Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Sally Yates is a Hero


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Sally Yates is a Hero Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 12:46:27 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


It's not like it's part of the AG's job to represent the administration in court or anything. Oh! Wait!

Utter clap-trap, refusing to uphold your constitutional duty, innit?

Michael


No it isnt. It is to uphold and defend the constitution, otherwise they are no better than you nutsuckers.

My understanding is limited, not being a US citizen and all.
But from what I heard in the news, including input from various US people interviewed, the job entails upholding and defending the constitution.
And if the constitution says that people cannot be denied entry by reason of nationality, race, colour or religion, then she has done exactly that.

If Trump wants to stop these people coming in, then surely he needs to charge them under some terrorist legislation?
Because without some specific charges to show they have broken the law, especially if they have a valid Visa or right to residence, they should not be refused entry.
As far as I'm aware, the president does not have the power, even with an EO, to override the constitution.

That's my take on it.


Well your knowledge is limited. First, a president doesn't make laws, he enforces laws that already exist. The laws that Trump is enforcing were signed into law by Obama. The fired AG was a hold over from the Obama administration. Her job was gone in a week or two anyway. So she made a big political fifteen minutes of fame ploy that will now land her a seven figure salary at some liberal law firm. It's all BS, but it keeps the little Koop aid drinkers hopped up.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 12:48:46 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In her confirmation hearing as AG, Sen. Jeff Sessions asked her specifically whether she would stand up to the president if asked to do an illegal action.

Seems some care about the law only when it restrains the opposition.

Well, since the law Trump was using was signed into law by Obama, she appears not to have been bothered by it then. It's political BS so looney tunes like you can have your fake outrage.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 1:07:44 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


It's not like it's part of the AG's job to represent the administration in court or anything. Oh! Wait!

Utter clap-trap, refusing to uphold your constitutional duty, innit?

Michael


No it isnt. It is to uphold and defend the constitution, otherwise they are no better than you nutsuckers.

My understanding is limited, not being a US citizen and all.
But from what I heard in the news, including input from various US people interviewed, the job entails upholding and defending the constitution.
And if the constitution says that people cannot be denied entry by reason of nationality, race, colour or religion, then she has done exactly that.

If Trump wants to stop these people coming in, then surely he needs to charge them under some terrorist legislation?
Because without some specific charges to show they have broken the law, especially if they have a valid Visa or right to residence, they should not be refused entry.
As far as I'm aware, the president does not have the power, even with an EO, to override the constitution.

That's my take on it.


Well your knowledge is limited. First, a president doesn't make laws, he enforces laws that already exist. The laws that Trump is enforcing were signed into law by Obama. The fired AG was a hold over from the Obama administration. Her job was gone in a week or two anyway. So she made a big political fifteen minutes of fame ploy that will now land her a seven figure salary at some liberal law firm. It's all BS, but it keeps the little Koop aid drinkers hopped up.

Trump was enforcing maybe a misrepresentation of the Law (which was first passed in 1986)
VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

The U.S. Congress shares this concern, and on December 18, 2015, the President signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2016, which includes the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (the Act). The Act, among other things, establishes new eligibility requirements for travel under the VWP. These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 1:17:43 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


It's not like it's part of the AG's job to represent the administration in court or anything. Oh! Wait!

Utter clap-trap, refusing to uphold your constitutional duty, innit?

Michael


No it isnt. It is to uphold and defend the constitution, otherwise they are no better than you nutsuckers.

My understanding is limited, not being a US citizen and all.
But from what I heard in the news, including input from various US people interviewed, the job entails upholding and defending the constitution.
And if the constitution says that people cannot be denied entry by reason of nationality, race, colour or religion, then she has done exactly that.

If Trump wants to stop these people coming in, then surely he needs to charge them under some terrorist legislation?
Because without some specific charges to show they have broken the law, especially if they have a valid Visa or right to residence, they should not be refused entry.
As far as I'm aware, the president does not have the power, even with an EO, to override the constitution.

That's my take on it.


