Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Being a 'home-grown' terrorist doesn't mean immigration policy irrelevant

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about "home-grown" terrorism. This follows this post about immigration. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Being a 'home-grown' terrorist doesn't mean immigration policy irrelevant



I'm seeing a lot about "home-grown" terrorists from news media and open-borders enthusiasts.
They seem to be suggesting that the fact that many of the perpetrators were not recent immigrants means that immigration policies don't play a significant role in the wave of terror in Brussels, Paris, San Bernardino and the next target cities.
Of course, there are many factors other than immigration behind these atrocities. But regardless of whether these bad guys arrived in a country six months ago or lived their whole lives there, nearly every one of them operated from within immigrant communities.
Experts on organized crime have long noted that big foreign-culture communities unintentionally serve as the pools in which the bad guys can easily swim out of sight of the authorities.
Crime historians tell us that nearly every nationality that has immigrated to America over the last 200 years in a large wave has brought with it a new organized crime network. It isn't that those nationalities are filled with criminals. But the large unassimilated number of a nationality in a foreign land provides a space for the bad guys to swim with much less chance of detection.
For half a century, promiscuous immigration policies in Europe and the United States have been filling these "enabling pools" faster than assimilation has been able to empty them.
While security forces in our countries work to protect against the next terrorist attack, our immigration policies should NOT continue to fill those pools with large flows of new foreign citizens.
There is no need to single out people by religion, ethnicity or country of origin. The problem can be greatly addressed by dramatic reductions in nearly all forms of immigration.
We don't need the massacres of Brussels, Paris and San Bernardino to justify adopting all the immigration-reduction goals of NumbersUSA (recommended by a bi-partisan federal commission for economic reasons).
But Brussels, Paris and San Bernardino should provide even more urgency to break the gridlock in Congress.
The aim should be to halt all immigration possible. Add as little as possible to the enabling pools. This will ensure that the number of immigrants arriving is small enough that all can truly be screened for security. In addition, the categories allowed to continue will be of immigrants most likely to arrive with the best chance of rapid assimilation.
Our full set of recommendations are found at: https://www.numbersusa.com/about
  • Eliminate chain migration that brings in unending flows of distant relatives of an original immigrant.
  • Eliminate the visa lottery that brings in people by raffle.
  • Eliminate employment-based visas for workers who have skills that unemployed Americans have.
And for now, a change in our long-standing goals, enact a moratorium on all refugee resettlement until Americans can be guaranteed of the safety of the program. In the meantime, the U.S. should concentrate on helping far more refugees find safe, healthy refuge in their home region.
During an era of Brussels, Paris and San Bernardino, we should restrict immigration to:
(a) spouses and minor children of immigrants already here,
(b) marriages and adoptions by U.S. citizens,
(c) workers with extraordinary skills in the national interest.
ROY BECK is Founder & President of NumbersUSA

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.


No comments: