The ‘Muslim Ban’ Is Gone. Now Come the Reminders of Why We Needed It.


Joe Biden had barely been in the Oval Office long enough to exile the Winston Churchill bust yet again when he repealed the notorious “Muslim Ban,” and so now Americans can rest easy. We have repudiated one of the hallmarks of the Bad Orange Man’s administration, put “racism” and “Islamophobia” behind us, and resumed our role as a refuge for the tired, the poor, the woke masses. And so as a glorious new multicultural era dawns in America, after a four-year-long speed bump, will come the reminders that virtue-signaling is never a risk-free proposition.
For besides cementing Old Joe’s role as the errand boy for his party’s ascendant hard-Left wing, that was all the repeal of the “Muslim Ban” was: virtue-signaling. The executive order his handlers had ready for him to sign on Wednesday made that clear. “Beyond contravening our values,” it said, “these Executive Orders and Proclamations” — that is, the ones instituting the bans – “have undermined our national security. They have jeopardized our global network of alliances and partnerships and are a moral blight that has dulled the power of our example the world over. And they have separated loved ones, inflicting pain that will ripple for years to come. They are just plain wrong.”
That “moral blight” bit is the key, as it would be hard for Biden’s handlers to whisper into his earpiece a coherent argument for how a ban on travel from such upstanding members of the international community as Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, North Korea, Venezuela, Nigeria, Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan and Tanzania undermined, rather than strengthened, national security.
But even the “moral blight” business runs into a major problem: there never really was a “Muslim Ban” at all. From beginning to end, that was just propaganda designed to smear Trump as a racist (even though Islam is, contrary to popular belief, actually not a race), bigoted, “Islamophobe.” It had no basis in reality. For as you may be aware, North Korea, Venezuela, and Myanmar are not actually Muslim countries at all. Eritrea has about a fifty percent Muslim population. Tanzania is about 35% Muslim.
What’s more, the world’s largest Muslim populations are (in descending order) in Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Algeria, and Sudan. Iran, Nigeria and Sudan are the only ones on the “Muslim Ban” list. If Trump had really wanted to bar Muslims from entering the United States, he would have banned travel from Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Egypt, Turkey, and Algeria. He made no attempt to do so. If he had intended to impose a “Muslim Ban,” barring travel from North Korea but not Pakistan was a remarkably inefficient way to go about it.
What led to the grouping of countries in the Trump “Muslim Ban” was not that they were Muslim at all. The travel bans were on countries that could not or would not provide adequate information about who was entering. It was a national security move from start to finish. But now Obama’s dotty old puppet and his handlers have made sure that any consideration of national security issues in connection with mass migration will be dismissed as “racist” and “Islamophobic.”
And so now the reminders of why we needed Trump’s travel bans will start coming. Here is a preview: Somali Muslim migrant Mohammad Barry in February 2016 stabbed multiple patrons at a restaurant owned by an Israeli Arab Christian; Ahmad Khan Rahami, an Afghan Muslim migrant, in September 2016 set off bombs in New York City and New Jersey; Arcan Cetin, a Turkish Muslim migrant, in September 2016 murdered five people in a mall in Burlington, Washington; Dahir Adan, another Somali Muslim migrant, in October 2016 stabbed mall shoppers in St. Cloud while screaming “Allahu akbar”; and Abdul Razak Artan, yet another Somali Muslim migrant, in November 2016 injured nine people with car and knife attacks at Ohio State University.
Seventy-two jihad terrorists had entered the U.S. from the countries listed in Trump’s initial immigration ban before it was instituted. But once the travel bans came into effect, suddenly we didn’t see as much of this as we had before. Yes, this was no coincidence.
There are warning signs from Europe as well. All of the jihadis who murdered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had just entered Europe as refugees. Numerous other Muslim migrants since then have committed “lone wolf” jihad attacks on the streets of several European countries.
But to consider such matters is now officially “racist” and “Islamophobic.” The problem with virtue-signaling by our moral superiors in Washington, however, is that they never have to deal with the consequences of their actions; ordinary Americans do. Anyone who is the victim of a crime or a jihad attack perpetrated by a migrant from one of the countries on Trump’s travel ban list can expect no sympathy from Biden’s handlers. Their constituency has been served, and it isn’t the Americans who have to deal with criminal migrants. As a nation, we are no longer “racist,” at least in this particular, and that’s all that matters.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Khamenei posts photo of Trump playing golf in drone’s shadow, vows ‘Revenge is Definite’
UK: Muslim migrant who murdered 3 was free and not deported despite 7 convictions for 19 previous offenses
Palestinian Islamic Jihad top dog says Soleimani gave ‘direct orders,’ Iran supplied rockets to hit Israel
Germany: 200 Muslims allowed to pray in mosque but only 70 Christians in church
Denmark’s Integration Minister: ‘A large part of Islam today is represented by extremists’
UK: Muslim accused of having explosives, detonators and documents referring to jihad and combat
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Poll: Nearly Two-Thirds Of Americans Say Country Is Headed In The Wrong Direction, Double-Digit Spike Since December


Amid lingering tensions from November’s presidential election and the Capitol riot earlier this month, recent polling data indicates that more Americans now believe the country is headed in the wrong direction than they did December.
USA Today/Suffolk University poll released Sunday found that 65% of respondents said the country is headed in the wrong direction, a roughly 16% increase since last month, when a Dec. 28 poll found that 49% of respondents thought the country was on the wrong track.


The number of Americans who said the country is headed in the right direction also fell by double-digit margins. Just 22% of respondents in January said the country is on the right track, compared to 34% who said the same in December.
Republicans were considerably more likely than Democrats to say the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to survey results. While 84% of Republican respondents said the country was on the wrong track, 52% of Democratic respondents said the same.
Respondents who thought the country was headed in the wrong direction — regardless of political affiliation — expressed more unfavorable views not only of both political parties but also of both President Donald Trump and President-elect Joe Biden.
Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos said the Capitol riot and Trump’s second impeachment most likely contributed to the notable shift in public opinion over just three weeks, according to USA Today. Polling data suggests a deep partisan divide on both issues even as Trump’s approval rating has dropped to the lowest point in his presidency.
Some Democrats who participated in the survey told USA Today during follow-up interviews that they remain worried about the future of the country even with Biden’s upcoming inauguration Wednesday.
The USA Today/Suffolk University poll surveyed 1,000 registered voters via live telephone interviews between Jan. 12-15. The poll had a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points.
COLUMN BY

VARUN HUKERI

Reporter. Follow Varun on Twitter
RELATED VIDEO: The Left Is EVERYTHING They Say We Are And MORE! | Huckabeehttps://rumble.com/embed/vadis9/?pub=3dgzn

RELATED ARTICLE:
Nearly Three-Fourths Of Voters Are Worried About Violence Before Biden’s Inauguration
CNN’s Jim Scuitto Forced To Push Back On Idea ‘White’ Soldiers Represent Potential Threat
Hawley Signs With New Publisher After Simon & Schuster Canceled His Book Deal
‘What The Hell?’: Tucker Carlson Responds To Rep Steve Cohen’s ‘Grotesque’ Comments On Racial, Gender Makeup Of National…
EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

What Biden’s Immigration Policies Would Do To America — America’s adversaries can’t wait for this massive betrayal.


