Tag: Donald Trump

An Open Letter to Tucker Carlson

Image: RawStory

As a teenager in America, and in most people’s valid opinion, an American citizen, I do not know where to begin on the comments you have made.

I was born in Boston, Massachusetts and currently live in Erie, Pennsylvania. I have lived in the United States all my life, have a legal birth certificate, social security number, passport, and more… yet you still have the audacity to say that, because I am under the age of eighteen, I am not an “American citizen” as much as you, Donald Trump, Uncle Sam, or anybody else.

I am Jewish. I am Latino. I am American.

Being any of those things does not strip me of my American citizenship in the least, and neither does my age.

My religion is a part of who I am as an American. I love being Jewish—especially in a country that allows me to express my religion without the fear of persecution or punishment. I love getting to educate people and being the one that gets to help other people grow as individuals by teaching them about my religion and what it means.

My heritage is no less significant to me than my religion or citizenship. Being Latino is also a part of who I am. I am a product of my family who came from South America, and I love to brag about it because it makes me feel like I am a real contributor to what is the great, American “melting pot.” Nobody could ever take my culture, history, or family away from me—not even you. To me, none of this, in any way, makes me less American.

I still feel as proud to pledge allegiance to the American flag as anybody else.

I just want to know—if it isn’t my religion or ethnicity—then what is it that makes me less American than the people around me? According to you, I’m not an American—I’m just a teenager.

This is what you said a couple weeks ago:

Video: FOX News

I would like to clear the air here: We are ALL Americans.

If you genuinely think that teenagers are not Americans, then I think you are about to be pretty surprised.

Across the nation, we teens have organized school walkouts, protests, marches, and other events to exercise our First Amendment right. We are fighting together against ignorant people like you who think that, just because we are not eighteen, we cannot have an opinion, exercise our God-given right to protest or challenge arrogant people like you. We want to show that we have a say in our future and that people such as yourself do not deserve to speak for us—people who would rather let us take the fall (literally) just so you don’t have to lose your guns.

If you ever had any respect for us and stopped to listen to what we had to say, you would know by now that we never asked for anyone to lose their guns. We only asked for common sense gun laws—to put in place reasonable restrictions on the Second Amendment, just as there are the same restrictions on our rights to free speech and rights to privacy. If you think we are being unreasonable just look to the Supreme Court Heller decision, and you will see as plain as day, that while it holds that the right to bear arms is not related to service in a militia, it is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated.

We teens have to live in fear at our schools. We don’t exactly think that this makes a ‘conducive’ environment for learning, do you? Nor do we think that arming our teachers makes for any more of a ‘conducive’ learning environment, but we already know that you don’t care. What you do care about is assisting the gun manufacturers to increase their revenue. You would prefer that you get to keep your guns—end of story.

I keep going over it in my head, but I just cannot answer this one question. I would really love it if you could answer it for me: Who exactly would it take to be killed in a shooting for you to realize that enough is enough?

Would it be a group of innocent civilians? No—we already saw that at the Pulse Nightclub, Las Vegas… (the list is way too big to count).

Would it be a group of church-goers like yourself? No—we already saw that in Charleston, Nashville, and Sutherland Springs.

Would it be a class full of high school students like myself? No—we already saw that at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas.

Would it be a class full of kindergarteners? No—we already saw that at the tragic Sandy Hook shooting.

What would it take for you to realize that the one life person would be worth more than all the guns in America? I just struggle to understand how somebody who is adamantly “pro-life” can have such blatant disregard for all of our lives. Somebody who was really “pro-life” would care about the life of a human being after they are born. What is the point in fighting for their life before it is born if you are just going to let them be shot someday after they are born by somebody with an automatic weapon that they shouldn’t even have?

We are fighting for our rights—for our lives—and whether you like it or not, we are equal American citizens with free speech, the right to organize, the right to assemble, and the right to protest.

I would really love to learn more about what you think, and so, while I have been rather firm and harsh in this open letter, I would also like to invite you to an interview with WTP Magazine if possible to sit down and your thought process when you made the statement saying that we teens are not Americans. I am not asking this in an antagonistic way. I am only asking this because I genuinely want to learn why you believe this.

Hopefully, when we are done, you can realize that if we are old enough to be shot, then we are old enough to have an opinion on being shot.

If you are seriously interested, like I am, in taking me up on my offer for an interview, please send me an email at harrison.romero@wtpmag.com. I look forward to hearing from you.

