There's pretty much blanket denunciation of Trump's Executive Order (EO) banning US entry by refugees from various Middle Eastern countries, all of which are Muslim majority countries.
Hence the EO has become known as the "Muslim Ban".
I've been following the issue on BBC, CNN and Fox.
They all -- even Fox; mostly -- rail against the EO as being in violation of the Constitution and "un-American".
But none of them talks of the main reason for the EO is as described by Andrew C. McCarthy.
But none of them talks of the main reason for the EO is as described by Andrew C. McCarthy.
McCarthy argues that the main aim of the EO is not terrorism, but is to stop the immigration of Muslims who want to promote Islamic SHARIA law in the United States. It's not specifically aimed at jihadi terrorists. If that's the case then that's way more logical than trying to stop terrorism, because there have been no terrorist attacks on the US from any one of the Trump-named countries.
LATER (10 Feb): that's on "Half True", according to fact checkers Politifact:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/29/jerrold-nadler/have-there-been-terrorist-attacks-post-911-countri/
I'm inclined to accept McCarthy's explanation because he was on the drafting committee of the EO and because I've read his excellent 2008 book "Willful Blindness". It was well written and well sourced.
LATER (10 Feb): that's on "Half True", according to fact checkers Politifact:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/29/jerrold-nadler/have-there-been-terrorist-attacks-post-911-countri/
I'm inclined to accept McCarthy's explanation because he was on the drafting committee of the EO and because I've read his excellent 2008 book "Willful Blindness". It was well written and well sourced.
For example, he said that W Bush attacking Iraq was like the United States after Pearl Harbour attacking Mexico instead of Japan. So he's no war booster.
Moreover I know from study of the issue that there are many Muslims who want to implement Sharia in the countries to which they emigrate. Look at he U.K. for example. There almost 100 SHARIA COURTS there. They supersede U.K. Law. That's slow-motion cultural suicide in my view.
There's nothing to like about SHARIA. Nothing. Don't believe me? Read the "Reliance of the Traveler", the classic manual of Islamic jurisprudence, link at left. It's a shocker. Full of murderous hatred of we infidels, of gays, adulterers, women, minorities and apostates. Punishments include whipping, amputation, crucifixion and stoning to death.
Lovely.
The wonders of the "religion of peace".
Yet that's what the U.K. Government is complicit in allowing. The US wants to avoid that with this latest EO.
Fair enough I reckon.
