Settling Afghans here puts America last



I have a longtime friend — I’ll omit his name because he is somewhat politically prominent — who has been very involved in the extraction of Afghans who allegedly helped us from Afghanistan and resettlement of them in the United States. My friend already has a demanding job, but he has often worked through the night, forgoing sleep to help with this task.

I have several strong political disagreements with him, but I would never question his patriotism. He voluntarily served as a soldier in Afghanistan after overcoming great obstacles to be accepted into the military. But I would strongly question his political judgment and the judgment of anyone who thinks we should be settling Afghan refugees in America.

'The second the US military backed out, their men folded and refused to fight for what we gave them. We don’t owe them, they owe us.'

Unfortunately, a number of our former soldiers, no matter how sincere their beliefs, seem to sympathize more with people in a foreign country whom they believed, rightly or wrongly, to be allies rather than with the interests of the only country to which they owe their allegiance.

Joe Kent, an Afghanistan combat veteran and director of the National Counterterrorism Center, argued on social media for the deportation of all of our “Afghan allies.”

“Vetting a foreigner in a war zone to determine if he will fight a common enemy is vastly different than vetting a foreigner to see if he is suitable to live in our country,” Kent wrote.

As journalist Daniel Greenfield notes, the targeted attack on two National Guardsmen by an Afghan national in Washington, D.C., the day before Thanksgiving was not a one-off. It’s part of an extensive series of assaults by Afghans whom we have foolishly allowed to resettle in the United States.

Unbridgeable inequalities

Having lived briefly in a third-world country and having traveled for many years in various countries of that description, I have quickly learned to be wary of “friendships.” It is not that people in these countries are inherently bad or incapable of genuine friendship in principle. It is that the gap between you (a well-off American) and them (a third-world citizen who, even if relatively affluent, is often at a huge disadvantage versus an American) is astronomical.

And that gap is not just financial and legal, but also based on traditions and customs. Relationships that may feel like genuine friendship for a time usually come with future requests or pleas for assistance. Again, I don’t necessarily blame these people — I might do the same in their shoes — and of course genuine friendships in such situations are possible, but they are far rarer than idealists might wish them to be.

What applies in basically peaceful third-world countries applies a thousandfold in an impoverished, war-torn, and primitive country like Afghanistan. It is monstrously arrogant to think the American political class understands deeply the inner workings of these countries and the motivations of the people there, given that we spent almost $1 trillion to occupy Afghanistan, only to see all of our efforts collapse within a week after we removed our military as a threat of force.

Wade Miller, the executive director of Citizens for Renewing America and a U.S. Marine combat veteran, responded to the claim that resettling Afghans was the moral thing to do since they “fought alongside our own” soldiers, rightly calling it a “BS metric.” As he noted, “1. Many played both sides. 2. Many only did it to make money. 3. Many were plants. 4. Many had long-standing tribal grudges against the Taliban.”

And none of them necessarily has a long-term loyalty to America, which is the first step to assess before even beginning to consider a claim of residency.

All of this would be obvious to anyone who does not let suicidal empathy overwhelm good sense. But unfortunately, we have lost that common sense, even among many of our supposedly hardened fighting forces.

‘We don’t owe them’

Miller punctures the lie that we owe these Afghans for “doing America a favor,” pointing out that we did them a favor by expending American lives and treasure to help them govern themselves without the Taliban. But “the second the U.S. military backed out, their men folded and refused to fight for what we gave them. We don’t owe them, they owe us.”

This is a harsh assessment, but in the aggregate, it is not unfair.

Or consider what Mark Lucas, an Afghanistan veteran and founder of the Article III Project, has written: “Afghans were untrustworthy allies who sold their children to pedophiles, ritually raped little boys, and beat their women.” He notes that without male soldiers guarding them, countless local Afghans made clear that they would have raped the women who were attached to their detachment.

RELATED: Trump makes America dangerous again — to our enemies

Jim Watson/Getty Images

Lucas points out that even asking simple questions of potential Afghan asylum-seekers, such as whether they support putting apostates to death, child marriage, Sharia for non-Muslims, defense of suicide bombings, polygamy, and honor killings, would quickly disqualify them. The vast majority of Afghans, he says, support one or more of these views — none of which are compatible with the American way of life.

One of the few Afghan refugees who resettled in my own state of Montana promptly raped a Montanan shortly after his arrival. Unsurprisingly, the crime and its implications were shamefully underreported by local media.

Toward a more sober policy

Even assuming we have an obligation to those we believed helped us in Afghanistan, it would mean we were obligated to get them to safety — not get them to America. If we had made it clear at the outset that relocating to America was not on offer, we would have see a drastic reduction in the number of “refugees.” We can and should resettle them in other countries. Making arrangements to do that is a worthy use of American soft power.

