Paris ringleader used refugee crisis to enter France

[Raven_tiger 5]

Really? Of course this could not happen in the US, our Dear Leader Obama told us so. Only women and children. There are other, easier ways, in the US, right??? Daesh wont exploit a refugee crisis here, they would instead request tourist visas.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11/20/france-pm-says-paris-attacks-ringleader-used-migrant-crisis-to-get-into-country/?intcmp=hpbt2

[AURaptor 1,128]

Oh no, now Obama is REALLY going to be angry at him....

[Raven_tiger 5]

I find it funny that the mods are editing our posts. I didnt refer to the group as 'daesh'. :-\

[AURaptor 1,128]

I find it funny that the mods are editing our posts. I didnt refer to the group as 'daesh'. :-\

Yes you did. Now, say no more about it.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

Because the scene in Greece had all kinds of safeguards and screenings just like ours.

The inability for you to think critically before speaking is disturbing.

[AUbritt 611]

These terms do not mean the same thing: 'migrant', 'immigrant', 'refugee'.

The vetting process for someone to enter the US as a refugess also differs from the process for folks to enter other countries.

News agencies have some responsibility to make sure they report the facts.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

These terms do not mean the same thing: 'migrant', 'immigrant', 'refugee'.

The vetting process for someone to enter the US as a refugess also differs from the process for folks to enter other countries.

News agencies have some responsibility to make sure they report the facts.

Help me out. What are the differences in each case?

[AUbritt 611]

These terms do not mean the same thing: 'migrant', 'immigrant', 'refugee'.

The vetting process for someone to enter the US as a refugess also differs from the process for folks to enter other countries.

News agencies have some responsibility to make sure they report the facts.

Help me out. What are the differences in each case?

Immigrant vs. refugee.

Immigration vs. migration.

So, not all migrations involve moving from one country to another; nor do they apply only to humans. Immigration happens when someone wants to move into another country and settle there. So, an immigrant is not the same as a tourist, for instance, who intends to return home. Refugees want to leave their country and get some place to escape persecution or war or other danger. The emphasis of refugees is on getting away from where they are to somehwere safe. They typically aren't too choosey about where they go (unlike an immigrant, who typically chooses the destination thoughtfully).

There are also different procedures used with immigrants and refugees. The refugee screening process to get into the US is described in pretty good detail in the Cato thread. Immigration is discussed in the thread AU-24 started about the problem being so big (the gumballs video). No one on this forum has posted anything about migration, yet -- though one of the Fox News story referred to Syrian refugees as 'migrants'.

I can post videos about geese flying south for the winter or caribou or something, but the notion of migration is not really relevant to what we're discussing here.

Immigration is relevant, because it seems like we need to reform the process to make it tougher to screen for potential terrorists. Lots of holes in that process, I think.

The toughest screening process we have is the one for refugees.

That's part of why some of us are suggesting that we worry a lot less about the Syrian refugees and more about other areas -- like folks who are here now, already; fixing the immigration process; and whether we should refer to the Islamic State terrorist group as Daesh or not.

[cooltigger21 0]

These terms do not mean the same thing: 'migrant', 'immigrant', 'refugee'.

The vetting process for someone to enter the US as a refugess also differs from the process for folks to enter other countries.

News agencies have some responsibility to make sure they report the facts.

Help me out. What are the differences in each case?

Immigrant vs. refugee.

Immigration vs. migration.

So, not all migrations involve moving from one country to another; nor do they apply only to humans. Immigration happens when someone wants to move into another country and settle there. So, an immigrant is not the same as a tourist, for instance, who intends to return home. Refugees want to leave their country and get some place to escape persecution or war or other danger. The emphasis of refugees is on getting away from where they are to somehwere safe. They typically aren't too choosey about where they go (unlike an immigrant, who typically chooses the destination thoughtfully).

There are also different procedures used with immigrants and refugees. The refugee screening process to get into the US is described in pretty good detail in the Cato thread. Immigration is discussed in the thread AU-24 started about the problem being so big (the gumballs video). No one on this forum has posted anything about migration, yet -- though one of the Fox News story referred to Syrian refugees as 'migrants'.

