Biden’s Catastrophic Policies: Immigration and Afghanistan
Shocking and dangerous parallels.
7 commentsNearly twenty years ago, on September 11, 2001 ago radical Islamist terrorists conducted the deadliest terror attacks ever carried out on American soil, in the history of our nation.
The administration of President George W. Bush, in response to the terror attacks, working with America’s allies sent the military to the Middle East to hunt down those responsible for the deadly attacks and to deprive al-Qaeda and other terror organization with sanctuaries from which they could launch terror attacks in the United States and other countries around the world.
Afghanistan was considered a key to our military operations.
President George W. Bush and then President Obama both justified the use of our military forces overseas by declaring that we were fighting the terrorists “over there” so that we would not have to fight them “over here.”
I took issue with that absurd statement in an article I wrote several years ago, Fighting The War On Terror Here, There And Everywhere.
We will delve into the issue of how the war on terror needed to be pursued domestically as well as overseas shortly. (Think immigration law enforcement.)
But first, the disastrous strategic decisions of President Joe Biden to pull our troops out of Afghanistan have reverberated around the world.
Our allies fear that America can not be trusted and has no resolve to stand up and our nation’s enemies are greatly encouraged by Biden’s lack of resolve. There is a fundamental principle that states that negotiations should never be conducted from a position of weakness but from a position of strength, however Joe and his policies could not be weaker.
The issue is not that Biden ordered our troops out of Afghanistan, there are many, including former President Trump, who believe that the time has come for American forces to be removed from Afghanistan.
The issue is how Biden ordered the removal of troops to be conducted- he got the sequence of the evacuation ass-backwards!
At the pistol range the orders are, Ready- Aim- Fire.
In essence, Biden’s orders were Fire- Ready- Aim!
Sky divers are instructed to pull their ripcords BEFORE they hit the ground.
Biden would have instructed them to pull the ripcord AFTER impact!
Biden did not consult with America’s allies including NATO even though there are NATO troops in Afghanistan.
Biden ordered our troops to abandon Kandahar International Airport, literally in the dead of night without even notifying Afghan troops who were fighting alongside American soldiers.
Biden evacuated the soldiers before he evacuated American civilians or the Afghanis who had worked with our military and our government are were, consequently at mortal risk.
This sets up a very real possibility of Americans and allies being taken hostage by the terrorists.
Biden evacuated the military before removing or destroying a huge arsenal of military hardware and weaponry so that terrorists would have access to these weapons.
Under federal law, anyone who provides weapons or items of potential military use to certain prohibited countries is subject to criminal prosecution that carries severe penalties. The 19 hijackers who carried out the terror attacks of 9/11 wielded boxcutters. Imagine what terrorists who could gain access to a huge arsenal could do!
Finally, he left thousands of terrorists in prisons at Kandahar and elsewhere who were promptly released by the Taliban.
How many U.S. or allied soldiers died or were seriously injured in operations to capture of these highly dangerous terrorists? Now that they are free, they will once again pose a threat, not only to the citizens of Afghanistan but to countries around the world, including the United States of America.
If you thought “Catch & Release” only applied to the Border Patrol, Biden has allowed that dangerous practice to metastasize to our military operations in what is one of the most dangerous places on earth!
Having mentioned the Border Patrol we now need to turn our attention to the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony.
That commission ultimately determined that those terror attacks were facilitated and, indeed, made possible, by multiple failures of the immigration system.
In the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11 I have testified before numerous hearings conducted in the House and Senate about failures of the immigration system that undermine national security and public safety.
On May 5, 2010 I testified at a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims on the topic: New ''Dual Missions'' Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.
Back then the chairman of that important subcommittee was Republican Congressman John Hostettler from Indiana who was extremely critical of the way that President George W. Bush failed to follow the guidelines established by the Homeland Security Act to create the DHS (Department of Homeland Security). Hostettler’s prepared remarks included this paragraph that succinctly laid out just how critical immigration law enforcement is to protecting the United States from international terrorists and is worth considering today:
The 9/11 terrorists all came to the United States without weapons or contraband—Added customs enforcement would not have stopped 9/11 from happening. What might have foiled al Qaeda's plan was additional immigration focus, vetting and enforcement. And so what is needed is recognition that, one, immigration is a very important national security issue that cannot take a back seat to customs or agriculture. Two, immigration is a very complex issue, and immigration enforcement agencies need experts in immigration enforcement. And three, the leadership of our immigration agencies should be shielded from political pressures to act in a way which could compromise the Nation's security.
