A Reading in Trump’s Isolationist Speech: Bold and Outright Lies

Nour Rida

The world and media are still busy with the Trump speech at the UN Security Council, which got a ripple of murmurs and giggles before it exploded into a wave of laughter when he made his claims on achieving what no other administration has achieved throughout US history.

About a minute to his speech, Trump said

“In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.”

He did not expect the chuckles, as he clearly stated

“didn’t expect the reaction, but that’s okay”.

Then he tried to improvise and turn it into “they laughed with me rather than at me” while speaking to the media afterwards. The reaction in the echoing General Assembly hall came in presence of more than a hundred and thirty heads of state and dozens of other delegations.

During the presidential campaign, Trump often repeated the phrase “The world is laughing at us.” However, during the UN around 35-minute speech, the world was laughing at Trump.

Of course, on the sidelines of the Assembly, the president used his favorite term of “fake news” that has been popularized, to justify the laughter of the audience by saying the speech was supposed to be received in a cheerful manner and was taken out of context, calling the media’s coverage “fake news.”

Trump’s speech requires long pages of critique however a few highlights does the work. The US President was audacious enough to say the following

“I honor the right of every nation in this room to pursue its own customs, beliefs, and traditions. The United States will not tell you how to live or work or worship.”

The Trump administration not only dictates everyone on this planet on how to live and what to do, it also disrespects its neighbors such as Latin America, and extends its disrespect and supremacy overseas and interferes in the affairs of others. It also disrespects American people living inside the borders of the US because of their descent or origin.

The US president is at odds with Hispanics, Muslims, African Americans and anyone but white supremacist inside and outside America. Around April, US relations with Latin America plummeted as President Trump traded spurs with his Mexican counterpart and canceled attendance at a regional summit.

According to Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,

“Throughout Latin America, we were at a high water mark in every public opinion poll, [but] perception of America has dramatically dropped. And that is uniquely due to President Trump.”

Washington has been involved in the war in Syria alongside Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other countries in support of Wahhabi terrorist groups such as ISIS or Daesh. It has been rocketing all sorts of attacks against Iran, claiming to support the Iranian people while crippling them economically in first place. Iran has been a target for Trump before he even made it to office, and no reason seems to be present except for Iran being different and independent. He ruined an internationally accepted deal and showered Iran with avalanches of accusations and criticism at the time Iran had been abiding by its side of the nuclear deal and has never started any aggressive act towards another state actor. Also, before arriving to the love letters part, Trump had threatened North Korea’s Kim Jung Un and calling him a monster over nuclear tensions.

Cynically, if Trump justifies his actions towards North Korea as out of national security concern, he should have destroyed his own nuclear warheads and “bigger button”.

In a tweet back in January, Trump wrote

“North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times. Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”

Trump also falsely claimed in his speech

“Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on Earth.”

But then he called on the more than a hundred and ninety UN nations

“to join us in calling for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela”

and to what he allegedly described as

“support Iran’s people as they struggle to reclaim their religious and righteous destiny.”

Trump’s moments at the speech reinforced his administration’s isolation among allies and foes equally, as his nationalistic policies have created rifts with partners and cast doubt about the credibility of America and the reliability of its commitments around the world.

Of course among all this, Trump focused on his “America first” and “no globalism” ideas, which was reflected in the words of US officials a couple of days before Trump’s speech at the UN. Now it remains a question on whether this “America first” policy will isolate the US especially after the European Union and China statements on Iran one day earlier to his speech.

Some observers have pointed out that Trump’s words are only meant to appease his domestic support base and that essentially, US foreign policy under Trump hasn’t changed much.

“There have been studies that show that substantially when it comes to Asia, not much has really actually changed. In terms of the number of US forces in Asia, its foreign policy makers coming for visits, a lot of the messages have not changed,” said Dr. Hoo Tiang Boon, an expert on US-China relations from the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

“Even though they are pushing the America First policy, they still maintain their alliance and relationship. But in terms of the way of communicating, that is certainly very different. And I think a lot of it is about domestic politics.”

