Thinking about a letter to the editor

[Oss]

any comments welcomed

Another viewpoint   

There has been much vitrol directed at President Trump over the Executive Order which suspended, temporarily, immigration from 7 countries.

Heaven knows if, or why, supposedly impartial journalists were unable to read the Order, as if they had, they should recognize it is NOT a “ban”. Calling it a ban is wrong and destroys the credibility of the news organization, including this paper.

Certainly, no person would propose that the Commander in Chief does not have the obligation to protect the citizens of this country from enemies foreign and domestic. This includes the border and the ability of people to come into the USA.

How short is the collective memory of the media? One could look to our prior POTUS, Barack Obama, to find a similar path taken to deal with a perceived problem.  There was no outrage or hatred directed at Mr. Obama by the media and no protests in the streets.

Another Democrat, Jimmy Carter also banned Iranians back when the Shah was deposed and the hostages taken. I believe there have been 6 outright bans during the last 100 years which ran their course after serving the purpose.

100 years ago, a much more restrictive act was passed by Congress which overrode a Woodrow Wilson veto on the eve of our entry into WWI.

As a result Ellis Island closed, perhaps we should bring such a place back so people with Visa’s and other grey area people could be vetted here. After all, the process of obtaining a visa is a long process for most and to get one, a person must go through a process that has NO appeal.

Perhaps the new Congress will pick up the mantle in response to a rogue Justice of the 9th Circuit’s decision to block a clearly Constitutional order. (That order by the way is being reconsidered by the whole 9th Circuit.)  Remember, Obama passed a Ban not a Suspension and the 9th Circuit was silent as it was during Carter’s ban !  What does this tell all of us about the members of that 9th Circuit (which has lately been over turned by 80%, by the Supreme Court) and also about the media and those behind the protests.

Of course, many compassionate individuals are upset to see someone denied medical care, or a family divided but this was a temporary suspension which inconvenienced only a few of the millions who travel, and again, the Order provided for review by State and Homeland Security.

You may think from all of the above that I am a Republican however you would be wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat. I find it disturbing that those protesting fail to apply their logic to the facts pertaining to fundamental Islam as it exists in the world.

It is indisputable that women under Sharia law may be beaten,  caned for having premarital sex, may suffer genital mutilation, may be beheaded for adultery and other “ honor” crimes.  Also, that gays and transgender risk death if discovered. Where is women's outrage??

The collective attention span of my fellow Americans seems very short. Not enough recognize the elements of fascism in Islamic extremism. Few remember much of the Moslem world was not against Hitler. If you live under Sharia Law there is no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no tolerance of gays and no criticism of the Koran is allowed under pain of death or jihad.

One can look to countries in Europe where Sharia law is openly enforced and law abiding citizens are beaten, threatened and killed.  In England Moslem clergy openly call for Sharia to be the law of the land. Youtube fortunately is filled with their videos so denial of this fact is just disingenuous. Likewise the call for death to America (Big Satan) and destruction of Israel (Little Satan) continues unabated for seventy years now.

Yet where is the moral outrage from my party? Why is it only the Republican party is speaking out and not a soul from my party and certainly no major network or television station? Why hasn’t our highly ranked Senator, a Democrat, moved in Congress to enact some kind of act that protects those visa holders instead of crying about the only move made in years to stop and take a hard look at the problems of immigration from countries with active terrorist cells, bent on OUR destruction?

You won't like the truth.  It is that the forces for worldwide Sharia are just smarter and more determined than the average American, and certainly smarter than most of our elected officials. The Communists in 1917, just like the Chinese and Russians now were and still are willing to play the long game and infiltrate, demonize, dehumanize and conquer much of the free world to suit their ends.

It should come as no surprise that radical islam has read the playbook and is using it to their advantage.

In our western world of immediate outrage and instant gratification the social media has made it “cool” to demonize the President for wishing to secure our borders while ignoring the fascist threats.

Who really runs the media?

Eight short years ago, the media fell over themselves to welcome President Obama and I was right there with them hoping for the best for our country.

Would not it be wonderful if the same courtesy was given to President Trump while he attempts to stem the open border situation and protect all of us from enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic?

Yes, President Trump was not the candidate of my party, but he is my President and if you are a citizen he is, like it or not, your President. President Obama asked us to support him and I am honoring his wishes. I wish the media would do so as well.

[scooperhsd]

Well written letter.

Good luck getting it published (in general), although they will bave some excuse like "it's too long",, etc...

Keep us posted if it actually gets published.

