Immigration

[MJ12666]

Where do you put 65 miĺlion "displaced" people? The largest number since WWII.

- 40.8 million people who had been forced to flee their homes but were within the confines of their own countries, "internally displaced"

-- 21.3 million refugees - "externally displaced"
A total of 54% of all refugees come from just three countries, Syria at 4.9 million, Afghanistan at 2.7 million and Somalia at 1.1 million. Turkey hosts 2.5 million externally displaced people. Followed by Pakistan (1.6 million), Lebanon (1.1 million), Iran (979,000) and Ethiopia (736,000). Major refugee populations include Palestinians (4.8 million), Afghans (2.9 million), Iraqis (1.8 million), Somalis (700,000), Congolese (456,000), Myanmarese (407,000), Colombians (390,000), Sudanese (370,000).

3.2 million people in industrialized countries who, at the end of 2015, were awaiting decisions on asylum – the largest total ever recorded.

Children made up 51 per cent of the world’s refugees in 2015, many unaccompanied, separated or alone. Women make up half the refugees.

About two-thirds of the world’s refugees have been in exile for more than five years.

The number of total displaced people increased by 5.8 million last year.

These numbers don't add up. 51% (childran) + 50% (women) = 101%. That means none of the refugees are men. What am I missing?

 

[Legacy]

These numbers don't add up. 51% (childran) + 50% (women) = 101%. That means none of the refugees are men. What am I missing?

50% of global refugees are female, all ages

UNHCR - Women

 

[Buster Bluth]

Why don't you enlighten us all with your wisdom.

I'll try but I have a feeling much doesn't get in that ol' noggin of yours.

I'm not sure anyone is listening anymore considering your worldview and the ideas you support

Go find quotes in which I put forth outright praise for the European's decision to allow millions of refugees. I have never, not once, said Angela Merkel is making a wise decision in deciding to make Germany the most welcoming country for refugees.

What I have done is combat sloppy, xenophobic rhetoric on IE because we can do better than to broad brush millions of people.

have led to Europe becoming a 3rd world style warzone.

What the hell is that? Europe doesn't resemble any part of the third world. If someone thinks so that person is a certifiable idiot.

I'm sure all of the Germans who enthusiastically lined up at the train station with their "Refugees Welcome" shirts and liberal smugness are singing a different tune. Europeans are getting a hard lesson in the reality that not all people are the same and not all cultures are equal.

You can sit there with smug liberal assurance that you know what you're talking about and vote for Gary Johnson all day long if you want. Just know that if you get your wish someday innocent Americans will pay for the insanity of your ideas. People like you never pay though, you'll have moved away to a less diverse neighborhood before you have to reap what you've showed.

Not exaggerating when I say this isn't worth a response. Go call in a radio show or something already.

They aren't citizens entitled to the same rights as a citizen. They aren't needed or wanted here, they are here as guests. When the guests start trashing your yard it is time to end the party and throw them out.

Who is saying refugees have the same rights as citizens? How are they not wanted, but then spoken of as guests?

Why do you continue to to use "we" when Europe is clearly the site of these ISIS attacks? Europeans aren't citizens entitled to the same rights as a citizen.

Okay everyone, except maybe Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, agree that America's foreign policy (which has been bipartisan) over the past 20 years sucks, but why do innocent Western women and children have to pay that price? America is going to face a lot of negative consequences for its Middle Eastern policy, but women getting raped on the streets of Denmark, Germany, France, the Netherlands, England, etc. shouldn't be one of them. Just because we made a mistake in foreign policy doesn't mean our people should have to pay that price forever and ever.

Who is "our people?" Again Europeans aren't citizens entitled to the same rights as a US citizen, ie our complete concern for their well being. They are adults. They can make their own decisions. Thankfully, the US has a much different set of procedures for refugees and has a completely profile for Muslims when it comes to assimilation and countries of origin.

So fearful of refugees but are you even aware that the US has pledged to accept just 10,000? And that'd be 10,000 vetted refugees, half of whom are young children.

Crime statistics and the daily news. Germany went from a 1st world nation to a nation that has train stabbings, pregnant women getting hatcheted to death, and suicide bombings (all in a weeks timespan) in about a year since they decided to commit suicide. Isn't diversity fun?

Your attempt to smear the concept of diversity with the attacks brought on my lunatics says a great deal about you.

1 western woman getting raped at the hands of a rapefugee is too many.

This is the dumbest shit I've read in a long time. Probably another post of yours.

The standard you have here is just beyond comprehension.

If you think I'm going to feel super sorry for the state of the Middle East I won't because the modus operandi of the Middle East since the dawn of history has been nearly nonstop tribal warfare with intermittent periods of peace.

#badhistory like a mofo right now.

Every place on Earth has been "nearly nonstop tribal warfare" for a looooong time. War is pathetically common, you should know this. The West, touting a superior culture and all, has done more than its fair share of fighting. Add up some body counts and get back to me.

But let's get serious, the Middle East has not always been a giant clusterfuck that it is today. I think you like to broad brush it because you're a xenophobic clown. The Ottoman Empire dominated the Sunni parts of the Middle East for for a very long time the "tribal warfare" was basically nil until...and this is great considering your us vs them mindset...the West started one of the deadliest wars in history and then chopped up the Middle East in part to pit once-peaceful tribes and ethnicities against each other. And then the West (we're all on the same team right?) invaded the place and toppled whole countries and created this ISIS mess...

America's foreign policy for the past 20 years has been horrible and has lead to a lot of negative consequences for a lot of people, that is why I want to change it. That being said, our citizens shouldn't have to pay the price for our puppet masters mistakes.

The US policy in the Middle East has been short-sighted for decades.

US policy on one hand, "our citizens" on another. Are you talking about Europe or the US?

The U.S. has paid a steep price already for our foolish interventionism. Asking our people to put up with 3rd world style terrorist attacks daily isn't some form of cosmic justice. It's ethno-machismo and suicidal.

You don't know a steep price until you see your country ripped to bits by wave after wave of instability and terror. The future you cowardly fear is actually happening to the people in much of Syria/Iraq. Try to wrap your head around that, just try.

ISIS knifemen film themselves murdering French priest in Normandy attack | Daily Mail Online

Yeah Buster we should just keep the borders open, what we would do without such cultural enrichment?

Did you just use an attack in France to criticize US border control?

