Guest Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 What about the legal people who are paying taxes, working for companies like Tesla,Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook etc. and making America great now? Many of these highly skilled people are stuck in limbo in h1-b, green card process. We should get these folks visa first.. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted November 17, 2015 Author Share Posted November 17, 2015 What about the legal people who are paying taxes, working for companies like Tesla,Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook etc. and making America great now? Many of these highly skilled people are stuck in limbo in h1-b, green card process. We should get these folks visa first.. Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." This doesn't worry me too much. I doubt that was pulled off by Syrian refugees. To me it sounds like an inside job by someone who knew that the alarms were disabled. There are plenty of guns in the US already, a dozen more aren't going to make a difference, and I'd much rather the guns be in the hands of civilians than the government anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 I think it's a little alarming if people have "no concerns." There is plenty of evidence (both here and abroad) that refugees have already caused terrorist attacks (both thwarted and not). I fail to see why we should take on the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted November 17, 2015 Author Share Posted November 17, 2015 Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." This doesn't worry me too much. I doubt that was pulled off by Syrian refugees. To me it sounds like an inside job by someone who knew that the alarms were disabled. There are plenty of guns in the US already, a dozen more aren't going to make a difference, and I'd much rather the guns be in the hands of civilians than the government anyway. If you buy guns legally, you have to register with FBI background check. Since you know that FBI knows you have guns, you will be more careful when you use it, and I don't think you can buy M4 assault rifles? If you steal guns, you don't need to go through any checks. That's day and night's difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." This doesn't worry me too much. I doubt that was pulled off by Syrian refugees. To me it sounds like an inside job by someone who knew that the alarms were disabled. There are plenty of guns in the US already, a dozen more aren't going to make a difference, and I'd much rather the guns be in the hands of civilians than the government anyway. If you buy guns legally, you have to register with FBI background check. Since you know that FBI knows you have guns, you will be more careful when you use it, and I don't think you can buy M4 assault rifles? If you steal guns, you don't need to go through any checks. That's day and night's difference. I don't see myself being any less careful with my guns depending upon what the FBI knows about me. I also can't see why someone planning a terrorist attack would care much about what the FBI knows about them. They usually plan to die committing the attack, to make Allah happy. You can buy semi-auto only versions of the M4 (basically an M16 with a shorter barrel), but you are correct that the select-fire version is probably what was stolen and you can not buy them. Although you should be able to. I'm not a supporter of background checks, gun registration, or limits on the types of guns you can buy or own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTEJD1997 Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." This doesn't worry me too much. I doubt that was pulled off by Syrian refugees. To me it sounds like an inside job by someone who knew that the alarms were disabled. There are plenty of guns in the US already, a dozen more aren't going to make a difference, and I'd much rather the guns be in the hands of civilians than the government anyway. If you buy guns legally, you have to register with FBI background check. Since you know that FBI knows you have guns, you will be more careful when you use it, and I don't think you can buy M4 assault rifles? If you steal guns, you don't need to go through any checks. That's day and night's difference. Muscleman: Yes, a "civilian" can buy M4 assault rifles....You can also buy them WITHOUT ID or any government check/regulation. You must pass a background check WHEN PURCHASING FROM A FFL DEALER. If you are buying from an individual "second hand", the only check is that they ask you if you are felon/criminal. If you are not, you are good to go...If you are a felon/criminal, the seller can't sell, and you can't buy. Another way to purchase rifles is to buy "partially assembled" "lowers". These are not fully formed guns...but they simply require drilling of a hole to complete them. This is also a very inexpensive way. Please see: http://aresarmor.com/store/Category/hmgar15 An individual can also purchase fully automatic machine guns and silencers. These are "class III" weapons, and are heavily regulated. Both the purchaser & seller have to have a "tax stamp" & other paper work. They are also heavily regulated in their movement...I know people who have done this. It is expensive and heavily regulated. Machine guns will sell for $10k, sometimes even more, depending on the model. Almost no crime is committed with these weapons... If you don't want to pay $10k + and still want an "automatic" rifle...you can simply buy a "bumpfire" kit. These cost about $75 or so. I think they only work with AR-15's & AKs...Very odd item, please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7DTjSla-O8 There is NO central FEDERAL registry of who owns what weapons. The background check simply checks to make sure you are eligible to purchase and that you are not buying 30 rifles (at one time) or other unusual activity. These records are also supposedly not held on the federal level for longer than 24 hrs. Depending on where you live (state level), you may be required to register pistols/handguns. Of course, most enlightened states don't do this. On a different note, I am concerned on MANY different levels about immigration...but that is a different response... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borgesian Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/11/16/3722838/all-paris-attackers-identified-so-far-are-european-nationals-according-to-top-eu-official/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Guys. I think you are mixing up the question of having immigrants into the US vs having ISIS infiltration through the immigration system, and this post is supposed to discuss the later, or the former. US is built by immigrants and we are all immigrants if we look back for 300 years. I definitely agree that we have a great immigrant system and we should not shutdown immigration. However, when you see Syrian refugees coming all looking like strong males and you see no kids or women, I would be surprised that you are not concerned if they are real refugees or not. This has nothing to do with discrimination. More bad news: http://www.weaselzippers.us/240022-breaking-fbi-on-high-alert-after-weapons-stolen-from-u-s-army-armory-in-worcester-ma/ "The U.S. Army Reserve armory in Worcester, Massachusetts was broken into Saturday night and more than a dozen guns were stolen, a law enforcement source tells The Daily Beast. Six M4 assault rifles, ten pistols, and several long guns were taken from the armory, according to the source. The break-in was discovered this morning. The armory’s alarms did not go off, according to the source who added they may have been disabled due to ongoing construction." This doesn't worry me too much. I doubt that was pulled off by Syrian refugees. To me it sounds like an inside job by someone who knew that the alarms were disabled. There are plenty of guns in the US already, a dozen more aren't going to make a difference, and I'd much rather the guns be in the hands of civilians than the government anyway. If you buy guns legally, you have to register with FBI background check. Since you know that FBI knows you have guns, you will be more careful when you use it, and I don't think you can buy M4 assault rifles? If you steal guns, you don't need to go through any checks. That's day and night's difference. Muscleman: Yes, a "civilian" can buy M4 assault rifles....You can also buy them WITHOUT ID or any government check/regulation. You must pass a background check WHEN PURCHASING FROM A FFL DEALER. If you are buying from an individual "second hand", the only check is that they ask you if you are felon/criminal. If you are not, you are good to go...If you are a felon/criminal, the seller can't sell, and you can't buy. Another way to purchase rifles is to buy "partially assembled" "lowers". These are not fully formed guns...but they simply require drilling of a hole to complete them. This is also a very inexpensive way. Please see: http://aresarmor.com/store/Category/hmgar15 An individual can also purchase fully automatic machine guns and silencers. These are "class III" weapons, and are heavily regulated. Both the purchaser & seller have to have a "tax stamp" & other paper work. They are also heavily regulated in their movement...I know people who have done this. It is expensive and heavily regulated. Machine guns will sell for $10k, sometimes even more, depending on the model. Almost no crime is committed with these weapons... If you don't want to pay $10k + and still want an "automatic" rifle...you can simply buy a "bumpfire" kit. These cost about $75 or so. I think they only work with AR-15's...not sure about AK's though... There is NO central FEDERAL registry of who owns what weapons. The background check simply checks to make sure you are eligible to purchase and that you are not buying 30 rifles (at one time) or other unusual activity. These records are also supposedly not held on the federal level for longer than 24 hrs. Depending on where you live (state level), you may be required to register pistols/handguns. Of course, most enlightened states don't do this. On a different note, I am concerned on MANY different levels about immigration...but that is a different response... You forgot to mention that thanks to Ronald Reagan's gun control laws, you can only transfer machine guns manufactured and registered with the ATF before May 19, 1986. If the M4s were select fire and manufactured after that date it would be impossible for a civilian to own them (legally anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5126bbb4e4b08c2e6d1cb6e4/t/517d4105e4b065cfbf62bbd1/1367163143250 Sketching the SS St. Louis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5126bbb4e4b08c2e6d1cb6e4/t/517d4105e4b065cfbf62bbd1/1367163143250 Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Apple, meet Orange. Oh yeah, that's right, this time we have a reason other than bigotry, even though every generation thinks this. Syrians are violent terrorists with a different religion and culture. Remember history doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme. Ok so how about this one: Irish Immigrant Stereotypes and American Racism http://picturinghistory.gc.cuny.edu/images/WildBeast-pg.jpg "The Most Recently Discovered Wild Beast" (1881) is one of a series of nineteenth-century images portraying the Irish as violent and subhuman. In the U.S. survey I use images of this sort when examining the history of anti-immigrant prejudice and its relationship to American racism. Native-born Americans criticized Irish immigrants for their poverty and manners, their supposed laziness and lack of discipline, their public drinking style, their catholic religion, and their capacity for criminality and collective violence. in both words and pictures, critics of the Irish measured character by perceived physical appearance. Political cartoons such as the "Wild Beast" offered an exaggerated version of these complaints. The Irish-American "Dynamite Skunk," clad in patriotic stars and stripes, has diabolical ears and feet and he sports an extraordinary tail. around his waist he is wearing an "infernal machine," a terrorist bomb that was usually disguised as a harmless everyday object, in this case a book.