Posted on 01/27/2017 11:42:33 AM PST by Louis Foxwell
3 Questions to Keep Muslim Terrorists Out of America How to screen Muslim immigrants for Islamic terror. January 27, 2017 Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
The Nonimmigrant Visa application form filled out by the 9/11 hijackers asked, “Are you a member or representative of a terrorist organization?”
They checked the box that said, ‘No’ and they were in.
The current incarnation of the form asks the same perfunctory and generic question. An actual terrorist is as likely to check the box as he is to finger a rosary while eating a ham sandwich and singing Hava Nagila. But since 9/11, the terrorist threat has evolved from foreign cells penetrating this country to domestic Islamist terrorists emerging out of Muslim settlements already occupying this country.
Most Islamic terrorists that the FBI has been dealing with had no specific terror plans at the time that they entered this country. Some Islamic terrorists, like the Tsarnaev perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing, came here as children. Others, like Omar Mateen, the Pulse shooter, and Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood killer, contrived to be born in this country to foreign parents.
Immigration screening has to do more than just ask terrorists to check a box if they plan to fly planes into our skyscrapers. We must identify visitors and immigrants who are at a high risk of becoming terrorists in the first or second generation. The only way to do this is with a holistic strategy that examines the worldview of new immigrants and the Islamic communities they intend to be part of.
Instead of checking a perfunctory box, it is important to interrogate how a Muslim applicant views his religion and its interaction with the rest of the world. And to examine the mosque he plans to attend.
For example, attendees at the infamous Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia included Nidal Hasan, its former Imam was Al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki, and a number of key figures associated with the mosque were linked to Islamic terrorism. Any Muslim immigrants planning to attend the mosque could be considered at high risk for engaging in terrorism regardless of their stated views.
Our current screening methods are laughably crude.
The immigrant visa form asks about engaging in and funding terrorism. It does not however specify what a terrorist group is. Muslims define terrorism differently and do not consider many of the Islamic terror groups listed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations list to be terrorists.
It asks about membership in the “Communist or other totalitarian party” and participation in various Columbian terrorist and militant organizations. Despite the thousands of people killed by Islamic terrorists in this country in the last few decades, it fails to ask anything about specific Islamist groups.
That should change.
Despite all the assurances about vetting, the forms don’t even bother to ask about membership in Al Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas or their parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is to Islamic terrorism what the Communist party was to subversive and terrorist groups during the Cold War.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a totalitarian organization. Its motto is, “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” This credo reflects the objective of a theocratic Islamic State to be achieved through any means: including violence. Its members have perpetrated and aided Islamic terrorism here and around the world. These include Osama bin Laden, Yasser Arafat and the Brotherhood perpetrators of the genocide in Sudan.
Any Muslim immigrant who had ties to the Brotherhood has falsely answered the question and should be deported. If he falsely answered this question on his naturalization application, he should be subject to denaturalization and deported. Any Muslim who has subsequently become involved with Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR, ISNA, the MSA and countless others, should be investigated for pre-existing links with the terror network and prevented from becoming a citizen of this country.
Communities where Muslim immigrants propose to settle should be tested for their extremism levels as defined by the preponderance of Muslim Brotherhood institutions. Muslim immigrants who seek out communities under the influence of Brotherhood institutions should be considered at a higher risk of engaging in terrorism either in the first or second generation without regard for their current views.
Our goal is not just to stop terror plots now. Our goal must be to stop terrorism a decade from now.
Our counterterrorism is reactive instead of proactive. Reactive counterterrorism is measured by the time we have to react. When a terrorist opens fire in a shopping mall, reaction time is measured in minutes or seconds. His original descent into Islamic terror plots may go on for months or years. But the closer we get to the source of the problem, the more lead time we have until we are no longer reactive, but proactive. Instead of rushing to stop the next attack, we can transform the entire battlefield.
That must be our objective.
Our biggest problem is that we aren’t asking the right questions. Asking a Muslim if he is a terrorist is the wrong question. Islamic terrorists don’t see themselves as terrorists. They view themselves as devout Muslims. That is how we must see them if we are to find them out and stop them before they strike.
The root cause of Islamic terrorism is the idea that Muslims are superior and non-Muslims are inferior. Exposing this conviction won’t be done with a terrorism check box. Many Muslims who go on to commit acts of terror in the name of Islamic Supremacism have no such plans when they enter the country. They do however believe that there is a primal struggle between Muslims and non-Muslims. It is this belief that they eventually put into practice at some later date by actually engaging in Islamist violence.
Instead of asking them whether they are terrorists, we ought to ask them how they view their participation in American life in light of the Koranic verse that commands Muslims, "O you who believe, do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends. ”And whether they are willing to disavow the message of such terrorist verses of the Koran as, “Do not take friends from them unless they migrate in the Way of Allah. But if they turn away (from Islam), seize them and kill them wherever you find them.”
If they are not willing to disavow calls for the murder of non-Muslims, such as, "I will cast terror into the hearts of non-believers. Therefore strike off their heads”, they present a serious terrorism risk.
Can we really afford to allow Muslim immigrants into the United States who believe that they ought to "fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion will all be for Allah"? What better predictor of terror risk could there be than those who believe that they must “kill the non-believers wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them?” This is the origin of Islamic terrorism. It’s the acid test for every Muslim migrant.
It all comes down to three simple questions.
Have you ever had any associations with the Muslim Brotherhood or any of its front groups? Will you commit to avoiding associations with Brotherhood mosques and other entities in this country? Are you aware that you may be deported if you do not? Do you disavow the following verses of the Koran calling for violence against non-Muslims?
Such simple questions are far more relevant than a terrorism check box because they address what terrorists actually believe, not what we believe about them. They will not stop an active terrorist, but asking them will help keep out the terrorists of tomorrow.
Muslim immigrants coming to America must make a choice. As must we. Both Muslims and non-Muslims must come to grips with the violence inherent in Islam if we are to break the cycle of Islamic terrorism.
>>”It is so much simpler. Just ask if the person is a follower of Islam.”<<
It is not that simple.
It’s akin to asking a murderer, a thief, or a hacker if he is a murderer, hacker, or a thief, before entering the country.
The ones who are actually thieves, murderers, hackers, and Islamists intending to blow up things & people, or subscribe to jihad (call them sleeper-cells) would or can say NO.
Besides, it is stupid on the one hand to have trade relations with Islamist regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait, etc., sell them weapons for profit, buy their oil, let them use our military to defend their borders, and basically line their pockets with so much money that they can fund jihadists & unleash them on us, run radicalization camps, and, on the other hand, ban and arrest their “little people”. It’s a contradictory and schizophrenic policy - that’s the core of the problem.
The Western world should stay out of the Muslim world, completely. No more invasions, no more destabilization, no more political alliances, no more trade, no more diplomatic relations, no more anything with them! And, those should uniformly apply to ALL muslim countries, not just a handful.
Within the US, ban all Islamic organizations, the ones that are lobby groups or breeding ground for radicalization such as CAIR, ISNA, or curtail their activities.
Only one question is needed: “Are you a Moslem?” and should be coupled with some investigation if the answer is negative and the applicant speaks Arabic or Urdu or Farsi.
During a war you do not admit enemy troops into your country as tourists or immigrants. All Moslem men can be accurately described as either actual or potential enemy soldiers. Moslem women are not exempt either.
The government in Viet Nam understands these things a little better than most. Moslems do not get visas except as officers in western or western allied Asian companies and their stays are limited and under surveillance at all times. The native Moslem population is allowed no Moslem visitors from elsewhere and is pretty much like Vietnamese country Buddhists in that their Islam is a veneer over traditional local animism and spirit worship. Viet Nam does not have the problems with aggressive local populations or invaders that plague Thailand and Myanmar.
The survey is initial step. The government needs to have them standby while they verify. If they get past that check, then if they are ever found to have lied, then they get immediately arrested and deported. Will someone lie to get it? Yes, quite likely, but we have to trust the government to figure that out. If they cannot, then, block all immigrants and visitors overall. Let in only those that have been truly vetted. Heck, we do not need more immigrants, so close the border. Hey, that fixes it.
A hundred years ago, they solved this problem by asking them if they believed that polygamy is legitimate.
Muslim men invariably answered “Yes”. They were deported.
http://sfppr.org/2016/08/how-americas-polygamy-ban-blocked-muslim-immigration/
“Under modern presidents, Roosevelt did not view Islam as a force for good. Instead, he had described Muslims as “enemies of civilization,” writing that, “The civilization of Europe, America and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of Civilization,” praising Charles Martel and John Sobieski for throwing back the “Moslem conquerors” whose depredations had caused Christianity to have “practically vanished from the two continents.”
>>”Only one question is needed: “Are you a Moslem?” and should be coupled with some investigation if the answer is negative and the applicant speaks Arabic or Urdu or Farsi.”<<
Add to that list: Pashto, Dari, Bahasa, Russian (or chechen, Nakh, Vainakh), Bahasa Melayu, Turkish, and French, German, etc. (since second generation western-muslim jihadists often aren’t fluent in other languages).
Step 1: Give immigrant candidate one handgun with blanks, tell them its for their own protection.
Step 2: Give immigrant candidate a Koran, and have them find their favorite passages.
Step 3: Take Koran from immigrant candidate, set alight in can, place bacon slices into fire.
If immigrant candidate attempts to fire weapon at person who sets fire, do not allow entry into U.S. (returning live ammo to said immigrant candidate optional)
Well, there is a key difference between radical Muslims and moderate Muslims:
A radical Muslim wants to kill you.
A moderate Muslim wants a radical Muslim to kill you.
That reminds me of a line from the door gunner in Full Metal Jacket: “Anyone who runs is a VC. Anyone who stands still is a well-disciplined VC.”
As for Turks, look for a solid middle class background. There is a middle class and they are educated and honorable westernized people. They assimilate when they emigrate. The other classes are highly suspect. The Turkish middle class is laying low. They get in their digs when they can. There have been riots and protests but they are pretty harshly dealt with by the aspiring Caliphate.
If they say they aren’t followers of Islam, then cross-screening by language is not necessarily a good indicative for radicalization or terrorism before they are issued a visa to enter the US.
Also, India’s official languages are Hindi and English; yet India has the 2nd largest muslim population in the world after Indonesia, and the muslim population is growing really fast there. These Indians are India’s nationals and passport holders.
The middle class Turks assimilate fairly well. Though, the Turkish cop who shot the Russian Ambassador also came from a middle class family. As did a few of 9/11 terrorists, if we only consider ‘middle class’ and western education only. BTW, Turkish (or a close dialect of it) is also spoken in Azarbaijan, Turkmenistan and a handful of other Turkic speaking southern ‘stans’ bordering Russia.
If we go by current and past trends of terrorism or radicalization (in the west), Arabic speaking Sunni muslims definitely stand out, followed by sunni North Africans, who are often second or third generation western Europeans, and/or have returned from war zones such as Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Some of whom may speak Arabic. The last significant group are Chechens, and to a lesser extent from southern ‘stans’. All sunnis, mostly from distinct countries not all on Trump’s list.
Ultimately, If an Islamist group seriously wanted to run an operation in the US, it could tap into any muslim group or individual (born or convert) from any country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.