Not unlike Donald Trump, during the Presidential campaign, Joe Biden turned immigration into a major issue.  However, unlike President Trump who promised to secure our nation’s borders against illegal entry and ramp up immigration law enforcement to protect innocent people from  criminal aliens and international terrorists, Joe Biden has promised to do the polar opposite within the first 100 days of taking office- but no one is questioning why he would do this or how this would be beneficial to America or Americans.
On January 16, 2021 the American Thinker published an important article, Joe Biden’s big amnesty plan stuns even the open-borders activists for its ‘boldness’ and ‘ambition’ that addressed many of the reasons why Biden’s plan to provide lawful status and pathways to citizenship for what has been estimated to be a  population of 11 million illegal aliens.
As disconcerting as all of the issues raised in the American Thinker article are, the article fails to make several other points that must be considered.
First of all, the number of 11 million is far, far smaller than would be the actual number of aliens who would benefit from such a massive amnesty program.
My earlier article, Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ is Bunk included this excerpt:
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Should be Renamed the Overwhelm America Act” in which I noted that on September 21, 2018 Yale University reported Yale Study Finds Twice as Many Undocumented Immigrants as Previous Estimates.  That report, published just over two years ago noted:
Using mathematical modeling on a range of demographic and immigration operations data, the researchers estimate there are 22.1 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.
It is likely that the actual number of illegal aliens currently present in the United States is significantly higher than the Yale study’s 22.1 million.  Furthermore with extravagant promises being made to illegal aliens by the incoming Biden administration, that includes a virtual end to immigration law enforcement, the floodgates will be flung open and God knows how many more millions of illegal aliens will stream across our borders.
When dealing with the number of illegal aliens who would be rewarded for violating our borders and our laws, virtually all estimates ignore the biggest factor- all legalized aliens would have the immediate and absolute right to have their spouses and every one of their minor children be lawfully admitted to join them permanently in the United States.
If, for example each illegal alien has, on average four minor children, a wildly optimistic estimate, and if 25 million illegal aliens apply for lawful status, more than 100 million immigrants who are not yet here would be permitted to enter the United States!
Imagine the impact and consequences of the massive influx of immigrants would have on our economy, on critical infrastructure, on inflation as 100 million new immigrants need such basics as food, clothing and housing.
These children would be enrolled in our already crumbling schools systems and the majority would likely not be proficient in the English language.
Today because of the COVID-19 pandemic many hospitals around the United States are overwhelmed.  Imagine the impact on our already overwhelmed healthcare system that would result from adding tens of millions of more immigrants to our population.
There would be no way for USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) to interview tens of millions of immigrants and absolutely no way to conduct field investigations.
Adding to this is the Biden administration’s pick for the pivotal position of Director of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas who had been a high-rating official at DHS during the Obama administration.  He had been investigated by the Office of Inspector General for improperly approving applications for EB-5 visas because of apparent political purposes.  He was also notorious for ordering the approval of applications for a wide variety fo applications for immigration benefits at USCIS ordering that these hapless adjudications officers “Get to yes!”
I wrote about the malfeasance of Mr. Mayorkas in my article,  Biden’s DHS: Department of Homeland Surrender.
Here is an excerpt from that article:

On March 24, 2015 ABC News reported, Top Homeland Official Alejandro Mayorkas Accused of Political Favoritism Alejandro Mayorkas oversaw controversial $500,000 visa program.
The above-noted report was preceded by two ABC News reports that were published on February 3, 2015 which illustrate a clear nexus between these visas and national security
Whistleblowers: US Gave Visas to Suspected Forgers, Fraudsters, Criminals Internal documents show feds ignored warnings from FBI.”  This report began with this excerpt:
Officials overseeing a federal program that offers an immigration short-cut to wealthy foreign investors have ignored pointed warnings from federal agents and approved visas for some immigrants suspected of having committed fraud, money laundering, and even one applicant with alleged ties to a child porn website, an ABC News investigation has found. The shortcomings prompted concerns within the Department of Homeland Security that the boutique immigration program would be exploited by terrorists, according to internal documents obtained by ABC News.

It is irrefutable that Biden’s massive amnesty program for tens of millions of illegal aliens would have catastrophic and irrevocable implications for national security and that the appointment of Mayorkas would exacerbate this threat to our nation.
To amplify this point, consider this unequivocal statement from the report that was prepared by the 9/11 Commission staff, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel that incorporated specific examples of the way that the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993 that killed six and injured more than one thousand victims.

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

The Britannica website furnished additional information about the World Trade Center bombing of 1993.
On December 26, 2020 Reuters reported, China to leapfrog U.S. as world’s biggest economy by 2028: think tank.
This is how this ominous report from Reuters began:

LONDON (Reuters) – China will overtake the United States to become the world’s biggest economy in 2028, five years earlier than previously estimated due to the contrasting recoveries of the two countries from the COVID-19 pandemic, a think tank said.
“For some time, an overarching theme of global economics has been the economic and soft power struggle between the United States and China,” the Centre for Economics and Business Research said in an annual report published on Saturday.

That assessment did not include the impact that a massive onslaught of immigrants would have on the U.S. economy.  It must be presumed that the Biden Administration’s immigration policies would hasten the day when the economy of China would surpass that of the United States.
Undoubtedly the leaders of the communist regime in China would be delighted if Mr. Biden gets his way, as would the leaders of Russia, Iran, North Korea and other adversaries of the United States.
The one question that should be asked by the reporters who will cover the White House once Joe Biden is sworn in is, “Why, why would you do this to America and Americans?”
Given the state of politics and supposed journalism today, I am not holding my breath to hear that question being asked of Joe Biden or his Presidential heir apparent, Kamala Harris.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Beijing Biden Plots Early Legislation to give 11 million Illegal Immigrants Citizenship


Taking the jobs from American minorities — pity those minorities remain shackled to the party of slavery.
Democrats need voters to cover their notorious election fraud. Illegals will do nicely.

