Politics and Society: The Ban!

Before Commenting (below) I want to present some actual statistics, or at lease those I could find with a relatively quick search.
Domestic Flights per day: 1.73 million. 
Number of Muslim travelers affected by Trump's ban day1: 109 or 0.006% of travelers

 From Wikipedia - the order suspended the entry of alien nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries — Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — for 90 days, after which an updated list will be made.[9] The order allows exceptions to these suspensions on a case-by-case basis. The Department of Homeland Security later exempted U.S. lawful permanent residents (green card holders).[10]

 Restrictions by previous administration
Between 2015 and 2016, the seven countries listed in the executive order were placed on the list of "countries of special concern" by the Obama administration.[24], which meant that any person who has visited these countries after 1 March 2011 is ineligible for the Visa Waiver Program.
The Visa Waiver Program (VWP) is a program of the United States Government which allows citizens of specific countries to travel to the United States for tourism, business, or while in transit for up to 90 days without having to obtain a visa.


7 countries listed under ban

  • Iraq (1.9% of world Muslims)
  • Iran (4.6% of world Muslims)
  • Libya (0.4%)
  • Somalia (0.6%)
  • Sudan (1.9%)
  • Syria (1.3%)
  • Yemen  (1.5%)
  • Total Muslims impacted worldwide by travel ban = 12.2%


Top 10 Muslim Countries (by Muslim population total)
  1. Indonesia, 12.7%
  2. India, 11%
  3. Pakistan, 11%
  4. Bangladesh, 9.2%
  5. Egypt, 4.9%
  6. Nigeria, 4.7%
  1. Iran, 4.6%
  1. Turkey, 4.6%
  2. Algeria, 2.7%
  3. Morocco, 2.0%

Of all the counties on the ban only Iran made the top 10, Iraq is 11th

The ban limits refugee arrivals to 50k for 2017, and suspends the Admissions program for 120 days after which it conditionally resumes. Is 50k/year a drastic reduction? Here is some historical data to consider:


Let us be clear, this is not a ban on Muslims, otherwise Indonesia, India, and Pakistan would have been at the top of that list. Let us also be clear that Obama prohibited individuals from the same nations listed in Trump's ban from being able to travel without a Visa. What this is, is a restriction expansion over and above what the previous administration has done, for the same reasons that Obama did it. We cannot effectively vet individuals from the nations listed in most cases. Trump is living up to his campaign promise but not going as far as he could have (thankfully), and he points to Europe (recently France) as precedent for the justification of the  expansion of restrictions.
All that know me well know that I have many Muslim friends, and am not an Islamophobic person. The truth behind this ban is that over the last decade or more the U.S. has been carrying out covert military operations and outright bombing raids in these countries. Something that most of us, including our conservative friends, absolutely detest. When I talk to conservatives and actually listen many of them supported Trump because they believed that he would discontinue the Empire-building by military force (which I don't really agree with... that Trump will cease this that is), and that Clinton would have continued it (Which I do agree with). It is now these nations where anti-US sympathies run strong and terrorist recruitment is ongoing.
I recently spoke with a friend that has in the last 18 months left his job as a cop to go work for the Department of Homeland Security, he told me that he wishes he did not know what he knows now regarding their inability to vet refugee's. Now, while that is no reason for us all to cower and live in fear of an imminent terrorist attack, it may help to justify extra precautions by the Federal Government who's primary purpose is to protect and defend its citizens. Do these precautions cross a line? Good question, difficult to answer.
The presentation and implementation of this executive order was very poorly handled, illustrating the President's inexperience in such matters (and that of his cabinet), and his apparent Islamophobia. Even still, the number of individuals held up (by my most recent search) was 109 out of 1.7 million people that traveled or 0.006%. So one might just want to consider that a good portion of the excitement has more to do with the war that Trump has declared on the press, being that the media is excitedly reporting this action when we did not even hear about similar (though more restrained) actions by the Obama administration, no one accused Obama of being Islamophobic (Though we are all pretty sure that Trump is, based on his campaign tweets).

