Recently, CBS reported that the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee; Rep. Devin Nunes, a Republican from California, said that America is dealing with “the highest threat level we have ever faced in this country.” He said that the threat is coming from the radicalization of young people and foreign fighters heading to Iraq and Syria to join terror groups. “They’re very good at communicating through separate avenues where it’s very difficult to track,” Nunes said. “That’s why when you get a young person who is willing to get into these chat rooms, go on the Internet and get radicalized, it’s something we are not only unprepared [for], we are also not used to it in this country.”
CBS also reported that several Americans across the U.S. have been arrested and charged recently with being ISIS sympathizers and trying to join the terror group. Nunes went on to say that “we are having a tough time tracking terrorist cells within the United States.”
This bothers me quite a bit and it should you too. Not because ISIS is a threat, but because we are being provided lame excuses by our elected officials and because they are setting themselves up for more power grabs. Notice how he mentions the internet and chat rooms as being the source of the problem. Can you imagine some restriction soon enough? It is as if the government completely disregards logic, reason, and reality in the face of their own actions. For instance; wouldn’t simply allowing these people in our country in the first place be a problem? I would like to suggest that perhaps federal policy is partially, if not completely to blame for this entire problem. For the sake of length though, this will not be a “deep dive”. Instead; this will merely be a few points in case.
First, let me establish some much needed information. Since before 2008, studies have showed that around 90% of all mosques in the US are funded in some part by Saudi Arabia – a supposed ally with massive terror connections. During that same time, it was admitted by the FBI that terrorist cells like Hamas and Hezbollah were already active in the United States. It was also known (even back in 2004), that due to signed and formal working agreements, groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah were working together to attack Israel and the US; and working together and actively collaborating with al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad and al-Fuqra INSIDE the US.
Today, there is the addition of ISIS; an offshoot of al-Qaeda, booted out of their origination due to their excessive and extremely violent tendencies, and their active and extreme efforts to form an Islamic caliphate. And while it can be argued that ISIS and these other groups are “very different”, it should not go without saying that there are several similarities between groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS; starting with their ideological opposition to the West and ending in their cooperation. To clarify; I should mention the fact that some militants have abandoned al-Qaeda to join ISIS and militant leaders from ISIS and al-Qaeda have decided to join forces against their opponents.
Since about 2004, I have publicly suggested that a porous border is a very large mistake. Not because of racial divide, but because of strategic prudence in regard to external terrorism. During 2005 there were an estimated 4 to 10 million criminal immigrants that crossed into the United States from our Southern border, of which as many as 19,500 were from what the FBI has labeled to be terrorist nations. This was, and remains, an issue and the numbers have risen dramatically since. Of course, this does not include violent gang members or cartel.
But the administration has chosen to ignore this very simple and admittedly huge problem. In 2014, Rep. Duncan Hunter warned the country by stating that ISIS members were crossing our border from the south. But Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson suggested that the four foreigners who were apprehended after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border did not have ties to terrorism, but were members of the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK), an organization that was fighting against ISIS. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security has said “any suggestion of ISIS crossing our borders is categorically false and not supported by any credible intelligence or the facts on the ground.” So I suppose we can rest easy right? Not so fast.
To begin with, four apprehensions out of millions is not a comforting statistic. Secondly, Chris Farrell, the director of research and investigation for Judicial Watch, has said that Rep. Duncan Hunter was not lying about ISIS terrorists crossing over the U.S.-Mexico border. He says that “there’s an ISIS operational element in Juarez” which is literally under 24 minutes away from the border. He went on to point out that these people do not declare themselves as ISIS, and don’t exactly carry documentation declaring their affiliations either. Logic would dictate that if they did, they would probably be arrested. I’m guessing they know this.
But the question we really need to ask ourselves is “Is it really so hard to believe that a radical organization bent on doing harm to a nation would not somehow make radical moves to get into that nation… like lie?” Even The Washington Times has recently reported that “ISIS is operating a camp in the northern Mexican state of Chihuahua, just eight miles from the U.S. border“. What do you think they are doing there? Are we to believe this is just some family outing?
