nation but instead we are going to set them up with government aid in the thousands?! Any other country would consider that flat out treason.

Let them seek shelter in one of their neighboring countries or else stay in their own country and fight for independence.

false. they do it in Europe and Australia all the time.

please don't throw the treason word around if you don't have proof to back that kind of claim up.

What were those Russian Muslims considered? White? Middle eastern? Who cares? Do either of you have the power to bring back one person that was lost?

No, we only have the power to prevent.

You need to read what I wrote a little closer.

Banning based on fringe religious groups is such an asinine policy. You could make such an argument against every single religious group out there.

You could, but at the moment (like say the last 14 years or so) members of this particular religion have to varying degrees of success killed or tried to kill our people. Like I said before, 19 (nineteen, 10+9=19) people killed almost 3,000 people-in one day.

You're basically saying that Westboro Baptist=All Christians. I could even mention how Christians shouldn't be allowed since they went on crusades and all...

One fringe group should not ruin it for everyone else.

Fine let them go to Europe then. Last time I checked several countries in Europe were complaining about such things happening already.

It's common knowledge that the people of syria as a country and as individuals loathe and hate America. They wish we were dead. They hold celebrations filled with joy when terrorist attack us. They are flat out enemies to our country. To let them just waltz into our country ahead of people who LOVE our country instead is ridiculous and insane.

If flat out endangers our country and is treason.

Don't want Americans to want you gone? Then don't kill our people and celebrate when bad things happen to us. They have no place here as people of Syria. I could care less about them being muslim. Although, being from a country run by extreme muslims who hate America doesn't make it any better.

Wow, thats just asinine. You want to compare 1 crazy sect compared to an entire country where 95% or more of the people want us dead or at the least hate us. Get real. I mean hell Syria is one of the top locations that al qaeda uses to train terrorism against America. Are you just ignorant or just insane? I mean seriously!

Westboro Baptist = 0 (NO, none, nada) Christians that I know.

And why do we always go back to the crusades?

Why? The nut case "christians" of today are nut case christians. The crusades have nothing to do with today....so, why bring it up?

Here's a thought - if you're going to hold the crusades against todays Christians, why don't you hold slavery against the Africans that captured and sold the slaves, and to some extent, continue that today?

Also, if the Muslims had not had it in their head to kill every Christian wanting to visit the holy land on pilgrimage it might not have been a need for the Crusades at all. The main reason America puts up with Israel is that it keeps the holy land open to all.

I'll thank you to not put words in my mouth sir. The last group had to sneak their way I of lie about why we should let them in and now these idiots are just going to waltz them on in?

Do we genuinely have the ability to vet all these people?

If the crusades happened within the last 10-15 years you'd have a point. As we all know, they didn't.

Europe is having another big push of nationalism in recent years. Part of this includes far reaching anti-antisemitism and Islamaphobia.

Yep!

White people have literally inflicted worse damage to this country and we let them live normally. So clearly, no.

You can't play this pick and choose game of who gets to represent you while not letting the other side do the same. You'll come down quickly on the Muslim population due to the actions of AQ and ISIS, but don't see that both AQ and ISIS are blowing up mosques as well. Any Muslim would disown AQ and ISIS, but yet you won't allow it. However, if the KKK or Westboro are mentioned as representatives of Christianity then it's a "How dare you" type of response. Please stop that nonsense.

Of course they are. All government agencies do it. If we even call for some sort of transparency with the CIA (but all agencies, but the CIA works best in this example), we get calls of OPSEC and the need for "National Security". Case and point, the CIA made it incredibly hard for the congress's intelligence committee to do their job and oversee the CIA. In response to that a staffer of the Intelligence Committee broke a rule/law and copied some files to a flash drive so he could view them later. As a result of that action the CIA began spying on the senators and their staff in the intelligence committee. The whole thing was just disgusting.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/cia-admits-spying-senate-staffers

Imagine that. A country wishing to preserve its culture and heritage and against a cultural invasion completely opposite to what they believe in. Most countries are not like the USA where becoming a citizen is so easy. Many other countries don't EVER allow citizenship by someone not related to a natural born citizen.

