What is "Radical Islamic Terrorism," and do I care?

He's the President for God's sake! Besides, he's fabulously rich and famous! He must be right, right?

I have always maintained that the United States of America is important enough that we should have an official language, but we don't. Judging by the comments I see on social media, a lot of ignorant people think we do, and that it is colloquial English, but they are just wrong! It would be nice, though, because then it might be easier to understand what the President, "Dishonest Don," and his press secretary, "Baghdad Sean" Spicer, are trying to say. Most of what I hear on recordings of them on TV sound like bald faced lies to me.

At issue is the President's recent executive order banning entry into the United States of Syrian refugees and US visa holders who are citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, countries whose citizens have no known instance of any fatal terrorist act committed in the US - none! He has also repeatedly equated "Muslims" with "terrorists," and appears not to be aware that foreign citizens, including those from the foregoing countries, are, and for a long time have been, thoroughly screened before being issued US visas.

His list of "terrorist attacks" was apparently submitted to show that the "dishonest media" is failing adequately to report them with the result that the American people are insufficiently alarmed by them. From the President's and other administration representatives' remarks, I get the impression that he thinks that if we all were sufficiently alarmed, the reasons for his seven nation ban would be obvious. According to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, they are not at all obvious, even after the President's attorneys presented every single shred of contrary evidence they could muster.

The list includes both domestic and overseas incidents since September 2014. The White House asserted that most of incidents on the list were under-covered by Western media sources, but it includes some very heavily publicized news events. One such is last year's attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando by a "US person". Also included are the series of attacks in Paris in 2015 which were the direct result of long-standing French persecution of its Muslim citizens that the President wants to duplicate here.

In short, the list provides no rationale whatever to support the claims for which it was supposedly compiled. This appears to be to show that we're all in mortal danger from these seven specific "Muslim countries," and that we have to keep the "Muslims" out! That "networks are not devoting to each of them the same level of coverage they once did," or, "members of the media don't always cover some of those events to the extent that other events might get covered," even if true, is irrelevant. What it proves is, the President just doesn't like "Muslims" any more than he likes Mexicans, and thinks that a lot of them come from the countries on the ban. He's demonstrably wrong!

On February 5, 2017, the President (@realDonaldTrump) said in one of his famous tweets: "Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!" If "something" does happen as a result of Administration oversight or failure, this may be a way to deflect condemnation. Nevertheless, the President, as well as every other citizen, is subject to the provisions of law, which it is the function of the courts to interpret. It is Congress, not the President, that makes that law.

There are categories of people in this Country that commit most of the crimes. They aren't Mexicans, and they aren't Muslims. They're "US persons," Like the eleven already on his list. I hope the President does something about them!

Here's the entire "underreported terrorist attacks" list:

[1] It is not obvious how this crime was "underreported," or how crimes committed in the United States by a "US person" could be prevented by keeping out foreigners.

[2] If the perpetrator of a crime is unknown, it does not follow that people whose identities are known are a threat, especially if the crime was committed outside the United States.

[3] Crimes committed in other countries by citizens of those countries do not appear to demonstrate a threat to people in the United States by people from different countries, regardless of the religious identities of the perpetrators. It is also not obvious how this particular incident was "underreported."

[4] Absent precise definition of what constitutes "terrorism," it is difficult to conclude how this crime in another country was "underreported, or what, if any, implications it has for the United States.

[5] French Muslims are reacting as expected to France's long history of their systematic oppression. For this reason alone, it may be unwise, as well as unconstitutional, to start doing the same thing in the United States.

John Lindorfer