America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 years ago by BuckyB93. 36 replies replies.
The problem with perceived conflict of interest
teedubbya Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
From the conservative Koch brothers founded and funded Cato Institute

Little National Security Benefit to Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration
By ALEX NOWRASTEH SHARE
Tomorrow, President Trump is expected to sign an executive order enacting a 30-day suspension of all visas for nationals from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Foreigners from those seven nations have killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and the end of 2015. Six Iranians, six Sudanese, two Somalis, two Iraqis, and one Yemini have been convicted of attempting or carrying out terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. Zero Libyans or Syrians have been convicted of planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil during that time period.

Many other foreigners have been convicted of terrorism-related offenses that did not include planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. One list released by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) details 580 terror-related convictions since 9/11. This incomplete list probably influenced which countries are temporarily banned, and likely provided justification for another section of Trump’s executive order, which directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release all information on foreign-born terrorists going forward, and requires additional DHS reports to study foreign-born terrorism.

I exhaustively evaluated Senator Sessions’ list of convictions based on publicly available data and discovered some startling details.

First, 241 of the convictions (42 percent) were not for terrorism offenses. Senator Sessions puffed his numbers by including “terrorism-related convictions,” a nebulous category that includes investigations that begin due to a terrorism tip but then end in non-terrorism convictions. My favorite examples of this are the convictions of Nasser Abuali, Hussein Abuali, and Rabi Ahmed. An informant told the FBI that the trio tried to purchase a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, but the FBI found no evidence supporting the accusation. The three individuals were instead convicted of receiving two truckloads of stolen cereal. That is a crime but it is not terrorism.

Second, only 40 of the 580 convictions (6.9 percent) were for foreigners planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Seeking to join a foreign terrorist group overseas, material support for a foreign terrorist, and seeking to commit an act of terror on foreign soil account for 180 of the 580 convictions (31 percent). Terrorism on foreign soil is a crime, should be a crime, and those convicted of these offenses should be punished severely but the government cannot claim that these convictions made America safe again because these folks were not targeting U.S. soil.

Third, 92 of the 580 convictions (16 percent) were for U.S. born citizens. No change in immigration law, visa limitations, or more rigorous security checks would have stopped them.

The executive order includes national security exemptions to be made on a case-by-case basis. The President reserves the option to ban the entry of nationals from additional countries in the future based on a national security risk report written by DHS. Furthermore, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security can recommend visa bans for nationals from additional countries at any time.

In addition to the visa restrictions above, Trump’s executive order further cuts the refugee program to 50,000 annually, indefinitely blocks all refugees from Syria, and suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days. This is a response to a phantom menace. From 1975 to the end of 2015, 20 refugees have been convicted of attempting or committing terrorism on U.S. soil, and only three Americans have been killed in attacks committed by refugees—all in the 1970s. Zero Americans have been killed by Syrian refugees in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The annual chance of an American dying in a terrorist attack committed by a refugee is one in 3.6 billion. The other 17 convictions have mainly been for aiding or attempting to join foreign terrorists.

President Trump tweeted earlier this week that executive orders were intended to improve national security by reducing the terrorist threat. However, a rational evaluation of national security threats is not the basis for Trump’s orders, as the risk is fairly small but the cost is great. The measures taken here will have virtually no effect on improving U.S. national security.



So why these countries? One of the things I've heard from multiple sources (some overly dramatic others pretty middle of the road) that each banned country vs non banned have in common is the existence of trump hotels vs lack of them.

Right or wrong ethics 101 values perception.
victor809 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I heard Cato Institute is a Soros plant.
ZRX1200 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Just gonna leave this here.....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/amp/
dstieger Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
ZRX1200 wrote:
/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/




and...Thomas Jefferson made "President Trump" possible...and Edison made the electric chair possible...and Gutenberg made my copy of Mein Kampf possible....
ZRX1200 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
You might wanna read it, there's more there than "blame" there is actually facts about this.....
Mr. Jones Online
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,359
I heard CATO works for the GREENLANTERN
and the KOCH BROTHERS SHIIT SILVER BARS.
Speyside Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
That's silly, it was the Hunt brothers!
victor809 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Clearly TW has stumbled across the solution to terrorism.

If those 7 countries open a trump hotel... they'll be allowed to travel again to the US and terrorism will be solved. Right?
delta1 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
zrx is right, those countries were listed by Obama as having terrorist training grounds...but there are other countries that do also, which are not on the list...not sure why...
teedubbya Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I don't dispute anything in ZRX's post. But tt has nothing to do with a perceived conflict of interest, and I've become accustomed if you post anything about trump it will be followed by a yea but Obama and the evil press. Oh yea... and the press won't tell you..... it's front page CNN
delta1 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
just trying my very hardest to be fair and balanced. But I agree with you about perceived conflict of interest. Trump has invited extensive, and distracting, scrutiny because there are questions about self-dealing in every decision he makes. His failure to release his tax returns and to divest his business interests is a negative to a majority of Americans.
gummy jones Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
teedubbya wrote:
I don't dispute anything in ZRX's post. But tt has nothing to do with a perceived conflict of interest, and I've become accustomed if you post anything about trump it will be followed by a yea but Obama and the evil press. Oh yea... and the press won't tell you..... it's front page CNN


is it official?
can we blame everything on obama the same way obama blamed everything on bush?

i didnt know the time frame involved but was hoping it was soon

or is it still rich white males who are to blame +/- global warming?
ZRX1200 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Nothing to do with the "conflict of interest"?

He didn't come up with the fuggin list.....so you whole pretence is based off of misleading reporting (there is a term for that now I think) and you want to focus on a theoretical possibility that the voting public already had a say on in the election.

Sorry your side lost dude, my candidate didn't win either.
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
I've become accustomed to anything bad being said about Soetoro being a reflection of the nature of the accuser here, while perceived stories about Cheeto don't receive the same exact path for you.

#orangelivesmattertoo
Abrignac Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
In regards to the op, I wonder if US bans on admitting large numbers of refugees in general and the Syrian ban specifically are actually good things. It makes absolutely no sense to me that people should be shipped halfway around the world. Why not work with neighboring states to absorb them where the culture and language are similar?
ZRX1200 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Because then you can't call Saudis racists.....
victor809 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I'm gonna agree with Anthony here.



... ok now that he's had a chance to recover from that...

The idea of shipping refugees all around the world has always seemed odd to me. It's led to some great things in the US... enclaves in cities where you can get amazing food you wouldn't normally be exposed to... but it seems strange that we would think this is the best way to serve these people...

However... (other shoe)... to have a ban on Syrian refugees but create some sort of exemption or prioritization for Syrians of Christian faith is both despicable and dumb in my mind.
Abrignac Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
victor809 wrote:
I'm gonna agree with Anthony here.



... ok now that he's had a chance to recover from that...

The idea of shipping refugees all around the world has always seemed odd to me. It's led to some great things in the US... enclaves in cities where you can get amazing food you wouldn't normally be exposed to... but it seems strange that we would think this is the best way to serve these people...

However... (other shoe)... to have a ban on Syrian refugees but create some sort of exemption or prioritization for Syrians of Christian faith is both despicable and dumb in my mind.



You and I agree way more often either of us will admit.
ZRX1200 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
^ so how did you feel about Obama's percentages?

Because regional Christians who were actively being slaughtered and sold as slaves were at a distinct disadvantage with Soetoro.

You know, consistency n' stuff Mellow
dstieger Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Abrignac wrote:
In regards to the op, I wonder if US bans on admitting large numbers of refugees in general and the Syrian ban specifically are actually good things. It makes absolutely no sense to me that people should be shipped halfway around the world. Why not work with neighboring states to absorb them where the culture and language are similar?


Good question. My question has always been 'Why are there ANY 'healthy' male Syrian refugees between 18 and 60?' They should be in Syria fighting for their country.

I do know that Turkey and Lebanon have accepted unfathomable numbers, but your question prompted me to dig just a little.

From Amnesty International Web site

Syria's refugee crisis in numbers
3 February 2016, 19:02 UTC

Last updated 20 December 2016
Refugees in the region

More than 4.8 million Syrian refugees are in just five countries Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt:

Turkey hosts 2.7 million Syrian refugees, more than any other country worldwide
Lebanon hosts approximately 1 million Syrian refugees which amounts to around one in five people in the country
Jordan hosts approximately 655,675 Syrian refugees, which amounts to about 10% of the population
Iraq where 3.1 million people are already internally displaced hosts 228,894 Syrian refugees
Egypt hosts 115,204 Syrian refugees

The UN’s 2016 humanitarian appeal for Syrian refugees was just 56% funded by the end of November 2016.

