Talk about jobs Americans won’t do! A new government report shows that 73 percent of those convicted of terrorism charges are immigrants, almost all from Islamic countries in the Middle East and North Africa. Yet the politicians don’t care and only want to discuss further opening our borders. Perhaps if DOJ and DHS had titled the report with a curse word, it would have gained more attention in the media and in Congress.
Pursuant to President Trump’s March 6, 2017, executive order, DOJ and DHS prepared a report detailing, among other things, the correlation between terrorism and immigration. The report found that at least 402, or 73 percent, of the 549 individuals convicted of international terrorism-related charges from September 11, 2001, through 2016 were verified as foreign-born.
Information on the immigration history of the other 27 percent was not fully available at the time of the report, which means many more might also be immigrants. Also, it’s likely that almost all of the remainder who were native-born were from families who emigrated from the Middle East fairly recently, such as the Orlando shooter (Omar Mateen) and the San Bernardino attacker (Syed Rizwan Farook).
Furthermore, the report reveals that there have been 1,716 removals of aliens with national security concerns since 9/11.
The report doesn’t chronicle those who haven’t been convicted yet, nor does it detail the manner of entry into the U.S. Those issues will be researched in future reports, according to the administration. However, the report does analyze the background of several immigrant terrorists from places like Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan, some of which are on the president’s immigration moratorium list. Several of those convicted of conspiring with ISIS came here through chain migration or the diversity visa lottery
In other words, terrorism is an imported problem based on a completely voluntary policy of immigration.
But what about the culture and the mindset behind terrorism? As we’ve noted before, those numbers are likely much higher. For example, while the report did not reveal any new information about the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the U.S., it did cite a 2016 Centers for Disease Control report, which estimated that “513,000 women and girls in the United States were at risk for undergoing FGM or its consequences in 2012—a number three times higher than the number estimated at risk in 1990.” The trajectory is alarming, and the CDC report notes that the estimated increase “was wholly a result of rapid growth in the number of immigrants from FGM/C-practicing countries living in the United States.”
As we’ve chronicled before, immigration from Islamic countries was just a trickle before the ’90s, averaged about 50,000 a year in the ’90s, grew to 100,000 a year in the last decade, and became as high as 179,000 a year over the past few years. When you import the Middle East in large numbers, it is impossible to achieve assimilation, and we are left with … the values of the Middle East.
Finally, as a more general measure of importing the criminals of the world (not necessarily related to Islamic terror), the report notes that from October 1, 2011, to September 30, 2017, a total of 355,345 non-U.S. citizen offenders were arrested by ICE for purposes of removal after previously having been convicted of an aggravated felony. It makes clear the fact that the number of criminal aliens is likely much higher because the sanctuary jurisdictions, which have the largest populations of illegal aliens, refuse to cooperate with federal authorities, limiting their ability to identify and apprehend the perpetrators.
Between this report, the study showing that “Dreamers” are 884 percent more likely to commit a crime, and the DHS inspector general report demonstrating lack of screening among the 2.37 million illegal aliens released by ICE, we have a national emergency. Yet at yesterday’s DHS oversight hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee, all the senators cared about was promoting the very amnesty agenda that has led to the theft of American sovereignty and compromise of our national security. Even the Republicans only referred to this report as an afterthought, as a plea for some security in return for the main course of amnesty.
As a polarized nation, we argue over health care, taxes, and education. But shouldn’t we all agree, as we wrangle over nutty domestic policy issues for Americans, that we should not import more problems from the world?
America is the envy of the world, and hundreds of millions if not billions of people would love to come here. Unlike with domestic policy, we have the luxury of screening out anyone we don’t want, and if we make a mistake, there is a long probationary green card period that we can use to deport any bad actors.
The number of criminal aliens we should have in this country is close to zero, because they should not be let in or else should be deported. Yet there are clearly many more criminal aliens than we know of, thanks to sanctuary cities, and there are many more quasi-Islamic attacks in this country that go unreported as terrorism. We had the recent machete attack on a Meals on Wheels volunteer in Burlington, Vermont and the stabbing of a Minneapolis woman by a Somali, yet there is no outrage against the problem of criminal or terrorist aliens, nor is there sympathy for the victims in the political world.
Yesterday was the opening day of the trial of Luis Bracamontes, an illegal alien who killed two cops in Sacramento three years ago: Danny Oliver and Michael Davis Jr. He reportedly laughed during the trial and expressed his desire to kill more cops. He was repeatedly deported but was allowed to come back because of our broken immigration and sanctuary policies. Where is the clamor and sense of urgency to pass the Davis-Oliver interior enforcement bill instead of more amnesty? Yes, I’m looking at you, Paul Ryan.
You will witness endless debate this week over a so-called government shutdown — when 17 percent of our nonessential bureaucracy has a temporary lapse of funding. But we already have a real government shutdown. The ultimate shutdown. One where a wayward district judge can shut down our laws, sovereignty, society, and national security with the flick of the wrist, and our prevailing political system views the entire country as helpless in reopening our government. We can’t vet immigrants or choose who we want to accept into the country because of district judges in Hawaii and Seattle. We can’t follow immigration statutes and must give amnesty to illegal aliens because of a judge in San Francisco.
But perhaps the worst shutdown of all is the utter disregard of our political class for the plight of the people they are charged with representing. It is now clear that Islamic terrorism is almost completely an imported problem resulting from a voluntary immigration policy. Yet few in our government are willing to give voice to those concerns, while most others give exclusive voice to the very policies that got us here in the first place.
Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.