(06-13-2017 12:36 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  If it were just a matter of funding we would have already done it.

Then why did you present it that way?

He didnt.

(06-13-2017 12:36 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  If it were just a matter of funding we would have already done it.

Then why did you present it that way?

Point out where I did.


(Hint.......I didn't)

Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

(06-13-2017 12:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

Because they're dumb?

(06-13-2017 12:53 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

Because they're dumb?

I think it's more sinister than that.

(06-13-2017 12:55 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:53 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

Because they're dumb?

I think it's more sinister than that.

Of course it is. They know that normally immigrants will vote for whomever gives them the goodies per se.

(06-13-2017 11:06 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The CIA does it. We should have a massive database, already, frankly.

I don't think you understand the problem. It's not as simple as knowing who the key players are, which I suspect the CIA knows... but knowing that the person presenting themselves today IS who they say they are. If the home country doesn't keep good records, which most don't, then we can't possibly know... so who IS this person? You don't think the CIA has fingerprints or DNA or even often photos of every suspected terrorist, do you? We're not going to get Al Qaeda #4 trying to sneak in. We're going to get his neighbor's nephew who attended his Mosque weekly and other meetings where 'evil' was planned...

Quote:If the information provided by the prospective traveler is insufficient, then you reject the request.

Sounds fine, except that's not how the system works. 90% of refugees have almost no documents at all and you can't get them if you have to... and we're expected to deal with them and not reject them. That's precisely the problem. It's not merely about insufficient... it's also about false documents. This like voter ID. There's no way to prove that the person in front of you IS the person they claim to be. The documents in many of these countries are easily faked. That's why Obama put them on the list in the first place.

That's precisely the rationale behind the enhanced vetting.... That the paper trail in these countries is completely unreliable... so they are rejected out of hand for that reason... unless and until they can prove otherwise who they are.

Quote:The 9th circuit said:

Quote:There is no finding that present vetting standards are inadequate, and no finding that absent the improved vetting procedures there likely will be harm to our national interests,” the panel noted. “These identified reasons do not support the conclusion that the entry of nationals from the six designated countries would be harmful to our national interests.

Take it up with them.

I suspect that's precisely what the SCOTUS will do.

Where this interpretation will fail (imo) is that it presumes that an executive order must somehow prevent harm to a national interest. That WOULD be the case if these were citizens, since you would be denying them constitutionally protected rights. Immigrants, at least those not physically here have no such rights. It is OFTEN a matter of opinion whether or not an executive order prevents harm to a national interest. I believe the burden for non-citizens is to prove that it doesn't... which of course you cannot do... and not to have to prove that it does... which is the burden the 9th is putting on it.

(06-13-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 11:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  You need to learn what the CIA does.

I'm not seeing a counter-argument here, only a deflection.

That's because you don't know what the CIA does. They don't exist to create or keep a database of every individual on earth for the possibility that they may one day want to immigrate or vist the US. They are (supposed to be) an intelligence gathering organization and assist in foreign policy analysis.

(06-13-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 11:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  What are you going to compare it to?

As I've said, the prospective travelers should provide contacts to vouch for themselves. Plus whatever intelligence the US has, or any other allies have.

If the information turns out to be insufficient, the fail-safe default is to reject the application. <--- this never doesn't work, so I don't see how you have an argument

So enough terrorists can get their buddies and families to vouch for themselves and that's good enough for you? Gimme a break. Do you really not see a problem relying on the Honor System and very limited official documents from their country of origin?

(06-13-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 11:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  No you couldn't, you couldn't even pay for you own on a individual plan.

Considering how often it happens, I think I could pay for quite a bit!

@ 20 instances per dollar I doubt that.

(06-13-2017 11:44 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 11:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I don't have to. The SC will.

If they decide to hear the case.

I don't see how they can't

So, Bison wants us to accept immigrants that furnish us with names of people they know to vouch for them?

BRILLIANT!

Let's do that!

Wow, sometimes I wonder about this genius. *rolling eyes*

LOL BIG TIME

(06-13-2017 12:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

Send every single one of them to a sanctuary city.

(06-13-2017 01:20 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 12:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Why are leftist hoping we can't keep certain people from entering this country?

Send every single one of them to a sanctuary citt.

But, we'd need walls to keep them there. You don't actually believe they wouldn't leave do you?

P.S. I know you're being sarcastic. Me too.