The U.S should allow refugees to be banned in Trump’s executive order because Trump’s presidential victory gives him the mandate to impose a travel ban, it is within the president’s powers to restrict immigration especially when it comes to the safety of their citizens, and the immigration act of 1965 was passed fraudulently and therefore should be repealed and disregarded. Additionally, an influx of refugees from the Middle East will increase the risk of terror attacks and crime as. Next taking in migrants from the Middle East will conflict our values and change the country for worse. Finally, the refugees are not U.S citizens and therefore the government is not morally obligated to serve them but they are obligated to serve its people.
Imposing restrictions on immigration are within the president’s power. First one of Trump’s campaign promises was to restrict immigration. This immigration includes illegal from mainly Latin America and legal immigration from namely the Middle East. Since he won the election and since that was Trump’s main policy was revolved around immigration. Additionally, we know that the president has the power to restrict immigration. According to the supreme court case in 1950 Knauff v. Shaughnessy that it is not in the power of any court to review the determination to exclude an alien after a decision made by the executive branch. The ruling also states that nobody has a right to be granted admission into this country and that it is a privilege.
The immigration act of 1965 was passed fraudulently and was only meant to be window dressing for our interests abroad during the cold war. Next, the people pushing the bill lied. They said that it wouldn’t restructure the shape of our lives and was only a ceremonial act that wouldn’t have much effect in restructuring our immigration policy. When we look at the effects the act had today we can see that all the reassurances were a lie. In the congressional record, many were quoted as saying only a few thousand would end up here as a result but in reality, it was 10s of millions. Senator Claiborne said that the act would not open the floodgates of immigration. The immigration act of 1965 had been the large justification for our immigration policy for 50 years. It has been the main impediment on Trump’s executive order and threatens the security of our country and its constituents. Since many supreme court rulings have explicitly given the president the power to control immigration even any act put in place by congress that overlaps the president’s power is null because of the judicial branch’s ruling and due to checks and balances. Finally, since local courts have been the issue for the executive order they should be disregarded as they don’t have the power to challenge the president’s authority on immigration as enumerated in the Supreme court case Knauff v. Shaughnessy.
Taking in migrants from the Middle East will increase the risk of terror and crime. In Germany when you look at the crime statistics since the influx of refugees we see a meteoric rise in crime: Drug-related crime 19 percent; pickpocketing 24 percent; homicide 33 percent; and burglary 43 percent. In Sweden, we see a 1472 percent increase in rapes. According to the gatestone institute, people who were foreign-born in Sweden were only around two times more likely to commit rape pre 2000s but now in Sweden foreign born citizens are up to 19.5 times more likely to commit rape.
All around the world since 9/11 Islamic terrorists have committed over 30,000 attacks and in Europe around 300 attacks also it is important to note that the attacks in Europe do not include Turkey, Bosnia, Kosovo, or any other predominantly Islamic countries. Additionally, according to the US Department of Homeland Security Islamic terrorists are successfully infiltrating refugee populations. Finally, we see a mass crime which was not only due to Muslims but due to refugees themselves. In Cologne, over 1,000 women were sexually assaulted during new year’s eve and most of this was perpetrated by refugees. Only 13 percent of refugees found work during their stay in Germany and this is after the politicians said it would help the economy due to the labor shortage. Finally, we can look at specific crime rates based on country of origin in Germany unlike France or other countries as they do not collect that data. This data is important because it shows the type of people we are letting into our country. Based on murder rates alone the top 10 nationalities are from Islamic countries and some of these murder rates are 10-20 times higher than that of native Germans. When it comes to rape the top 12 countries are Islamic not only that but many of these groups rape at 10 times the rate of native Germans.
This could be you or your daughter if we do not act now!
Taking in migrants from the Middle East will conflict with our values and change the country for worse. In the west, we support fair trials and no cruel or unusual punishments but according to the Quran, the punishment for leaving the religion is death. The punishment for homosexuality is death. The price of being a nonbeliever is having a heavy tax put upon you. If you steal you get a hand chopped off. These are all forms of cruel and unusual punishment. Next, we see the hatred of infidels. Many jihads have been called in the past and these always meant war and murder to infidels. According to Sharia law, a man is allowed to have up to 4 wives while in the west we are a monogamous society. Not only this but according to sharia court rulings in Nigeria the punishment for having more than 4 wives is death. Muhammad had sex with girls as young as 9 and even married one of his son’s wives. According to accounts given by one of the Prophet Muhammad’s many wives her and the other wives had the task of constantly washing the semen off his clothes and he even sometimes went to prayer with the stains on his clothes. In many Islamic countries women are not allowed to drive and often times schools for girls are burned to the ground. If a woman is raped they will often be charged with adultery or be used for an honor killing for disgracing a family. In many European countries, groups of Islamic immigrants have already instituted “Sharia patrols” these patrols are militant groups who impose Islamic law upon secular western countries. In Copenhagen, bars have been vandalized and its patrons have been harassed without end. The youths have used explosives and have smashed windows and have also tried to ask businesses for “protection money.” In Vienna Austria, a sharia patrol attempted to abduct two young girls and when the dad showed up to protect his daughters the gang attacked him.
Many claim that we have a moral obligation based on the past to bring in more refugees as we have done in the past due to conflicts like WWII. They also say that our European allies are taking millions while we have only taken a thousand or two. They say that we risk losing clout and risk losing face as being a humanitarian country. They also say that refugees will benefit the population economic because in WWII we had many skilled Jewish and Eastern European scholars come to staff universities. Others say that although European refugee attempts have been failures due to many refugees imposing themselves upon countries illegally without vetting thus causing terrorists, criminals, and startling demographics to show up. Not only have millions flooded major cities and displaced natives but 72% of the refugees are men. The Europeans were promised to get children and women.
Saying that we have a moral obligation to anyone other than our own citizens is absurd. The government which we select is supposed to serve our interests and not those of foreign nationals. Saying that because we did something in the past means we have to do it in the future is ridiculous especially given the fact that not all groups of refugees are the same. In world war two we were taking in Europeans and as an outpost of Europe, America was an easy place for them to assimilate. The Europeans we took in were also from countries that are way more developed and have a higher quality of people. Next, saying that we must take them because our European allies are is not a good thing because I just stated earlier what is happening in Europe as a result of the influx of refugees. Finally, just because we can vet better doesn’t mean we can stop bad people from getting into our country. One American is worth more than all the refugees in the world as that is who the government is supposed to serve. Finally, the more Muslims we have in America the more people we have who can be radicalized by quranic literalists and Isis. The more people we have who are radicalized the less ability we will have to track them we saw this in France where people on the watch list were able to carry out an attack due to the fact that the government cannot track everybody at once.
To conclude letting refugees in is a huge decision one that can be entirely decided by the president but also a decision that should not be decided by rich bureaucrats but by the people that will feel the direct effects of living with them. People should be given the facts about what is happening in Europe despite their government’s best attempts to cover it up. There should be a dialogue and all voices should be heard including those from Europe. Now is not the time for propaganda or lies but the truth and a referendum to gauge the population’s views on the opinion. This should not be voted on by the congressional bureaucrats yet because they do not represent their constituents on these issues as that was not a part of the dialogue when they ran. This is a big decision that is looming and one that we need to address as we can no longer beat around the bush.
Work Cited Below: