Barack Obama vows to veto House Syrian refugee bill
The House, under new Speaker Paul Ryan, met earlier today to draft a bill which supporters claim would protect American citizens by putting additional scrutiny on Syrian refugees before they are relocated in the country. Some Republican critics of the legislation claim that the bill does not go far enough and in fact claim it will leave Barack Obama’s plan, for all intents and purposes, in place without much change at all.
Here is more on that:
Sources Congress-wide confirm to Breitbart News that McCaul’s bill leaves the entire refugee program unchanged and doesn’t affect funding for the program.
But despite McCaul’s and the committee’s tough-sounding rhetoric, the bill—several congressional aides and the actual text of the legislation confirm—simply requires one new step for Syrian and Iraqi refugee admittance and resettlement: That the Director of National Intelligence, the director of the FBI and the Secretary of Homeland Security approve any such refugees beforehand. Each of those people work for President Obama at the pleasure of the president.
“That’s like asking Janet Napolitano to verify the border is secure,” one GOP aide told Breitbart News. “Of course they are going to approve them without hesitation.”
If this is true it would appear as if this bill will only require what amounts to another rubber stamp from one of the President’s men, and now the White House has vowed to veto the bill. Here is more:
President Barack Obama would veto a proposal from Republican lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives for additional scrutiny of refugees from Syria or Iraq, the White House said on Wednesday.
“This legislation would introduce unnecessary and impractical requirements that would unacceptably hamper our efforts to assist some of the most vulnerable people in the world,” the White House said in a statement.
The proposed requirements “would provide no meaningful additional security for the American people, instead serving only to create significant delays and obstacles in the fulfillment of a vital program that satisfies both humanitarian and national security objectives,” the White House said.
If what the Republican critics of the bill are claiming is true than it appears as if Barack Obama, who most likely has no idea what is actually in the bill at this point, is also right: this is a meaningless piece of legislation which I believe would be designed once again to make it look as if the Republicans are doing something to oppose Barack Obama while in fact doing nothing and that is probably because they want to run against this program in the 2016 election.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
America's Watchtower 
It might reach climax if any refugees pull a Paris-style attack and lynch mobs go after congressional members for allowing everything to happen while they impotently stood by.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for the link. Let’s hope it does not come to that but I have a bad feeling it will at some point…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Then, who, will be blamed when all hell breaks loose in retaliation? They never think of that. All they know is whose special interests they must support because they accepted lobbyists’ money. THIRTY PIECES OF SILVER.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Exactly, blood money rules the day!
LikeLiked by 3 people
John Bohner was overheard asking: Miss me yet? 🍺🍺🍺
LikeLiked by 3 people
He appears to be just an extension of Boehner, why am I not surprised?
LikeLiked by 2 people
These boys say it all:
LikeLiked by 2 people
Great video, thanks for sharing it!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just watched this. It’s refreshing to hear elucidated by real Americans what we already feel and know to be true. Thanks Lou.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I try, Peter! We need to post whenever we DO find something that might give us some hope.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There will be hell to pay if we have an attack. I do believe this time the days of passive resistance will end. Mad as hell and doubtful they will take it anymore.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think so as well, I just wish it would not have to come down to that!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ya, Bunker, I believe the Administration has run out of “passes” for the crap they have been pulling on all of us. Once you bring it here, we are going to start hitting back and I have a feeling it is going to be striking out hard. I just do not understand how this Administration could think we would let this happen, but on the whole, the nation has been pretty complacent for a number of years. When it comes knocking on your own door, you HAVE to do something. While it was over seas, well, it will never happen here, that has been the mantra….SURPRISE!
LikeLiked by 2 people
He thought he could ride out one more year and complete his “home” agenda.
LikeLiked by 2 people
For the most part we as a people have let Obama do whatever he wants so he thinks he can do whatever he wants to and for the most part he can. This would be the final straw but at that point it will be too late.
LikeLike
The more I read this morning about different groups of “refugees” being picked up on the border or in Ohio or in Honduras, we can see they are starting to make their move. We will be hit just like Paris was and we will be hit hard, I am afraid, I really think that Obama has his popcorn ready and waiting so he can sit back and watch the plan unfold. He, it seems, doesn’t like us and is willing to show us in the worst way. When it starts hitting any of the Senators or Representatives, then and only then, will they start hitting back at him. He has been waiting to bring in his military force and enforce Martial Law. Then and only then will he be able to say we need to take everyones guns to make us all safer and for our own good. What scares me is that there will be people willing giving up their guns and actually expect our Government to take care of us. I wonder if they stop to think how good of a job the Government has done up to now with their care of the American people? This man (term used lightly) is deranged and needs to have a psych evaluation done on him, but then again, who will push that issue!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
They would be foolish not to make a move using this crisis at some point and I hate to say it but it appears as if this is what the President wants at this point. The final crisis to implement everything he has wanted but has been unable to do.