News flash silly goose: refugees admitted into the US have to go through a whole different set of hoops than ones bound for Europe. Probably because, you know, they can't fucking just walk here.

You take the worst refugee policies, paint a picture that it's like that everywhere, and point to the worst attacks, and paint a picture that they're all like that everywhere. It's the lamest shit on IE right now, and there is an awful DNC being discussed, to put it in perspective. I'm not sure you put two sentences together without coming off as a xenophobe and/or being factually incorrect with your generalizations.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Im sure if 20,000 Syrians moved to Toledo OH, you would be saying WTF when they raise crime and change the culture of Toledo

That would be twice the number the entire country is pledged to accept.

But it's funny you use Toledo, we have been praised repeatedly for our success in welcoming refugees.

Among The Lucky Few: Syrian Family Rebuilds In America's Heartland : NPR

How an Ohio Town Became a Model City for Resettling Syrian Refugees | VICE | United States

Refugees from Syria happy to be in Toledo - The Blade

 

[NDgradstudent]

That would be twice the number the entire country is pledged to accept.

But it's funny you use Toledo, we have been praised repeatedly for our success in welcoming refugees.

Among The Lucky Few: Syrian Family Rebuilds In America's Heartland : NPR

How an Ohio Town Became a Model City for Resettling Syrian Refugees | VICE | United States

Refugees from Syria happy to be in Toledo - The Blade

Good, you can take them. I hope the "refugees" have as much affection for Ohioans as the ones in France seem to have for the French.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Good, you can take them. I hope the "refugees" have as much affection for Ohioans as the ones in France seem to have for the French.

Let me just say right now that I am in no way afraid of this couple and others like them.

We're the most powerful nation in the history of the world and people are running around clamoring for the rejection of any and all Muslims out of fear. Say what you will about terrorism, but it works. It works because the extremists on that end get the extremists on our end to react in a way that harms themselves.

You're nothing but a coward NDgradstudent. An ignorant coward.

 

[dshans]

You're nothing but a coward NDgradstudent. An ignorant coward.

Thems fightin' werds, Buster!

I say we put Monsanto to werk developin' a remedy fer tearists.

Mebbe a vaccinator.

Dayum.

Ain't no one gunna dickterate what I 'lowe be injecterated in my Red, White and Bleu chillun!

This world ain't big enough for the whole of us ... DRAW!


KAPOW, Yer daid!!!



Look at your shirt.

Judging from the blood, you are too.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Let me just say right now that I am in no way afraid of this couple and others like them.

We're the most powerful nation in the history of the world and people are running around clamoring for the rejection of any and all Muslims out of fear. Say what you will about terrorism, but it works. It works because the extremists on that end get the extremists on our end to react in a way that harms themselves.

You're nothing but a coward NDgradstudent. An ignorant coward.

How does it harm our country to not take in tons of Muslim immigrants?

 

[dshans]

How does it harm our country to not take in tons of Muslim immigrants?

I don't know.

How many Muslim immigrants are there in a ton?

Does the formula take into account the undernourished?

The children?

The percent of women, who are statistically weigh less than males?

Is this metric tonnes?

"We" are talking, in large, about a European issue, are we not?

Where's the the گاو پرواری?

Oh, yeah; it's global.

Well, Holy Hell. Welcome to the 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st Centuries.

GoodGawdAwmighty.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Well, Holy Hell. Welcome to the 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st Centuries.

Actually, what's going on in Europe at the moment looks an awful lot like the 13th century.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

News Deeply's Bethan Staton just published an article titled "Jordan Experiment Spurs Jobs for Refugees". It's a good example of how we could help refugees who may have difficulty assimilating within the West.

 

[Legacy]

News Deeply's Bethan Staton just published an article titled "Jordan Experiment Spurs Jobs for Refugees". It's a good example of how we could help refugees who may have difficulty assimilating within the West.

A couple of articles on this camp in Jordan - the largest in the Mideast.

Behind the fences of Jordan’s Zaatari refugee camp


Jordan Deal with Donors Means Legal Work for Syrian Refugees (perhaps what Whiskey's cited article notes) Getting a legal work permit can be problematic, because many fled without their official papers.

Jordan hosts more than 650,000 refugees, with about 80 percent living in communities, rather than refugee camps, and imposing a heavy burden on resources, including health care, schools and housing.

Some UN stats on the Zaatari Camp.

 

[calvegas04]

That would be twice the number the entire country is pledged to accept.

But it's funny you use Toledo, we have been praised repeatedly for our success in welcoming refugees.

Among The Lucky Few: Syrian Family Rebuilds In America's Heartland : NPR

How an Ohio Town Became a Model City for Resettling Syrian Refugees | VICE | United States

Refugees from Syria happy to be in Toledo - The Blade

get ready for sharia law gangs roaming the street

 

[Legacy]

Which is even MORE of a reason for Western countries to better vet those requesting asylum. If the number of immigrants going to Western countries is a minority, then that means that the percentage of troublemakers getting to the West is much higher; possibly an indicator that terrorists/agitators ARE indeed mingling in with refugees in order to infiltrate the West.

You have to admire, if that's the word, the patience of a terrorist going deep cover into a refugee camp for an average of five years to emerge in the West to cause havoc, especially the majority who are women and children.

Religion and Refugee Resettlement in the United States
Religion and Foreign Policy Conference Call: Religion and Refugee Resettlement in the United States (Council on Foreign Relations - audio or transcript)

Exceprts:

So what does it mean when a congregation signs up to be a co-sponsor? There are varying levels of commitment. And everything that I’m telling you is actually on our website, RefugeeOne.org, and, you know, you can feel free to download the packets and share it with groups in your communities. So they commit to raise resources that are needed for the resettlement, and depending on the size of the family that may vary from 4,000 (dollars) to 8,000 dollar(s). They commit to put together a group of volunteers from their congregation that will be able for a period of six months to visit the family and basically befriend them, and help them with various activities—you know, showing them the city, taking them out, visiting them at home, tutoring their children, helping adults learn English and how to navigate the system, and go to the airport to pick them up when they first arrive, help us furnish their apartment, and, you know, anything and everything that goes into being part of a welcoming community for these newly arriving refugee families.

A lot of, you know, times, these relationships, you know, are limited to six months, and then the congregation may move on and co-sponsor another family. Other times, even although they may do that and take on another family, but these relationships really blossom, and the refugees and the various individuals from these congregations remain, you know, friends throughout their lifetime.

