Racism or Freedom of Speach

I support granting asylum to those individuals who have had their homes and lives destroyed by political corruption, narcoterrorism and American sponsored proxy wars in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

My argument is based on fact and US law rather than my personal belief system. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Get real, whisky boy. Your first statement above is - for all practical purposes - a call for open borders, which is inconsistent with the law AND the personal beliefs of the vast majority of Americans.

I support granting asylum to those individuals who have had their homes and lives destroyed by political corruption, narcoterrorism and American sponsored proxy wars in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Does that include: tents, shacks, lean tos, and hooches?

How do they prove they had a "home"?

How do they prove the "political corruption, narcoterrorism and American sponsored proxy wars"?

And to whom do they prove all those FACTS?

And how do they prove all of those FACTS?

Get real, whisky boy. Your first statement above is - for all practical purposes - a call for open borders, which is inconsistent with the law AND the personal beliefs of the vast majority of Americans. Originally Posted by lustylad

All ok then post then post the US Codes (law), Department of State or HLS regulations (implementation of law) that supports your position. I'll wait!

Does that include: tents, shacks, lean tos, and hooches?

How do they prove they had a "home"?

How do they prove the "political corruption, narcoterrorism and American sponsored proxy wars"?

And to whom do they prove all those FACTS?

And how do they prove all of those FACTS? Originally Posted by LexusLover

In the past the CIA was the proponent for investigation of foreign nationals on foreign soil and the FBI traditionally responsible for investigation of the domestic component of background investigations for foreign nationals. However, the current administration has such a high turnover rate of key position and departmental vacancies that it is difficult to tell who is responsible or accountable for what these days.

All ok then post then post the US Codes (law), Department of State or HLS regulations (implementation of law) that supports your position. I'll wait! Originally Posted by Whisky_1

The burden is on you. You are the one advocating a "right" contrary to centuries of common law and natural law. It's called "trespass"! Territorial rights and sanctity are well documented as one group or state attempted to occupy another's land. My neighbors have NO RIGHT to come upon my property without my permission and/or invitation. Period.

And before you get all SocialisticLiberalAntiTrumper on me, I don't have a "right" to enter Mexico, and if my ass is caught in Mexico without PREauthorization then if I'm lucky (real lucky) the worst that will happen to me is an ass whipping and a rough ride back to the U.S. border.

What you are advocating is detrimental to statehood all over this world. If people retreat and hide in the U.S. while being supported by the U.S. taxpayers not only will it destroy this country, but it will also encourage people not to stand and fight in their own country to establish the "freedoms" taken from them for which the justify seeking asylum.

IB nailed you with his comment above. You should give up and admit defeat. Originally Posted by friendly fred

Everybody may appear to be smarter than you when you show up for a debate without having done your research then resort to regurgitating emotionally driven non-sense that is easily refuted.

In the past the CIA .... Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Bullshit! You don't know squat about the CIA.

The burden is on you. You are the one advocating a "right" contrary to centuries of common law and natural law. It's called "trespass"! Territorial rights and sanctity are well documented as one group or state attempted to occupy another's land. My neighbors have NO RIGHT to come upon my property without my permission and/or invitation. Period.

And before you get all SocialisticLiberalAntiTrumper on me, I don't have a "right" to enter Mexico, and if my ass is caught in Mexico without PREauthorization then if I'm lucky (real lucky) the worst that will happen to me is an ass whipping and a rough ride back to the U.S. border. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I advocate following the US Constitution and all US laws not just the one's I like or agree with. If you don't like the current laws then advocate for change. I have again posted excerpts in the thread to support my position.

Excerpt from the link of a US Embassy in a foreign country:
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-con...efugeesasylum/

Asylum
The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States. Here it is again and feel free to visit the webpage of any US Embassy for verification.

Link to plain English explanation of why it is not normally possible for foreign nationals to apply for asylum in US Embassies and Consulates in foreign countries and why individuals seeking asylum are not considered illegal immigrants:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

Who are you people?

I advocate following the US Constitution and all US laws not just the one's I like or agree with. If you don't like the current laws then advocate for change. I have again posted excerpts in the thread to support my position.

Excerpt from the link of a US Embassy in a foreign country:
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-con...efugeesasylum/

Asylum
The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States. Here it is again and feel free to visit the webpage of any US Embassy for verification.

Link to plain English explanation of why it is not normally possible for foreign nationals to apply for asylum in US Embassies and Consulates in foreign countries and why individuals seeking asylum are not considered illegal immigrants:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

Who are you people? Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Nothing you cited removes the statutory requirement that any and all entering this country do so in accordance with U.S. laws. You can keep posting the same shit until hell freezes over, but people coming into this country are required by law to follow U.S. laws for admission.

