Renowned Neurosurgeon and U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Ben Carson is being berated for describing slaves as immigrants.
During his debut speech with HUD employees on Monday, Carson characterised slaves as immigrants who came to America, worked harder and longer for less, because they had a dream that their generations “might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land”.
“That’s what America is about. A land of dreams and opportunity. There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great grandsons, great granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land,” Carson said.
In an interview with SiriusXM‘s “Urban View” Carson defended himself, explaining that one can be an involuntary immigrant.
“I think people need to actually look up the word ‘immigrant’. Whether you are voluntary or involuntary, if you come from outside to the inside, you’re an immigrant. Whether you’re legal or you’re illegal, you come from the outside to the inside, you’re an immigrant. Slaves came here as involuntary immigrants, but they still had the strength to hold on,”
Carson told host Armstrong Williams.
Carson later made a statement on Facebook saying that “the slave narrative and immigrant narrative are two entirely different experiences”.
“I’m proud of the courage and perseverance of Black Americans and their incomprehensible struggle from slavery to freedom. I’m proud that our ancestors overcame the evil and repression that we know as slavery.
The slave narrative and immigrant narrative are two entirely different experiences. Slaves were ripped from their families and their homes and forced against their will after being sold into slavery by slave traders.
The Immigrants made the choice to come to America. They saw this country as a land of opportunity. In contrast, slaves were forced here against their will and lost all their opportunities. We continue to live with that legacy.
The two experiences should never be intertwined, nor forgotten, as we demand the necessary progress towards an America that’s inclusive and provides access to equal opportunity for all.
We should revel in the fact that although we got here through different routes, we have many things in common now that should unite us in our mission to have a land where there is liberty and justice for all,” he wrote.
The U.S. President Donald Trump has issued a new executive order, temporarily blocking travel to the US for residents of six Muslim-majority countries pending revision of visa procedures, AFP reports.
The revised travel ban excludes Iraq which was included in the January ban as the government in Baghdad agreed to increase cooperation with the US on background checks for its citizens applying for visas.
The new order halts the issuance of new US visas to citizens of Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen for the next 90 days.
During a briefing Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer disputed the notion that President Trump’s executive order halting immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries constitutes a “ban.”
Our Source asked Spicer about comments Mayor Rudy Giuliani made in a Fox News interview last Saturday, in which he suggested that the order evolved out of Trump’s campaign promise to impose a “Muslim ban.” Spicer argued that the order does not constitute “a Muslim ban” or a “travel ban.”
“I think the president has talked about extreme vetting and the need to keep America safe for a very, very long time. At the same time, he’s also made very clear that this is not a Muslim ban. It’s not a travel ban. It’s a vetting system to keep America safe. That’s it plain and simple, and all of the facts, and a reading of it, clearly show that that’s what it is,” Spicer said.
Yahoo News pointed out that Giuliani did not say the ban was based on religion, but instead suggested that it arose as a result of a desire for a Muslim ban.
“Then you should ask Mayor Giuliani,” Spicer replied. “That’s — that’s his opinion. I’m just telling you what the president has said, and what the president has done has been to focus on making sure that we keep the country safe and that the executive order that was drafted does just that.”
The order, which Trump signed last Friday afternoon, stopped people from Sudan, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Libya and Somalia from entering the United States for 90 days. It also barred all refugees from entering the United States for 120 days and indefinitely suspended the entry of refugees from Syria. The order caused some people with current visas to be detained and led to widespread protests and legal challenges.
During his presidential bid, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims” entering the U.S. That proposal subsequently evolved into a vague promise to impose “extreme vetting.” In his Fox News interview, Giuliani said Trump approached him to find a legal way to implement a “Muslim ban.”
“I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,'” Giuliani said.
Giuliani went on to claim that Trump had asked him to form a commission to discuss the policy.
“He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally,’” said the mayor.
Giuliani said he had assembled a group that “focused on, instead of religion, danger.” He stressed that the policy it settled on was “not based on religion” and called it “perfectly legal, perfectly sensible.”
“It’s based on places where there are substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country,” he said.
Yahoo News followed Spicer’s advice and reached out to a spokeswoman for Giuliani, Jo Ann Zafonte, to ask about the mayor’s comments.
“I’m sorry, the mayor is not available,” she said.