A Problematic Religious Freedom Day

Image: Politicus USA

Freedom of religion has had roots in our history long before it was guaranteed by the constitution. We grow up with stories of William Penn dedicating Pennsylvania to people of all religions. Americans who opened their hearts and their land to welcome people of different faiths. It is utterly ingrained in our patriotic, opportunistic culture, the freedom to speak, write, express, and pray. Which may be why you either think this holiday is overkill, or you plain haven’t heard of it. To most,  it goes down as a holiday known only on the day of, fading in and out of fickle Twitter accounts like Squirrel Appreciation Day, Jan. 21National Organ Donor Day, Feb. 14, and… Panic Day, March 9. In fact, all Wikipedia has on religious freedom day is a meager 3 sentences:

National Religious Freedom Day commemorates the Virginia General Assembly‘s adoption of Thomas Jefferson‘s landmark Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom on January 16, 1786. That statute became the basis for the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and led to the freedom of religion for all Americans. Religious Freedom Day is officially proclaimed on January 16 each year by an annual statement by the President of the United States.

You probably care about its principles, but I’m not going to pretend you care about the holiday itself, and for years that meant that we’ve been so attuned to the normalcy of religious freedom, that we haven’t had to worry about protecting it. We should hope to see it next year and not bat an eyelash as it passes over us. We shouldn’t have to worry about its sanctity today, but the Trump administration’s press release has more than a few concerned.

It starts off as many Presidential Declarations have, exulting religious freedom’s virtues and vowing to protect it. It ends nicely as well,

The free exercise of religion is a source of personal and national stability, and its preservation is essential to protecting human dignity.  Religious diversity strengthens our communities and promotes tolerance, respect, understanding, and equality.  Faith breathes life and hope into our world.  We must diligently guard, preserve, and cherish this unalienable right.

What’s the problem? Many point to this quote from the president:

Our Constitution and laws guarantee Americans the right not just to believe as they see fit, but to freely exercise their religion.  Unfortunately, not all have recognized the importance of religious freedom, whether by threatening tax consequences for particular forms of religious speech or forcing people to comply with laws that violate their core religious beliefs without sufficient justification. These incursions, little by little, can destroy the fundamental freedom underlying our democracy.  Therefore, soon after taking office, I addressed these issues in an Executive Order that helps ensure Americans are able to follow their consciences without undue Government interference and the Department of Justice has issued guidance to Federal agencies regarding their compliance with laws that protect religious freedom.  No American—whether a nun, nurse, baker, or business owner—should be forced to choose between the tenets of faith or adherence to the law.

In the same speech proclaiming the ethics of respecting others, he subtly references the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. The case is supported by the Trump administration and a group called Alliance Defending Freedom whom the Southern Poverty Law Center deems a hate group. The story can be summed up as a baker unwilling to create a cake for a gay couple, citing his religious beliefs as the reason why. It was brought up in the supreme court to debate a business’s right to pick and choose customers. This right isn’t immoral in itself, it’s actually exceptionally important. Afterall, who would disagree with a business owner’s decision to kick out an angry, unreasonable customer who generally causes mayhem? Whereas the customer is causing harm to the owner, in circumstances such as Newman vs. Piggie Park enterprises, it’s the other way around. In the 1960’s, a barbecue owner refused service to a man established solely on the fact he was African American. He argued it was because of his religious values too. The lawsuit was a landmark piece of litigation that established that civil rights are more important than religious views.

I want to point out something: if Trump and his followers get his way in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, it could harm the people he’s trying to protect. If he believes that business owners should be allowed to discriminate based on religious beliefs, then he may unknowingly believe that the Christian bake shop proprietor can discriminate against someone of a different faith. The Buddhist refuses the Muslim, the Catholic refuses the Shintoist, and on and on and on. If he truly wants to protect “The right not just to believe as they see fit, but to freely exercise their religion,” He should understand the full repercussions of his statement.

With that, let’s hope for a more boring Religous Freedom day next year—a day that actually represents religious freedom.

Make America Great… For Once

Although we do not regularly acknowledge it, for many of us who are in our early to mid-20s, we are the last of the “house phone generation.” We are the last of those who did not spend the entirety of our everyday lives surrounded by technology. We are the last of those not connected to devices every day. The social implications of this reality are arguably the reasons why things are increasingly being said and done in modern times without any regard for the real world repercussions of these words and actions.

As a political operative for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign on the ground in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, I decided to do my best to fight for sensible leadership in such a world because I understood the risks of having a socially and emotionally incompetent president as the leader of this great nation. When Donald Trump won the election in November 2017, despite the man that he had shown us all to be, I wanted to believe that his administration would appreciate the gravity of their newly elected and appointed positions.

I was so damn wrong.

The election of 45 almost decidedly made the reality of identity politics in America ‘right versus wrong’ in a world where it was just ‘Democrat versus Republican’ before. Differences in philosophy have very quickly shifted to differences in morality. Every “Make America Great Again” hat is a loud vote for discrimination. A loud rallying cry to all who support the rhetoric plastered on the hats to ‘make America hate again.’

Admittedly, I never understood the MAGA slogan as anything but a blatantly coded message of white supremacy. When I would ask Trump supporters what the phrase meant, none could really give me any definitive elements of what it would take to make America great. The usage of the word “again” especially bewilders me because it implies that we must go back to some period in this nation’s history where things were better. My biggest problem is that I can think of no such time period.

