US outrage at Iran ‘hostages’ envoy http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26860984
Iran’s actions/proposals are curious and troubling.
I’m unclear of implications of proposed US legislation.
I would assume that such Visa applications would systematically be rejected, hence dunno why legislation would be necessary. If it is, perhaps we need a closer look at the overall process in place for granting Visas.
Wording of terrorist, as we’ve seen lately, can at times, be a matter of perspective,semantics, or inflation of mankind if words. Currently terrorists are as we expect the word to mean. However, some governments and people can water that word down, and use it to describe most anyone or cause that they disagree with. At an extreme, it can be used to describe someone using their (US) free speech rights to express disagreement. We have seen this in other regimes. So, in its intended use, OK. But in power gone out of control, this eliminates a path for checks and balances. So I’m technically concerned about impact in a possible future scenario.
I’m also in the dark about the Visa application process. I suppose, for this legislation to be introduced, there may be loose controls, or oversight on the application process, who is in charge of making said decisions, how is that authority given, handled, and overseen. I must infer from this legislative proposal that an application from a known terrorist like this currently would have a high likelihood of being granted, which seems rather off to me. Perhaps the Visa granting process needs a closer oversight over all. Our perhaps this legislation handles some loopholes effectively. Curious.