...And I was eager to hear their stories and see what the process was like of trying to come to this country—to uproot oneself, and then to bring either just individual self or their entire families into the country.

And what I saw was what we call a “whole of society” society approach: the federal government puts in some money, often states provide social-service benefits, but it’s really the local community partnerships that have led to the successful integration of now 3.2 million refugees since 1975. And what I saw were police departments, school superintendents, an amazing array of houses of worship that come together and partner with these implementing agencies to try and smooth the transition of refugees coming into the United States.

I think the key piece of misunderstanding often in some of these controversies has to do with the extent of the security background checks for refugees who do come to the United States. As Melineh mentioned, the background checks for refugees traveling to the United States are the most extensive security background checks for any traveler to the United States, and the Department of (Health and) Human Services is involved, the intelligence community is involved, the FBI is involved in that. And if a refugee cannot affirmatively prove their safety to the American population, they are not allowed to come into the country.

One Hand Extended to Too Many (Notre Dame Magazine)

The Place Called Nowhere (ND Magazine)

 

[BGIF]

FBI Chief Warns ‘Terrorist Diaspora’ Will Come to the West - Bloomberg

Chris Strohm

July 27, 2016 — 8:59 AM CDT
Updated on July 27, 2016 — 10:35 AM CDT

Hundreds of terrorists will fan out to infiltrate western Europe and the U.S. to carry out attacks on a wider scale as Islamic State is defeated in Syria, FBI Director James Comey warned.

“At some point there’s going to be a terrorist diaspora out of Syria like we’ve never seen before,” Comey said Wednesday in New York. “We saw the future of this threat in Brussels and Paris,” said the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, adding that future attacks will be on “an order of magnitude greater.”

Comey’s blunt warnings echo those of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has scoffed at Obama administration efforts to defeat Islamic State extremists in Syria and Iraq. Nonetheless, the FBI chief’s comments reflect a consensus among U.S. intelligence officials that the group inevitably will strike out abroad as it continues to lose ground militarily under attack from a U.S.-led coalition.

CIA Director John Brennan told the Senate Intelligence Committee in June that “our efforts have not reduced the group’s terrorism capability and global reach.” Using an acronym for Islamic State, Brennan said, “as the pressure mounts on ISIL, we judge that it will intensify its global terror campaign to maintain its dominance of the global terrorism agenda.”

‘Greatest Threat’
Comey, who called violence directed or inspired by Islamic State “the greatest threat to the physical safety of Americans today,” said that “a lot of terrorists fled out of Afghanistan in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This is 10 times that or more.”

In his remarks at a conference on cybersecurity, Comey also cited the difficulty of heading off what are often called “lone-wolf” attackers acting on the group’s calls for violence.

It is “increasingly hard” for counterterrorism officials to find and stop individuals inspired or directed by Islamic State who use a knife or a vehicle to kill people, Comey said.

At the same time, U.S. officials have claimed increasing success in reducing Islamic State’s hold on the caliphate the group proclaimed across a swath of Iraq and Syria.
Kerry, Trump

“We can say that the tide has turned,” Secretary of State John Kerry said last week. Using an Arabic name for Islamic State, he said, “Our coalition and partners on the ground have driven Daesh out of nearly 50 percent of the territory that it once controlled in Iraq and 20 percent of the territory in Syria.” But he also cited the need for “real-time communications between countries” and other measures to counter the group’s efforts “to transform themselves into a global terrorist organization.”

While Trump has said he would be more aggressive in attacking Islamic State if elected in November, he hasn’t provided details. His response to the threat of attacks in the U.S. is a vow to introduce “extreme vetting” of potential immigrants from certain “territories” affected by terrorism.

Attacks in France have left more than 230 dead since the start of last year. A mass shooting that killed 49 people at a nightclub last month in Orlando, Florida, was carried out by a man who claimed allegiance to Islamic State. Less than two weeks before the Olympic Games begin in Rio de Janeiro, Brazilian police have rounded up a dozen people it said were possibly members of an Islamic State cell.

Beyond the West, Islamic State took credit for a July 23 suicide bombing at a rally in Kabul that killed more than 80 people, the deadliest single attack in Afghanistan in 15 years of war.

Encryption Debate
The FBI chief also spoke Thursday of the unresolved fight over law enforcement access to encrypted communications that brought his agency into conflict with Apple Inc. earlier this year.

The debate over encryption “has dipped below public consciousness right now,” Comey said.

The FBI is using that time to collect data on the negative impact that encrypted communications is having on investigations, he said. From October through March, 500 of 4,000 devices the FBI confiscated couldn’t be opened due to encryption, he said.

Debate by policy makers over the issue probably will have to wait until next year, after the U.S. elections, he said.

“At some point encryption is going to figure in a major event in this country,” Comey said. “We’ve got to have the conversation before that happens.”

 

[ickythump1225]

Did you just use an attack in France to criticize US border control?

News flash silly goose: refugees admitted into the US have to go through a whole different set of hoops than ones bound for Europe. Probably because, you know, they can't fucking just walk here.

Investigators are looking into Malik’s K-1 “fiancee” visa, which she had to be granted to enter the country with Farook.

Two government sources told The Times Malik used the name of a neighborhood or street near her home in Pakistan, rather than her family's home address, on her application. Investigators have speculated that she did so to deflect any investigation of her family's reputed ties to Islamic militants in Punjab.

K-1 applicants, like other visa applicants, undergo extensive counter-terrorism screening that includes checks based on fingerprints and facial recognition software. Questions for the partner seeking to come to the U.S. include: "Do you seek to engage in terrorist activities while in the United States or have you ever engaged in terrorist activities?" and "Have you ever or do you intend to provide financial assistance or other support to terrorists or terrorist organizations?"

Everything we know about the San Bernardino terror attack investigation so far - LA Times
Ah the old "they'll be vetted" canard. First of all I work in the immigration system so I can tell you that that concept is a complete joke. We're talking about people who are coming from unstable nations with less than great record keeping to put it nicely. They aren't going to be seriously "vetted" the government is just going to fill out some paperwork and do a song and dance routine to appease people like you who think they are actually doing something productive.

Furthermore even if they do a legitimate vetting process that doesn't stop someone from being radicalized once they get here. Look at the San Bernardino shooters. The refugee/immigration system is full of scam artists, it really isn't that hard to bullshit your way into the country.

Also, it doesn't matte if it is "only" 10,000...why have any at all? They aren't wanted here nor are they needed here. America doesn't stand to benefit from their addition in fact most of them (probably all of them at some point) will end up on government aid in the short or long term. They will get refugee assistance, help finding housing, clothing, etc.

It is disingenuous to say 10,000 when you know damn well the Obama Administration wants to raise the rates to 70-80,000 a year and Clinton will most certainly do that if elected.

I'm sure at some point you'll find something I said is "xenophobic" or some other such leftist buzzword nonsense and then whimper about it. But the point remains, why take a single refugee when we don't stand to gain anything tangibly from it other than virtue signalling to other nations and new Democrat voters? Even if we take in 10,000 children, guess what kids do? They grow up, and some of them will grow up to be terrorists and criminals. Even if only 1% of them grow up to be bad, that is 100 of them. 100 terrorists or criminals that America wouldn't have had on its own.

 

[ickythump1225]

I'll try but I have a feeling much doesn't get in that ol' noggin of yours.



Go find quotes in which I put forth outright praise for the European's decision to allow millions of refugees. I have never, not once, said Angela Merkel is making a wise decision in deciding to make Germany the most welcoming country for refugees.

What I have done is combat sloppy, xenophobic rhetoric on IE because we can do better than to broad brush millions of people.



What the hell is that? Europe doesn't resemble any part of the third world. If someone thinks so that person is a certifiable idiot.



Not exaggerating when I say this isn't worth a response. Go call in a radio show or something already.



Who is saying refugees have the same rights as citizens? How are they not wanted, but then spoken of as guests?

Why do you continue to to use "we" when Europe is clearly the site of these ISIS attacks? Europeans aren't citizens entitled to the same rights as a citizen.



Who is "our people?" Again Europeans aren't citizens entitled to the same rights as a US citizen, ie our complete concern for their well being. They are adults. They can make their own decisions. Thankfully, the US has a much different set of procedures for refugees and has a completely profile for Muslims when it comes to assimilation and countries of origin.

So fearful of refugees but are you even aware that the US has pledged to accept just 10,000? And that'd be 10,000 vetted refugees, half of whom are young children.



Your attempt to smear the concept of diversity with the attacks brought on my lunatics says a great deal about you.



This is the dumbest shit I've read in a long time. Probably another post of yours.

The standard you have here is just beyond comprehension.



#badhistory like a mofo right now.

Every place on Earth has been "nearly nonstop tribal warfare" for a looooong time. War is pathetically common, you should know this. The West, touting a superior culture and all, has done more than its fair share of fighting. Add up some body counts and get back to me.

But let's get serious, the Middle East has not always been a giant clusterfuck that it is today. I think you like to broad brush it because you're a xenophobic clown. The Ottoman Empire dominated the Sunni parts of the Middle East for for a very long time the "tribal warfare" was basically nil until...and this is great considering your us vs them mindset...the West started one of the deadliest wars in history and then chopped up the Middle East in part to pit once-peaceful tribes and ethnicities against each other. And then the West (we're all on the same team right?) invaded the place and toppled whole countries and created this ISIS mess...



The US policy in the Middle East has been short-sighted for decades.

US policy on one hand, "our citizens" on another. Are you talking about Europe or the US?



You don't know a steep price until you see your country ripped to bits by wave after wave of instability and terror. The future you cowardly fear is actually happening to the people in much of Syria/Iraq. Try to wrap your head around that, just try.



Did you just use an attack in France to criticize US border control?

News flash silly goose: refugees admitted into the US have to go through a whole different set of hoops than ones bound for Europe. Probably because, you know, they can't fucking just walk here.

You take the worst refugee policies, paint a picture that it's like that everywhere, and point to the worst attacks, and paint a picture that they're all like that everywhere. It's the lamest shit on IE right now, and there is an awful DNC being discussed, to put it in perspective. I'm not sure you put two sentences together without coming off as a xenophobe and/or being factually incorrect with your generalizations.

BB, the whole lot of of this is just liberal virtue signalling. "Oh you don't support massive refugee resettlement? Ha ha ha, you are ignorant and not as intellectually superior as I am. hahah John Oliver called Donald Trump "Donald Drumpf" and a meanie!" This is who you are and you are like this whether we're talking football or politics.

It has nothing to do with ignorance, cowardice, or manliness. It is about doing the right thing for the United States, you know OUR country. I talk of Europe a lot because they are the canary in the coalmine and I saw "we" a lot because we are Europe's blood brothers. The overwhelming vast majority of America citizens have blood ties to Europe, in fact it is probably close to 95% maybe more. We are part of Western Civilization with Europe, Australia, and Canada. I care more about what happens in Western nations than I do in non-Western nations in the same way I'd be more upset if my cousin was murdered than some random guy I don't know.

What is happening in Europe is what our politicians want to happen here: unchecked immigration and refugee resettlement. You think we're just inoculated from what is happening over there but we're not. It is a small world now and being buffered by 2 oceans on each side doesn't stop anyone from coming here. Just ask the victims of 9/11. Ask the victims of San Bernardino. But really they don't even have to come here anymore, they're probably already here. And they will be radicalized by the internet. This is the price we will pay for accepting thousands of people every year from nations, cultures, and a religion that are incubators of anti-western terrorism.

I do have to specifically comment on this because it is hilarious:

You don't know a steep price until you see your country ripped to bits by wave after wave of instability and terror. The future you cowardly fear is actually happening to the people in much of Syria/Iraq. Try to wrap your head around that, just try.

I love how it is "cowardly" to fear your nation turning into France or Germany with weekly (sometimes daily) terrorist attacks. It is funnier still because everything about your demeanor screams soft guy who has never been in so much as a fistfight. You're just a keyboard warrior but if SHTF in Toledo (or whatever backwater heartland town you hail from) you'd piss yourself.

In reality though wanting to save my country and my civilization from terrorist attacks isn't "cowardly." We don't have to prove anything to world and subjecting westerners to terrorist attacks doesn't make us noble, it just makes us stupid.

 

[Legacy]

For the economic perspective...

Facts About Immigration and the U.S. Economy
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (Economic Policy Institute)

 

[Buster Bluth]

Ah the old "they'll be vetted" canard. First of all I work in the immigration system so I can tell you that that concept is a complete joke. We're talking about people who are coming from unstable nations with less than great record keeping to put it nicely. They aren't going to be seriously "vetted" the government is just going to fill out some paperwork and do a song and dance routine to appease people like you who think they are actually doing something productive

Did you just call yourself incompetent?