Challenge yourself to interrogate this concept and think about a time when America has been better than it is right now in terms of social progress, even with an unqualified Trump leading the way. Should we go back to the time when thousands of Native Americans were slaughtered for occupying lands that they had called home for generations? Should we go back to a time when LGBTQ existence was unacknowledged because of how much of a societal taboo it was? Should we go back to the time when women were powerless accessories to society if they were without a man to represent them? How about taking a visit to the days of slavery or the viciousness of the Jim Crow era that saw many people of color mistreated on a systemic level?

Our America is more progressive now than it has ever been and even still, we have so far to go. There is a divide between police and black and brown communities that needs to be addressed in order to make America great. There are members of the LGBTQ community still fighting in 2018 to enjoy their right to peaceably exist and live life on their own terms. There are women in 2018 still fighting for the right to make the same wages as their male counterparts for the same work. Equality must be established in order to make America great. There are hardworking immigrants in 2018 that are fighting for their right to enjoy the American dream free of persecution. There are Muslims in 2018 that are fighting for their right to peacefully practice their religion in light of post-911 xenophobia and the sensationalism of such by even some of our top government officials. Acceptance must happen for America to be great. When all of these things have begun to happen, we can finally make America great for once.

Ironically enough, Donald Trump stands in stark opposition to all of the things that could actually make America great. Equality and acceptance aren’t the kinds of words that come to mind when I’m forced to think of a man who has disrespected and offended so many different groups of people. Just recently, he referred to a set of very noble nations as “shithole countries.” That’s spicy talk from a guy who’s doing his very best to turn this great nation into a shithole country with his tweets, divisive rhetoric, and blatant disregard for the level of decorum and honor professionally required of the office he holds.

Official Army Twitter Account Likes Anti-Trump Post

On Saturday, the U.S. Army’s official Twitter account liked a tweet from actress Mindy Kaling, apparently mocking President Donald Trump’s claim that he’s “like, really smart.”

This tweet comes after Trump defended his mental fitness by claiming to be “Like, really smart” and “a stable genius.”

The Army later unliked the tweet and stated,

An operator of the Army’s official Twitter account inadvertently ‘liked’ a tweet whose content would not be endorsed by the Department of the Army. As soon as it was brought to our attention, it was immediately corrected.

This isn’t the first time a government social media page expressed anger over Trump. In early 2017, the National Park Service retweeted two photos of small crowds from Trump’s inauguration. Those retweets were later investigated.

Kaling later responded to the Army in a tweet using their signature slogan “Army strong.”

Will Michael Flynn be Prosecuted by the Logan Act?

Image: Toronto Star

On November 30th, Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. This raised questions about the Trump administration and the “Logan act.” The Logan Act forbids Americans from unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments, especially those that seek to “defeat the measures of the United States” aimed at those same countries. In short, it protects the ability of the U.S. government to conduct foreign policy without interference from private citizens.”

The Logan Act accusations started in the summer of 2016 when Donald Trump told Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails. In February, the White House said that they were confident Michael Flynn didn’t say anything that violated the Logan Act. Should the Trump administration be worried? No, no one has ever been prosecuted through the Logan Act. It’s mainly just used as a political scare tactic. Newsweek wrote about how Michael Flynn probably won’t be convicted:

What the Act criminalizes is an unusually harmful subset of communications with foreign governments: ones intended to “defeat” concrete “measures” of the United States, or to undercut the authority of a sitting President by altering how foreign governments will resolve pending “disputes or controversies. In other words, the Logan Act’s limited domain ensures that transitional figures won’t be jailed for swapping pleasantries with foreign leaders or even engaging in substantive foreign-policy discussions with the United States.”

I don’t think Michael Flynn intended to do any of this especially since he’s a decorated general and was on the transition team.

Early Tuesday morning, a U.S District Court judge ordered Robert Muller to turn over any information on Michael Flynn tbe used for sentencing. A sentencing date has not been yet announced, but people have been speculating sometime in February. The majority of political sites are saying that it is going to be hard to prosecute Michael Flynn.

If they would try to prosecute Michael Flynn they would also have to prosecute Nancy Pelosi For violating the law when she went to Syria against the State Department’s wishes. Last year Robert F. Turner chimed in:

Ms. Pelosi’s trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world’s leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

Jimmy Carter also violated the Logan act. The OPU blog stated when he visited Hamas in 2008. He said that no one from the State Department told him not to, but Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had said:

The State Department had explicitly informed Mr. Carter that it opposed his plans to meet with leaders of Hamas.

Will these two ever be tried under the Logan Act?

The Fight for Net Neutrality

Image: CNBC

Do you have an idea that you want to develop? Do you fancy yourself an entrepreneur? Good for you! Your future is bright! Here in the Land of the Free, we are fortunate to be able to access information with ease. Just think of the treasure trove of help you can find with your budding business on the internet! But wait! Maybe not! Have you heard of Net Neutrality? Sounds boring? Well, stop snoring and take notice! The business you save may be your own!