The frustration and consternation of Chairman Hostettler was absolutely justified, yet our political leaders from both parties refused to take commonsense measures needed to protect America and Americans.
President Trump was the only president to accept the critical nature of America’s borders and immigration laws and act accordingly.
In my view, as a result of his efforts to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws, came under fire in unprecedented ways.
For decades immigration law enforcement was hobbled by a policy of “Catch & Release” whereby illegal aliens who were arrested by the Border Patrol were promptly released from custody. Only a very small percentage ever showed up for their hearings. What was never discussed publicly was that the lunacy of Catch & Release also included the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.
On March 10, 2005 the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims conducted a hearing on Interior Immigration Enforcement Resources. I testified at that hearing.
I urge you to read the transcript of that entire hearing and that you pay particular attention to the prepared statement of no other than Democrat Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee who, in criticizing President Bush for not providing necessary resources stated, in part:
The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement merged the investigative function of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Customs Service, the INS detention and removal functions, most of the INS intelligence operation, the Federal Protective Service, and the Federal Air Marshals Service. ICE's areas of responsibility include the enforcement of laws dealing with the presence and activities of terrorists, human trafficking, commercial alien smuggling operations, document fraud, and drug trafficking, and many important aspects of their work have been successful.
Just recently, for example, we were able to applaud Operation Predator, which was able to bring in 5,000 arrests since 2003 on the question of those who are non-citizens who have come into this country and who have been predators against our children.
Also, for instance, ICE investigators conducted an 8-month investigation last year of two men who were selling false identity documents to members of terrorist organizations. The ICE investigators developed such a strong case against these individuals that they pleaded guilty on February 28, 2005, to a charge of involvement in a conspiracy to sell false documents to purported members of Abu Sayyaf, a Philippines-based group that has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization.
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 authorized 800 new ICE investigators for FY 2006 through FY 2010. The President's budget only requests funding for 143 new ICE investigators for FY 2006, which is only 17 percent of the authorized number. We need all of the 800 additional ICE investigators authorized by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act.
And with a little lightness, Mr. Chairman, maybe the Administration was simply trying to tease us, to egg us on, to see if we had the stomach to do what is right, and that means that we need to fully fund the 800 additional ICE investigators. Let's take the bait, if you will, accept the challenge, and do what we need to do.
The National Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act also authorized 8,000 new detention beds each year from FY 2006 through 2010. The President, however, has requested funding for 1,920 beds for FY 2006, which is only 24 percent of the authorized number. Mr. Chairman, I know that you are headed to the border, at least a portion thereof. I have spent some time at the border with Congressman Ortiz. I saw what the need was and the crisis—hard-working men and women who understand the needs of securing the border, but more importantly, understanding the needs of retaining those who have entered this country illegally. They cannot do their job without the full funding of these detention beds and the recognition that, in fact, we have a responsibility to provide them with the necessary resources.
Whatever happened to Sheila and her Democrat friends since that hearing?
Clearly she very well understands the perils we face because of systemic failures of the immigration system.
Even after the terror attacks of 9/11 increasing numbers of cities and even some states declared themselves to be “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens and among them criminal aliens and terrorists, in directly contradiction to the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
Now Biden’s immigration policies have turned America into a Sanctuary Country for illegal aliens and Afghanistan into a Sanctuary for terrorists who seek the destruction of the United States and our allies.
The title of my recent article will serve as my summation today, Biden Ends War On Radical Islamist Terrorists 'Over Here' and 'Over There' Too bad the terrorists aren’t calling it quits.
The Eternal Jihad
Although August 15, 2021 will forever live in infamy as the date the Taliban reconquered Afghanistan, for over 13 centuries that date was famous for another event -- Constantinople’s defeat of the caliphate, August 15, 718. While these two events separated by exactly 1,303 years are vastly different in nature -- not least that in 718 Islam lost, while in 2021 it won -- they both confirm one irresistible point that the confident West should take to heart: the tenacity of Islamic jihad -- this relentless snake of war that always bides its time, even if by remaining coiled for many centuries, before striking.
Consider the first event. In 718, the Eastern Roman Empire (“Byzantium”) repulsed, in dramatic fashion, the Arabs. It was such a spectacular victory, and Muslim losses were so bad, that, for many centuries, the caliphates never dared make another attempt against the walls of Constantinople.
