As an example, consider the case of poor “young” Hussein Khavari.
Khavari entered Greece in 2013. He was a “17 year old refugee” from Afghanistan.
While in Greece, for some reason on Corfu Khavari threw a 20-year-old female student off a cliff. Unluckily for Khavari, she survived – and identified him as her assailant.
Khavari was then incarcerated by Greek authorities. But for reasons that aren’t readily apparent he was later released.
Khavari sneaked into Germany in 2015. He again claimed to be an “unaccompanied 17 year old” seeking asylum.
Well, it seems that Khavari has some other legal issues now. He’s now in German custody for having attacked a second female student in October, 2016. This time his victim was a 19-year-old medical student.
Only this time . . . Khavari apparently was successful in murdering the lady. After raping her.
When arrested for the crime last December Khavari once again claimed to be 17 years old. Under German law, Khavari being a juvenile at the time of his crime would have limited his sentence to 10 years.
But German authorities have now determined Khavari was at least 22 years old at the time of his German crime. He can thus be tried as an adult under German law. That in turn means he’s looking at a possible life sentence.
It also means he hoodwinked both Greek and German authorities concerning his age when he entered both countries. If he was 22 in October 2016, it is not possible for him to have been 17 at any time during 2013.
Gee. It seems as if both Greece and Germany had difficulty in vetting this . . . individual’s claims. I wonder why.
It couldn’t be that he was falsely claiming to be a “juvenile refugee” to hide either a terrorist or criminal past, could it?
If anyone reading this needs further justification for limiting “refugee” entry into the US to those who can and have been thoroughly screened prior to entry, I suggest you re-read this article – as well as the linked article here that gives further details.
Anyone of at least moderately-below-average intellect or better should “get it” after re-reading those articles no more than twice. I’d guess most people won’t have to re-read squat for the proverbial “light to come on”. But a few might miss the point the first time around.
If you don’t “get it” after having read the articles 3 times, well, that tells us something too. After all: there’s always those few who are “special”.