HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Bannon & Miller have let ...

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 09:44 AM

Bannon & Miller have let it slip: it's about population/demographic reshaping, not counterterrorism [View all]

In leaked document, the case for Trump’s ‘Muslim ban’ takes another huge hit

Here’s the real reason for the delay:
The Trump administration can’t solve the problem that has always bedeviled this policy, which is that there isn’t any credible national security rationale for it. Unlike on the campaign trail, when you’re governing, you actually have to have justification for what you’re proposing, or you often run into trouble.


As I have reported, the evidence is mounting that Bannon and Miller view the ban as part of a much broader, long-term demographic-reshaping project. Miller let slip in a recent interview that the ban isn’t just about national security, but also about protecting U.S. workers from foreign competition. And the Los Angeles Times reports that Bannon and Miller have privately argued that the ban is in keeping with the need to combat immigration by people who “will not assimilate”:

Inside the West Wing, the two men have pushed an ominous view of refugee and immigration flows, telling other policymakers that if large numbers of Muslims are allowed to enter the U.S., parts of American cities will begin to replicate marginalized immigrant neighborhoods in France, Germany and Belgium that have been home to plotters of terrorist attacks in recent years, according to a White House aide familiar with the discussions.

Thus, the ban is of a piece with the long-term goals of protecting American workers from economic competition and preventing European-style immigrant communities (which incubate terror plotters) from developing here. Bannon and Miller could argue that these arguments are partly about national security, too. But this is a case that centers on long-term demographics. That does not support the administration’s case for the immediate ban, since DHS has concluded that “extreme vetting” can’t screen out the threat of radicalization later. If anything, those larger motives undermine the case for the ban, by throwing its stated short-term motive into doubt.


37 replies, 5420 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 37 replies Author Time Post
Reply Bannon & Miller have let it slip: it's about population/demographic reshaping, not counterterrorism [View all]
kpete Mar 2017 OP
Zoonart Mar 2017 #1
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #2
Zoonart Mar 2017 #3
2naSalit Mar 2017 #15
NewJeffCT Mar 2017 #17
mountain grammy Mar 2017 #18
Bernardo de La Paz Mar 2017 #27
DetlefK Mar 2017 #4
atreides1 Mar 2017 #29
klook Mar 2017 #5
Jonny Appleseed Mar 2017 #6
dalton99a Mar 2017 #9
hatrack Mar 2017 #11
kpete Mar 2017 #19
mountain grammy Mar 2017 #21
whathehell Mar 2017 #24
Jonny Appleseed Mar 2017 #32
whathehell Mar 2017 #33
Maru Kitteh Mar 2017 #31
uponit7771 Mar 2017 #7
OnDoutside Mar 2017 #28
Initech Mar 2017 #8
octoberlib Mar 2017 #10
Mr. Ected Mar 2017 #12
world wide wally Mar 2017 #13
BainsBane Mar 2017 #14
AgadorSparticus Mar 2017 #16
usaf-vet Mar 2017 #30
Loge23 Mar 2017 #20
mountain grammy Mar 2017 #22
ck4829 Mar 2017 #25
whathehell Mar 2017 #34
Lucinda Mar 2017 #23
dlk Mar 2017 #26
Solly Mack Mar 2017 #35
Amaryllis Mar 2017 #36
nilesobek Mar 2017 #37