A cultural war or war of ideas is still a war...

seriously, where are you getting this information from?

you realize how easy it is to get citizenship in a country like germany if you speak the language. the visa requirements, just like here in the US, is a borderline joke?

honestly, what are you guys credentials?

awesome chart CHS

Germany is listed as one of the 5 hardest countries to gain citizenship.

"Obtaining permanent residency in Germany is difficult unless you are a citizen of another EU country. Other foreign nationals must have lived in Germany for at least five years and demonstrate competency in language, the political system and society. Applicants must also demonstrate they have an ability to earn a living and that they've contributed to the national pension plan, as well as having proof of accommodation.

To become a citizen, applicants must have lived in the country at least eight years (seven, if they've passed a competency test) and renounce citizenship in any other country."

Switzerland is almost impossible. Austria is very hard also.

France is only easy if you join the foreign legion.
---------------------
USA is easy just cross the river and have a baby. Then collect welfare for life.

German has about the same requirements as the US. ALL countries require that you live there a certain amount of time and speak the language before being granted citizenship. there's nothing ground breaking about that.

and people have anchor babies in european nations all the time just like here in the US. why do you think gypsies run so rampant in the EU? it's next to impossible to get rid of them.

come on man.

Just when you thought the Obama administration could not hit a new low, they did. State Department Spokesperson, Marie Harf, was on Hardball with Chris Matthews Monday and she said the key to winning the fight against ISIS is:

“We cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the longer term, medium or longer term, to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups. Whether it is lack of opportunity for jobs. . .

Chris Matthews had enough at that point and he cut her off. He said there will always be poor people, there will always be poor Muslims and giving them jobs will not solve anything.

Harf went on to say:

“We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people.”

So let me get this straight, first Obama will not call terrorists what they are and now he thinks throwing money at them (taxpayer monies mind you) will make them stop hating us? Wow. . .

In regards to the killing of 21 Christians on the beach White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest issued a statement about it but in that statement he did not mention the religion of the killers nor did he mention the victims. As a matter of fact the words ‘Christian’, ‘Islam’ or ‘Muslim’ were not included at all in his statement.

Even Pope Francis from the Vatican on Monday said the 21 victims:

“They were killed simply for the fact that they were Christians.

I guess the lesson learned here is the Obama administration feels if you have enemies that absolutely hate you, don’t acknowledge the heinous things they are doing just give them money and then they will be your new best friend.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/do...+muslim+problem

Do you have a chart that would show the size of the damn dot for the 19 hijackers on 9/11? Or how about the Tsarnaev brothers?

That's a grand total of 21 PEOPLE! WHICH OF THOSE THAT WERE LOST DO YOU HAVE THE POWER TO BRING BACK?!

Do either of you have the guts to answer that or are you just going to hide behind your 'racism' comments?

Look at things from this perspective...
What amount of money/resources have we spent in response or to try to stop another such event?

What amount of money/resources have they spent to do any of said events?

Having said that, how do you define winning or that we won?

How many more terrorists have we created in our policies to try to stop these types of events, and therefore only made things worse, and not better?


What is the answer? I don't know. But our current policies (and this goes back way beyond Obama, and even Bush) aren't working, and only seem to ever make things worse in the long-term.

Short-term goals (Hey we got this guy, we got that guy) aren't translating to long-term success and only seem to cause more problems.

Calling this a War on Terror is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. We're fighting an ideology that can't be beat.

What's the answer? I don't know. How do you change the education level, trust factor, economics,tolerance system etc of millions and millions of people to help prevent them from turning into terrorists in the first place? And at a quick enough pace that this activity dies down (on both sides)?

But to simply think we can fight the fight out of them is laughable. Hell, if nuking the region would solve the problem, I might even understand that. The problem is, people like that (susceptible to becoming terrorists) are everywhere, and you would only create more of them outside the region by doing such a thing.

It only takes a few to create huge problems for many. That won't ever change.