Home » Our insane immigration vetting

Comments

Our insane immigration vetting — 18 Comments

  1. I note that the policy in question only referred to “foreign citizens”. You can bet that the U.S. government is closely monitoring the social media of all us gun-toting, bible-thumping, bitter-clingers.

  2. What objective basis is there for the assumption that the administration’s ‘incompetence’ is NOT entirely intentional?

    The federal agencies charged with the protection of America are being intentionally hamstrung, hindered, obstructed and, you can ‘take to the bank’ that when all else fails, outright threatened by this administration.

    “FBI Neglect of San Bernardino Crime Scene Fits a Pattern”

    “DHS Whistleblower: Investigation That Would Have Flagged CA Attackers Shut Down Due To Profiling Fears”

    BTW, the ‘troublemaker’ was forced out for actually doing his job.

  3. Geoffrey Britain:

    Who said it wasn’t intentional?

    It’s intentional. But why it is the administration’s intent is another story. Maybe the administration wants to exploit smaller terrorist attacks for their “bigger” agenda like gun control, and to get more power. They are gambling the attacks won’t be huge enough to cause a backlash.

    Or, alternatively, they just don’t care about that, but they care about pandering to their base.

    Of, alternatively, they want America to be attacked because they are in league with terrorists (I don’t subscribe to that one).

    Or they really think that what they’re doing is sufficient and isn’t risky at all, because they are omniscient and omnipotent.

  4. That’s why I said in an earlier post that you cannot design an effective vetting process for immigrants. One third of the country doesn’t want one and they are the bureaucracy.

  5. Just because they are not Americans doesn’t mean they are not citizens and just as good and entitled as you are. So there. Or something.

  6. So, Bill Clinton’s people stopped information sharing between intelligence agencies.

    And Bush, after 7 months in office was blindsided, and we wound up with 9/11 to the great glee of the left … whose only regret was, per Michael Moore, that it killed people in the wrong part of the country.

    Bush of course was blamed for not listening to a vague agenda driven holdover from the previous administration.

    Now, as Obama weakens and undermines our security, it will be up to his successor to pick up the pieces. If it is a Republican, he may even be successful in fact, if not reputation.

    Liberals are so determined to self-destruct that there is nothing you can do to save them; and affiliating with them will only kill you sooner or later. Probably sooner by the looks of things.

  7. Its the never let a crisis go to waste in order to promote a political agenda mindset. They want to use terrorist attacks to push their ‘gun control’ agenda. It must really p*ss them off that they are promoting firearm purchases in record numbers.

    The only effective ‘gun control’ is the self-exercised trigger finger control of the gun owner

  8. social media messages are often used as part of the screening process. But not as part of the screening process for letting people into this country? Absurd.

    And ID is required everywhere but the voting booth..
    its racist…or so i am told…

  9. One of the Left’s failings, at least with me, is that I have too good a memory. I see plenty of evidence on Neoneocon that there are too many others who are rocky soil for the growth of the propaganda memes. So, I remember, and I know that y’all do too, the constant complaints that Gitmo detainees were not Mirandized, etc, thus tainting efforts to prosecute them, as if we ever intended to prosecute these fools. Now, that doesn’t matter any more, I guess, so they spoil a crime scene, don’t dust for prints, etc.

  10. The jihadista of San Bernardino, Malik Tashfeen, passed three DHS background checks when immigrating to the United States. The Obama administration looks the other way when it comes to social media postings- on the part of immigrants. Tashfeen openly supported violent jihad but in the Obama regime that’s not a disqualifier. The boss at DHS wouldn’t allow it.

    Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson resisted calls last year to allow immigration agents to review visa applicants’ social media activity because of fear of “bad public relations,” according to a former agency official.

    “During that time period immigration officials were not allowed to use or view social media as part of the screening process,” John Cohen, a former under-secretary at DHS for intelligence and analysis, told ABC News, where he now works as a national security consultant.

    contrasted with

    Obama and Johnson, however, do approve of monitoring the social media of American citizens.

    In its “National Operations Center Media Monitoring Capability Desktop Reference Binder,” published in 2011, DHS encouraged agents to compile reports based upon a list of items of interest (IOI) which included discussions on sites like Twitter and Facebook about “policy directives, debates and implementations related to DHS.”

    Ginger McCall, whose group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, obtained the manual through a Freedom of Information Act request, told The New York Times in 2012 said that DHS was essentially monitoring the Internet “for criticism of the government.”

    Apparently that is “who we are.” – author of above, see flopping aces…

  11. Obama sprang Ibrahim Qosi in 2012. Where’d he end up?

    Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) released a new video featuring a former Guantanamo detainee, Ibrahim Qosi, who is also known as Sheikh Khubayb al Sudani.

    In July 2010, Qosi plead guilty to charges of conspiracy and material support for terrorism before a military commission. His plea was part of a deal in which he agreed to cooperate with prosecutors during his remaining time in US custody. Qosi was transferred to his home country of Sudan two years later, in July 2012.

    Qosi joined AQAP in 2014 and became one of its leaders. Qosi and other AQAP commanders discussed their time waging jihad at length in the video, entitled “Guardians of Sharia.”

    and

    Obama is releasing dangerous terrorists and outright lying about it:

    President Barack Obama says his administration will continue releasing terrorists from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, so long as those released are less dangerous than the jihadists currently fighting against the U.S. and its interests.

    The bizarre argument comes in a new interview with Olivier Knox of Yahoo! News and is one of several comments in their discussion that reinforces the president’s stubborn nonchalance on issues related to jihad. Obama also shrugs off concerns about recidivism of former Guantanamo detainees, suggesting that only a “handful” of former detainees have returned to the fight and claiming that only “low-level” terrorists have been released from the detention facility. Both claims are demonstrably false.

  12. Mark Steyn: Celebrating a Deserter in the Rose Garden

    “If there were a real press in this country, someone would ask Obama how it is that he became the first president to host a Rose Garden celebration for a deserter.”

    All of a piece. So we’ll have little surprise that direct questions won’t be demanded of President VettBitterClingers

  13. Actually this has a lot more to do with the kind of short shrift of thinking when the left constructs laws and actions. their namby pamby pacifism makes for a very dysfunctional system, which like the soviet union, is not able to adapt or contradict itself in an attempt to be safe.

    the most easily examined example of this is the use of Title IX… which was warned, and now is causing a huge amount of issues accross the board.

    ie. movie claims that students rape culture exists

    harvard professors get together like the duke professors, but instead stand up for a student whose action was examined by a grand jury and he was absolved.

    now harvard is facing the potential of losing all its federal money IF a woman says that calling the film a propaganda piece is a hostile environment, just as letting a innocent man go free of rape is also a hostile invironment.

    Meet The Taxpayer-Funded Administrator Who Thinks Title IX Supersedes The US Constitution
    http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/11/college-administrator-thinks-title-ix-supersedes-us-constitution/

    Harvard Law Professors Slam School’s New Sexual Misconduct Policy
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/15/harvard-law-professors-slam-schools-new-sexual-misconduct-policy/

    Professors Threatened With Investigation For Questioning Rape Documentary
    http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/14/professors-threatened-with-investigation-for-questioning-rape-documentary/

    the gist is that whatever a non reasonable (As reasonable woman doctrine was abandoned a long time gao), wacko feminist calls hostile, the schools and the society have to change it to make it equal.

    for some reason, people who are supposed to be equal but superior, who can fight in battle and do everything a man can do, have to have their environment completely set up and protected in their favor or else its hostile and may keep them out which would be denying their equality.

    this is the same thing with the islamists, as the hostile environment is what we are rebelling against in terms of trumps saying stop the flow, or using social media, etc.

    ie. use social media against the foreigner its a hostile environment, use it against a citizen, and its socialisms state monitoring its cows for compliance.

    its inane logic that refuses to back peddle bad ideas and isntead heap fixes or other positions on top till society and its rules resemble a rube goldberg machine.

    we are about one complaint away from men having to leave college as their presence makes for a hostile environment… making us go full circle to separate but eqal, the old segregation of the progressives by race, gender, orientation, etc.

    a land of separate camps that cant deal with each other and white men exterminated as no camp wants them (see list of comments from clinton to others as to exterminating white males!!! i would put some up but censored for whatever reason prevents me… whether automatic by size, content, number of posts, etc… so i am trying to avoid wasting time telling you what will be erased anyway… now you get less even if it would not be cut out!)

    add to this the ideas of white privelege and you get a recipe that preventing things is a hostile environment whites have constructed to protect their society an preserve white supremacy.. (though little is said of chinese supremey in china, japanese supremecy in japan, or even the same in the country of the people claiming it here!!!)
    [edited for length by n-n]

  14. Leon Aron: Why Can’t Obama Catch Up with Putin’s Increasingly Bold Moves?

    […] “Specifically, one is drawn to ask: what caused this policy to be so dismal, so strewn with mistakes, so strikingly unable to predict Moscow’s behavior or to catch up with Vladimir Putin’s increasingly bold moves?

    Between historical explanations based in theories of conspiracy and those premised on assumptions of incompetence, it’s usually prudent to plump for incompetence; or so we’re told. But a number of those advising President Obama on Russia are personally known to me to be quite competent, so that explanation won’t wash. Doran offers a different explanation, one that focuses on the beliefs of the president. Barack Obama, he writes, is ideologically wedded to a strategic understanding that is at once false, impervious to correction by reality, and unswayable by the counsel of advisers. This may well be so, but the problem may also be deeper and require elaboration.

    […] It is as if Obama were daily consulting the key precepts of realist doctrine: ignore a regime’s ideology and domestic behavior; do not meddle in its internal affairs; do not “preach” or “reprimand” or “advocate” anything, least of all “democracy”; respect the regime’s “national interests” and stick to negotiating on that basis–and lo!, from out of the test tube will emerge a “responsible” geopolitical “stakeholder.”

    All of a piece. Peace, on the other hand, can take a hike.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>