Put differently, for many centuries after the year 718, anyone living in Constantinople would have thought -- and would have apparently been justified for thinking -- that the Islamic threat, whatever it was elsewhere, was well behind them.
And yet, in the early 1400s -- 700 years after the people of Constantinople had thought they’d seen the last of jihad -- it was back again besieging them, with the city finally falling to Islam on May 29, 1453.
More significantly, those who besieged and conquered Constantinople in 1453 had little to do with those who besieged it in the eighth century. The latter were Arabs, under the Umayyad caliphate centered in Damascus. Those who actually conquered Constantinople were Turks, whose capital was Adrianople (now Edirne).
On the surface there is no connection or continuity between those who in the eighth century tried to conquer, and those who in the fifteenth century did conquer, Constantinople -- except, of course, for one thing: both were Muslims, and both articulated their hostility for and need to conquer Constantinople in distinctly jihadist terms: like every other infidel, the Christian kingdom had two choices before it: submit to Islam -- which it rejected -- or fight.
Thus, while the jihad was down in the eighth century, it was never out for the final count. It bided its time, even as empires rose and fell, and finally manifested itself again in the guise of the latest newcomers to the stage of world conquest, the Turks (who, even more ironically, were greater devotees and practitioners of jihad than even their Arab predecessors).
Seen this way, Constantinople’s mortal enemy was never really the Arabs or Turks; it was Islam, which, while experiencing highs and lows in the intervening centuries, still transformed its adherents, first Arabs then Turks, into existential enemies devoted to the slaughter and subjugation of infidels, whenever possible.
Now consider how this “ancient” and “distant” history applies to recent events. At the height of U.S. victory in Afghanistan in 2005, when both al-Qaeda and the Taliban had been all but rooted out, Ayman al-Zawahiri (current leader of al-Qaeda) was asked about the statuses of those two organizations’ leaders, who were missing in action. His response, which follows, has, in the aftermath of August 15, 2021, proven true:
Jihad in the path of Allah is greater than any individual or organization. It is a struggle between Truth and Falsehood, until Allah Almighty inherits the earth and those who live in it. Mullah Muhammad Omar and Sheikh Osama bin Laden -- may Allah protect them from all evil -- are merely two soldiers of Islam in the journey of jihad, while the struggle between Truth [Islam] and Falsehood [non-Islam] transcends time (Al Qaeda Reader, p.182; emphasis added).
Similarly, consider what Muhammad Arif Mustafa, a Taliban commander, said recently:
One day mujahedeen will have victory and Islamic law will come not just to Afghanistan, but all over the world. We are not in a hurry. We believe it will come one day. Jihad will not end until the last day [emphasis added].
When one considers the state of the world, the current military and economic dominance of the West, and the general weakness of the Muslim world, surely such claims sound laughable. As seen, however, time has a way of switching the tables, making what once seemed impossible imminent.
In short, as long as Islam exists, the jihad may be down but it is never out for the count. It may take years, decades, and centuries; its name and guise may morph and change from eighth century Arab caliphates to fifteenth century Turkish sultanates to the twenty-first century’s loose amalgam of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Hamas, Hezb'allah, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, etc. -- but it is always there, often lying dormant, yes, though ever ready to strike at the first opportunity.
What will it be called, what guise will it take, and what new inroads will it have made in the decades and centuries to come?
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Sword and Scimitar, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center; a Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow at the Middle East Forum; and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.
Image: Dosseman
Tucker: They won't admit they are wrong and don't care what you think
Exclusive—Michael Savage: Biden’s Afghanistan Disaster Is ‘Terror’s Greatest Victory in My Lifetime’
Conservative radio legend and New York Times best-selling author Michael Savage offered his insights on President Joe Biden’s disastrous handling of the U.S.’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News on Monday.
The following transcript has been edited for length.
BREITBART NEWS: Dr. Savage, let’s drive into the interview with a big and broad question: What’s your overarching analysis of Biden’s handling of the situation in Afghanistan in recent weeks?
