Reckless Ryan assents to Syrian 'refugees'
Per yesterday’s blog by Rick Moran, the spending and tax package proposed by Paul Ryan and his cronies does not ban Syrian refugees from the United States. As far as I’m concerned, all the other horse manure in the bill is secondary compared to this single point: our elected officials have decided to ignore the FBI’s unequivocal warning that they can’t vet “Syrian refugees.”
Which leads me to ask: (1) what part of the FBI’s warning does Congress not understand? (2) If they understand the warning, why are they ignoring it?
Because it’s one or both of those. They don’t grasp the threat we face, and/or they don’t care. In which case they have no business being in a position of power. Heck, with that level of brazen disregard for public safety, they don’t qualify to flip burgers at McDonald’s.
And speaking of McDonald’s and basic skills, I’ve got one more question: how come, if it costs $1,000 per “refugee” per year when supported in a refugee camp in the Middle East compared to $13,000 per “refugee” per year when brought to the United States, we’re bringing them here instead of helping to fill the funding gap needed to provide adequate shelter and services for them in places like Jordan?
Our so-called leaders not only fail on national security; they fail on basic arithmetic.
There is no way – none – any of them can defend the plan to bring “Syrian refugees” to the United States. (And keep in mind that the number admitted will swell after they bring their families in about a year’s time, so every refugee becomes 8, 10, or 12 in the blink of an eye.)
And by the way, can we agree to stop calling them “Syrian refugees”? Since we can’t vet them, the fake Syrian passport business is booming, and ISIS is cranking out forged passports faster than we can print dollar bills, the end result is once again, and again, and again: we don’t know who these people are!
Good grief! Have we learned nothing from what has unfolded in just the past few years (let alone the past 1,400 and counting)?
We are in uncharted waters as We the People lose our voice and our elected officials abdicate their primary oath – to protect and defend this nation.
Apparently our lives are expendable. One would think that if nothing else, self-preservation would kick in, and our leaders would have a shred of concern for themselves and their families. Perhaps living in the D.C. bubble creates an aura of omnipotence, as if they are untouchable. And on some level they are more protected than the average American, as Washington elites travel with security details and live in large homes with armed security while the rest of us are left to scramble for our lives. Because that’s what it’s coming to, slowly but surely.
Have there not been a sufficient number of Americans slaughtered by jihadists to make the issue of Muslim immigration salient? Must more of us die? Must a city be destroyed? Must the lives of our leaders be directly impacted? What’s the criterion to take the gravest threat we face seriously? I want to know.
(Of note, Obama has already brought over 100,000 Syrians to the United States since 2012. And, hating to make bad news worse, this monster of a spending bill also quadruples the number of guest worker visas.)
Hat tips: Breitbart, NRO, and Atlas Shrugs