The Facts

Net Neutrality is the idea that internet service providers (ISPs)—think of companies like Verizon, Spectrum, AT&T, and more—will provide the same access to an open internet, no matter the status of an individual. So when you question the almighty Google from your phone, you get the same results as some big shot company executive from her corner office. That sounds like a good idea for a variety of reasons. For example, if you really are trying to start your own business, the internet is a great place to advertise and sell your products or services. If you are a social activist, the internet gives you a platform to organize and communicate. These notions are dependent on a vital and open internet.

We currently have strong net neutrality protections here in the United States. In 2015, thanks to the strong support of millions of net neutrality activists, the Obama administration was able to draft net neutrality regulations, getting the ISPs classified as “common carriers” under Title II of the Communications Act. This allowed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to draft strong regulations protecting access to the internet. Now, however, these regulations are under attack, led by the current administrations FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. A vote by the FCC to rescind these regulations are currently scheduled for December 14. The Democrats have asked for a delay in the vote, but the FCC has denied that request.

What would happen if these protections are rescinded? Your internet access may begin to look more and more like your cable TV access. That means you may have different packages from which to choose, with each package providing you a different level of access to the internet. Additionally, an ISP may determine the speed at which the content is delivered. For example, the more you pay, the faster you play.

It is also critical to remember that in many areas of the US, ISP providers may not even exist. According to Dr. Brian Whitacre of Oklahoma State University, just over ½ (55%) of people living in rural areas of the United States can access internet speeds considered to be broadband! This percentage suggests there aren’t a heck of a lot of ISPs out there in rural America. If net neutrality goes out the window, and ISPs can dictate access, who is the competition in rural America? These folks will have to simply take what they are offered.

Proponents of rescinding the net neutrality regulations, AT&T being one of the most notable, indicate the current regulations hinders ISPs investments in innovation. Yet the evidence we see around us each day is that technology is improving. This argument seems to be lame when compared to the stifling effect rescinding can have on budding entrepreneurs, start-up businesses, activists, and others in dorm rooms and garages, dreaming big dreams and making great strides, thanks to our open internet.

What You Can Do

There is a wide variety of options for people like you—people who want to save net neutrality and save our internet—the first being signing this petition: Save the Internet. Save the Internet is an online petition with one simple goal: protecting our rights and providing every person that browses the internet equal access to every site that they browse. You can also even donate to their cause here.

You can call your senator by using this simple tool: Call My Congress. It will help you find all of the contact information of all of your elected officials. You must use it to urge your representatives and senators to vote net neutrality.

The truth is, we have almost no time left. The vote in the FCC is today, so we must act now. Now is our time to be heard before it’s too late.

Alabama: A Man Who Allegedly Molested Eight Minors Is Probably Your Next Senator

Image: ABC News

A man who convicted a man of the murder of four children is currently losing to a man who allegedly molested/dated eight minors in a Senate race in Alabama—what a time to be alive!

It has been such a crazy month with the countless sexual assault allegations ever since #MeToo started trending. The charges of sexual assault on Roy Moore dropped a little over a week ago, but there’s no sign of them slowing down. Just last night, four more women came forward with claims against the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Moore, born in 1947, was the oldest of five. Following high school, he attended the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York and graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in 1969. He subsequently served in the US Military, stationed in Vietnam, returning to his hometown of Gadsen in 1977.  That year, Moore began working for the office of the district attorney. He quit his job to run for the county’s circuit-court judge as a Democrat. He overwhelmingly lost in the primary to a fellow attorney, Donald Stewart. Shortly afterward, Moore left Gadsden to live in Australia for a year. He returned to Gadsen in 1985, the same year he got married.

In 1986, Moore decided to give it another shot and run for Etowah County’s district attorney, but he lost to fellow Democrat Jimmy Hedgspeth. Following his defeat, he decided to simply return to private practice in the city.

In 1992, the year that he had switched to the Republican Party, Etowah County’s circuit judge, Julius Swann, died in office, and the Governor of Alabama was to make a temporary appointment to fill the vacant seat. Jimmy Hedgspeth, Moore’s former political opponent who ran the D.A.’s office, recommended Moore, and Moore was installed in the position that he had failed to win in 1982. Moore ran as a Republican in the 1994 Etowah County election and was elected to the circuit judge seat.

Roy Moore was known as the “Ten Commandments Judge” for his refusal to take down a  plaque of the Ten Commandments that hung behind his bench. In 1995, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued him over the religious plaque and Moore’s tradition beginning sessions with prayers, saying such actions were unconstitutional and disregarded the separation of church and state. Moore told NPR:

Separation of church and state never meant to separate God from government. The First Amendment never meant to divide our country from an acknowledgement of God. It’s time to stand up and say, we have a right under our Constitution to acknowledge God.

