Trump's ban: forget unconstitutional, it's INCORRECT

Other | Thursday 23rd February 2017 | Parmis

Believe it or not, there is both a reason and agenda behind Trump's Muslim ban.

Trump 's ban has been declared inconstitutional - how about just plain incorrect? Immediately after President Trump was inaugurated, he issued an infamous ban preventing passport holders of 7 countries from entering the United States.

He did so, because according to him - these 7 countries consisiting of: Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Somalia and Sudan are known terrorist countries who could pose a potential threat to the security of the United States.

But do they really? The whirlwind events of 9/11 that projected the west's 'War on Terror,' and the subsequent wars waged on Afghanistan and Iraq created a Western narrative of fear for those from the Middle East.

But why won't the media and Trump's ban target Saudi Arabia? In which 15 of the 19, 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia.

Why does it instead target, perhaps the poorest country in the region, Yemen - subjected and torn apart by a war waged by this same Saudi Arabia? Or how about Israel? Breacher of multiple UN resolutions in its appalling treatment of Arab Palestinians.

It is because it does not suit the US narrative. Saudi Arabia is wholly unwestern. It has fewer rights for women than Iran - which the western media consistently scrutinise. It is a corrupt country run by a dictator who is quietly destroying Yemen. But it is an American ally. With money and oil.

Israel 's concentration - like camp conditions enforced on the Palestinians has remnants of those of World War 2 - an era which the Hollywood film industry highlights in a collective emotional effort to preach 'never again'. So why is this ignored? Because it is also America's ally.

Israel's AIPAC The (American Israel Public Affairs Committe) lobby give endless donations to members of the United States congress in exchange for stricter restrictions against enemy Iran.

Trump is now President, yes. But before this he was a businessman. His ban is simply his way of continuing the legacy set before him of siding with the money - makers. Terrorists and all.