People who will kill Americans if they don't get into America... shouldn't be allowed into America.
September 29, 2015
This is lefty policy in a nutshell.
Not giving money to panhandlers, creates muggers. Not going out on dates with rapists, causes rape. Not letting potential terrorists in to America... causes terrorism. Just ask the Times.
THE Syrian refugee crisis, building in a horrifying crescendo over the past four years, has set in motion a debate in this country: Should America open her arms to the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” or fold them in a defensive posture born out of fear that refugees will harbor terrorists among them?
They're not yearning to "breathe free". They're yearning to create a state based on Islamic law that will treat non-Muslims and women as inferiors.
President Obama directed his administration to take in some 10,000 Syrian refugees this year, a tiny number in relation to the total needing help. The administration emphasized that it would not relax the lengthy criminal and terrorist background checks demanded of refugee applicants, a vetting process that can take 24 to 36 months.Those of us in the security community know this is dangerously long.
Isn't Orwellianism awesome?
A security check now takes "dangerously long" because the real danger isn't the terrorists we let into this country, it's that the nice people yearning to "breathe free" will turn into terrorists if they have to wait another six months.
That's something that "we in the security community", a term that focuses on Georgetown professors who pander to enabling terrorists, understand, and you peons who don't want to be blown up by refugees at the next marathon, don't grasp.
It is in America’s best interest to speed up the refugee acceptance process for humanitarian reasons and our national security. Not helping refugees resettle as quickly as possible is, in itself, a factor that can increase risk for Americans the world over.
Don't you get it?
We have to take in as many Syrian refugees right now. As soon as possible. For our national security. Also we have to set all our supermarkets on fire. Don't ask why. It's for national security.
Every second we're not taking in a Syrian Muslim is another terrorist we're creating. It's like leaving cooked food out on the counter. The terrorist bacteria start growing and then the non-terrorist will suddenly want to kill us.
Counterterrorism data is clear: Most of the terrorists on American soil do not come from the ranks of refugees but are individuals who are born here
1. Sure if you discount the Boston Marathon bombers and the WTC bombers. And it's not like they matter. In fact some of the worst terrorist attacks in this country were carried out by refugees.
2. How many of the "terrorists who were born here" were born to immigrants and refugees?
Experience from many conflict zones teaches us that the longer these refugees are left to languish in despair in camps the more prone they become to radicalization.
Except for all the ones who are prone to "radicalization" here. If you parse Anne Speckhard's fuming mass of drivel, then "radicalization" only happens to Muslim immigrants before they come to America or in the second generation.
"Since 2007, a small number of Somali refugees in Minnesota joined the Shabab in response to events happening in Somalia, which played into their own traumatic memories and failure to integrate well here. It bears noting that those who became terrorists left the United States to fight for Somalia rather than attacking the country that gave them refuge."
By a small number, Anne Speckhard means dozens. Dozens of Muslims joining Al Qaeda openly is a small number by Somali standards. It's a large number by American standards.
Plenty of domestic terrorists went to fight overseas before returning to America to kill. Those of "us in the security community" know that. Maybe they don't cover it at Georgetown.
"With four million Syrians having fled their country, the United States has accepted only a small number to date, and many have become desperate. Our national security interest requires us to diminish the Islamic State’s recruiting grounds wherever they are. "
So we can "diminish" the recruiting grounds of ISIS by taking ISIS recruits into America?
Why don't we just nuke ourselves and get it over with?
The only certain way to screen Muslim migrants for terrorists is not to take any in. It's that simple. All the arguments that warn us that refusing to take them in will turn them into terrorists is a giant clue that they are not appropriate immigrant material.
People who will kill Americans if they don't get into America... shouldn't be allowed into America.
It's a common sense solution.
ABOUT DANIEL GREENFIELD
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
No comments:
Post a Comment