Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order

[ezgeze]

Ok here it is

Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order
http://cis.org/vaughan/study-reveals...-vetting-order

A review of information compiled by a Senate committee in 2016 reveals that 72 individuals from the seven countries covered in President Trump's vetting executive order have been convicted in terror cases since the 9/11 attacks. These facts stand in stark contrast to the assertions by the Ninth Circuit judges who have blocked the president's order on the basis that there is no evidence showing a risk to the United States in allowing aliens from these seven terror-associated countries to come in.
In June 2016 the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, released a report on individuals convicted in terror cases since 9/11. Using open sources (because the Obama administration refused to provide government records), the report found that 380 out of 580 people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-born. The report is no longer available on the Senate website, but a summary published by Fox News is available here.
The Center has obtained a copy of the information compiled by the subcommittee. The information compiled includes names of offenders, dates of conviction, terror group affiliation, federal criminal charges, sentence imposed, state of residence, and immigration history.
The Center has extracted information on 72 individuals named in the Senate report whose country of origin is one of the seven terror-associated countries included in the vetting executive order: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The Senate researchers were not able to obtain complete information on each convicted terrorist, so it is possible that more of the convicted terrorists are from these countries.
The United States has admitted terrorists from all of the seven dangerous countries:
Somalia: 20
Yemen: 19
Iraq: 19
Syria: 7
Iran: 4
Libya: 2
Sudan: 1
Total: 72
According to the report, at least 17 individuals entered as refugees from these terror-prone countries. Three came in on student visas and one arrived on a diplomatic visa.
At least 25 of these immigrants eventually became citizens. Ten were lawful permanent residents, and four were illegal aliens.
These immigrant terrorists lived in at least 16 different states, with the largest number from the terror-associated countries living in New York (10), Minnesota (8), California (8), and Michigan (6). Ironically, Minnesota was one of the states suing to block Trump's order to pause entries from the terror-associated countries, claiming it harmed the state. At least two of the terrorists were living in Washington, which joined with Minnesota in the lawsuit to block the order.
Thirty-three of the 72 individuals from the seven terror-associated countries were convicted of very serious terror-related crimes, and were sentenced to at least three years imprisonment. The crimes included use of a weapon of mass destruction, conspiracy to commit a terror act, material support of a terrorist or terror group, international money laundering conspiracy, possession of explosives or missiles, and unlawful possession of a machine gun.
Some opponents of the travel suspension have tried to claim that the Senate report was flawed because it included individuals who were not necessarily terrorists because they were convicted of crimes such as identity fraud and false statements. About a dozen individuals in the group from the seven terror-associated countries are in this category. Some are individuals who were arrested and convicted in the months following 9/11 for involvement in a fraudulent hazardous materials and commercial driver's license scheme that was extremely worrisome to law enforcement and counter-terrorism agencies, although a direct link to the 9/11 plot was never claimed.
The information in this report was compiled by Senate staff from open sources, and certainly could have been found by the judges if they or their clerks had looked for it. Another example that should have come to mind is that of Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who attacked and wounded 11 people on the campus of Ohio State University in November 2016. Artan was a Somalian who arrived in 2007 as a refugee.
President Trump's vetting order is clearly legal under the provisions of section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which says that the president can suspend the entry of any alien or group of aliens if he finds it to be detrimental to the national interest. He should not have to provide any more justification than was already presented in the order, but if judges demand more reasons, here are 72.

[Endus]

So literally nothing that contradicts the courts, even though they're going to misrepresent their own findings and claim otherwise.

The courts stated that nobody from those countries had committed a terrorist attack.

The study broadened that analysis to include "use of a weapon of mass destruction, conspiracy to commit a terror act, material support of a terrorist or terror group, international money laundering conspiracy, possession of explosives or missiles, and unlawful possession of a machine gun. "

So not actually committing any actual attack, but aiding or planning one. This is moving the goalposts. And that only applies to 33 of the 72; they don't clarify (and the report is apparently not available for me to double check), but the strong implication is that the remaining 39 were charged with much lesser crimes than the above.

