ELDER PATRIOT – The president of the United States has no more important responsibility than to protect the American people. President Barack Hussein Obama’s unilateral decision to flood the small towns of America with Muslims of unknown origin and intent shows a callous disregard for the health and wellbeing of those American citizens he took an oath to represent.
Yesterday Obama decided to chide Republicans rather than to confront the Radical Islamists who are threatening to destroy the West. It turned out to be a shameless display of politics, cowardice and disregard for the safety of America: “Apparently they’re [Republicans] scared of widows and orphans coming in to the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion.”
These are the hate-filled “babies” that Obama says Republicans are afraid of. How would you feel about having these little darlings in your child’s class? Mr. President, it’s not about whether I’m scared of them it’s whether they will serve to disrupt our grade schools and threaten the safety of our children in the same manner in which you created Black Lives Matter to disrupt our college campuses. While our children are being expelled for making a gun by rolling up their hand and extending a finger, Obama demands these budding young killers indoctrinated in Jihad be in school alongside them.
And, unless you are serious about making them orphans (we know you’re not,) you’ll be allowing these sweet looking mothers to join them. They’ll make great PTA moms.
But, President Obama lies. The exodus looks more like an invading army on the march.
As picture after picture clearly shows us, fully seventy percent or more of these “desperate” migrants are military aged males. Why is no one asking why these men have left their women and children behind if they were being persecuted and they are not bent on causing murder and mayhem in their new destinations? Obama’s own appointees are publicly admitting there’s no way to guarantee American’s safety:
FBI Director James Comey had this to say: “I can’t sit here and offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”
And, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said: “I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees, so that’s a huge concern of ours.”
Gee, ya think? Only a person bent on ignoring the facts would deliberately fail to acknowledge that at least one of the Paris terrorists was granted entrance as a refugee. But, what difference would it make if they were granted admission under another program? Or, they come across our unguarded southern border as was revealed is happening yesterday? According to a poll conducted by Center for Security Policy over fifty percent of American Muslim’s believe in elevating Sharia Law ahead of our Constitution that Barack Obama swore to protect and defend.
And, why did President Obama deliberately misstate federal immigration law yesterday:
“When I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which a person who’s fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted … that’s shameful…. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”
Au contraire, Mr. President. There actually is a test to be considered a refugee worthy of consideration for asylum. Writing for National Review Andrew McCarthy recites the federal statutes governing those seeking asylum as refugees:
“Under federal law, the executive branch is expressly required to take religion into account in determining who is granted asylum. Under the provision governing asylum (section 1158 of Title 8, U.S. Code), an alien applying for admission
“must establish that … religion [among other things] … was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant.”
Moreover, to qualify for asylum in the United States, the applicant must be a “refugee” as defined by federal law. That definition (set forth in Section 1101(a)(42)(A) of Title , U.S. Code) also requires the executive branch to take account of the alien’s religion:
“The term “refugee” means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality … and who is unable or unwilling to return to … that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of … religion [among other things] …[.]”
The law requires a “religious test.” And the reason for that is obvious. Asylum law is not a reflection of the incumbent president’s personal (and rather eccentric) sense of compassion. Asylum is a discretionary national act of compassion that is directed, by law not whim, to address persecution.
There is no right to emigrate to the United States. And the fact that one comes from a country or territory ravaged by war does not, by itself, make one an asylum candidate. War, regrettably, is a staple of the human condition. Civil wars are generally about power. That often makes them violent and, for many, tragic; but it does not necessarily make them wars in which one side is persecuting the other side.”
All of which Obama knows since he signed the Lautenberg Amendment on January 17, 2014. The bill was intended to open a door to freedom for religious minorities in Iran and the former Soviet Union.
The only people being persecuted, and therefore eligible under federal statute for refugee status, are Christians and Jews but Obama has avoided that subject like the plague. Only 53 Christians have been granted refugee status to date.
So why is Obama leaving us unprotected? Only he knows for sure but try this on for size; Obama is following the path of another Marxist, Joseph Stalin, who flooded The Ukraine and the Baltic States with millions of ethnic Russians so as to make the native culture unrecognizable and create division among the peoples such that a unified challenge against the tyranny he had planned would never be possible.
Why has he steadfastly refused to apply the terms radicals and extremists to these murderous scum but has no such restraint when discussing the opposing political party? He can’t seriously consider Republicans a greater threat to your safety that Muslim extremists, can he?
We have long since passed dismissing the president’s actions as malfeasance or fecklessness. Even if those were the reasons he needs to be removed before he does any more damage. If the Republicans continue to refuse to perform their Constitutional responsibilities they must be considered complicit with the president.