4 ms·
Of course most immigrants are law-abiding and good citizens. I think most of us know that. The challenge is that this specific group in this specific location
by bequanna 4y ago
Of course most immigrants are law-abiding and good citizens. I think most of us know that.
The challenge is that this specific group in this specific location has an outsized number of people that are aiding terrorist organizations.
It is pry worth trying to figure out why. But also, it would be irresponsible if our govt didn’t allocate resources to try and stop that.
- worik 4y ago> The challenge is that this specific group in this specific location has an outsized number of people that are aiding terrorist organizations. Racism
- dontcare007 4y agoHow so?
- wolverine876 4y ago> this specific group in this specific location has an outsized number of people that are aiding terrorist organizations Can you back that up with anything at all? That is a very dangerous accusation, and obviously plays to prejudice and racism regardless of intentions. It seems it should be stated very specifically and with clear evidence. Edit: Someone else posted an article. I still think that nobody should make claims like that without being specific and having evidence. 64 people do not indict an entire community. What does the OP imply about DHS, for example? > most immigrants are law-abiding and good citizens Most people are law-abiding and good citizens, but some are not. It has nothing to do with immigration status. I happen to think that all people were created equal, regardless of where they were born.
- ncmncm 4y agoThe 63 number is deeply suspect as well. Were the 63 convicted? Were they even arrested? Or just deported without arrest, charge, or trial? DHS is well known for selectively hiring aggressive bigots, so their judgment on anyone carries negative credibility.