In the briefing, Spicer stressed to Yahoo News that the seven countries affected by the order had already had restrictions placed on them during the administration of President Barack Obama. Specifically, people traveling from those countries, or who had recently visited them, were deemed ineligible for the “visa waiver” program, and had to apply for a visa to enter the U.S. But they were not excluded altogether.
“It is … to make sure and to ensure that people coming in from seven countries identified by the Obama administration [where] we didn’t have the proper systems, to know who was coming into our country,” Spicer said, later adding, “A 90-day period was also granted to ensure that we knew how to further address vetting situations in the future.”
Despite Spicer’s contention that the order is not “a ban,” he and Trump have both used this language in the past. Spicer referred to it as a “90-day ban” in an appearance on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday that was subsequently touted in a White House press release. Trump himself described the order as a “ban” in a tweet he sent on Monday, in which he defended the fact that it was announced without warning, as a necessary step to ensure “bad ‘dudes’” did not “rush into our country” before it took effect.
During the briefing, NBC News’ Kristen Welker read Trump’s tweet and asked Spicer how he could deny that the order was a “ban” if the president was using that language to describe it. Spicer argued that Trump is “using the words that the media is using,” which prompted an incredulous response from another reporter in the briefing room.
“Those are his words!” the reporter exclaimed.
Spicer went on to argue that the U.S. is still admitting large numbers of visitors into the country.
“It can’t be a ban if you’re letting a million people in … that is by nature not a ban. It is extreme vetting,” Spicer said.
In recent years, the total number of foreign visitors to the U.S., including those from Canada and Mexico, has been around 6 million a month.
Spicer concluded by repeating his claim that the media was responsible for the order being described as a ban.
“I think that the words that are being used to describe it derive from what the media is calling this. He has been very clear that it is extreme vetting,” he said.
- At the press conference on Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly promised to carry out the executive order "humanely" and "in accordance with the law." | AP Photo
Republican and Democratic lawmakers peppered President Donald Trump's homeland security chief John Kelly with questions Tuesday about the administration's new immigration restrictions, which sowed chaos at international airports and sent shockwaves around the world.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly on Tuesday defended the implementation of President Donald Trump's immigration order, saying "we knew it was coming" despite the confusion after its signing.
"It wasn't a surprise that it was coming, so we implemented it," Kelly told reporters, saying he believes that he knew by Thursday that Trump would sign it the next day.
Trump's temporary ban on entry from seven mostly Muslim countries and temporary suspension of the U.S. refugee program sparked immediate confusion and protests around the country and condemnation from lawmakers from both parties. Some lawful permanent residents were detained at U.S. airports, and some reports indicated that the White House did not tell Kelly about the order's specifics before it was signed.
Kelly said Tuesday he had seen at least two drafts of the order but did not give much clarity about how much he knew about the final order before Trump signed it.
Trump signed the order late Friday. It indefinitely bars Syrian refugees from entering the country, suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days and blocks citizens of the seven majority countries from entering the country for 90 days, except for minorities facing persecution. It prompted criticism from lawmakers who said it could hurt rather than help the fight against terrorism.
Kelly played down concerns about how the government rolled out Trump's order. In particular, he said officials are complying with a court order protecting some visa holders from deportation, despite reports that some border agents have not followed it.
"No member of the Homeland Security team ignored the court order nor would they ignore they court order," Kelly said, adding that he had heard the reports and asked for more information on them.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, who supports the order, on Tuesday called the confusion over its rollout "regrettable."
Much of the criticism about the order's implementation surrounded lawful permanent residents, or green card holders. Kelly said Sunday he deemed letting permanent lawful residents into the country to be in the national interest, after the administration previously indicated that green card holders could face additional scrutiny on a case-by-case basis.
Acting Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan said that in the first 72 hours of the order, 721 people with visas from the affected countries were denied entry to the U.S., while 1,061 were granted waivers.
About 1 million travelers came into the country during that span, including 500,000 foreign nationals, McAleenan said.
Kelly echoed the White House in denying that the order is a Muslim ban. On the campaign trail, Trump once called for a temporary "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" until Washington could figure out how to prevent terrorists from entering. He then changed his rhetoric to the so-called "extreme vetting" procedures he signed last week.
Also on Monday night, Trump fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who refused to defend the order. In a statement, he alleged that she "betrayed" the Department of Justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