Furthermore even if they do a legitimate vetting process that doesn't stop someone from being radicalized once they get here. Look at the San Bernardino shooters. The refugee/immigration system is full of scam artists, it really isn't that hard to bullshit your way into the country.

You can say that about anyone, thus your xenophobia.

If it's not that hard, why isn't the US seeing attacks as frequently as Europe?

Also, it doesn't matte if it is "only" 10,000...why have any at all? They aren't wanted here nor are they needed here. America doesn't stand to benefit from their addition in fact most of them (probably all of them at some point) will end up on government aid in the short or long term. They will get refugee assistance, help finding housing, clothing, etc.

Please tell me you wrote this using an Apple product.

It is disingenuous to say 10,000 when you know damn well the Obama Administration wants to raise the rates to 70-80,000 a year and Clinton will most certainly do that if elected.

A year? That's a bold and unsubstantiated claim. Par for the course though.

I'm sure at some point you'll find something I said is "xenophobic" or some other such leftist buzzword nonsense and then whimper about it. But the point remains, why take a single refugee when we don't stand to gain anything tangibly from it other than virtue signalling to other nations and new Democrat voters? Even if we take in 10,000 children, guess what kids do? They grow up, and some of them will grow up to be terrorists and criminals. Even if only 1% of them grow up to be bad, that is 100 of them. 100 terrorists or criminals that America wouldn't have had on its own.

You don't have to be an expert to know that a 1% figure here is an enormously large number. Using "if only" shows a pathetic amount of ignorance, fear, and xenophobia.

 

[Buster Bluth]

BB, the whole lot of of this is just liberal virtue signalling. "Oh you don't support massive refugee resettlement? Ha ha ha, you are ignorant and not as intellectually superior as I am. hahah John Oliver called Donald Trump "Donald Drumpf" and a meanie!" This is who you are and you are like this whether we're talking football or politics.

A+ stuff keep it up.

It has nothing to do with ignorance, cowardice, or manliness. It is about doing the right thing for the United States, you know OUR country. I talk of Europe a lot because they are the canary in the coalmine and I saw "we" a lot because we are Europe's blood brothers. The overwhelming vast majority of America citizens have blood ties to Europe, in fact it is probably close to 95% maybe more. We are part of Western Civilization with Europe, Australia, and Canada. I care more about what happens in Western nations than I do in non-Western nations in the same way I'd be more upset if my cousin was murdered than some random guy I don't know.

You just defined xenophobia and signed up for it.

What is happening in Europe is what our politicians want to happen here: unchecked immigration and refugee resettlement. You think we're just inoculated from what is happening over there but we're not. It is a small world now and being buffered by 2 oceans on each side doesn't stop anyone from coming here. Just ask the victims of 9/11. Ask the victims of San Bernardino. But really they don't even have to come here anymore, they're probably already here. And they will be radicalized by the internet. This is the price we will pay for accepting thousands of people every year from nations, cultures, and a religion that are incubators of anti-western terrorism.

Bringing out that ol' broad brush of yours to paint politicians this time. Nice.

"nations, cultures, and a religion that are incubators of anti-western terrorism" is really the perfect phrase to show your broad brushing stupidity. Someone who isn't quite an amateur would be hammering away at the disturbing cult of Salafism/Wahabism, our odd relationship with Saudi Arabia, a lack of a crackdown on mosques around the world spreading this ideology, etc.

No, instead you get sloppy and turn into a broad brushing xenophobe. And that's really the difference between you and me: you're just sloppy.

I do have to specifically comment on this because it is hilarious:

I love how it is "cowardly" to fear your nation turning into France or Germany with weekly (sometimes daily) terrorist attacks. It is funnier still because everything about your demeanor screams soft guy who has never been in so much as a fistfight. You're just a keyboard warrior but if SHTF in Toledo (or whatever backwater heartland town you hail from) you'd piss yourself.

Funny see this is the sort of thing I would expect from a coward behind a keyboard.

In reality though wanting to save my country and my civilization from terrorist attacks isn't "cowardly." We don't have to prove anything to world and subjecting westerners to terrorist attacks doesn't make us noble, it just makes us stupid.

You are the definition of success for a terrorist.

 

[Legacy]

At Least 700 Migrants May Have Died At Sea In Past Week
The migrants — fleeing wars, oppression and poverty — often do not know how to swim and do not have life jackets.

ROME (Reuters) - At least 700 migrants may have died at sea this past week in the busiest week of migrant crossings from Libya towards Italy this year, Medecins San Frontieres and the UN Refugee agency said on Sunday.

About 14,000 have been rescued since Monday amid calm seas, and there have been at least three confirmed instances of boats sinking. But the number of dead can only be estimated based on survivor testimony, which is still being collected.

“We will never know exact numbers,” Medecins San Frontieres said in a Tweet after estimating that 900 had died during the week. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said more than 700 had drowned.

Migrants interviewed on Saturday in the Sicilian port of Pozzallo told of a large fishing boat that overturned and sank on Thursday with many women and children on board.

Initial estimates were that 400 people died, but the UN Refugee agency said on Sunday there may have been about 670 passengers on board.

According to testimony collected by EU border agency Frontex, when the motorless fishing boat capsized, 25 swam to the boat that had been towing it, while 79-89 others were saved by rescuers and 15 bodies were recovered. This meant more than 550 died, the UNHCR said.

The migrants — fleeing wars, oppression and poverty — often do not know how to swim and do not have life jackets. They pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to make the crossing from Libya to Italy, by far the most dangerous border passage for migrants in the world.

This week’s arrivals included Eritreans, Sudanese, Nigerians and many other West Africans, humanitarian groups say. Despite the surge this week, as of Friday 40,660 arrivals had been counted, 2 percent fewer than the same period of last year, the Interior Ministry said.


HANDOUT . / REUTERS
Refugees and migrants on a partially submerged boat in the Mediterranean.
Most of the boats this week appear to have left from Sabratha, Libya, where many said smugglers had beaten them and women said they had been raped, said MSF, which has three rescue boats in the area.

The migrants are piled onto flimsy rubber boats or old fishing vessels which can toss their occupants into the sea in a matter of seconds.

About 100 are thought to have either been trapped in the hull or to have drowned after tumbling into the sea on Wednesday.

