Gateway Pundit reports that at least one Syrian 'refugee' who was placed in Louisiana went missing. An update to the post says that the missing individual was found 'in another state' and placed with Catholic Family Services, the resettlement agency through which he was placed originally.
I suspect this is just one case of many. And though most of the states in the Union are now on record as opposing the seeding of Syrian 'refugees' within their borders, I was saying in a conversation with someone in the 'real world' today: suppose their states do refuse to allow this seeding. What's to stop the 'refugees' from simply removing themselves from one state to another? We still have free movement within this country. I don't see how 'refugees' can be kept from relocating to whatever state they choose, particularly if they have relatives or other contacts in other states.
And what if they are 'sleeper' agents, who will join up with others in cells here and there? It has been known to happen. Only the blind and the willfully naive or dishonest can say it hasn't happened, much less that it can happen.
The fact that these 'refugees' are NOT being vetted (the government has said they can't do so) is also a problem. But I remind everybody that for decades we have let in many Latin Americans and assorted others who enter illegally and whose true identity is not known; some carry multiple IDs. They are not vetted, either. Our government is blithely cavalier about this fact, and is happy to welcome millions of unknown people of unknown background, with unknown intentions. This should trouble us. Even legal immigrants from Third World countries have no 'paper trail' or perhaps carry forged IDs, as with many of the refugees in Europe carrying forged Syrian papers. Our government does. not. care. Yet we citizens have to jump through hoops to prove our identity, and are increasingly surveilled and watched, every aspect of our lives documented. We even have to show picture ID at the doctor's office -- for our own protection, they say. Immigrants, refugees are exempted from all the scrutiny in many instances. Just their say-so is enough.
And do the governors of the several states, or other elected officials, have the right, in the eyes of the federal government, to defy the policy of the D.C. government? Many Northerners in these United States claim that the issue of 'State's rights' was settled once and for all by the War Between the States, in which those who asserted 'state's rights' were crushed, to the approval of most in the North. So now that we've given so much power to a centralized government in that alien place called D.C., will these states refusing Syrian 'refugees' have a legal leg to stand on?
How can we prevent free movement of these 'refugees'? I say we can't. The powers-that-be seem to be able with their vast surveillance system to track all of us American citizens, including phone calls, e-mails, snail mail (so I've read), our contacts on social media, our location and movements, via our cell phones and computer use. But when it comes to tracking people who do represent a real threat they plead impotence. They ignored warnings about Nidal Malik Hassan, the Tsarnaevs, and who knows how many others. Funny how selective they are in tracking people and acting on any suspicion.
Labels: anti-White, borders, cultural Marxism, elites, globalists, Islam, leftism, Mass immigration, Moslems, refugees, self-defense