[Hook#3287]

Evan, eloquently written

I hope it gets published.

But unfortunately, truth doesn't seem to matter in our society any longer.

[Cracker Jack]

Great Missive. I've taken the liberty to copy and send to all on my distribution list that I think would be interested. Hope it is OK.

I have assumed that it is since it is intended for newspaper distribution. Should be required reading for all US Citizens

[Valker]

Well said. This needs to be read by many.

[Moonshot_1]

any comments welcomed

Another viewpoint   

There has been much vitrol directed at President Trump over the Executive Order which suspended, temporarily, immigration from 7 countries.

Heaven knows if, or why, supposedly impartial journalists were unable to read the Order, as if they had, they should recognize it is NOT a “ban”. Calling it a ban is wrong and destroys the credibility of the news organization, including this paper.

Certainly, no person would propose that the Commander in Chief does not have the obligation to protect the citizens of this country from enemies foreign and domestic. This includes the border and the ability of people to come into the USA.

How short is the collective memory of the media? One could look to our prior POTUS, Barack Obama, to find a similar path taken to deal with a perceived problem.  There was no outrage or hatred directed at Mr. Obama by the media and no protests in the streets.

Another Democrat, Jimmy Carter also banned Iranians back when the Shah was deposed and the hostages taken. I believe there have been 6 outright bans during the last 100 years which ran their course after serving the purpose.

100 years ago, a much more restrictive act was passed by Congress which overrode a Woodrow Wilson veto on the eve of our entry into WWI.

As a result Ellis Island closed, perhaps we should bring such a place back so people with Visa’s and other grey area people could be vetted here. After all, the process of obtaining a visa is a long process for most and to get one, a person must go through a process that has NO appeal.

Perhaps the new Congress will pick up the mantle in response to a rogue Justice of the 9th Circuit’s decision to block a clearly Constitutional order. (That order by the way is being reconsidered by the whole 9th Circuit.)  Remember, Obama passed a Ban not a Suspension and the 9th Circuit was silent as it was during Carter’s ban !  What does this tell all of us about the members of that 9th Circuit (which has lately been over turned by 80%, by the Supreme Court) and also about the media and those behind the protests.

Of course, many compassionate individuals are upset to see someone denied medical care, or a family divided but this was a temporary suspension which inconvenienced only a few of the millions who travel, and again, the Order provided for review by State and Homeland Security.

You may think from all of the above that I am a Republican however you would be wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat. I find it disturbing that those protesting fail to apply their logic to the facts pertaining to fundamental Islam as it exists in the world.

It is indisputable that women under Sharia law may be beaten,  caned for having premarital sex, may suffer genital mutilation, may be beheaded for adultery and other “ honor” crimes.  Also, that gays and transgender risk death if discovered. Where is women's outrage??

The collective attention span of my fellow Americans seems very short. Not enough recognize the elements of fascism in Islamic extremism. Few remember much of the Moslem world was not against Hitler. If you live under Sharia Law there is no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no tolerance of gays and no criticism of the Koran is allowed under pain of death or jihad.

One can look to countries in Europe where Sharia law is openly enforced and law abiding citizens are beaten, threatened and killed.  In England Moslem clergy openly call for Sharia to be the law of the land. Youtube fortunately is filled with their videos so denial of this fact is just disingenuous. Likewise the call for death to America (Big Satan) and destruction of Israel (Little Satan) continues unabated for seventy years now.

Yet where is the moral outrage from my party? Why is it only the Republican party is speaking out and not a soul from my party and certainly no major network or television station? Why hasn’t our highly ranked Senator, a Democrat, moved in Congress to enact some kind of act that protects those visa holders instead of crying about the only move made in years to stop and take a hard look at the problems of immigration from countries with active terrorist cells, bent on OUR destruction?

You won't like the truth.  It is that the forces for worldwide Sharia are just smarter and more determined than the average American, and certainly smarter than most of our elected officials. The Communists in 1917, just like the Chinese and Russians now were and still are willing to play the long game and infiltrate, demonize, dehumanize and conquer much of the free world to suit their ends.

It should come as no surprise that radical islam has read the playbook and is using it to their advantage.

In our western world of immediate outrage and instant gratification the social media has made it “cool” to demonize the President for wishing to secure our borders while ignoring the fascist threats.

Who really runs the media?

Eight short years ago, the media fell over themselves to welcome President Obama and I was right there with them hoping for the best for our country.

Would not it be wonderful if the same courtesy was given to President Trump while he attempts to stem the open border situation and protect all of us from enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic?