Of course, current policy is all about allowing criminals to cross our borders every day. In fact, not long ago, a patriotic border agent leaked a few documents to a well-known conservative web site, explaining that “the Department of Homeland Security has decided that the majority of immigrants crossing U.S. borders illegally cannot be detained or deported without approval from top officials in Washington” – which that kind of approval is unlikely to occur according to the Morton Memos.
It gets worse. Judicial Watch has also reported that a document called the “Enforcement Options With Alcohol-Impaired Drivers”, literally directs U.S. Border Patrol agents in Tucson, to “release” individuals under the influence and “allow them to go on their way.” The part that I find extremely telling is that the DHS memo states that “there is no legal requirement for a Border Patrol agent to intervene in a state crime, including DUI, and therefore there is generally no liability that will attach to the agent or agency for failing to act in this situation.”
This is extremely interesting because that would mean the states and local authorities would then be responsible for such enforcement, right? Keeping in mind of course that even many local law enforcement executives agree that persons who are in the country illegally have violated the law and that they should be treated in the same fashion as other criminals; but there is a problem, and that problem is federal policy.
The federal government wants you to believe that they have struggled to secure the borders, deter illegal immigration, or track down those who overstay temporary visas. But when we look at their orders to the Border Patrol to stand-down, their continued pressure against states that attempt to enforce such laws, or even the recent Justice Department’s 2010 lawsuit against the state of Arizona over its immigration law that grants local police greater authority to check the legal status of people they stop, and numerous other actions far too numerous to list here, we can begin to see a clear trend. Top this off with the encouragement of racial divide and amnesty, and you’ve sealed the deal in regard to border enforcement… or the lack thereof.
So let’s get back to the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee for a moment. Again, we know that several Americans across the U.S. have already been arrested and charged recently with being ISIS sympathizers and trying to join the terror group. We know (or at least can logically assume) that ISIS is crossing the border. We know that the media is blasting the ISIS name and their shock value around the clock. This all easily equates into impressionable young men and women being drawn to ISIS for any number of reasons, which furthers the problem. But when we consider the porous borders, terrorist groups already present, and with more on the way – having a free pass to enter courtesy of current policy; and more than likely… with the aid of cartels, it should really shock no one when terror strikes our soil again.
But let me really drive this point home: National Intelligence Director James Clapper reported to Reuters at the beginning of the year that about 40 of the estimated 180 Americans who have traveled to Syria to join Islamist groups such as ISIS have returned home. Perhaps they are just visiting family. And I should also mention that FBI Deputy Assistant Director Michael Steinbach recently spoke about Americans who have trained with terrorist groups like ISIS overseas saying “It’s not even close to being under control”. And CNN recently reported that “an ISIS fighter who calls for jihad in a new online video was trained in counter-terrorism tactics on American soil, in a program run by the United States”. I have to admit… I am all fuzzy with the sense of security provided by our government.
Now… with all this mind, I want you to consider the following: with militants abandoning al-Qaeda to join ISIS, and with ISIS and al-Qaeda joining forces anyway; and considering that al-Qaeda was already in the US; and with ISIS camps just 8 miles from the porous southern border; what are the odds that ISIS is already here? Logic demands that the chances are more than great.
Now to the point: in spite of the promises of the administration, the TSA, the DHS, the FBI and so on, and in complete contrast to the “security” we were sold in exchange for so many of our liberties, and knowing this is now a long-term problem that the administration seems all too eager to exacerbate, it’s not hard to see who is REALLY at fault for this problem. And Rep. Nunes has the audacity to say that “we are having a tough time tracking terrorist cells within the United States?” But somehow, they still don’t have a problem tracking law abiding American citizens or infringing on Constitutional Law or unalienable rights. Define irony, right?
Well, just a thought Nunes, perhaps we shouldn’t have let them come in to begin with or better yet… perhaps we should simply stop selective enforcement of the law; or maybe the American people shouldn’t have traded their liberties for the false sense of security some warned you could never provide in the first place; or just maybe… if Congress would do what they were sent to Washington to do in the first place, it would be a non-issue; but I digress.
Perhaps we all need to think about this; this government is the same group of people who continually suggest that your Right to self-protection is our biggest problem. Seems to me, and based on the evidence provided here today, we’ve never needed our Rights more.