The original case was dismissed, but in 1996, a Montgomery County Judge, Charles Price, initially ordered Moore to stop the prayer but he allowed the Ten Commandments plaque to be displayed. However, Price ordered the plaque removed after visiting Moore’s courtroom the following year. The case was again dismissed.

When Moore was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2000, he took his fight over the Ten Commandments even further. Now, he was designing and planning a two-and-a-half ton granite obelisk inscribed with the Ten Commandments to be placed in the lobby of the Alabama Judicial Building. The Montgomery Advertiser states:

Moore had not told his fellow justices he was planning to install the monument, but brought a company into tape the installation of the monument in the Heflin-Torbert Judicial Building. Sales of the tapes later helped pay for his legal defense fund.

In 2002, a federal district judge ruled that the new statue was unconstitutional, violating the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. A deadline for removing the monument was instated and ignored by Moore in August 2003. A panel ruled that Moore had violated the judicial ethics code, and Moore was removed from the bench.

Just after a decade after being removed from the bench, Moore successfully won back his seat on the Alabama Supreme Court in 2012. No, he didn’t resurrect his Ten Commandments monument, but with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that legalized same-sex marriage, Moore ordered state judges to protest it and enforce the state’s ban on same-sex marriages instead. In response to Obergefell v. Hodges, Moore wrote:

The Court’s opinion speaks repeatedly of homosexuals being humiliated, demeaned, and being denied ‘equal dignity’ by a state’s refusal to issue them marriage licenses.

That attempt to defy yet another court order resulted in another appearance before Alabama’s Court of the Judiciary, and he was suspended for the rest of his term in 2016, however, Moore’s age has prevented him from any chance of running again in 2018.

Now, Moore has decided to run for Senate in Alabama, and many shocking and revealing allegations have been put against him. He has been accused by eight women of sexual assault, and people are not happy.

This story was broken by the Washington Post, but the saddest part of all this is that Moore will probably still win.

Nate Cohn, a writer at the Upshot and the New York Times’ political data guru, said:

I don’t see any reason to assume Moore is in serious jeopardy.

When asked how much does he think this scandal might affect Moore’s chances to be elected, Cohn said:

My honest answer is that I don’t know. Alabama is an extremely conservative state that is deeply polarized along racial lines. Hillary Clinton might not even have received 15 percent of the white vote in Alabama last year. For Doug Jones to win, he might need to double that number. So this is not an easy task at all for the Democrats.

Cohn was asked by Slate whether there is any other state in the union that would be more likely to elect Roy Moore than Alabama. To that, he responded:

No. In Mississippi, the white vote is more conservative, but black voters are a much larger share of the electorate. If you had a revolt against a Republican candidate and black turnout was high, I think you can imagine how the Democrats get over the top there in a way that is tougher to imagine in Alabama. The argument the other way is that Alabama has better-educated metropolitan areas like Birmingham or Huntsville where maybe you can imagine that a Republican revolt would be modestly more likely than it would in Mississippi. But no, I think Alabama is basically as tough as it gets for Democrats.

Seeing what the political expert has said, it’s heartbreaking to think that an alleged child molester could beat a perfectly qualified Democrat just because of the political polarization in our society.

Yes, it is possible that he could win and be kicked out of the Senate, something that hasn’t occurred in over 150 years, almost immediately, but it’s not about whether he serves or not. It’s about whether the citizens prefer a child molester and a man who has been kicked off the bench of the Alabama Supreme Court not once, but twice, over a perfectly qualified candidate, simply because they are too dedicated to their political party. I truly hope Alabama makes the right decision, but it’s their decision to make, not mine.

While the Alabama Republican Party has not taken back their endorsement of Roy Moore, many Republicans and Democrats alike have called for him to drop out of the race.

In the end, who knows whether he will win or not? This entire election is ensured to be a toss-up, even though it should just be handed on a silver platter to the one who is not a child molester.

Terror in Barcelona

Image: Gone Fishing

Fifteen people have been killed in a terror attack on Las Ramblas avenue in Barcelona on the 17th of August. Over 80 others were injured. An attacker drove a large white van down Las Ramblas Avenue, a pedestrian street packed with tourists and Barcelonians, plowing through crowds of people, killing and injuring many while causing mass chaos and a mini stampede. The attack happened before 5 pm Central European Time (11 a.m. Eastern Standard Time), and the Police acted quickly, evacuating the area and closing nearby Metro and train stations while getting aid to the victims.

The attackers reportedly had fled on foot. Four men were arrested for their alleged involvement in the attack. Also, police found another van they believe was going to be used as a getaway vehicle and found Moroccan passports. Driss Oukabir, one of the arrested suspects, claims his documents were stolen to rent the vans. Adding to the confusion, a hostage situation was reported by the media, but it is unclear whether it actually happened. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack, but this does not mean that the attackers have any direct ties with ISIS. Furthermore, an explosion the day before that killed one person and injured 6 has been linked to the attack. Our hearts are with Barcelona, the victims of this callous and unwarranted attack, and the law enforcement and medical staff dealing with its fallout.