Bullshit! You don't know squat about the CIA. Originally Posted by LexusLover

This aspect of the CIA operations is common knowledge to anyone married to a foreign national and seeking access to certain military or government jobs, foreign nationals who join the US Armed Forces and require a security clearance or holders of high office and the military who have served overseas and need to update/update their security clearence. I have not ever worked for the CIA or intend to imply that I have. I am just sharing what I know from my situational experience which may be significantly different than yours. Calling BS on everything you disagree with or have no knowledge of will only get you so far before it becomes apparent that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Nothing you cited removes the statutory requirement that any and all entering this country do so in accordance with U.S. laws. You can keep posting the same shit until hell freezes over, but people coming into this country are required by law to follow U.S. laws for admission. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

^^^^^^^^^^^Prime example of cognative dissonance right here^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Excerpt from the link of a US Embassy in a foreign country:
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-con...efugeesasylum/

Asylum
The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States.

Link to plain English explanation of why it is not normally possible for foreign nationals to apply for asylum in US Embassies and Consulates in foreign countries and why individuals seeking asylum are not considered illegal immigrants:
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

Please post these laws or a link to these laws you speak of!

I advocate following the US Constitution and all US laws not just the one's I like or agree with. If you don't like the current laws then advocate for change. I have again posted excerpts in the thread to support my position.

Excerpt from the link of a US Embassy in a foreign country:
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-con...efugeesasylum/

Asylum
The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States. Here it is again and feel free to visit the webpage of any US Embassy for verification.

Link to plain English explanation of why it is not normally possible for foreign nationals to apply for asylum in US Embassies and Consulates in foreign countries and why individuals seeking asylum are not considered illegal immigrants:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

Who are you people? Originally Posted by Whisky_1

You were born in...



come out of a sewer.



FU!

^^^^^^^^^^^Prime example of cognative dissonance right here^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Excerpt from the link of a US Embassy in a foreign country:
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-con...efugeesasylum/

Asylum
The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States.

Link to plain English explanation of why it is not normally possible for foreign nationals to apply for asylum in US Embassies and Consulates in foreign countries and why individuals seeking asylum are not considered illegal immigrants:
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...consulate.html

Please post these laws or a link to these laws you speak of! Originally Posted by Whisky_1

You'd be the one suffering from cognitive dissonance. Nothing you've cited removes the statutory requirement that any and all entering this country do so in accordance with U.S. laws. You can keep posting the same shit until hell freezes over, but people coming into this country are required by law to follow U.S. laws for admission.

... under U.S. law, asylum seekers can apply only if they are physically present in the United States [which requires a VISA] (or ... [otherwise] at a U.S. border or other point of entry).

This aspect of the CIA operations is common knowledge ..... Originally Posted by Whisky_1

Bullshit! Even your own posts reflect that bullshit. I know exactly about what I posted ... and it includes calling out your bullshit.

You have never participated from an investigatory point of view with the "vetting" and "verifying" of information provided to you by a foreign national who you had not known until you saw their initial information ..... period. Or you wouldn't go off on some cock-n-bull anecdotal bunch of crap saying it "is common knowledge"!

Here is the TIP OF THE ICE BERG:

The truth is, criminal background information is based on the laws of country in question, as well as the quality of record-keeping and their relationship with the U.S. While some countries still only keep paper records, many retain criminal records at local jurisdictions and have no centralized database in the way that the US, Canada, the UK and many European Union countries do. Therefore, it is common in many countries that each city, state, or province must be searched separately to determine if a criminal history exists on the applicant. To complicate matters even more, each jurisdiction also has its own rules and regulations as to how records are kept and released, with many record queries only covering a period of two to three years. This is in sharp contrast to the FBI-managed Interstate Identification Index, which keeps arrest and conviction information on file for life.

The truth is that we cannot simply access trusted background data from certain places at all. If the country the immigrant or refugee flees from is war torn, has an unstable government, or has no diplomatic relationship with the US (think Syria, Libya, North Korea, etc.) then we will have no way to access their records. If criminal records on recent arrestees was lost at Orleans Parish Prison and the New Orleans Police headquarters following Hurricane Katrina, what can we expect the state of record keeping in Aleppo or Benghazi to be right now?

THIS BEARS REPEATING 200 MILLION TIMES TO U.S. LEGAL VOTERS:

If criminal records on recent arrestees was lost at Orleans Parish Prison and the New Orleans Police headquarters following Hurricane Katrina, what can we expect the state of record keeping in Aleppo or Benghazi to be right now?

"Criminal History" ... that's just scratching the surface. I said how are they going to prove all that crap you listed ... as a "right" to come to this country ...

.... forget there is no "right" to come to this country ....

.... 90% of them can't even prove they were born!!!

Do you recall reading about the document manufacturing facilities that were taken by the ISIS assholes? Paper, ink, photo, and printing equipment for making fake documents. "The CIA" didn't find that shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go bullshit someone else.

Whisky better stick to it!