I am not trying to argue one side or the other, but I find this more of a "fun fact" than something that should matter at all for this topic.
But that's the point, isn't it?
What argument for pro-acceptance of migrants does this article/fact make?
It is entirely possible that some Syrians will create the next Apple, and that others will create the next horrific terrorist attack. People are people, and they're all different. The only thing that matters when it comes to immigration is math. Syria and surrounding areas have produced more terrorists per capita than other places. That's a reason to be careful with them, whether or not that is politically correct.
Compromising the principles on which the country was founded would be a victory only for the terrorists. For US citizens, and the rest of the world, it would be a tremendous shame.
There is a rather long and impressive list of Billionaire and influential recent immigrants or children of immigrants.
I wouldn't confuse "anti-immigrant" with "anti-mass immigration".
We may be better off with a simple, more modest, legal only, citizenship oriented, points system.
That said I do agree with you. His father was Syrian but Steve was raised in an American house hold and has zero cultural/emotional connection to Syria and the middle east.
Once again, I am not arguing one way or the other, just that this argument is no more silly than "This baby will grow up to cure cancer, but was aborted so cancer will never be cured" ads.