On Friday, the Italian Navy ship Vega collected 45 bodies and rescued 135 from a “half submerged” rubber boat. It is not yet known exactly how many were on board, but the rubber boats normally carry about 300.

“Some were more shaken than others because they had lost their loved ones,” Raffaele Martino, commander of the Vega, told Reuters on Sunday in the southern port of Reggio Calabria, where the Vega docked with the survivors and corpses, including those of three infants.

“It’s time that Europe had the courage to offer safe alternatives that allow these people to come without putting their own lives or those of their children in danger,” Tommaso Fabri of MSF Italy said.

 

[Legacy]

Where refugees to the U.S. come from (Pew) with other articles under the topic Immigration, too, such as

Key facts about the world’s refugees

 

[calvegas04]

At Least 700 Migrants May Have Died At Sea In Past Week
The migrants — fleeing wars, oppression and poverty — often do not know how to swim and do not have life jackets.

They should have stayed home

 

[Legacy]

The World’s Largest Refugee Camp Is Invited to Please Shut Down:
The Kenyan government says it will clear its country of Somali refugees before the end of this year. But it's not saying how. (Foreign Policy, July 2016) Dadaab camp

DADAAB REFUGEE CAMP, Kenya — Nafiso Mohamed Noor says she never wants to go back to Somalia. But if the Kenyan government follows through with its plan to close the world’s largest refugee camp by the end of the year, she may not have a choice.

Noor knows what it means to return prematurely to a war zone. In May 2015, after Kenya renewed what has become a perennial threat to shutter the sprawling, windswept settlement on its northeastern frontier that houses more than 326,000 refugees, most of them from neighboring Somalia, she decided to sign up for the U.N.’s voluntary repatriation program. Better to go back on her own terms than risk being rounded up and deported without warning, she thought.

So in August, after waiting three months for the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) to process her application, she boarded a flight to the Somali capital of Mogadishu. She found her old house in Wardigle, a neighborhood whose name in Somali roughly translates to “stream” — or “channel” — “of blood,” still standing. But less than two months later, a mortar fired by al-Shabab militants crashed into her kitchen. The round sheared off her right breast, sliced a 3-inch gash in her left foot, and left shards of metal embedded deep in her left hip.

SANCTUARY WITHOUT END: THE REFUGEES THE WORLD FORGOT (CNN) Dadaab camp

Dadaab rose from modest beginnings, set up in 1991 as a temporary shelter for 90,000 refugees fleeing the civil war engulfing neighboring Somalia. Almost a quarter of a century later it is a complex of five distinct camps, and it is still growing. After years of conflict, famine, and floods, Somalis continue to stream over the border into the camp.
Europe's migrant crisis may have grabbed all the headlines this summer, but two-thirds of the world's roughly 20 million refugees live in protracted situations like the one here in Dadaab.
Nearly 60 million people around the world were displaced by war, conflict or persecution by the end of 2014 -- the highest figure since records began. An average of 42,500 people are forced from their homes each day, according to the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR).

Half the world's refugees are children.

During the height of Somalia's 2011 famine, tens of thousands of refugees made the journey by bus, donkey cart and foot to escape hunger and the Islamic militant group Al-Shabaab. A quarter of a million people died during the famine. Most were under the age of six, according to the U.N.

"I don't want Kenyan residency, I don't want a Somali passport, I want to be resettled," Bulle tells us. "I've worked very hard to at this job, but still feel like I'm in an open jail. I just want to lead my own life."

 

[Legacy]

Understanding the Central American Refugee Crisis: Why They are Fleeing

In the spring and summer of 2014, tens of thousands of women and unaccompanied children from Central America journeyed to the United States seeking asylum. The increase of asylum-seekers, primarily from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala—the countries making up the “Northern Triangle” region—was characterized by President Obama as a “humanitarian crisis.” The situation garnered widespread congressional and media attention, much of it speculating about the cause of the increase and suggesting U.S. responses.

Figure 1. Homicide Rates for Selected North and Central American Countries, 2000-2013

Figure 2. Crime Victimization and Migration Intentions, 2014

Figure 3. Honduran Views of Immigration to U.S., 2014

Why do these individuals continue trying to make the trip when seemingly fully aware of the dangers involved? The findings reported here suggest that no matter what the future might hold in terms of the dangers of migration, it is preferable to a present-day life of crime and violence. The unprecedented levels of crime and violence that have overwhelmed the Northern Triangle countries in recent years have produced a refugee situation for those directly in the line of fire, making no amount of danger or chance of deportation sufficient to dissuade those victims from leaving.

 

[Legacy]

Turkey’s failed coup could have disastrous consequences for Europe’s migrant crisis (Brookings Institute, July 29, 2016)

Turkey’s recent failed coup may lead to the worsening of Europe’s migration crisis. That’s because it could lead to the dissolution of a recent pact between Brussels and Ankara over the plight of refugees arriving on the European Union’s shores. Even before the events of last weekend, the fate of the agreement was uncertain amid quarrels between the parties. Now its future is even more in doubt.

Last year, more than a million migrants and refugees crossed into Europe, roiling politics across the continent. It’s a crisis EU chief Donald Tusk has described as an “existential challenge.”

Under the terms of the deal, Turkey agreed to accept the “rapid return of all migrants not in need of international protection crossing from Turkey into Greece and to take back all irregular migrants intercepted in Turkish waters.” In other words, almost all refugees who cross into Greece are slated to be returned to Turkish soil.

In return, the EU pledged to speed up the allocation of €3 billion in aid to Turkey to help it house and care for refugees, “reenergize” Turkey’s bid for membership in the EU, and lift visa restrictions on Turkish tourists and businessmen.

But the European Commission has conditioned changes to the visa restrictions on better governance in Turkey. In particular, it requires a change in President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s controversial anti-terror law, which he has used to crack down on journalists and critics. Erdoğan was already adamantly against narrowing the law to protect free speech. Having now overcome a determined coup attempt, he is even less likely to do so.

Instead, it appears probable that he will further clamp down on civil liberties, acting on his authoritarian instincts and retaliating against his detractors. On Sunday, he suggested that he might reintroduce the death penalty, a practice Turkey abolished in 2004 as part of its bid for EU membership. Doing so would widen the gap in political culture between Turkey and Europe and, as German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier asserted forcefully on Monday in Brussels, derail the already limited possibility of reigniting accession talks.

