A couple of weeks ago, the President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump, sacked the country’s Attorney-General, Sally Quillian Yates, for giving a direct order to her staff to ignore the executive order issued by the president against admitting people of specifically-named religion and countries into the US in the name of fighting terrorism.
Sally Yates’ courage in standing up against a bad order is crucial, but it is eclipsed by the furore over the order. Some say it is bad because it violates the inalienable-civil rights of the named persons, while others deem it good for the reason Trump gave for issuing it. To call the creature by name, however, it is a bad executive order for all the right and wrong reasons.
It is a bad executive order, because it targets and victimises specific people of a particular religion. It is a bad law for the right reason, because the goal of issuing it is to fight terrorism, and; it is a bad law for the wrong reason, because its practical consequences harkens back to the means of terrorism and what terrorism does.
A couple of days after Trump issued the order, news reports say, lots of Moslems were detained at airports around the country, but certain groups immediately went to court and judges ruled to release the detained on the basis that they cannot be detained using the order. As at last Saturday, a US federal judge in Seattle, Washington, Justice James Robart, “had issued a temporary nationwide block” on the executive order, and US Justice Department lawyers were preparing to filing an injunction for stay of execution, so that they can go on enforcing the order.
Now, suppose tomorrow, someone admitted into the US in the last week bombs a US city, will that vindicate Trump? NO! Those affirming that the executive order is unconstitutional, like Corey Brettschneider of (US) Politico magazine, are actually saying you cannot violate inalienable rights to defend US citizens against terrorism. (Besides, acceptance of bad orders, laws and policies encourages politicians to become lazy.) Trying to show why that is so is the thrust of this article.
The order and its antecedent
On Friday, January 27, 2017, Trump issued an executive order against a section of Moslems. According to a senior editor at (US) The Atlantic magazine, Kashnadev Calamur, the executive order bans [all] refugees from entering the US for 120 days, “prohibits all Syrian refugees from entering the U. S. until further notice” and “bans the citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries—Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and Yemen—from entering the U.S. on any visa category.” Also, a senior US federal administration official said, even those with permanent-residence (green card) status will have their applications considered on case by case basis.
Calamur adds that the ban will also affect citizens of other Western countries that hold dual citizenship where the other country is among the listed seven, while cases of US citizens in similar circumstances will be handled with discretion.
Interestingly, Calamur asks “Is this a Moslem ban?” and answers “Technically, no”, because it does not affect all Moslems and the seven states fall without the set of most-populous Moslem states.
That is interesting, because Calamur fails to see the larger point the effect of the executive order feeds into – the perception that Moslems are terrorists; hence dangerous people to live with. And to create that universal accusative perception one does not need to actually show that all Moslems are terrorists, but to paste that label, directly or indirectly, on some Moslems every now and then. And such intentional labelling to create that accusative perception (worldwide) works because of the way the human mind works. It is simply the application of some basic rules of psychology in international affairs.
According to the report, former New York City mayor, Ruddy Giuliani, was on the panel of experts that advised Trump on details of the executive order. Giuliani is reported to have told Fox News that they did not focus on religion, but rather on the danger those seven states represent to the US. Calamur adds that Moslems “from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and other [Muslim] countries can still visit the U. S.” That is interesting, because all the seven suspects US security agencies named as responsible for the 2001 Twin Towers bombing in New York City, New York, were all Saudi Arabians. And although he is supposed to have lived in Afghanistan and Pakistan most of the time, the phantom or real terrorist, Osama bin Laden, is a Saudi Arabian. So what is the true goal of this executive order?
One of the campaign promises Candidate Trump made to the American people was to ban all Moslems from entering the US, and his reason was a simplistic one – Moslems are terrorists and represent a danger to that country. Properly, sane people were horrified, for it is like saying there is white bigotry against blacks in the US, so every white person is a bigot. That is dangerous! It is lethal for both US domestic and international affairs; the latter because of the reach of the US in global affairs.
However, the reality is that a global atmosphere poisoned against Moslems works to the benefit of the US money-power establishment, i.e., the wealthy business men and women who own or have invested in multi-national companies (along with their hirelings in politics, such as George W. Bush and Trump). And they benefit as the problems and woes of humankind deepen. Bush was, serbe, stupid enough to use a lie as a basis to go to war just so the US money-power establishment will have their way in Iraq. Today, livelihoods in Iraq are a mess, sectarian war reigns supreme and, the end of the civil war and commencement of re-construction are nowhere in sight. Yet Bush knew what he was doing; that is what made his stupidity stick.
Trump, on the other hand, is naïve; unless he is a better actor than President Ronald Reagan. He has about his country convictions and a vision that are worthy – security, re-rising of US business, keeping manufacturing by US companies and hence jobs in the US, the US re-gaining diminished glory it used to have in global affairs, etc. However, the moment he begins to articulate his means to reaching those convictions and vision, all we hear is directly or indirectly labelling Moslems as terrorists and blaming others (such as Mexico, China and the EU) for the US’s international problems, etc.
“Now, suppose tomorrow, someone admitted into the US in the last week bombs a US city, will that vindicate Trump? NO! Those affirming that the executive order is unconstitutional, …are actually saying you cannot violate inalienable rights to defend US citizens against terrorism.”
“That is interesting, because all the seven suspects US security agencies named as responsible for the 2001 Twin Towers bombing in New York City, New York, were all Saudi Arabians.”
“…The moment [Trump] begins to articulate his means to reaching those convictions and vision, all we hear is directly or indirectly labelling Moslems as terrorists and blaming others …for the US’s international problems…”
Join GhanaStar.com to receive daily email alerts of breaking news in Ghana. GhanaStar.com is your source for all Ghana News. Get the latest Ghana news, breaking news, sports, politics, entertainment and more about Ghana, Africa and beyond.