A Supporter of Israel Must Have a "Bias" on Trump Travel Ban: The Newest Bigotry!

I support a well-crafted and well-reasoned travel ban (neither done by Trump) for two reasons.

Or perhaps more precisely, I support a vigorous, lengthy, and thorough National Debate on whether such a ban on non-citizen Muslims is necessary because of the nature of Islam, the commandments of the religion as laid down by its founder, Mohammed.

The lesser reason for a travel ban is to keep down the number of Muslims moving to America, because I respect the figures that seem to show the larger the percentage of Muslims in any country - and most ominously and vividly in Europe in just the last three years - the more tensions and trouble, culminating in the unbending intolerance of all religious minorities in the core countries of the Muslim Middle East with their 90% or more Muslim populations.

But the more important reason is my continuing bafflement and sense of wonder that so many can blithely equate Islam with other religions given that so many Muslims have engaged in so many acts of terrorism in so many countries since 9/11. (I'll leave out the four wars - 1948-73 - supported by hundreds of millions of Muslims against the tiny state of Israel, for either the same or closely related motives).

It's as if a kind of planet-girdling DENIAL has gripped most of the world's non-Muslim population,or at least the world's non-Muslim leaders, despite the same motives being given by all the terrorists for their attacks, including the Muslim-on-Muslim carnage that is claiming hundreds of thousands of lives in the Muslim Middle East, with no end in sight.

It is almost amusing that Professor Dershowitz has to fight off a 'dual loyalty' charge when no one anywhere, as far as I can tell, is raising the dual loyalty issue regarding tens of millions of Muslims in Europe, who are showing increasing signs of not only refusing to assimilate, but demanding that hundreds of millions of Europeans 'accommodate' (appease?) them in any way the most visible and active Muslim leaders claim their religion demands.

So by all means, let's have a debate on the nature of Islam and what the Koran says. If the form of that debate is a proposed ban on future Muslim immigration to the United States - on whether Muslims will have to decide between the historic values of their religion and the radically different values of the country they wish to emigrate to - well, that seems an excellent issue on which to have that debate.

The entire focus of Dershowitz's article was to show that Flannery, in his introduction of Israel to the travel ban discussion, was showing a bias. This in fact is the favored way of those with a bias against Israel, ie. by attacking the legitimacy of Jewish voices to take part. This has been seen most publicly in recent attacks on the right to participate in university student government issues by Jewish students.

Expecting a radical lefty to act without bias is expecting too much.
Mr. Dershowitz might as well have asked if his attacker believed the Holocaust happened.
I have recently downloaded and hard copied a file from wiki on "Logical Fallacy".
John Flannery, a "former" prosecutor, (Thank G-d) relies on logical fallacy, that's not comforting when you know he was a prosecutor, it is actually kind of scary.
He prosecutes Dershowitz because he is Jewish and immediately assumes the conditional fallacy Dershowitz must be thinking only of Israel in his defense of President Trump. It is a formal fallacy because Flannery does not seem to care if his conclusion is dependent on correct premises which it is not. It is an informal fallacy because it would be true if his premises of true and they are not true.
How did Flannery become a public prosecutor, he is an activist of the antisemitic type. A better question would be if Flannery believes the Holocaust happened? How far does his bigotry go?

alan,we are seeing a big insight into the europe of the 1930's. just as the jews thought they were part of the general population; just as they thought they were europeans (who went to a different church), they had fought in the war, had medals, were heroes, were politicians, doctors, lawyers; when the rubber met the road, they were all just jews. you, me us. this guy don lemon, he knows what he's doing. none of these bigots are stupid.

I can't see the connection between president Trump's travel ban and Israel, other than a number of countries, mainly Arab, have closed their borders for Israeli citizens or people with Israeli stamps in their passports.
Denmark has a long standing travel ban on several countries. The Danes just don't call it a travel ban, as they are a little bit smarter in this case, than Mr. Trump. Citizens from certain countries (and we can all guess which they may be), have to apply for a visa, which is only granted, if the applicant has a legitimate reason for wanting to visit Denmark, such as, for instance, business travel.
This is fully in accordance with international law, and this is the method Mr. Trump should have applied instead of issuing a general ban on people born in, or living in specific countries, which has just served to enrage a lot of people

Some people must be slow in the uptake and processing of basic information. I didn't vote for President Trump nor Her Honor Clinton. I voted. 4 out of 10 Americans eligible did not vote. Temper whatever we see or hear with knowledge of this fact.
The "travel ban" is an attempt to put a leash on crazy, "bad", unvetted, unprocessed travelers. Israel doesn't get a free ride. No one does... if someone is criminally violent they cannot come here. Israel "knows" its people and will not let criminally violent people come to my country. The data base of knowledge about people and their backgrounds (history/herstory of behavior) can be vouch-safed about people coming from Israel. And in some countries the people are still rubbing sticks together to make fire... so to speak.

If you had actually bothered to read the travel ban first, you would have seen that even the first temporary 3-month ban only restricted 7 of the 49 muslim-majority countries in the world, and does NOT include, for instance, Pakistan, Turkey, Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia. Further, those 7 countries are the EXACT same 7 countries which had travel bans applied to them by the OBAMA regime.