The notion that resettling Afghans in America is a moral duty reflects Joe Biden’s poor political leadership. His administration and previous ones before it had become arrogant about their ability to control events and remake complex societies and peoples far different from our own. In reality, their policies promoted cultural arrogance under the guise of friendship. They abandoned our own in favor of those from distant cultures and lands.

Let us hope that President Trump’s promise to refuse all new Afghan visas and to remove postwar arrivals and resettle them elsewhere is the start of a more sober, realistic, and serious refugee policy that will put the interests of America and its citizens first.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

Claims Afghans Were ‘Vetted’ Contradict Federal Investigations And Common Sense

The process by which the Biden administration ushered Afghans into the United States barely resembles 'vetting' at all.

SHOCK: Trump administration finds Biden policies let in terrorists, including ISIS plotters



The Trump administration is set to conduct a review of the over 185,000 refugees imported by the Biden administration — especially those imported from terrorism hot spots such as Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, and Venezuela.

This initiative, which is aimed at keeping America safe, has liberals at various NGOs throwing fits.

'I don't want that person in my country.'

According to a Nov. 21 memo outlining the plan reviewed by Reuters, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will undertake a review and "re-interview of all refugees admitted from January 20, 2021, to February 20, 2025," having determined that the previous administration prioritized expediency, quantity, and admissions over quality interviews and proper vetting.

Foreign nationals found not to meet refugee criteria will lose their status, says the memo.

The memo, which was signed by USCIS Director Joe Edlow, also orders a pause on the processing of permanent residence applications for refugees who entered under former President Joe Biden.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to Blaze News, "For four straight years, the Biden administration accelerated refugee admissions from terror- and gang-prone countries, prioritizing sheer numbers over rigorous vetting and strict adherence to legal requirements. This reckless approach undermined the integrity of our immigration system and jeopardized the safety and security of the American people."

"Corrective action is now being taken to ensure those who are present in the United States deserve to be here," added McLaughlin.

RELATED: 'Begin repatriating': German chancellor admits it's time to give Syrian migrants the boot

Photo by ARMEND NIMANI/AFP via Getty Images

Upon retaking office, President Donald Trump paused the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, halting the potential admission of hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals, noting in the corresponding executive order that "the United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees."

This caused consternation among activists and the liberal media, who had evidently grown accustomed to having the floodgates open to the third world.

In fiscal year 2023, the Biden administration admitted 60,014 refugees from 75 countries. Foreign nationals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Afghanistan, and Burma made up two-thirds of the total admissions.

The Biden State Department brought in over 100,000 refugees in fiscal year 2024 and had projected to admit over 125,000 refugees as well as "531,500 other arrivals in FY 2025, the majority of whom are expected to arrive as Cuban and Haitian Entrants through lawful pathways."

Trump was one of many critics who raised concerns in recent years about whether the Biden administration had done a proper job vetting many of the refugees, particularly those from Afghanistan.

Clearly, some radicals made it over.

In January, for instance, Gul Nabi Rahmati, an Afghan refugee who settled in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, allegedly stabbed a caseworker helping refugees. Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard indicated that the motive might have had something to do with religion. Rahmati's attempted murder trial will commence in early 2026.

Rahmati was not the only bad egg former President Joe Biden brought into the U.S.

Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, a 27-year-old Afghan citizen living in Oklahoma City, was arrested after the Justice Department foiled his "plot to acquire semiautomatic weapons and commit a violent attack in the name of ISIS on U.S. soil on Election Day," former Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement in early October.

Tawhedi pleaded guilty to two terrorism offenses in June. His 19-year-old co-conspirator, another Afghan refugee, was sentenced last week to 15 years in federal prison for his role in the foiled terrorist plot.

RELATED: Virginia high-school principal allegedly suggests anti-ICE 'hunting' plot; brother brags about 'assault rifle,' cop claims

Karl Merton Ferron/Baltimore Sun Staff

"Zada was welcomed into the United States and provided with all the opportunities available to residents of our nation, yet he chose to embrace terrorism and plot an ISIS-inspired attack on Election Day," said John Eisenberg, assistant attorney general for national security.

Vice President JD Vance said in a January interview with CBS News' Margaret Brennan, "Now that we know that we have vetting problems with a lot of these refugee programs, we absolutely cannot unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country."

When pressed on whether some refugees were actually being radicalized once in the U.S., Vance said, "I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country, and I think most Americans agree with me."

'It would re-traumatize tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees.'

The news of the Trump administration's new initiative to ensure that decisions made and persons imported by the previous administration — individuals like Zada or Tawhedi — aren't endangering Americans today caused apoplexy among NGOs in the space.