The pact has already been strongly opposed by the European left, and particularly by humanitarian and human rights groups. Rising authoritarianism in Turkey would only increase resistance to the deal, making implementation even harder, especially if those groups were to scale back their activities on the ground.

That would not be without precedent. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Doctors Without Borders, and the International Rescue Committee, among others, have suspended some of their activities in refugee centers because they do not want to be involved in implementing a deal that they describe as constituting the blanket expulsion of refugees from Turkey back to Greece.

Crucially, a crackdown could also undermine the legal basis of the agreement. One of the agreement’s key provisions is that individuals who cross from Turkey into Greece will be sent back across the Aegean to Turkey. That hinges on the notion that Turkey is a “safe third country” for migrants. A crackdown could prompt refugees to argue that it isn’t.

If that were the case, deporting them to Turkey could be seen as constituting “refoulement”—the forcible return of asylum seekers to a country where they are prone to be subjected to persecution—which is forbidden under both international and EU law.

That’s a problem, since some analysts believe worsening conditions in Turkey could lead even more people seeking refuge to journey onward to Europe. In the past, Erdoğan has threatened to “open the gates” and send refugees streaming into Europe when displeased with the level of financial assistance from Brussels earmarked for managing the crisis. Preoccupied by troubles at home, he may see stability as in his interest and resist taking aggressive steps that would cause an open breach.

For both parties, finding a stable, though imperfect, accommodation—as they were poised to do prior to the events of last weekend—is still the most promising path forward. Let’s hope the parties take it. Managing Europe’s migration crisis depends on it.

European Immigration Through Turkey Surges After Coup Attempt (Breitbart, August 3, 2016)
Excerpt:

One of the few cards in Erdogan’s hand is control of the migrant situation, with some two million desperate people crowding camps throughout the Turkish peninsula, many of whom are anxious to enter the European Union. It is a card that Erdogan is not afraid to play. In a recent interview with the German Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu issued a stern ultimatum to European authorities: either Brussels lifts visa requirements for Turkish citizens or last March’s agreement on migrants will fall. Either alternative promises serious immigration problems for Europe.
If the EU grants visa liberalization, hundreds of thousands of migrants are likely to enter Europe “legally” from Turkey, and EU authorities will have little way of ascertaining the origins or intentions of those coming in. The risk of infiltration from Islamic terrorists is high, since the Turkish government has expressed its intention to issue some 350 thousand new passports, according to nebulous criteria. If Europe refuses, however, Erdogan will likely reopen the floodgates of migrants across the Aegean Sea into Greece, with numbers likely to equal or exceed the waves of migrants experienced in 2015.
Either way, Europe’s migrant crisis will likely get much worse before it gets better.

 

[Legacy]

Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy Report, 1981

Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy Report, 1981

As many of you may know, Father Hesburgh, who headed many Presidential Commissions that resulted in some of our major legislations that are the foundations of our society now, was head of the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy. Their report to the Senate's Subcommittee on Immigration is below.

This was a bipartisan Committee which held hearings and developed recommendations which were submitted prior to this Congressional Hearing and which were enacted into law thirty-five years ago. Here's the full text of the report.

Excerpts from the opening statement by Chairman Senator Alan Simpson, Wyoming:

I have had the honor of being one of the sixteen Commissioners who were part of that effort, which was the most ambitious such project in over 50 years. The Rev. Theodore Hesburgh who will be the first witness at these joint hearings was the Chairman of the Select Commission. Father Ted did a most remarkable job in that capacity. He is a true humanitarian and a man who gives much of himself to any issue in which he is involved. Without his innate skills OF reconciliation and direction the task would have been a long and labored one.

I realize that I am about to enter into a very sensitive area and there is some risk that what I will say may be misunderstood. So, at the outset, let me emphasize that I believe no individual applying to this country lawfully in search of freedom and opportunity and anxious to adapt to this country's political institutions and values should be discriminated against because of color, nationality or religion, as we have sometimes done in the nation's past. I am very much aware of the great contributions made by various ethnic groups to the well-being of all americans.

We are aware that throughout the world there constant pressures and disruptions which cause people to seek our shores. We as a nation are proud that this is the case, and i am sure that we all wish we could take within our borders all that wish to come. That is clearly impossible. The refugee figure is growing extremely rapidly. Last year there were 13 million. This year 16 million. And the immigrant demand also continues to grow.

The leadoff hitter in today's batting order will be the Chairman of the Select Commission, Father Ted Hesburgh. Father Hesburgh did a most extraordinary job in that capacity, a true humanitarian and a man who gives much of himself to any issue in which he becomes involved. Without his innate skills of reconciliation, compassion and direction, the task would have been long and labored.

Father Hesburgh's statement (beginning on page 23) includes:

Some among us, often moved by deeply religious values, ask the question, why should immigration be a problem? Why shouldn't people be free to move wherever they want to? We are all one species, all children of one God, and from the beginning of time human beings have been a curious migratory species. Why not let down the barrier of nation-states and permit people to move freely?

The questions almost answer themselves. Immigration is a problem because nearly all peoples believe in nationalism, in nation-states in which to maintain the integrity of national ideologies, institutions, and boundaries. We believe this in the United States, too, but not for narrow nationalistic purposes only, but also because we believe that our Nation has become a symbol of the possibilities of freedom and the potentiality for justice in a world which sees little of either.

In fact, the first of the three principles which undergird this Commission's important recommendations is the principle of international cooperation. As a nation, we cannot survive without international cooperation. We live in a constant state of interdependence. Consequently, the Select Commission has made several recommendations guided by that principle.

The second of our important principles is the rule of law. To the Commission, the rule of law meant two things: First, enforcing the limits we set for immigration in a firm, unambiguous manner, and second, doing so with high standards of due process. Dozens of the Commission recommendations are guided by the principle of the rule of law.

Our third principle was that of the open society and how few of them there are in today's world. By the open society we mean certain specific things. We mean that it is in the national interest of the United States to accept a reasonable number of immigrants and refugees each year to fulfill the U.S. policy goals regardless of the color, nationality, or the religion of those admitted. It also means that once admitted to this country, these people should be entitled to get on a fast track to citizenship under the protection of the U.S. Constitution and the laws of this land without discrimination.

I know there are persons who are wondering why the Commission recommended an increase in legal immigration. The answer is straightforward but not simple. It is clearly in the interest of the United States to do so. Once again I will summarize our finding with respect to legal immigrants.