The "study" is just an attempt to muddy the waters.

[PACOX]

More alternative facts

[Gorgodeus]

What is not in that biased report is the actual facts: The 2 countries that are the largest producers of terrorists in regards to numbers, and harboring and funding them, is Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Trump has no business dealings in any of the countries on the ban list. He does in both Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Funny how that works.

[announced]

So literally nothing that contradicts the courts, even though they're going to misrepresent their own findings and claim otherwise.

The courts stated that nobody from those countries had committed a terrorist attack.

The study broadened that analysis to include "use of a weapon of mass destruction, conspiracy to commit a terror act, material support of a terrorist or terror group, international money laundering conspiracy, possession of explosives or missiles, and unlawful possession of a machine gun. "

So not actually committing any actual attack, but aiding or planning one. This is moving the goalposts. And that only applies to 33 of the 72; they don't clarify (and the report is apparently not available for me to double check), but the strong implication is that the remaining 39 were charged with much lesser crimes than the above.

The "study" is just an attempt to muddy the waters.

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

[belfpala]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

If I'm following your logic, we should lock up all white males in a given age demographic before there's another school shooting. /shrug.

[Mifuyne]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

You think travel bans would have any effect on terrorism activity?
Hilarious.

[Noxx79]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

It's much more likely that a white male American citizen is going to do worse. Does that apply to you? Should we lock you I your house?

Also it's funny that you bring up 9/11 when, as stated multiple times, none of the countries hat the 9/11 conspirators were from have been banned. Hmmmmmm I wonder why that is?

[Traveler Voltin]

alot of racism and sexism in here over white males.

[unbound]

So literally nothing that contradicts the courts, even though they're going to misrepresent their own findings and claim otherwise.

The courts stated that nobody from those countries had committed a terrorist attack.

The study broadened that analysis to include "use of a weapon of mass destruction, conspiracy to commit a terror act, material support of a terrorist or terror group, international money laundering conspiracy, possession of explosives or missiles, and unlawful possession of a machine gun. "

So not actually committing any actual attack, but aiding or planning one. This is moving the goalposts. And that only applies to 33 of the 72; they don't clarify (and the report is apparently not available for me to double check), but the strong implication is that the remaining 39 were charged with much lesser crimes than the above.

The "study" is just an attempt to muddy the waters.

Furthermore, the "study" fails to show the numbers of terrorists and damage caused by those from countries not covered in the Executive Order.

Here is a comprehensive list of foreign-born individuals who committed or were convicted of attempting to commit a terrorist attack on U.S. soil - https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...rorism/514361/

In order of actual murders committed by terrorists from foreign countries since 1975:

- Saudi Arabia - 19 terrorists; 2,369 murders
- United Arab Emirates - 2 terrorists; 314 murders
- Egypt - 11 terrorists; 162 murders
- Lebanon - 4 terrorists; 159 murders
- Kuwait - 2 terrorists; 6 murders
- Cuba - 11 terrorists; 3 murders
- Kyrgyzstan - 2 terrorists; 3 murders
- Pakistan - 14 terrorists; 3 murders
- Palestine - 5 terrorists; 2 murders
- Armenia - 6 terrorists; 1 murder
- Croatia - 9 terrorists; 1 murder
- Taiwan - 1 terrorist; 1 murder
- Trinidad and Tobago - 2 terrorists; 1 murder

And that is it. More terrorists have been caught, some from the 7 countries. But if the OP wants to believe that we are protecting the US from terrorists, those facts clearly show that Trump's executive order does absolutely nothing to protect us. The list shows 88 terrorists that actually murdered people...and not one of them came from Trump's list.

[announced]

If I'm following your logic, we should lock up all white males in a given age demographic before there's another school shooting. /shrug.

when white males are caught handling bombs sarin gas or other items classified as wmds then sure arrest them regardless of skin color.

It's much more likely that a white male American citizen is going to do worse. Does that apply to you? Should we lock you I your house?

Also it's funny that you bring up 9/11 when, as stated multiple times, none of the countries hat the 9/11 conspirators were from have been banned. Hmmmmmm I wonder why that is?

I could also mention the Boston bombing, with the Tsarnaev brothers who's parents were refugees

[rogueMatthias]

I feel the idea that this is just some blanket "Muslim ban" masks the real issue here with these countries.

Sure, more known terrorists have come from other countries that aren't on the list like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. These countries weren't in the ban as this wasn't about some irrational fear of extremist islamists.

The countries that Obama put on the list were ones that had been completely fucked over by US foreign policy. Fucked over so badly that there's the genuine rational fear that people who've lost their wives, children, parents, future, +entire lives to US policy might want to take matters into their own hands.

[Noxx79]

when white males are caught handling bombs sarin gas or other items classified as wmds then sure arrest them regardless of skin color.


I could also mention the Boston bombing, with the Tsarnaev brothers who's parents were refugees

And? You could,but it wouldn't help your point at all, as they were children when they came, AND their country of origin was not on the list either.

[Xeones]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

What it means is our law enforcement does a good job.

[Tikaru]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

Denying thousands upon thousands of people, including small children, from fleeing death should be denied on the chance that one or two of them might kill someone?

Well shit, based on that "logic", we should round up all the white males in the US. Not all white males are "lone-wolf mass-murderers", but there seems to be an alarming number of mass killings in the US carried out by white males. (That's how you sound)

[Eliseus]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

Just report him for conspiracy theories and move on.

[kail]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

Maybe use existing statistics instead of "it will (probably) happen". Helps make informed decisions.

[Deleted]

I could also mention the Boston bombing, with the Tsarnaev brothers who's parents were refugees

Yes, from Kirghizstan. That evil nation of terrorism and horror.

Maybe you should look inside America and figure out why American-born citizens become terrorists.

[Endus]

so its better to wait for the terrorists to commit another Paris/Niece/911/attack potentially murdering thousands before charging them? nice logic there

Never said anything even remotely like that. Didn't even say any of these particular individuals shouldn't have been charged. Was pointing out that nothing in this study contradicted the courts' reasoning that the travel ban was unconstitutional and without functional merit. Which it is, and lacks. It will do nothing to prevent those future attacks you're so worried about, and serves only to harass and harm innocents.

Just report him for conspiracy theories and move on.

Pointing out arguments rooted in ignorance and fear isn't in any way, shape, or form a "conspiracy theory".

[Espe]

Furthermore, the "study" fails to show the numbers of terrorists and damage caused by those from countries not covered in the Executive Order.

Here is a comprehensive list of foreign-born individuals who committed or were convicted of attempting to commit a terrorist attack on U.S. soil - https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...rorism/514361/

In order of actual murders committed by terrorists from foreign countries since 1975:

- Saudi Arabia - 19 terrorists; 2,369 murders
- United Arab Emirates - 2 terrorists; 314 murders
- Egypt - 11 terrorists; 162 murders
- Lebanon - 4 terrorists; 159 murders
- Kuwait - 2 terrorists; 6 murders
- Cuba - 11 terrorists; 3 murders
- Kyrgyzstan - 2 terrorists; 3 murders
- Pakistan - 14 terrorists; 3 murders
- Palestine - 5 terrorists; 2 murders
- Armenia - 6 terrorists; 1 murder
- Croatia - 9 terrorists; 1 murder
- Taiwan - 1 terrorist; 1 murder
- Trinidad and Tobago - 2 terrorists; 1 murder

And that is it. More terrorists have been caught, some from the 7 countries. But if the OP wants to believe that we are protecting the US from terrorists, those facts clearly show that Trump's executive order does absolutely nothing to protect us. The list shows 88 terrorists that actually murdered people...and not one of them came from Trump's list.

Don't bother, your facts aren't "alternative" enough for the willfully ignorant.