US relaxes strict rules on potential immigrants with limited terrorist links • First action by Obama on immigration since State of Union • Automatic bar lifted for giving ‘limited material support’ Associated Press in Washington Sunday 9 February 2014 15.20 GMT The Obama administration has eased the rules for would-be asylum-seekers, refugees and others who hope to come to or stay in the US and who gave “limited” support to terrorists or terrorist groups. The change is one of President Barack Obama’s first actions on immigration since he pledged during his State of the Union address last month to use more executive directives. The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department now say that people considered to have provided “limited material support” to terrorists or terrorist groups are no longer automatically barred from the US. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/09/us-relaxes-rules-immigrants-terrorist-links Obama is insane?
This is exactly why the republicans are right not to trust him on anything, immigration or otherwise. They attempted to rationalize this policy by saying these are people who perhaps were coerced into assisting terrorists or maybe it was just incidental, like letting somone stay at your house. The problems are manifold however. First, how do we know they were coerced? We would end up having to take their word for it. No potential for mistakes there, right? Second, why is this so important that we would risk letting in terrorist supporters? It is not like legitimate aylum seekers couldn't go elsewhere. Why is it our responsibility? It's not like we have never had any problems with asylum seekers. I guess the obama administration has already forgot about the Boston bombing. What this is about is influential pressure groups like CAIR have access to the highest levels of the state Department and push this kind of stuff. The administration is obviously very sympathetic to radical muslims and willing to put the rest of us in jeopardy to accommodate them.
I'll put it in even simpler terms. It's not like we're in desperate need of more Muslims in our country.
Exactly. We should be looking for ways to keep them out, not let even more in. Liberals are so irrational. They despise Christians because of gays and abortion. Yet they seem to idolize muslims, who regularly stone gays to death, treat women like live stock and ban abortion.
I know AAA knows this since he once posted this or a very similar coulter column. But, Coulter explains here its not just hypocrisy... it is a plan... http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/05/america-nears-a-demographic-tipping-point/ I apologize to America’s young people, whose dashed dreams and dim employment prospects I had laughed at, believing these to be a direct result of their voting for Obama. On closer examination, it turns out that young voters, aged 18-29, overwhelmingly supported Romney. But only the white ones. According to Pew Research, 54 percent of white voters under 30 voted for Romney and only 41 percent voted for Obama. That’s the same percentage Reagan got from the entire white population in 1980. Even the Lena Dunham demographic — white women under 30 — slightly favored Romney. Reagan got just 43 percent of young voters in 1980 — and that was when whites were 88 percent of the electorate. Only 58 percent of today’s under-30 vote is white and it’s shrinking daily. What the youth vote shows is not that young people are nitwits who deserve lives of misery and joblessness, as I had previously believed, but that America is hitting the tipping point on our immigration policy. The youth vote is a snapshot of elections to come if nothing is done to reverse the deluge of unskilled immigrants pouring into the country as a result of Ted Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act. Eighty-five percent of legal immigrants since 1968 have come from the Third World. A majority of them are in need of government assistance. Whites are 76 percent of the electorate over the age of 30 and only 58 percent of the electorate under 30. Obama won the “youth vote” because it is the knife’s edge of a demographic shift, not because he offered the kids free tuition and contraception (which they don’t need because it’s hard to have sex when you’re living with your parents at 27). In 1980, Hispanics were only 2 percent of the population, and they tended to be educated, skilled workers who got married, raised their children in two-parent families and sent their kids to college before they, too, got married and had kids. (In that order.) That profile has nothing to do with recent Hispanic immigrants, who — because of phony “family reunification” rules — are the poorest of the world’s poor. More than half of all babies born to Hispanic women today are illegitimate. As Heather MacDonald has shown, the birthrate of Hispanic women is twice that of the rest of the population, and their unwed birthrate is one and a half times that of blacks. That’s a lot of government dependents coming down the pike. No amount of “reaching out” to the Hispanic community, effective “messaging” or Reagan’s “optimism” is going to turn Mexico’s underclass into Republicans. Any election analysis that doesn’t deal with the implacable fact of America’s changing demographics is bound to be wrong. Perhaps the reason elections maven Michael Barone was so shockingly off in his election prediction this year was that, in the biggest mistake of his career, Barone has been assuring us for years that most of these Third World immigrants pouring into the country would go the way of Italian immigrants and become Republicans. They’re hard-working! They have family values! Maybe at first, but not after coming here, having illegitimate children and going on welfare.
The American Gestpo is meant for YOU, dummy. Not terrorists. If Obama doesn't issue a green-card to a terrorist, he can walk right across the Southern border. Real easy, chumps.
It's almost like they're inviting something bad to happen. OTOH, libs have always believed if we treat our enemies like friends, they'll like us and would never think of hurting us.