Immigrants work hard, save and invest, and create more jobs than they take. Thus, they contribute to economic growth in the United States. It is true even for refugees, although the contribution takes place after a longer period of adjustment.

Immigrants rapidly pay back into the public coffers more than they take out when they arrive.

Immigrants strengthen our pool of younger and middle-aged workers, thus strengthening our social security system and enlarging the U.S. manpower capabilities.

Immigrants strengthen our ties with other nations.

Immigrants strengthen our linguistic and cultural resources.

Immigrants and their children embrace American ideals and public values rapidly and help to renew them.

Immigrants give a brilliant demonstration to the world of the advantages of a free society.

And finally, the children of immigrants, according to our studies, acculturate well to the American life and actually seem to be healthier and do better in school on the average than those of native-born Americans.

Why should we be so worrisome, in light of U.S. history? The fact is that about 45 percent of the people now in this country either arrived here from afar or are descendents of people who came here within the last four or five generations. In fact, at least one-half of the congressional members of our Commission are descendents of persons who came to the United States within the last four generations, not even counting that distinguished alumnus of Notre Dame, Ron Mazzoli.

No one questions their Americanism in the slightest, even though many people vigorously opposed the arrival of their ancestors, their grandparents, and great-grandparents, predicting dire consequences for the United States because of their admission.

We are all fortunate that some of our ancestors were immigrants, others refugees, some contract laborers, others indentured servants, and still others survived the slave trade and made it to this land. Most of them suffered the migration passage and the problems of adjustment here, even those who chose to come, but few of us regret that they stuck it out. If they had not, none of us in this room would be here today.

While this Nation should get its house in order by regaining control over immigration policy, and while it is clear that we can no longer follow George Washington's advice to open all our doors to all of the oppressed of the world, this would be a horrible time to impose additional quantitative restrictions on immigration.

We can and we should assert our own values, and traditions, and our national self-interest by modestly increasing levels of immigration and my instituting a legalization program as well and by enforcing the law firmly and fairly. What is required is a campaign of leadership to articulate those values, those traditions, and those interests in relationship to immigration so that the American people will support the recommendations of the Commission.

In his initial statement, Senator Simpson also says:

Joint Congressional hearings are nearly unprecedented, I understand that the last time it occurred was thirty years ago and then both houses of Congress were controlled by my good colleagues on the other side of the aisle! Chairman Mazzoli and I trust that the fact that we are able to work together on this issue to this degree--despite our differing party affiliations--will indeed indicate the necessity for a bipartisan revision of our nation's Immigration and refugee policy. I also trust that the joint hearing process and close consultations with each body will facilitate the development and enactment of the legislative reforms which are so vitally needed in this area.

 

[ickythump1225]

Immigrants rapidly pay back into the public coffers more than they take out when they arrive.

Immigrants strengthen our pool of younger and middle-aged workers, thus strengthening our social security system and enlarging the U.S. manpower capabilities.

Immigrants strengthen our ties with other nations.

Immigrants strengthen our linguistic and cultural resources.

Immigrants and their children embrace American ideals and public values rapidly and help to renew them.

Immigrants give a brilliant demonstration to the world of the advantages of a free society.

This is all nice and feel good but the bulk of them aren't true or are spun heavily. "Immigrants strength our ties with other nations?" That is debatable. Is Europe any closer to North African nations since they've let in a tidal wave of refugees? Are we that much closer to Syria since we've started admitting refugees from there?

"Immigrants strengthen our linguistic and cultural resources." That is just feel good gobbledygook. Multiculturalism is an abject failure and lowers community bonds, trust, and cohesion. America went to the moon when nearly everyone spoke English, are we really than we were when Apollo 11 was completed just because we have to press "1" for English?

"Immigrants and their children embrace American ideals and public values rapidly and help to renew them."
This is just blatantly false. Some may eventually embrace American ideals and values but it is not "rapidly." If they did, they wouldn't be strengthening our "linguistic and cultural resources" to put it in Fr. Hesburgh's words. America (which is not just an "idea" despite the claims of egalitarian neoliberals and neoconservatives) was founded on ideas like private property, individual rights, limited government, freedom of religious thought, freedom of political speech, etc. You know, ideas rooted in Western (particularly Anglo-Saxon) theory and idea. Poll after poll shows that recent immigrants favor big government, expanded welfare, collectivist ideas, etc. This is why Democrats are open border people, they see billions of potential voters out there outside the Anglosphere.

The other points are economic points and for neoliberals like Fr. Hesburgh that is the most important thing to them. Neoliberals, neoconservatives, and the like view the world through the prism of economics. Flooding the West with millions of immigrants from nations, religions, and cultures that are vastly different than (if not diametrically opposed to) our way of life is worth it to them because they economically benefit from it. That is the same reason we pursue a free trade agenda though it has clearly ruined large segments of the U.S. economy.

A nation without borders (or a country that has "borders" like we do but they exist only so we can say we have them), a common interest, a common culture, common ancestry, common ideas on religion, law, morality, virtue, governance, etc. is not really a nation but just a hodgepodge of people. A group of strangers that exist together in a loosely defined geographic area.
Human beings are unique beings with individual thoughts and passions that exist as part of larger structures like races, cultures, and nations. They are not interchangeable economic units as most of our business and political leaders see them, Fr. Hesburgh apparently thinks of them, and quite frankly how most people on this board and in this country see them. America is a unique nation with a unique culture and a unique heritage. Part of vetting process for immigration should be whether or not that individual would fit our culture.

 

[ickythump1225]

You are the definition of success for a terrorist.

Yeah I'm sure terrorists dream of being banned from the United States and denied access to American targets.

 

[ickythump1225]

"nations, cultures, and a religion that are incubators of anti-western terrorism" is really the perfect phrase to show your broad brushing stupidity. Someone who isn't quite an amateur would be hammering away at the disturbing cult of Salafism/Wahabism, our odd relationship with Saudi Arabia, a lack of a crackdown on mosques around the world spreading this ideology, etc.

No, instead you get sloppy and turn into a broad brushing xenophobe. And that's really the difference between you and me: you're just sloppy.

We can do all of that and still build a wall, deport as many illegals as humanly possible, and put severe restrictions on immigration to the country.

Also, repeating the word "xenophobe" doesn't make you right. In fact I often find that people fall back on labeling their opponents by calling them "sexist," "racist," "xenophobic," "homophobic," etc. when they have no valid points to make. Simply virtue signalling and demagouging your opponent doesn't make you right or smart.