With the signing of the executive order designed “to protect United States citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist acts in the United States,” Trump barred entry into the U.S. of aliens from a list of seven countries for the next ninety days. Notable in this list was the inclusion of Iran and the exclusion of Saudi Arabia. None of the countries are specifically named in the executive order. They are “countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12).” So rather than naming those countries that he and his national security team think may pose a danger to U.S. citizens, he relies on a list compiled by a Borg infested DOS and DHS of an administration now out of office. So is this a case of SSDD?
This executive order invoked the specter of 9/11, yet Saudi Arabia gets a free pass once again. The country most responsible for supporting and sustaining both the Islamic State and Al Qaeda skates free. The Borg found it convenient to cozy up to the Saudis to further its goals, but why does Trump continue that coziness? He railed against the Clinton Foundation’s Saudi connections. I thought things might change. However, in August of last year, he told Fox News this.
“Saudi Arabia — and I get along great with all of them. They buy apartments from me,” Trump said in Mobile, Alabama. “They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”
During his presidential bid, his organization established eight companies tied to hotel interests in Saudi Arabia. Seems the coziness with the fountainhead of radical Islamic terrorism will continue, despite all the bombastic rhetoric, executive decrees and drastic actions taken to supposedly protect U.S. citizens from radical Islamic terrorists. Just more security theater and fodder for the meme machines. Well, it's still early.
Maybe Iran should negotiate with the Trump organization to build a Trump Towers in Teheran and a golf resort in Shiraz. Just think of the marvelous carpets that could decorate the club house. Then, perhaps, they’ll get the same consideration as the Saudis from the current Administration.
ADDENDUM:
Within 24 hours of this executive order, at least two Iraqis who worked with American Forces during our war in Iraq have been denied entry into the United States. One was an interpreter with the 101st for ten years. He and his family have been threatened with death for his loyal service. This situation offends me personally as a retired Army officer. It is an affront to the honor of this country and our Armed Forces. I call on Secretary of Defense Mattis to intervene to right this wrong without haste. I am not naive enough to think this has never happened under Bush and Obama, but they’re not President anymore. I have two words to the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces if he doesn’t fix this. Disgusting. Sad.
A FURTHER ADDENDUM:
The former translator was released after 17 hours in Federal custody when U.S. Representatives Jerry Nadler and Nydia Valazquez and immigration lawyers went to the Queens airport to intervene on the detained man’s behalf. DOL
TTG
Colonel Lang,
I met Donald Trump twice in the Seventies and for what it is worth, now as then, I believe the man to be unhinged.
Posted by: David E. Solomon | 28 January 2017 at 02:59 PM
The logic of whether Saudi Arabia or not, the anti Muslim, the wall are just part of a concerted effort to create cognitive dissonance. http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2017-01/alternative-facts-donald-trump-sean-spicer-media
This is about Bannon's theory of destruction. We have a weird man in the Whitehouse, backed by a new Rasputin. The whole thing is simply un-American an extremely against the moral principles of the nation.
Posted by: Origin | 28 January 2017 at 03:14 PM
TTG:
See Robb's "Will the World be Safer or More Dangerous Under a Trump Presidency?" http://tinyurl.com/jfj6lqd
"...In Trump's post cold war world, US foreign policy will be dominated by trade policy. Even national security policy will be subservient to trade policy. If trade policy is dominant, we'll see China, Mexico and the EU (Germany) become competitors. Russia, in contrast will become an ally since it doesn't pose a trade threat."
Posted by: The Librarian in Purgatory | 28 January 2017 at 03:23 PM
TTG, Sir
As a Trump voter I am bothered that Saudi Arabia and the other nations whose citizens were the 9/11 terrorists were not included in the list for extreme vetting.
It is clear that Saudi Arabia and the Gulfies are the funding sources for the jihadists and nihilistic Islam that want to export their medieval behavior to the west. They should be the ones that should face sanction the most.
Posted by: Jack | 28 January 2017 at 03:40 PM
Iran just announced will reciprocate the same
"Iran to ban US citizens in response to Trump's immigration order
"http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/middleeast/iran-will-ban-us-citizens/
Posted by: kooshy | 28 January 2017 at 03:44 PM
TTG:
As far as US and Iran are concerned, this is business as usual - one side screams "Death to America" and the other side bars them from entering US.
Tit for Tat.
But in regards to the 9/11/2001 attacks on the United States by Muslim terrorists; Trumps executive order is not any worse, in my opinion, that what Bush II did.
He went to UAE, a country that was jubilant of 9/11/2001 attacks on US (there were days of celebrations in cities of UAE) and proceeded to harangue Iran from across the Persian Gulf from UAE.
I asked myself then and I ask myself now: "What price geopolitics?"
I would like to add that, in my opinion, we witnessing another consequence of the religious war that I have been writing about on this forum, the logical consequence of which, in the fullness of time, would be imprisonment or expulsion of Muslims from the United States.
Liberalism, in my opinion, cannot endure long under the conditions of religious war.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:04 PM
Folks you can put this in the bank: Rex's fingerprints are on the order someplace.
As far as domestic terrorists/terrorism suppression goes try 'our' drug cartels and the outfits do the laundering. If Trump can 'sequester/deal for' El Chapo's reported 14-15 billion it'd be a waste to pour it into postholes. Better ICE use it to once and for all/get serious ie, chase-down and bust our non-doc"terrorist" employers and their assets right down to the ground/deeper.
Posted by: Hood Canal Gardner | 28 January 2017 at 04:04 PM
TTG, IMO this is not about Trump and about terrorism, never was, some of us may forgot just a few months back after the nuclear agreement, US administration of BHO announced that foreign travelers to Iran from a third country must obtain visas to enter US, that was targeting european tourists and businessmen. IMO ever since Iranian revolution nothing has changed and nothing will change between Iran and US. the simple fact is Iran and US in this current US' geopolitical policy for MENA region are strategic enemies and not compatible. IMO, the JCPOA was just a time limited arms control agreement between Iran and the west, nevertheless, that was the best US could do in lat 38 years. IMO, what US just did and Iran announcement to reciprocate, will elevate Iran' standing and credibility in the ME region' and streets level muslims everywhere, especially among resistance.
Posted by: kooshy | 28 January 2017 at 04:09 PM
They had to do something...
We have to wait and see how this plays out - with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
The interesting is that Trump's government has, in effect, sanctioned the historical core of Islamdom.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:09 PM
In my opinion. this action is going to have unintended consequences from an American point of view.
From the Trump perspective, this action proves to his base that the President is "Getting things done!". The plethora of rapid fire executive actions, as Scott Adams points out, will leave his detractors with so many choice targets that they will be so dazed and confused they will not mount effective counter attacks - another "plus" for the President.
The problem I think I see coming for America is that President Trump is used to an environment ruled by law (no matter how it is enforced) and his world is defined by competitors, suppliers and customers. These folks may get disgruntled from time to time ( so sue me!) but they don't come after you with ordnance.
What concerns me is the quality and provenance of advice that President Trump is receiving. A ban on Muslim travel seems to have been an easy "sell" to President Trump, it plays to his base, it makes him look like a man of action it obviously is quite attractive.
The trouble is that he, in my opinion, may be alienating that small band of muslims that actually like America and what it stands for by this travel ban. To put that another way, 99% or more of those affected are wanting to be in the USA for no other reason then to make a contribution to it. I cannot think of anyone who benefits from this situation except for perhaps the current Israeli Government for whom any American rapprochement with the Islamic world is anathema.
Posted by: walrus | 28 January 2017 at 04:09 PM
Iran has already reciprocated, and are now barring entry of US citizens. This puts thousands of American jobs at risk if Tehran follows through and cancels their 8-billion dollar deal with Boeing and buys from Airbus instead.
Trump World Golf Resort in the UAE: where two of the 9/11 attackers came from. And is reportedly building another.
Trump Towers Istanbul: Turkey is another enabler of Daesh and al-Qaeda terrorism.
Reportedly there are also deals in Egypt where another of the 9/11 attackers came from. Interesting article in Newsweek regarding Egypt. It tells of Confederate veterans who went there to help Khedive Ismail get out from under the Ottoman yoke. One of those Confederate vets was a Coastal Carolinian, General "Old Blizzards" Loring, who had received two brevets for bravery at Mexico City and lost an arm there.
