• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ohio shooter - pollitical..

So...what would you consider acceptable risk KNOWING you cant properly vet refugees and KNOWING enemies of America have infiltrated those camps and WANT to come here? 10 in 100? 5 in 100? 2 in 100?

It is fascinating that libs oppose the death penalty, because no level of murderous criminal death is acceptable. Yet, they literally have an acceptable, death of innocents level. It is hard to fathom.
 
So...what would you consider acceptable risk KNOWING you cant properly vet refugees and KNOWING enemies of America have infiltrated those camps and WANT to come here? 10 in 100? 5 in 100? 2 in 100?
We can properly vet. Vetting doesn't mean that everyone is 100% safe. We will always have enemies trying to abuse a refugee system. It's also important to remember that the screening process takes a long time. They will have background checks and multiple interviews while waiting for over a year to try to get into the country. After they are in the country they will still have to pass more screenings if they need to get a green card. The U.S. program is much better than Europe's. People aren't just flooding into our country. I don't know where you got your numbers, but we have already taken in almost 12,000 Syrian refugees and I imagine we would have heard something about it if we had 240-1200 terrorists successfully infiltrating the refugee program. I think the numbers are a lot lower than you're guessing.
 
It is fascinating that libs oppose the death penalty, because no level of murderous criminal death is acceptable. Yet, they literally have an acceptable, death of innocents level. It is hard to fathom.

I don't oppose the death penalty. Not taking in refugees is also an acceptable death level. You don't get away from that on either side of the issue.
 
We can properly vet. Vetting doesn't mean that everyone is 100% safe. We will always have enemies trying to abuse a refugee system. It's also important to remember that the screening process takes a long time. They will have background checks and multiple interviews while waiting for over a year to try to get into the country. After they are in the country they will still have to pass more screenings if they need to get a green card. The U.S. program is much better than Europe's. People aren't just flooding into our country. I don't know where you got your numbers, but we have already taken in almost 12,000 Syrian refugees and I imagine we would have heard something about it if we had 240-1200 terrorists successfully infiltrating the refugee program. I think the numbers are a lot lower than you're guessing.
Wait. Stop.

Explain again how you can ADMIT that we dont have a means of properly vetting people (based on the very words of people you said you would trust). We KNOW there are no records to vet people against and we KNOW that ISIS has the means to produce new names, identities etc complete with supporting documents so that they CANNOT be traced....and you claim that is properly vetting?

Dood...you are so invested that you refuse to be honest. Thats so sad.
 
Look! Look! He's a brown Muslim! Be afraid! Hate! Hate!

No... it's more like... Look Look! A guy running people over with a car. Oh sh--! He's stabbing people with a knife!!

Later....

That guy was a Somali Muslim committing an act of terrorism and trying to kill as many people as possible because he's an extremist Islamic terrorist who is now worm food. The end.


:2bow:
 
Wait. Stop.

Explain again how you can ADMIT that we dont have a means of properly vetting people (based on the very words of people you said you would trust). We KNOW there are no records to vet people against and we KNOW that ISIS has the means to produce new names, identities etc complete with supporting documents so that they CANNOT be traced....and you claim that is properly vetting?

Dood...you are so invested that you refuse to be honest. Thats so sad.
I'm not refusing to be honest. You are claiming that there are no records. That is not true. Some refugees may not have records, but don't act like there is no data in the system. Comey has said both that there are gaps and also that the FBI has an effective vetting process. Johnson has expressed concern while also stating the process is constantly improving and they should stay on their current trajectory. I will admit that I am less convinced after reading up on the totality of their comments, but seeing as they overall support the program than I do too.

Johnson on current state of vetting

Comey on effective process
 
I'm not refusing to be honest. You are claiming that there are no records. That is not true. Some refugees may not have records, but don't act like there is no data in the system. Comey has said both that there are gaps and also that the FBI has an effective vetting process. Johnson has expressed concern while also stating the process is constantly improving and they should stay on their current trajectory. I will admit that I am less convinced after reading up on the totality of their comments, but seeing as they overall support the program than I do too.

Johnson on current state of vetting

Comey on effective process
....sigh....

Do they have valid and reliable historic records or dont we?
 
Back
Top Bottom