Biden plans early legislation to offer legal status to 11 million immigrants without it

By Cindy Carcamo, Andrea Castillo, Molly O’Toole, LA Times, Jan. 15, 2021
During his first days in office, President-elect Joe Biden plans to send a groundbreaking legislative package to Congress to address the long-elusive goal of immigration reform, including what’s certain to be a controversial centerpiece:
a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 11 million immigrants who are in the country without legal status, according to immigrant rights activists in communication with the Biden-Harris transition team.
The bill also would provide a shorter pathway to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people with temporary protected status and beneficiaries of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals who were brought to the U.S. as children, and probably also for certain front-line essential workers, vast numbers of whom are immigrants.
DACA changed a generation of California immigrants

RELATED VIDEO: There’s Something Happening Here, What it is Ain’t Exactly Clear

RELATED ARTICLES: 
Markets Fret Over Sanders’ Role As Head Of Budget Committee, Stocks Flat As Investors Brush Off Impeachment Plans
VIDEO: “If You Need All This To Protect Your Inauguration from the People, Maybe the F-ing People Didn’t F-ing Elect You!” – DC Worker Shows Video of Military Checkpoints in City (VIDEO)
Black Lives Matter Insurrectionist who was arrested over the Capitol riot “incites violence and sparked militia movement” says brother who turned him in
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Most Illegal Immigrants Arrested by ICE in 2020 Had Average of Four Criminal Convictions or Charges


The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants arrested by federal authorities in 2020 had an average of four criminal convictions or charges, according to a year-end report published by the government. In the document Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reveals it arrested 103,603 illegal aliens last fiscal year with a total of more than 374,000 convictions and charges. Driving under the influence was the most popular conviction or charge at 74,000, followed by drug crimes (67,000), assaults (37,000), sex offenses (10,000), robberies (3,800), homicides (1,900) and kidnappings (1,600).
It doesn’t end there. An additional 185,884 illegal immigrants were deported by ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) in 2020 and most of them—64%—had criminal convictions or pending charges. In fact, they had a total of 399,235 criminal convictions and pending charges, according to statistics provided by the Homeland Security agency. Those removed from the country include 4,276 gang members, 675 of them from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), and 31 terrorists. ICE reports that 350 were considered “high-profile removals.” Among them is a Bosnian named Saudin Agani who provided material support to a terrorist organization and has ties to the suspect who attacked two New York City police officers in 2020. “ERO Removal Division’s ICE Air Charter Operations coordinated a record-breaking 76 Special High-Risk Charters to 61 countries, six of which were new countries it had not previously visited,” the report says. Those countries include Jordan, Albania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Romania, and Mongolia, effectuating 3,278 removals. “This is a 160% increase in total removals via Special High-Risk Charter flights compared to FY 2019,” according to ICE.
The agency also issued 122,233 detainers last year with local law enforcement agencies nationwide for illegal immigrants with criminal histories. More than 1,900 committed homicide-related offenses, 3,600 robberies, 42,800 assaults and 11,900 sex crimes. The detainers are issued as part of a federal-local partnership known as 287(g) that notifies ICE of jail inmates in the country illegally so they can be deported after serving time for state crimes. A growing number of leftist officials running local governments around the country refuse to participate in the program, but 150 still do and federal immigration authorities credit them with significantly improving public safety. ICE says when law enforcement agencies fail to honor immigration detainers and release serious criminal offenders onto the streets, it undermines its ability protect public safety and carry out its mission. Judicial Watch has reported extensively on some of the culprits, providing outrageous examples that include elected law enforcement officials freeing child sex offenders, major counties releasing numerous violent convicts and a state—North Carolina—that discharged nearly 500 illegal immigrant criminals from custody in a year.
The problem continues as more local police departments refuse to comply with 287(g). In the recently issued report ICE discloses that a two-month program known as Operation Cross Check XI helped arrest more than 2,700 at-large individuals living illegally in the U.S. with pending charges or convictions for crimes involving victims. That means the offenders were likely protected by sanctuary policies. “Of the arrests conducted during Operation Cross Check XI, there were more than 5,800 criminal convictions and more than 3,200 pending charges associated with those arrests,” the ICE report states. “The aliens who were the subjects of these arrests had criminal histories including, but not limited to, the following charges and convictions: more than 1,500 assaults, more than 340 sex crimes, nearly 200 weapon offenses, more than 50 robberies and 31 homicide offenses.”
As if all this information was not enraging enough, the document also reveals that the government spent a ghastly $315 million on healthcare for illegal immigrants in custody last year. That includes comprehensive medical, dental, and public health services. In 2020 the feds delivered health care to nearly 100,000 detainees at 20 facilities nationwide that have inhouse ICE Health Services Corps (IHSC) and oversaw health care for more than 169,000 additional detainees housed in facilities without IHSC. This includes 99,219 intake screenings, 3,048 emergency room visits,15,571 dental visits,19,367 urgent care visits, 123,936 sick calls, 68,985 mental health interventions, 270,222 filled prescriptions and 52,278 physical exams. Adding to the expenses, when COVID-19 hit, ICE created a working group of medical professionals, disease control specialists and other experts to minimize the spread of the virus.
EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Terror Arrest Highlights How Perilous Biden’s Immigration Plans Are


Biden administration would order U.S. to lower its shields.


On December 16, 2020 the Justice Department issued a press release about the arrest of alleged terrorist, Cholo Abdi Abdullah, who was conspiring with other terrorists from an al Qaeda-affiliated terror organization to carry out a 9/11-style terror attack inside the United States.  This substantiates a point I have made on numerous occasions, where the threats posed to America and Americans by foreign radical Islamic Terrorist organizations are concerned, the “All Clear” has most certainly not been sounded.
However apparently Joe Biden and Kamal Harris never got or, more likely, never read the memo.
Biden and Harris have both enthusiastically promised (threatened) to all but end immigration law enforcement and remove the restrictions that prohibit the entry of aliens from countries that sponsor terrorism and whose backgrounds cannot be effectively vetted.
While the media refers to the countries on the list of those countries as being “Muslim majority countries” implying that the so-call “travel ban” which is actually an entry restriction, was created to target Muslims, in reality, has nothing to do with religion but national security.  The  countries on that very limited list have a direct nexus to terrorism and for a variety of reasons, our officials are unable to effectively vet the citizens of those countries.
In point of fact, the three most populous Muslim-majority countries are Indonesia, Pakistan and India.  Yet those countries do not appear on that list.
For Americans to be happy that Biden would eliminate that entry restriction makes as much sense as a flock of chickens celebrating that Colonel Sanders has announced a new recipe for fried chicken!
Shortly after Biden announced he would nominate Alejandro Mayorkas to be Secretary of DHS (Department of Homeland Security) I wrote an article about who Mayorkas would be a terrible choice.  My article, Biden’s DHS: Department of Homeland Surrender included information that when Mayorkas was the Director of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) for Obama, was the architect of DACA and had been investigated by the OIG (Office of Inspector General) for acting improperly, approving applications for visas that should not have been approved and for pressuring employees of USCIS to “Get to yes”- in other words approve just about every application for various immigration benefits including applications for political asylum, work visas, resident alien status and U.S. citizenship- or else!  This not only undermined employee morale but undermined national security by creating opportunities for immigration fraud.
It has recently been reported that if Biden is sworn in as President that he may nominate Andrew Cuomo to be the Attorney General.  Cuomo has referred to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) Agents as “thugs” and as the governor of New York State, provides illegal aliens with driver’s licenses and refuses to share DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles) information to the Border Patrol, ICE and the inspection personnel of CBP (Customs and Border Protection) who stand watch on our nation’s borders and conduct the inspection of people and vehicles seeking entry into the United States.
Roughly one year ago I addressed Cuomos gift to ISIS, the drug cartels, and human traffickers in my article, New York State Blocks ICE and Border Patrol Access to DMV Database.
I urge you to read that article to understand just how dangerous Cuomo’s policy is- not just for the hapless residents of New York State, but to all who live within the United States.
The 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, identified multiple failures of the immigration system as having contributed significantly to the ability of a number of terrorists, including the 19 who participated in the deadly terror attacks of September 11, 2001 to enter the United States and embed themselves (hiding in plain sight) as they went about their deadly preparations.
Immigration fraud came under particular scrutiny by the 9/11 Commission as a key vulnerability frequently exploited by terrorists.
President Trump’s immigration policies have been, in part, driven by the nexus between border security and effective immigration law enforcement to enhance U.S. national security to protect our nation from the Damoclean threat of terrorism.
Nevertheless the leaders of the radicalized Democrat Party have criticized the Trump administration at every turn and have expanded “Sanctuary” policies that undermine immigration law enforcement and Biden has promised to undo all that President Trump did to protect our nation and our citizens.
Today, as we contemplate how dangerous a Biden administration would be for national security and public safety, we will focus on the December 16, 2020 Department of Justice news release,
Kenyan National Indicted for Conspiring to Hijack Aircraft on Behalf of the Al Qaeda-Affiliated Terrorist Organization Al Shabaab.
The chilling subtitle of that DOJ press release provides a bit more information about this terror plot: Cholo Abdi Abdullah Obtained Pilot Training and Researched How to Hijack Aircraft in Order to Conduct a 9/11-Style Attack at the Direction of al Shabaab.
The DOJ press release begins with the following paragraph:

The Department of Justice announced the unsealing of an indictment charging Cholo Abdi Abdullah with six counts of terrorism-related offenses arising from his activities as an operative of the foreign terrorist organization al Shabaab, including conspiring to hijack aircraft in order to conduct a 9/11-style attack in the United States.  Abdullah was arrested in July 2019 in the Philippines on local charges, and was subsequently transferred on Dec. 15, 2020 in connection with his deportation from the Philippines to the custody of U.S. law enforcement for prosecution on the charges in the indictment

The press release also includes this excerpt:

Nearly 20 years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, there are those who remain determined to conduct terror attacks against United States citizens. Abdullah, we allege, is one of them,” said FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge William F. Sweeney Jr. He obtained a pilots license overseas, learning how to hijack an aircraft for the purpose of causing a mass-casualty incident within our borders. Fortunately, the exceptional work by the men and women assigned to the many agencies that comprise the FBIs New York JTTF have, once again, disrupted a threat to our communities.”

It must be noted that ICE contributes the second largest contingent of federal agents to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) because virtually all foreign nationals who engage in terrorism violate multiple sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act and as such, ICE agents are uniquely qualified to provide vital assistance to these investigations.
A review of the indictment underscores just how important immigration law enforcement is and how any efforts to undermine the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws undermines national security.
Item 17 on page 7 of the indictment states:

While CHOLO ABDI ABDULLAH, the defendant, was obtaining flight training at the Flight School, he conducted research into the means and methods fo hijack a commercial airliner to conduct an attack, including, among other things, security on commercial airliners and how to breach a cockpit door from the outside, information about the tallest building in a major U.S. city, and information about how to obtain a U.S. visa.

Item 20 on page 8 states, in part:

It was a part and an object of the conspiracy that CHOLO ABDI ABDULLAH, the defendant, and others known and unknown, would and did knowingly provide al Shabaab with material support and resources, including, among other things, property, explosives, personnel, services, training, false documentation and identification, communications equipment, weapons, transportation, and expert advice and assistance, knowing that al Shabaab was a designated FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) (as defined Title 18, United States Code, Section 2339B(g)(6), that al Shabaab engages and has engaged in terrorist activity as defined in section 212(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act…

The first paragraph of the preface of the official report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel provides the summation for my commentary today:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

How RINOs Undermined the President


Yesterday I wrote about Elizabeth Neumann, a former Republican big wig at the Department of Homeland Security who claimed she supported the President initially because she is pro-lifebut decided to work against him because he cut back on immigration and talked mean “racist” talk. Talk, she says, that makes America less safe.
So much for her devotion to life as she actively worked on behalf of pro-abortion Biden/Harris, making innocent babies less safe. See here.

Neumann has described herself as “first and foremost a follower of Jesus Christ,” and her 2016 decision to vote for Trump as “primarily because of the pro-life issue.”

She subsequently re-examined her earlier convictions (?) and concluded that admitting 125,000 refugees a year is more important than babies!  She claims America is safer when we open our borders.
I’m posting this here because I am not sure how many of you see Refugee Resettlement Watch and because I have a category here specially made for posts like this—political rats.  That is a category I originally made when I wrote about the Lincoln Project, but it has come in handy.

Anti-Trump RINO Pushing Biden’s 125,000 Refugees-a-year Agenda; says it will Strengthen America


EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Ted Kennedy altered U.S. immigration policy to accommodate Communist China


