I REFER to Constitutional grounds for temporary US travel ban (Letters, Feb 16) referring to How Trump's politics affect us (Beyond the Wall, Feb 10).
The letter covers the technicalities of the US president having the constitutional power to commit the acts and has missed the whole point about my article. I am more interested in justice and the integrity of the US president.
It did not matter whether the ban was temporary or only covered seven Muslim majority countries, it's about the morality, effectiveness (to prevent terrorism) and fairness of the order. The order did not prove anything about Trump's sincerity in fighting terrorism.
On the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", Trump has not shown any credible evidence that the immigration order against the seven countries can help to prevent terrorism in the US, in fact, most studies point to the opposite. Even most of the president's own administration officials and his own intelligence agencies were against the order because it was unjust, racist and counter-productive.
I respect the democratic and check-and-balance system in the US, including a free press and an independent judiciary, to block their president, if necessary, from committing injustices. I would let the US legal system sort itself out.
The US government has been partly responsible for creating refugees by being involved in many modern-day wars and conflicts all over the world where millions of innocent people were also maimed and killed.
Many independent analysts believe (with historical facts) that the US' geo-political involvements in Afghanistan and the Middle East conflicts, including siding with Zionist Israel against the Palestinian people, were also partly responsible for the creation of Al Qaeda and IS.
My past articles have also explained the situation and I have commended peace-loving, neutral (not involved in creating the Syrian refugee crisis) and anti-terrorism Germany for taking in more than a million Syrian refugees when despotic Arab countries and now the new US president have shunned them.
God bless America and the rest of the world.
K.K. Tan
The letter covers the technicalities of the US president having the constitutional power to commit the acts and has missed the whole point about my article. I am more interested in justice and the integrity of the US president.
It did not matter whether the ban was temporary or only covered seven Muslim majority countries, it's about the morality, effectiveness (to prevent terrorism) and fairness of the order. The order did not prove anything about Trump's sincerity in fighting terrorism.
On the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", Trump has not shown any credible evidence that the immigration order against the seven countries can help to prevent terrorism in the US, in fact, most studies point to the opposite. Even most of the president's own administration officials and his own intelligence agencies were against the order because it was unjust, racist and counter-productive.
I respect the democratic and check-and-balance system in the US, including a free press and an independent judiciary, to block their president, if necessary, from committing injustices. I would let the US legal system sort itself out.
The US government has been partly responsible for creating refugees by being involved in many modern-day wars and conflicts all over the world where millions of innocent people were also maimed and killed.
Many independent analysts believe (with historical facts) that the US' geo-political involvements in Afghanistan and the Middle East conflicts, including siding with Zionist Israel against the Palestinian people, were also partly responsible for the creation of Al Qaeda and IS.
My past articles have also explained the situation and I have commended peace-loving, neutral (not involved in creating the Syrian refugee crisis) and anti-terrorism Germany for taking in more than a million Syrian refugees when despotic Arab countries and now the new US president have shunned them.
God bless America and the rest of the world.
K.K. Tan