- Do you understand that the attacks in Paris weren't committed by Syrian refugees but rather by Belgians and disenfranchised French citizens?
- Do you understand that if people show up at US borders without a visa and rush onto trains, or washes up on our shores, they aren't treated politically as refugees but rather "EWI/undocumented immigrant/illegal immigrant"? (ie. things don't work the same here as you see on TV in Europe).
- Do you understand that the US refugee process is much more complicated than in Europe? It takes years to get approvals and involves significant vetting. Anyone being admitted as a refugee from Syria right now must have left and started applying years ago.
If so, please call or write your congressperson, senator, governor and ask them to push for allowing, not blocking, Syrian refugees in the US.
I was at a talk by Madeleine Albright last night and she suggested this. Our elected officials and representatives are getting deluged with calls from uninformed xenophobes. Even those in "liberal" areas are getting calls. Let's be the voice of reason.
Post by marshmallowmars on Nov 18, 2015 12:21:44 GMT -5
I will definitely be writing to my congresspeople/senator and douchebag governor.Thank you for this. Also, I've been wanting to post this for awhile and seems appropriate here, lol.
Post by lizard1131 on Nov 18, 2015 12:35:29 GMT -5
I didn't realize that the refugees were not the ones currently fleeing, and had applied years ago. Where are they right now? What 'good' does it do if we aren't taking the people fleeing right now? (I mean this as in why aren't we taking people like Europe does?) Why did the FBI guy say that we have no way to accurately clear people? I thought he was saying that it would be more like a rush of people.
What good? They are still refugees who fled Syria because of some sort of oppression and have been able to prove it to our department of state.
The good it does is give a permanent home to someone who previously fled the country. Some of the current refugees are starting the process to come to the US. After they have jumped through a million hoops they may be admitted in a year or two. If legislation is passed banning Syrian refugees, all of them will be affected - those who fled in the past and any currently fleeing who seek future refuge.
FBI is not State. It isn't the CIA. FBI deals with domestic issues. Any FBI agent commenting on international issues might as well be your cousin the mechanic. (I'm not familiar with the FBI guy you mention and his specific statement so I can't address it's specifics).
Post by lizard1131 on Nov 18, 2015 12:47:57 GMT -5
I don't think I expressed myself well. Obviously, it is a good thing that those refugees are welcome here for all the reasons you mentioned. I envisioned it being more like it is in Europe. Are the people awaiting asylum in camps somewhere safe-ish? I guess I meant if they are relatively safe and have started the process, then why aren't we taking the people in the boats, etc that seem to be in a worse situation.
ETA: Why is this FBI yahoo they only one talking? Why hasn't there been a PR campaign to dispell the myth about vetting?
Another factor is that states can't legally discriminate for aid programs. So the only way they can attempt to deter refugees from entering their state is to eliminate those programs. Programs that people already depend on.
I don't think I expressed myself well. Obviously, it is a good thing that those refugees are welcome here for all the reasons you mentioned. I envisioned it being more like it is in Europe. Are the people awaiting asylum in camps somewhere safe-ish? I guess I meant if they are relatively safe and have started the process, then why aren't we taking the people in the boats, etc that seem to be in a worse situation.
ETA: Why is this FBI yahoo they only one talking? Why hasn't there been a PR campaign to dispell the myth about vetting?
We have a bad history when it comes to turning away desperate refugees in boats. Unless those refugees are Cuban, of course.
I don't think I expressed myself well. Obviously, it is a good thing that those refugees are welcome here for all the reasons you mentioned. I envisioned it being more like it is in Europe. Are the people awaiting asylum in camps somewhere safe-ish? I guess I meant if they are relatively safe and have started the process, then why aren't we taking the people in the boats, etc that seem to be in a worse situation.
ETA: Why is this FBI yahoo they only one talking? Why hasn't there been a PR campaign to dispell the myth about vetting?
We have a bad history when it comes to turning away desperate refugees in boats. Unless those people are Cuban, of course.
Agreed. I guess it is just more frustration on my part. There is so much misinformation and hysteria. It shouldn't take TWO YEARS for asylum. AND WHY WOULD A TERRORIST WAIT FOR REFUGEE STATUS!? Just come here on vacation!
Another factor is that statescan't legally discriminate for aid programs. So the only way they can attempt to deter refugees from entering their state is to eliminate those programs. Programs that people already depend on.