When Henry Kissinger was Secretary of State, David Rockefeller, as Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, met with the Chinese Premier to pursue strategies to open markets in Communist China for Western corporations so that they could be linked into global scientific networks financed by American taxpayers and developed by American know-how as part of a long-term strategy to enrich multinationals in the vast, untapped markets of Communist China, which was to be elevated to lead the New World Order.
The United States, with its industrious, morally upright citizens, strong nuclear families, safe, stable communities, constitutionally protected freedoms, unlimited opportunities for upward mobility, and burgeoning wealth would need to be brought to its knees so that Communist China could ascend to superpower status.
WATCH: How Kennedy Altered U.S. Immigration Policy to Accommodate Communist China
In the Kissinger Transcripts, Kissinger and Chairman Mao-tse Tung discussed using immigrants as a weapon against the United States, to weaken this country for conquest by Communist China.
“My colleagues in Washington think I’m a raving maniac,” Kissinger said.
“Fundamental cooperation is needed,” Mao reminded him.
“Even if we sometimes criticize each other, we will coordinate our actions with you,” Kissinger told Mao. “Both of us must be true to our principles. In fact, it would confuse the issue if we spoke the same language.”
“The whole world should unite to defeat all reactionaries and establish socialism,” Mao said alluding to patriots and nationalists – that is, those who were not agreeable to the technocratic, globalist agenda that seeks to enslave humanity and absorb the wealth and power of the world into the hands of a select few.
Mao and Kissinger also discussed a strategy of changing U.S. immigration policy to weaken the United States from within.
“Do you want our Chinese women,” Mao asked with deadpanned seriousness. “We can give you 10,000,000. We can let them flood your country with disaster and therefore impair your interests.”
Kissinger complimented Mao’s “novel idea” and advised, “I will have to study it.”
“You can set up a committee,” Mao suggested. “That is how you settle the population question.”
Around this time, Senator Ted Kennedy, who nursed political ambitions of his own, took steps to permanently change America’s immigration policies, with a view toward transforming the country’s demographics forever.
“You can let in so many nationalities,” Mao said.
While observing his Chinese counterpart, Kissinger perceived a “mocking, slightly demonic smile.”
While globalists were fond of accusing Americans of racism, Kissinger privately acknowledged their tolerance.
“There is no feeling of hostility at all toward the Chinese people,” Kissinger told Mao. “On the contrary, between us right now, there is only a judicial problem, which we will solve in the next years…there is a strong community of interests which is operating immediately (and tapping) other countries that have intentions.”
Mao laughed with Kissinger over his view of the United States as a “paper tiger” – that of a powerful, but ultimately ineffectual force that could fold with a gust of wind.
As transcripts revealed, Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping praised Kissinger for “(pulling) the wool over the eyes of the West, (demoralizing) the Western people, and (letting) them slacken their pace.”
Kissinger’s assistant, Winston Lord, who had joined the National Security Council in 1969, went on to become Ambassador to China during the Bush and Reagan Administrations.
Bill Clinton then appointed Lord Undersecretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, ensuring that Kissinger’s agenda continued regardless of whom the people elected to serve them.
Good, decent, and trusting American people were largely oblivious to the machinations at play as the shadow dragon gradually executed a plan against them which was conceived by a small group of men in London controlled by the Rothschilds.
Ted Kennedy, who nursed presidential ambitions, was quick to perceive an opportunity.
It was not long after that Kennedy aligning his interests with those of Communist China and the City of London.
Kennedy’s treachery began with his unrestrained support for the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which ended the immigration quota system and removed restrictions on immediate relations of immigrants.
Previously, the American immigration system gave priority to Northern and Western European immigrants who shared the values and culture of the United States.
In contrast, Kennedy opened the doors to Africa and Asia, where communists were fomenting revolutions.
The bill was written by Norbert Schell, a legal adviser to Kennedy whose client list included Atlantic Richfield and business interests in Asia.
Recall Kissinger’s discussions with Mao in which the men privately discussed “flooding” the country with Chinese immigrants for the specific purpose of impairing the interests of the United States and “let(ting) in so many nationalities.”
While Americans have begun to resist the influx of immigrants into this country, their resistance was not based upon racism. Kissinger remarked effusively about tolerance Americans expressed towards people from other lands.
The new immigrants the City of London sought to bring into the United States were those who would deliberately create problems for the host country and impair its interests.
It is difficult for Americans to believe that the immigration laws were written with this intent, but elites have admitted to this in their own words, and the problems created as a result are palpable.
According to NumbersUSA, an organization that seeks to reduce legal and illegal immigration into the United States, Kennedy’s immigration policies have “fundamentally changed America” by destroying the ability of the United States to control its own borders and be an environmentally sustainable nation. Immigrants are now coming into the country faster than they can be absorbed, inflicting stress on communities and impairing their ability to meet budgets due to growing demands for medical care, education, housing, and social services.
In turn, Americans are facing dramatic increases in property taxes, making it difficult for many to purchase and maintain their own homes. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have fallen out of the middle class as their occupations have collapsed and their wages have stagnated while their taxes had shot into the stratosphere.
It is clear that another agenda is at play.
Not only do Communists advocate a strategy of overwhelming the United States with immigrants, but globalist groups have organized caravans from the United States and Mexico, like Pueblos sin Fronteras, which have called for open borders.
Another tell is that the Chair Emeritus of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), an organization which champions asylum seekers, is none other than Winston Lord, a Yale graduate and member of Skull and Bones.
In addition to attending meetings with President Richard Nixon, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and Communist Chinese Chairman Mao Zedong, Lord accompanied Nixon on his historic trip to China and served as U.S. Ambassador to China under President George Herbert Walker Bush.
The IRC was subsidized by the National War Fund whose president was Winston Aldrich, an American financier and scion of a prominent political family who served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom.
Married to a Rockefeller, Aldrich became President and Chairman of Chase National Bank which coordinated financial assistance for the UK and Europe after World War II.
Parroting globalist talking points, the IRC opines: “Central Americans fleeing violence and persecution have the right to apply for protection, A new U.S. policy that will push these desperate asylum seekers back into Mexico is not only cruel but illegal.”
Among the IRC’s champions is actress Meryl Streep who endorsed Hillary Clinton for President and then promptly joined the “Resistance” after Trump won in her place.
The IRC, which established 191 field offices in over 30 crisis torn communities to help refugees survive conflict and rebuild countries after wars, is presided over not by an American – but a Brit – UK Foreign Secretary David Milliband to be exact.
Founded during World War II, the IRC was established to help Jews flee Nazi Germany.
After the IRC facilitated the emigration of European Jews to Israel, China, and the United States, the group expanded its mandate to include other types of refugees. The IRC’s antecedent, the International Relief Association, was founded in Germany by communists, some of whom survived Stalin’s purges in Russia and who were members of the Socialist Workers Party. Among those purged was Jay Lovestone, the head of the Communist Party of the United States and CIA asset.
In the 1970s, Kennedy expanded the refugee program, spawning a resettlement cottage industry.
As public funds became available for refugees and other poor immigrants, corporations demanded the United States increase its intake of poor, unskilled immigrants to exploit cheap labor, in turn displacing more American from jobs while increasing the demand for more public housing and entitlement programs for the needy which government contractors provided, making the rich richer at the expense of ordinary citizens.
Americans who took umbrage at this agenda which was admittedly created to prepare the United States for conquest, demoralize and displace its people, and bankrupt the country, have been disparaged as racists, nationalists, and part of old America that deserves to die, not unlike the traditional Chinese whose noble culture and religion were decimated by the materialistic, Godless communists who seized control in their country, flooded their country with drugs, and oppressed its people.
The U.S. government has further accommodated Big Business at the expense of ordinary citizens by ensuring corporations receive subsidies and tax relief to hire foreigners over Americans, often paying immigrants lower wages than what their American counterparts would need to survive.
The taxpayers are then required to support poor immigrants to make up the wage differential. The more needy, unskilled, and vulnerable the people that can be brought into the country, the more government contractors and corporations can profit by way of providing them free or subsidized housing, new schools, hospitals, equipment, products, and services that are taxpayer subsidized, with lucrative government contracts offered to provide hospitality to needy immigrants.
Kennedy tried to force through more immigration legislation between 2000 and 2008, creating a lottery that randomly gave away 50,000 green cards a year to people in countries with the least cultural ties and affinity with the United States, some of which sponsored terrorism.
Elites profited from the influx while consolidating power through the societal chaos that ensued.
Kennedy also pushed the H-1B visa for immigrants with specialized knowledge, preventing hundreds of thousands of American children from acquiring jobs in high tech companies.
He further helped squash the recommendations of Civil Rights activist Barbara Jordan’s Blue Ribbon Commission to reduce overall immigration and eliminate chain migration and the immigration lottery.
He even promoted mini amnesties directed as specific nationalities, transforming the United States permanently while residing near the Chinese Embassy in the posh neighborhood of Kalorama in Washington, DC.
Between 1966 and 1979, Ted Kennedy played a critical role behind the scenes in normalizing diplomatic relations with China by “(leading) the electorate out of its hostility and fear of what was then called Red China.”
While angling to be President, he gave speeches that encouraged the United States to build a closer relationship with Communist China.
In spring of 1971, Kennedy tried to become the first U.S. politician to travel to China while advocating for full U.S. diplomatic relations with Communist China.
Kennedy believed that carrying water for the Communist Chinese and elites within the City of London would be his ticket to the White House.
In 1977, he delivered a major foreign policy speech in which he advocated normalizing relations with China before the World Affairs Council of Boston.
The New York Times described his speech as “the most forthright and detailed proposal made by a politician.”
Later that year, Kennedy traveled to China to meet with Deng Ziaoping to discuss an “imaginative and practical” strategy to normalize Sino-U.S. Relations.
The following year, China and the United States had restored diplomatic relations.
When cozying up to the Chinese didn’t produce the results he wanted, Kennedy enlisted the help of the Soviets to clear the way for his path to the White House in 1988.
As the London Times reported in 1992, Kennedy offered to help the Soviets influence the 1984 election through an intermediary Soviet KGB agent.
“Kennedy would arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament, so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA,” the Washington Post‘s Bob Woodward wrote in the London Times.
In exchange, Kennedy enlisted Soviet assistance to challenge Ronald Reagan’s re-election campaign by offering to use his influential friends in the media to soften the image of Soviet leaders and depict the duly elected President of the United States as “reckless” and “dangerous.”
It was not treason that ultimately derailed Kennedy’s presidential ambitions but a personal indiscretion in which he pleaded guilty to having left the scene of a car accident that killed his passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick. If the White House eluded him, it was not for a want of trying. Still, the damage had been done.
COLUMN BY