Well your knowledge is limited. First, a president doesn't make laws, he enforces laws that already exist. The laws that Trump is enforcing were signed into law by Obama. The fired AG was a hold over from the Obama administration. Her job was gone in a week or two anyway. So she made a big political fifteen minutes of fame ploy that will now land her a seven figure salary at some liberal law firm. It's all BS, but it keeps the little Koop aid drinkers hopped up.

Trump was enforcing maybe a misrepresentation of the Law (which was first passed in 1986)
VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

The U.S. Congress shares this concern, and on December 18, 2015, the President signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2016, which includes the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (the Act). The Act, among other things, establishes new eligibility requirements for travel under the VWP. These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

Now, Trump was enforcing laws that Obama signed in 2011 and 2015.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 1:32:23 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


It's not like it's part of the AG's job to represent the administration in court or anything. Oh! Wait!

Utter clap-trap, refusing to uphold your constitutional duty, innit?

Michael


No it isnt. It is to uphold and defend the constitution, otherwise they are no better than you nutsuckers.

My understanding is limited, not being a US citizen and all.
But from what I heard in the news, including input from various US people interviewed, the job entails upholding and defending the constitution.
And if the constitution says that people cannot be denied entry by reason of nationality, race, colour or religion, then she has done exactly that.

If Trump wants to stop these people coming in, then surely he needs to charge them under some terrorist legislation?
Because without some specific charges to show they have broken the law, especially if they have a valid Visa or right to residence, they should not be refused entry.
As far as I'm aware, the president does not have the power, even with an EO, to override the constitution.

That's my take on it.


Well your knowledge is limited. First, a president doesn't make laws, he enforces laws that already exist. The laws that Trump is enforcing were signed into law by Obama. The fired AG was a hold over from the Obama administration. Her job was gone in a week or two anyway. So she made a big political fifteen minutes of fame ploy that will now land her a seven figure salary at some liberal law firm. It's all BS, but it keeps the little Koop aid drinkers hopped up.

Trump was enforcing maybe a misrepresentation of the Law (which was first passed in 1986)
VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

The U.S. Congress shares this concern, and on December 18, 2015, the President signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2016, which includes the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (the Act). The Act, among other things, establishes new eligibility requirements for travel under the VWP. These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

Now, Trump was enforcing laws that Obama signed in 2011 and 2015.

In his imagination, and in your clueless defense of it. The Act listing the seven nations is the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act which was signed in 2015.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 5:30:06 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In her confirmation hearing as AG, Sen. Jeff Sessions asked her specifically whether she would stand up to the president if asked to do an illegal action.

Seems some care about the law only when it restrains the opposition.

And how much did she stand up against Obama when he appointed heads to positions within his administration without congressional approval while the Senate was in session? The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it was unconstitutional. Can you cite where it is mentioned that she stood up to the President then?

What Trump has done may be unpopular...though the last 5 President's have all done it in one way or another...but it is up to the Supreme Court to decide its constitutionality. Not a holdover from a liberal administration.

You think maybe because the AG has no power to stop that.
Her reason for not defending Trumps order was that it was unconstitutional. That should have been her same reason for standing up to Obama...if standing up for the Constitution is "her deal".

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 5:40:06 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

If you would pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually see what's going on around you, you might see that it's NOT a ban, just a chance to actually vet those that want to enter this country. What part of that do you find offensive?

People who were already vetted who had visas, some with green cards for chrissakes, were denied entry. That's the part I find offensive.

Even if that doesn't bother you, you should find it offensive that only countries where Trumplethinskin wasn't doing business were on the list.

Umm...idiot, the list was Obama's. Had nothing to do with Trump's business.

(in reply to stef)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 5:43:59 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

So, given that Trump has the Constitutional mandate to defend Americans and has the power to do so by stopping any foreigner from entering the country then when Sally Yates decided to not obey the order she put all Americans at risk and failed in her mandate to defend the Constitution. She is fired. If she was in the military she would be behind bars. She is no hero. She failed her fellow citizens.

It's all a ploy to get leftist kool aid drinkers all rialed up for when the Supreme Court nominee is announced. The idiots here are being used by Chucky Shumer and don't even realize it. It's sad.

(in reply to LTE)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 5:45:02 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

Jesus- beyond The ban- does no one realize this is the "check" in "checks and balances"? Like he's just one step closer to the coup he wants.

Or Bannon, that nazi fuckwit, wants.

What an idiot.

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 6:10:54 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In her confirmation hearing as AG, Sen. Jeff Sessions asked her specifically whether she would stand up to the president if asked to do an illegal action.

Seems some care about the law only when it restrains the opposition.

And how much did she stand up against Obama when he appointed heads to positions within his administration without congressional approval while the Senate was in session? The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it was unconstitutional. Can you cite where it is mentioned that she stood up to the President then?

What Trump has done may be unpopular...though the last 5 President's have all done it in one way or another...but it is up to the Supreme Court to decide its constitutionality. Not a holdover from a liberal administration.

You think maybe because the AG has no power to stop that.
Her reason for not defending Trumps order was that it was unconstitutional. That should have been her same reason for standing up to Obama...if standing up for the Constitution is "her deal".


The Supreme Court only decides cases that are brought to them. Someone else stands up first.

We have a Constitution for a reason. If this were a gun rights case, y'all would be waving that Constitution like a fan.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 6:19:27 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
FR
According to Claire McCaskill the people were vetted by the UN and not the State Department... I for one seriously doubt ANYTHING that comes from the UN.
Linky

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 6:37:36 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
According to people with worse alzheimers than st. wrinklemeat has today, real nutsuckers, but not mccaskill

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 6:51:07 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji


quote:

ORIGINAL: stef


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

If you would pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually see what's going on around you, you might see that it's NOT a ban, just a chance to actually vet those that want to enter this country. What part of that do you find offensive?

People who were already vetted who had visas, some with green cards for chrissakes, were denied entry. That's the part I find offensive.

Even if that doesn't bother you, you should find it offensive that only countries where Trumplethinskin wasn't doing business were on the list.

Umm...idiot, the list was Obama's. Had nothing to do with Trump's business.

Nope, the Bill came out of the House of Representatives, sponsored by a Michigan Republican'

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 8:45:25 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In her confirmation hearing as AG, Sen. Jeff Sessions asked her specifically whether she would stand up to the president if asked to do an illegal action.

Seems some care about the law only when it restrains the opposition.

And how much did she stand up against Obama when he appointed heads to positions within his administration without congressional approval while the Senate was in session? The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it was unconstitutional. Can you cite where it is mentioned that she stood up to the President then?

What Trump has done may be unpopular...though the last 5 President's have all done it in one way or another...but it is up to the Supreme Court to decide its constitutionality. Not a holdover from a liberal administration.

You think maybe because the AG has no power to stop that.
Her reason for not defending Trumps order was that it was unconstitutional. That should have been her same reason for standing up to Obama...if standing up for the Constitution is "her deal".


The Supreme Court only decides cases that are brought to them. Someone else stands up first.

We have a Constitution for a reason. If this were a gun rights case, y'all would be waving that Constitution like a fan.
Yes...we do. And I have no problem with standing up for it impartially. But when you only stand up for it based on your ideology, I do have a problem. That's what Sally Yates did. Failed to stand when Obama walked on it, stood when Trump may have.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 9:56:37 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
The dumbarses who dont know the diufference between VWP and trumps "extreme vetting muslim ban" really need to read this.....

Heres a clue...
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/trumps-faulty-refugee-policy-comparison/

President Donald Trump defended his sweeping immigration policy by calling it “similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.” That’s a faulty comparison.
There was a delay in processing Iraqi refugees in 2011 after it was discovered that two Iraqi refugees living in Kentucky had been involved in roadside bombing attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

One of the refugee’s fingerprints were found on a detonation device in Iraq, prompting U.S. immigration, security and intelligence agencies to use federal databases to rescreen about 58,000 Iraqi refugees in the U.S. and more than 25,000 Iraqis who had been approved to enter the U.S., but had not yet been admitted, Department of Homeland Security officials testified at the time.

The Kentucky case not only caused a backlog in processing Iraqi refugees in 2011, but it also resulted in an overhaul of the refugee screening process.
The Obama administration’s actions were limited to one country and in response to a specific threat — the potential for other Iraqi refugees to take advantage of a flaw in the screening process.
By contrast, Trump ordered a far wider ban — albeit also temporary — without identifying a specific threat.

President Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27 that bars Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. indefinitely and bars all other refugees for 120 days, and keeps out visitors for 90 days from seven predominately Muslim countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. Initially, as ABC News reported, administration officials said the ban also applied to U.S. green card holders reentering the United States from those seven countries, though they could get a waiver to reenter. But two days after Trump signed the executive order, administration officials said green card holders, who are permanent residents, would be admitted on a case-by-case basis after additional security screening.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said in a statement that “lawful permanent resident status will be a dispositive factor in our case-by-case determinations.”
The order caused confusion at the nation’s airports over the weekend as refugees, legal visa holders and visitors affected by the new policy were detained and some even sent back to their home countries. Democrats and some Republicans criticized the Republican president for overreaching his authority and jeopardizing Muslim relations in the fight against terrorism.
A day after Trump signed the order, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union won a temporary stay in federal court to allow those already in the U.S., or en route to the U.S., to remain in the country.
As a candidate, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” But, in response to criticism of his executive order, Trump issued a Jan. 29 statement accusing the media of “falsely reporting” that it is a “Muslim ban.” Trump said his policy is “not about religion — this is about terror and keeping our country safe.”
Trump also drew comparisons to the Obama administration’s action on Iraqi refugees.
Trump, Jan. 29: My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.

But what Obama did was not a ban, and it did not involve visas.
Trump and the White House did not elaborate on the 2011 reference, but the conservative Breitbart website posted a story the same day with the headline, “Flashback: Obama Suspended Iraq Refugee Program for Six Months Over Terrorism Fears in 2011.” Trump’s senior counselor and chief strategist, Stephen Bannon, is the former executive chairman of Breitbart.
Breitbart, Jan. 29: In 2013, ABC News first revealed that two years earlier, the State Department had imposed a freeze over the processing of Iraqi refugees for six months. The halt was the result of the discovery of two al-Qaida members admitted as refugees from Iraq who were living in Bowling Green, Kentucky and who had admitted to targeting U.S. troops in Iraq.

That is an accurate summary of the ABC News article.
Iraqi refugees Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi settled in Kentucky after entering the U.S. in 2009. Alwan entered the U.S. in April of that year and Hammadi in July, according to the federal indictment.
Alwan was involved in planting and detonating IEDs against U.S. troops in Iraq from approximately 2003 to 2006, the Department of Justice said. ABC News reported that the FBI opened an investigation after receiving an intelligence tip that led them to Alwan, who then led investigators to Hammadi.

Alwan “had claimed to be a refugee who faced persecution back home — a story that shattered when the FBI found his fingerprints on a cordless phone base that U.S. soldiers dug up in a gravel pile south of Bayji, Iraq on Sept. 1, 2005,” ABC News wrote. “The phone base had been wired to unexploded bombs buried in a nearby road.”
The FBI set up a sting operation that led to the conviction of both Iraqi refugees on several charges, including attempting to provide support to terrorists in Iraq. The men were sentenced in January 2013.

“As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets,” ABC News reported.
The case also “prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists’ fingerprints,” ABC News reported.

ABC News, Nov. 20, 2013: “We are currently supporting dozens of current counter-terrorism investigations like that,” FBI Agent Gregory Carl, director of the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center (TEDAC), said in an ABC News interview to be broadcast tonight on ABC News’ “World News with Diane Sawyer” and “Nightline”.

At a congressional hearing on Sept. 13, 2011, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the Kentucky case resulted in an overhaul of the screening process.
Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, said more than 58,000 Iraqi refugees had been admitted to the United States (since 2007), but more than 25,000 Iraqis at the time had been approved but not yet admitted and resettled. Collins asked Napolitano “is there a hold on that population until they can be more stringently vetted to ensure that we’re not letting into this country people who would do us harm?”

