IGX

There's a video on this page worth seeing when you think about refugees coming into the country and wondering who they may or may not be and whining about the current work to put the travel ban in place.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-0 ... ing?page=4

Direct link to the video is here:

https://videos.funker530.com/bitmotive/ ... 54x480.mp4

There's like a 17 month vetting period currently. 5 interviews, I think.

How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Wi92BAvtYJiy5RBmUJiFVFcgA&ust=1486502961521893http://www.maryellenmark.com/text/magazines/li ... 0-031.html

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Are you serious? They only asked them questions. There was no background check. This best case and carefully selected refugee had no papers and no way of being checked for past radicalization or terrorist activities. It is bullshit. Utter bullshit. All they had to do was learn a basic cover story and stick with it and not admit they were fucking terrorists. There is no way to know if anything this fgt said was true at all. It could all be lies and probably is mostly lies considering the steong incentive to deceive.

Q: are you a terrorist?
A: ummm no?
Q: will you protest in the US?
A: ummm no?
Q: are you a criminal?
A: ummm no?
Q: have you received training from any terrorist group?
A: ummm no?

Repeat ten times.

When people in the US hear the word "vetting," it implies background checks of some sort. Checking public records, driving records, court records, work history, etc. Maybe contacting former coworkers, classmates and neighbors, such as would be done for a security clearance in the US military. However, for chaos-states like Somalia and Syria, such background checks are impossible. There are often no public records* to check and no cooperating bureaucracy to check them.

So "vetting" simply means, "Does this person tell a fairly consistent story?" But there's no way to verify the story.




*Anyone know why so many Somalis have a Jan. 1 birthday?

bennyonesix wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Are you serious? They only asked them questions. There was no background check. This best case and carefully selected refugee had no papers and no way of being checked for past radicalization or terrorist activities. It is bullshit. Utter bullshit. All they had to do was learn a basic cover story and stick with it and not admit they were fucking terrorists. There is no way to know if anything this fgt said was true at all. It could all be lies and probably is mostly lies considering the steong incentive to deceive.

Q: are you a terrorist?
A: ummm no?
Q: will you protest in the US?
A: ummm no?
Q: are you a criminal?
A: ummm no?
Q: have you received training from any terrorist group?
A: ummm no?

Repeat ten times.

Given the terrorist attacks in the US from those countries remains a reliable zero, 15+ years since 9/11, it seems like they're getting the job done on vetting.

bennyonesix wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Are you serious? They only asked them questions. There was no background check. This best case and carefully selected refugee had no papers and no way of being checked for past radicalization or terrorist activities. It is bullshit. Utter bullshit. All they had to do was learn a basic cover story and stick with it and not admit they were fucking terrorists. There is no way to know if anything this fgt said was true at all. It could all be lies and probably is mostly lies considering the steong incentive to deceive.

Q: are you a terrorist?
A: ummm no?
Q: will you protest in the US?
A: ummm no?
Q: are you a criminal?
A: ummm no?
Q: have you received training from any terrorist group?
A: ummm no?

Repeat ten times.

I believe they ask if they packed their bags themselves as well.

The current 'vetting' process is nothing but paperwork for bureaucrats. A lot of people in need get bogged down in the process, people who shouldn't get in slip past the system and people from the UN get (literally) sucked off.

People questioned why Saudis and Egyptians weren''t included in the ban but, as terrible as those countries may be, they have proper paperwork and criminal background checks and financial records. What does that process look like when you come from a war zone and have no way of verifying who you are? Though people online seem to be fairly divided over this when I've talked with people in person, most seem opposed to the idea but admit the process is lacking and needs to be improved, which is what the EO sought to do. People on valid visas or green cards have already gone through the process and should be excluded, in my opinion, but if improvement comes out of a 120 day pause, I don't see that we can argue against it.

Grandpa's Spells wrote: Given the terrorist attacks in the US from those countries remains a reliable zero, 15+ years since 9/11, it seems like they're getting the job done on vetting.

Zero, yes. "Reliable zero?" Your hubris is showing. Until 9/11 there was no major foreign terrorist attack on the US. Then, there was.

The US can demonstrate compassion for Syrian refugees by creating & protecting Safe Zones in Syria. No need to import Syrians to the US.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Are you serious? They only asked them questions. There was no background check. This best case and carefully selected refugee had no papers and no way of being checked for past radicalization or terrorist activities. It is bullshit. Utter bullshit. All they had to do was learn a basic cover story and stick with it and not admit they were fucking terrorists. There is no way to know if anything this fgt said was true at all. It could all be lies and probably is mostly lies considering the steong incentive to deceive.

