This Isn’t The Way to Honor the Victims of Islamist Terrorism

Article author: 
Tom Tancredo
Article publisher: 
Article date: 
12 September 2015
Article category: 
Our American Future
Article Body: 

...When President Obama and John Kerry suggest taking 10,000 Syrian refugees in 2016, 90 percent of them Muslim and many of them jihadist sympathizers– really, it’s not that hard. Not today. Not ever. Just say no. In fact, say HELL NO!

Why is there even a debate on the matter?

Yes, the flood of refugees fleeing Syria is a humanitarian tragedy of historic proportions. However, these are not refugees from a terrible hurricane, a volcano eruption, or a tsunami tidal wave. These 4,000,000 are refugees from a civil war made intractable and horrific by an Islamist insurrection called the Islamic State, or ISIS. The refugees are a product of the same war that victimized 3,000 Americans on that beautiful September morning in 2001.

Unlike the Vietnam boat people or Cuban refugees after Castro came to power, the U.S. has no moral responsibility for the chaos in Syria. In fact, just the opposite is the case.

Is it really such a novel idea that refugees from a Middle East civil war should be resettled in the Middle East, not Europe and America?

... Let’s ask if it meets a test never applied by President Obama but occasionally enters the conversation among patriots and some Republicans: Is it in America’s best interests — from both the economic and national security standpoint?

The blunt truth is that taking 10,000 Syrian refugees is not only a bad idea, it is such an obviously bad idea that it ought to serve as a litmus test for foreign policy sanity among the 17 Republican candidates for president...

  • Maybe our Republican candidates do not know that the United States already has over one million Muslims and is home to the largest expatriate Muslim population on the planet.
  • Maybe they do not know that 9 out of 10 legal immigrants from Africa, East Asia, Latin America and the Middle East ALREADY reside in the United States....

Let’s just list the five most obvious reasons why taking 10,000 ADDITIONAL Syrian refugees is not only not very smart, it’s borderline criminal.

  • The 10,000 Syrians Obama is proposing to accommodate would be on top of the 70,000 refugees we are already slated to take in 2016 – along with tens of thousands of “Asylees.” It’s not as though we aren’t already doing our part in accommodating world migration. In fact, we do more than any other nation.
  • Are Syrians being moved to the front of the line among the millions of displaced persons across the globe? Why? Why are they more deserving than Africans fleeing tribal butchery, Coptic Christians driven from their homes in Egypt and Libya, Ukrainians fleeing Russian Reconquista, or Venezuelans escaping Marxist militarism?
  • Why are we allowing Saudi Arabia and several other wealthy Middle East nations to take in ZERO refugees? Why are Syrian, Iraqi and Libyan refugees not being resettled in wealthy neighboring countries instead of Europe and the US?
  • With over 50 percent of our present immigrant population on welfare, does a country with a $19 trillion debt really need to add to that fiscal burden?

Finally, and most important of all, what about the national security implications? We know that ISIS is actively placing jihadists among the hundreds of thousands of Syrian migrants...


CAIRCO Research

Syrian refugees and national security.

Refugee Resettlement.

Refugee Resettlement Fact Sheet from Refugee Resettlement Watch - the premier information resource for forced resettlement of foreigners in American communities.

America Unsecured - Pathway to Another 9/11

The Third World Is On The Move. This Will Get WAY Worse Before It Gets Better, John Derbyshire, VDare, September 12, 2015.

Refugee Flow May Mask Terrorist Infiltration, Spy Chief Says

The Refugee Resettlement Racket, articles from the Social Contract, Summer 2013 issue.