The effectiveness of the order. I think we can all agree that this will not likely stop many, if any radicals from coming in. It is pretty easy to get here unlawfully. Furthermore, most of the incidents here in the states have come from legal residents, not foreign nationals. The radicalization is mostly home-grown and all this is likely to do is give groups and organizations such as ISIS the propaganda they need to recruit more deranged individuals both domestically and abroad.
The legal battles challenging this order will likely outlast the duration of the suspension, which would not have likely done any good in the first place and so we go on spending tax-payer money in litigation over an ineffective policy that only succeeds in illustrating just how divided this actually country is, and therefore how vulnerable we are systemic collapse if given the appropriate push.
Another impact of this order is that hateful, wicked people will be (and have been) emboldened, going from grumbling under their breath to actions that effectively terrorize legal tax-paying and patriotic citizens of this great nation. A hypocrisy that is apparent to those of us that try and educate ourselves about Muslims, among others, but goes right over the misinformed heads of those that are quick to engage in bigotry and/or religious elitism. This is something we clearly need to combat, but we cannot face it with an air of condescension. Meaning that we can't combat misinformation with negative, or even hateful, talk. We have to use information, objectively, which means looking at all facts and not just those that fit into our progressive ideals. 



Comments

Post a Comment

Please comment in good taste with respect to others (as well as yourself). Thanks for commenting...
-J

Popular posts from this blog

Climate Conspiracy

People often wonder, as I have, that if anthropogenic climate change is a hoax, why is there such a fuss over it by the liberal establishment? What is their motive if not for the actual doom of global warming? Well, before reading on, ask yourself that same question. Consider the following: Government can be trusted, right? They have our best interests at heart, right? They are smarter than we are… right? Wrong. I recently watched video of a congressmen expressing his concern to an Army officer that Guam was going to capsize because there were too many people on it. As if Islands float and can capsize and sink! I believe this to be a rare case of a public official being terribly misinformed (and ignorant) which concerns me greatly regarding those that elected him, but there's the point. Instead of debating the data (see below for some skeptic-data) right out, let's instead look first at the reasons why they might propagate such a falsehood. Consider, first, that the wo...
Read more

Perspective: Climate Change

There seems to be a lot of hype in the media regarding the consequences of Climate Change. Some in the media and in Washington claim that the world will end in as little as 12 years, on the surface this looks a lot like fear-mongering. Pretty sure that's exactly what it is, but what does the science say? Recently (2018-2019) some of the most respected scientists have put conservative estimates out there that we will see what they call 'biological annihilation' over the next decade or so. Some assert that the ship has sailed, others that we can still do something to slow or halt this, but what they are talking about is the Earth's sixth mass extinction event. I've blogged about it before. The truth is, we have a limited ability to predict what precisely will happen. It ranges from; losing a considerable number of species, in which case other species will assume the vacated niches in the ecosystem, to; losing this considerable number without the niches being back-fil...
Read more

Politics and Society: Slavery Reparations

rep·a·ra·tion ˌrepəˈrāSH(ə) noun the making of amends for a wrong one has done, by paying money to or otherwise helping those who have been wronged. Apparently there is a new movement with the end goal of getting reparations paid by the U.S. government to African Americans for the slavery that ended 152 years ago. Yes this is real. Where do I start? It's Divisive  Let's start with the divisive nature of this "movement". By proposing such an idea one is in fact asserting that African-Americans are in fact separate from the rest of America. This is in direct opposition to the efforts of liberal people/politics since the 1960's (the last 50-55 years) for ethnic equality based on the idea that we are all simply Americans and we are all equal. There is a hypocrisy inherent in this thinking, you cannot have it both ways. How effective will this be? The claim is that black Americans are impoverished still because of the trauma slavery has caused them, and ...
Read more