MICHAEL SAVAGE: I don’t think I can add to what’s already been said and written about [Biden], this imposter, this failure, this bum, this mook, this faker who has gotten people killed. I am so incensed and outraged about what I am watching. Not only because of the deaths and destruction that have occurred thus far, but because what is coming will be far worse. Today we read that Biden’s friends, the Taliban, who he has entrusted with airport security [in Kabul], take an elderly folk musician and shot him in front of his family because music is not permitted, according to the Quran. This is terror’s greatest victory in my lifetime and it’s directly tied to Biden. It’s his biggest blunder. And to make it worse, look at the sad performance of [Biden officials] like [Pentagon press secretary] John Kirby and [White House press secretary] Jen Psaki putting on the lies, trying to gloss over the failures. All the world can see they are lying and smirking through it. These kids remind me of the kids who cheated in school and ended up running the government. They’re absolutely incapable of it.
Look at the tanks and weapons left behind. I thought any other government would have dissolved after the suicide bombing killing 13 U.S. service members and many Afghans. First, our hologram Biden was in hiding, then he came out and was clutching his cheat sheets during a press conference when being asked a question. He was leaning his head forward as if he was overwhelmed by it all. I’ve said Trump defeated ISIS and Biden brought them back to life. ISIS and the Taliban are two of the same sides of evil. It’s good cop, bad cop. Trump and the Russian air force ran ISIS out, which ran rampant under Obama. ISIS was locked up at Bagram Air Force Base and were released by the Taliban under Biden.
On top of this, Biden has weakened the military overseen by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley — a proponent of Critical Race Theory. They’re pushing woke ideology instead of military readiness. They were looking for white supremacists while Afghanistan blew up in their faces. And just the other day, Marine Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller blasted the military’s leadership. He should replace Milley. Instead he was fired and his pension denied. Then we hear a U.S. drone killed two ISIS planners with no names released. Why not identify them? To me, this feels like when [then-President Bill Clinton] bombed the aspirin factory in Sudan in retaliation for the attacks on its embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Now they have Taliban death squads, Al Isha, using U.S. scanners and biometric databases to identify Afghans who worked with the U.S. or NATO, just like a Nazi unit out of Hitler’s Germany, and executing and torturing them.
The left, of course, is blaming Trump as part of their message, which is ludicrous. Trump wanted to withdraw from Afghanistan and had a strategy that didn’t include giving up Bagram Air Force Base. It will get a lot worse tomorrow when we withdraw for good. That’s when the slaughter and rapes will begin in earnest.
BREITBART NEWS: In a recent interview with Newsmax, you warned that there’s more than meets the eye regarding the establishment media’s seemingly critical coverage of Biden’s handling of Afghanistan. You suggested that it was less about the disaster ensuing post-withdrawal and more to do with planning for Biden’s successor, who right now would be Vice President Kamala Harris. Let’s unpack that.
MICHAEL SAVAGE: Who is really running the nation? Biden is not fit to be president. I don’t need to make any jokes about a man who is way past his shelf life. To me, he has presenile dementia or has overt dementia. Who is next? Kamala Harris, who is a stooge of the San Francisco political machine. She doesn’t really exists on her own and has no base. The Getty-Pelosi machine put in her power. I’ve lived in California long enough to see what goes on in this one-party state of ours, which is why it’s dying. Watch out, if Harris takes over, we will be looking back on old Joe as a centrist. God forbid we see her a president. Who would take her slot as vice president? They would pick a party hack. We’re in trouble one way or another, stuck with a two-party system which I’ve been opposing for years. I like the parliamentary system better because after [Afghanistan], there would have been a call for a new government like England or Israel. No question, a new U.S. government would have been formed. [Biden] would have been gone.
Let’s also talk about the Afghans being airlifted to the United States that are not being vetted. I asked on my podcast a week ago how many are trojan horse refugees. Common sense would say many. I don’t know how this ends. I know it’s going to get much, much worse. This is happening as our police have been deballed.
BREITBART NEWS: Thinking about Afghanistan through the lens of the Savage doctrine, what should the U.S. do or not do next about the war-torn country? What are your thoughts on Neoconservative Republicans and pro-war Democrats possibly pushing for re-engagement there.
MICHAEL SAVAGE: Of course. The military-industrial complex wants to build everything again that was just given to the Taliban. Think about the trillions of dollars that would cost. I wouldn’t send one U.S. troop [back into Afghanistan]. I would use drone strikes to knock out all the heavy equipment we gave [the Taliban] before it’s transferred to Iran or some other country.
Biden’s Agencies Plan to Resettle Afghans Across Many Swing States
President Joe Biden’s federal agencies, with the help of refugee contractors, plan to resettle Afghans across a multitude of swing states.
