CIS — Those who kept up with the investigation in the aftermath of the San Bernardino terrorist attack by U.S.-born Syed Rizwan Farook, of Pakistani descent, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, a Pakistani who entered on a fiancée visa to marry Farook, may have pondered — as I did — whether the two had united in a marriage that they arranged for the purpose of carrying out the attack in the first place. Certainly the indicators were there, including incendiary social network posts that long predated not only the attacks, but Malik’s entry into the United States.
There can be many reasons to forge the bonds of marriage, and it is not inconceivable that a shared purpose of jihad is one. Consider the number of young Muslim women who have left comfortable homes and middle-class lives, often in Europe, to become the brides of Islamic State fighters in Syria and Iraq (and perhaps now in some of its other global outposts such as Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Afghanistan, etc.).
You may also remember that as the investigation unfolded it took some twists and turns involving Farook’s friend and sometime-conspirator, Enrique Marquez, Jr., who bought the weapons used in the shooting. Marquez, it turns out, was similarly involved with a foreigner, in an outright marriage fraud conceived of to obtain a green card for his erstwhile wife. He was ultimately charged for a variety of crimes, including the marriage fraud as well as material support for terror.
Marriage fraud for the purpose of obtaining immigration benefits is commonplace; more common than most Americans think, and more common than our government wishes us to believe, because it casts a pall over romantic notions of love and bonding, not to mention disturbing the narrative this administration and immigrant advocates wish us to buy into about the boundless benefits of unrestrained migration.
• AMNESTY ACTIVISTS VOW TO “GET EVEN” — BREITBART
• OBAMA: MOST ILLEGALS STILL WON’T BE DEPORTED — WASHINGTON TIMES
• SITTING ON THE HOUSE FLOOR — CIS