Many politicians and famous people tweeted their support. President Macron of France, Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada, President Vladimir Putin of Russia and many other world leaders also issued statements or tweets expressing their solidarity with Barcelona, including our own President, Trump. Trump originally told Barcelona to “be tough & strong, we love you” in a kind, heartfelt tweet of solidarity, but then proceeded to tweet a bizarre statement mentioning a claim he made on the campaign trail about an American General in the Philippines during the early 1900’s dipping bullets in Pig’s blood before shooting 49 captured terrorists and sending the 50th back to report what had happened. Trump said it stopped terrorism for 35 years in his tweet. First of all, this piece of made up “history” has been debunked, and second of all, let me recount a bit of history to explain how truly atrocious and dehumanizing this urban legend is. When America invaded the Philippines, there were protests against it in America with supporters saying the invasion was cruel and unfair and supporters saying that we had to bring order and civilization to a “barbaric race,” in the words of a United States Senator at the time. The Muslims we were fighting against were the native Filipinos who were trying to protect their country. We were the terrorists. We put people into “reconcentration camps” and killed somewhere between 200,000 and a million civilians in a war that only killed 16000 Filipino soldiers. It is possible Trump’s story is true, except we weren’t killing terrorists, we were committing an atrocity against a country and race based on racist stereotypes. The answer to Islamic extremism is not to make the West seem barbaric or aggressive towards Islamism or people in general. Trump has been inadvertently helping ISIS recruit with his aggression and insulting speeches towards all Islam (and humanity) instead of violent Islam, even having been featured in ISIS recruitment video.

Refocusing on the attack, this is the ninth vehicle attack in Europe. Seven previous vehicle attacks were committed by ISIS affiliated attackers and one was committed by an extremist who drove into a group of people outside of mosque saying “I want to kill all Muslims.” There was also a vehicle attack on the home front in Charlottesville just this Saturday. White Supremacists had gathered for a rally protesting the taking down of a Robert E. Lee statue, their chants and messages couldn’t possibly be misconstrued as not hateful, with chants like “Jews will not replace us” as they held Hitler signs. Counter-protesters formed a line in front of them, refusing to let them pass. The protesters violently charged through them, and the two groups broke out into fighting. Luckily, police were there to disperse the two groups. While the governor of Charlottesville called it a state of emergency. Nobody had yet gotten killed or seriously injured and both groups were leaving. Then, a white nationalist drove a car into a group of counter-demonstrators, killing one and injuring nineteen. When the attack happened, the groups of protesters and counter-protesters had already split up, there was no violence or skirmishes going on between those groups at the time of the attack. In a statement after the attacks, our President refused to condemn the White Supremacists, even when asked direct questions about his view of them, instead, he blamed violence on “many sides.” Two days later, Trump claimed that he didn’t support the KKK or White Supremacist groups in a scripted speach, however, on Tuesday, he had undone the comments that he had made on Monday by going as far as defending the white supremacists. By any account, his statement of condemnation came too late and was too ambiguous. White Supremacists took his failure to condemn them as support, and it seemed a lot like support to everyone else as well.

As a nation, and as a world we are left with these facts; vehicles are easy to get and large groups of innocent people are easy to find. Having one group of crazy extremists inspired by ISIS to attack people was scary enough, but now because of the amount of xenophobia, fear and hate that has been caused by ISIS and how our countries have handled ISIS, anti-Muslim extremists and white supremacists are also attacking innocent people in their twisted war on people who are different.

There is no sign this is going to get any better. The leader of the KKK said of the attack in Charlottesville “we’re going to see more stuff like this happening at white-nationalist events.” He could absolutely be right. As more terrorist attacks happen, charged by different groups all of whom are growing and possibly becoming more violent, we need a leader who’s going to condemn all people who kill innocent civilians or attempt to whether they are White Supremacists, Muslim extremists or anti-Muslim extremists, without insulting any groups who did not kill innocent civilians. Unfortunately, Donald Trump has demonstrated how he is completely incapable of confronting many of his base supporters.

Illegal Immigration- 11.1 Million Lives in Limbo

Image: The New Yorker

There were 11.1 million undocumented immigrants in the United States in 2014 according to the Pew Research Center. They made up 3.5% of the U.S. population and one-fourth of the US immigrant population. Since 2009, the population of undocumented immigrants has stabilized, meaning that the percentage of the US population that are undocumented immigrants has stayed the same (or very close to it). Therefore, the most important question in immigration policy today is what should the United States do with the undocumented immigrants already here.

Undocumented immigrants are problematic for various reasons. They often have to commit crimes like using a counterfeit driver’s license because they have no social security number. They also haven’t gone through the screenings that legal immigrants in our country have. Another problem is that employers could potentially take advantage of their vulnerability—they may be put in unsafe conditions and paid less than minimum wage, but they can’t report their employer to the authorities because they risk deportation. This is obviously a problem for the immigrants, but it also means documented immigrants and American citizens can’t compete for these jobs. Undocumented immigrants live in fear they will be deported which means they are less likely to work with the police and other authorities.

