OPINION: The travel ban: Fiction, fable and fact – Part 1
Christian Segers, Assistant Editor
Photo Courtesy Pixabay.
This is the first in a two part series on President Trump’s recent travel ban. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the article has been divided in to two parts, with the second dealing with precedent for a travel ban and what the ban fully entails. Please come back next week for part two.
On Friday, January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed an executive order, entitled, �Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.� The executive action included the immediate suspension of travel from seven countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen), whose U.S. entry vetting process was deemed as not up to par.
The goal of the order was defined in its text as follows. �It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.�
Predictably, the Internet was set ablaze with cries of �fascism� and �dictatorship,� simultaneously directed at the president. Calls for the immediate removal of the �Muslim ban� (as it came to be called) and President Trump himself, could be seen or heard, regardless of the media represented. While the purpose of the travel ban was intended to be for national security and terrorist prevention reasons, mainstream media largely chose to portray a falsified image of discrimination in its stead.
Unfortunately, the 21st century is a day and age where the misinformed and the unguided reign supreme and the facts and the truth become all too often shrouded in a web weaved by the socialistic patterns of the alt. left. To separate fact from fiction, regarding the current U.S. travel ban, it is imperative that the facts and the truth be represented, versus the immediate disregard of both logic and reasoning that the news media has somehow neglected to share with both the American and worldwide publics.
September 11, 2001. As planes crashed in to the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a feeling of widespread shock, disbelief and ensuing panic erupted like a sonic blast from America�s eastern to western seaboards. Not a single eye was left untouched by tears of emotion and not a single heart was laid bereft of national pride as President George W. Bush echoed the countries fears but reinforced its courage and senses of duty and patriotism, in his address to the nation. It is with that sense of patriotism and that sense of duty that I believe President Trump acted on January 27, 2017.
According to the text provided by The New York Times, it is Trump�s job to, ��ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.�
Nowhere in that statement did the President include a disclaimer that his duties to the nation would have to be publicly agreed upon, prior to the enactment of an executive order. The due governmental process of checks and balances remains intact so as to prohibit the President from taking such steps that might inhibit the safety of the American people. However, the President and consequently, his administration staff, were elected by the people, under the platform that he would strengthen and in many cases, tighten border security. Thus, in actuality, the people themselves, voted for radical changes to be made to the current visa-vetting system.
It is an inarguable fact that mass numbers of illegal aliens cross over to American soil annually, through one means or another. In fact, statistics gathered from the U.S. Border Patrol, estimate that approximately 11.4 million illegal immigrants have lived in the United States since the beginning of former President Barrack Obama�s second term and have remained in eight figures ever since.
This number pales in comparison to the naturalized U.S. citizens whose parental statuses may vary, but who continue to reap the benefits of a giving country. These occurrences take place, due to federal laws restricting the deportation of citizens whose parents were illegal, but they themselves were birthed on American soil (in other words, in the same hospitals taxpayers are helping to fund).
A large portion of the issue with these illegal immigrants however, is not whether or not they should legally be here, but instead how they can be vetted for criminal actions. The fact remains, if an immigrant is undocumented, then criminal actions and additionally, terrorist affiliations prior to their arrival in America, are also unknown to governmental agencies, including ICE.
While terrorists arguably converge upon American property through various means and methods of transportation, there is an outstanding history of violence from those that board airplanes, i.e., the attacks on 9/11. Amidst continued attacks worldwide and on American citizens specifically, including the Boston bombings, the attack on Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, etc. etc., it is crucial that the Trump administration address the very real national security concerns these undocumented immigrants and refugees pose.
Bottom line�Middle Eastern terrorists arguably do not swim to our shores, they come by both air and by sea and it is the job of the President to protect our borders by both air and by sea.
Many news outlets and individuals alike, have echoed the often heard �Muslim ban� phrase, sensationalizing the immigration ban and tainting its meaning to include the discrimination of an entire religion, instead of interpreting the executive order as the precautionary edict that it is meant to be.
Borrowing a quote from The National Review, �the order imposes a temporary, 90-day ban on people entering the U.S. from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. These are countries either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.�
Thus, the question remains�what sensible government or people, would call for a reinstatement of travel to and from such countries, while clearly still struggling to properly vet said immigrants and consequently, possible terrorists. To those criticizing Trump as a demagogue (cue Senator Bernie Sanders), I would ask if they are remiss on their history�
