Every day thousands of refugees flee the war torn country of Syria. With the fear of terrorism on the rise, a nation built on the ideals of immigrants, started to shift to a paranoid state. This led to the immigration policy, a controversial topic that still resonates fear into many. Many say it is wrong and that America welcome the refugees with open arms. And there those who believe in a secure structured nation, that defends against the growing correlation between terrorism and immigration.Immigration, a word that holds the keys to a new life and a new beginning. Immigration for some is not only a beginning, but it’s an end to their lives that they once knew. Immigration is often a second chance, but this can be overshadowed by the looming threat of terrorism. In recent years terrorist groups like Issis, have used immigration as a gateway to America. Isis used the refugees to infiltrate a nation still feeling the effects of terror. This alarming realization caused the U.S to respond with the immigration ban on Syrian refugees. This sparked great controversy, that led to a divided nation on an issue that needed unity. The immigration ban was a solution devised by President Donald J. Trump it opted for a complete ban of refugees coming from Syria. Many were outraged, but with this surreal decision there is truth to this madness. In recent a study compiled by a senate committee in 2016, “revealed that seventy-two individuals with terroristic backgrounds” (creating a threat 72). These seventy-two individuals were from the seven countries covered by President Trump’s executive order, making the ban justifiable. In order understand this hidden threat,we must first know the process of how the U.S deals with terrorism. Terrorismis a very wide scale problem that correlates heavily with immigration. It shouldby all means, be dealt with as soon as possible. President Bush took actions in2002 by creating Homeland Security, the main department that deals withterrorism. Their motive and main job is to search and identify people to getvarious clues on certain pertaining threats on the United States. Terrorism istaken very serious by this department. One of the members stated the severityof terrorism and how there are endless threats that people usually ignore. He said,“The threat of terrorism and the threat of extremist ideologies has not beendealt, this threat has not evaporated, and we can’t turn the page on it”(Sullivan 23). It is very true; people shouldn’t turn their backs on terrorism.It would be devastating to have our country go through a turmoil like 9/11 again.Since the moment that this program has been in progress, the United States hasbeen able to capture and kill America’s most wanted terrorist through manycountries and continents.A new problem arises, with immigrants and terrorisms blending. The lines of immigrant and civilian has been blurred.  This has led to some controversial means by the government, to address the hidden threat imbedded in our system. The process of protecting citizens from the extremity of terrorism also includes a set of government guidelines to follow. The United States government adopted a set of laws in order to control a terrorist situation in a more orderly fashion. One of the most important bills that came out of congress was right after the 9/11 attack. This bill was called the USA Patriot Act (2001). Simply, this bill gives permission to the government to search any individual personnel of suspected threat to the United States. The results of passing such a bill helped to identify and eliminatemany Issis extremists. Without this permission by the government, these peoplecould have done some serious damage while not paying attention. In a timeperiod of 10 years (up to the present day), this bill has gone under variousrenovations. In 2001, there were immediate amendments that were added onto thisbill. For example, an amendment having to deal with foreign intelligence andillegal immigration turned out to be a main focus for Homeland Security. Alocal online article supplies the amendments of the first renovated copy of thePatriot Act. It states: “When the matters involve foreign intelligence orcounterintelligence, or foreign immigration, to any Federal law enforcement,intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense or national securityofficial, there must be supplied assistance of the official information in theperformance of his official duties” (Ashcroft). The initiative that governmentofficials have to take now are a lot more prestigious and uphold a lot moreresponsibility in their roll. In 2005, they readopted this bill in order tohave the right to search the internet to prevent cyber terrorism of any sortfrom occurring. They also were given the right to search a person’s homewithout a liable search warrant. This really upset citizens because, as statedbefore, they were being violated of their personal privacy. Although there wereriots against the fact that their democracy wasn’t being called for, thegovernment could not comply because they haven’t been more successful inobtaining evidence of terrorist threats. Later, in 2011, when Obama waspresident, he authorized the most recent renovation of the bill with anextension of the same laws until 2013. He created a controlled system of searchwarranting that would have no effect on terrorist identificationand it would also put people at ease. Some of the regulations to the bill areas follows: “Modifies reporting requirements for national security letters torequire a breakdown of thetypes of persons targeted and whether such persons are subjects of authorized nationalsecurity investigations this changes the federal criminal code to reduce from30 to 7 days the period for giving delayed notice of the execution of a searchwarrant in a criminal investigation when the warrant permits the giving of suchdelayed notice” (Conyers). The law states that it is required to have anational security letter in order to take further actions in pursuing a suspectof possible terrorism. In other words, it’s a more structured version of awarrant. The second part of the law states that an individual can only hold ontoa record for seven days until it is unreliable, whereas before this improvedlaw, thirty days could have given a terrorist enough time to plot out astrategy and followed through with it. These actions taken by the governmentare overall taking a great effect on citizens, but is worth the case ofpreventing terrorism. Ever since 9/11, Terrorism has a major concern for the country since many individuals were directly affected by the destruction