A "Radical Experiment To Fundamentally Transform...Who Is Allowed Into The Country

The L. A. Times says that Bannon and Miller are running:

   ...a radical experiment to fundamentally transform how the U.S. decides who is allowed into the country and to block a generation of people who, in their view, won’t assimilate into American society.
...
   The chief architects of Trump’s order, Bannon, Miller and National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn, forged strong bonds during the presidential campaign.
   The trio, who make up part of Trump’s inner circle, have a dark view of refugee and immigration flows from majority-Muslim countries, believing that if large numbers of Muslims are allowed to enter the U.S., parts of American cities will begin to replicate disaffected and disenfranchised immigrant neighborhoods in France, Germany and Belgium that have been home to perpetrators of terrorist attacks in Europe in recent years.
   Within decades, Americans would have “the kind of large and permanent domestic terror threat that becomes multidimensional and multigenerational and becomes sort of a permanent feature,” one senior administration official argued.
   “We don’t want a situation where, 20 to 30 years from now, it’s just like a given thing that on a fairly regular basis there is domestic terror strikes, stores are shut up or that airports have explosive devices planted, or people are mowed down in the street by cars and automobiles and things of that nature,” the official said.
   Counter-terrorism experts have long noted that Muslim immigrants in the U.S. are better assimilated and less likely to be radicalized than immigrants in many European cities.

This is is very, very not good. And I'm someone who's skeptical of "multiculturalism"--a can of worms that has never properly been opened and investigated in our public discussions. I have no interest in actually promoting a fragmented culture, as so much of the left does. I'm also not in favor of promoting a unified or homogeneous culture, either. I view both sides of that disagreement with grave suspicion. The point is: if we have/had good evidence that Muslims will/would  not assimilate, I am inclined to accept that as a reason for decreasing Muslim immigration. I am disinclined to think that we betray our values by refusing to cause that kind of problem for ourselves. But we'd need some damn good evidence for the non-assimilation prediction.
   Though, contra the Times's suggestion, it isn't very helpful to note that Europe has a bigger problem. What we need to know is whether we do or will have a problem here. And I don't know the answer to that question.
   However... Here's a thing about the contemporary GOP: they tell you you're buying conservatism, but what you're commonly going to get is radicals.