A 90 day prohibition is a sensible precaution, and it is regrettable that that those protesting Trump's temporary ban on immigration from seven Muslim majority nations are so blinded by their hatred for the President that they fail to see that

Trump’s Travel Ban and the Protests—A Reality Check

By —— Bio and Archives--February 5, 2017

Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

The protests against President Trump’s executive order on immigration that are being organized and funded by left wing groups are disingenuous to say the least.  There was no similar outcry when Obama barred all immigration from Iraq for six months in 2011. There has been no outrage about the killings and mistreatment of non-Muslims by Muslims.  Nor have there been protests about the subjugation of women in all but a very few Muslim communities worldwide.

Trump’s executive order is a temporary 90 day ban.  It would have been better had he ordered the reinstitution of the Mantis program and required a Security Advisory Opinion on every visa applicant and asylum seeker from every Muslim nation and from several, like Nigeria, with sizable Muslim populations.

The simple truth is that it is virtually impossible to vet men who have no documents and are simply claiming to be refugees, which may be why the Obama administration ended the Mantis program, since very few of those applying for asylum could receive a Security Advisory Opinion that would approve of their entry to the United States.  The other ugly truth is that as long as the Saudis and the Gulf Arabs continue to fund organizations that we incorrectly term terrorist instead of fundamentalist, and as long as they help to spread hate through the imams they train and financially support and through the textbooks and Hadith they distribute free of charge to mosques and madrasas in every country in the world including the United States, we will continue to experience the kind of violence that we saw most recently in Brussels, Paris and Orlando. When young men are taught that Jews are apes and Christians are swine, that infidels cannot be trusted and those who do not submit to Allah deserve to spend eternity in hell fire, to expect otherwise would be to stick your head in the sand.  King Salman and Caliph Baghadi have the same goals; they differ only in how to achieve them and about who should be in charge of the global jihad.

It’s been ten years since I wrote my first op-ed calling for an Islamic reformation.  On January 1, 2015, Egypt’s President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, speaking to the faculty at Al-Azhar and to the staff of the Awqaf [Religious] Ministry also called for a “religious revolution” by which he meant a reexamination of Islamic “thinking—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the centuries, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible.” Sadly, his call for an Islamic reformation has been rejected by every senior Muslim cleric, all of whom take the position that there is nothing about Islam that requires change.

Had the Sufi saint Amadou Bamba been an Arab instead of a Senegalese, the Islamic world might be different place today.  Bamba preached that the way to Heaven was paved with hard work and peace.  He founded the Mouride Brotherhood, a highly industrious, entrepreneurial branch of Sufi Islam, and while Gandhi never credited him, Bamba’s non-violent protests against French colonial rule were probably the model for Gandhi’s later acts of defiance against the British in India.

Leviticus, chapter 24-16 requires that anyone who “blasphemously pronounces the Name of the Lord, shall be put to death; the entire community shall stone him.” We would rightly be horrified if any Jewish or Christian religious leader called for the death of blasphemers today.  Yet Islam’s religious leaders regularly pronounce death sentences on those who have the temerity to draw a cartoon depicting the Prophet. Until Muslims recognize that the Koran was written by men and is not the immutable word of Allah, and that what the Prophet said and did in the seventh century, as recorded in the various Hadith, is history and not to be taken literally, there will be no end to what we call “radical Islamic terrorism” because it isn’t radical it’s fundamental and in the eyes of far too many Muslims it isn’t terrorism.

Winston Churchill wrote The River War in 1899.  Sadly, much of what Churchill wrote then is still true today:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

While it’s nice to be a welcoming nation, it’s more important to take sensible precautions against harm.  Ask yourself why is it that except for the nations bordering Syria, which would keep the refugees out if they could, no Muslim nation has been willing to accept even a single refugee from Syria, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Afghanistan.  A 90 day prohibition is a sensible precaution, and it is regrettable that that those protesting Trump’s temporary ban on immigration from seven Muslim majority nations are so blinded by their hatred for the President that they fail to see that.

Al Kaltman -- Bio and Archives | Comments

Al Kaltman is a political science professor who teaches a leadership studies course at George Washington University.  He is the author of Cigars, Whiskey and Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Ulysses S. Grant.

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.
-- Follow these instructions on registering: