US politicians misguided on anti-terror policies

By Mitchell Blatt
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail, November 19, 2015
Adjust font size:

This is not Germany, where the tiny village of Sumte, population 100, took in 750 refugees. For some reason Jindal didn't even want to take any of the 14.

Whether or not a state can legally ban refugees -- considering that immigration is a national issue -- banning it in a single state is meaningless.

Most of the states trying to ban refugees are not what you would call prime targets of terrorism. Georgia, Indiana and Arkansas, for example, are sparsely populated states with few attractions of interest. Their respective governors are flattering themselves if they think they warrant consideration as ISIS targets. If they did, a terrorist could easily drive a car there, anyway.

Furthermore, the United States is not Europe. There are not hundreds of thousands of refugees coming in on boats. Reports are suggesting that one of the Paris attackers was intentionally blending in with refugees to gain admission. That suggests that the problem isn't refugees but the disorderly process of immigration. Any refugees that come to America would have to pass through proper channels.

The next question is how best to fight ISIS. Trump plans to "bomb the shit out of" ISIS. Whatever that means, clearly he has no idea. He reheated his old rhetoric about bombing ISIS-held oil fields. The U.S. has already been bombing oil refineries for more than a year. ISIS also happens to control entire cities and have insurgents living among civilians. They're a terrorist organization, not an oil company.

On the other side, some extremists are expressing raving opinions in the opposite direction, excusing ISIS and blaming their victims. A candidate for state legislative office in Minnesota, Dan Kimmel of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, tweeted in response to the attacks: "ISIS isn't necessarily evil. It is made up of people doing what they think is best for their community."

Well, the Nazis were also "doing what they think is best for their community." That such people have twisted, bigoted, and yes, evil, views of the world doesn't make their judgment right. I made a point of using the word "evil" because someone who thinks that intentionally murdering civilians in cold blood is right deserves nothing better.

Donald Trump can be called nothing other than ignorant, narcissistic, and ethnocentric. But he, for all his defects, is not evil. He is just terribly misguided and a bad choice for Americans. It is worth keeping that in mind after seeing real evil unfold.

The author is a columnist with For more information please visit:

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of

Follow on Twitter and Facebook to join the conversation.
   Previous   1   2  

Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Enter the words you see:   
    Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from