Yes, President Trump was not the candidate of my party, but he is my President and if you are a citizen he is, like it or not, your President. President Obama asked us to support him and I am honoring his wishes. I wish the media would do so as well.

Ok some comments. Remember you done asked!

General theme and perspective right on the money.

Editorial suggestions.

1. You wrote- Calling it a ban is wrong..... it is but you should also call it what it is."Calling it a ban is wrong. It is a moratorium." Or something like that. Then refer to this EO as a moratorium throughout.

2. You wrote -Certainly, no person would propose that the Commander in Chief does not have the obligation to protect the citizens of this country from enemies foreign and domestic. This includes the border and the ability of people to come into the USA.

I'd invoke the Constitution here. A suggested edit...

The Commander in Chief has the Constitutional and Statutory Obligation to protect the Citizens of the Country from enemies foreign and domestic. This includes Border security, Port of Entry security, and to regulate the ability of people to come into the USA. This is not only self evident but Constitutional by definition.

3. I'd leave the Obama ban and 9th circuit out of it. Nail the 9th circuit on the current moratorium.
The 9th circuit could only rule on Obama's ban if a case was brought before it at the time. I'm not aware that any related case was so the 9th had no way to offer an opinion at all. The way you have it written would suggest they did have a way.

Aside from that the rest looks pretty decent in theme and context.

Might want to look at reframing the last few paragraphs for the flow but that goes to your perspective as well. Meaning you gotta write it like you say and think it.

Stick it to'em

[Oldfishguy]

any comments welcomed

Another viewpoint   

There has been much vitrol directed at President Trump over the Executive Order which suspended, temporarily, immigration from 7 countries.

Heaven knows if, or why, supposedly impartial journalists were unable to read the Order, as if they had, they should recognize it is NOT a “ban”. Calling it a ban is wrong and destroys the credibility of the news organization, including this paper.

Certainly, no person would propose that the Commander in Chief does not have the obligation to protect the citizens of this country from enemies foreign and domestic. This includes the border and the ability of people to come into the USA.

How short is the collective memory of the media? One could look to our prior POTUS, Barack Obama, to find a similar path taken to deal with a perceived problem.  There was no outrage or hatred directed at Mr. Obama by the media and no protests in the streets.

Another Democrat, Jimmy Carter also banned Iranians back when the Shah was deposed and the hostages taken. I believe there have been 6 outright bans during the last 100 years which ran their course after serving the purpose.

100 years ago, a much more restrictive act was passed by Congress which overrode a Woodrow Wilson veto on the eve of our entry into WWI.

As a result Ellis Island closed, perhaps we should bring such a place back so people with Visa’s and other grey area people could be vetted here. After all, the process of obtaining a visa is a long process for most and to get one, a person must go through a process that has NO appeal.

Perhaps the new Congress will pick up the mantle in response to a rogue Justice of the 9th Circuit’s decision to block a clearly Constitutional order. (That order by the way is being reconsidered by the whole 9th Circuit.)  Remember, Obama passed a Ban not a Suspension and the 9th Circuit was silent as it was during Carter’s ban !  What does this tell all of us about the members of that 9th Circuit (which has lately been over turned by 80%, by the Supreme Court) and also about the media and those behind the protests.

Of course, many compassionate individuals are upset to see someone denied medical care, or a family divided but this was a temporary suspension which inconvenienced only a few of the millions who travel, and again, the Order provided for review by State and Homeland Security.

You may think from all of the above that I am a Republican however you would be wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat. I find it disturbing that those protesting fail to apply their logic to the facts pertaining to fundamental Islam as it exists in the world.

It is indisputable that women under Sharia law may be beaten,  caned for having premarital sex, may suffer genital mutilation, may be beheaded for adultery and other “ honor” crimes.  Also, that gays and transgender risk death if discovered. Where is women's outrage??

The collective attention span of my fellow Americans seems very short. Not enough recognize the elements of fascism in Islamic extremism. Few remember much of the Moslem world was not against Hitler. If you live under Sharia Law there is no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no tolerance of gays and no criticism of the Koran is allowed under pain of death or jihad.

One can look to countries in Europe where Sharia law is openly enforced and law abiding citizens are beaten, threatened and killed.  In England Moslem clergy openly call for Sharia to be the law of the land. Youtube fortunately is filled with their videos so denial of this fact is just disingenuous. Likewise the call for death to America (Big Satan) and destruction of Israel (Little Satan) continues unabated for seventy years now.

Yet where is the moral outrage from my party? Why is it only the Republican party is speaking out and not a soul from my party and certainly no major network or television station? Why hasn’t our highly ranked Senator, a Democrat, moved in Congress to enact some kind of act that protects those visa holders instead of crying about the only move made in years to stop and take a hard look at the problems of immigration from countries with active terrorist cells, bent on OUR destruction?

You won't like the truth.  It is that the forces for worldwide Sharia are just smarter and more determined than the average American, and certainly smarter than most of our elected officials. The Communists in 1917, just like the Chinese and Russians now were and still are willing to play the long game and infiltrate, demonize, dehumanize and conquer much of the free world to suit their ends.

It should come as no surprise that radical islam has read the playbook and is using it to their advantage.

In our western world of immediate outrage and instant gratification the social media has made it “cool” to demonize the President for wishing to secure our borders while ignoring the fascist threats.

Who really runs the media?

Eight short years ago, the media fell over themselves to welcome President Obama and I was right there with them hoping for the best for our country.

Would not it be wonderful if the same courtesy was given to President Trump while he attempts to stem the open border situation and protect all of us from enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic?

Yes, President Trump was not the candidate of my party, but he is my President and if you are a citizen he is, like it or not, your President. President Obama asked us to support him and I am honoring his wishes. I wish the media would do so as well.

Well, just one minor point:  The attention span of the the average reader is pretty short, you need to catch them off guard a little earlier.  This statement should be moved to very early:

"You may think from all of the above that I am a Republican however you would be wrong. I am a lifelong Democrat. I find it disturbing that those protesting fail to apply their logic to the facts pertaining to fundamental Islam as it exists in the world."

The way it is written now most readers will assume you are a staunch Republican after the first few sentences and will tune out and not even listen to your message.  To get the audience you want to read this they need to identify with you and then you will be able to hold them for a bit longer.

Yes, we are so polarized these days that many are not even listening to the other side.  First, pull them in, then send your message.

Best of luck.

David

[Oss]

thanks for the suggestions

If anyone wants the updated version send me a PM or email me
evan@rogersandrogersesq.com

[The emperor has no clothes]

Evan, I agree with Moonshot's recommendations.

[3fan4life]

A very good letter and some excellent editorial suggestions!

The amount and diversity of talent in our "little" club never ceases to amaze me.

[G-Man]

Can you come over and tell this to Cheryl and Kike'?

[Oss]

No but you can print it for them   

I did sent it to lohud.com (the Journal News) and a few members asked me to send the edited version

[Alpha Dog]

No but you can print it for them   

I did sent it to lohud.com (the Journal News) and a few members asked me to send the edited version

Good for you Oss.  Now we need another million to do as much.

[Daddie O]

I think the issue with the ban, moratorium, suspension, or whatever you want to call it is that on one hand it seems arbitrary because none of the terrorist attacks that have occurred here were perpetrated by anyone from those countries, yet on the other hand it is a thinly veiled action against people from those countries based on their religion alone.

It's also interesting that the countries from where there were terrorists that have perpetrated terrorist acts on American soil were strangely left out of the "suspension", seemingly because the president has business ties in those countries.  If the goal was to "keep us safe", wouldn't the suspension apply to countries who's citizens have a history of attacking us as opposed to those that don't?

On the other hand, President Carter had opted to impose sanctions on Iran, which included a cessation of diplomatic relations, a prohibition on trade, assessment of previously-frozen Iranian Government assets, the cancellation of Iranian-U.S. visas, and a moratorium on new visas (with exceptions for humanitarian and otherwise compelling situations) in response to Iranian terrorists’ having invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran five months earlier and taken 50 American citizens hostage.  Stripped of context (and if readers squinted very hard), President Carter’s remarks bore a passing resemblance to Donald Trump’s proposal. However, while Carter’s action involved a well-defined class of persons (Iranian citizens) being denied entry to the U.S. until a well-defined goal was achieved (the hostages were released), President Trump's proposal is not clearly defined ("until we find out what's going on").

Obama’s suspension was in direct response to a failed plot by Iraqi nationals living in Bowling Green, Ky., to send money, explosives and weapons to al-Qaida. The two men were arrested by the FBI in May 2011 for actions committed in Iraq and trying to assist overseas terrorist groups.

Both had entered the United States as refugees after lying about their past terrorism ties on paperwork. One man worked as a bombmaker in Iraq, and the FBI even matched his fingerprints to an unexploded IED discovered in 2005 in Iraq, raising questions about the thoroughness of the vetting process.