One day before Trump delivered his speech, Europe sounded its willingness to cooperate with Iran and was devising ways around US, Chinese state media was whipping up popular sentiment to fight the trade war Trump started, and the US administration was about to miss the deadline for a trade agreement with Canada and Mexico.

Trump’s game at the UN Assembly hall was not very different from his game during the electoral campaign; it is all about humiliation and name-calling and ongoing lies (according to the Washington Post’s Fact Checker list,  since assuming office and before the start of summer, President Donald Trump has made 3,251 false or misleading claims).

Source: Al-Ahed News

Advertisements

When They Try To Delete Palestine!

Hussein Samawarchi

If England were to occupy Mexico and agree with a certain religious or ethnic group’s claim to it, the phone at ten Downing Street would probably ring off the hook; most world leaders would be calling the British Prime Minister to condemn this blatant act. England manages to secure the success of its plan and facilitates the transport of many waves of illegal immigrants to Guadalajara, Tijuana, and Monterrey. The people rushing into ships and airplanes to their new homeland can be Yazidis, Bahraini Shiites, or any other minority that has suffered at the hands of an absurdly stronger dogmatic organization with little assistance from the international community. The recently victimized people of Rohingya would fit the profile just fine.

England also succeeds in deleting the name “Mexico” at the United Nations and the once victimized and exhausted people of Rohingya form armed gangs and begin committing atrocities against the civilians living in Mexican villages and then towns and cities. Hundreds of thousands of Mexicans flee southwards to live in refugee camps from Guatemala to Colombia.

England pulls out of Mexico leaving the Rohingya population to marginalize every remaining Mexican into a second-class citizen or less. They are also given the facility to create the most superior army in the region, to a point where they start invading parts of neighboring countries and calling it annexation.

Of course, all of the above is not true. Mexico is too powerful to be stolen and the good people of Rohingya are not land thieves. But the story is just made up to explain to the new generations what really happened in Palestine and the region.

Palestinians have lost their country to a group of foreigners claiming that their god had promised them the land. These foreigners came from many countries where they are already citizens. They speak of antisemitism when many of them are actually Europeans annihilating the original Semites of the land. The rationale of it all is beyond logic.

In a world that advocates religious freedom, how can it be acceptable to impose someone’s beliefs on others? How can someone say that his “god” is more correct than yours and that his “god” has promised him your home? According to them, “god” has favorites among the humans he had created and that he has categorized the overwhelming majority as Goyim who are equal to cattle and are destined to serve the chosen ones who are blessed in their massacres of little children in Gaza just like he blessed their butchery of every living person in Deir Yassin.

These same chosen ones denounced the biased and discriminatory Egyptian gods who approved their enslavement. Yet, they fanatically worship the one allowing them to enslave others.

Palestine was officially deleted from so many history books and from the charter of the world’s main authority on countries, the United Nations. This happened during a time when the Germans were still trying to understand how it was possible to literally melt down tens of thousands of women and children in one long air raid and the Japanese were trying to figure out if the radioactive effects of two atomic bombs would eventually kill the rest of them. On the other side of the world, much closer to the land being raped, some Arabs were busy creating a covert Zionist state in Mecca while others were establishing the worst Machiavellian dictatorships under the pretense of progressive revolutions.

The average Arab citizen, Christian and Muslim, had and still has his heart in the right place. The long Ottoman invasion did its best to fight all chances of education for those Arabs. Then came the British and French invasions that delivered an abundance of education; only, this education was targeted towards the submission of future generations to a Zionist vision of what the Arab society should be like. The acceptance of an “Israeli” tree being irrigated with Palestinian blood in the Arab orchard was to be achieved.

