Wednesday, May 31, 2017

The Left’s Unilateral Suicide Pact | City Journal

Islamic terrorism in the West is an immigration problem. Until we have the law enforcement and intelligence capacity to detect terror plots, immigration policy has to change, both in Europe and in the U.S.  European security forces are unable to track the militants in their populations, so large are their numbers. The United States must not end up in the same situation. We need lower immigration levels and much tighter screening. The Manchester bombing vindicated President Donald Trump’s March 2017 executive order briefly limiting travel to the U.S. from half a dozen ISIS- and al-Qaida-riven countries, including Libya, while the administration reviews security screening in those countries. Yet three days after Manchester, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down that order, claiming that it “drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination.” This judicial crusade against Trump’s travel pause cripples the executive’s ability to protect the country from attack, by exporting phantom constitutional rights to the world.  Progressives’ passivity in the face of Islamic terrorism is not a consistent philosophy. It is rather the outcome of their commitment to open borders at any cost. That ideology has taken too many lives and must be overcome.


The extremely intelligent California native Heather MacDonald. I'm Thomas A., but I wish I endowed her chair at the Manhattan Institute.

I also wish I understood what the Left is up to with encouraging immigration from countries like Libya. Heather says "[p]rogressive passivity in the face of Islamic terrorism is not a consistent policy." It seems like it must be, but what? Central America, I understand. You don't like the way the native Americans are voting, so you import new voters, poor and dependent on the state. But Muslims may include a certain number of terrorists, and that's bad for everyone, isn't it. Even if you suppose you can't make omelets without breaking little girls, you still just end up with insulated communities that are hardly politically correct. It really does seem as if the progressives have some sort of cultural death wish. Is that it? Of course, you have a certain number of old school liberals--throw open the doors and everyone we let in will eventually become good Democrats throwing frisbees at the 4th of July picnic. But they're just the useful idiots. So just what the heck is going on here?

On this Fourth Circuit decision--I find very troubling this finding that incorporates Trump's generally anti-immigrant attitude, if that is what it is, into the specifics of his actual policy. Can a court really do that? If so, it sort of invents a whole new dimension of courts being political. Which is bad.

| Permalink


"We need lower immigration levels": that would be wise.

"and much tighter screening": that's an idle pipe-dream. How on earth do you screen people from corrupt and incompetent countries? And, perhaps even more important, you can't screen their children and children yet to be born.

Talk of "screening" is mainly a panacea.

Posted by: dearieme | May 31, 2017 3:17:12 PM