Faisal Shahzad

[IPL-fan]

I guess you didn't "comprehend" my post.

Comprehension is the ability to understand and interpret. Reading and writing would fall under comprehension.

Reading 1 line and writing 1 line is comprehension test?????

My understanding on comprehension test is that you will be a given a page or two page essay and need to answer few questions related to the essay.

 

[WBH]

Reading 1 line and writing 1 line is comprehension test?????

My understanding on comprehension test is that you will be a given a page or two page essay and need to answer few questions related to the essay.

It can be required that everyone pass TOEFL or TOEIC with certain scores. It all depends upon
how citizens lobby their representatives. But I don't think people care that much. The people
who cares most are perhats those whose aged parents who understand no or little English
and tehy woudl only urge their represenbtaives to lower teh standard rather than raise it.

 

[Huracan]

What would the level of English have to do with causing or not causing harm to the US? I would be more worried about changes to the law to prevent children born in the US from acquiring citizenship, or stripping the citizenship from children who live abroad, or things like that. I am not terribly worried, but I can see some politicians taking this as an excuse to pass this kind of law. Some politicians have tried to avoid children of undocumented immigrants to acquire citizenship by birth.

 

[cafeconleche]

We cannot require draconian English tests. I know people who were born here whose command of English is woefully sub-par. Yes, offer courses and improve the educational system, but preventing productive people from becoming citizens is wrong.

 

[WBH]

What would the level of English have to do with causing or not causing harm to the US? I would be more worried about changes to the law to prevent children born in the US from acquiring citizenship, or stripping the citizenship from children who live abroad, or things like that. I am not terribly worried, but I can see some politicians taking this as an excuse to pass this kind of law. Some politicians have tried to avoid children of undocumented immigrants to acquire citizenship by birth.

When that happens, USA woild be already be country immigrants want to leave rather than come.

 

[howdy_howdy]

As someone mentioned, applicants from PK will face extra scrutiny towards name check & background check! Having said that, I don't personally feel that USCIS would delay
the immigration process (I485 OR N400) because, a bad guys is a bad guy and is going to harm anyhow nevertheless he is a citizen or a PR. In fact, being a non-PR & non-USC gives
more flexibility to the bad guys because, it becomes difficult for US Government to extradite & prosecute them in the US.

In all, we hope USCIS thinks logically because doing something drastic & chaotic!

 

[WBH]

The best way to do is for everyone to pass a polygraph test at the time of natualization and increase application fee to cover that cost. To prevent embarrassment, limit this polygraph test only to the loyalty to USA skip all other questions. In other words only use this polygraph to determines if one is honestyly want to be loyal to USA and do not use this polygraph for good moral character purpose (otherwise we can all fail if we truly think taking apen from company is a crime. We will fail too if we drink alcohol on daily basis)


This of course would still not prevent a person who indeed love USAS and later changed his opinion.

 

[btbican]

You do realize that a polygraph test results are not accepted by the courts right? You can do a test and hope it helps your case but there is plenty of evidence showing people can train to fool the system. CIA does the test routinely on their workers, but failing a test does not mean you are out....

 

[Huracan]

My take is that there is no need to ask for stricter naturalization process or to lament that a naturalized citizen has done something bad. Any citizen, naturalized or not can do bad things. I would claim that probably the crime rates among naturalized citizens are lower than the general population (I don't have any data to back this claim) based on all the criminal background checks done on immigrants and the lengthy process which puts most naturalized citizens at an age when violent crime is less likely to occur. There is some homegrown terrorism as evidenced by Timothy McVeigh and they are still treated as US citizens and afforded the protection of the constitution. Nobody asks to deport them or strip them of their citizenship. Naturalized citizens should be treated the same way. It might reflect bad on naturalization, but any reasonable person can see that it is the exception and not the norm. A citizen, either by birth or naturalization should be treated the same in front of the law. I am sure the US legal system is strong enough to deal with the crime this person attempted to commit. I just hope that no opportunistic politician tries to use this to pass harsh citizenship legislation.

 

[Huracan]

The fallout is just starting. It makes me sick what these politicians can do in the heat of the moment:

http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2...-americans-overseas-with-ties-to-terror-orgs/

 

[wantmygcnow]

Maybe U.S should stop allowing dual citizenships. If this man didn't have his PK passport, maybe he wouldn't have had enough time(visa-etc) to mingle with the bad crowd?

Isn't it also weird that he did this after becoming a USC? Maybe the laws need to be changed that if you are a U.S citizen, you Still need to maintain ties to THE Country you took the oath for?

 

[sanjoseaug20]

Maybe the laws need to be changed that if you are a U.S citizen, you Still need to maintain ties to THE Country you took the oath for

Why do you want to make life difficult for 100s (maybe 1000s) of USC OCIs living in India?

 

[wantmygcnow]

Why do you want to make life difficult for 100s (maybe 1000s) of USC OCIs living in India?

I am an idiot but I never got how you can be loyal to 2 countries when you have dual citizenships? What if the 2 countries you are citizens of goes to war..who do you fight for?

