Like many new American veterans, I owe my life to Muslims: Trump’s executive order is un-American, dishonorable and severely harmful to U.S. national security

Like many new American veterans, I owe my life to Muslims: Trump’s executive order is un-American, dishonorable and severely harmful to U.S. national security

    Monday, February 20, 2017   No comments

Like many new American veterans, I owe my life to Muslims — the Iraqi and Afghan comrades who fought alongside me during my multiple combat tours as a Green Beret.

I join fellow veterans in Seattle and nationwide in denouncing President Trump’s decision to temporarily ban people from seven predominantly Muslim nations from entering the United States. Trump’s executive order is un-American, dishonorable and severely harmful to U.S. national security.

This sweeping and ill-conceived order will further damage U.S. credibility in the Muslim world, and will fuel recruiting by insurgent and terrorist groups claiming that America is at war with Islam.

Moreover, this shortsighted move will backfire by curbing the immigration of people from the Middle East and Africa whose language skills and cultural knowledge are in short supply in the United States. From a national-security perspective, turning our backs on them undermines our long-term interests.

 This indiscriminate ban threatens to make it harder to recruit native-born translators to support operations in Iraq, Syria, Somalia and Yemen, as well as in future conflicts, jeopardizing the lives of U.S. troops.

Throughout my military career, loyal Iraqis and Afghans displayed incredible bravery under fire to protect me and my men. These linguists have proved their trustworthiness on the field of battle and undergone extreme vetting. Our nation pledged to resettle in America interpreters who put themselves and their families at risk by working for the U.S. government.

But Trump’s ban even temporarily blocked Iraqi interpreters and their families from the United States — exposing them to unnecessary danger. It took an outcry from veterans and concern inside the Pentagon to push the Trump administration to amend the ban on Thursday and allow these heroes to immigrate as promised.

The damage caused by a stroke of Trump’s pen is already being felt, disrupting thousands of lives — from the most vulnerable refugees to talented immigrant employees of major U.S. companies. Fear is spreading.  source

POTUS loses again: Appeals court maintains the freeze on Muslim Ban

POTUS loses again: Appeals court maintains the freeze on Muslim Ban

    Friday, February 10, 2017   No comments

ISR Comment: For the thirst time, the White House lost in court.  

 Learn about the process

It failed to convince three judges that the freeze of POTUS' Muslim ban should be lifted.The White House insists that it will pursue the defense of the ban in courts still. Trump is not stranger to using the court system. Before moving into the White House, he stood as the most litigious person ever to be nominated by a major party to run for the U.S presidency. In June 2016, USA TODAY analyzed legal filings across the United States found that the then "presumptive Republican presidential nominee and his businesses have been involved in at least 3,500 legal actions in federal and state courts during the past three decades."
Now that lawyers will be paid by tax payers, not from his personal or business accounts, it is likely that he will continue to take every challenged decision to courts.
  ______________

The 9th Circuit’s Opinion on the Muslim Ban:

#MuslimBan could cost Boeing $20 billion, 100,000 U.S. jobs lost

#MuslimBan could cost Boeing $20 billion, 100,000 U.S. jobs lost

    Wednesday, February 08, 2017   No comments

 

Around $20 billion worth of Boeing commercial aircraft orders to foreign countries could be at risk due to President Donald Trump's immigration action targeting countries such as Iran and Iraq.

"We think the president's travel ban could have negative implications for orders from Iran and Iraq," said James Corridore, an aerospace analyst at CFRA Research. "We see these contracts as vulnerable to cancellation, though we also think it possible that the current injunction against the travel ban will be upheld, which could lessen the impact."

In announcing the Boeing deal on Dec. 11, Boeing said the new orders will support nearly 100,000 new jobs. Boeing is in the midst of cost-cutting in its commercial aircraft division and is facing tough competition from Airbus.

In December, Boeing announced a $16.6 billion agreement for the state-owned Iran Air to buy 50 of its narrow-body 737 passenger jets and 30 of the wide-body 777 aircraft. Separately, Iraq has firm orders to buy 10 of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner wide-body aircraft and another 18 of the 737s.

Corridore noted that list prices value the combined contracts at about $20 billion. source

#MuslimBan: Trump justifies his anti-Muslim views and actions by the fact that his rhetoric won him “standing ovations”

#MuslimBan: Trump justifies his anti-Muslim views and actions by the fact that his rhetoric won him “standing ovations”

    Tuesday, February 07, 2017   No comments

 

Throughout Donald Trump’s campaign and now into the first weeks of his presidency, critics suggested that he cool his incendiary rhetoric, that his words matter. His defenders responded that, as Corey Lewandowski said, he was being taken too “literally.” Some, like Vice President Pence, wrote it off to his “colorful style.” Trump himself recently explained that his rhetoric about Muslims is popular, winning him “standing ovations.”

No one apparently gave him anything like a Miranda warning: Anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law.

And that’s exactly what’s happening now in the epic court battle over his travel ban, currently blocked by a temporary order set for argument Tuesday before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

The states of Washington and Minnesota, which sued to block Trump’s order, are citing the president’s inflammatory rhetoric as evidence that the government’s claims — it’s not a ban and not aimed at Muslims — are shams.

In court papers, Washington and Minnesota’s attorneys general have pulled out quotes from speeches, news conferences and interviews as evidence that an executive order the administration argues is neutral was really motivated by animus toward Muslims and a “desire to harm a particular group.” source

____________

The case for and against the Muslim Ban: the argument of the states of Washington and Minnesota



____________________

The case for and against the Muslim Ban: Trump's lawyers argument