93% of Syrian refugees in urban areas in Jordan are living below the poverty line, as well as 70% of Syrian refugees in Lebanon, 65% in Egypt and 37% in Iraq.
Conflict in Syria

According to the UN around 13.5 million people are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance inside Syria. The number of people displaced within Syria is expected to rise to 8.7 million by the end of 2016.

The 5 countries which border Syria (Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey) have closed their borders to people fleeing the conflict. Currently, 75,000+ Syrians are stranded in dire conditions along the Syria-Jordan border. Ongoing conflict in Syria, including recent attacks in Aleppo, will likely lead to more people trying to flee Syria.

Between January and September 2016, Syrians made up the largest nationality of those crossing the Mediterranean to get to Europe (26.2%).
International Resettlement

In total, 224,694 resettlement and other admission pathways have been pledged globally since the start of the Syria crisis, which equates to a mere 4.7% of the total population of Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt and Turkey.

At least 480,000 people in the five main host countries - or 10% - are in need of resettlement according to the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR.
Key facts:

Gulf countries including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees.
Other high income countries including Russia, Singapore and South Korea have also offered zero resettlement places
Germany has pledged 43,431 places for Syrian refugees via resettlement and other admission pathways; about 46% of the combined EU total.
Excluding Germany, the remaining 27 EU countries have pledged around 51,205 places via resettlement and other admission pathways, or around 1% of the Syrian refugee population in the main host countries
Germany and Sweden together have received 64% of Syrian asylum applications in Europe between April 2011 and October 2016

Sources: UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), International Organization of Migration (IOM)


I can't find good current numbers, but I don't think that more than about 15,000 have settled in US since the start of their civil war. Pretty low when compared to some outside the gulf region. Vast majority seem to be women and children, also. And many have extended family members here...so there is that.

If there is agreement that there are true refugees that need resettlement, then I have no problem with the US stepping up and taking numbers more in line with EU countries and Canada. I am not convinced that the current 'ban' is making us any safer.

In fact, I'm fairly certain that it will have the opposite effect. We've all heard how great the ISIS recruiting engine is. We've just offered to keep it gassed up and running at top speed for a while. This will be a propaganda coup for those painting a picture that 'The West hates us'.
Abrignac Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
I do agree with you Dave. Its abominable that the gulf nations won't take them. Perhaps, we should look at their place at the handout table? I'm thinking the UAE states depend on US troops to stop invasions. Don't recall any large deposits to the treasury to pay for that protection.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
delta1 wrote:
just trying my very hardest to be fair and balanced. But I agree with you about perceived conflict of interest. Trump has invited extensive, and distracting, scrutiny because there are questions about self-dealing in every decision he makes. His failure to release his tax returns and to divest his business interests is a negative to a majority of Americans.



Liar Liar Liar
DrMaddVibe Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
Abrignac wrote:
I do agree with you Dave. Its abominable that the gulf nations won't take them. Perhaps, we should look at their place at the handout table? I'm thinking the UAE states depend on US troops to stop invasions. Don't recall any large deposits to the treasury to pay for that protection.




http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/15/saudi-arabia-has-100000-air-conditioned-tents-sitt/
teedubbya Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Zrx my side didn't lose. That's pretty petty. I lost whether it was Hillary or trump. I didn't want either and would not have been happier with Hillary.

Perception of conflict of interest has nothing to do with the talking point of a list under obama that in no way shape or form was being used like this.

It's the fact that he can be accused of it whether true or not because he is set up for it.


I know obama this or that. Obama is a douche that sucked. Got it. Agree.

teedubbya Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Aside from the conflict of interest thing is the actual act. It reminds me of the over reaction following 911.
ZRX1200 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Talking point? I'll take that as you didn't read the link then.

Oh Cheeto has as much potential for douchebaggery as Soetoro......
frankj1 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Abrignac wrote:
I do agree with you Dave. Its abominable that the gulf nations won't take them. Perhaps, we should look at their place at the handout table? I'm thinking the UAE states depend on US troops to stop invasions. Don't recall any large deposits to the treasury to pay for that protection.

are you talking about the same nations (and a few who are taking in Syrians) that refused to give up one inch of sand to establish Palestine at the same time Israel was born?

HA!

I'm more surprised by the omission from Trump's list of the major native country of birth of the perpetrators of 9/11

HA again!

MACS Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_e_NXQqqXA
Buckwheat Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
ZRX1200 wrote:
Just gonna leave this here.....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/amp/


And most of what I heard from Trump/republicans during the campaign was that Obama was soft on immigration. Looks like that wasn't entirely accurate. fog
ZRX1200 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
OK Mr false equivalency
delta1 Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
The difference is that Trumps's is a total ban that created chaos when implemented unannounced, while Obama's was narrowly defined and implemented gradually. Many of the people stopped on Sunday had already been subjected to months if not years of vetting. Included were many people who fought against ISIS side by side with American troops, and had been totally vetted and promised entrance. Others were already in the U.S., students and others on work visas, who traveled abroad and were returning "home."
gummy jones Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
i just heard trump is rounding up all of the worlds muslims and saudi arabia has offered to take them in
delta1 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
I remember when I was in the police academy. One of our tac officers was well-regarded but somewhat of an individualist who went against accepted norms. He was respected as an officer's commander, but bottle-necked his ascent to the chief's position at his department with his manner and behavior. He liked to say things like "I'd rather ask for forgiveness than for permission." "When in a fight, shoot them all and let the good Lord sort them out" Trump reminds me of that cavalier attitude, without the asking for forgiveness, or letting the Lord sort them out.
Abrignac Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
delta1 wrote:
The difference is that Trumps's is a total ban that created chaos when implemented, while Obama's was narrowly defined and implemented gradually. Many of the people stopped on Sunday had already been subjected to months if not years of vetting. Included were many people who fought against ISIS side by side with American troops., and had been totally vetted and promised entrance. Others were already in the U.S., students and others on work visas, who traveled abroad and were returning "home."



Yep heard about this. Especially the story about the Iraqi translator. It's a shame he was delayed for 19 hours prior to admission.

It doesn't bother me in the least that some people feel they were inconvenienced in their travels to the land of opportunity.

Inconvenience is when a Wolfpack of company commanders toss an entire boot camp company's entire squad bay furnishings and personal items, including bunk frames and mattresses, from 4th story windows as you march by knowing your company has 4 hours to haul it all back up,put it all back up in the correct order, remake all bunks and make sure all personal belongings are not only in the correct locker, but also in the exact place in those lockers. Or perhaps it can defined as five people standing in a circle shaving the face of the guy to your right while everyone jumps up and down in continuous and perfect rhythm.

Sorry Chuck, but your alligator tears mean nothing to me.
RMAN4443 Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
[quote=delta1]The difference is that Trumps's is a total ban that created chaos when implemented unannounced, while Obama's was narrowly defined and implemented gradually. Many of the people stopped on Sunday had already been subjected to months if not years of vetting. Included were many people who fought against ISIS side by side with American troops, and had been totally vetted and promised entrance. Others were already in the U.S., students and others on work visas, who traveled abroad and were returning "home."[/quote]

Not really sure you can correctly say it was unannounced , as Trump has been using the ban as a campaign tool for the past year or so......he first mentioned it in 12/2015 (google it)

I also believe the Boston marathon bombers had been vetted and one(Dzhokhar) was a student/drug dealer , and the other(Tamerlan) was an Olympic wanna be boxer and had traveled abroad(to Dagestan,Chechnya) and was allowed reentry to the US . The Tsarnev family also received more than $100,000 in govt. benefits from 2002-2012 ,including section 8 housing and food stamps, college education......all while under investigation by FBI and CIA....including Investigations by Russian Govt........so now as I see it Trump is increasing the pressure on possible Radical Islamic Terrorists from infiltrating the US in mass numbers, just as he promised on the Campaign Trail.

IMHO I see this Promised Executive Action as not being "unannounced" nor "subjecting anyone to undue vetting" If these people really want to come to the US the increased scrutiny is a VERY SMALL price to pay to gain entrance to THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH. If they don't want to go through the vetting ......DON'T

OK,rant off horse horse horse
BuckyB93 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,111
Awww.... they got held up for a few hrs waiting to be cleared to get into the USA. Poor babies.

You can be denied entrance to Canada if you have a DUI on your record.
Users browsing this topic
Guest