“Refugees are the most thoroughly vetted group to enter the United States. In addition to a screening by the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees, the federal government conducts its own vetting process involving multiple law enforcement, national security and intelligence agencies, including fingerprint and biometric security checks, as well as medical screenings. The entire process can take more than two years. …
“In the 40 years since the program was established, no refugee who has entered the country through the resettlement program has killed anyone in a terrorist attack in the United States. Significantly more refugees have been turned away than admitted every year — even before the historically low caps. …
“Refugee resettlement will not survive another four years under this administration. The loss of this program would have major ramifications for America’s international relationships, not to mention the thousands of people seeking refuge. If the nation’s reckoning with race is a mirror into its ideals on justice and equality, then refugee resettlement is the testing ground for our ideals.”
Views: 53
The unpleasantly realistic observation is, “What part of ‘Wogs out!’ weren’t they clear about?” The people who voted for Trump will consider this to be a promise fulfilled. (Though IMHO a number of refugee debacles show that advanced countries could handle refugee resettlement is far less divisive ways.)
The article speaks of “the thousands of people seeking refuge”, whereas the total seems to be in the millions if not the tens of millions. So that’s off by three or four orders of magnitude.
But I’m curious about “major ramifications for America’s international relationships”. My impression is that “refugee” is roughly equivalent to “people nobody gives a damn about”, which is why they are refugees. How would increasing or decreasing resettlement affect our international relationships?