There are two solutions to this issue: deport all of these undocumented immigrants or give them a path to citizenship. Recently, the Trump administration has endorsed the idea of mass deportation. Marielena Hincapie, an immigration advocate, told NPR:

In my many years of practicing immigration law, I have not seen a mass deportation blueprint like this one. Trump is saying that everyone is now a priority. He is governing by fear, not by what’s best for the American people or for aspiring Americans.

As she points out, Trump’s new plan targets basically all undocumented immigrants, not just criminals. He has already looked at adding 15,000 officers to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and CBP (Customs and Border Protection) and blocking federal funding from sanctuary cities.

Sixty percent of undocumented immigrants have been in the US for more than ten years, which gives reason to assume that they have become integrated into their community. In fact, one-third of illegal immigrants over age 15 live with a child who is a US citizen. CNN reported the story of Garcia de Rayos, an illegal immigrant with two American children, who was deported February 8, 2017. Her deportation sparked protests as her children spoke against it. She was checking in with ICE when she got deported. A few years before, she had been caught using a fake Social Security number and lost her case. Since she was not a priority to be deported, instead of deporting her, ICE just did check-ins. She went to seven meetings with ICE and followed all the instructions they gave her. There did not seem to be any reason to deport her but, as the lawyer of another woman in the same situation stated, “When you have a blanket deportation policy you don’t need to have specific reasons, you just say no.” Garcia De Rayos’s situation is a common one, and now that Trump is in charge, all of these people who weren’t in danger of being deported because they were not a priority are now in danger of being deported. Critics say this policy does more to rip families apart than to keep America safe. The government is supposed to work to make American’s lives better, but deporting parents of US citizens is working against that goal. These children, who are US citizens, may be put in the care of an older sibling, sent to an unsafe or impoverished country, or landed in foster care.

Some children were not born in the United States, but were brought here at a young age as undocumented immigrants by their parents. Obviously, they had not been the ones to decide that their family would move to the US, but they have grown up knowing the United States as their only home. DACA stands for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. It is an executive order signed by President Obama to grant undocumented immigrants who were brought into the country as children (dubbed “dreamers”) amnesty and work permits. Roughly 750,000 undocumented immigrants are protected under the program. These are people who were taken to the US before they turned 16. Some don’t even remember their native country. Even Trump has sympathy for their case; he has promised to keep DACA in place and says “it’s a very, very tough subject” because “you have some absolutely, incredible kids.” However, his word can’t be trusted. While he may be hesitant to undo the order due to fear of political backlash, he could just stop issuing work permits or deport people based on misdemeanors or find another way around the order. Kamal Essaheb from the National Immigration Law Center told CNN:

We cannot at this time offer a confident assessment of whether anyone—including those with DACA—are protected from enforcement.

Sadly, Trump definitely holds the power to deport the “dreamers” if he really desired to do so. This just seems cruel, especially since DACA only applies to law-abiding undocumented immigrants brought to America as children.

Logistically, a mass deportation just doesn’t make sense. The American Action Forum found removing all the undocumented immigrants in America would cost between $100 billion and $300 billion dollars, take 20 years, and shrink the GDP by $1.6 trillion. According to National Farm Workers Ministry, six out of ten farm workers are undocumented immigrants. If all those workers are deported, food prices in America might skyrocket as employers struggle to fill those positions and have to pay workers more. A shrinking GDP and higher food prices create difficulties for all Americans, and, remember, this is all to deport people who aren’t dangerous or causing problems.

Deportation is not as easy [or cheap] as it may sound. Some people are hard to deport. Only about half of the undocumented immigrants in America are from Mexico. 268,000 are from China, one of the twenty-three countries that do not cooperate with deportations, which means there is literally nowhere to deport these people. Deporting people from other countries like India, Korea or even El Salvador can be costly because they would have to be flown back to their countries of origin.

Now let’s consider the other solution, giving undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship. This plan would allow undocumented immigrants to apply for citizenship and would probably include temporary amnesty as they go through the process. It would mean safety for the families currently in danger of being ripped apart and the “dreamers” and every other undocumented immigrant who now has their life here and hasn’t broken any major laws. A change in administration would no longer decide whether parents can stay with their children or whether someone is shipped off to a country they haven’t seen since they were five, and if there are fewer people too afraid of deportation to report their bosses, employers in America would have to comply with American safety and minimum wage laws. Money would still have to be spent on border control and removing dangerous criminals, but less would be spent on deporting people. Some people claim giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship would encourage more people to come to America illegally. There is no data to back up this claim and logically the possibility, after living in America illegally for years, that you might get amnesty and begin the process to become a citizen is a weak pull factor when compared to the other push and pull factors involved with illegal immigration. These people are leaving their countries to escape extreme poverty, violence and in some cases oppressive governments. They come to America to get a steady income to support their families and a safe place to live. Simply giving these people a path to citizenship seems to be the best option regarding most of the undocumented immigrant population in America. For now 11.1 million people’s lives hang in the balance while the Trump administration tries to decide what to do with them.

