Right now, do you think our nation’s borders are secured? If you don’t, what do you think our government can do to make you and your family safe? And will it be done?
According to Time.com, the Republican National Committee passed a resolution Friday that calls on Congress to create a special, legal status for illegal immigrants brought to America as minors—or “DREAMers” as immigration activists call them, for the eponymous bill to provide them legal status, which would include a renewable five-year work permit. They would have to provide proof of employment or enrollment to retain the status.
Both parties have caved to special interests and have not considered the national security risks involved with giving millions of undocumented immigrants’ legal status and an official U.S. IDs.
The premise that was asserted by the 9/11 Commission was “if terrorists cannot get into this country, they cannot commit violent acts of terrorism in this country.” The U.S. has failed to change its policies and has ignored the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations for over a decade now.
Ed Kowalski director of the 9/11 Families for a Secure America Foundation said, “Terrorists have come into this country in the thousands among the millions of illegal aliens who simply walk across our border or who come here with visas or without visas, and they over stay their visits.”
Michael W. Cutler, retired INS senior special agent and immigration expert, in his insightful column, Political Asylum: Where Compassion and National Security Intersect states,
“Those 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 aliens who had gamed the visa process and/or the immigration benefits program.”
“Alleged terrorists in the Boston bombings, Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, were not hiding in the shadows — they were hiding in plain sight! In fact, published reports indicated that they and their families may have gamed the immigration system by filing for political asylum even though there are reasons, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, to be skeptical about the validity of their application for political asylum,” Cutler said.
Clearly, our failed national security is linked to a failed immigration policy. Cutler told Benswann.com, “During 9/11, we had 26 countries with visa waivers; now we are up to 37 now. Those aliens do not need to apply for visas who are coming to the United States. The current visa waiver program undermines our national security.”
On April 21, 2013, less than a week after the terrorist attack in Boston, the AP report noted, in part:
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said Sunday that the bombings that left three dead “should urge us to act quicker, not slower when it comes to getting the 11 million identified,” referring to the estimated number of immigrants living in the country illegally. Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York added “keeping the status quo is not a very good argument, given what happened” in Boston.
Cutler said, “The level of dishonesty in these outrageous statements should boil the blood of every American, irrespective of their political orientation. National security is neither a “liberal” nor “conservative” issue — national security is an American issue.”
“What is broken about the immigration system is its pervasive lack of integrity, created by an abject lack of resources and a lack of political will to enforce the immigration laws that are already on the books,” Cutler said.
South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy agrees that the system is broken.
In an interview with Benswann.com, Joshua Cook asked Gowdy, “If Congress authorizes to take undocumented immigrants and grant them legal status, how do we know they are not terrorists?”
“There is no amnesty bill in the House,” Gowdy said. “Whatever methodology, if any, becomes law, it will necessarily include a background check, and then you get into the details of what that background check is … every version says national security risks disqualify you. The question is how good are you going to be at vetting these people? But we are light years away from having that happen. There is no amnesty bill in the House.”
“What are we going to do with the terrorist cells in the U.S.?” asked Cook. “What is the strategy to identify these cells? That’s a big concern because they are still in the shadows.”
“Hopefully, pass my SAFE act,” Gowdy said, “which helps state and local law enforcement to help the 5,000 I.C.E. agents, and there are only 5,000 I.C.E. agents, enforce visa over-stays and people that cross the border. But keep in mind that crossing the border is a misdemeanor. Now it does make you eligible for deportation, but without border security, what difference does it make if you are deported if you’re going to cross the border again next week?”
Cook asked, “What is the solution to close the border?”
“I think if it was an easy solution… I’m sure we would have already stumbled upon it. I noticed that Jerusalem had some gates and some walls,” Gowdy said.
Responding to Gowdy, Mike Cutler told Benswann.com,
“An alien who crosses the border is committing a misdemeanor, but an alien who has previously been deported has committed a felony. Immigration laws are difficult because by simply watching someone crossing the border does not tell you if someone is committing a felony or not. If a police sees a man holding up a teller in a bank, you know it’s a felony. But if a border agent sees someone crossing the border, he doesn’t know if that person is committing a felony or not because that can only be determined by know who the person is by a background check. It’s not very accurate…to say it’s a misdemeanor. The full statement should have been simply running the border with no other things considered is a misdemeanor.”
Cook asked, “How do you prevent a terrorist from gaming the system? How do you prevent a bad guy from getting an official identity document and a false name?”
“That’s an excellent question,” said Cutler.
“If an Islamic terrorist walked into an immigration office and if we didn’t have his finger prints on file and claimed his name is ‘Donald Duck,’ how would we know better? We wouldn’t. We will be providing terrorist and fugitives from around the world with official identity ID with false names to build identities around,” Cutler said.
“There are no resources to do background checks to investigate that many people. I agree with Gowdy; there is no proper way of vetting these people,” Cutler said.
Cutler told Benswann.com that the immigration laws have been enacted to achieve two primary goals: protect innocent lives by enhancing national security and community safety and protect the jobs of American workers.
“What we are doing is contrary to common sense,” Cutler said. “George W. Bush sent our border patrol agents to secure the Iraqi border and left our borders wide open. The feds had our border patrol agents prosecuted for doing their jobs. I mean this is a level of betrayal that is stupendous.”
The Bush administration had both the House and Senate and didn’t secure the border. Obama had both the House and Senate and didn’t secure the border – both administrations have failed us on securing our borders.
Cutler said that they should call comprehensive immigration reform was it is: the terrorist assistance and facilitation act.
A South Carolina attorney told Benswann.com, “the pro-amnesty forces are using a strategic maneuver to hide what is going on. Here’s the problem: the House Republican leadership, like the Senate, wants an amnesty bill. Rep. Gowdy has his own personal bill, which, as you would expect, has some good things in it, and is not the problem. The content of Trey’s bill is not the issue. The problem is that Trey’s bill, or any other bill the House might pass, no matter how good it may appear, will be used by the House leadership in a procedural maneuver to “conference” with the Senate. Due to the Senate and the House Leadership’s preference for amnesty, a conference committee will be stacked with pro-amnesty votes, and it will produce a result similar to the Senate bill. This will produce a vote in the House on a bill that could never have been passed by the House alone, but under cover of “conferencing” the House leadership will vote with Democrats and pass an amnesty bill, likely with any minor good provisions of Trey’s bill stripped out. That is the strategy of the “pro-amnesty” forces, and that strategy must be exposed and defeated. No bill must be passed until new elections replace the pro-amnesty leadership!