What's new

Paris under attack

Maybe not for centuries. And while in big countries like USA and Canada it is not big deal, most would agree that Sweden was much much better, prosperous and safer country 30 years ago then it is now. Same things are happening in rest of Europe. I have 3 co-workers from UK who moved to Canada just for that reason. When I asked why, they said that UK is turning into ****hole, sorry.

Sweden is still a safe and prosperous country. I doubt the 2% Muslim population has turned it into the ****hole the white supremacist websites you link make it out to be.

I am not saying that there are no consequences to allowing people with different cultures into your country. This is doubly so when they carry with them the ideological package Muslims do. But mixture with the West is about the most powerful long-term solution to the Islamist problem you can come up with. Look at Western Muslims like Dalamon. They are no more backward than anyone else.

The same thing was said about the Irish, the Italians, the East Asians, and now the Latin Americans. But liberalism wins every time. And why wouldn't it? The Western way has an incredible appeal. I grew up watching American movies and following American trends and fashions. It is a far more powerful vision that radical Islam, if only you allow Muslims to buy into it. And that can never happen if you see them as nothing but a backward, irredeemable enemy. Again, I ask you to see the forest for the trees. Forget about how things are today, and consider what they CAN BE like 50 years from now. Do you want another culture like Japan and Korea (and soon to follow the rest of East Asia) that enriches our lives by their enjoining the global community? Or do you want a dogmatic death-cult that encompasses 2 billion people?

And to answer your question, I moved to the US with my family as a teenager. My grandmother met an American man, they got married, she moved to the US, my mom followed her a few years later, and I moved with my mom.
 
Sweden is still a safe and prosperous country. I doubt the 2% Muslim population has turned it into the ****hole .

Again, I do not blame Muslims for that alone. It may sound like it is still safe and prosperous but crime stats seem to point that it got much worse.
 
It is a far more powerful vision that radical Islam, if only you allow Muslims to buy into it. And that can never happen if you see them as nothing but a backward, irredeemable enemy. Again, I ask you to see the forest for the trees. Forget about how things are today, and consider what they CAN BE like 50 years from now. Do you want another culture like Japan and Korea (and soon to follow the rest of East Asia) that enriches our lives by their enjoining the global community? Or do you want a dogmatic death-cult that encompasses 2 billion people?

Oh how I wish you would be right man. I hope you are. But I am kind of skeptic about it.
 
Chappelle ****ing called it guys. We have our black white supremacist. I can't ****ing believe it.
 
Sweden is still a safe and prosperous country. I doubt the 2% Muslim population has turned it into the ****hole the white supremacist websites you link make it out to be.

I am not saying that there are no consequences to allowing people with different cultures into your country. This is doubly so when they carry with them the ideological package Muslims do. But mixture with the West is about the most powerful long-term solution to the Islamist problem you can come up with. Look at Western Muslims like Dalamon. They are no more backward than anyone else.

The same thing was said about the Irish, the Italians, the East Asians, and now the Latin Americans. But liberalism wins every time. And why wouldn't it? The Western way has an incredible appeal. I grew up watching American movies and following American trends and fashions. It is a far more powerful vision that radical Islam, if only you allow Muslims to buy into it. And that can never happen if you see them as nothing but a backward, irredeemable enemy. Again, I ask you to see the forest for the trees. Forget about how things are today, and consider what they CAN BE like 50 years from now. Do you want another culture like Japan and Korea (and soon to follow the rest of East Asia) that enriches our lives by their enjoining the global community? Or do you want a dogmatic death-cult that encompasses 2 billion people?

And to answer your question, I moved to the US with my family as a teenager. My grandmother met an American man, they got married, she moved to the US, my mom followed her a few years later, and I moved with my mom.

Rep this man. He could not be more correct.
 
Sweden was welcoming refugees and asylum seekers for years. It is proven huge failure. We have a saying in our country - you let pig in the church it will get on the altar. Is this what all you naive people want in your countries as well?

I prefer the saying, "Do unto others as you would have them do to you."
 
Taken from a legal friend who works in immigration to explain how the process actually works. This is consistent with pro bono immigration work I have done (although I primarily work in U-Visas and T-Visas rather than with strict refugees):

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

As a final note: virtually all of the fixes I've seen for the refugee system essentially boil down to "security theater" rather than actual security. They are things that actually make it take longer to go through the process but won't actually make much difference in the end.

You also need to understand that American processes for accepting refugees are totally different than most of the European processes that they are being compared to. It's comparing apples to tire irons.
 
