OPINION: The travel ban: Fiction, fable and fact-part 2
Christian Segers, Assistant Editor
Photo Courtesy Pixabay.
The travel ban set in motion by newly elected President Donald Trump has been described by the White House as a necessity in protecting the United States from acts of terror on American Soil.
Positions taken by the news outlets covering the travel ban have been broadly and decidedly critical of the executive order, accusing the commander-in-chief of racially profiling countries based on their large Muslim populations or their religious affiliations. However, the executive order issued by President Trump is neither unprecedented, racist or unreasonable.
According to The Federalist in 2011, President Obama ordered a temporary halt to immigration/refugee requests for six months, quadruple the size of Trump’s new order, so that he, along with the DHS (Department of Homeland Security), could properly vet and make changes to current screening procedures.
Unfortunately, the discovery of bomb makers, posing as refugees in Bowling Green, KY, caused several government departments to be on high alert in regards to additional refugees who might have had unsavory intentions for the land of the free, instead of the freedom that they claimed to seek.
Unbeknownst to a large portion of Americans is the fact that President Barrack Obama, along with his administration team, were responsible for drafting a version of Donald Trump’s travel ban. Despite the widespread panning of this inescapable truth, the fact remains that President Obama signed off on the list of countries President Trump has since barred from being able to send its citizens to and from the United States.
A greatly detailed listing, courtesy of the United States Publishing Office, recorded on January 6, 2015, covers the order issued by President Obama, that according to Politifact, restricts, “…travel to the United States for people who lived in or visited Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria since March 2011. The law was soon expanded by Obama’s Department of Homeland Security to cover Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. They were identified in the agency’s announcement as “countries of concern,” a phrase used in the law.”
I would ask the people of this great country, where was the backlash when our leader of the previous eight years issued the command just described? The answer is that there was little to none, and rightfully so. Regardless of party, the POTUS is in charge of forging legislation that will maintain the sanctity and safety of the nation and its people. Unfortunately, the onslaught of negativity surrounding President Trump’s verification and reinstitution of the order has been marred with emotion, instead of fact.
The fact of the matter is as follows. The travel restrictions issued, are in place while the DHS collects the “…information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.”
To further my argument, I would mention that President Obama’s refugee cap from 2011-2015, held at 70,000, but according to the Migration Policy Institute, only three years out of his eight-year presidency, did he utilize the full refugee limit he was allotted. Again, where was the public outcry and swift retribution of a public so incised with a president who failed to admit tens of thousands of refugees, with little to no explanation as to the reasoning?
Additionally, even The Washington Post, try as it might to implicate President Trump in a racial scandal, admits in its article, “Who could be affected by the travel ban,” that, “The order doesn’t explicitly mention Muslims, Christians or any other religion…”
The point I am trying to make is as follows. When did politicking become the sole purpose of the media, to the point that they ignore the advice of our very own Department of Homeland Security, to further an agenda that dictates the supposed downfall of November’s Electoral College results? The people used their right to vote, in large part, because they believed a Trump presidency would protect our country better than one run by yet another Clinton.
I would pose the following question to those in defiance of President Trump’s executive order and to those in the media who wish to undermine the authority or circumvent the gravity of the decree: Do you know better than the trained professionals who have dedicated their lives to protect us at the DHS? If so, I would suggest that you cease to pander your existing audience(s) and find a way to make the world and America in particular, the safer place that President Trump is attempting to bring about.
In the words of Euripides, “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
But I digress.