The well-placed plan began with encouraging Arabs to attack the “Israelis”. Among the first and second line leaders of those Arabs were ones who worked directly with the British intelligence services and others who served unknowingly. This needed to be done so as to march the Western world’s opinion to the rescue of the poor minority who had just barely escaped total Nazi annihilation. Of course, the Arab campaign failed miserably but not because the “Israeli” gangs were strong; rather, due to traitors placed in the highest government ranks. Then the so-called chosen people needed more Western support, so more Arab campaigns with preset plans of failure were required.

All this was to delete not only the name Palestine from the world map but, to delete any traces of a Palestinian identity as well.

Things very rarely work perfectly as planned though. The Syrians had Hafez Assad for a leader – Love him or hate him, everyone agrees that the man was a genius. He knew that fake Islamic movements would be utilized to break Arab countries from within. He also knew that betting on Western regimes would mean a national loss in dignity and geography. The man held his ground and forged correct alliances. The proof to that is Syria today; it simply would not have the whole world trying to break it down if the Assad legacy was not on the right ethical track.

Then there were the highly educated common well-read people in other Arab countries; most of whom were imprisoned or assassinated by their governments for voicing out animosities against the reality of the Zionist colonial scheme. Only regime-controlled opinions were allowed in the media.

No other people on earth have been subject to a conspiracy this big and this well planned. The Palestinians were not only to have the claim to their home wiped out but the reference to it as well. If a Palestinian today would say “I want what is mine back,” the answer would be “You can’t have what was never yours.” After all, and thanks to the dominant Zionist media, the whole world thinks “Israel” is a real national entity.

Freedom of opinion dictates that people may choose what they believe in. Arthur Balfour may only give away his own property and not an inch of that which he holds no deed to. This is the belief of people who agree with justice. If it is legal and acceptable for England to invade and give Mexico away then an argument could be considered regarding another country; one like Palestine. But, theft is a battled concept.

No possible amount of years can deprive the righteous of their rights. No amount of instigating media can make right of what is wrong. Palestine is a reality and it is made of Arabs belonging to many religions and sects, including Judaism. Ottoman oppression is not a valid pretext for British acquisition.

England is responsible for what the Palestinians are enduring today. As far as many are concerned, England never really pulled out of Palestine regardless of what it declared. The fact is, regular troops were exchanged with European mercenaries carrying the star of David for a banner.

Source: Al-Ahed News

Trump’s Policies & the ‘True Face’ of America

Darko Lazar

30-06-2018 | 09:02

In February of last year, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei thanked US President Donald Trump for finally revealing Washington’s “true face”.

Donald Trump

“What we have been saying, for over thirty years, about political, economic, moral, and social corruption within the US ruling establishment, he [Trump] came out and exposed,” Sayyed Khamenei told a group of Iranian Air Force commanders on February 7, 2017. “With everything he is doing … he is showing the reality of American human rights.”

In the months that followed, Trump has been busy pulling back the curtain.

Between filling his cabinet with warmongering neocons like John Bolton and pairing up with hawkish generals and shady billionaires, the Trump administration also found time to withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council (HRC).

Citing alleged anti-“Israel” bias, the US will be the first state to leave the UN body voluntarily.

“For too long, the human rights council has been a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias,” exclaimed the US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, earlier this month.

One can be forgiven for thinking that this reads a little too much like a bit of soul-searching on the part of the American government.

But while Washington’s exit from the HRC can certainly be described as ironic, the move is hardly surprising.

The ill-timed maneuver came as American border guards ripped apart families, and Washington assisted allies in massacring tens of thousands in Yemen, all the while defending the killing of unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza.

According to US-based peace activist Scott Rickard, “the Human Rights Council should have been considering ejecting the United States based upon its human rights violations.”

“In the United States we have one of the most atrocious human rights records; we have almost ten thousand people a year being killed by police officers,” Rickard added. “At the same time, the United States is heavily involved in warfare around the world, murdering millions in my lifetime alone.”

‘Murderers & thieves’

In the lead-up to the US withdrawal from the Council, the outgoing UN human rights chief, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, blasted the Trump White House for its “unconscionable” policy along the US border with Mexico.

Zeid was referring to the Trump administration’s recently abolished effort to dissuade illegal migrants from crossing the border by separating children from their parents and dispatching them to detention centers with no assurances that they would ever be reunited.

“The thought that any state would seek to deter parents by inflicting such abuse on children is unconscionable,” Zeid said during his opening remarks to the HRC’s 38th session this month.

Trump attempted to justify his immigration policy by citing concerns over ‘security and safety’.

Recently, he was quoted as saying that those who sneak across the border “could be murderers and thieves and so much else.”

Such comments, much like the mass outrage by Trump’s critics at home who are often complicit in the slaughter of Yemeni and Syria children, are intended to disguise the fact that the asylum seekers are fleeing the very violence and chaos that the US instigated.

“The president has to realize what a hundred years of US policy towards Central and South America has caused,” said radio talk show host Robert Patillo.

“US efforts to destabilize governments, US efforts to set up puppet dictators – that’s why we have this level of crime and this dysfunction in Central America,” Patillo explains.

For puppet dictators, look no further than Saudi Arabia.

The kingdom, which remains the source of the Takfiri ideology, fueling global terrorism and the country of origin of 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 has somehow stayed off of Trump’s travel ban from seven countries.

This week, the US Supreme Court upheld the ban, arguing that it had a “legitimate grounding in national security concerns” and was thus constitutional.

Trump’s ban, which is breathtaking in scope and inflammatory in tone, extends to North Korea, Syria, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Venezuela.

And while Saudi nationals are responsible for the deaths of more than 2,360 people as a result of terrorist attacks on US soil, the countries covered by Trump’s ban are responsible for none. 

Journalist and political commentator Syed Mohsin Abbas believes that “those Muslims who are the lackeys and the puppets of the US foreign policies, who freely give their recourses to the US and who don’t oppose the US’ imperialist policies in the Middle East are not banned.”

Abbas describes the ban as a “direct attack against any nation in the world who dares to stand up to the US” with Iran being one of the primary targets.

American Civil War 2.0

The policies of the Trump administration are as much a reflection of a deeply polarized United States, as they are an indication of the responsibility that the powers that be bear for instigating those very same divisions.

A new poll testifies to just how divided the American public has become over issues like immigration, declaring that some 31% of the population believes a second civil war is likely in the next five years.

The Rasmussen national telephone and online survey revealed that uncompromising accusations of fascism and an alleged desire for open borders have raised fears in the US over the possibility of an armed confrontation between Trump’s supporters and those opposed to his policies.

And in light of the manner in which the current political climate in the country has drawn the curtain to reveal the hitherto well-concealed, callous visage of American society, any suggestion that this previously unthinkable scenario now appears far more likely holds water indeed.

Source: Al-Ahed

Recalling Nazi Propaganda, Trump Says Immigrants “Infest” United States

Source

From Nazi Germany to Japanese Internment Camps: Here’s the Disgusting History Behind Trump’s ‘Infest’

H4 trump tweet infest migrants

Intercept: U.S. Has Separated At Least 3,700 Children from Parents Since October

On Tuesday, President Trump continued his xenophobic Twitter rant, tweeting, “Democrats are the problem. They don’t care about crime and want illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country.” Conservative editor Bill Kristol tweeted, “Trump’s statement that immigrants will ‘infest our Country’ probably sounds better in the original German.” This is Trump speaking Tuesday.

President Donald Trump: “When countries abuse us by sending their people up—not their best—we’re not going to give any more aid to those countries. Why the hell should we?”

US Sponsored Coups and Regime Change, NATO Expansionism, Washington Interferes Globally. Ukraine, Mexico, Korea, Venezuela

US Sponsored Coups and Regime Change, NATO Expansionism, Washington Interferes Globally. Ukraine, Mexico, Korea, Venezuela

By Shane Quinn,

From Vietnam to Venezuela, the US consistently interferes in the sovereign affairs of nations. Russia, by contrast, simply wants security on its borders.

On February 2014, a United States-sponsored coup was initiated in the Ukraine in which President Viktor Yanukovych was illegally ousted from power. (1) Over three years later, the putsch has done nothing but plunge the Ukraine, a tortured country plundered throughout modern history (by the West), into another abyss. In a 2015 interview with CNN, then US president Barack Obama openly confessed that “we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine”.

Around 10,000 people have been killed in the time since, with the conflict generating 2.5 million refugees who relocated to Russia. The putsch led to Crimea’s annexation a month after the coup, with a 96% vote in favour of joining the Russian Federation – the majority of Crimeans already considered themselves ethnic Russians. (2)

The new Western-backed government, led by billionaire Petro Poroshenko, has been riddled with corruption and sees meagre support from the Ukrainian people. (3) Just 1.9% fully trust Poroshenko personally, according to an unreported survey conducted in June. (4) Poroshenko’s dismal backing is hardly surprising considering the disastrous economic conditions millions are enduring in the country. What’s more, the 2014 coup has led to an unseemly rise in far-right groups.

In contrast, the Russian president Vladimir Putin has an 87% approval rating according to a poll also in June. (5) This makes Putin “one of the most popular leaders in the world”, with even mainstream networks like CNN reporting on his consistently high approval ratings.

Thinking objectively one can quickly identify the enormous pretense at work here. Picture the Western reaction had Russia performed a key role in, say, toppling governments on the US border, in Canada or Mexico. What would the superpower’s reaction be? To adopt CIA lingo, any efforts to install pro-Russian governments on the US frontiers would be “terminated with extreme prejudice”.

Examining Mexico’s case, it’s worth remembering that the US is illegally sitting on half of its territory. (6) After the Mexican-American war in 1848, the US stripped of Mexico lands that later became known as California, Arizona, New Mexico, etc. This is already taking into account the annexation of Texas from Mexico in 1845. Such huge land-grabs have been wiped from memory, except from the minds of Mexicans that is.

The West has acted with seeming abhorrence on what they deem as Russian interference in eastern Ukraine, the majority of whose people view Russia positively. One of the West’s principal goals in initiating the 2014 putsch, was to integrate the Ukraine into NATO – a hostile, expansionist foreign entity receiving three-quarters of its funding from Washington. George Kennan, former US Ambassador to the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, described NATO enlargement as “a tragic mistake”. (7) Kennan later joined other American statesman in penning an open letter to the White House condemning NATO expansionism as “a policy error of historic proportions”. To no avail.

NATO is simply one arm of American imperialism. Since 1945 the CIA, with US government and military support, has toppled numerous foreign regimes and installed military dictatorships. (8) Around the world, the US has violated international law at will. Right now, for example, the US is conducting aggressive military exercises to intimidate an isolated and threatened North Korea. There are almost 30,000 American troops in South Korea, and another 50,000 in another client state slightly further east, Japan. On top of this is a significant American air and naval presence in south-east Asia.

It seems reasonable to query the presence of tens of thousands of US soldiers situated 11,000 km from Washington. It can be safely called imperialism. With this state of thinking, US military personnel have no qualms about telling China how to behave in the South China Sea, or the East China Sea. (9) The problem being that China is thousands of years old and difficult to intimidate. The West might have reacted differently if, for example, Russia was rebuking Japan for conducting exercises in the Sea of Japan.

US policy towards North Korea can be put under the grill too. What right does the US have to bully a poor, deprived country, and in doing so provoke inevitable responses? North Korea has a duty to protect itself, seeing as it was utterly levelled by the US Air Force during the seldom-mentioned Korean War. This past aggression can largely explain why the North developed nuclear weapons to begin with: as a deterrent against further invasion. Under current circumstances, it seems certain Kim Jong-un and company are glad they have their small nuclear arsenal. After all, the US have never invaded a nuclear-armed country, just weak, vulnerable ones like Vietnam, Iraq or Libya.

