Resolved: On balance, refugee restrictions in developed countries are permissible. [Definitions]        According to Wellman, a professor at Washington university, Refugees are generally understood as individuals who must leave their home country due to war or persecution, as is the United Nations understanding. And developed countries are countries with advanced economies. The University of Belgrade states that, “permissible” means Tolerable. In practice, what is morally permissible is what is in a way morally indifferent, and it is the subject of legitimate freedom. Tolerance is possible only when I tolerate something with which I disagree, something that is unpleasant, odious and repulsive. [Framework] The framework for this debate is, if the PRO can prove that refugees may affect national security, and sovereignty protects state’s natives, and creates cultural tension, while showing evidences with clear sources, then the PRO will win this round. Contention 1: National sovereignty  The definition of National sovereignty is one country/state’s power to handle internal affairs without any external interference.          According to ARDD LEGAL AID, because refugee status is contingent upon border-crossing, this legal definition strips other forced migrants – such as people displaced by intra-national conflicts – of the protections and resources afforded to refugees. Some scholars have warned against broadening the definition, because the stipulation that refugees must cross state borders is the legal caveat that allows the international community to aid refugees without infringing on national sovereignty.      According to Amit Singh, in 2016, Jurisdictional sovereignty allows the States to pass immigration laws; and, it has been considered an essential sovereign act of the State. Since development of the modern states from the fifteen century onwards, governments have regarded control over their borders as core of the sovereignty. An essential characteristic of sovereignty is the State’s prerogative to regulate the stay and entry of people within their geographical border. Many countries put various kinds of limitations on non-citizens regarding their stay and entry in their territory.        So since the refugees cannot violate against the national sovereignty, we can use the authority to limit the amount and types of refugees. Sovereignty is a very important system that in which protects the states’ natives, provides insurance for what kind of people comes into the country, and it helps the country to stay at a not overpopulated stage. Contention 2: Terrorism        Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Terrorism is an act of injustice which is now quite common in some developed countries.         According to  fact-check.org and new york times, Last year, the F.B.I. has averaged 10,000 assessments annually, and 7,000 to 10,000 preliminary or full investigations involving international terrorism. On the same day that Trump signed the executive order, The FBI is investigating 300 people who were admitted into the United States as refugees as part of 1,000 counter terrorism investigations involving Islamic State or individuals inspired by the militant group.” This example shows that in the United states, counter terrorism is a big deal composed by refugees. According to the Fox news, At least 61 people who came to the United States as refugees engaged in terrorist activities between 2002 and 2016, according to a report from the Supreme Court’s reinstatement of much of President Trump’s travel ban. The report says “There is no universal right to migrate, resettlement is not the solution to mass displacement, and U.S. policymakers have a responsibility to ensure that the United States takes in only as many refugees as it can safely vet and assimilate,” Contention 3: Cultural tention        The Europeans show increasing Islamophobia towards the Muslims coming from Islamic states. According to the most recent annual European Islamophobia report in 2017, Europe’s average public opposition to further migration from predominantly Muslim states is 55 percent, ranging from 41 percent in Spain to 71 in Poland. At the same time, according to the pew research center, the percentage of Muslims fleeing conflicts in Syria and other predominately Islamic countries in Europe increased from 19.5 million (3.8% of the over-all population ) in 2010 to 25,8 million (4.9%) in the middle of 2016.        If we lift control over refugee restriction largely in developed countries, the contradiction between western culture and Muslims will only be intensified. Less refugee restriction means most of them resettles in developed countries. The European stereotype of islam coming from violent extremism such as 9/11 and Isis plus an influx of refugees which shared their living resources will intensified the sense of insecure, xenophobia and bias towards islam.        The cultural tension can lead to social instability and chaos including stabbing, arson, melee attack, shooting and so on in those developed countries which is both detrimental to local citizens and newly settled refugees. 1. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/ten-facts-about-us-refugee-resettlement?gclid=Cj0KCQiAn4PkBRCDARIsAGHmH3e8VXSTV8-PrC2yw5dl6aWYvAqq-jhLs8d66TRiagrKlu0AlAlvZr4aAuzyEALw_wcB(Randy Capps is Director of Research for U.S. Programs at the Migration Policy Institute. Michael Fix is a Senior Fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, and previously served as its President. )