Susan Bradford

©American Media Periscope. All rights reserved.

Biden’s DHS: Department of Homeland Surrender


Alejandro Mayorkas, architect of DACA, picked by Biden to head DHS.


On May 5, 2005 the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims conducted a hearing on the topic, New ”Dual Missions” Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.
I was one of the four witnesses who testified at that hearing.
One paragraph in particular from Chairman Hostettler’s statement at that hearing back then, is of particular significance today, as we consider what will happen if Joe Biden is sworn in as President of the United States:

The 9/11 terrorists all came to the United States without weapons or contraband—Added customs enforcement would not have stopped 9/11 from happening. What might have foiled al Qaeda’s plan was additional immigration focus, vetting and enforcement. And so what is needed is recognition that, one, immigration is a very important national security issue that cannot take a back seat to customs or agriculture. Two, immigration is a very complex issue, and immigration enforcement agencies need experts in immigration enforcement. And three, the leadership of our immigration agencies should be shielded from political pressures to act in a way which could compromise the Nation’s security.

Now we come to Biden’s choice for the vital position of Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas. Remember Biden has pledged to create a massive legalization program for unknown millions of illegal aliens. The DHS enforces and administers America’s immigration laws and thus would bear the responsibility for administering this ill-conceived program.
I addressed my concerns about this amnesty in my earlier piece: “Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ is Bunk.”
Let’s begin by noting that during the Obama administration Mayorkas was the Director of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services), an agency that operates under the aegis of the DHS and is responsible for the  adjudication of all of the applications that are filed to accord aliens various immigration benefits. This includes applications for political asylum, change in status for various visa lawful immigrant status, and even United States citizenship.
You can think of USCIS as “America’s Locksmith” because lawful status provides aliens with easy entry into the United States through the “front door” of our nation’s ports of entry.
Mayorkas was notorious for demanding that USCIS adjudicators “Get to yes”- that is to say, approve virtually all applications for various immigration benefits.
It must be noted that immigration fraud was determined by the 9/11 Commission to be the key method of entry and embedding for numerous foreign terrorists operating in the United States.
I wrote about the nexus between immigration fraud and national security in my article: “Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill – 9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as a key embedding tactic of terrorists”
On December 20, 2013 a website known then as watchdog.com published a report: “Grassley Rips DHS Nominee Maorkas, E-5 Visa Program.” That report began with this statement:
Washington, DC – As Democrats in the filibuster-free U.S. Senate fill key administration vacancies, U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) assailed a Department of Homeland Security nominee for playing a key role in aiding Terry McAuliffes electric-car company raise funds through a visa-investor program.
Whistleblowers have provided my office with very troubling evidence. Much of the evidence involves the EB-5 regional center program, which (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro) Mayorkas is responsible for managing,” charged Grassley, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees immigration issues.
The evidence appears to support allegations that Mr. Mayorkas and his leadership team at Citizenship and Immigration Services are susceptible to political pressure and favoritism,” the Iowa Republican said.
Grassley said documents appear to show (Mayorkas) intervening in an EB-5 decision involving Gulf Coast Funds Management, an organization run by Hillary Clintons brother, Anthony Rodham.”
So much for Chairman Hostettler’s heartfelt concerns about the politicization of immigration law enforcement!
Mayorkas was also the architect of the DACA (Deferred Action, Childhood Arrivals) Program.
Additionally, in 2015, prompted by serious complaints from many USCIS employees, the Office of the Inspector General conducted an investigation into allegations of malfeasance committed by Mayorkas when he was the head of USCIS.
On March 24, 2015 a report of the findings of the investigation by the Office of the Inspector General was released.
The focus was on how applications for a particular visa category, the EB-5 Visa for aliens who invest between 500,000 and 1,000,000 in businesses that creates jobs for Americans in the United States, were wrongly approved.
ABC News published several in-depth articles about the troubling findings of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
On March 24, 2015 ABC News reported, “Top Homeland Official Alejandro Mayorkas Accused of Political Favoritism Alejandro Mayorkas oversaw controversial $500,000 visa program.
The above-noted report was preceded by two ABC News reports that were published on February 3, 2015 which illustrate a clear nexus between these visas and national security:
Whistleblowers: US Gave Visas to Suspected Forgers, Fraudsters, Criminals Internal documents show feds ignored warnings from FBI.”  This report began with this excerpt:
Officials overseeing a federal program that offers an immigration short-cut to wealthy foreign investors have ignored pointed warnings from federal agents and approved visas for some immigrants suspected of having committed fraud, money laundering, and even one applicant with alleged ties to a child porn website, an ABC News investigation has found. The shortcomings prompted concerns within the Department of Homeland Security that the boutique immigration program would be exploited by terrorists, according to internal documents obtained by ABC News.
It is shocking,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican. Particularly when you have F.B.I. and other law enforcement agencies that are saying national security could be compromised or is being compromised — that’s enough for us to be concerned.”
Feds Investigating Iran Ties to Firm Involved in US Visa Program Documents: Iranian operatives may be abusing program to “infiltrate” U.S.”  This report began with these excerpt:
Federal agents in Los Angeles are investigating an L.A. shipping firm and its Iranian-born owner who for years have participated in and promoted an obscure U.S. immigration program — allowing the company to recruit wealthy foreign investors to receive visas and potentially Green Cards, law enforcement sources told ABC News.
The companys name surfaced in a confidential Department of Homeland Security government document, which raised concerns that this particular visa program may be abused by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States.”
