Catherine Shakdam is a political analyst, writer and commentator for the Middle East with a special focus on radical movements and Yemen. A regular pundit on RT and other networks her work has appeared in major publications: MintPress, the Foreign Policy Journal, Mehr News and many others.Director of Programs at the Shafaqna Institute for Middle Eastern Studies, Catherine is also the co-founder of Veritas Consulting. She is the author of Arabia’s Rising - Under The Banner Of The First Imam
Donald Trump unleashed a furious storm on his newly inaugurated presidential head when he decided to put ink to paper and sign off on what the world refers to as the infamous “Muslim ban.” And just like that, America … and most of the Western world flocked to the defense of Muslims, arguing Washington’s vile immigration policy and fascist streak!
Who knew it would take a visa ban for the world to jolt back to its humanity and realize that exclusion on the basis of one’s faith or ethnic profile equates to a pernicious act of terror? Hold on! THAT was former US President Obama.
All Trump did with his executive order was to temporary halt the entry of refugees into the United States. All he’s really done is use Obama’s policy as a springboard for his own tempestuous and misguided terror crusade against an enemy he has failed to identify adequately. So let’s give credit where credit is due and thank America’s very own presidential Nobel Peace prize for so kindly laying down the foundation of Trump’s misguidance.
To be perfectly fair, America has done a lot worse by way of injustice and state-sponsored criminal behavior over the years than an entry ban: rendition, black sites, drone strikes, systematic torture, unilaterally declaring war on countries … Need I go on?
Please understand that I am in no way, shape or form excusing or even rationalizing Trump’s decision – but at the same time, I do not like being ran circles around on account a few liberals are upset their “candidate” didn’t get into the White House.
Are we seriously asked to believe that this anti-Trump wave of dissent is organic, and not in the slightest orchestrated by powerful invisible hands? Repeat after me so that it may sink in: soft coup d’état.
No? What about colored revolution? That term might sit better actually. If you recall there were a few pink hats taking a stroll down the public squares the other day, trumpeting against the Donald.
What it is that El Presidente did? What it is that is so very evil and antithetical to American values, and sense of decency? I’m at a loss here. While I recoil at Trump’s entry ban in that it is humanely questionable and painstakingly pointless since it fails to address the very premise of its purpose: fighting terrorism, I don’t accept the tsunami of uber-sentimentalism liberals have showered us with.
Bottom line I don’t buy it!
The Oval Office did not manifest the list of countries; it recycled the intelligence that Obama’s administration put forth and then pulled a Trump on America.
I find the sudden cries of outrage both hypocritical and ever so conveniently timely.
From where I’m sitting the US did not exactly wait for Mr. Trump’s arrival to revel in all things Islamophobic. And yet today a litany of Hollywood stars and other “celebs” are having a day at the bashing their favorite tangerine pantomime to a nasty pulp.
I would personally argue that the United States has not only defined but architected the very industry that is Islamophobia, to the tune of misconceptions, bigoted generalizations, and downright fascist orientalism. Here I would say that Mr. Trump stands the product of decades of exceptionalism, political arrogance, and intolerant self-entitlement.
Let us remember for a second that President Trump sits in the White House not as conquering sociopath, but an elected official. In all fairness, every decision he has so far taken – good or bad, has been in keeping with his campaign promises. Might it be the Mexican wall, the anti-lobby act, or the Muslim ban, Mr. Trump has been consistent.
As his daughter once declared: “He says what he means, and he means what he says.”
So what gives?
Was America expecting Mr. Trump to suddenly transform into a Democrat and front liberal policies instead of enacting those he promised his fan base?
So yes Mr. Trump’s entry ban is abhorrent in its implementations, but then again I will say that former presidents have done a lot worse than stop people at the border over the years and no one batted an eyelid.
I will refer here to Dr.
Ammar Nakshawani’s, who, amid a storm of nonsensical neoliberal platitudes saw through the smokescreen. He told me:
“The issue here is not so much the Muslim ban but the landslide of human rights violations that made it possible. The real enemy here is not the seat of government or any one individual, but religious and political exclusionism. We can no longer afford to think ourselves against other people – violence, calls for dissent and vengeful retributions only serve to incense passions, not bring solutions. We need to rethink not just immigration but the way we address counter-terrorism.”
Even the UK has joined the anti-Trump bandwagon, with its petition, failing to look at its neo-fascist reflection.
While I applaud
Jeremy Corbyn for speaking up against Washington’s latest stunt, he is most probably one of the few decent politicians left in town, I would rather a ban be implemented against those systematic right violators, who, to this day, buy billions of dollars’ worth of weapons from the UK – Bahrain and Saudi Arabia come to mind.
I would rather righteous anger be directed at those actors, who, from their pulpits fan ethnocentrism and sectarian bigotry, lumping Islam and the Middle East to the hateful ideology the likes of Deash have fronted over the decades.
But that, of course, would require real political involvement and THAT flash-in-the-pan-activists don’t really do, do they?
There is a dangerous agenda at play, and from the looks of it, most of us all have fallen for it.
While we should condemn any and all discriminatory policies against minorities, we cannot allow for anger and political myopia to distract from the obvious: the Establishment’s attempted takeover of America’s institutions. Let’s not confuse demagoguery with a genuine populist movement.
I agree! I cannot help but see an engineered narrative of planned dissent against President Trump on account he did not bow to the Establishment and played the neocons’ game.
So yes absolutely, most of his policies are crass and unsophisticated, but they pale in comparison to the horrors previous administrations have fronted. I would say that Mr. Trump’ real crime has been his delivery. Obama was much better at packaging mass murder than Mr. Trump has been at fronting unapologetic ethnocentrism infused with corporate supremacism.
Does anyone really want to play Soros and Clinton’s games?
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