Trump’s ban, meanwhile, is more preemptive. No refugee or immigrant from any of the seven countries targeted by the ban has been implicated in any fatal terrorist attack in the United States.

The "vitriol" directed at Trump has to do with trying to implement a poorly thought out plan, which arbitrarily bans people from countries because they are muslim, without any evidence that they are a threat that would be ameliorated by "suspending" their entry.

[Alpha Dog]

I think the issue with the ban, moratorium, suspension, or whatever you want to call it is that on one hand it seems arbitrary because none of the terrorist attacks that have occurred here were perpetrated by anyone from those countries, yet on the other hand it is a thinly veiled action against people from those countries based on their religion alone.

It's also interesting that the countries from where there were terrorists that have perpetrated terrorist acts on American soil were strangely left out of the "suspension", seemingly because the president has business ties in those countries.  If the goal was to "keep us safe", wouldn't the suspension apply to countries who's citizens have a history of attacking us as opposed to those that don't?

On the other hand, President Carter had opted to impose sanctions on Iran, which included a cessation of diplomatic relations, a prohibition on trade, assessment of previously-frozen Iranian Government assets, the cancellation of Iranian-U.S. visas, and a moratorium on new visas (with exceptions for humanitarian and otherwise compelling situations) in response to Iranian terrorists’ having invaded the U.S. Embassy in Tehran five months earlier and taken 50 American citizens hostage.  Stripped of context (and if readers squinted very hard), President Carter’s remarks bore a passing resemblance to Donald Trump’s proposal. However, while Carter’s action involved a well-defined class of persons (Iranian citizens) being denied entry to the U.S. until a well-defined goal was achieved (the hostages were released), President Trump's proposal is not clearly defined ("until we find out what's going on").

Obama’s suspension was in direct response to a failed plot by Iraqi nationals living in Bowling Green, Ky., to send money, explosives and weapons to al-Qaida. The two men were arrested by the FBI in May 2011 for actions committed in Iraq and trying to assist overseas terrorist groups.

Both had entered the United States as refugees after lying about their past terrorism ties on paperwork. One man worked as a bombmaker in Iraq, and the FBI even matched his fingerprints to an unexploded IED discovered in 2005 in Iraq, raising questions about the thoroughness of the vetting process.

Trump’s ban, meanwhile, is more preemptive. No refugee or immigrant from any of the seven countries targeted by the ban has been implicated in any fatal terrorist attack in the United States.

The "vitriol" directed at Trump has to do with trying to implement a poorly thought out plan, which arbitrarily bans people from countries because they are muslim, without any evidence that they are a threat that would be ameliorated by "suspending" their entry.

There have been 72 documented terrorist attacks or break up of terrorist attacks before they happened by folks from those countries since 911.  From all predominately Muslim countries in the neighborhood of 572.  The temporary ban for 90 days includes Christians, although the Isis, and other Jihad groups seem to be doing a pretty good job of eliminating them at the source.  Much under reported story, but then again who really cares about Christians and Jews.   Me for one. 

[Oss]

 Saudi Arabia had just announced that they were going to work on helping displaced Syrian refugees. They are actively fighting Isis in Yemen. ( Isis is in many countries, thanks to the failed policies of Obama)  I wont touch your math on terrorist acts  its like teaching a pig to dance (only annoys the pig)
3W told me that joke but I think I just butchered the punch line

However I will say that the Executive Order was a STARTING POINT as we (Thank you Obama) dont have a proper vetting process. You agree that the Commander in Chief's job to make sure we have a secure border, plans for dealing with the refugees before they get to america and arrangements with allies to house the refugees, safely, before bringing them here.

Its well and good to cry for the world DaddyO and to look for business ties here of anyone in power or in congress but the bottom line is Obama kissed the Saudi King's ring after bending over and there is no way on this earth Obama would ever do anything to piss off the Saudi's.  After a week in the Oval office the Saudi king is on the phone to Trump offering his assistance with refugees.  This is a positive first step.

Perhaps the number of countries will be expanded or lessened.  I've been mightily inconvenienced at airports since 9-11. It does not bother me that others are inconvenienced.

I understand that you have at least one failing dam that the feds have been asking California to fix for a decade. Real people are in real danger.  Wonder how many are looking into why California's head was up its ass for so long and hope nobody dies when that spillway collapses.

Or how about some kind of demonstrations against those that want to kill gays, publicly cane women who have premarital sex (by the way if you are single and want an abortion under Sharia you first get to be caned, or worse before even asking for an abortion assuming one could get one in the first place)