Three people convicted for terror-related crimes were granted citizenship by the Obama administration
Three people who were CONVICTED in trials relating to terrorism were granted United States citizenship after their convictions by Barack Obama. While these trials were terror-related, these criminals were convicted of non-terror related crimes.
The March 2011 audit (released on April 21, 2011) by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), entitled Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests and Costs, shows that three individuals were among “defendants where the investigation involved an identified link to international terrorism but they were charged with violating other statutes [not directly related to terrorism], including fraud, immigration, drugs, false statements, and general conspiracy charges,” referred by DOJ as Category II terrorism-related cases.
How can something like this happen?
When a person applies for naturalization his or her background over the last five years is looked at and as long as they are determined to be in “good moral character” they can be granted citizenship. These people were convicted of their crimes more than five years ago. But the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service can and does look beyond the five previous years if it is deemed necessary to establish the “good moral character” of the individual applying for citizenship. Apparently that did not happen in these cases.
Here is what these individuals were convicted of:
Two were convicted of unlawful production of an identity document and one was convicted of transferring funds out of the country in violation of U.S. sanctions
Two were convicted of creating false documents so that either they or whoever they were creating the documents for (possibly terrorists) could enter this country illegally, while the other was illegally transferring money out of the United States (in order to sponsor terrorism?) And yet these people are allowed to become citizens of the United States of America?
If the USCIS routinely goes beyond the five year mark while investigating the past of certain individuals it certainly seems as if these individuals deserved the tougher scrutiny. People who create false documents so that somebody can break into the country, and people who funnel money to states which may sponsor terrorism should lose any right they may have of becoming an American citizen and yet these people were allowed to slip through the cracks. If the story I linked to is incorrect and the USCIS is not allowed to look further back than the last five years than it is time to change the law, for this is inexcusable.
These people–and people like them–should be permanently ineligible for citizenship and if the USCIS cannot be trusted to use proper discretion when investigating the history of the people who apply for citizenship than it is obvious to me that it is time to toughen up these rules and take the decision out of their hands altogether before it is too late.
It is beyond time for somebody in the Obama regime to start taking this issue seriously.

Imagine had this happened under Bush! We’d hear endless stories about how his police state had failed and how his policies were making things worse. Under Obama, it’s only crickets in the press.
LikeLike
Nobody seems to care about this issue, do they. What is it going to take to wake people up?
LikeLike
Remember, CAIR ended up “unindicted’ co-conspirators, even though the judge thought they should have been prosecuted as terrorists and the FBI had the evidence and wanted to do it. The Justice Department blocked it. Now we have this. How many more terrorists are operating in the United States under the protection of this administration?
LikeLike
It is a very scary thought!
LikeLike
I wonder how many others have gotten this treatment, or what else remains uncovered? It’s scary to contemplate.
LikeLike
A good question; these are the only ones we know of and it is safe to assume that there are more.
LikeLike
Not like it matters too much as long as that southern border goes unsecured. If they didn’t get in legally they would just come in illegally. When did national security become optional?
LikeLike
I wish I had the answer to that question, but sadly I do not. This administration does not take this issue seriously and I can only hope that it doesn’t lead to another attack on our homeland.
LikeLike