Napolitano would not use the word “hold,” but explained that tens of thousands of Iraqi refugees already in the U.S. had to be rescreened and Iraqi citizens in the future would undergo a tougher screening process.
Napolitano, Sept. 13, 2011: Yup. Let me, if I might, answer your question in two parts. First part, with respect to the 56, 57,000 who were resettled pursuant to the original resettlement program, they have now all been revetted against all of the DHS databases, all of the NCTC [National Counter Terrorism Center] databases and the Department of Defense’s biometric databases and so that work has now been done and focused.

Collins: That’s completed?

Napolitano: That is completed. Moving forward, no one will be resettled without going through the same sort of vet. Now I don’t know if that equates to a hold, as you say, but I can say that having done the already resettled population moving forward, they will all be reviewed against those kinds of databases.

On July 13, 2011, Rand Beers, under secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security, testified at a Senate hearing that it had rescreened about 58,000 Iraqi refugees already living in the United States, but the rescreening process had caused a backlog. Beers said that “it was not an easy process because it required some database adjustments and interactions that we had not even tried before.”

At a congressional hearing on Jan. 7, 2014, a homeland security official said the screening process was strengthened as a result of the Kentucky case.
“Following the May 2011 arrest of Mohanad Hammadi and Waad Ramadan Alwan in Kentucky, DHS and DOS have worked closely with the Intelligence and Law Enforcement communities to enhance our screening regime for refugee resettlement applicants,” Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Molly Groom said.

“While the exact details of these new checks are classified, we are prepared to provide a classified briefing to members should there be interest in this information,” Groom said. “While no screening is infallible, we believe that current screening systems to vet refugee applicants are more likely today to detect individuals with derogatory information should they apply.”
The new screening process for Iraqi refugees in 2011 reduced the number of Iraqi refugees admitted that year.

In calendar year 2011, the U.S. admitted only 6,339 Iraqi refugees — down from 18,251 in 2010, according to the State Department’s refugee admissions database. The number of Iraqi refugees jumped to 16,369 in 2012 after the screening systems were changed.
Trump’s comparison of his immigration actions to Obama’s policy in 2011 is a faulty one. The fact is that the Obama administration was responding to a known and specific threat from one country and limited its response to refugees from that country, while Trump’s order temporarily bans refugees from all countries — indefinitely in the case of those from Syria — and temporarily bars all other visitors from seven predominately Muslim countries.


Just because you bad boys think trumps right, doesnt mean anything to anyone....



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 10:03:21 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
You know, sometimes, reading stuffs like this. It's like Left thinking and Right thinking people are living on different panes.

The fact is that the Obama administration was responding to a known and specific threat from one country and limited its response to refugees from that country


This specific line tells me What Trump is doing right now IS the Same thing as what Obama did back then.

Back then, the main threat came from specifically Iraq only, but nonetheless, it was implemented in reaction to a potential threat. In Obama's administration, they have evaluated that the main threat came from refugees of Iraq. So they halt the process of accepting them temporary.

These days, the main threat are coming from these 7 countries and beyond just refugees. People from these countries have launched several attacks in Europe. And they were not solely refugees who did it.

Some people claim that none of these nationalities have committed Terrorism in the US yet. Why ban them?

BECAUSE that's what prevention is about! By preventing them from having a chance to commit the Terrorist Act, BEFORE they can do so!

I feel like the whole problem with alot of problems in this world is, waiting for shit to happen before implementing measures to prevent further shit.

That is seriously not the right way of doing things to run things efficiently and effectively.

The sad bit is, IF no Terrorism were ever committed by these folks on US grounds thanks to these measures. People will complain that, they never hurt US anyway, so why discriminate against them?

And IF Terrorism happens. Libs will complain that the ban cause them to be angry to commit those Terrorists act.

But as a leader, Trump just has to stand strong by his own conviction on what is gonna keep America safe. And not worry about all the exaggerated meltdown that is going on right now.

Every time there is increased security screening, inconveniences will be caused to a group of people.

