Trump’s travel ban wouldn’t have stopped 9/11

RE: All you Trump crit­ics take note (Feb. 13)

The Hamilton Spectator - - COMMENT -

Peter Col­ley poses a thought pro­vok­ing ques­tion: “If there was an at­tack like the World Trade Cen­ter in this coun­try, what would you think then?” Would we turn the other cheek? My ini­tial re­ac­tion was, prob­a­bly not. Even af­ter some thought, still prob­a­bly not.

There would, no doubt, be some dras­tic con­se­quences for the per­pe­tra­tors and plan­ners and sanc­tions against their re­spec­tive coun­tries of ori­gin. That is where Mr. Col­ley’s let­ter in sup­port of the Trump pres­i­dency not only falls apart, it be­comes dan­ger­ous and in­flam­ma­tory, not un­like much of what we hear from Trump him­self.

The let­ter con­tains just enough truth to be con­vinc­ing, but a lit­tle fact check­ing is war­ranted and re­veal­ing. In the at­tack on the World Trade Cen­ter on 9/11, of the 19 hi­jack­ers, 15 were ci­ti­zens of Saudi Ara­bia, and the oth­ers were from the United Arab Emi­rates (2), Egypt, and Le­banon. How­ever, Trump’s now failed ban listed the tar­geted coun­tries as Iraq, Iran, Libya, So­ma­lia, Su­dan, Syria, and Ye­men. So Mr. Col­ley, you pose a good ques­tion on its own, but don’t use it as a sup­port­ive ar­gu­ment for Trump and his poli­cies. David Wise­man, Cale­do­nia

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.