What do you mean? Can't discriminate based upon nation of origin? Can't discriminate based upon immigration status? Can't discriminate among those with legal residence in the US? Can't discriminate between citizens and non-citizens? I'm puzzled by what you mean so I don't know if I agree or not.
We have a bad history when it comes to turning away desperate refugees in boats. Unless those people are Cuban, of course.
Agreed. I guess it is just more frustration on my part. There is so much misinformation and hysteria. It shouldn't take TWO YEARS for asylum. AND WHY WOULD A TERRORIST WAIT FOR REFUGEE STATUS!? Just come here on vacation!
We had a rep with the school district come talk to our counseling department about refugee students. She said it takes 7 years, on average, to be processed, and can take as long as 25 years.
Another factor is that statescan't legally discriminate for aid programs. So the only way they can attempt to deter refugees from entering their state is to eliminate those programs. Programs that people already depend on.
What do you mean? Can't discriminate based upon nation of origin? Can't discriminate based upon immigration status? Can't discriminate among those with legal residence in the US? Can't discriminate between citizens and non-citizens? I'm puzzled by what you mean so I don't know if I agree or not.
I think she means they can't legally turn refugees away? That power is held by the President, thanks to the Refugee Act.
But they can cut the aid programs' funding off at the knees to discourage refugees from coming to their states. I know our governor is currently looking into ways that the authority to turn refugees away can be given to states (he's one of the assholes that has vowed to stop Syrian refugees coming to our state). Something about "special exceptions" listed in the Refugee Act?
I don't think I expressed myself well. Obviously, it is a good thing that those refugees are welcome here for all the reasons you mentioned. I envisioned it being more like it is in Europe. Are the people awaiting asylum in camps somewhere safe-ish? I guess I meant if they are relatively safe and have started the process, then why aren't we taking the people in the boats, etc that seem to be in a worse situation.
ETA: Why is this FBI yahoo they only one talking? Why hasn't there been a PR campaign to dispell the myth about vetting?
I read an article about a refugee family that has resettled here. They were in a refugee camp in Jordan for two years before they were accepted.
I've read stories about refugees in Jordan from the Israeli/Palestine conflict that have been living in the refugee camps for decades. It was a LONG time ago that I read it, but I believe if they leave the camp then they aren't eligible for refugee programs so they just stay there and wait.
Someone please correct me if this is wrong, I read this a long time ago.
Another factor is that statescan't legally discriminate for aid programs. So the only way they can attempt to deter refugees from entering their state is to eliminate those programs. Programs that people already depend on.
What do you mean? Can't discriminate based upon nation of origin? Can't discriminate based upon immigration status? Can't discriminate among those with legal residence in the US? Can't discriminate between citizens and non-citizens? I'm puzzled by what you mean so I don't know if I agree or not.
They can't physically bar anyone from coming into their state once they've been granted access (federally). And then, regarding any relocation assistance programs or settlement programs within their state, all of the protections of the 14th amendment apply. So you can't say "I'm not giving any aid to Syrians" as the governor of a state. Your only option is to defund the programs entirely, potentially hurting a LOT of people just to avoid possibly helping a group of people who, as you pointed out, aren't even the people you've been seeing on TV in recent months.
And to take it a step further, if there weren't constitutional blocks, if they could just say "NO HELP FOR NONCHRISTIAN SYRIANS," there is still nothing stopping a Muslim Syrian refugee from settling over the border in another state that isn't hateful and fucking gross, and then moving their ass to their state, assuming their are jobs or family or whatever wonderful thing they think is going to draw all of the refugees to their state. Probably their winning personalities.
Realize I'm late to the game with this one but if anyone is interested in learning about the refugee process in the United States, you can read more about it here. Really, it's quite a rigorous process.
Post by InBetweenDays on Nov 18, 2015 21:38:32 GMT -5
Oh man, we have a friend who is both Belgian AND works at Starbucks corporate. So now we must assume he's a terrorist and supports a war on Christmas!
In all seriousness, our governor has come out strongly in support of accepting Syrian refugees. However this is a good reminder that we need to show him we support that decision, as I'm sure he's receiving lots of emails/letters from angry people.
Here is a quote from our governor: "I live on Bainbridge Island, this little island just west of Seattle. And it was the first place where we succumbed to fear, in 1941 after Pearl Harbor. And we locked up Washington and American citizens, and we sent them to camps for years while their sons fought in the Army in Italy and were decorated fighting for democracy.We regret that. We regret that we succumbed to fear. We regret that we lost moorage for who we were as a country. We shouldn't do that right now."