Curiouser and curiouser, isn't it?

Even more, 5 of those 7 are still completely banned by KUWAIT itself.

The President of the United States, as constitutional head of the nation's international relations and foreign policy, and as Commander in Chief, entered a formal finding that the status quo of complacency and lax border enforcement presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States. In the language of the governing statute, President Trump entered a finding that entry from seven failed or dangerous states "would be detrimental to the interests of the United States."

the Executive Order creates only a 90 day pause in entry from the world's seven most dangerous countries.

The PRESIDENT'S POWER TO REGULATE ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES IS CLEAR AND ALMOST UNLIMITED:

Congressional legislation confirms the President's authority in 8 U.S. Code § 1182(f), which is Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act:

(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States
would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

However, even without the benefit of legislation, the President has inherent constitutional authority over foreign policy.

See, e.g., Zivotofsky v. Kerry, 576 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 2076, 2083-84(2015).

Of course that power is at its zenith when Congress by statute has agreed by legislation, as here.

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579 (1952).

see also, e.g., Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, 588 (1952)

(recognizing that control over immigration is an integral part of Article II authorities "in regard to the conduct of foreign relations [and] the war power").

The Executive Order explicitly, clearly, and unambiguously covers only those countries identified, during the Obama Administration, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1187(a)(12), as being the seven most dangerous countries in the world for their risk of terrorists infiltrating the United States.

Specifically invoking 8 U.S. Code § 1182, President Trump ordered in the Executive Order:

"I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and - 1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

These are so-called "failed states" from whom reliable records cannot be obtained to sufficiently vet against the risk of terrorism. The seven (7) countries are selected not because they are Muslim, but because those countries are in chaos (or in the case of Iran implacably hostile and a state sponsor of terrorism), such that documents and records related to a person seeking entry into the United States cannot be trusted. Records about potential entrants necessary to investigate and screen entrants for national security purposes are either non-existent or incomplete or worse commonly forged or falsified due to rampant corruption of officials, poverty-stricken bureaucrats, threats of violence or intimidation against bureaucrats, or terrorist infiltration of governments.

It is beyond reasonable question, that the defining characteristic is the unreliability of records from these seven (7) countries. This is underscored by the temporary 90 day time limit on the Executive Order (in relevant portions).

The Executive Order ignores 42 other Muslim-majority countries.

This EXECUTIVE ORDER TARGETS "FAILED STATES" PLUS TERRORIST SPONSOR, HOSTILE IRAN, NOT RELIGION:

In fact, because the issue is the risk of terrorism, not religion, the Muslim nation of Kuwait has also implemented a travel ban from five (5) of the same seven (7) countries covered by the Executive Order.

A Muslim country has banned travel from five of the same Muslim countries.

So it's not a "muslim ban."

If the Executive Order constituted discrimination against religion, (a) it would not be limited to only 90 days, and (b) it would not be limited only to those seven countries from whom records necessary for vetting cannot be trusted.

(12) Not present in Iraq, Syria, or any other country or area of concern (A) In general Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)—(i) the alien has not been present, at any time on or after March 1, 2011—(I)
in Iraq or Syria; (II) in a country that is designated by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701
et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or (III) in any other country or area of concern designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D); and
(ii) regardless of whether the alien is a national of a program country, the alien is not a national of —
(I) Iraq or Syria; (II) a country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or 8 (III) any other country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D).

That's from Obama's original ban.

As for Trump's ban itself:

1) Nowhere does the Executive Order mention Muslims or Islam.
2) Nowhere does the Executive Order mention Christians.
3) Nowhere does the Executive Order mention Jews.
4) Nowhere does the Executive Order mention religion at all.
5) In fact, nowhere does the Executive Order mention any particular country, nor specify any of the seven (7) countries affected.

In fact, the Executive Order does not even mention the countries affected, but refers instead to the countries designated by the Obama Administration pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1187(a)(12) as countries of concern. Because of the chaos created in those countries after the so-called "Arab Spring," and the hostility of Iran, records are either unavailable or easily forged by money-strapped or corrupt officials.

In other words, a terrorist could present himself at the U.S. border posing as a Hasidic Jew under a false name, and the records from those seven countries are too deficient to confirm the entrant's true identity. It is the nature of the "Muslim-Majority Countries Comprising the Islamic World," Center for the Education of Women, University of Michigan, accessible at:

http://www.cew.umich.edu/muslim_majority; The Pew Research Center identifies 49 countries: "The Future of the Global Muslim Population: Muslim-Majority Countries," Pew Research Center, January 27, 2011, accessible at:
http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-muslim-majority/

It is the countries of origin, not the religion of the entrants, that drives the Executive Order.

Whilst I don't understand how the US Muslim travel ban could benefit Israel, I disagree with Alan Dershowitz about its usefulness to the US. Whilst neither a fan nor supporter of Mr Trump in most other spheres, I believe his policy to restrict Muslim immigration into the US is because he's aware of the parlous situation in Europe, not necessarily with regard to terrorism per se but also the demographic consequences of years of unlimited Muslim immigration that has changed the face and culture of many areas of European cities. Only a blind man would today be unaware of the islamic aim for a worldwide caliphate and as they say, time is on their side.