Another Atrocity In Syria

 

Image: VOA News via AP Images

On the fourth of April, the Assad regime attacked civilian targets in Syria. A doctor in a hospital near the attack told CNN, “Today around 7:30 a.m., about 125 … arrived to our hospital. Twenty-five of them were already dead, 70% to 80% of the wounded people were kids and women.” He went on to describe symptoms indicative of a sarin gas attack. More than eighty-six people died in the chemical attack on Khan Sheikhoun, a small town in Syria. The main hospital in Khan Sheikhoun was bombed as well. Neither of the attacks seemed to have any counter-terrorism purpose. In response, Trump fired fifty-nine missiles at the air base responsible for much of Assad’s bombing in Syria.

In 2013, a similar attack by Assad happened with very different results. Over a thousand people were killed in a sarin attack by the Assad regime in 2013.  The attack was investigated by the United Nations and was a human rights scandal even though Assad had attacked his citizens with chemical agents before in much smaller attacks. In Syria’s six-year civil war, Assad’s regime has been accused of torture, sieging cities and starving innocent citizens, chemical warfare and other war crimes. Assad’s government is in a fight against rebel groups that include ISIS but is also an oppressive regime that has repeatedly targeted civilians instead of rebel groups and terrorists. Obama’s secretary of state, John Kerry, even conceded that Assad’s regime used chemical warfare. America’s previous policy did include removing Assad from office, but Trump’s air strike was the first American attack on the Assad regime.

Because it is backed by Russia and stands between ISIS and complete control of Syria, attacking the Assad regime could lead to a disastrous international fallout. This is why Assad has been able to use chemical warfare on civilians without fear of being attacked by a superpower. By attacking Assad, Trump attacked an ally in the fight against ISIS. America has supported rebel troops trying to overthrow Assad while Russia has supported Assad claiming that ISIS will take over Syria without his leadership. Opponents of Russia’s viewpoint claim ISIS has taken over much of Syria because the Assad regime was not stable enough to fight back well.  If America continues to attack and possibly overthrow Assad, it would be up to the rest of the world to create a stable government fast enough to stop ISIS from taking over. It is also worth noting that citizens may be less likely to join ISIS or Al-Qaeda if they feel the West is doing something to stop the bombing and terror that comes with daily life in Syria.

Russia has already responded to the attack on its ally in a joint statement with Iran that says, “What America waged in an aggression on Syria is a crossing of red lines. From now on we will respond with force to any aggressor or any breach of red lines from whoever it is and America knows our ability to respond well.” This means if America attacks the Assad Regime again it might start a war with Russia and Iran. Once again the world may be teetering on the edge of a world war. But at the same time, how can America and the rest of the free world continue to allow a brutal and repressive government to abuse its people?

Trump added more frightening dimensions to the story by not getting congress’s approval before issuing the air strikes. This could be illegal and shows he is willing to attack countries without going through the necessary diplomatic steps. When Obama considered bombing Assad in 2013, he got congress’s approval, yet Trump neglected to go through the fundamental procedure. Trump has been criticized for his flippant statement on nuclear weapons while on the campaign trail; he even asked why we were making nukes if we weren’t going to use them, demonstrated minimal to no knowledge of the nuclear triad, and refused to promise not to nuke Europe. He also said we had to be unpredictable with nuclear power and said he was okay with countries such as South Korea and Saudi Arabia getting nuclear power.  In some cases, he even encouraged it. He has also been criticized for suggesting that America should torture the families of terrorists and commit other war crimes. Because of these statements, it is especially worrying to see him bomb Assad without going through congress, in a move that can be seen as having little foresight. Next time, he may decide to drop a bomb on a city instead of an air base. Also, the decision has been criticized because it makes little sense strategically in that it did little more than anger Assad. Planes started taking off from the airbase America bombed less than 24 hours after it was bombed. Comedian John Oliver had made a joke, saying, “Delta passengers experience more significant delays on a daily basis.”
Thomas Friedman had said, speaking of the Syrian crisis, “If there were a good, easy solution it would have been found already.” The decision to fight Assad or let him do as he pleases without fear of retaliation is foreign policy at its most treacherous. Both choices have a very real human cost and a million repercussions, but to some extent, they also come down to how much Americans care about Syrians being slaughtered and living in terror. Enough to risk the lives of Americans? Enough to let them into our country? Enough to send money and aid? 

As for the air strikes, many human rights advocates are just thankful a foreign power is finally standing up for the civilians of Syria. These people are being attacked by ISIS, other rebel groups and their own government in a brutal civil war. They face a perilous and often deadly journey to a refugee camp if they decide to leave. Whether you agree with Trump’s retaliation or not, keep the people of battle torn Syria in your thoughts.