[Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively on VDARE.com.]

Last week started off with another Muslim terrorist attack, this one on the campus of Ohio State University in Columbus. Shortly before 10 a.m. Monday a Somali immigrant, a student at the university, deliberately drove his car into a group of people, injuring several. Then he got out and stared stabbing bystanders with a butcher knife.

Fortunately a campus cop was nearby. He shot the Muslim dead.

There were thirteen victims altogether: three with broken bones, one with possible internal injuries, the rest listed as having moderate or minor injuries.

Could have been worse.

The terrorist was identified as Abdul Artan. His age was given as 18, but that's obviously a lie. In photographs he looks to be at least thirty, with a well-developed case of male-pattern baldness.

The incident is mainly noteworthy for illustrating the utter absence of any sense or reason in our immigration and so-called "refugee" policies.

Before proceeding, let me justify that adjective "so-called."

Abdul Artan moved with his family from Somalia to Pakistan in 2007. [Deceased Ohio State attacker identified as Somali refugee Abdul Razak Ali Artan, RT.com, November 29, 2016] Seven years after that, in 2014, he was admitted to the U.S.A. as a refugee and was granted legal permanent residency.

So after seven years in Pakistan, how was he a refugee? Is Pakistan a country people need refuge from? A country Muslims need refuge from?

If it is, we're in trouble. The population of Pakistan is 202 million. If any significant portion of them need refugee status, that's millions of people.

In fact, there is no reason to grant refugee status to anyone from Pakistan. Sure, the place is dirt-poor and politically corrupt, but there's no civil war or famine. Nor is there any threat of Pakistan being destroyed by external agency: it's a nuclear power, for crying out loud.

So in what sense were Artan's family, resident there seven years, in what sense were they refugees?

People often say, concerning genuine Muslim refugees, driven from their homes in places like Syria, that their brother Muslim nations should take them in. Well, in the case of the Artans, assuming they genuinely were fleeing from something or other in Somalia — a questionable assumption in itself, given the history of fraud in these cases — even assuming that, Muslim Pakistan did indeed step up and take them in.

How did they then become America's responsibility?

The answer is that the U.S.A. has an insatiable appetite for Somali immigrants. Ann Corcoran has dug out the numbers over at Refugee Resettlement Watch. We've taken in eight thousand Somalis so far this year. Last year it was nine thousand. Year 2014 it was also nine thousand. Clicking back through the years from there: eight thousand, five thousand, three thousand, five thousand, four thousand, two and a half thousand.

That last low number was for 2008, when family reunification was suspended after the State Department tried out a DNA testing program that exposed widespread fraud — strangers claiming to be family members.

The suspension was annulled in 2009, with no further effort to reduce fraud, after the Obama administration came in. [Fraud in the Refugee Family Reunification (Priority Three) Program, State.gov, February 3, 2009]

Continuing to scan backwards, 2007 we took in seven thousand Somalis, the previous year ten thousand, then ten thousand, thirteen thousand, two thousand, 242, …

Whoa, what happened there? Only 242? Oh, that was 2002, the year after 9/11.

Yes, incredibly, we actually cut back on importing Somali Muslims the year after 9/11. The cutback only lasted a few months, though.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: the most astounding statistic of the 21st century is, that the U.S.A. has taken in more Muslims for settlement in the 15 years since 9/11 than it did in the 15 years before.

Not that we were exactly slack before, certainly not in the case of Somali Muslims. Ann's numbers show that, as long ago as the Clinton administration we took in 36,000 Somalis.

And these are Somalis: the group, of all Muslim groups, with the highest proportion of swivel-eyed fanatics and the lowest proportion of persons with any useful skill or literate in anything but Islamic mumbo-jumbo.

Yet, as those numbers show, the U.S.A. has an insatiable appetite for more and more of them.

When I say "the U.S.A.," of course, I don't mean the ordinary people of America. Nobody cares what they want.

The appetite belongs in the first place to the refugee importers, the so-called Voluntary Agencies, who get vast grants of federal money to aid them in their efforts, and who pay their executives grand salaries; and in the second place to Midwestern meatpacking and food-processing companies wanting cheap labor.

It's all a nice little money racket dressed up in humanitarian language.

The precise Voluntary Agency involved in Artan's case was Catholic Charities of Dallas.  [Email them] [Catholic Charities Resettled Ohio State’s Somali Attacker, by Michael Patrick Leahy, Breitbart.com, November 29, 2016] They will not, of course, be held responsible for the actions of their protégé. Nor will anyone be called on to explain how the mass importation of African Muslims helps the mission of the Catholic Church.

Monday's attack also brought out the sanctimonious non-judgmentalism of our Goodwhite elites. One of those more seriously hurt was 68-year-old emeritus professor of engineering William Clark. [Send him mail] Quote from him, speaking the day after the attack:

Before I pass judgment on this young man, I would like to see exactly what the circumstances are and exactly why he took the course of action that he chose.

Ohio State University Professor Injured in Attack: ‘We’re Still a Great University’

Time.com,  November 29, 2016

The circumstances! The root causes! It wasn't Mr. Artan's will, his agency, that brought about those injuries and his own death, you see; it was those pesky circumstances.

Members of victim groups have no agency. They are the helpless playthings of circumstance.

I haven't so far seen anyone quoted as saying that as horrific as this attack was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, that would be worse.

However, I've no doubt that somebody, somewhere, has said it.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He's had two books published by VDARE.com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013. His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.

Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire's writings at VDARE.com can do so here.