Definitions - Janet Philips, Social Policy Section, Australian Parliament, Department of Parliamentary Services, 1/14/2011, "Asylum seekers and refugees: what are the facts”, https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/bn/sp/asylumfacts.pdf) A refugee is someone who has been recognised under the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees to be a refugee. - Habitat for Humanity in 2019 (“REFUGEES, ASYLUM SEEKERS & MIGRANTS: A CRUCIAL DIFFERENCE”, Accessed, 3/1/2019, https://www.habitatforhumanity.org.uk/blog/2016/09/refugees-asylum-seekers-migrants-crucial-difference/) Refugees are people fleeing armed conflicts or persecution. - “Restrictions” means to limit movement. Carol-June Cassidy, (Editor), CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH, 2008, 719. Restrict: To limit someone’s actions or movement or to limit the amount, size, etc. of something. - Permissible = tolerable Jovan Babic, Philosophy Department, University of Belgrade, 2000 (Justifying Forgiveness”, Peace Review, Vol. 12, no. 1) Tolerance is the demarcation line between that which is permissible from that which is impermissible. In practice, what is morally permissible is what is in a way morally indifferent, and it is the subject of legitimate freedom, while what is morally impermissible can absolutely not be tolerated and its tolerance (by others) would mean abandoning the basic principle of moral evaluation (in oneself). Framework Providing the definition of some key terms in the resolution, this debate should be about whether refugees are tolerable in developed countries. If the PRO side can prove that refugees restrictions are permissible in developed countries by providing evidences and linking every piece to the topic, while giving clear citations to each and making logical sense, then the PRO will win this round. Contentions - Contention 1: terrorism (security) - Contention 2: protecting the economy - Contention 3: self-determination

Resolved: On balance, refugee restrictions in developed countries are permissible. {Contention 1}: Refugees lead to crime and terrorism. [Definition] (“What is terrorism?”, Terrorism Research, accessed 3/1/19, http://www.terrorism-research.com/) Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter. Terrorism is an act of injustice which is now quite common in some developed countries. If PRO can be able to prove that terrorism is connected to refugees entering the country, then this contention can prove PRO is right. [Example 1] (“Refugees and Terrorism Investigation”, Eugene Kiely (Eugene Kiely is a journalist who has covered government and politics for more than 20 years. Prior to joining FactCheck.org, Kiely was a Washington assignment editor at USA TODAY, leading a team of reporters who focused on Congress, politics and government accountability), March 10, 2017, https://www.factcheck.org/2017/03/refugees-and-terrorism-investigations/) According to a website called fact-check.org, it states that, “A 2014 inspectors general report. ‘In recent years, the F.B.I. has averaged 10,000 assessments annually, and 7,000 to 10,000 preliminary or full investigations involving international terrorism,’ the New York Times reported last year. On the same day that Trump signed the executive order, Reuters reported, “The FBI is investigating 300 people who were admitted into the United States as refugees as part of 1,000 counter terrorism investigations involving Islamic State or individuals inspired by the militant group, congressional sources told Reuters on Monday, citing senior administration officials.” But a federal law enforcement official told us that report is not accurate and advised us to “avoid the 300 out of 1,000 construct.” The law enforcement official, who asked to remain anonymous, said in FBI parlance “investigations,” as used in the executive order, means “full investigations.” The official would not say how many full investigations involving terrorism are underway, but referred us to the Times article that said the FBI averages “7,000 to 10,000 preliminary or full investigations” a year.” This example shows that in the United states, counter terrorism is a big deal composed by refugees. They are one of the main resons why there is terrorism. [Example 2] (“Muslim ‘Refugees’ and Terrorism in America: How many Americans will Obama’s Muslim migrants kill?”, Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam, September 14, 2015, https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260119/muslim-refugees-and-terrorism-america-daniel-greenfield) A ccording to an article written by Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, who focuses on radical Islam, posted on frontpagemag.com, “While the World Trade Center bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing cases are the most famous terrorist attacks by Muslim refugees, there are numerous other cases of Muslim refugee terror. America has been resettling huge numbers of Somali Muslim refugees. One of them, Nuradin Abdi, was an illegal alien who wanted to bomb a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio after using his refugee travel document to fly back to Africa for terrorism training while claiming that he wanted to visit Mecca. Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a Somali refugee, plotted to bomb a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland in 2010. "I want whoever is attending that event to leave, to leave dead or injured," he said. The family had been settled in Oregon by the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon. The Ecumenical Ministries had nearly caused an ecumenical Somali Muslim massacre of Christians. Numerous other Somali refugees have also left the United States to become terrorists abroad, joining Boko Haram and pledging to the Jihadist campaign of Islam against the non-Muslim free world.” Therefore, accepting terrorists as refugees leads to terrorist attacks on America. This strengthens the argument of developed countries should allow the restrictions of refugees. Its both dangerous and risky, doesn’t matter whether which aspect you choose to analyze this problem. [Example 3] (International Business Times, 11/13/15, Erin Banco ("Paris Attacks: European Migrant, Refugee Crisis Could Be Fueling Attacks In France" https://www.ibtimes.com/paris-attacks-european-migrant-refugee-crisis-could-be-fueling-attacks-france-2184317) November 2015 Paris attack, was a massive, coordinated terrorist attack in Paris that has killed at least 149 people. "The attackers killed 130 people, including 90 at the Bataclan theatre. Another 413 people were injured,almost 100 seriously. Seven of the attackers also died while the authorities continued to search for accomplices.The attacks were the deadliest in France since the Second world war, and the second deadliest in the EU since the Madrid train bombings in 2004. France had been on high alert sinceThe Jan 2015 Attack on Charlie Hebedo, offices and a Jewish supermarket in Paris that killed 17 people and wounded 22, including civilians and police officers." This means that terrorist attacks must somehow have connections in an obvious way with the permission of allowing refugees enter developed countries. Thus, for citizens’ safety and sake, refugee restrictions in developed countries are permissible.

