Dunno. Don't mistake me as someone who agrees with the ban. I agree with A BAN and re-assessment, but what he is doing makes no sense to me.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

It appears to me, they only picked those 7 countries so that they can say "See, we are doing what we said we'd do". and at the same time when people complain they can also say "But, but, but OBAMA!!!".

A pointless exercise and money well spent.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Why not Saudi? Saudi is clearly the logical place to start re-evaulating your vetting process if you were keen to re-evaluate your vetting process.

Why's that? Because of 9/11?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

The current administration clearly thinks that the previous administration were a bunch of bumbling fools.

So why are they blindly following the previous administration on this issue?

They are so far following the previous devils on a lot of issues. Trump met with Netanyahu and not one word was mentioned about the Iran nuclear deal, the same deal Trump said he would tear up immediately. They also said they would repeal and replace Obamacare and then it was changed to keeping the good parts (there were no good parts during the campaign) and now, who knows? I haven't heard that anything will change in terms of Syria or the fight against ISIS, both points of contention in the campaign. It also seems the relationship with NATO and now Russia are essentially the same. It's still early but those were things that were a disgrace in October.

Why only those 7 countries? Why not Saudi? Saudi is clearly the logical place to start re-evaulating your vetting process if you were keen to re-evaluate your vetting process.

Saudi Arabia is not included because of oil and Pakistan is not because the ISI said they are working hard (cough * U.S aid * cough) to "fight the terrorists" in the border area of Afghanistan, so they need to keep good relations.

---

Yes. If I was keen to re-evaluate the vetting process due to my crippling fears of Muslim terrorism, I would start with the place that has provided the most Muslim terrorists.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Exactly. Here is what Trump said at his last press conference. Extreme vetting will be put in place and it already is in place in many places.

IOW, extreme vetting only took two weeks to get in place in many places because it was already happening. There's a reason why ~1000 foreign service officers sign a dissent petition against the immigration ban.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3438487/Dissent-Memo.pdf

That's just dumb. It's 2017, not 2001.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

So Saudi is in the clear then? What did you guys do to eliminate the Saudi Muslim threat?

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Nobody is "in the clear," in the sense that there are dangerous people everywhere. But Saudi Arabia has a government that is both functional and friendly, and believe it or not, that's kind of significant when it comes to things like vetting travelers from a particular country.

The seven countries on the list don't meet that threshold.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

They call that a riot? In the US people do a lot than that over a sports championship.

But Saudi Arabia has a government that is both functional and friendly

It's not the Royal Family that is the problem. They continue to invest heavily around the world in building Mosques, Madrasas, schools and Sunni cultural centers to teach Wahhabism. They don't do a lot within Saudi Arabia because they are concerned that the Fundamentalists will attack them. It s just self-preservation. Instead, they export their ideology elsewhere and it gives the appearance that they are stable.

The doctrine ISIS follows has it's roots in Wahhabism and it is a pretty fundamentalist doctrine. I would say that the fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia are far more of a threat to the West than just about anyone in Iran.

Yes this. The house of Saud and much the Saudi Kingdoms middle and upper class are quite moderate as far as radical islam is concerned. But the roots of extremism are ever present and direct conflict with the house of saud. In fact, they don't want any other middle eastern influence to infect what they have, so they appease would be threats domestically (elites with extreme Wahhabism ties and sympathies), fund Mosdques, Madrases, schools and Sunni cultural centers outside its borders, publicly support the Palestinian cause against the jews, because they don't want Palestinians in their borders mucking up their order.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I would say that the fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia are far more of a threat to the West than just about anyone in Iran.

Nobody is saying that there aren't Islamic nut jobs in Saudi Arabia, or that their brand of extremism isn't a threat. But they live in a country with a functional government that cooperates with us. That makes a difference in our ability to screen them as security risks.

People seem to have this idea that the travel ban is some kind of punishment we're meting out to countries because we're saying they're just bad, and by extension, countries that aren't on the list somehow have our approval. That's not what it's about.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Quoting the NY times quoting the Obama administration. Did you forget the pink?

Look at the timeline from when Obama announced how many were coming and then how long it took before he took credit for hitting his number. Now go look at who decides refugee status and for what. Now explain how you do a background check someone with no paper trail. If they did nothing wrong then what could you possibly have on them? Two years? More like two weeks or hours during Obamas great importation.

How do you verify a name or address in a war torn area? How do you gauge someones intent or verify their story?

So basically they are asked questions and if they give the correct answers then they have a chance of coming here since apparently our country wasnt going to survive without them being here.

---

~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson

Quoting the NY times quoting the Obama administration. Did you forget the pink?

<sigh>

Better?

http://www.heritage.org/...etting-process-works


First, most applicants apply for refuge through the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, or UNHCR. The office then forwards some applications to the U.S. State Department, which prepares these applications for adjudication by Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.



Once an applicant is referred to the State Department, biometric and biographic checks are done against various U.S. security databases at multiple points throughout the process.



Multiple agencies systems and databases are incorporated in this process, including:



The State Department

-Consular Lookout and Support System

-Consular Consolidated Database

-Department of Homeland Security

-TECS (a DHS security system)

-DHS Automated Biometric Identification System



National Counterterrorism Center/FBI's Terrorist Screening Center

-Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment

-Terrorist Screening Database



Federal Bureau of Investigation

-Extracts of the National Crime Information Center's Wanted Persons File, Immigration Violator File, Foreign Fugitive File, Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File (and the Interstate Identification Index)

-Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System / Next Generation Identification



Interpol



Drug Enforcement Administration



Department of Defense

-Automated Biometric Identification System



In addition, the refugee process requires a security advisory opinion to be completed by the FBI and the intelligence community on many refugee applicants who are considered higher risk. Similarly, interagency checks are constantly being done in connection with a wide range of U.S. agencies.

In additional to these background checks, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services conducts a refugee interview. These interviews cover everything from refugee and immigration matters to security and country specific questions.


<>


After an average of 12-18 months, this process ends with entry into the U.S. According to the Department of Homeland Security, of the approximately 23,000 Syrian referrals made by the U.N. High Commissioner on Refugees to the U.S., only about 2,000 have been accepted. The U.S. refugee system can be, should be, and is being picky at who we allow to enter the U.S. as a refugee.



The U.S. has made constant improvements to the program, learning from mistakes such as when in 2009, two Iraqi terrorists were caught in the U.S. after slipping through the vetting process. It is worth noting that these are the only two individuals who slipped through the screening process

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."