I can post videos about geese flying south for the winter or caribou or something, but the notion of migration is not really relevant to what we're discussing here.

Immigration is relevant, because it seems like we need to reform the process to make it tougher to screen for potential terrorists. Lots of holes in that process, I think.

The toughest screening process we have is the one for refugees.

That's part of why some of us are suggesting that we worry a lot less about the Syrian refugees and more about other areas -- like folks who are here now, already; fixing the immigration process; and whether we should refer to the Islamic State terrorist group as Daesh or not.

But nobody wants to fix immigration. It's Unchristian to not allow every person in. It's Unchristian to turn in criminals who kill American citizens.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

But nobody wants to fix immigration. It's Unchristian to not allow every person in. It's Unchristian to turn in criminals who kill American citizens.

Why bother arguing the issue at hand when you can go throw another punch at that strawman?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Back to the OP....the point here is that the ringleader in the Paris killings came in with refugees. It happened. Why in the world do we want to take that chance? Do you think U.S. vetting/screening is any better than France's?

[cooltigger21 0]

But nobody wants to fix immigration. It's Unchristian to not allow every person in. It's Unchristian to turn in criminals who kill American citizens.

Why bother arguing the issue at hand when you can go throw another punch at that strawman?

it's not a strawman. It's the truth. Nobody wants it closed. Liberals want the voters. Big business wants the cheap labor. Even churches and so called Christians feel they have a duty to take all these people in.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

Back to the OP....the point here is that the ringleader in the Paris killings came in with refugees. It happened. Why in the world do we want to take that chance? Do you think U.S. vetting/screening is any better than France's?

Yes, our process is much better, much lengthier than what has been happening in Europe. Do you know read and understand that it takes anywhere from a year to over two for a refugee to be vetted and allowed in the US?

But beyond that, have you not seen that this guy was actually a European national and the passport was a fake?

http://www.ibtimes.com/paris-attack-2015-named-terrorists-all-european-nationals-not-syrian-refugees-2191677

Stop listening to whatever right-wing freakout channel you're getting stale info from and research it for yourself. This stuff has been updated from the initial craziness. And our processes are far more lengthy and extensive than what happened when tens of thousands just showed up on Europe's doorstep.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

But nobody wants to fix immigration. It's Unchristian to not allow every person in. It's Unchristian to turn in criminals who kill American citizens.

Why bother arguing the issue at hand when you can go throw another punch at that strawman?

it's not a strawman. It's the truth. Nobody wants it closed. Liberals want the voters. Big business wants the cheap labor. Even churches and so called Christians feel they have a duty to take all these people in.

It is a strawman because we are talking about refugees and you're over in your own corner muttering about illegal immigration and other crap. If you'd like to have an argument about immigration in general, fine, start a thread. But in THIS thread on THIS issue it's nothing more than changing the subject and punching strawmen.

[homersapien 11,513]

These terms do not mean the same thing: 'migrant', 'immigrant', 'refugee'.

The vetting process for someone to enter the US as a refugess also differs from the process for folks to enter other countries.

News agencies have some responsibility to make sure they report the facts.

Help me out. What are the differences in each case?

Immigrant vs. refugee.

Immigration vs. migration.

So, not all migrations involve moving from one country to another; nor do they apply only to humans. Immigration happens when someone wants to move into another country and settle there. So, an immigrant is not the same as a tourist, for instance, who intends to return home. Refugees want to leave their country and get some place to escape persecution or war or other danger. The emphasis of refugees is on getting away from where they are to somehwere safe. They typically aren't too choosey about where they go (unlike an immigrant, who typically chooses the destination thoughtfully).

There are also different procedures used with immigrants and refugees. The refugee screening process to get into the US is described in pretty good detail in the Cato thread. Immigration is discussed in the thread AU-24 started about the problem being so big (the gumballs video). No one on this forum has posted anything about migration, yet -- though one of the Fox News story referred to Syrian refugees as 'migrants'.

I can post videos about geese flying south for the winter or caribou or something, but the notion of migration is not really relevant to what we're discussing here.

Immigration is relevant, because it seems like we need to reform the process to make it tougher to screen for potential terrorists. Lots of holes in that process, I think.

The toughest screening process we have is the one for refugees.

That's part of why some of us are suggesting that we worry a lot less about the Syrian refugees and more about other areas -- like folks who are here now, already; fixing the immigration process; and whether we should refer to the Islamic State terrorist group as Daesh or not.

But nobody wants to fix immigration. It's Unchristian to not allow every person in. It's Unchristian to turn in criminals who kill American citizens.

Pathetic.

[AUbritt 611]

What Titan said.

Can we really not have a rational discussion of these issue?! Come on, y'all! This reminds me of the football board, which people seem to use for venting more than for real discussion.

By the way, the immigration issue as a whole already has its own thread here.

[homersapien 11,513]

Back to the OP....the point here is that the ringleader in the Paris killings came in with refugees. It happened. Why in the world do we want to take that chance? Do you think U.S. vetting/screening is any better than France's?

Yes, our process is much better, much lengthier than what has been happening in Europe. Do you know read and understand that it takes anywhere from a year to over two for a refugee to be vetted and allowed in the US?

But beyond that, have you not seen that this guy was actually a European national and the passport was a fake?

http://www.ibtimes.c...efugees-2191677

Stop listening to whatever right-wing freakout channel you're getting stale info from and research it for yourself. This stuff has been updated from the initial craziness. And our processes are far more lengthy and extensive than what happened when tens of thousands just showed up on Europe's doorstep.

But, but... if Daesh is planting fake Syrian passports on their operatives, doesn't that mean they actually want us to believe the Syrian refugees are an inherent threat?

Doesn't that mean the anti refugee movement is essentially providing Daesh a victory?

[AUUSN 823]

Picture of the female suicide bomber.

“She spent her time criticising everything. She was living in her own world. She was not interested in studying her religion. I never saw her open the Koran. She was permanently on her phone, looking at Facebook or WhatsApp.

“I told her to stop all of this but she would not listen, she ignored my numerous attempts to give her advice.”

Three weeks ago, Aitboulahcen left her mother’s home to live with a female friend in Drancy, a suburb of northeast Paris. Then on Sunday – two days after the attacks – she rang him at 7pm

Mr Aitboulahcen said: “On Sunday at 7pm she called me because I had called her - and she sounded like she had given up on life.”

He rushed over in his car to check on her but got no answer.

“She called me and I put the phone down on her after telling her not to call me any more after the inconvenience she had caused me, getting me to come over for nothing,” he said.

“Finally on Wednesday morning I turned on the TV and I learned that she had killed herself, sacrificing the life that the Lord had given.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12004720/Paris-attacks-female-suicide-bomber-shouted-Help-me-Help-me-to-police-during-Saint-Denis-raid.html

[Mikey 16,777]

This is a drive-by. I don't expect to be back to this thread. However, it occurs to me that we can establish a safe-haven in that part of the world for the refugees and maintain it until the current unpleasantness is over. This would be much cheaper and safer in the long run than bringing them here. Bye-bye.

[AUUSN 823]

This is a drive-by. I don't expect to be back to this thread. However, it occurs to me that we can establish a safe-haven in that part of the world for the refugees and maintain it until the current unpleasantness is over. This would be much cheaper and safer in the long run than bringing them here. Bye-bye.

Like Israel?

Buh Bye

[cooltigger21 0]

So we're banking on this administration getting it right and following some stringent procedure. This is the same administration that delights in not following established procedures. It takes pride in flouting the law and the constitution. We're counting on the eternally corrupt and inept United Nations to not be inept and corrupt. I want some of what you're having. That must be good stuff.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

So we're banking on this administration getting it right and following some stringent procedure. This is the same administration that delights in not following established procedures. It takes pride in flouting the law and the constitution. We're counting on the eternally corrupt and inept United Nations to not be inept and corrupt. I want some of what you're having. That must be good stuff.

It is the same procedure we have used successfully for years if not decades. Good Lord, could you just stop being so partisan for a second and do some damn research for once?