Unsurprisingly, ISIS is Trump’s ban’s biggest fan.

The Independent reports:

Al Qaeda, Isis and other jihadi groups are thrilled with US President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration targeting Muslim countries, describing it as proof that the US is at war with Islam.

Extremist social channels are calling this new ban “blessed” for fuelling growth in anti-western sentiments, much like the invasion of Iraq.

Nobody should be surprised. Islamic extremists have always perpetuated the idea that the west is at war with all of Islam, as a method of fueling recruitment and radicalisation.

After 9/11, President Bush recognised this, and made it clear the US was at war with terrorism, not Islam. Obama did the same. They refused to play into the hands of the extremists.

Unfortunately, Trump doesn’t share the same tact.

“[The ban] plays into this clash of civilisations idea, which is something that global jihadis need as fuel, to claim Americans are against them, that the West is against them,” Dr Renad Mansour, a fellow from the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, told The Independent. “Trump is seen to be validating what they already claimed was happening.”

While both Bush and Obama had flawed foreign policy, it’s clear that ISIS and extremism will not be defeated under President Trump.

Javad Zarif, the foreign minister of Iran, one of the countries affected, tweeted that the travel ban “will be recorded in history as a great gift to extremists and their supporters”.

What a mess.

It sure isn’t national security.

No, this is just a messy, chaotic, and unjustified attempt at proving he can stand up to Muslims- but only the non-threatening ones.

Benjamin Wittes wrote an insightful article on Lawfare:

On the underinclusive side, the order wouldn’t have blocked the entry of many of the people responsible for the worst recent terrorist attacks. There is, in fact, simply no rational relationship between cutting off visits from the particular countries that Trump targets (Muslim countries that don’t happen to be close U.S. allies) and any expected counterterrorism goods. The 9/11 hijackers, after all, didn’t come from Somalia or Syria or Iran; they came from Saudi Arabia and Egypt and a few other countries not affected by the order. Of the San Bernardino attackers (both of Pakistani origin, one a U.S. citizen and the other a lawful permanent resident), the Orlando shooter (a U.S. citizen whose parents were born in Afghanistan), and the Boston marathon bombers (one a naturalized U.S. citizen, one a green card holder who arrived in Massachusetts from Kyrgyzstan), none came from countries listed in the order. One might argue, I suppose, that the document is tied to current threats. But come now, how could Pakistan not be on a list guided by current threat perception?

If this executive order was supposed to advance national security, then there is no explanation for why it only includes Muslim countries that aren’t actual threats to the United States or aren’t allies.

When do you do these things? You do these things when you’re elevating the symbolic politics of bashing Islam over any actual security interest. You do them when you’ve made a deliberate decision to burden human lives to make a public point. In other words, this is not a document that will cause hardship and misery because of regrettable incidental impacts on people injured in the pursuit of a public good. It will cause hardship and misery for tens or hundreds of thousands of people because that is precisely what it is intended to do.

There is no justification for this chaotic move. It’s simply a cruel way to prove he’s a strongman figure- and proving himself weak at every turn.

I strongly suggest you read Wittes’ insightful article.

Trump Surrogates are using JAPANESE INTERNMENT CAMPS as precedent for a Muslim registry

This is absolutely amazing and horrifying. The WW2 internment camps have been unanimously regarded as a breach of human rights and an example of explicit racism. Of all the things to use as an example of ‘precedent’, don’t use the one thing that nobody can legally or morally justify.

Internment camps were an extreme breach of justice. Simply because of their Japanese race, these people were illegally imprisoned without any trial. So many of their universal human rights and their rights as Americans were totally violated.

It was Republican hero Ronald Reagan who signed the Civil Liberties Act, which apologised for the internment of Japanese-Americans on behalf of the US government and paid every camp survivor $20,000.

“I know the ACLU is gonna challenge it” he says. If you have to argue that it will hold “constitutional muster” and you are certain the American Civil Liberties Union will challenge it, it’s an absolutely awful idea even if it is somehow legal.

Megyn Kelly was right to push back at him on these commented, but I just wish she had challenged him harder.