As Breitbart News has reported, thousands of Afghans are being flown to Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, where they are then dispersed throughout the United States. Many thousands are heading to swing states.
Just this past week, 11 flights of Afghans were taken to Wisconsin while hundreds of others are being resettled in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. More are going to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
In addition, Afghans are being resettled throughout West Texas, areas of Arizona, the suburbs of Virginia, as well as Akron, Ohio, and Jacksonville, Florida, while refugee contractors in North Carolina hope to resettle Afghans in the state.
While the Biden administration has been unclear about the total number of Afghans it is seeking to resettle across the U.S., refugee contractors are expecting tens of thousands and potentially hundreds of thousands when the operation is completed.
Afghans with Special Immigrant Visa (SIVs), a minority of the Afghans arriving, have green cards and can apply for naturalized American citizenship after living in the U.S. for five years.
Afghans arriving on refugee status can apply for a green card after living in the U.S. for a year. After obtaining their green card, they can then apply for naturalized American citizenship after five years of living in the U.S.
For the tens of thousands of Afghans that the Biden administration is giving humanitarian parole to come to the U.S., they must adjust status to secure green cards after two years. Later, they too could eventually get naturalized American citizenship.
Over the last 20 years, nearly a million refugees have been resettled in the nation — more than double that of residents living in Miami, Florida, and it would be the equivalent of annually adding the population of Pensacola, Florida.
Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to research, and each refugee costs taxpayers about $133,000 over the course of their lifetime. Within five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
CNN: Biden’s Agencies Bringing Afghans ‘With No Documents Whatsoever’ to U.S.
Afghans are arriving in the United States despite having “no documents whatsoever” after having been screened and approved by President Joe Biden’s federal agencies, CNN reported.
Sources with knowledge of Biden’s massive refugee resettlement operation out of Afghanistan to the U.S. told CNN that many Afghans are arriving at Dulles International Airport in Virginia without having any paperwork on them.
The goal from the top-down, a source told CNN, is to fast-track as many Afghans out of the screening and vetting process in European and Middle Eastern countries and board them on flights to the U.S. without first requiring documentation or proof of identity.
Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is facilitating the resettlement operation, refused to disclose how many Afghans have arrived in the U.S. without any documentation.
CNN reported:
The approach from the administration has been “get as many people on the plane as you can, and we’ll sort out the (immigration visa) stuff later,” the source added, pointing to the rush to get people out of Afghanistan after the US-backed government there collapsed. [Emphasis added]
“Some people have landed with no documents whatsoever, creating a very challenging work environment for the officers,” the source added. [Emphasis added]
DHS sources told CNN that even though they are able to identify Afghans without an individual providing them with documents, “it’s just a math game” due to the tens of thousands, and potentially hundreds of thousands, the Biden administration is wanting to resettle in the U.S.
The large-scale resettlement, the source told CNN makes the likelihood of an Afghan with ties to terrorism “higher and higher.”
A former DHS official warned about the federal government’s inability to know whether a foreign national will turn to terrorism after their resettlement in the U.S., telling CNN:
Intelligence and law enforcement officials are always fearful of missing something in their vetting and that a terrorist could slip through. “The challenging aspect is you can’t predict the future. You can’t tell when someone can go bad,” the former official said. In rare cases, refugees allowed to resettle in the US have been later discovered to have ties to terror groups and charged with lying to immigration authorities. [Emphasis added]
Last week, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said he did not know the number of Afghans who have sought resettlement in the U.S. but subsequently were found to have been on terrorist watch lists.
Pentagon officials last week, though, told Defense One that “up to 100 of the 7,000 Afghans evacuated as prospective recipients” of Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) seeking permanent resettlement in the U.S. have been “flagged” as “potential matches to intelligence agency watch lists.”
“There’s certainly been a number of them,” an official said of the Afghans flagged as possible matches for individuals listed on terrorist watch lists.
At least one of those Afghans seeking an SIV to enter the U.S. has been detained in Qatar after officials said his background revealed possible ties to the Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist organization.
NBC News revealed last week that in at least five cases at the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghans have attempted to board U.S.-bound flights using fraudulent American passports that do not belong to them.
“The U.S. mission team reported at least five cases of Afghans who presented U.S. passports that didn’t belong to them … highlighting fraud concerns and complicating the process of screening people to enter the airport,” the NBC News report stated.
Though Biden has touted that Afghans are being screened at U.S. Military bases abroad, he has ignored that they are also being flown to the U.S. before having completed their visa processing. Specifically, Afghans are being sent to Fort Bliss in Texas, Fort Lee in Virginia, Fort McCoy in Wisconsin, and Fort Dix in New Jersey to continue their processing.
Over the last 20 years, nearly a million refugees have been resettled in the nation — more than double that of residents living in Miami, Florida, and it would be the equivalent of annually adding the population of Pensacola, Florida.
Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to research, and each refugee costs taxpayers about $133,000 over the course of their lifetime. Within five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Progressives Want 1.2 Million Afghan Immigrants
Immigration advocates are urging the government to import 1.2 million Afghan immigrants into the United States, even as President Joe Biden’s deputies are rushing to pack roughly 100,000 Afghans into the pipeline by August 31.
The New York Times reported August 25:
At least 250,000 Afghans who may be eligible for expedited American visas remain in Afghanistan, far too many for American forces to rescue before their deadline to leave next week, new estimates suggest.
…
These estimates are based on reports on Afghan employment published annually by the Department of Defense and analyzed by the Association of Wartime Allies, a group that advocates for Afghans affiliated with the U.S., and researchers at American University. Other estimates vary widely, from 100,000 to more than 300,000 people.
The group estimated that the number could be far higher, depending on the assumptions used: More than a million Afghans who remain in the country, it found, could be eligible for expedited immigration status.
On its website, the Association of Wartime Allies group suggests a goal of roughly 1.2 million:
The group is run by Kim Staffieri and Matt Zeller, who is affiliated with the liberal-run Truman National Security Project, which works with progressive groups that want to further expand migration.
The group’s current goal of 1.2 million is equal to one Afghan refugee for every three U.S. children born in 2020 — or 20 times the number recently suggested by President Joe Biden.
“The estimate we’re giving is somewhere between 50,000 and 65,000 folks total, counting their families,” Biden told ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos on August 19.
On August 26, Biden showed little enthusiasm for importing additional Afghans, telling a White House press conference:
Millions of Afghani citizens who are not Taliban, who did not actively cooperate with us … if given a chance, they’d be on board a plane tomorrow. It sounds ridiculous, but the vast majority of people in communities like that want to come to America if given a choice. So, getting every single person out can’t be guaranteed for anybody because there is a [official] determination of all who want to get out … It’s a process.
The progressive push for more Afghan migrants is happening even as Biden’s Department of Homeland Security continues to extract migrants across the Mexican border for use in the U.S. economy as consumers, workers, and renters. The border inflow will likely exceed 800,000 in 2021, including illegals who sneak across the border, and perhaps 500,000 job-seeking migrants.
This southern inflow is in addition to the inflow of legal immigrants — about 730,000 — and also the inflow of visa workers, such as H-1B foreign graduates.
The total 2021 inflow of migrants is on track to deliver almost 1.6 million people into Americans’ society, or roughly one migrant for every two American births in 2020.
The government’s economic policy of extraction migration inflates the nation’s labor supply and boosts consumer spending, so aiding companies and investors. The migration is deeply unpopular because it damages ordinary Americans’ career opportunities, cuts their wages, raises their rents, curbs their productivity, shrinks their political clout, widens regional wealth gaps, and wrecks their democratic, equality-promoting civic culture.
Yet many progressives insist on importing more migrants, even after the U.S. quits Afghanistan on August 31. “We should bring as many as possible here,” said New York Times op-ed writer Michelle Goldberg on August 16:
Canada, which is about one-ninth the size of the United States, has announced its intention to take more than 20,000 fleeing Afghans. There is no way to justify America accepting fewer on a per capita basis; 180,000 should be the absolute floor.
This is likely to be unpopular; polls showed a majority of Americans opposed the comparatively tiny Syrian refugee resettlement program. But there is no moral argument against vastly expanded refugee admissions.
The mass migration would be unpopular. For example, 52 percent of Americans oppose the resettlement of more than 50,000 Afghans in the United States, according to a survey by Rasmussen Reports. Only 26 percent favor an inflow of more than 50,000, according to the August 18-19 survey of 1,000 likely voters.
For many years, a wide variety of pollsters have shown deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into jobs sought by young U.S. graduates. This public opposition is multiracial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based, bipartisan, rational, persistent, and recognizes the solidarity Americans owe to each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment