Vetting refugees

[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.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

Refugees aren't applying for citizenship.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

Refugees aren't applying for citizenship.

Well, maybe I should have answered this with a Spencism....

You are reading it out of context.....read it again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[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.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

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.

There are records and there is process. Even without perfect records you can learn and verify a lot through process.

Big point is that no refugee can even say they want to go to the US. The UN has to nominate them for resettlement, the refugee has no idea where they are going.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

There are records and there is process. Even without perfect records you can learn and verify a lot through process.

Big point is that no refugee can even say they want to go to the US. The UN has to nominate them for resettlement, the refugee has no idea where they are going.

What records exist in these tent camps and mountaintop villages, exactly?

"the refugee has no idea where they are going."

So it's not possible ISIS would put a few dozen terrorists in line, in the hopes that any of them end up, or can make their way to, nations that are prime targets.

Forgive me if I consider you 'big point' to be worthless.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

What records exist in these tent camps and mountaintop villages, exactly?

"the refugee has no idea where they are going."

So it's not possible ISIS would put a few dozen terrorists in line, in the hopes that any of them end up, or can make their way to, nations that are prime targets.

Forgive me if I consider you 'big point' to be worthless.

I think the majority of refugees are actually from the cities.

Risking an asset that has a minuscule chance of making it to the US doesn't make a lot of sense.

It's also why the recent attacks in the EU have all been by fighters who were able to return to their country of citizenship.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think the majority of refugees are actually from the cities.

Risking an asset that has a minuscule chance of making it to the US doesn't make a lot of sense.

It's also why the recent attacks in the EU have all been by fighters who were able to return to their country of citizenship.

"I think the majority of refugees are actually from the cities."

Funny how your "thoughts" support The Narrative with 100% consistency. How do you know? Please support that.

And how do we verify that someone is who he says he is?

Only you would say that investigating a US citizen is harder than vetting people from places that still live in the 9th century.