On Trump's choice of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen-Criteria for selection clearly spelt out in Obama era legislation, but ignored by various experts "re-imagining" US law that binds Trump


by Ganesh Sahathevan

Much is being said of  President Trump's Executive Order  Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States or “Refugee/Muslim Ban” , but precious little about the legislation which empowers it.

Examples  of  "expert" commentary:
President Trump's Muslim ban excludes countries linked to his sprawling business empire


Trump left countries with high terror risk off his banned list


What the Obama era legislation which binds Trump's executive order actually says:


(A)In general
The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, shall evaluate program countries on an annual basis based on the criteria described in subparagraph (B) and shall identify any program country, the admission of nationals from which under the visa waiver program under this section, the Secretary determines presents a high risk to the national security of the United States.
(B)CriteriaIn evaluating program countries under subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, shall consider the following criteria:
(i)
The number of nationals of the country determined to be ineligible to travel to the United States under the program during the previous year.
(ii)
The number of nationals of the country who were identified in United States Government databases related to the identities of known or suspected terrorists during the previous year.
(iii)
The estimated number of nationals of the country who have traveled to Iraq or Syria at any time on or after March 1, 2011 to engage in terrorism.
(iv)
The capacity of the country to combat passport fraud.
(v)
The level of cooperation of the country with the counter-terrorism efforts of the United States.
(vi)
The adequacy of the border and immigration control of the country.
(vii)
Any other criteria the Secretary of Homeland Security determines to be appropriate.
(C)Suspension of designation
The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, may suspend the designation of a program country based on a determination that the country presents a high risk to the national security of the United States under subparagraph (A) until such time as the Secretary determines that the country no longer presents such a risk.


In other words,an Executive Order aimed precisely at US visa waivers. The matter of jihadis from Saudi Arabia ,Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries are not dealt with in this executive order, but that does not mean it is not being dealt with at all.
Posters of this sort do nothing to tell us anything at all about the Executive Order.

No automatic alt text available.

END  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Not new or worthy of consideration" : WA Corruption & Crime Commissioner confirms but dismisses Anne Azza Aly 's referring queries about PAVE, her work to Malaysia

Image
by Ganesh Sahathevan       John McKechnie The issues raised on my related RealpoltikAsia blog in the posting:  ALP's Anne Aly's Phoenix Consulting of Dubai provides covert intel training-Who does she report to in Dubai, and then there is the matter of Malaysia....... were brought to the attention of The Hon John McKechnie QC,the current Commissioner, WA Corruption and Crime ,given the security implications that arise from the connections between PAVE and one David (Dave) Allen, currently Assistant Director Intelligence,WA CCC. McKechnie's response is as follows: Thank you for the email. I am the Corruption and Crime Commissioner. I will decide if and when Mr Allens security clearance should be reconsidered but nothing in this email is either new or worthy of consideration. The Hon John McKechnie QC Readers have now confirmation from no  less a personage than the WA CCC Commissioner himself, a former judge and QC,of the fact of Aly's Dubai connection, and her ref...
Read more

If Damien Tudehope's COVID hotel quarantine fee statements are correct, SLHD revenue reported in financial statements signed by former CEO Teresa Anderson is overstated, and false

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevan                     Tough talking Damien Tudehope may not have the power to impose th.  bulk of his quarantine fee, if any Readers will recall that former NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller (now a PwC partner) said in his notice that Revenue NSW " will be charging a mandatory quarantine fee". Readers will also recall that the rormer NSW Minister For Financial Services, Damien Tudehope insisted that the quarantine fees charged by Sydney Local Health District, pursuant to the NSW Health Services Act include charges for police security. However, there is nothing  in the SLHD's financial statements for the relevant periods (see links below) to reflect any payment from the COVID quarantine fee revenue being made over to NSW Police. SLHD's revenue must then have been overstated, by the CEO concerned Teresa Anderson.  SLHD Financial Statements https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/annualreport/Publicat...
Read more

Strata managers' aversion to contact with tenants can leave strata managers exposed to personal liability

Image
 by Ganesh Sahathevan      Advice for living in, or buying into, a strata community Strata managers are employed to manage strata schemes which are often home to renters as well as owners. However, in evasion of that which they are paid to do there are instances where strata managers have attempted  to evade their duties by refusing to  deal with tenants.   Even this writer can recall an instance where the strata manager warned that it was against the law for tenants to contact him directly.  The instances where strata managers have refused to deal with tenants occur when the issues raised concern fairly pedestrian maintenance issues, for example blocked plumbing and the like. Having said that, tenants do actually have a legal right to a great many things, including being informed (and presumably make representations) when strata schemes consider re-development. Strata managers who seek to stand in place of strata committees  are even more e...
Read more