A simple, three-step, approach

Submitted by Michael S, Feb 7, 2017 at 17:21

Dear Father Jon,

There are some common-sense criteria for use in vetting. Here are some of my own:

1. As a first sorting, Muslims only, past or present, should be vetted. The chances of a non-Muslim becoming a Jihadist are extremely slim. Of course, CAIR, the ACLU and other inhumane, politically-oriented groups are ready and willing to sue on this point. The President's choice is to fear, for his own personal well-being, pressure groups such as CAIR and the ACLU, or to fear, for the sake of innocent Americans, the entry of Jihadi terrorists into the US.

2. As a second sorting, databases should be kept of anyone known to express Islamist, irrational or anti-American views (as well as those who have engaged in suspect activity). These individuals need to be set aside and questioned, to ascertain whether they continue to have extreme views. This may produce slightly more inconvenience to such travelers than that already caused millions of innocent Americans every year; but the trade-off in human safety mandates it.

3. Beyond the criteria above, there is not much that can be PROFITABLY done at the "vetting" level. Many Jihadis can slip through even the most thorough and ingenious vetting; but once they are in this country, their ACTIONS will speak louder than any questionaire. It becomes a law enforcement and intelligence problem.

Daniel Pipes and Father Jon, Is this a reasonable program?

BTW, the more effective our President is at rooting out problem individuals, the more politically-activist people like the MSM and the Democrats will oppose him. I am a firm believer in the God of Israel, and His sovereignty over ALL situations like this; and my wife and I fervently pray for our President in these situations. For us and other like-minded people, this is absolutely the most effective means of protecting innocent people.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".