@ND
Thanks for getting back to us. now I will asses whether or not your research corroborates the claim that immigrants from the banned countries have a higher proportion of terrorist attacks!
"Research
“More than 55 percent of all attacks took place in five countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Nigeria), and 74 percent of all deaths due to terrorist attacks took place in five countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Syria).”
(Please note that two of the nations on this list have been temporarily restricted due to Trump’s executive order: Iraq and Syria.)"
This does not matter, as many people immigrating are FLEEING violence. To ban the countries, you must focus on the motives of the immigrants. You need to prove that these nation-states are in a position where their immigrants possess more of a reason for committing acts of terrorism than surrounding states' immigrants.
“The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/ISIS) was responsible for 31 percent fewer terrorist attacks in Iraq, the number of attacks carried out by ISIL in Syria increased by 39 percent.
-- The geographic reach of attacks by ISIL and its affiliates expanded as several existing terrorist groups pledged allegiance to ISIL. In addition to Boko Haram in West Africa, the most active of these ISIL branches were located in Afghanistan/Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen.”
-Please note that some of these countries include Libya, Yemen, Syria and Iraq (all restricted temporarily)- "
so... the population is more violent, so you're banning them altogether. This does not prove that the immigrants are more prone to terrorism, but basic statistics would give us a higher concentration of terrorists ceteris paribus. We'd need to take into account more factors than just this for a solidified conclusion.
"http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/11774-number-terror-attacks-worldwide-dropped-13-2015
Review of this relevant source evidence: Many of the suspects on this list come from Pakistan and Nigeria, but some also come from Iraq."
still, the population is more violent therefore the immigrants must be as well. You need to directly address motive for immigration though
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Islamic_extremism and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United_States_post-9/11
This document reviews 60 Terrorist Plots since 9/11. Published in 2013. Interesting cases include: Lackawanna Six (2002), Nuradin M. Abdi (2003), Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar (2006), Air Cargo Bomb Plot (2010), Mohamad Osman Mohamud (2010), Iranian Terror Plot (2011), AQAP Plane Bomb Plot (2012), Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser (2013).
These foiled plots include plots supported or directed or having involvement with temporarily restricted nations.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/60-terrorist-plots-since-911-continued-lessons-in-domestic-counterterrorism and
http://dailysignal.com/2015/09/10/a-timeline-of-73-islamist-terror-plots-since-911/
This is a list of individuals in the United States who have left to join Islamic terrorist organizations.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-uncovered/americans-15-who-left-united-states-join-isis-n573611
Additional information of individuals who have left to join ISIS. Some are from temporarily restricted nations or connected to traveling to those nations. "
I'm listing from your source "http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/60-terrorist-plots-since-911-continued-lessons-in-domestic-counterterrorism"
The new US President has imposed a controversial 90-day ban on travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen
60 TERRORIST ATTEMPTS AT USA, AND COUNTRIES FROM
49/60 not from targeted countries
11/60 from targeted countries
1. British citizen, trained in Afghanistan. not on the list of 7
2. Came from Pakistan
3. Born in New York, trained in Afghanistan
4. Pakistanis, not on list of 7
5. Ohio, originally from India
6. American from Jordan
7. India, Afghanistan, and USA, father of one WAS Iraqi- not counting it though
8. Somalia
9. Pakistan
10. US citizens
11. Iraq
12. Pakistan
13. USA
14. USA
15. Iraq
16. Iran
17. Pakistan and USA
18. Haiti and USA, (funding from Yemen, but not immigrants from)
19. Lebanon
20. Pakistani involvement
21. USA
22. Pakistan, UK, Panama, USA, Rome
23. USA
24. Guyana, South America
25. USA
26. USA
27. USA/hispanic
28. USA/haitian
29. USA
30. Pakistan
31. Afghanistan
32. Jordan
33. USA
34. Iraq et. al
35. USA afghanistan
36. Nigeria/london - involved in Yemen, i'll allow it
37. Pakistan
38. Pakistan
39. USA
40. Pakistan
41. Yemen - not technically immigrant but i'll count it
42. Somalia
43. USA
44. Saudi Arabia
45. Algeria/Morcco
46. Ethiopia
47. USA
48. Uzbekistan
49. USA
50. USA
51. Iran
52. Dominican Republic
53. Kosovo
54. Morocco
55. Yemen
56. USA
57. Bangladesh
58. Pakistan
59. Chechnya/USA
60. supported by element in Iran, will count
11/60 had background from targeted areas by Trump 49/60 did NOT
HOWEVER: a ban would not apply to already naturalized citizens, so only a permanent ban would have stopped it.
"https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/isis-suspects/
This link includes information about Syrian Refugees and how some have turned to terror after getting a refugee status: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322649/The-enemy-Nearly-SEVENTY-arrested-America-ISIS-plots-include-refugees-given-safe-haven-turned-terror.html
“America over ISIS plots in the last 18 months - including refugees who had been given safe haven but 'turned to terror'
• Federal and local law enforcement agencies have made dozens of arrests of men and women suspected of ISIS involvement
• Analysis shows that they include refugees who entered the United States as refugees”
Additional evidence: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/21/us/6-somali-americans-arrested-in-isis-recruiting-case.html
There are countless more articles like these that suggest foiled terror attacks within the United States. Some of which are connected to the temporarily restricted nations from Trump’s executive orders.
This list does not even include really examples of terror in those countries of in Europe. "
Refugee argument seems to genuinely check out, saying there is a legitimate danger form Syria
But, let's go back to the earlier list, and we can see that the muslim ban is not as effective as it could be.
MY CONCLUSION:
ND: the refugee crisis needs to be taken seriously, and whether or not people like it, denial of entry from Syria is a legitimate proposal. However, the ban on immigrants in the targeted countries is entirely ineffective compared the mass amounts of support from other areas such as Afghanistan and Pakistan. The claim that immigrants from this region are more prone to terrorism is wrong in regards to the states, and not determinable in Europe.
Without further data, that will be all