I bet if China started committing Terrorism in other countries. Any other Chinese Nationalities are gonna be profiled like fuck and inconvenienced greatly. And the last person I would get upset with is with a President who made these things so difficult for the right reasons, to protect his own people. I should get mad at those fellow Chinese who fuck the rest of us up by committing Terrorism. And we should be going after them relentless until we kill them all. And anyway, it's Chinese culture, we WILL KILL them all when we get our hands on them. For being the fucks who are making Chinese look like World Wide Terrorists.

We need to go after the root of the problem.

And the root of the problem is not Trump.

It's Islam at it's literal interpretation. Promoted by ISIS and many other whole Islamic countries.





< Message edited by Greta75 -- 1/31/2017 10:17:21 PM >

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 10:17:50 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
the difference is....
you believe what you want to believe, and I will continue looking into actual facts and truth not your opinion and idiocy.




_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 11:10:24 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

FR
According to Claire McCaskill the people were vetted by the UN and not the State Department... I for one seriously doubt ANYTHING that comes from the UN.

Linky



Yeah, I wouldn't trust the UN to vet a ham sandwich.



Michael


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 1/31/2017 11:32:31 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
U.S. Refugee Admissions Program
https://www.state.gov/j/prm/ra/admissions/
Application and Case Processing

When UNHCR — or, occasionally, a U.S. Embassy or a specially trained nongovernmental organization — refers a refugee applicant to the United States for resettlement, the case is first received and processed by a Resettlement Support Center (RSC). The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) funds and manages nine RSCs around the world, operated by international and nongovernmental organizations and one U.S. interests section. Under PRM’s guidance, the RSCs prepare eligible refugee applications for U.S. resettlement consideration.

Some refugees can start the application process with the RSC without a referral from UNHCR or other entity. This includes close relatives of asylees and refugees already in the United States and refugees who belong to specific groups set forth in statute or identified by the Department of State as being eligible for direct access to the program.

The RSCs collect biographic and other information from the applicants to prepare for the adjudication interview and for security screening. Enhanced security screening is a joint responsibility of the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security and includes the participation of multiple U.S. Government security agencies.

Officers from the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) review all the information that the RSC has collected and also conduct an in-person interview with each refugee applicant before deciding whether to approve him or her for resettlement in the United States.

All USCIS-approved refugees undergo a health screening to identify medical needs and to ensure that those with a contagious disease, such as tuberculosis, do not enter the United States. Finally, the RSC requests a “sponsorship assurance” from a U.S.-based resettlement agency that is experienced in providing assistance to newly arrived refugees. Most refugees undergo a brief U.S. cultural orientation course prior to departure for the United States.

Those refugees who are approved by USCIS receive assistance upon arrival in the United States through the Department of State’s Reception and Placement Program – a cooperative public-private program made up of a number of participants. The support of millions of Americans is fundamental to the program’s success. Though Congress mandated the program, it is local communities that have ensured the success of the resettlement program by welcoming and helping refugees from around the world.

United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is comprised of:

The Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) of the U.S. Department of State.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Five international or nongovernmental organizations operating Resettlement Support Centers around the world under the supervision and funding of the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) of the U.S. Department of State
Nine domestic nongovernmental organizations with a total of about 350 affiliated offices across the United States.
Thousands of private citizens who volunteer their time and skills to help refugees resettle in the United States.
The total processing time varies depending on an applicant’s location and other circumstances, but the average time from the initial UNHCR referral to arrival as a refugee in the United States is about 18-24 months.


https://www.state.gov/j/prm/ra/admissions/

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Sally Yates is a Hero - 2/1/2017 12:44:07 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

FR
According to Claire McCaskill the people were vetted by the UN and not the State Department... I for one seriously doubt ANYTHING that comes from the UN.

Linky



Yeah, I wouldn't trust the UN to vet a ham sandwich.



Michael



Yup, they let NAMBLA in. As consultants of course...

Why didn't the 911 hijackers destroy that building ? Oh, they were after bankers and other Jews, moneychangers pretty much. Damn, can't even gegt smartt terrorists these days, seems like we invented the car bomb for nothing doesn't it ?

T^T

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Sally Yates is a Hero Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109