Last week I was in Washington DC. I was there for a couple of reasons. Is was there for an Act for America meeting. This is a national group that stands for national security. It is the largest grassroots organization for security in America. Its founder is Brigitte Gabriel, and you have probably seen her on TV.
We had a number of speakers who spoke on national security issues. We spoke with senators, congresspeople, people involved in homeland security, etc. The discussion was about how we protect ourselves against Islamic terrorism, what laws to we want to have passed, and then we lobby our representatives in Congress on these issues.
One of the major issues was Obama’s desire to allow 200,000 more refugees from Syria into America. He is asking Congress to approve the spending for this. Sadly some congresspeople are willing to sign on to whatever Obama wants. If someone stands against this they are called a racist, and islamophobe, or some other nasty name.
The FBI Director, the Homeland Security Director, and others have told Congress that there is no way we can vet these refugees. There is no trustworthy source by which we can check their background. We cannot determine if they are part of some terrorist group, like ISIS, and are coming here to do us harm, or if they are truly legitimate refugees. We do know that ISIS has told us that they have infiltrated the refugees coming into the West.
If the professionals are telling us we can’t vet them, how do we know we are not setting ourselves up for disaster if we allow them to come here? We have been lobbying Congress to say no to this request for funding until we can ensure that those who are coming in are not going to do us harm. America is a compassionate nation, and we want to help those who are truly in need, but it is foolish to let those who desire the destruction of our way of life into our country.
Does it not sound reasonable to want to ensure that those who come here are not a danger to us? It doesn’t mean we are uncaring to have to say no to some people. What if people were coming here from a country that had a deadly disease? Would it not be irresponsible for our government to to say we have to have a heart for these people so lets bring them in in spite of the fact that they might spread the disease here? Shouldn’t we try to validate that they are not carrying the disease? It is equally irresponsible to bring in refugees without knowing who they are and why they are coming.
Most of the congresspeople we talked to were pretty much in agreement with us. They knew approving more spending to bring in un-vetted refugees is irresponsible.
I want to share a report from the Homeland Security Committee. It covers a period from 2014 to July 2016. This is from the Director of Homeland Security, James Clapper. As you read this, remember that the Obama administration and the media want us to believe that we are making great progress against Islamic terrorism.
“The following quote is from the DHS Director in February this year:
There are now more Sunni violent extremist groups, members, and safe havens “than at any time in history…
Let that sink in. He went on to say:
ISIL, including its eight established and several more emerging branches, has become the preeminent global terrorist threat…ISIL’s leaders are determined seek to strike the U.S. homeland—beyond inspiring homegrown violent extremist attacks
The following is from CIA Director John Brennan:
Unfortunately despite all our progress against ISIL on the battlefield and in the financial realm, our efforts have not reduced the group’s terrorism capability and global reach.
Statements like these show that the Obama administration is not telling us the truth when they say they have everything under control. It is actually worse than ever before.
Listen to what Abu Muhammed Al-Adnan said on ISIS Radio:
The smallest action you do in their heartland is better and more enduring to us than what you would if you were with us. If one of you hoped to reach the Islamic State, we wish we were in your place to punish the Crusaders day and night.
He is basically saying, don’t come here to join the fight. It is better that you remain where you are and fight them in your heartland. The strategy has changed. In the beginning ISIS was encouraging people to come to the Islamic State and join the battle. Now they are encouraging them to stay where they are and cause as much havoc as possible. You can do so much more for Allah in the lands of the unbelievers than by coming to Syria.
You can read the report for yourselves at https://homeland.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/100-ISIS-Linked-Plots-Report-.pdf.
I want you to look at the following charts from page 4 of the report:
From January to July, there were 34 ISIS related plots. If they continue at this rate we can expect close to 60 plots for the year of 2016. For the whole year of 2015 there were 48. In 2014 there were only 19. The efforts to attack the west has grown over the last three years.
You can see the countries that are included in the report. Forty percent of the attacks have been launched here in the US. The other sixty percent have been spread across the other Western nations mentioned in the report.
The report also tells us the the success rate of these attacks has been growing. In 2016 44% of the attacks have been successful. This means we have disrupted 56% of them. The success rate is up 31% from the year before.
Eighty percent of those involved in these attacks are 30 years old or younger. The average age is 26.
They are also getting more destructive. In 2016 we had 58 casualties per attack, as apposed to 48 the year before. There were only 3 casualties per attack in the year 2014.
We have to be more vigilant than ever before. We can’t just depend upon our security forces, we must be alert ourselves to anything that looks suspicious.
15total visits,1visits today