It sends a dangerous message to the world: arm yourself with nuclear warheads if you want security from US aggression. Yet, in the Western mainstream, it is North Korea who are continuously portrayed as the villains in all this. The main reason the US are maintaining a presence in south-east Asia, is that it’s one of the richest energy producing areas on earth. (10) To stall their long-declining power, and thwart a rising China, the US wants desperately to retain a presence in this region.

Switching 14,000 km westwards, the US is again inciting conflict in Venezuela, a country with a long troubled history. As the superpower has lost much influence in South America this century, the Trump administration are supporting right-wing groups with the aim of removing president, Nicolas Maduro. The US have imposed various sanctions on a country rich in oil reserves, hence the superpower’s interest. The corporate media are portraying the “dictator” Maduro as the antagonist, much as they did with Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro. US military figures like General H. R. McMaster have voiced concern that democracy is being lost in Venezuela (and reported seriously it appears). (11) As history portrays, American concern for democracy goes down as one of the more grotesque myths mankind has ever conjured.

Shane Quinn is an honor graduate with journalism degree. She is interested in writing primarily on foreign affairs.

Towards a « Latino Spring »?

by Thierry Meyssan

Anxiety is growing in Latin America – the United States and the United Kingdom are preparing a « Spring » for them on the model of the « Arab Springs ». Of course, this time, it will not be a case of spreading war and dividing the populations along religious lines – Latino citizens are practically all Christians – but by using elements of their local identities. The objective will, however, be the same – not to replace the governments with other governments, but to destroy the States in order to eradicate any possibility of resistance to imperialism.

| CARACAS (VENEZUELA) | 16 MAY 2017

JPEG - 42 kb

With time, many political leaders throughout the world have reinterpreted the « Arab Springs ». What at first seemed to be spontaneous revolutions against authoritarian governements is today perceived for what it is – an Anglo-Saxon plan for the destabilisation of an entire region of the world in order to put the Muslim Brotherhood into power. The memory of the « Arab Revolt of 1916 » – during which Lawrence of Arabia raised the whole region against the Ottoman Empire by feeding the People dreams of liberty in order, finally, to submit them to the British Empire – shows that London has the know-how.

It seems that the Anglo-Saxons are preparing a new wave of pseudo-revolutions in Latin America. Everything began with a decree by Barack Obama, on 9 March 2015, declaring a state of emergency in view of the extraordiary menace that the situation in Venezuela could bring to bear on the United States. This document caused an upsurge of indignation on the continent, forcing the US President to apologise during an international summit. But the decree was not cancelled, and the preparations for a new war continue.

Different from the Syrian Accountabilty Act by George W. Bush (2003), the text by Obama on Venezuela is a presidential decree, not a law. Consequently, the Executive does not need to account for the preparations to the Legislative body. It took eight years for the Anglo-Saxons to pass this act in the Arab world in general, but numerous elements lead us to believe that it will not take them as long to launch a programme for the destruction of Latin America.

At the time of the Olympic Games, trouble broke out in Brazil, aimed against President Dilma Rousseff. She was destituted after a parliamentary procedure which, although it was perfectly legal, was totally contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. This coup d’Etat was carried out under the control of the Central Bank – whose n°2 was a Brazilo-Israëlian – by deputies, many of whom have been shown to be guilty of corruption. The State security services remained curiously passive during the coup. This may be because, during the Olympic Games, they had been placed under the coordination… of Israëli experts. Currently, the new President, Brazilo-Lebanese Michel Temer, is now widely contested.