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/donald-trump-el-sissi-cairo-egypt-531572.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_W._Loring#Civil_War
Posted by: mike | 28 January 2017 at 04:13 PM
Trumps action, both in regards to the Wall against Mexico and the changes to Visa rules affecting 7 Muslim countries are very smart domestic moves by him to assuage as well as cater to his domestic constituency - in my opinion.
These decisions against foreigners will be and are enormously popular all over the United States; and he could say that he is delivering on his promises.
Few, I should think, would look carefully at the facts; that there have already been a continuous effort at building a wall or that terrorists hails exclusively from outside of Seljuk boundaries.
Who would care?
In my mind, the interesting is that if Trump, in a manner analogous to FDR, would cut Finance Capital to size in the United States. For that one, we have to wait and see.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:17 PM
In case of Iran, the combined US-EU Economic War against her destroyed the livelihoods of those who actually had been actively trading with EU and other countries and were the cosmopolitan and open-minded men and women of Iran.
Australia and New Zealand were enthusiastic supporters of that war - by the way.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:20 PM
Iranians are not stupid; they will not cancel the Boeing order.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:21 PM
Should have added that the RICO money/property seized from terrorist employers would be more than enough to dam the Bay/Sacramento River give a good charge to replenishing the Central Valley aquifer the Mexifornia corporations have sucked to the devil's rooftop.
Posted by: Hood Canal Gardner | 28 January 2017 at 04:23 PM
Ruling through fear. Maybe he studied Machiavelli's 'The Prince.'
Posted by: FourthAndLong | 28 January 2017 at 04:33 PM
Babak Makkinejad -
Tehran got a yuuuge discount from Boeing on that deal. Perhaps Airbus cannot match it? So you may be correct.
I never implied Iranians were stupid.
Posted by: mike | 28 January 2017 at 04:34 PM
Trump supporters can spin it anyway they want, but he is giving Saudi's a pass? He was elected president, not Clinton, I guess that makes him big borg,he might like that title.
Posted by: Nancy K | 28 January 2017 at 04:40 PM
"Liberalism, in my opinion, cannot endure long under the conditions of religious war."
But apparently liberal democracy must accommodate the medieval Salafist cult on behalf of the moneyed class.
If this man refuses to risk the businesses he presumably divested himself from it is confirmation that when it comes to some aspects of U.S. foreign policy considerations we are still BAU.
Posted by: Lesly | 28 January 2017 at 04:42 PM
Why not bar entry to Tunisians? They provided 6000 headchopping foreign terrorists to Daesh in Syria and Iraq.
Saudis - 2500; Chechens - 2400; Turks - 2100; Jordanians - 2000.
Posted by: mike | 28 January 2017 at 04:43 PM
Trump just reassured the Gulfies that he is on their side against Iran and the Shia Crescent. This was cost-free & smart move by him to reassure Gulfies.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:45 PM
TTG,
Nice picture!
Does it represent the Saudis laughing all the way to the - Trump Tower?
Posted by: FB Ali | 28 January 2017 at 04:48 PM
I think Iranian leaders are arguing something a bit different in their speeches by pointing to the economic war against the nationalist and secular government of Mossadegh as well as the one against the Islamic Republic (within 50 years) and state that the United States and indeed the Western Fortress is against Iranian independence.
They could be right, when one looks at the analogous situation in Europe where NATO expanded East against the Russian Federation and the subsequent events in Ukraine.
I suspect and speculate that when Nixon went to China, he might have reassured the Chinese godless brutal human-right-violating dictatorial communist leaders that the United States was not against independent Chinese power.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 28 January 2017 at 04:51 PM
Babak, I wouldn't trust Congress to allow delivery of a single aircraft to Iran. Iran will pay, Boeing will build, but delivery? AIPAC will see that it never happens. As for Airbus, all Congress has to do is prevent American components from being used in an Airbus destined for Iran.
Posted by: walrus | 28 January 2017 at 05:51 PM
They don't need to,
One of Trump's "election promises", was to kill the Iran/Boeing deal.
Posted by: Brunswick | 28 January 2017 at 05:55 PM