Resolved: On balance, refugee restrictions in developed countries are permissible. {Contention 1}: Refugees lead to crime and terrorism. [Definition] (“What is terrorism?”, Terrorism Research, accessed 3/1/19, http://www.terrorism-research.com/) Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter. Terrorism is an act of injustice which is now quite common in some developed countries. If PRO can be able to prove that terrorism is connected to refugees entering the country, then this contention can prove PRO is right. [Example 1] (“Refugees and Terrorism Investigation”, Eugene Kiely (Eugene Kiely is a journalist who has covered government and politics for more than 20 years. Prior to joining FactCheck.org, Kiely was a Washington assignment editor at USA TODAY, leading a team of reporters who focused on Congress, politics and government accountability), March 10, 2017, https://www.factcheck.org/2017/03/refugees-and-terrorism-investigations/) According to a website called fact-check.org, it states that, “A 2014 inspectors general report. ‘In recent years, the F.B.I. has averaged 10,000 assessments annually, and 7,000 to 10,000 preliminary or full investigations involving international terrorism,’ the New York Times reported last year. On the same day that Trump signed the executive order, Reuters reported, “The FBI is investigating 300 people who were admitted into the United States as refugees as part of 1,000 counter terrorism investigations involving Islamic State or individuals inspired by the militant group, congressional sources told Reuters on Monday, citing senior administration officials.” But a federal law enforcement official told us that report is not accurate and advised us to “avoid the 300 out of 1,000 construct.” The law enforcement official, who asked to remain anonymous, said in FBI parlance “investigations,” as used in the executive order, means “full investigations.” The official would not say how many full investigations involving terrorism are underway, but referred us to the Times article that said the FBI averages “7,000 to 10,000 preliminary or full investigations” a year.” This example shows that in the United states, counter terrorism is a big deal composed by refugees. They are one of the main resons why there is terrorism. [Example 2] (“Muslim ‘Refugees’ and Terrorism in America: How many Americans will Obama’s Muslim migrants kill?”, Daniel Greenfield,  a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam, September 14, 2015, https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260119/muslim-refugees-and-terrorism-america-daniel-greenfield) According to an article written by Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, who focuses on radical Islam, posted on frontpagemag.com, “While the World Trade Center bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing cases are the most famous terrorist attacks by Muslim refugees, there are numerous other cases of Muslim refugee terror. America has been resettling huge numbers of Somali Muslim refugees. One of them, Nuradin Abdi, was an illegal alien who wanted to bomb a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio after using his refugee travel document to fly back to Africa for terrorism training while claiming that he wanted to visit Mecca. Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a Somali refugee, plotted to bomb a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland in 2010. "I want whoever is attending that event to leave, to leave dead or injured," he said. The family had been settled in Oregon by the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon. The Ecumenical Ministries had nearly caused an ecumenical Somali Muslim massacre of Christians. Numerous other Somali refugees have also left the United States to become terrorists abroad, joining Boko Haram and pledging to the Jihadist campaign of Islam against the non-Muslim free world.” Therefore, accepting terrorists as refugees leads to terrorist attacks on America. This strengthens the argument of developed countries should allow the restrictions of refugees. Its both dangerous and risky, doesn’t matter whether which aspect you choose to analyze this problem. [Example 3] (International Business Times, 11/13/15, Erin Banco ("Paris Attacks: European Migrant, Refugee Crisis Could Be Fueling Attacks In France" https://www.ibtimes.com/paris-attacks-european-migrant-refugee-crisis-could-be-fueling-attacks-france-2184317) November 2015 Paris attack, was a massive, coordinated terrorist attack in Paris that has killed at least 149 people. "The attackers killed 130 people, including 90 at the Bataclan theatre. Another 413 people were injured,almost 100 seriously. Seven of the attackers also died while the authorities continued to search for accomplices.The attacks were the deadliest in France since the Second world war, and the second deadliest in the EU since the Madrid train bombings in 2004. France had been on high alert sinceThe Jan 2015 Attack on Charlie Hebedo, offices and a Jewish supermarket in Paris that killed 17 people and wounded 22, including civilians and police officers." This means that terrorist attacks must somehow have connections in an obvious way with the permission of allowing refugees enter developed countries. Thus, for citizens’ safety and sake, refugee restrictions in developed countries are permissible.