of such a devastating event. The government has been trying new ways to improve their ways of finding data towards possible threats to the harm and safety of others. The government’s actions have left both positive and negative effects on citizens and their personal privacy. Without the help of such a beneficial system of terrorist searching, the United States would be in terrible danger and risk of having another 9/11 event occur. The first counter-argumentstates that a nation cannot label migrants as terrorist. Many people want tolook past the hate and accept each and every immigrant. Many nations want to openly accept migrants and offer them safe haven. But thereality is terrorism is like a cobra. If we let our guard down it can strikewith such ferocity that leads more separation between the U.S and immigrants.Labeling an entirety of immigrants, leads to the effect of fear that theterrorist wanted to instill in each nation. But how can a nation combat anenemy if one can’t identify it first, people need to acknowledge the fact thatimmigration is the window of opportunity for terrorism. This problem was addressedfamously by Ronald Reagan who quoted “A nation that cannot control its borderis not a nation.” This quote embodies the dream of a secure unified nation. Ifwe look at the current state of our borders, they are withered like thepolicies that created them. It is time to re-engineer a system based onsecurity and opportunity. An example that helps envision the problem facedtoday, is the object of a door. Imagine the past border policy, as an open doorundermining our security. With this new policy, we have closed that doorleading to more awareness of rising threats. But with every action there are consequences.This means the ban of migrants; each nation has to come terms with everypositive action has negative consequences. Why are people willing to sacrificeour national security for migrants?  Yes,America is a nation built on immigrants, but where is the line drawn betweensecurity and acceptance?The second counter argumentis that the United States should be involved more with immigration. Many peoplewant to admit as many possible refugees. Refugees flee from the chaos caused bythe war broken countries like Syria. People feel a certain personalresponsibility, to help everyone in need. But the cost to maintain immigrationeach year is quite staggering, in an article by Washington times “Mass immigration costs government 296 billion ayear.” That number continues to rise with each new country we accept in, wecannot sustain a working country with an outflow of money like that. We arealready a nation in deep debt, yet we try to continue to take on new expanding costlyproblems. Picture this problem this way, the U.S is a ship being sunk down bydebt. And when we add immigration, sooner or later, the money attributed willbring us to rock bottom. We need to prioritize the needs of U.S first, and oncewe are at a stable self-efficient level, then we can start to provide thenecessary care the migrants need. Fear, a word that repels afeeling of safety and creates a world based on paranoia. This fear of terrorstarted on the day the nation stood still. September 11th “a seriesof suicide attacks committed by 19 militants associated with Islamicextremists, led the deadliest attack on American soil”. This feeling of fearstill resonates with us today, the terrorist wants to create a sense ofparanoia in such a vast country. These attacks are what fuel the hate, andmodern day stereotypes of today’s immigrants. We need to remove this fear,because when we convey fear it only strengthens the terrorist to act. In anarticle Washington Times polledAmericans if they feel safe, “42 percent of Americans say they are less safefrom terrorism The physiological scars left by 911 are irreversible, but we canstart to dismantle this fear if we acknowledge the threat and work for a securenation.”The third counter argument,is that immigration does not create fear. Being a nation that has a long recordof welcoming refugees and immigrants, they say there is no cause for concern.But the truth is we need to become aware and more knowledgeable about thepeople we let in.  The factor of not knowing who these people are, creates thisfear in each U.S citizen. This sense of breach of security, has a ripple effectin the U.S. As addressed before, many view immigration as a threat. If weaddress this dividing issue and start to dismantle stereotypes, we can create anation not driven by fear. But a nation driven by the strengthen and sense ofsecurity, which redefines and unifies the country. Immigration poses a threat to a nation’s security and is a hidden that that divides a country already on the edge. The balance of security and acceptance needs to be addressed. This will ultimately create a structured nation. The hidden threat needs to be addressed, creating a nation not driven by fear, but rather of strength. The U.S should reevaluate the policies but the U.S needs to still maintain the core ideals built from immigration. Immigration is here to say, it’s a matter of how well the U.S can adapt to this ever-changing problem. Works CitedVaughan, Jessica. “Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order.” Center for Immigration Studies. N.p., 09 Feb. 2017. http://cis.org/vaughan/study-reveals-72-terrorists-came-countries-covered-trump-vetting-order>.Ashcroft, John. “USA Patriot Act.” American History ABC CLIO. Gov’t and Court Documents, Morgan, Gregory W. “Global War on Terrorism.” American History. ABC-CLIO. N.p., n.d. Sullivan, Eileen. “Homeland Security Forecasts 5-Year Terror Threats.” Associated Press [Austin, TX] 20 Dec. 2008: 21-25. SIRS Issues Researcher. USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2011. 14 USC. Sec. 1805. 2011. The Library of Congress. Rep Conyers, John, Jr., 29 July 2009. .Radio address “A nation without borders is not a nation” (Ronald Reagan) http:://www.presidency.ucb.eduVaughan, Jessica. “Study Reveals 72 Terrorists Came From Countries Covered by Trump Vetting Order.” Center for Immigration Studies. N.p., 09 Feb. 2017. http://cis.org/vaughan/study-reveals-72-terrorists-came-countries-covered-trump-vetting-order>.Taylor, Adam. “Poll: 42 Percent of Americans Say They Are Less Safe from Terrorism than before 9/11.” The Washington Post. WP Company, 22 Aug. 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/08/22/poll-42-percent-of-americans-say-they-are-less-safe-from-terrorism-than-before-911/?utm_term=.e9fb70133571>.Get Help With Your EssayIf you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Find out more