Last edited:
Great post sirkickyass, but one conflicting statement I noted is numbers of children, elderly and women. What I see in videos, pictures and what I read in interviews from European Refugee camps 80-85% of them in Europe are actually 20-25 year old men. Maybe screeing and selection process to USA is different and if that's the case than it is great as obviously children, women and elderly should be given priority.
 
Taken from a legal friend who works in immigration to explain how the process actually works. This is consistent with pro bono immigration work I have done (although I primarily work in U-Visas and T-Visas rather than with strict refugees):



As a final note: virtually all of the fixes I've seen for the refugee system essentially boil down to "security theater" rather than actual security. They are things that actually make it take longer to go through the process but won't actually make much difference in the end.

You also need to understand that European processes for accepting refugees are totally different than most of the European processes that they are being compared to. It's comparing apples to tire irons.
Thanks for posting this. It is very helpful to understand how the process works. It does not surprise me that people are fearful under the circumstances, but if info like this was widely distributed I'll bet most people would feel comfortable with the situation.

I heard somewhere that over 70% of the current refugees are men. That seems very strange. I wonder if it's true.

BTW, I assume you meant to say that the American process is totally different than the European process in your last paragraph.
 
Thanks for posting this. It is very helpful to understand how the process works. It does not surprise me that people are fearful under the circumstances, but if info like this was widely distributed I'll bet most people would feel comfortable with the situation.

I heard somewhere that over 70% of the current refugees are men. That seems very strange. I wonder if it's true.

BTW, I assume you meant to say that the American process is totally different than the European process in your last paragraph.

Yeah, I fixed that above.

It might be true. there is a strong possibility that women and children left previously before the situation got quite so bad.
 
[video=youtube_share;VX5igFy5P58]https://youtu.be/VX5igFy5P58

Glenn Greenwald with truth-bomb after truth-bomb.


"it's the weirdest part of the war on terror: that there's one country that's most identified with the 9/11 attacks and the ideology that drove it and that country happens to be 2nd closest ally of the United States in that region-- which is Saudi Arabia. They not only were responsible for lots of parts of Al-Qaeda, but are funding in lots of different ways ISIS as well-- and yet we continue to hug them while waging war with countries that have never had anything to do with attacks on our country."
 
Well, thank God we have a determined demagogue like The Donald to protect us. Let's see, what was it Hitler did? Oh yeah, demonize the Jews. Brand them to be more easily identified. He was a great demagogue. Knew how to do it right, strike fear in the hearts of people living through an anxiety laden time in their history. He gave them a good scapegoat upon which to take out their fears. Our own budding demagogue has a ways to go, but he has found a scapegoat: American Muslims. Let's register them. Maybe we could brand them with a sign on their foreheads so we can recognize them easier. The Other. Must find The Other, the scapegoat.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...d-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716

https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.co...ps-horrifying-plan-for-american-muslims/?_r=0

https://qz.com/555837/five-symbols-donald-trump-could-use-to-identify-the-muslims-in-our-midst/

Wow! This man is very dangerous. He has plenty of support among Americans who are not educated enough to recognize a fear mongering demagogue when they see one. Let's hope enough people come to their senses to reject our very own wannabe Adolph Hitler.....

That's the spirit, The Donald. Appeal to people's baser instincts. You'll make a great demagogue. You're following the plot perfectly....
 
Well, thank God we have a determined demagogue like The Donald to protect us. Let's see, what was it Hitler did? Oh yeah, demonize the Jews. Brand them to be more easily identified. He was a great demagogue. Knew how to do it right, strike fear in the hearts of people living through an anxiety laden time in their history. He gave them a good scapegoat upon which to take out their fears. Our own budding demagogue has a ways to go, but he has found a scapegoat: American Muslims. Let's register them. Maybe we could brand them with a sign on their foreheads so we can recognize them easier. The Other. Must find The Other, the scapegoat.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...d-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716

https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.co...ps-horrifying-plan-for-american-muslims/?_r=0

https://qz.com/555837/five-symbols-donald-trump-could-use-to-identify-the-muslims-in-our-midst/

Wow! This man is very dangerous. He has plenty of support among Americans who are not educated enough to recognize a fear mongering demagogue when they see one. Let's hope enough people come to their senses to reject our very own wannabe Adolph Hitler.....

That's the spirit, The Donald. Appeal to people's baser instincts. You'll make a great demagogue. You're following the plot perfectly....

LOL

When asked if a Muslim should ever be allowed to be president, 72 percent of Republicans said no, and 12 percent were unsure. Only 16 percent of GOP voters said a Muslim should be able to hold the office.

Y'all are some crazy mother****ers man.
 
Back
Top