Accepting terrorists as refugees leads to terrorist attacks on America. Daniel Greenfield（a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam）, September 14, 2015, https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260119/muslim-refugees-and-terrorism-america-daniel-greenfield Accepting terrorists as refugees leads to terrorist attacks on America. America has been resettling huge numbers of Somali Muslim refugees. One of them, Nuradin Abdi, was an illegal alien who wanted to bomb a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio after using his refugee travel document to fly back to Africa for terrorism training while claiming that he wanted to visit Mecca. Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a Somali refugee, plotted to bomb a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland in 2010. "I want whoever is attending that event to leave, to leave dead or injured," he said. Mir Qazi, a Pakistani using a fake passport, applied for political asylum and then got amnesty. A year later he murdered two CIA employees and fled to Pakistan. Hesham Mohamed Hadayet walked into Los Angeles International Airport and opened fire. Like the Blind Sheikh, Hadayet was a “refugee” from Egypt because of his Islamic religious beliefs. This refugee killed two people before he was stopped. Abdel Hakim Tizegha, a member of the Millennium plot to bomb the airport, had applied for political asylum in the United States. Ahmed Ressam, another of the bombers, had applied for political asylum in Canada claiming that he was fleeing persecution in Algeria. He was caught entering the United States and the plot was averted. Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer was another Muslim refugee who applied for political asylum in Canada in order to carry out terrorist attacks in America. He made repeated efforts to cross the border. He told a Border Patrol agent that he wanted political asylum because Israel had suspected him of terrorist involvement. Instead of getting rid him as fast as possible once he had admitted that he was suspected of terrorism in another country, he applied for political asylum in the United States. Then he was set free and was only arrested once he was caught plotting to bomb subways in New York. The Fort Dix plotters intended to kill as many Americans as possible. Three of them, the Duka brothers, were illegal aliens who invaded the country through Mexico and applied for asylum. Even a brief review of these cases shows that we have a serious Muslim refugee terrorist problem. Some of the deadliest and most ambitious terror plots in America came from Muslim refugees. Terror attacks not carried out by refugees in USA "How many fatal terror attacks have refugees carried out in the US? None" Eric Levenson, CNN，Updated 2354 GMT (0754 HKT)， January 29, 2017 https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/29/us/refugee-terrorism-trnd/index.html New York and New Jersey explosions Ahmad Khan Rahimi faces an array of bombing, weapons and attempted murder charges in two on September 17, 2016, incidents. He is accused of detonating bombs in New Jersey and in New York's Chelsea neighborhood. The explosion in Chelsea injured 29 people.Rahimi was born in Afghanistan and first came to the United States in 1995, following several years after his father arrived seeking asylum. Rahimi became a naturalized US citizen in 2011. He had recently spent time in Afghanistan and Pakistan, officials said. Neither Afghanistan nor Pakistan is on Trump's list of banned countries. Orlando Pulse nightclub shooting Omar Mateen, the man who shot and killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, was an American citizen living in Fort Pierce, Florida. He was born in New York, and his parents were from Afghanistan. His widow, Noor Salman, was arrested earlier this month on charges of obstruction of justice and aiding and abetting her husband's material support to ISIS. She grew up in Rodeo, California, and her parents immigrated to the United States from the West Bank in 1985, according to The New York Times. Neither Afghanistan nor the West Bank is included on the list of banned countries. Boston Marathon bombings Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who carried out the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, were born in Kyrgyzstan to parents originally from war-torn Chechnya. The Tsarnaev family arrived in the United States when Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was 8 years old, and they applied for and were granted political asylum. The process for applying for political asylum is different from the process of arriving as a refugee.Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the younger brother, became a naturalized citizen in September 2012. Chechnya and Kyrgyzstan are not included on the list of banned countries.