The situation in Mexico is hardly any better. The country is currently divided, de facto, into four. The North is enjoying strong expansion, while the South is in full recession. The political leaders have sold the national oil company, Pemex, and all its reserves, to the United States, who therefore have no further need of Middle East oil. Only the army seems to persist in believing in their homeland.

Exploiting the economic errors of the government, the Venezuelian opposition has managed to organise a few major peaceful demonstrations. Simultaneously, it also organised some small and extremely violent demonstrations during which several police officers and demonstrators were killed. Creating confusion, the international Press agencies are giving the impression that an anti-Chavez revolution has now begun, which is not the case at all.

Thus, the three main Latin-American states are destabilised at the same time. It seems that the US neoconservatives are anticipating the possibility of peace in Syria, and are pushing forward their Latin-American projects.

On Friday, during a televised speech, Venezuelian President Nicolás Maduro warned his people about the Anglo-Saxon project for a « Latin Spring ». He frequently mentioned and repeated the previous cases of Libya and Syria, speaking before an audience of intellectuals from the region, with whom, Syrian of heart, I was associated.

Translation
Pete Kimberley

Source
Al-Watan (Syria)

Thierry Meyssan

Thierry MeyssanPolitical consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire (Voltaire Network). Latest work in French – Sous nos Yeux. Du 11-Septembre à Donald Trump(Right Before our Eyes. From 9/11 to Donald Trump).

Trump’s Latest 180 Degree Flip-Flop: Immigration

Back during the campaign Trump talked about building a wall along the US-Mexico border to control the flow of illegal immigrants. Now it appears that Trump’s Agriculture Secretary, Sonny Perdue, has reached the conclusion that illegal immigrants, at least some, are needed after all–to work as farm laborers.

“He (the president) understands that there are long-term immigrants, sometimes undocumented immigrant laborers, out here on the farms, many of them that are doing a great job, contributing to the economy of the United States,” Perdue said.

“That (deporting undocumented immigrants) is not his focus nor will that be my focus,” he added.

According to the report, Trump met with farmers last week and heard all about the “challenges they face keeping laborers for dairies or field work”–and Perdue says he’s hired a labor lawyer to design a program by which undocumented immigrants could be allowed in in sufficient numbers to fulfill the needs of the ag industry.

But of course once that need is filled, then others, the tourist industry for instance, will step forward with similar needs–large hotel chains will insist, for instance, that they need illegal immigrants to work as dishwashers and maids, etc., until eventually every campaign promise Trump made about stemming the tide of immigrants will be tossed into the trash can. Or at least that’s the way things seem to be headed now.

The writer of the piece acknowledges that the latest developments are “a turnaround for both Perdue and Trump,” and then goes on to add:

Many of the most powerful agriculture industry groups have pushed Washington to complete comprehensive reform to the immigration system that would allow for more legal foreign farmworkers. More than 70 percent of farm workers are foreign-born and half of those are in the U.S. illegally, according to the USDA.

More recently, Trump told a private meeting with TV anchors that he would consider immigration reform that would provide a legal pathway for people in the U.S. illegally. He has not made similar remarks publically since taking office.

Perdue said during his Senate confirmation hearings that he supported making it easier for dairy farmers to employ immigrants. Yet in 2006 as governor of Georgia, he instituted a major crackdown on illegal immigration, which resulted in a crisis for farmers who couldn’t find labor.

Certainly the ag industry has cause to celebrate, but it would appear others are elated as well:

Daniel M. Kowalski, an attorney and editor of Bender’s Immigration Bulletin, said he’s surprised and pleased with the news.

“This new benefit for ag workers could be an entering wedge of reform, opening up relief for DACA (“Dreamer”) kids, their parents, refugees, and more,” Kowalski says. “It will take sustained pressure from families and small businesses to convince Trump and Congress that immigrants are a benefit, not a burden.”

I do not know whether Mr. Kowalski is Jewish, but as I have noted in previous posts, Jews are some of the leading proponents for increased immigration to the US.

%d bloggers like this: