Jump to content

Something terrible happened in France.


Ms. Spam
 Share

Recommended Posts

A big part of the problem when it comes to refugees is that the majority of everyone is trying to shoehorn it as a black and white issue, when in reality it's multiple shades of grey.

In practice, I believe it's our moral responsibility as a nation of both privilege and immigrants to show hospitality and care for those looking to us for it. On top of that, I do believe that the U.S. is at least partially responsible for ISIS even existing, as our involvement in Afghanistan in the 80's and Iraq in the early 2000's are big factors in their origins. So yes, the right thing to do is show them care and take them in. Additionally, if we truly are a Christian nation as many on the right keep repeating, it's our religious responsibility to show them compassion as well.

But then the harsh reality is that there are a few wolves in sheep's clothing in that demographic. And it's even more problematic to think that there's absolutely no way that we can accurately or comprehensively screen them all to identify those wolves. But do you ignore thousands and thousands of innocents because of the fact that there could be a few dozen within their ranks who mean us harm? Do you leave them to the violent political elements for months or years while you sort things out on their behalf?

Really, I don't think there is a right answer, no matter how binary the loud critics on either side try to make it. My personal opinion is that we do hold a moral responsibility to right our wrongs and care for the innocent, so we'd better get to work on figuring out how to safely make that happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys are refugees for the very reason that we don't like ISIS or other radical elements as they're trying to find a place that is safe. The more alarmist the protest becomes in allowing refugees to come the more I become concerned that we are worsening the issues of that region and causing marginalized people to become radicals who act on things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I'd love to help those people out, but I can totally see ISIS using this as a way to get into the country.

 

If you buy a bag of peanuts from a peanut stand and one of them makes you sick, you don't go back and ask for more peanuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing that scares me too. Much of our populace is becoming so stubbornly oppositional. And look, I'll come out and say it, they're oppositional to anyone brown. That kind of radicalism on our end does nothing but encourage it elsewhere.

These guys are refugees for the very reason that we don't like ISIS or other radical elements as they're trying to find a place that is safe. The more alarmist the protest becomes in allowing refugees to come the more I become concerned that we are worsening the issues of that region and causing marginalized people to become radicals who act on things.

 

BINGO!

 

And these two quotes are, I strongly suspect, why ISIS actually carried out (or at least sponsored) the attacks in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pretty much agree with what D-Ray said. It sounds like the process is actually pretty rigorous. Is there a danger that ISIL is sending in a sleeper agent? Yes. There's also a very real danger that they are trying to recruit within our own borders through social media and the dark/deep web.

 

I think the wholesale rejection of refugees is racist, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as there is a screening process in place and we aren't talking about some absurdly large number that just can't be accommodated (i.e. way more than the additional 10k), I don't think there is any reasonable excuse not to let refugees in.

 

I don't think it's good policy to lead with emotional/humanitarian desires (the quick fix road to unintended consequences), but I think you can analyze this situation intellectually and ask:

 

  • Are Syrian refugees facing a humanitarian crisis, and could it be abated at least for some by entrance into the United States?
  • Does allowing Syrian refugees into the United States constitute a security risk, and if so, are there screening protocols in place to mitigate said risk?
  • With mitigation factored in, are potential security risks to the United States serious enough to outweigh humanitarian concerns?

While there may be disagreements on matters of degree, I think there are clear answers to all three of those questions.

 

(also, I would include economic risks, but with the numbers we are currently talking, I just don't think they constitute the kind of risk you could have a serious debate over.)

 

Everything has a risk to it. And honestly, if I were gonna try and blow something up or do some terrorizin', I'd probably want to enter through a path that is faster and comes with less scrutiny. But that's just me.

 

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's impossible to have empathy for these people and still not want them here in the interest of national security?

No, it is possible. If I felt threatened, I would have empathy but say "Nah, sorry. Too risky." But assuming there is a halfway competent screening process, I have yet to see anything that makes me feel there is a legit threat to national security.

 

:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I guess a halfway competent screening process should suffice. And I guess 10K is enough to alleviate people's guilt over what's going on over there.

"halfway competent" was a flip comment. I'm not a fan of the competency of our government in many regards.

 

That said (and somebody correct me if I'm wrong as I'm going by memory), if you are a refugee from Syria, there are additional security steps you have to go through, including a cross check against classified info, and it still takes something like an additional year before you even step on U.S. soil compared to other refugees. That's good enough for me.

 

Some of the hyperbole over this is absurd. There are people who aren't far off from believing that Obama is personally rubber stamping everyone of Islamic faith and Middle Eastern descent and handing them suicide vests and AK47s at the border. The caricaturing and fear-mongering surrounding this issue is disgusting to me.

 

Regarding 10k, that number is not about guilt; the U.S. takes in refugees from all over the world, but there is a yearly quota. 10k is being allotted specifically for people fleeing Syria, because of the disproportionately high number of people needing refuge from that part of the world. It is based on need and the number of refugees wanting to come into the United States each year, not on people's feelers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most or all of the people involved in the Paris thing were already there and established in their countries of France and Denmark beyond the one with the passport that was linked to a Syrian refugee. The dudes that rammed planes into the Twin Towers were here legally under visas. Those guys that did the Boston Marathon bombing were here legally. I honestly believe that the best option for these people who are having purple twinkies over the refugees to feel safe is a vigilant internet and very intrusive further than the Patriot Act type monitoring to track people who've responded to radical ideas online. It makes me sad now to say I would consider continuing the Patriot Act and worse when I was against it all those years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This bit of information maybe helpful for people that want to battle ignorance concerning refugees. I am good friends with a friend who has a friend who works in immigration law and he posted this to Facebook today:

 

Most of my friends know I practice Immigration law. As such, I have worked with the refugee community for over two decades. This post is long, but if you want actual information about the process, keep reading.
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. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)
Over one-third of all refugee arrivals (35.1 percent, or 24,579) in FY 2015 came from the Near East/South Asia—a region that includes Iraq, Iran, Bhutan, and Afghanistan.
Another third of all refugee arrivals (32.1 percent, or 22,472) in FY 2015 came from Africa.
Over a quarter of all refugee arrivals (26.4 percent, or 18,469) in FY 2015 came from East Asia — a region that includes China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)
Finally, the process in Europe is different. I would be much more concerned that terrorists are infiltrating the European system because they are not nearly so extensive and thorough in their process.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.