LikeLike
This asshat is untouchable and the liberals who now write the text books and the history books are even now straining at the bit to praise the brilliancy of his presidency leaving it up to we parents and grandparents to tell the kids what an angry black anti-white anti-american traitorous douchebag he was; is. I for one am ready to do my duty.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Well of course you are! As are the rest of us. History, hopefully will not be kind to Obama and his friends, guess we will find out, IF they are still writing books by then. It amazes me how many people are willing to still cover for what all has been put on the American population! Are all the freebies worth the country going to hell???? I think the answer is a big YES! I like free things too, but you have to be able to look and see if there are “strings” attached and if there are, you say, “no thanks” and back away. I do not like being beholding to anyone, if at all possible….all of our houses are paid for, all of our vehicles are paid for, we owe nothing to anyone unless you consider the normal monthly bills you cannot get out from under. I do not want payments or mortgages, that is just who I am. Then you look at the ones getting the free rent, power, phones, schooling, vouchers for food….why would they want to have to work for any of it when it is FREE? That is what our country has become, a big WELFARE STATE, if you will. Is it any wonder why all these people are flocking to our shores? And still, we vote ignorant asses into office that make us pay for thousands upon thousands more that want to cash in on the good life we have to offer. How many millions of dollars will be spent on programs for people that are not even citizens? What about the veterans and homeless here? They have taken a back seat to Obama bringing in his “people” and making sure he punishes US for their care. It is sickening.
Laura, guess I am in a ranting mood this morning! 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rant away, Lou, rant away… 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
The winners write this history and so far Obama has won at every turn, he will go down as one of the greatest Presidents of all time…in the books.
LikeLike
The boys again:
LikeLiked by 2 people
I SO love to listen to Bill Whittle!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s difficult for me to watch videos. I don’t have the patience and I prefer to read a transcript where I can skip over uninteresting parts.
I enjoyed both the videos you posted, Lou. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, how refreshing to know i wasn’t the only one who immediately thought this was the handiwork of seventh century savages rivaled in their ignorance only by those subscribing to the worldwide libtard/progressive movement led by the Islamic baboon in the White House.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Laura, I know what you mean about some videos, but these 3 men will not give you time to want to pass over anything they have to say!
No, Peter, you are not alone, I can assure you of that! It wasn’t Pancho Villa or Genghis Khan, either, although Obama could possible hint that it kinda sorta might have been and the media would run with it. Andrea Mitchell and Mika Brzezinski could not be reached for comment at this time, but I am sure they would be backing whatever they have been told. Fools!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree, Lou. The Trifecta videos were very informative – they held my interest right to the end.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, at least we know there are 3 men out there that GET IT!
LikeLiked by 2 people
They nailed it! Thanks for sharing.
LikeLike
Apparently after we “settle down”, he can go on with what he is set to do. This man (term used lightly) hates all of us. Read the comments, they are pretty good too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Retired Refugee Administrator Calls for Syrian Refugee Moratorium
For most of my adult life, I have worked with refugees both overseas and in the US. So, I DO understand the plight of refugees and the challenges of successfully resettling them in their new American homeland.
That said, I just read a lengthy article in the local newspaper in which the mayor and the local refugee resettlement director discounted the Syrian refugee threat by sweepingly equating the reaction of those of us with legitimate concerns about the flawed vetting process of Syrian refugees with “knee-jerk reactions of politicians”. I was understandably irked. The very idea of my being a politician is offensive. But, at least my colleagues and I weren’t characterized as bigots, racists, xenophobes or Islamophobes. Very surprising, indeed.
In the article, the local director was quoted as saying that “all refugees go through a rigorous review process before being allowed to come to the U.S.” He went on to say that “we shouldn’t allow terrorists and criminals to dictate changes to our great tradition of welcoming the stranger”, pointing out that local resettlement agencies “can’t pick and choose whom to accept.”
That last string of quotes smacked of talking points–not reasoned arguments–for permitting the influx of inadequately vetted Syrian refugees into our community. I immediately questioned that if the threat of “terrorists and criminals” should not dictate how we tackle the question of welcoming potential terrorists and criminals into our midst, then what exactly should dictate whom we permit to resettle next door to us.
His also stating that local agencies “can’t pick and choose whom to accept” is, for the most part, false. In the case of refugees entering to join family members already here, then, yes, the agency is expected to accept them into our community; however, so-called “free cases”, or those refugees without anchor relatives already in place in the community, may be rejected for resettlement by the local agency. Bear that mind.
He went on by asserting that “Syrians coming to the US will likely come through an orderly process from refugee camps,” again adding that “it is a very secure process.” Likely? Not reassuring.
Obviously he has ignored or entirely discounted the remarks of our security agency heads who have consistently and unambiguously warned about the flawed vetting process of Syrian and other Middle Eastern refugees.
Since I’m sure the local resettlement program has come under considerable pressure of late, and not wanting to pile on, I contacted an old colleague and friend at the national refugee resettlement agency with which the local agency is affiliated.