Sharif Aly, president of the International Refugee Assistance Project, claimed that the refugees who entered the U.S. under the USRAP "are already the most highly vetted immigrants in the United States" and characterized the proposed review as "an insult to refugees."

"This order is one more in a long line of efforts to bully some of the most vulnerable members of our communities, by threatening their lawful status, rendering them vulnerable to the egregious conduct of immigration enforcement agencies, and putting them through an onerous and potentially re-traumatizing process," said Aly.

Aly, the former CEO of Islamic Relief USA, suggested further that "besides the enormous cruelty of this undertaking, it would also be a tremendous waste of government resources."

"This plan is shockingly ill-conceived," Naomi Steinberg, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society vice president of U.S. policy and advocacy, said in a statement.

"It would re-traumatize tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees who already went through years of security vetting prior to stepping on U.S. soil," continued Steinberg. "This is a new low in the administration's consistently cold-hearted treatment of people who are already building new lives and enriching the communities where they have made their homes."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Israel Enters Talks With Third Countries Over Trump’s Gaza Emigration Plan

TEL AVIV—Israel began talks on Monday with third countries about taking in Gazans under a mass emigration plan first proposed by President Donald Trump, three people familiar with the matter told the Washington Free Beacon.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and top aide Ron Dermer briefed fellow ministers on the plan during a Monday closed-door cabinet meeting. The goal of the talks, which are expected to continue in the coming days, is to secure commitments by the third countries to accept specific numbers of Gazan migrants. The sources did not know the identities of the countries or what Israel or the United States were offering in return.

"This is big," said one of the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press about the matter. "The immigration plan is moving ahead, and it sounds pretty serious."

The post Israel Enters Talks With Third Countries Over Trump’s Gaza Emigration Plan appeared first on .

Legacy Media Turns On Waterworks For Another Criminal Migrant

'The legacy media must be hard-pressed for sob stories.'

The left rages over 59 white refugees — but defends killers



The left’s radical immigration agenda isn’t just dangerous, it’s hypocritical to the core. Some recent stories show just how radical leftists have become.

Let’s start with a story Blaze News reported this month that should infuriate every law-abiding American. A 42-year-old Venezuelan man — a known hitman tied to the brutal El Chamu gang and accused of four contract killings — was released into the United States after being caught crossing the Arizona border illegally in 2022. That’s right: arrested, deemed inadmissible, then set free.

Leftists' selective outrage reveals a disturbing truth: Their moral compass isn’t guided by justice or suffering. It’s guided by race and politics.

But it gets worse. The Biden administration granted this suspected murderer a work permit because, at the time, the U.S. wasn’t talking to Venezuela about taking back its criminals.

This man walked freely through our communities for nearly three years. He was finally arrested in February 2025 — not thanks to Biden but because President Donald Trump pressured Venezuela to resume accepting deportees. Immigration and Customs Enforcement picked him up in Grapevine, Texas, which happens to be in my backyard.

This is what happens when ideology overrides public safety. And it’s not an isolated case.

An activist judge

In Wisconsin, Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was just indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly helping an illegal immigrant evade ICE agents. Dugan reportedly got “visibly angry,” confronted federal agents in her courtroom, and then snuck the man — who was facing battery charges and had been deported once before — out a private exit for the jury.

This man is accused of punching one victim 30 times and attacking a woman who tried to intervene. Both victims were hospitalized. But Dugan, a sitting judge, allegedly aided his escape. That’s not just reckless — it’s criminal.

And yet, as usual, the left rushed to glorify her. Some are actually comparing Judge Dugan to Harriet Tubman. I wish I were joking! Leftist lawyer Jeffrey Mandell and his friends at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel are likening her actions to a modern Underground Railroad — as if protecting a violent illegal alien compares to the rescue of fugitive slaves.

It’s beyond insulting. Harriet Tubman risked her life to free human beings from bondage. Judge Dugan risked the public’s safety to help a man accused of brutal violence. The left’s delusional moral equivalence here reveals exactly how twisted their priorities have become.

Blind eye to genocide

Yet, these priorities don’t apply if you don’t have the left’s approved skin color.

President Trump has made it a priority to deport illegal immigrants who have committed crimes. That’s what this is really about. But instead of recognizing the distinction between lawful immigration and criminal activity, the left screams that Trump wants to “kick out all immigrants” and destroy the American dream.

Then, when the administration offers refugee status to 59 Afrikaners fleeing persecution in South Africa, the same people lose their minds.

These are white farmers and their families — victims of racial violence, land seizures, and targeted killings. The South African government passed a law in 2024 that allows for the confiscation of land without compensation. Political rallies routinely feature chants of “Kill the Boer,” referring to white farmers. A political party leader led one such rally in 2023 — and it wasn’t subtle. The crowd chanted, “Shoot to kill!” with bloodthirsty fervor.

Elon Musk, a South African native, called it open incitement to genocide. He’s right.

You’d think the self-appointed champions of compassion would welcome these families with open arms. But no — they’re furious. MSNBC analyst Richard Stengel dismissed their plight as “apartheid nostalgia.” U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) called it “global apartheid.” And the Episcopal Church, which has helped resettle more than 100,000 refugees and proudly aids illegal aliens, publicly refused to help these 59 families. It even ended a 40-year partnership with the federal government over it.

Why? Because these refugees are white.

Narrative-driven immigration

In summary, the left welcomed a Venezuelan gang hitman into the country and handed him a work permit. Leftists are defending a judge who allegedly helped a violent offender escape ICE. They have no problem with 10 million illegal immigrants who flooded the country under President Biden. But when it comes to 59 South African farmers fleeing actual persecution?

They call it racism. They shut down programs. They rage on television.

This isn’t compassion. It’s a radical ideological agenda that says borders should be open to criminals — as long as they fit the narrative — and closed to those who don’t.

RELATED: ‘Not based on color’: Tom Homan debunks media claims about white South African refugees with Glenn Beck

Anna Moneymaker / Staff, SAUL LOEB / Contributor | Getty Images

It would be laughable if it weren’t so morally bankrupt.

Leftists' selective outrage reveals a disturbing truth: Their moral compass isn’t guided by justice or suffering. It’s guided by race and politics. Some victims are celebrated. Others are ignored, depending entirely on their skin color and the usefulness of their story.

America is at a crossroads. We can continue this reckless, backward approach — or we can choose sanity, security, and fairness. President Trump is trying to restore order, but the radical left is fighting him every step of the way. And if this latest circus has shown us anything, it’s that leftists are just getting started.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

'Not based on color': Tom Homan debunks media claims about white South African refugees with Glenn Beck



The director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement flatly denied the idea that refugees from South Africa were being welcomed to the United States because of their race.

Director Tom Homan spoke to BlazeTV host Glenn Beck on Wednesday, the same day that President Donald Trump welcomed South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to the White House.

'There's no color to refugees.'

Trump pressed the South African leader about the mistreatment, and sometimes murder, of white Afrikaner farmers in his country. Trump even showed Ramaphosa a horrifying video that featured gravesites and a stadium full of South Africans singing about shooting white people.

Beck asked Homan if he had any comment about the "debacle" in the media where left-wing outlets criticized the Trump administration's decision to bring 59 white South Africans to the U.S.

"There's no color to refugees," Homan plainly stated. "We don't base refugee status on color. We base it on the law. ... It's not based on color. I know, I read a lot of media stories, and a lot of the media is basically, you know, 'because they're white.' Refugee status isn't based on color."

RELATED: Tom Homan to Glenn Beck: Tim Walz 'disgusting' for comparing ICE to 'Gestapo' — Eric Swalwell not 'above the law'

— (@)

Homan added that refugee status in relation to race is "not the way the law is written" and assured Beck, "That's not the way we're doing things."

When it came to illegal immigration, Beck and Homan also discussed the CBP Home app, a program designed to help illegal immigrants self-deport back to their home country.

"It's been good," Homan explained. "I mean, several thousand signed up. We just did our first flight where we hosted that flight and sent them home."

Homan was likely referring to a flight of 65 illegal immigrants who accepted a free plane ticket to their home country on the condition they would receive $1,000 upon landing.

The director revealed that there had been around 4,500 additional sign-ups, and when a group of illegal migrants at a detention center had been presented with the option recently, about 50% of them volunteered.

"'You want to go home? We'll make arrangements. Go home, and you get $1,000 for going.' And just about half of the population raised their hands," Homan said.

RELATED: 'Self-deport' flights begin as some illegal migrants take advantage of Trump's tempting offer: Report

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Homan's conversation with Beck also included responses to politicians like Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D), both of whom made strong statements about the Trump administration and Homan's department.

Walz had referred to ICE agents as a "modern-day Gestapo" that is "scooping folks up off the streets," while Swalwell had claimed that the Trump administration had been prosecuting its political enemies.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hillary’s Very Special Boy Thought He Had Marco Rubio On The Ropes. He Didn’t

'You're the one that's talking about the color of their skin'

Outcry Over White South African Refugees Shows Democrats’ Goal Is Control, Not Compassion

Democrats' selective outrage reveals that the demographic transformation of the West is not a byproduct of migration but the goal itself.

The Left’s Outcry Over South African Refugees Exposes Their Anti-White Bigotry

All the moral talk of giving justice to the persecuted, helping the helpless, liberating the oppressed — it only ever goes one way.