• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice Dept. admits error but won’t correct report linking terrorism to immigration


Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Dec 27, 2014
Reaction score
Best Coast Canada
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal

The Justice Department has acknowledged errors and deficiencies in a controversial report issued a year ago that implied a link between terrorism in the United States and immigration, but — for the second and final time — officials have declined to retract or correct the document.

Released by the departments of Justice and Homeland Security, the report stated that 402 of 549 individuals — nearly 3 in 4 — convicted of international terrorism charges since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were foreign-born.

“There is no requirement in either the [law or department guidelines] that agencies must always provide underlying data when disseminating information to the public,” Allen wrote.

WH admits their Executive Order 13780:
Protecting the Nation From
Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States
Initial Section 11 Report

Was full of deficiencies and not factully based,

Now ordered by EO 13807 to prepare a report that would also be widely available to the public.

The issue is the underlying data to arrive at that conclusion was factually wrong
So we have his anti immigrants rants, his EO's overturned by the Courts.

A report on Foreign Terrorist entry to the US was factually incorrect in their data, and they say, nope, cannot see what they based the report on.

Link to the report

Top Bottom