President Donald Trump’s travel pause for refugees from countries considered security risks was lifted, allowing refugees from at least 11 countries affected entrance to the U.S.
The resumption came after a 90-day review of vetting rules. New procedures are now in place to (hopefully) weed out potential security and criminal risks from Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen and other countries that remain unnamed.
News of the resumption passed with no major fanfare in the media — interesting in itself, considering the hysterical outpouring and accusations of racism, bigotry and Islamophobia that accompanied the three-month pause.
The lifting of what was billed as a “ban” was also accompanied by another story that broke just 10 days ago, which was “missed” by the mainstream media but vindicated the very reason for the travel pause:
An audit of screening procedures for known and suspected terrorists by Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) found that ICE had not complied with the required protocols in every case checked. The audit was made by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to see if procedures they instituted in 2011 were being followed.
(The cases sampled were not only from the Obama years of 2013-2015, but also from 2016 after Trump took office.)
To say there is a need to focus on and revamp the vetting procedures for immigrants that pose security risk is a given. As ISIS and other terrorist organizations are being defeated in the Middle East, their fighters are looking to escape the region. They have been instructed to pose as refugees to Western countries to wage jihad over here.
The politicization of Trump’s travel pause was shameful and transparent. Three months is not a lot to ask to get vetting procedures in order in today’s world. It was hardly the unreasonable and racist request it was made out to be.
Yet, now that refugees from high-risk countries are again being admitted, even the “straight” news outlets couldn’t resist reporting this news without insinuating Trump’s nefarious agenda of the pause. Take, for example, the news agency Reuters.
After reporting the facts of the story (which took all of about four sentences), the rest of the agency’s lengthy “news” article on the subject comprised pointed whining and convoluted speculation about what the pause was really about and questioning its need in terms of national security.
Here is a sampling from the article:
National security is one issue that should not be politicized. It is something that affects every citizen regardless of race or religion. Making the issue into a Muslim ban is a move straight out of the Islamist playbook.
By framing the issue as one of religious persecution (understood to be by white nationalists), it reinforces the Islamist narrative – it’s “us” against “them,” Muslims against their persecutors.
Terrorism committed by ISIS and the like then becomes a “justifiable” defensive action.
The left wing and their media enablers are all too happy to pick up the victimhood gauntlet worn by ISIS and their fellow Islamists, which serves only to suppress the possibility about a real conversation about the dangers of Islamism and its accompanying extremism.
It is a dangerous road to travel down – a path we will all pay for in the end.
Watch Clarion Project’s Raheel Raza explain why Trump’s travel pause was not a ban on Muslims: