Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Bud's Message to International Students
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Whiskey_Clear" data-source="post: 291492" data-attributes="member: 735"><p>Thoughtful post but way too long for me to respond to point by point. So I'll try and hit the highlights for the most part.</p><p></p><p>As to Tech students. I honestly give Tech students no more regard than students of any other school with regard to this debate. Students in good standing with no criminal history will likely have their visa process expedited once vetting is resolved but until then, they will have to wait for the process to unfold.</p><p></p><p>The majority of prior attacks here in the U.S. may not have come from the group of 7 nations. While understanding what has occurred is important, looking back in that manner is not necessarily the best way to prevent FUTURE attacks. That is best done by evaluating the current situation internationally and evaluating trends. And that responibilty lies solely within the purview of the executive branch; whether you agree with the current administration and current policies or not. And let me point out once again the prior administration enacted a ban on the same seven countries. Did you oppose that?</p><p></p><p>If you think no citizens of those 7 countries hate America, and are thus no threat to cause violence here, you are indeed naive in my opinion. Your advocacy of "taking in refugees" to foster love instead of "barring them" creating hate....well that simply smacks of appeasement quite honestly and I think that is also a very naive sentiment.</p><p></p><p>The FBI simply does not have the manpower to closely monitor even a small number of the refugees we have already granted asylum to. To believe otherwise is simple ignorance. Not to mention the Constitutional protections these refugees have once they are here which prevent many forms of surveillance without a search warrant, and thus probable cause to believe they have or are committing criminal acts. Once here it is extremely difficult to "closely monitor them." Your definition of close monitoring may be vastly different than mine however.</p><p></p><p>As to your point on legal immigration and worth / value a potential immigrant brings. As I stated previously I support legal immigration. My prior post was in reference, primarily, to immigrants passing through Ellis Island. I was referring to things I have read but none I can source directly at the moment. In the earily 1900's though certain things were grounds to bar immigration. Disease was one, a likelihood to be unable to support oneself was another. So if a potential immigrant had currency with them that was usually not a concern. If not they could still prove they would be self sufficient if educated, skilled in a trade, etc. The laws governing all that were likely driven by some nationalist sentiments of the time. This point is probably worthy of a separate post or another thread altogether but feel free to correct me where I'm wrong. (My index finger is starting to cramp typing on my phone)</p><p></p><p>As to the humanitarian argument, providing safe shelter for these people residing in war torn countries. In what way are they America's responsibility? Answer that please. I don't give a rat's hindquarters if you think I'm "inhumane" for not wishing to grant them unquestioned asylum. As to the leaders of any country that takes exception to this ban or any other restriction we have on immigration...Eff them. Their sorry asses can grant asylum to every "refugee" in the world their damn selves...problem solved.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Whiskey_Clear, post: 291492, member: 735"] Thoughtful post but way too long for me to respond to point by point. So I'll try and hit the highlights for the most part. As to Tech students. I honestly give Tech students no more regard than students of any other school with regard to this debate. Students in good standing with no criminal history will likely have their visa process expedited once vetting is resolved but until then, they will have to wait for the process to unfold. The majority of prior attacks here in the U.S. may not have come from the group of 7 nations. While understanding what has occurred is important, looking back in that manner is not necessarily the best way to prevent FUTURE attacks. That is best done by evaluating the current situation internationally and evaluating trends. And that responibilty lies solely within the purview of the executive branch; whether you agree with the current administration and current policies or not. And let me point out once again the prior administration enacted a ban on the same seven countries. Did you oppose that? If you think no citizens of those 7 countries hate America, and are thus no threat to cause violence here, you are indeed naive in my opinion. Your advocacy of "taking in refugees" to foster love instead of "barring them" creating hate....well that simply smacks of appeasement quite honestly and I think that is also a very naive sentiment. The FBI simply does not have the manpower to closely monitor even a small number of the refugees we have already granted asylum to. To believe otherwise is simple ignorance. Not to mention the Constitutional protections these refugees have once they are here which prevent many forms of surveillance without a search warrant, and thus probable cause to believe they have or are committing criminal acts. Once here it is extremely difficult to "closely monitor them." Your definition of close monitoring may be vastly different than mine however. As to your point on legal immigration and worth / value a potential immigrant brings. As I stated previously I support legal immigration. My prior post was in reference, primarily, to immigrants passing through Ellis Island. I was referring to things I have read but none I can source directly at the moment. In the earily 1900's though certain things were grounds to bar immigration. Disease was one, a likelihood to be unable to support oneself was another. So if a potential immigrant had currency with them that was usually not a concern. If not they could still prove they would be self sufficient if educated, skilled in a trade, etc. The laws governing all that were likely driven by some nationalist sentiments of the time. This point is probably worthy of a separate post or another thread altogether but feel free to correct me where I'm wrong. (My index finger is starting to cramp typing on my phone) As to the humanitarian argument, providing safe shelter for these people residing in war torn countries. In what way are they America's responsibility? Answer that please. I don't give a rat's hindquarters if you think I'm "inhumane" for not wishing to grant them unquestioned asylum. As to the leaders of any country that takes exception to this ban or any other restriction we have on immigration...Eff them. Their sorry asses can grant asylum to every "refugee" in the world their damn selves...problem solved. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who won the ACC Coach of the Year Award in 2014?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Bud's Message to International Students
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top