"Bad Actors"

[Teach]

“Watch out for these guys, they’re all “bad actors!” my colleague said. As I recall it was either my first or second day on the job teaching history in a Boston high school. After our department meeting, one of my colleagues, a fellow history dept. member, said, “Walt, let me see your class lists.” I passed over five sheets of paper with lists of students’ name on them.

It was then that my colleague said, “Walt, let me show you something.” I noticed you have three American History sections. I had several of your current students last year in Modern European History.

It was then that he looked over my lists and put check marks besides the names of students; he thought these were the kids who would cause me the most trouble. As my colleague checked off the names, he would occasionally make comments. “Oh, this kid’s the biggest cheater in the world, you gotta watch him like a hawk,” he added. “Oh, watch out for this guy, I wouldn’t turn my back on him; he’s already been in trouble with juvenile authorities.” This checking and commenting went on and on. When he was through, he must have cited close to a dozen kids.

Well, when he finished, I thanked him for his input. Yet, after I left the dept. meeting and began getting things set up in my own classroom, I thought, “Maybe he was having trouble with kids that I won’t (that’s not to say that I wouldn’t have trouble with the same kids). Or, it’s quite possible that there are kids that are not listed who could be troublesome to me. Most everyone makes judgments based on their own values, their own backgrounds and upbringings.

And this is the point. Let’s fast-forward to the present. President Trump recently issued a travel-ban by signing an executive order Friday night to keep refugees from entering this country for 120 days and immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim nations out for three months. Although I want America to be safe and applaud efforts to do so, I find this hastily-devised, catch-all EO (like an Otter-doored fishing- net) approach to be repugnant. There are potential terrorists and then there are peaceful, productive people coming from Muslim-dominated countries that are decent, upright individuals. Sadly, in this approach, “One size fits all!” Not!

Furthermore, if you’re going to include “The Maligned Seven,” why not, while you’re at it, include other more terrorist-laden countries (as cited in another post) like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Saudi citizens were, for the most part, responsible for 9/11. The San Bernardino shootings involved a woman with both a Pakistani and Saudi Arabian background and the man, her husband, had Pakistani connections. Further, wasn’t it in Pakistan that Osama bin Laden was living and hiding when he was killed by Navy SEALs.

Frankly, I was worried from the get-go (this is not “sour grapes over the election) that there could – or should I say would likely be –conflicts of interest between POTUS’s vast international holdings and American foreign policy. I have read that President Trump has interests in the United Arabic Emirates; they’re not on the list). I do not know if he has interests and/or “entanglements” in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (tax returns might help us with that).

I believe that POTUS opens up a “can of worms” every time he makes an international or foreign policy decision involving a country in which he has holdings (I still don’t know the status of his vast empire; I know it’s not in a blind trust).

Oh, harking back to my colleague’s lists in a Boston high school school years ago. Just because that was his list doesn’t mean it’s mine. I judge things on a case-by-case basis. I frequently up-date my thinking. As it turns out some of the “bad actors” my colleague mentioned, I got along with very well.

[PaceAdvantage]

Scott Baio?

[MutuelClerk]

Meryl Streep.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Tom Cruise!

[NorCalGreg]

Teach...until we can find a way to separate the "good, decent" muslims from the one's that want to kill as many of us as possible---this is a good beginning.

Like a lot of people--you question the decisions, but have no solution.

Thanks for posting anyway

[davew]

Trump was following the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (the McCarren - Walter Act ) -> the president may by proclamation restrict entry of people they may find appropriate.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by NorCalGreg

Teach...until we can find a way to separate the "good, decent" muslims from the one's that want to kill as many of us as possible---this is a good beginning.

Like a lot of people--you question the decisions, but have no solution.

Thanks for posting anyway

I don't think there is anything wrong with Trump instituting a moratorium, assuming it doesn't catch the dolphins along with the tuna. In other words, the people who are citizens or are here legally, even if they are originally from the seven countries, should be allowed to return. They've been vetted and have clean records.

Interesting news story about the airlines. Apparently flight attendants, despite having gone through thorough security checks, are being denied entry if they are from one of the seven countries. The airlines are scrambling to make sure flight attendants on flights to the U.S. will be allowed to clear ICE.

By Trump's own description we are talking about hundreds of thousands of people looking to enter the country. Those who are refugees already go through a vetting process of two years, certainly not a cursory process.

Logically, the only way you could keep out terrorists posing as refugees is to deny admission to everybody. It would have to be close to impossible to do the kind of detailed investigation necessary to expose a small number of terrorists mixed in with hundreds of thousands of legitimate refugees. That's assuming you could even generate sufficient intelligence out of some war-ravaged country. If you believe the message on the Statue of Liberty, one of the things that has always made us the greatest nation on earth is our willingness to say “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” I hope it is Trump's intent to keep us safe without letting terrorists win by keeping out those who need our help the most.

I'll admit I haven't looked at the Trump plan for the next four months in great detail, but I'm not sure what he believes needs to be done beyond what we are already doing. That's not to say there is anything wrong with Trump evaluating the process, but somebody must have an idea where the potential holes are in the process. Other than delay, I'll be interested to see where the rubber hits the road.

I think even those of us willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt for the next few months want some assurance that he's got a good plan for getting us from here to a process where we can treat legitimate refugees with dignity and compassion.