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. You posted this while I was typing my last reply. Great minds think alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. Apple: 908 refugees, and there was no credible the threat of that boat being infiltrated Jewish agents of war hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. Orange: 100,000 refugees, and there is a credible threat of the Syrian refugees being infiltrated ISIS Jihadists hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. Apple: 908 refugees, and there was no credible the threat of that boat being infiltrated Jewish agents of war hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. Orange: 100,000 refugees, and there is a credible threat of the Syrian refugees being infiltrated ISIS Jihadists hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. People fleeing violence and persecution and being turned away because of fear and prejudice seems like similar fruit to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisdom Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Italian immigrants went through a similar experience after the Irish. Human nature doesn't change much. Anything different is a threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalab Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 What about the Somalis? Looks like they are the largest group coming in. http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/refugees-in-u-s-state-drawn-to-welfare-jihad/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. Apple: 908 refugees, and there was no credible the threat of that boat being infiltrated Jewish agents of war hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. Orange: 100,000 refugees, and there is a credible threat of the Syrian refugees being infiltrated ISIS Jihadists hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. People fleeing violence and persecution and being turned away because of fear and prejudice seems like similar fruit to me. If you can't see the basic difference here then I can't help, good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Where are they getting their data? http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kentucky-terror-case-waad-ramadan-alwan-mohanad-shareef/story?id=13727518 "They were indicted for allegedly providing assistance to Al Qaeda in Iraq and attempting to send weapons overseas. The men were living in the United States and had been granted refugee status, despite their insurgency activities in Iraq and their role in attacking U.S. troops. ' Let me guess...indicted but not arrested? ::) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palantir Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I'm just more worried about diabetes/cancer/getting hit by a bus/car accident than dying in a terrorist attack... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sys Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 not domestic. a bit of a loophole, to be sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 From the June 6, 1939 Daily Mirror. Sketching the SS St. Louis Apple, meet Orange. Is it really though? The quote about history not repeating, but rhyming comes to mind. Apple: 908 refugees, and there was no credible the threat of that boat being infiltrated Jewish agents of war hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. Orange: 100,000 refugees, and there is a credible threat of the Syrian refugees being infiltrated ISIS Jihadists hellbent on mass destruction of innocent lives inside the USA. People fleeing violence and persecution and being turned away because of fear and prejudice seems like similar fruit to me. If you can't see the basic difference here then I can't help, good luck. Here is a much better comparison than than I was able to construct, maybe this helps: http://www.nationalreview.com/syrian-refugees-arent-1939s-jews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I would go so far as to host them in my home for the first few months while they figure things out. are you actually going to do this? I would be open to it, I am not at this point in time going out to actively seek such an opportunity. Right now my life is fairly busy with 3 young kids and our spare bedroom is already occupied but an 18 year old student who's parents are abroad. So I am not seeking it out but if the opportunity sought me out I would see if we could accommodate them. The government might have something to say about it though. These Groups Have An Idea To Help Syrian Refugees: Let People Sponsor Them "Every single day we get phone calls from Americans who want to privately sponsor a refugee," said Omar Hossino of the Syrian American Council. "But since the private sponsorship is not legal, it's not an option, the government doesn't permit that, they're unable to do that." I think the problem is that the Republicans don't want the refugees here at all and the Democrats would rather funnel them into the welfare system where they will become multigenerational dependants on government (and thus become multigenerational Democratic voters). The last thing either party wants is for private people to bring them here, sponsor them, and help them get on their feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I would go so far as to host them in my home for the first few months while they figure things out. are you actually going to do this? I would be open to it, I am not at this point in time going out to actively seek such an opportunity. Right now my life is fairly busy with 3 young kids and our spare bedroom is already occupied but an 18 year old student who's parents are abroad. So I am not seeking it out but if the opportunity sought me out I would see if we could accommodate them. The government might have something to say about it though. These Groups Have An Idea To Help Syrian Refugees: Let People Sponsor Them "Every single day we get phone calls from Americans who want to privately sponsor a refugee," said Omar Hossino of the Syrian American Council. "But since the private sponsorship is not legal, it's not an option, the government doesn't permit that, they're unable to do that." I think the problem is that the Republicans don't want the refugees here at all and the Democrats would rather funnel them into the welfare system where they will become multigenerational dependants on government (and thus become multigenerational Democratic voters). The last thing either party wants is for private people to bring them here, sponsor them, and help them get on their feet. I'd support private sponsorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now