Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens - Rasmussen

[jg121783 3,915]

Most Support Temporary Ban on Newcomers from Terrorist Havens

 

Monday, January 30, 2017

 

Most voters approve of President Trump’s temporary halt to refugees and visitors from several Middle Eastern and African countries until the government can do a better job of keeping out individuals who are terrorist threats.

 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided. 

 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/january_2017/most_support_temporary_ban_on_newcomers_from_terrorist_havens

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

expect the usual MDL attack the source in 3 2 1

[Boiler 45,482]

That was my impression, even the usual rags comment sections reflect this.

[smilesammich 10,727]

i wonder what percentage of likely voters are aware of the existing vetting process, or the actual statistics concerning who attacks the us and where they're from. 

[jg121783 3,915]

There is no existing vetting process for some of these people. It is reasonable to temporarily stop them from entering the country until one is in place. These people are from countries where anti US terrorist groups exist. I think it is reasonable to have a system in place to check these people's histories to make sure there are no red flags. I am all for immigration. In fact we need immigrants for the future of our country but we can't just have a free for all.

[Bayareaguy 156]

Not that I particularly agree with an across the board delay just because you are from a certain country, but...Obama's executive order for DACA in 2012 inadvertently delayed just about all the CSC K1's for a similar amount of time. 

 

So I guess, just like anything related to the USCIS, they'll just have to "suck it up", or "bend over"...which ever you prefer. 

 

You can also call USCIS at 1-800-375-5283, I'm sure someone there will be able to help you!

 

[OriZ 3,157]

I could support a temporary ban on visas, but not on people. If they wanna look into things for the next couple months then whatever, but why the rush? What are the chances someone from one of those countries will commit a deadly attack in the next few months when it hasn't happened for decades?

[smilesammich 10,727]

10 hours ago, jg121783 said:

There is no existing vetting process for some of these people. It is reasonable to temporarily stop them from entering the country until one is in place. These people are from countries where anti US terrorist groups exist. I think it is reasonable to have a system in place to check these people's histories to make sure there are no red flags. I am all for immigration. In fact we need immigrants for the future of our country but we can't just have a free for all.

lie. put up with facts or shut up with the lies. come here talking that nonsense, people here know vetting occurs.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 hours ago, OriZ said:

I could support a temporary ban on visas, but not on people. If they wanna look into things for the next couple months then whatever, but why the rush? What are the chances someone from one of those countries will commit a deadly attack in the next few months when it hasn't happened for decades?

i've been lose with my likes but i can't let this go. 97% agreed. i would only go on to add i could support a temporary ban on visas if preceded by an actual act of terror or tangible intelligence threat. this is just bannon finally started on getting the jollies off he's been stewing on for years..

[Teddy B 17,252]

10 hours ago, smilesammich said:

i wonder what percentage of likely voters are aware of the existing vetting process, or the actual statistics concerning who attacks the us and where they're from. 

Seeing that most Americans are ignorant and don't care about facts or stats, my guess would be very few, less than 30%.

 

10 hours ago, jg121783 said:

There is no existing vetting process for some of these people. It is reasonable to temporarily stop them from entering the country until one is in place. These people are from countries where anti US terrorist groups exist. I think it is reasonable to have a system in place to check these people's histories to make sure there are no red flags. I am all for immigration. In fact we need immigrants for the future of our country but we can't just have a free for all.

Perhaps you've never heard of administrative processing?

[OriZ 3,157]

20 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i've been lose with my likes but i can't let this go. 97% agreed. i would only go on to add i could support a temporary ban on visas if preceded by an actual act of terror or tangible intelligence threat. this is just bannon finally started on getting the jollies off he's been stewing on for years..

 

The problem is you don't always get intelligence on everything. But that's why I went on to say basically that in this case maybe even that would be rushing into things, since the chances of something happening while they look into things are very slim.

 

13 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

Seeing that most Americans are ignorant and don't care about facts or stats, my guess would be very few, less than 30%.

 

Perhaps you've never heard of administrative processing?

 

AP = Purgatory. You don't know why you're there or how long you're going to be there. I can't imagine anything more horrible than not even being able to get any info whatsoever on what's going on with your case. I was stuck in some sort of AP not in the initial phases of our application(so it wasn't security related) but AFTER they approved my visa. From VJ I knew most people's get printed several days later and they receive it shortly afterwards. As you can see in my sig it took almost two months to receive mine after the interview and they never told us why. We ended up actually contacting one of my wife's state representatives but they couldn't give us much info either. Had no clue how long I was actually going to have to wait - that's what I call purgatory. I can't imagine being stuck there for a year or two long before your interview even.

Edited January 31, 2017 by OriZ

[Teddy B 17,252]

16 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

The problem is you don't always get intelligence on everything. But that's why I went on to say basically that in this case maybe even that would be rushing into things, since the chances of something happening while they look into things are very slim.

 

 

AP = Purgatory. You don't know why you're there or how long you're going to be there. I can't imagine anything more horrible than not even being able to get any info whatsoever on what's going on with your case. I was stuck in some sort of AP not in the initial phases of our application(so it wasn't security related) but AFTER they approved my visa. From VJ I knew most people's get printed several days later and they receive it shortly afterwards. As you can see in my sig it took almost two months to receive mine after the interview and they never told us why. We ended up actually contacting one of my wife's state representatives but they couldn't give us much info either. Had no clue how long I was actually going to have to wait - that's what I call purgatory. I can't imagine being stuck there for a year or two long before your interview even.

There is a normal administrative processing procedure that every potential immigrant goes through that includes the basic background checks. The administrative processing that you and I are talking about here is the same AP that most people from high fraud and terrorist countries go through which is actually an additional procedure that digs deeper into background, name, fingerprints and document checks. And yes it is a purgatory and you know nothing until it is finally over. One can be initially approved for a visa and then go through the AP procedure, there are quite a few posts about it in the upper forums.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Teddy B

[smilesammich 10,727]

17 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

The problem is you don't always get intelligence on everything. But that's why I went on to say basically that in this case maybe even that would be rushing into things, since the chances of something happening while they look into things are very slim.

 

i understand that there is info bannon/trump are getting that the public probably won't ever hear about. however, this whole thing has bannon's filthy cheeto covered fingers all over it. i do not buy that bannon wants the country safe. bannon wants to usher on in the big one, xian vs islam. the extreme religious right bannon's been courting for years is on board, pumped n angry after eight years of ISIS POTUS as well as being very keen to get jesus back with his heaven ship to take the faithful away from this hell on earth. these people aren't playing, we need to take their enthusiasm for armageddon seriously.

[Jacque67 7,328]

Fig leaves!

Lenin!!!!

[Dakine10 5,452]

14 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

expect the usual MDL attack the source in 3 2 1

   I wonder who it was who was actually attacking the polls as being manipulated? I think it was the same person who continually calls the news media fake when they don't agree with something. I think it was actually the same person who started this topic. Funny how everything changes when you find something you agree with.