Whistleblowers inside the federal agency that oversees the immigration program told ABC News they have been deeply frustrated by an inability to de-certify the company, even after they became aware of the investigation and saw the companys name surface in an alarming internal Department Homeland Security memo. The memo, shared with ABC News, outlines concerns that Irans Revolutionary Guards have attempted to exploit the visa program to infiltrate the United States.”
The ABC report included this excerpt about one company in particularly, TTC (Total Transportation Concepts):
The records show that the TTC employee was suspected of ties to an Iranian terror network that was involved in bombing plots and attempted assassinations. In 2012, federal investigators sent an email to immigration officials to advise them against re-certifying American Logistics for the immigration program, warning that an approval would likely have serious national security implications.”
I strongly advise against a favorable adjudication,” wrote a Homeland Security Special Agent in the Counter-Proliferation Investigations Center in the April 30, 2012 email.
But agents with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) moved forward and green-lighted American Logistics and Mahdavi, to continue overseeing a designated regional center” for a special U.S. immigration program for wealthy foreigners known by its visa classification, EB-5.
It appears that Biden is not assembling a Cabinet but a syndicate (SINdicate?).
If Biden is inaugurated as President, all that would stand between him and his dangerous plans would be the confirmation process conducted by the U.S. Senate. That is why today all eyes are on the runoff elections for the U.S. Senate in Georgia.
Where the confirmation hearing for Mayorkas is concerned, the Senate must “Get to no!”
©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Trump is Right: Our Exit from Afghanistan is Long Overdue


President Trump is withdrawing a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is livid. According to AP, McConnell “warned against a potentially ‘humiliating’ pullout from Afghanistan that he said would be worse than President Barack Obama’s 2011 withdrawal from Iraq and reminiscent of the U.S. departure from Saigon in 1975.” Not to be outdone, Rep. Michael McCaul, Republican leader on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, insisted: “We need to ensure a residual force is maintained for the foreseeable future to protect U.S. national and homeland security interests and to help secure peace for Afghanistan.” But McConnell and McCaul are advocating for a failed policy. It is long past time to leave Afghanistan.
In his State of the Union address on February 5, 2019, President Trump stated: “As a candidate for President, I pledged a new approach. Great nations do not fight endless wars.” Epitomizing the need to do this was what happened when Trump first moved to end America’s longest endless war, the war in Afghanistan, with a treaty with the group that the U.S. entered Afghanistan in order to topple, the Taliban, in February 2020. The ink was still fresh on the signed document when the Taliban launched a new attack against Afghan government forces, killing twenty Afghan soldiers and police officers.
The attack was a fitting symbol of the fruitlessness of these endless wars and the bankruptcy of the assumptions and policies that had led to their being waged.
After all these years, we have little to show for all our efforts in the nation that has been ominously dubbed the “graveyard of empires.” The U.S. has sacrificed the lives of numerous heroic service members and squandered trillions for nearly two decades in the fond hope that it could remake Afghanistan into a stable, Western-style republic that would respect the human rights of all its citizens. That’s still the plan, as far as the architects of our intervention are concerned: One foreign policy establishment wonk counseled patience, saying that Afghanistan “is not going to become Switzerland overnight,” a fact that is as obvious as Joe Biden’s dementia.
Great. So we know now after almost twenty years that it isn’t going to happen overnight, but how long exactly is it going to take? To that question the advocates of endless intervention have no definite answer. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said in late 2019: “We are never going to get the U.S. military out of Afghanistan unless we take care to see that there is something going on that will provide the stability that will be necessary for us to leave.”
All right, but what’s it going to take? Do Rumsfeld, McConnell, and McCaul really think that after nearly twenty years, one more year, or five more years, or ten more years, will do the job?
Afghanistan will never be a Western-style republic and will likely never be free of the Taliban without a massive transformation of Afghan society, no matter how long we stay, and such a transformation is not on the horizon. This was clear relatively early in the conflict, but the obviousness of this fact did not make successive Republican and Democratic administrations rethink the wisdom of being there.
And so after all this American expenditure of personnel, money, and materiel, there is absolutely no doubt that once we leave, the Taliban will make gains and may even regain control of the Afghan government.
Did that mean that America had to keep troops there for fifty years? A hundred years? Should we just make Afghanistan the fifty-first state and seal our commitment there forever? Or should the U.S. instead focus on what is best for America in Afghanistan, working to contain the jihad there and to ensure that the Taliban does not and cannot engage in international jihad terror activity, while otherwise leaving the Afghans to their own devices?
America’s tragic misadventure in Afghanistan makes it clear that a new foreign policy strategy is urgently needed, and that the ideas and assumptions that have governed U.S. foreign policy for nearly a century needed to be consigned to the dustbin of history. President Trump had proposed to do that. Now we are likely to see instead a retrenchment of the forces that made the tragedy of two decades of war in Afghanistan happen in the first place. President Biden, or President Harris, or President Pelosi, or whatever horror show we may be facing next, could send the troops that Trump withdraws right back into the belly of the beast.
After all, as Trump said last September, “the top people in the Pentagon…want to do nothing but fight wars so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy. But we’re getting out of the endless wars, you know how we’re doing.” He is getting us out. Others, wanting to keep the Masters of War happy, may get us right back in.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Netherlands: Muslims threaten to murder teacher over Muhammad cartoon, teacher goes into hiding
Pakistan: Five Muslims gang-rape and torture deaf-mute Christian girl for 2 months as police do nothing
Sweden: Discrimination Ombudsman rules that municipality’s ban on hijab, burqa, and niqab is illegal
Philippines: 48-year-old Muslim marries 13-year-old girl
France: Muslims write on walls of two schools ‘You are all dead, you are all dead. Samuel Paty. Allah Akbar.’
Egypt: Grand Sheikh of al-Azhar refutes claim that Islam allows Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Trump suspended entry of migrants from Syria, Somalia, and Yemen over terror risk, Biden could admit 125,000