Q: are you a terrorist?
A: ummm no?
Q: will you protest in the US?
A: ummm no?
Q: are you a criminal?
A: ummm no?
Q: have you received training from any terrorist group?
A: ummm no?

Repeat ten times.

Given the terrorist attacks in the US from those countries remains a reliable zero, 15+ years since 9/11, it seems like they're getting the job done on vetting.

Do you think this is some lawgic trap? The system does not screen for x quality.

Our screening system for foreigners from muslim states is incompetent. It all needs to be stopped.

http://www.sessions.senate.gov/public/i ... reign-born

A guy goes to his mechanic for a brake job and says, "I don't want Chinese brakes, I only want OEM brakes installed. Chinese brakes will fail and kill me and my family."

The mechanic says, "Well, the OEM brakes are actually Chinese. They're quite safe."

"No they aren't. They'll fail and kill my family. Everybody knows this."

Mechanic checks his records and says, "Look, these brakes have been used for 15 years. They've been in cars for hundreds of millions of miles. They do fatal accident investigations, and these brakes have never caused an accident. We've seen some pretty serious problems from some Korean manufacturers, but you're not talking about those."

"I don't care. I don't want Chinese brakes. Get me different ones."

"Who told you Chinese brakes are bad?"

"My insane racist uncle."

Grandpa's Spells wrote:A guy goes to his mechanic for a brake job and says, "I don't want Chinese brakes, I only want OEM brakes installed. Chinese brakes will fail and kill me and my family."

The mechanic says, "Well, the OEM brakes are actually Chinese. They're quite safe."

"No they aren't. They'll fail and kill my family. Everybody knows this."

Mechanic checks his records and says, "Look, these brakes have been used for 15 years. They've been in cars for hundreds of millions of miles. They do fatal accident investigations, and these brakes have never caused an accident. We've seen some pretty serious problems from some Korean manufacturers, but you're not talking about those."

"I don't care. I don't want Chinese brakes. Get me different ones."

"Who told you Chinese brakes are bad?"

"My insane racist uncle."

That assumes benny's nephew listens to him. #Fakenews, this is clearly.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:A guy goes to his mechanic for a brake job and says, "I don't want Chinese brakes, I only want OEM brakes installed. Chinese brakes will fail and kill me and my family."

The mechanic says, "Well, the OEM brakes are actually Chinese. They're quite safe."

"No they aren't. They'll fail and kill my family. Everybody knows this."

Mechanic checks his records and says, "Look, these brakes have been used for 15 years. They've been in cars for hundreds of millions of miles. They do fatal accident investigations, and these brakes have never caused an accident. We've seen some pretty serious problems from some Korean manufacturers, but you're not talking about those."

"I don't care. I don't want Chinese brakes. Get me different ones."

"Who told you Chinese brakes are bad?"

"My insane racist uncle."

I have read this 3 times. I don't understand your point. Just say what you mean. Or go ask whoever wrote this on facebook to explain it to you so you can explain it to me.

It's 2017, racism is the old black box used to avoid arguing because you aren't very smart. Now the shitlib approved terms to use are nazi and fascist.

Turdacious wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:A guy goes to his mechanic for a brake job and says, "I don't want Chinese brakes, I only want OEM brakes installed. Chinese brakes will fail and kill me and my family."

The mechanic says, "Well, the OEM brakes are actually Chinese. They're quite safe."

"No they aren't. They'll fail and kill my family. Everybody knows this."

Mechanic checks his records and says, "Look, these brakes have been used for 15 years. They've been in cars for hundreds of millions of miles. They do fatal accident investigations, and these brakes have never caused an accident. We've seen some pretty serious problems from some Korean manufacturers, but you're not talking about those."

"I don't care. I don't want Chinese brakes. Get me different ones."

"Who told you Chinese brakes are bad?"

"My insane racist uncle."

That assumes benny's nephew listens to him. #Fakenews, this is clearly.

Holy shit this board is filled with overconfident 115 IQers.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

bennyonesix wrote:How do you vet a refugee from Somalia or Syria etc etc?

Everyone admits it can't be done yet we are already at 1% of the country.

At what level of consciousness are you a liar? Is it a fully aware existence or just beneath the surface?

Where was the lie?

Here is an example of a Syrian being vetted:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ing-214703

Are you serious? They only asked them questions. There was no background check. This best case and carefully selected refugee had no papers and no way of being checked for past radicalization or terrorist activities. It is bullshit. Utter bullshit. All they had to do was learn a basic cover story and stick with it and not admit they were fucking terrorists. There is no way to know if anything this fgt said was true at all. It could all be lies and probably is mostly lies considering the steong incentive to deceive.

Q: are you a terrorist?
A: ummm no?
Q: will you protest in the US?
A: ummm no?
Q: are you a criminal?
A: ummm no?
Q: have you received training from any terrorist group?
A: ummm no?

Repeat ten times.

Given the terrorist attacks in the US from those countries remains a reliable zero, 15+ years since 9/11, it seems like they're getting the job done on vetting.

Spells, if this is truly the case then why would you have an issue with the current administration putting a 90-120 day moratorium on people coming in from those seven countries? Half the country voted for Trump and this was part of his platform to investigate immigration and make sure that all is well and the we are doing the best we can regarding bringing people. Perhaps an investigation into the process will find nothing or maybe it will make some improvements, I just can't understand why the left is so whacked out about this.

If you haven't watched the video take some time to watch it. Kids being trained by ISIS to clear a building in a military fashion and along the way learning to kill bound prisoners indiscriminately. Kids that age in the US are worried about sports, what's on tv and whining about not having the latest gadgets. They wouldn't stand a chance against these kids who are trained killers. Getting a mother figure from Syria or some other shit hole to bring kids like this into other countries as refugees just seeking peace and a place for the kids to get back into school is a very likely possibility. Once they were in place you just wait for an opportune time to have them commit some type of terrorist act. Islam is infiltrating Europe and advocating Sharia law, quite the takeover from the inside out.

Do we really want to be the frog in the boiling water?

Hymen Asshole wrote:Spells, if this is truly the case then why would you have an issue with the current administration putting a 90-120 day moratorium on people coming in from those seven countries?

Three reasons:

1. It presupposes there isn't already heavy vetting in place that takes over a year. There is.
2. The way it was rolled out will help radicalize home-grown extremists.
3. The Muslim countries with the most anti-US sentiment have the closest government/business ties with us. If he was talking about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt, he'd have an argument about terrorism. He's not talking about them, and isn't going to, because business.

Trump spun people up on mostly imaginary problems. Non-Trump voters aren't going to pretend they're real.

johno wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote: Given the terrorist attacks in the US from those countries remains a reliable zero, 15+ years since 9/11, it seems like they're getting the job done on vetting.

Zero, yes. "Reliable zero?" Your hubris is showing. Until 9/11 there was no major foreign terrorist attack on the US. Then, there was.

Not to pick too big of a nit, but 9/11 wasn't even the first attack on the towers. The earlier one would have been lots worse if successful, because it would have brought down at least one if not both towers immediately with no one getting out alive.

To this day, the greatest threat seems to be from Anwar Al-Alawki. Even though he is dead, his videos are viewed all over the US. He's got killer propaganda going on, and it works great on disgruntled loser islamo-merkins. Throw in a muslim ban, and it only gets better.

I predict the next radical islamic attack will be by a US citizen, and he will cite the ban as partial justification.

You know someone out there is planning it right now.

We produce enough waste internally. No need to import it.

Tent city with power and plumbing in Saudi Arabia. Will hold 3 million. Saudi Arabia takes few if any refugees, only temporary visitor visas

Kazuya Mishima wrote:We produce enough waste internally. No need to import it.

"Overpopulation is a problem, we must protect the environment!"

-US population doubled over last 60 years-

"we need open borders and unlimited refugees!"

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

Hymen Asshole wrote:Spells, if this is truly the case then why would you have an issue with the current administration putting a 90-120 day moratorium on people coming in from those seven countries?

Three reasons:

1. It presupposes there isn't already heavy vetting in place that takes over a year. There is.
2. The way it was rolled out will help radicalize home-grown extremists.
3. The Muslim countries with the most anti-US sentiment have the closest government/business ties with us. If he was talking about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt, he'd have an argument about terrorism. He's not talking about them, and isn't going to, because business.

Trump spun people up on mostly imaginary problems. Non-Trump voters aren't going to pretend they're real.

1.b. If vetting people from the countries Trump targeted is really as impossible as his acolytes claim and those refugees are really as dangerous as they claim, how is a temporary moratorium going to help? Will identifying the legions of hypothetical ISIS infiltrators no longer be impossible after the Trumpettes take a few months to pretend to study the situation?

keep your logic to yourself