Friday, November 20, 2015

Washington State's U.S. Reps. Not Concerned About Syrian Terrorists

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

The House of Representatives voted yesterday to approve The American Security Against Foreign Enemies (SAFE) Act.

However, all Washington State Democrat Representatives voted against it, even though 47 other House Democrats supported tightening the screening process on Syrian refugees.

Quoting the Pope, Rep. Jim McDermott (7th District) characterized the bill as "fear" driven, "racist rhetoric" and "political gamesmanship."

WA Congressman Adam Smith, who serves on the House Armed Services Committee, said, "It is wrong to deny asylum to refugees on the basis of inaccurate assumptions, fear and prejudice."

I suspect these same public servants would characterize King County Sheriff John Urquhart as motivated by "inaccurate assumptions, fear and prejudice" following his email to King County's 700 commissioned personnel.

King County Sheriff Urquhart sent a letter to his deputies this week suggesting that off duty officers remain armed with their service weapons and extra magazines of ammo should a terrorist attack hit the Puget Sound area.

He says he is particularly concerned about home grown terrorists who have been radicalized by ISIS type propaganda.

He says, "I always tell my people to be vigilant, 'if you see something, say something' all of that. But it's not enough. Here is something they can do. They can be ready...We have the experience, we have the weapons; lets carry them"

Commonsense, rather than nonsense.

While all Republicans and 47 Democrats recognize the danger posed in these unique circumstances, there is a thread of denial that always shows itself in the thinking of the "enlightened, elite progressives."

Secular progressives most always choose a very different path. A long and winding road.

That becomes clear in their dissent regarding this bill.

There is not a more classic example of far left secular progressivism than Seattle's own Jim McDermott.

He said yesterday, "I stand in strong support of Governor Inslee's recent announcement that Washington State would welcome refugees escaping the violence and devastation in Iraq and Syria. The Governor's courageous stand is not only morally the right thing to do as Americans, but it also follows a tradition of past Washington State governors who saw through the fear, racist rhetoric and political gamesmanship and opened Washington State's doors to those escaping hardship and despair."

With all due respect for Mr. McDermott's service to our country in the Navy, and his service as a Navy psychiatrist treating men and women in both the Army and Navy as they returned from the Vietnam War, he should have a more clear memory of Washington's past in regard to refugees.

Washington has indeed been kind to those coming from both Europe or Asia or elsewhere. My own family on both sides, came to Washington State, putting down roots for these reasons. My grandchildren now growing up in Washington State are the 6th generation of both mine and my wife's family in the state.

Although born and raised in Chicago, Mr. McDermott should know that the "tradition of past Washington State governors" who "saw through fear, racist rhetoric and political gamesmanship" also recognized potential danger to the citizens of the state.

Although they have been highly criticized by the Left---after the fact--- following the attack on Pearl Harbor, Governors Arthur B. Langlie (R) and Arthur C. Wallgren (D), working with the federal government, authorized Japanese internment camps in an a number of places in the state. Most notably at what is now the Puyallup Fair Grounds.

Most of the Japanese interred were not dangerous, nor did they intend harm to America---I grew up with their sons and daughters in the Yakima Valley. But those in leadership at the time did what they believed to be in the interest of national security.

McDermott should also know what the rest of us know. The Filipinos, later the Vietnamese, most other Asians and those Japanese who were already living here did not come here from a country, with a religious commitment to destroy the "Great Satan" that happens to be us.

However, to paint Washington state as always being a far Left secular bastion of progressivism is simply not truthful.

Equally disingenuous and hypocritical is the continuing cry that Jesus and Moses wants us to open the borders and "let em in."

David French, attorney and writer for the National Review rightly points out that biblical Christians are not the "hateful, bigoted hypocrites ignoring clear Scripture imperatives of openness and compassion" they are made out to be by the progressive Left.

He writes, "Christians who urge that we care for Syrian refugees abroad rather than here at home are responding wisely to national leaders who've failed in their own God given duties."

Those "spiritual leaders" who use the Mosaic Law and the teaching of Jesus to demand open borders are false prophets.

Last night on national news channels Hillary Clinton sternly chastised those American Christians who were refusing children and orphans refuge in America.

Scripture draws a clear absolute line between the responsibility of a Christian individual and the role of the state.

Individuals are told to leave vengeance to the Lord, turn the other cheek and personally welcome strangers, but the state is told to address those who do wrong, and protect the citizens....including from genocidal terrorist action that uses refugee status as a shield and disguise to perpetrate brutal attacks against innocent individuals.

French says, "While the American people are undoubtedly imperfect, we have lived out our Judeo Christian values by establishing and defending the most generous, compassionate nation on the face of the earth. We continue to live those principles by helping feed, house and defend countless refugees from conflict zones abroad. And we would not violate those principles by closing our borders to a specific group of people who we 'know' will mask and facilitate deadly attacks against our friends, neighbors and families."

America can and should be both compassionate and wise.

I personally believe the bill passed yesterday in the House is an attempt to do that.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-5th District) said yesterday, "America has a long history of providing safe haven for many of the world's most vulnerable refugees. Yet, we must ensure that we do not allow terrorists to exploit refugee resettlement to gain entry to the United States. Our top priority must remain the safety of the American people."

Rep. Jamie Herrera Beutler (R-3rd District) said, "Our compassion as a nation must go hand in hand with this government's paramount goal---the protection of its citizens."

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Informed. Be Prayerful.


  1. This is way worse than Jonestown. When people say they intend to kill people in the name of their religion, we should believe them, trust them, and act in faith, and not be afraid of "offending" people. I don't know what their problem is. Don't they know what's going on?

  2. What's wrong with responsible screening?

  3. Trump's right. We need a registry of all muslims. And he'll make the terrorists pay for it!

  4. "Just widows and orphans" they say....from a far country I'll bet... But they are not all just widows and orphans are they? It's OK to be a little politically incorrect these days,
    it seems to me.

  5. Maybe it would help us identify terrorists if we declared war against terrorism like back in the better old days.

  6. I was on Morningstar ministries facebook page and Rick Joyner was commenting on how maybe our government could use some of these refugees to fight ISIS, instead of spending millions of dollars on a few people who they thought might make good soldiers.

    Could they gain a new perspective on the consequences of killing innocent people? Could they grasp the idea that God who freely gives so much good to all, sending the sunshine and the rain on everyone alike, regardless of our sins, that he will indeed hold sinners accountable when they stand before him, and that there really is such a thing as rewarding those who will be saved with eternal life among the righteous, and rewarding the wicked who refuse to be saved, with the evil they deserve?

    Could they talk this out among themselves and gain a new perspective? Could they be tested by lie detector tests or something, and could they be armed and set up somewhere, and supported, and overseen by US military, and used against ISIS?

    This could bring a moral defeat to the enemy also. Is it possible? Would it be worth a try?

  7. If we do take in the refugees, maybe we could make gun purchase background checks required for all Muslims.


Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.