What could possibly go wrong? Celebrate diversity, you greasy Islamophobe!
“US Cuts Refugee Admissions, Creating Doubt for Tens of Thousands of Applicants,” by Aline Barros, VOA, November 6, 2020 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

The United States will admit a maximum of 15,000 refugees for fiscal 2021, an all-time low, according to a notice the Trump administration published Friday in the Federal Register.
The administration also suspended entry of most refugees from Syria, Somalia and Yemen, citing terrorism risks….
Humanitarian organizations told VOA the number of Syrian, Somali and Yemeni refugees already referred for resettlement in the U.S. was almost double the number established by the cap.
As of October 27, nonprofit groups confirmed that 27,023 individuals were in the “pipeline” for resettlement in the United States, pending security checks.
The breakdown among the countries was 12,924 from Somalia, 14,084 from Syria and 15 people from Yemen, according to two humanitarian organizations….
Contacted by VOA, a State Department spokesman declined to comment on whether refugees from Somalia, Yemen and Syria already in the resettlement process would be rejected based on their nationality or the lowered refugee cap.
Friday’s notice specifies that exceptions can be made for refugees of the three restricted nations “who have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of religion” or were referred by a U.S. embassy….
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden vowed during the campaign to raise the refugee admissions ceiling to 125,000….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden plans sweeping reversal of Trump’s immigration agenda, from deportations to asylum policy

Now for the Next Step: Articles About What Happens if the President-Elect Dies Before Taking Office
UK: Muslim who plotted to behead soldier is likely to be freed next month, jihad bomb plotter is already free
Al Jazeera celebrates the end of US ‘Muslim ban’ on day one of Biden presidency
Iran’s Rouhani: ‘The next US administration should use the opportunity to make up for past mistakes’
Bangladesh: Muslims lynch man, burn his body, riot, assault police over rumor that he desecrated Qur’an
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Do Islamists Like CAIR Represent American Muslims? The ‘Surprising’ Muslim Vote

Muslim voters more than doubled their support for Trump from 2016. We explore why.


Islamists have been successful in the U.S. of laying claim to the “Muslim voice,” garnering attention in the media and government in an effort to push through their agenda. It is with this backdrop that we look at an interesting finding of the voting patterns of the 2020 presidential election, particularly in regard to the diversity of the American Muslim community.
An Associated Press VoteCast survey, which monitored the U.S. electorate over several days before November 3 until the polls closed, showed that Muslim voters more than doubled their support for President Trump from 2016.
According to the AP, 35 percent of Muslim voters supported Trump in 2020. In 2017, the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU), an organization that provides research and education about American Muslims, reported that only 15 percent of Muslims supported Trump in 2016 (54 percent supported Hillary Clinton and 30 percent supported neither candidate).


In addition, an October ISPU poll showed that President Trump’s approval rating among Muslims steadily increased during his presidency — from 13 percent in 2018 to 16 percent in 2019 to 30 percent in 2020.
Muslims make up roughly 1 percent of the U.S. population, which translates to about 1.1 million potential voters. However, even though the 2016 ISPU report found that although 41 percent of Muslims report being satisfied with the country’s trajectory at the time, 61 percent reported that they most likely would not vote. At present, it is unknown what percentage of Muslims voted in 2020.
Speaking with Middle East Eye, Erum Ikramullah, a research project manager at ISPU, said:

“American Muslims, like other religious groups in America, are not a monolith. What our data support is that Muslims, like the general public, are not guided by their religiosity, but by their political views and opinions.”

In their 2017 survey, ISPU reported on that diversity as follows:

“Compared with other faith communities and the non-affiliated in our study, American Muslims are the youngest, with more than one-third younger than 30 years of age. American Muslims are the most ethnically and racially diverse faith group with no single background garnering a majority. Half of Muslims were born in the United States; thus, immigration continues to be a significant part of the American Muslim story. “

Director of the Clarion Intelligence Network Ryan Mauro enumerated at least six reasons for Trump’s surprising share of the 2020 Muslim vote:

  1. Trump was tougher on Iran than the Obama-Biden administration, the latter of which was responsible for pushing through the faulty Iran nuclear deal and shipping off $1.7 billion in cash to Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Presumably, Trump’s Iran policy would be favorable to both Iranian-Americans and (Sunni) Arab-Americans, as both groups bitterly oppose the Iranian regime.
  2. The Trump administration conducted airstrikes on Syria after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used chemical warfare against his own population. The Obama-Biden administration had threatened such reprisals if Assad used chemical weapons on civilians, but when it happened, they backed off and failed to act.
  3. Trump made alliances with Saudi Arabia and was friendly to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a popular figure among many Saudi-Americans.
  4. Trump took a verbal stand against Islamism, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, which garnered him support among the many non-Islamist Muslims. This sentiment has been continually “missed by the media because outlets rely on ‘mainstream’ Muslim organizations that actually don’t have much popular political support from Muslim-Americans,” Mauro says.
  5. Backlash from demonizing Trump and the Republican Party. Mauro says that by making it sound like Trump would wage a war on innocent Muslims (i.e., “Muslim ban”), the disconnect from reality ended up decreasing the credibility of Trump’s detractors.
  6. Although anecdotal, Mauro says that in his talks with Muslims from immigrant families, it appeared that the narrative of an “outsider” fighting for the people against the elites in the “deep state” of the government resonated with them.

In Clarion Project’s direct conversations with American Muslims in the 50-plus age bracket, national security seemed to play a significant role in how this demographic voted. (Overall, for those Americans who told the AP that foreign policy was the most important issue facing the country, 72 percent reported voting for Trump.)
In addition, first-generation Muslim immigrant voters reported respecting Trump’s strength and straight-forwardness when dealing with leaders and political issues within the Middle East/North Africa (MENA) region. Trump’s ability to deliver on peace in the Middle East was also a driver for these Muslims.
RELATED ARTICLES:
What’s the Attraction of Anarchy?
Educating the Next Generation About Communism
EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.