Quote:One of the gangs mentioned in that article I referenced earlier that's involved in human trafficking has also been under investigation for potentially helping al Qaeda operatives enter the United States through the southern border. I'm not throwing anything at the wall hoping something sticks. I'm not trying to connect drug trafficking to human trafficking in any essence other than the gangs you're laughing off are involved in both.


The brothers who executed the Boston Marathon bombing were Muslims born in Chechnya.


In 2012, the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev who was relatively westernized at the time, traveled to Russia and spent 6 months closely associated with a cousin who was a leader of a radical Muslim group called The Union of the Just, which advocates Sharia law and a global caliphate. This is where he was radicalized. While in Russia, he was associated with more than one radical Muslim group. The guy was investigated by both US and Russian intelligence because of who he was associating with while in country.


When he was forced by his father to return to the US to complete his citizenship processing, he came back a radicalized Muslim. It is believed that he subsequently recruited his brother to his cause, and the rest is history.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/15/europe/paris-attacks-passports/'>The attack in Paris last year included at least one Syrian refugee. </a>


The Ft. Hood shooter was actually inspired to Jihad by Anwar al-Awlaki, an American born imam who might have been one of your neighbors since he was born in New Mexico. Nevertheless, al-Awlaki was the imam at a mosque Nidal Hasan attended, and he was the one who radicalized the shooter. Yes, Hasan was born in the US. So, like the shooter in Orlando, he wasn't a creation of immigration issues. As I said earlier in this discussion, there is more than one problem to deal with when it comes to the radicalization of Muslim men. You want to fixate on those who did so domestically, as if we don't have a problem introducing more radicals to the US homeland via immigration, whether legal or not, and that's a complete load of crap. The US needs to defend against BOTH types of radicals because they DO exist whether you want to hide in your little fantasy land believing otherwise.


Feel free to keep lobbing up more examples. It makes no difference. I can show you where immigration problems absolutely cost the lives of thousands of Americans ON US soil. All you need to do is look at 9/11 and the lax immigration policies that allowed 19 terrorists to enter this country and remain here illegally on expired visas. We can go back and forth all day long about this, but at the end of the day, the fact remains. Weak immigration policies and border control lead to what happened in France yesterday, and will very likely happen here in the United States again in the future whether you want to believe it or not.

All the examples I lobbed up were here legally, that is why I mentioned them.


So as I tried to ask badger, what changes to immigration do you think would change that? Not let citizens and legal residents travel to ant country that may have terrorists? Ignore the refugee crises we created and turn back all immigrants from "rogue" nations?

These aren't solutions, in my opinion. These are knee jerk reactions that only exacerbate the situation.


What specifically do you think would begin to solve the crises? And again, I'd like to point out that these terrorists in the us were living in the country for a very long time before they ran off the rails...

---