States say “No” to Syrian Refugees
Governors of eight states have expressed their opposition to accepting Syrian refugees into their states as a result of the ISIS attack in Paris. Of the eight governors, Gov. Robert Bentley (Alabama); Gov. Mike Pence (Indiana); Gov. Greg Abbott (Texas); and Gov. Rick Snyder (Michigan) have outright stated a refusal to accept any additional refugees into their states. Hopefully others will follow. Just as the President of the United States has power to issue executive orders, so too do governors. As executive leader of each state (or commonwealth), governors are allowed to issue Executive orders for the following reasons: “trigger emergency powers during natural disasters, energy crises, and other situations requiring immediate attention”.(http://www.nga.org/cms/home/management-resources/governors-powers-and-authority.html#executive) And these governors are right and they should act on behalf of the citizens of their respective states.
Government, in general has a primary responsibility of ensuring the safety of its citizens. Its responsibility does not include compromising safety for reasons of empathy. Do I have empathy for Syrian refugees? Of course I do. But the problem is we do not have the capability to properly vet refugees into this country. On September 11th of this year, the Homeland Security Chairman issued an explicit warning regarding this very issue. Just last month, the FBI also issued a similar warning. As thousands of refugees prepare to enter into this country, what database is used to vet them? Even if we had a valid database of potential terrorists from Syria and elsewhere, what identification will these refugees have on them? Does anyone believe that if a person does not have identification we will turn them away? I would venture a guess that few, if any of the refugees who are truly in need have valid identification. What about those with false identification? Surely none of those infiltrating the country will admit to being a terrorist. (See the 4 Stages of Islamic Conquest/Jihad, particularly the first stage).
Suppose our vetting process was better than the experts believe. Suppose we are able to vet refugees with 99% accuracy. Quite optimistic. This means out of 10,000 Syrian refugees, the potential exists for allowing 100 refugees with terrorist ties into this country. In this person’s opinion, that is 100 too many! Today’s news indicate Obama now plans to bring in 45,000 of these refugees. This is national suicide. The meme to the right might just say it best:
We only see the images and videos the media want us to see. Here are the disturbing images the media doesn’t want you to see (warning strong language and graphic images): http://buzzpo.com/this-is-the-most-disturbing-muslim-refugee-video-you-will-ever-see/
As for our president, his actions don’t back up his words. And even his words (or lack thereof) speaks volumes. Has he ever said “Islamic Terrorism”? Why is it so hard for him to utter those words? So what did Obama do while the world was rocked and glued to the tragic events in Paris? He released 5 prisoners from Guantanamo Bay to the United Arab Emirates. Does that sound like he’s concerned? Does that sound like the actions of someone who hours earlier denounced (to some degree) the terrorist attacks in Paris?