Vetting refugees

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

My point was this...it's much easier for the FBI to investigate an American citizen, than it is for anyone, in any agency, to investigate someone from a mountaintop village which has no electricity or computers. So forgive me if I'm not relieved when Obama says "don't worry, we are vetting these people".

Totally different processes.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Totally different processes.

As I said, I agree. One process (FBI vetting citizens) is a lot easier. And they still failed miserably in teh case of the Orlando guy.

You said that if we implement bad policies, terrorists win. How does the removal of second amendment rights fit into that argument?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

As I said, I agree. One process (FBI vetting citizens) is a lot easier. And they still failed miserably in teh case of the Orlando guy.

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder. There are significant protections that limit how far the FBI can go without violating a presumption of innocence. Refugees applying for UN sponsored status have no such protections and face a rigorous process that goes well beyond the scope of the FBI.

You said that if we implement bad policies, terrorists win. How does the removal of second amendment rights fit into that argument?

Who is calling for the removal of second amendment rights?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder.

Bonkers.

We have publicly available data on citizens - birth records, immunization records, criminal records, that the FBI can easily get. Hell, I can look up someone's arrest record online.

Please tell me, Spence, how do we vet someone from a village with no computers, no schools, no jails, etc? Other than asking each refugee, "do you promise not to kill anyone", how the hell do you confirm anything?

Have fun with that.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bonkers.

We have publicly available data on citizens - birth records, immunization records, criminal records, that the FBI can easily get. Hell, I can look up someone's arrest record online.

What good is that against someone with a clean record who can walk into a gun store and pick up some weapons?

Please tell me, Spence, how do we vet someone from a village with no computers, no schools, no jails, etc? Other than asking each refugee, "do you promise not to kill anyone", how the hell do you confirm anything?

I don't think you understand the process.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

What good is that against someone with a clean record who can walk into a gun store and pick up some weapons?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Inverse and it will make sense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What good is that against someone with a clean record who can walk into a gun store and pick up some weapons?


I don't think you understand the process.

That's exactly why I asked you to explain it to me. And you didn't. Because you can't. As always, you take it on faith that any plan implemented by anyone with a (D) after their name, must necessarily be brilliant. Always, always, always.

We have more ability to paint a quick and accurate picture of a citizen living here, than we do about someone who lives in a remote village in the Middle East. No rational person would deny that. I have a background check done on any new employee. I can look up your criminal record online in 5 minutes. It's not perfect obviously, but it's a hell of a lot more available than background info on someone from a place that has never had electricity to send data, or even a filing cabinet to store paper records.

But you would say, details, shme-tails.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

Who is calling for the removal of second amendment rights?

I can tell you who,
pretty much any and all of the politicians who are trying to infringe our rights with further gun control legislation seeing as we already have enough laws on the books and they need to be enforced before any more infringement happens. That includes Senator Warren to begin with and all the rest who choose to take the lazy approach to issues of violence.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

I can tell you who,
pretty much any and all of the politicians who are trying to infringe our rights with further gun control legislation seeing as we already have enough laws on the books and they need to be enforced before any more infringement happens. That includes Senator Warren to begin with and all the rest who choose to take the lazy approach to issues of violence.

Yea, and left-wing nuts like four star Generals McChrystal and Petraeus who don't think the public has a rational need for a 223 semi auto configured with assault features.

What freaks.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd think vetting citizens is probably a lot harder.

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

Gee, when you put it that way...

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

U.S. Citizen:

Birth Certificate = Verify Age
Social Security Card = Verify Employment History
Drivers License = Driving Record/Insurance Issues/Infractions
Credit Cards = Credit History/Shopping History
Bank Accounts = Financial History/Transactions/

Interview Employers, Neighbors, Known Associates.
Check Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media footprints


Syrian Refugee:

No Birth Certificate = Can't verify Age
No Social Security Card = Can't verify Identity
No Drivers License = Can't verify Identity
No Credit Cards
No Bank Accounts
No Way to verify Work History
No Way to interview Employers, Neighbors, or Known Associates

But he can say his name is Bob and he promises to behave....you're right, that is sooooo much easier.

I'll just google Bob and see if I can find his facebook account....

You're missing the point. The FBI can't access most of that without a warrant. You also make it sound like the vetting process is totally open, it's not...read up.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

You're missing the point. The FBI can't access most of that without a warrant. You also make it sound like the vetting process is totally open, it's not...read up.

No, You're missing the point(s)

A) I'm already a citizen so, yeah you need a warrant due to my constitutional rights. but since I'm already a citizen I don't need to apply to come here and/or become a citizen. That makes that entire argument moot

B) If you want to come here and become a citizen, you should be voluntarily providing me with all that information so that I can properly vet you.

C) If you can't voluntarily provide that information so we can vet you, because none of it exists or is accessible....then how do we successfully vet you? (here's a hint: You can't)

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

No, You're missing the point(s)

A) I'm already a citizen so, yeah you need a warrant due to my constitutional rights. but since I'm already a citizen I don't need to apply to come here and/or become a citizen. That makes that entire argument moot

Refugees aren't applying for citizenship.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

You're missing the point. The FBI can't access most of that without a warrant. You also make it sound like the vetting process is totally open, it's not...read up.

No, you are missing the point. Because whatever the FBI can access even without a warrant, is more than anyone can access about a refugee from Syria who lived in a village with no information to even try to access.

It's obvious common sense. If we can't detect terrorists among our own citizens, only you would say it's easier to weed out terrorists from a crowd of Middle Eastern refugees, when we probably can't even confirm their identity, let alone their background, in some cases.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

You're missing the point. The FBI can't access most of that without a warrant. You also make it sound like the vetting process is totally open, it's not...read up.

Sooo....Lets read up...shall we. this is the procedure from your link.

Step 1: Collects identifying documents (as was mentioned, none exist)
Collect Bio Data: Name, Address, Birthday, Place of Birth (No Documents exist to VERIFY any of this information)

Collect Biometrics: Iris Scans (Newsflash, this is to help identify them for future ID in case of an issue, There is NOTHING that exists that can link them to past actions)


Step 2: Collects Identifying Documents (Huh, did these all of a sudden magically appear)

Create an Applicant File. (Ooooohhh now we mean business, we have an actual folder that has all of your supposed unverified information on it)


Step 3: US Security Agencies screen the Candidate (so they use all the unverified data collected to see if any flags pop, but since the data could be false.....everything looks good)


Step 4: The Interviews are conducted. (This is where they promise to work and play well with others)


Step 5: Fingerprints are screened (again if there is no database to bounce these against then they are good)


....and according to your link this is the end of the Security portion of the vetting process.

do I need to go on......point is....if the initial information is false, the entire process they follow is built upon false data.

But the graphic they used is a might purty....so I can see where you might be lulled into a false sense of security.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Sooo....Lets read up...shall we. this is the procedure from your link.

Step 1: Collects identifying documents (as was mentioned, none exist)
Collect Bio Data: Name, Address, Birthday, Place of Birth (No Documents exist to VERIFY any of this information)

Collect Biometrics: Iris Scans (Newsflash, this is to help identify them for future ID in case of an issue, There is NOTHING that exists that can link them to past actions)


Step 2: Collects Identifying Documents (Huh, did these all of a sudden magically appear)

Create an Applicant File. (Ooooohhh now we mean business, we have an actual folder that has all of your supposed unverified information on it)


Step 3: US Security Agencies screen the Candidate (so they use all the unverified data collected to see if any flags pop, but since the data could be false.....everything looks good)


Step 4: The Interviews are conducted. (This is where they promise to work and play well with others)


Step 5: Fingerprints are screened (again if there is no database to bounce these against then they are good)


....and according to your link this is the end of the Security portion of the vetting process.

do I need to go on......point is....if the initial information is false, the entire process they follow is built upon false data.

But the graphic they used is a might purty....so I can see where you might be lulled into a false sense of security.

Well I don't know about you, but that puts my mind at ease...

As you pointed out, all this presumes that (1) records exist on these people, and that (2) there is a mechanism for verifying said records.

Oh yes, that interview, that must really cut down on terror. Because as we all know, a terrorist would never fail to announce his intentions ahead of time.