Why does January 28, 2017 mark a day that requires a crack-down on refugees and people asking for asylum from seven predominant Muslim nations? Why is it that neither George W. Bush and Barack Obama who were facing far worse times involving terrorism than Donald Trump is facing today never felt the need to institute such draconian measures at our borders and at U.S. airports as regards these seven countries over the past 16 years?
Is there something different in the world on January 28th than there has been in the last decade and one-half that necessitates such action?
No, there is nothing new going on. There is no fresh threat of terrorist attacks.
As the story plays out, it is now increasingly evident that the Trump Administration never consulted either its own State Department over potential assaults on our soil or spoke to those officials in the government handling refugees over the issue of admission of such peoples.
They would have found out: First, we are already prepared to ward off all menaces to our population; and, second, contrary to Trump's claim that no full background investigations were completed on these foreigners, that all of the individuals seeking entry into the U.S. from these seven states had gone through extreme vetting before being allowed into our country.
The FBI, the CIA, U.S. embassies and other intelligence agencies have had to review each person asking for the right to stay in the U.S. Further they would have found that none of the earlier persons who gained entry into the U.S. under Bush and Obama were ever involved in any terrorist activity of any nature. And, in any case, it is clear that Trump's executive order is aimed at Muslims despite his cover story that it is targeting terrorists. The real terrorists involved in 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia -- a nation which is not even being banned under Trump's executive order. No, the true reason that Trump is acting in this manner is to try to demonstrate that he is "tough" on Muslims while his predecessors -- Obama and Bush -- were weak.
He holds to his false assertion that only he, as America's new leader, knows how to handle ISIS and Al Qaeda. But he is actually the timid chief executive in this drama. He is so insecure about America's strength and about his own resolve to deal with any sudden unforeseen strikes that he feels he must demonstrate a faux command at our borders or otherwise, he believes, he will be seen as a failure. In fact, he displays little grip on reality -- just the opposite, he indulges in a fantasy about enemies that don't exist at this time.
This is a man preyed on by paranoia who, in his great self-doubt and fearfulness, is acting out his deepest anxieties with such drastic moves and doing huge and long-lasting damage to the prestige and authority of the United States.