Wondering how Thomas Eric Duncan was able to enter the U.S. while suffering from Ebola? He asked for a visa and received one in August.
In fact, the Department of Homeland Security is proudly advertising its "Ebola Outbreak-related Immigration Relief Measures to Nationals of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone Currently in the United States."
You read that right. Not only are the Obama Democrats leaving our doors wide open to those seeking entry from Ebola-infected countries, they're actually expediting visa requests!
Here's a more legible version:
With a 70 percent mortality rate and an incubation period in excess of three weeks, what possible reason could the Obama Democrats have for banning travel from West Africa?
Oh, that's right. Sorry, I forgot. They hate America.
Update: The inimitable Thomas Lifson notes that the notice "ONLY applies to nationals currently in the USA. IOW, no new arrivals. Mainly, I think to avoid kicking out people and forcing them to return to the hot zone."
Thanking him for his note, I responded that: "...the problem with this notice is that there is no cutoff date. In other words, if I make it into the U.S. today, then I presumably still qualify."
Consider the notice: it doesn't say "...in the United States as of 16 August 2014..."; no, if you make it into the U.S., you can apply for an extended stay and see your request expedited. Perfect, just perfect.
Hat tip: FreeRepublic.
They're not helping people come here. They're giving them leniency to allow them to stay longer for those who are already in the United States. It's right there in the text.
I'm not sure that's a good idea or a bad idea, but one could argue it's better to keep them in one place and not have them infect more people on airplanes.
But at least read what you post.
it's genocide by the left of the usa, not suicide.
@8:29 anon -
The problem with this notice is that there is no cutoff date.
In other words, if I make it into the U.S. today, then I presumably still qualify.
But it doesn't mean you get expedited consideration of your visa request if you're in Sierra Leone.
Doug, please don't twist things like this. Dog knows it's bad enough.
Yeah Anonymous.. Do read it slowly..let the facts congeal in your brain for a minute or 2. It's deadly the way our government is handling this, like it or not.. Obama ' s bringing death to America one way or the other.. Even his actions of sending 4,000 American troops, like lambs to the slaughter, is nuts, I would rather our soldiers go to Iraq & Kill the devil people that are murdering women & children right & left, than to go to Africa & blatantly expose 4,000 of our national 'protectors' to Ebola.. what's wrong with this picture?!?
Your headline is extremely misleading. It needs to be removed if you want any credibility.
Perhaps you people should read before you post. Duncan came here to visit his relatives because of the following
"Expedited processing of immigrant petitions for immediate relatives (currently in the United States) of U.S. citizens;"
Anonymous at 8:29 is correct.
The tipoff is that it comes from DHS. DHS does NOT ISSUE VISAS. Visas are issued by the State Dept.
The DHS announcement refers to granting Temporary Protected Status to aliens who are ALREADY HERE. They have been here for a long time and are NO THREAT.
Anonymous at 2:11 is incorrect. A "petition" is not a visa application. A visa application is filed abroad with the State Dept. for a visa to ENTER the U.S. A "petition" is filed by an alien who is ALREADY HERE and wants to change his status from "nonimmigrant" (visitor, student, etc.) to "immigrant" based on legal eligibility to do so.
This is NO DANGER TO ANYONE.
Note that the first listed relief measure states explicitly that this relief measure is available "even if the request is filed after the authorized period of admission has expired."
WHICH "authorized period of admission"? The "period of authorized stay" on the applicant's original visa, or the term under which the offer of relief is made to "Nationals of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone Currently in the United States"?
This ambiguity would seem to be intentional, so that if an immigration court is ever asked to rule on whether the relief provisions apply to people who were not "current" at the time the offer to those who were then currently here, it will have no choice but to extend the relief.
Obviously the statement of available legal relief was written by lawyers, calculating how their wording will be interpreted by judges, making it highly unlikely that the obvious ambiguity is accidental.
To be unambiguous the authors would only have had to add two letters, changing "the" to "their":
"Change or extension of nonimmigrant status for an individual currently in the United States, even if the request is filed after THEIR authorized period of admission has expired." ["the individual's" if you want to be grammatically careful.]
They WANTED it ambiguous, and the courts will take note of this. If the rule-makers had wanted to be clear that the rule applied only to the applicants period of stay they would have added "ir." The prima facie implication is that they CHOSE not to.
There is no ambiguity there.
Every alien who enters the U.S. has a form called an I-94 stapled into his passport. The I-94 shows the length of his authorized stay, along with his port of entry and status at entry (student, visitor, etc.) The date on the I-94 is the "authorized period of admission."
The "the" in the statement refers to the alien's individual authorized period of admission.
Of course the more fundamental point is the one Doug makes about there being no cut-off date. The ambiguous wording of the first provision just shows their thinking, that they were making sure to touch all the bases.
Temporary Protected Status is temporary. By law, it can be implemented for up to, but no more than, two years. It can be extended if the conditions in the alien's country continue to be dangerous.
This is all boilerplate language. The same announcement has been promulgated dozens of times in the twenty-plus years it's been part of the law. The wording is always the same; all they do is change the name of the affected country. Most or all of the things you are objecting to have been addressed for years.
The incompetence shown by this administration in handling this is disgraceful. But this is not anything to worry about.
Temporary always becomes permanent. We never send anyone back once they get their temporary status. This is an invitation for more to come from Ebola countries. One has to read between the lines on this but the intent is for more to come.
Mr. Duncan got a visa faster than I can get a passport. It makes me wonder.
Does anyone really believe anyone will be sent back no matter what date they came?
This rule does endanger people. The rule is ostensibly to protect people who would face going back to a country with Ebola but there are no restrictions on flying back-and-forth.
Judicial Watch reported yesterday that unnamed sources say there is a plan to bring Ebola-stricken non-US citizens into the country. That's another report to keep an eye on.
Re: "There is no rule on flying back-and-forth."
Leaving the United States breaks the Temporary Protected Status of the alien. Once he leaves the country, he cannot use his prior status as a way to reenter. It's been in the law for at least fifty years.
Yet Another MESS of ole barry and his Cronies!! Of course like every other MESS ole barry makes, his PC CRAP makes it even WORSE!!!!!!!! Vote ALL DEMS and RINOS OUT in Nov!!
One more thing. The original post says that the regulation doesn't specify a date that the alien has to be here by. Again, that's already in the law. The alien has to prove that he was in the U.S. at the time the regulation was implemented (in this case, August 2014). Otherwise, the alien is ineligible. In other words, an alien who arrived yesterday is ineligible.
This is a small part of a big body of law. If your town passes an ordinance that says "From now on the speed limit on Main Street is 30 instead of 35," you don't freak out because the new ordinance doesn't say "but you still can't run over people." That's somewhere else in the law.
This is the same thing.
"Obama Plans to Let Ebola-infected Foreigners Into U.S. for Treatment"
That's something else entirely.
This post was a misinterpretation of a rule regarding giving RELIEF to HEALTHY ALIENS WHO ARE ALREADY HERE. (A rule which has been invoked dozens of times in the past twenty years.) Bringing patients here for treatment is A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE.
Focus on what's important.
Old..I don't mean this to be rude..but that part you said about aliens 'being here for a long time & are NO THREAT'?!? that's actually almost hilarious if it wasn't so untrue..YOU obviously haven't spent too much time in the southern most states, because I know literally hundreds of illegals in this country, many of them first hand, & the sad TRUTH is, a large percentage of them were criminals before they came here & the ones who were NOT criminals before they came here, once they've been here a little while ~become criminals! If you EVEN SPENT ANY TIME IN The lower court systems, you would know this.
Post a Comment