Friday, November 20, 2015

Terrorists Already Have Gotten into the U. S. as “Refugees”

Christians and people of good will want to be hospitable, especially to those fleeing bad situations.  So it should not surprise that many of the same well meaning people are allowing those good instincts to overwhelm common sense and oppose efforts to stop or severely restrict bringing Middle Eastern “refugees” into the U. S.  I see this myself in a number of personal friends of mine.  They are good people.  But on this subject, they are mistaken.

I’ve already stated that the very nature of Islam makes allowing the mass migration of Muslims pretty much a death wish.  But, leaving that aside for now, it has become a meme that the U. S. screens refugees so closely that we should not be concerned and let those that pass screening right on in.

But it is already evident that whatever screens we are using, they are not working with Muslim refugees.  Kentucky knows that well:

Of the 31 states that have declared their opposition to taking in Syrian refugees, one state, Kentucky, has a specific reason to be wary of the background check process: previously two Iraqi refugees who settled in Bowling Green turned out to be al Qaeda-linked terrorists with the blood of American soldiers on their hands, an ABC News investigation found. Both pleaded guilty to terror-connected charges after trying to acquire heavy weapons while in America’s heartland.

The 2013 ABC News investigation also revealed that several dozen other suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some who were believed to have targeted U.S. troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the U.S. as Iraq and Afghanistan War refugees, among the tens of thousands of innocent immigrants.

The Obama administration insists now that Syrian refugees are subjected to intense vetting before they’re allowed to settle in the U.S. and that a vast majority of the millions of refugees the U.S. has resettled since the 1970s are normal, peaceful people, but the program has had serious security problems before. In 2009, a flaw in background screening of Iraqi refugees allowed the two al Qaeda-linked terrorists to settle in Bowling Green and led to a temporary suspension of the refugee program, officials told ABC News in a 2013 investigation.

More recently, refugees from Bosnia and Somalia have been caught being involved with Islamic terrorist groups as well.

And now we are supposed to let in tens of thousands of Syrian “refugees” without letting in terrorists or future terrorists?  Why should we trust our screens when they have already failed against lesser numbers?

Should Christians desire to aid refugees who are refugees indeed?  Of course.  But aiding them and allowing masses of them to come to the U. S. even if they have problematic backgrounds (And, again, Middle Eastern Islam is a problematic background if there ever was one.) are two different things.

And I have not mentioned that the behavior of most of the “refugees” is that of economic opportunists rather than that of genuine refugees.  Why must so many of them go to countries with sweet welfare benefits, hmmmm?

I believe in prison ministry and have contributed to it and even been involved in it on occasion.  And many prisoners have good hearts and/or changed hearts.  But I have no plans to let a bunch of prisoners I don’t know move into my house.  Just no.  Sorry. 

I guess I’m xenophobic that way.

No comments: