It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"Far from being foreign infiltrators, the large majority of jihadist terrorists in the United States have been American citizens or legal residents. Moreover, while a range of citizenship statuses are represented, every jihadist who conducted a lethal attack inside the United States since 9/11 was a citizen or legal resident," the New America study says. "In addition about a quarter of the extremists are converts, further confirming that the challenge cannot be reduced to one of immigration."
"It's certainly the case that none of the major, deadly attacks carried out in the United States were carried out by people from these countries," said Erin Miller, who manages the Global Terrorism Database for the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland. Other experts agreed. "Since 9/11, no one has been killed in this country in a terrorist attack by anyone who emigrated from any of the seven countries," added William C. Banks, director of the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism at Syracuse University College of Law.
Nationals of the seven countries singled out by Trump have killed zero people in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and 2015. Zero.
Six Iranians, six Sudanese, two Somalis, two Iraqis, and one Yemeni have been convicted of attempting or executing terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during that time period, according to Nowrasteh’s research.
Information from Terrorism in America After 9/11 found that 190 US-born citizens have been charged with, or died while carrying out, jihadist terrorism since 2001. That number tops the list and far outstrips illegal immigrants (8) and refugees (12).
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: queenofswords
Yes, I do.
Do you not understand the multi-level aspect we are dealing with?
Do you understand that Trump's EO would have had no effect on Malik?
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RazorV66
That is the problem, there are so many millions of them here, it would have to be a mass round-up.
You expect a government that can't get the IRS to function like a well-oiled machine to be in charge of mass round-ups?
Exactly what due process do you think they should be afforded? How much more taxpayer money do you want spent on this problem? It's against the LAW.
Any and all it takes to make sure we don't screw up.
Your comments and the comments of others are very disturbing.
originally posted by: carabao
a reply to: neo96
Who does business with Saudi Arabian wahabists again?
Guess it's not Trump then....
Meh, Clinton is a lying pos, as is Trump.
Your partisan polarizing bs is funny. Keep it up.
originally posted by: LumenImagoDei
a reply to: neo96
So we should just hold the terrorists as innocent? Since 'every single drop' of blood will be on Trump's critics' hands and all.
Obviously you don't believe the terrorists would be innocent which means you're using pure hyperbole as the basis of your argument. I see this happening a lot around here, emotions ruling over people instead of logic and reasonability.
originally posted by: xstealth
What keeps President Trump from rescinding the order, signing a new order with the same wording and phrase added "green card holders and existing visa holders exempted".
This would nullify the courts restraining order because the new order isn't the one being restrained.
originally posted by: muse7
Where does the Trump admin go from here?
originally posted by: gription
a reply to: muse7
Federal court declares jurisdiction over all lands and peoples outside of the USA. Federal court then grants select Executive actions null and void. Federal court judges retire in style....