I explained that local community groups with whom I am closely affiliated have understandable concerns about the resettlement of Syrian refugees in our community, and went on to cite the quotes of the local director which appeared in the newspaper.
His first reaction was that it was not true that the local agency cannot reject refugees. Those who are not arriving to join family members already resettled in the community may be rejected by the local agency. This would certainly describe all the Syrian refugees earmarked for resettlement in this community.
Throughout the cordial conversation–we hadn’t spoken for years–I sensed a inclination on his part to adroitly skirt the potential threat posed by the resettlement of Syrian refugees. When queried about the inadequate vetting process for Syrian refugees in particular, he seemed unaware of the DIA’s, FBI’s and DOD’s warnings about the absence of an adequate database to properly vet these refugees. Has there been a news blackout?
He emailed me an updated version of the 13-step vetting process currently in use, and seemed convinced that the process was adequate. I pointed out that the vetting process is fine as it applies to non-Middle Eastern refugee groups, but that we’re talking about Islamic refugees, some of whom could well be ISIS or Al Quaida infiltrators; that it only took 8 radical Islamists to slaughter 129 people in Paris. He gingerly acknowledged this threat, but quickly went on to point out the obvious: these refugees have been in camps for up to 4 years and are badly in need of help; that after such a prolonged period of time “one would think” that [even without a database with which to work] that the wheat could be effectively separated from the chaff.
I opined that merely hoping that such is the case is one thing, but asked if on that hope alone were we willing to risk a terrorist attack which might otherwise have been averted. He again gently agreed, but kept returning to the genuine suffering of the bulk of Syrian refugees. That was his fallback position throughout the conversation. He could never really bring himself to fully grapple with the real threat of improperly vetted Syrian refugees. For him, compassion alone trumped caution.
We both worked in refugee camps in Southeast Asia and were both involved in interviewing and otherwise screening SEA refugees before they were finally approved for entry into the US. Clearly, these were entirely different refugee groups–no terrorist inclinations among them at all. Thus, the vetting process for SEA refugees proved to be adequate and no warnings from our security agencies about the vetting process were necessarily forthcoming.
We agreed that the suffering Syrian refugees needed help, but we couldn’t agree that a moratorium on the resettlement of Syrian refugees was the responsible course of action to take.
We then spoke about the difficulty we all had with smoothly resettling Somalian refugees in the past, but he couldn’t recall but two Somalians being arrested for terrorist related activities after arrival. I reminded him of a substantial number of Somalian refugees who had been resettled in Minnesota who had linked up with ISIS; that although they are likely under close surveillance by the U.S. government they are still free and their legal status here unchanged. In short, I reminded him that they remained a serious potential terrorist threat to the homeland. Again he agreed, but was indisposed to grasp the true nature of the threat. Like so many companies and organizations, it is difficult for resettlement agencies, local or national, to see things as they really are, in this case to clearly see the threat attending a flawed vetting process. As always, agency and organization culture and those inevitable talking points pretty much dictate an employee’s outlook and opinions. So, while his stance was unsurprising, when weighing the validity of refugee program commentary, from the start we must all bear carefully in mind this ingrained myopia.
Possible remedy: if a refugee is a “Free Case” (with no familial US ties), the local resettlement agency CAN, in fact, say no. Thus, the remedy for those of us who are pushing for a moratorium on the resettlement of Syrian refugees may be to pressure the local resettlement agency to reject Free Syrian cases. In most communities without Syrian refugees already in place, such an effort would most certainly stop the influx. Thus, a moratorium can be accomplished on the local level.
With this in mind, I drafted the following editorial for local consumption. The newspaper’s being a seriously liberal newspaper, who can say if it will be published:
“Dear Editor:
Though ISIS has dubbed the Islamist terrorist attack on Paris as but the
“first of the storm”, Pres. Obama continues to mystifyingly describe “global
warming”, coal and CO2 as THE most profound threats we face as a nation; worse,
he continues to vigorously push for the entrance of thousands of inadequately
vetted Syrian “refugees” into our homeland.
Despite the existential threat of Islamic terrorism, and warnings against such a
Syrian influx by our own security agencies, the Administration remains
recklessly determined to resettle these refugees in our communities.
I’ve worked with refugees both here and abroad for most of my adult life, so no
one can honestly discount my compassion when it comes to helping suffering
refugees; however, until our security agencies verify that an adequate vetting
process is in place a moratorium on the resettlement of Syrian “refugees” is a
no-brainer. Anything less would be terribly irresponsible.
Moving past empty-headed political correctness, delusional ideology and faux
compassion, let’s properly safeguard our homeland and families from the menace
of radical Islamic terrorism.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Does anybody know anything about this? I just read it and was wondering if you had seen any articles about this happening.
http://100percentfedup.com/say-what-obama-gives-go-ahead-for-new-un-regional-hub-in-washington-dc-what-they-plan-to-use-center-for-is-disturbing/
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is the first I have heard of it but I wouldn’t be surprised if it is true.
LikeLiked by 1 person