WHY TRUMP'S TEMPORARY BAN ON MUSLIM ENTRY FAILS
The notion that banning Muslim entry into the United States would stop radical Islamists from reaching American shores is naïve, offering false hope of stemming terror. It starts with the same fallacious assumption that drives the U.S. Post Office to ask if postal patrons have inserted a weapon and explosive device in a package, namely that those who would do us harm will be honest when we ask them about their backgrounds. If the United States were to impose a temporary ban on immigration based on Muslim religion, we would find that Islamic extremists would start identifying themselves as atheists, Catholics, Protestants, and Jews. In short, who among us thinks terrorists intent on harming Americans will tell the truth to American authorities and their proxies when asked about their religious affiliation if Muslim faith is a disqualifier for emigration to the United States?
At root, Trump, like his fellow Republican candidates, are on to something. We do not have the means to vet those who are interested in coming into the United States who hail originally from Arab countries. We cannot know whether any one admitted is a terrorist. The need to secure America from terror trumps all other factors related to immigration. Precisely because we need to secure America’s borders first and foremost, a more profound set of measures are needed than Donald Trump is offering.
We need to forbid immigration to the United States for any person who originally hails from a country in which terrorists recruit, conduct training, manufacture weapons, and perform tactical operations. We should grant exceptions on a case by case basis limited to those instances where there is detailed and verifiable proof of a person’s background sufficient to establish no terror ties, where there is also a critical domestic need for the person’s services, and where there is prior evidence of helpful association with Americans. Once people who meet those exception criteria are admitted into the United States, they should agree to be subjects of surveillance until such time, if ever, as they become American citizens. Only then can we assure ourselves to the maximum reasonable extent possible that we have protected America from terror.
Blocking immigration from people who hail from such countries is necessary but definitely not sufficient to protect America. Without question the only sure way to protect America is to engage in a relentless and expansive special forces campaign to identify and destroy all who are engaged in terror, who support terror, or who provide aid and comfort to terrorists outside of the United States. Only by employing all means to ensure destruction of terror outside of the United States can we provide adequate security for the United States.
Moreover, we have some of the most porous borders of any country in the world. Congress needs to authorize funding for an interconnected barrier to block entry along our Northern and Southern borders and to invite the border states to rely on their own law enforcement and national guard to police and protect the integrity of the border. Those caught entering the United States illegally should be arrested, incarcerated, and then transported back to their countries of origin at their own expense or upon confiscation of such resources as they have available to help pay for a return trip.
If we do not substantially increase American military operations against terrorists overseas, and if we fail to secure our borders, we can certainly expect more frequent terrorist events within our borders. While that circumstance is unacceptable, it is with us now and there appears no political will in Washington to do what is necessary to protect the nation.
Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.
© 2015 Jonathan W. Emord - All Rights Reserved
Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Ron Paul calls Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says “all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, seven on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of the Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, Global Censorship of Health Information, and Restore the Republic. He is the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine and joins Robert Scott Bell weekly for “Jonathan Emord’s Sacred Fire of Liberty,” an hour long radio program on government threats to individual liberty. For more info visit Emord.com, join the Emord FDA/FTC Law Group on Linkedin, and follow Jonathan on twitter (@jonathanwemord).
If we do not substantially increase American military operations against terrorists overseas, and if we fail to secure our borders, we can certainly expect more frequent terrorist events within our borders.