When you take the oath, you are saying you will defend this country...should a polygraph be strapped to you to see if you really meant it?

Regarding OCIs, well in the name of security, you do have to let go of some privileges? Again I ask for OCI individuals, who is your loyalitu to? Btw I am just giving my opinion...I m not Lieberman..however We have got the same hairstyle

 

[cafeconleche]

Well, "loyalty" to a country is a relative subject. Without getting into a heated philosophical discussion about it, nationalism and excessive pride and loyalty for ANY country is one major reason we have conflicts and cannot get along. Dual citizenship is one of the more progressive aspects of today's society, especially when you think about how interdependent we are these days. To regress and start defending and rebuilding national sovereignty based constructs would be the wrong way to go.

 

[sanjoseaug20]

Regarding OCIs, well in the name of security, you do have to let go of some privileges? Again I ask for OCI individuals, who is your loyalitu to? Btw I am just giving my opinion...I m not Lieberman..however We have got the same hairstyle

#1. My previous comment re OCIs was only with respect to changing the laws to maintain US ties, nothing to do with dual citizenship.
I feel that with the recent increase in expatriation due to taxation, such a legal change will make it worse for expats resulting in more people giving up USC. However, I do not think IRS will want to let go of their golden geese, and fight against such a change.

#2. Loyalty - I do not agree with Faisal, not even remotely. But, loyalty is pretty much a slogan, and in reality a majority of people do what "works for them". Of course, many are blinded by the passion generated by their leaders, but that's true of many natural born USCs too.

#3. While I agree they should profile people based on whatever parameters work best (even racial, country or family of origin), I do not think dual citizenship has got much to do with it. What if he gave up his previous citizenship? Would he be less suspect?

#4. I am sure Lieberman must have looked good in his younger days. Don't take it to heart...

 

[cafeconleche]

Yes!

 

[Vorpal]

Reading 1 line and writing 1 line is comprehension test?????

My understanding on comprehension test is that you will be a given a page or two page essay and need to answer few questions related to the essay.

Actually, the entire interview is a test of one's comprehension of the English language. During the interview, the IO engages the applicant in conversation, be it casual banter or the way the applicant responds to the N-400 questions. Writing a sentence and reading a phrase are only small parts of it. An applicant can still fail the test (there have even been a few accounts of this on this very forum) for not being able to respond to the questions asked by the IO.

In fact, your essay idea is exactly what should be implemented as part of the test. Instead of reading a dumbed-down sentence, such as "I drive a blue car", have the applicant read a short paragraph and answer a couple of questions about it.

 

[Vorpal]

We cannot require draconian English tests. I know people who were born here whose command of English is woefully sub-par. Yes, offer courses and improve the educational system, but preventing productive people from becoming citizens is wrong.

I respectfully disagree. Many other countries require prospective citizens to demonstrate their ability to communicate in the country's language. In order to be productive, communication is absolutely essential.

 

[sanjoseaug20]

English comprehension is also measured by the dialogue the IO holds with applicant throughout interview.

After reading yours and Vorpal's comments, some things now become clear to me ... after nearly 9 months. When I had my interview, the IO first started talking about how big my file was, and maybe I was an asylum case, but then he realized that it was employment throughout. I just acknowledged and moved on. This was on the way to his office. After the oath, he started going through the file and started complaining about how his shoulder was hurting and he did not want to come to office that day. I again mumbled (not really) something courteous and waited for the questioning. Then he started off on how a surgery will help his shoulder ... this is when I "got" that he wanted to talk ... and wanted me to talk ... not sure what was the trigger, there may have been something else too [ maybe the english test happened this time ].

On my side, I was not expecting a hostile interview, but at least an interview and this kept me from talking much from my side. But seeing his signals were that he wanted to talk, I eventually changed tack and engaged in a conversation ... maybe 5-7 minutes. At the end of it, he went through the N400 almost at a super sonic speed, and gave the "recommended for approval" letter.

I thought it was weird then, but realized even then that I was expected to talk. Now, as they say - I know the rest of the story...

[ BTW, after the approval, I commended the IO pointing to the file ... saying that however clean one's file might be, we are always anxious when we walk into such an interview, and I wanted to thank him for not letting me feel like an interview. He said that he was glad to hear that, and also that apart from the day of the oath, this is likely to be one day we remember for the rest of our life, and as long as he is satisfied to the genuineness of the case, he sees no reason to give us a hard time and in fact wants to work to make it memorable. I never posted it here because I joined this board after my interview ... when trying to figure out the oath date ... but Bob's and Vorpal's comments somehow reminded me of this. ]

 

[Bobsmyth]

The fallout is just starting. It makes me sick what these politicians can do in the heat of the moment:

http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2...-americans-overseas-with-ties-to-terror-orgs/

Being a member of or associated with a terrorist organization is already a bar to naturalization, so in all likelyhood Faisal falsely answered his N-400.
Being convicted of an act of treason is already grounds for denaturalization.
What the senator is suggesting is just an extension of what is already in place. How does that make you sick (unless you're referring to how politicians like to jump on the band wagon of popularity for personal gain).