Editor In Chief Rachael Kriger and staff writer April Pfrogner talk why their either against (Kriger) or for (Pfrogner) the travel ban proposed by President Donald Trump.

Kriger Against: Think about humanity for a minute

I want you to close your eyes and picture this: One night, you go to sleep in your bedroom, here in the United States of America.

However, when you open your eyes, you’re not in your bedroom. You’re in Syria. You’re in a refugee camp. All you hear is gunshots, explosions and screaming. You want back in your bedroom in America. You look around and see the faces of innocent men, women and children.

Now open your eyes again. Reality snaps back into place, and you, indeed, are in the United States. You’re safe and sound in the confinements of your living space. You’re doing alright. Everything in intact. You go to the window, and there’s not bombings or gunshots outside. There’s the typical view you’re so used to seeing.

However, for Syrians, and many other Middle Eastern people, the typical view they see is what your worst nightmare was.

Now, remember your dream you had. Remember those innocent men, women and children? Mainly Muslim people, their reality is that nightmare. Trying hard to protect their families, while also trying to protect themselves. They have their own government openly firing on them. There isn’t much hope for survival.

Those people in Syria- as well as Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Iran and Iraq- are having the door shut against them by the United States of America. The same country that thrives on claims of major diversity and acceptance. The same country that was founded on the basis of immigrants.

The Immigration Ban that was laid out to the rest of the world on Saturday, Jan. 28, is not only incredibly unconstitutional, but it’s disgraceful. It’s un-American. It’s not who the United States is as a nation.

We’re a melting pot. I’ve mentioned this many times. Many people look my direction, and don’t take another glance. Little do most know, I was born in Russia, to a Russian mother and a Middle Eastern father. While I am an American citizen, and this doesn’t affect me here in America, it affects people that I share the same skin color as. It affects people that possibly have the same blood as me.

This affects me personally- even if I’m not being detained in an airport.

This affects me because I’m watching the news, and hearing stories about how families are being torn apart. Why? Because Donald Trump thinks that all Muslims are terrorists and that all people from the Middle East are bad apples. Meanwhile, no person from any of those seven countries has made an attack on United States soil. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and other countries- which Trump has certain assets in- are home to many radical terrorists.

That’s another notion. The whole idea of calling radical terrorists, “radical Islamic terrorists” is not OK. Those terrorists are not speaking on behalf of Islam. While I’m not Muslim, I do have Muslim friends, and have studied the Islam religion. It’s a religion of peace. Is Trump forgetting that Christians are also committing mass murder attacks? That it’s not just imposters saying they’re “Muslim?”

This whole situation is unconstitutional. Now, asking for background checks and such before granting visas, green cards or passports is 100 percent constitutional. I’m not arguing that. I’m arguing that shutting innocent people- especially the ones that need our help- is unconstitutional. It’s wrong.

And I hope President Trump remembers that now, the blood of many innocent people who will die because of this is now on his hands. Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is doing the right thing, and opening Canada’s arms to the people in need. Mr. Trump, take some notes.

This ban is for 90 days for people from the seven countries wanting to enter the United States and 120 days for refugees. While it’s not permanent, the threat of it being a permanent ban is real- and scary. 90 days, 120 days, whatever. This ban should have never happened in the first place.

I want to applaud the judges, protesters and others speaking out and taking a stand against President Trump. Resisting is our right, and you better believe we won’t stop until our voices are heard. We’re protesters, not rioters, and we will make our voices heard.

We are a country of immigrants. We are a country of diversity. We are a country that needs to learn respect when it comes to race, ethnicity and respect of other’s religions and beliefs. We’re a long way to go, but the Immigration/Muslim Ban is only proving that we’re farther than we thought.

This needs to change.

Pfrogner For: Not a Muslim ban

The hash tag #MuslimBan is inaccurate.

It is a ban of all refugees from seven of the 50 Muslim countries of the world: Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran, and Iraq, which were verified, via the Obama administration, to be hotbeds of terror.

A proper hashtag would be #RadicalIslamBan or #TravelBan.

Donald Trump’s proposal is not a ban against a race or a religion. Radical Islam is an ideology; one that is vehemently against the Judeo-Christian fabric of the United States. If it were a Muslim ban, as the media claims it to be, there would be a ban on all 50 Muslim countries.

There was no media outrage or protesting when President Bill Clinton, in his 1996 State of the Union address, talked about immigration. He got a standing ovation.

Here is a comparison between Trump and Clinton’s comments:
Clinton: One of these areas is the problem of illegal immigration.
Trump: We have to stop the in-flow of illegals coming into our country.
Clinton: This administration has taken a strong stand to stiffen the protection of our borders.
Trump: We will build a wall, it will do what it’s supposed to do, keep illegal immigrants out.
Clinton: We are increasing border controls by 50 percent.
Trump: We’re going to have a border, it’s going to be a real border… We have a country, we have to have borders
Clinton: We are increasing inspections to prevent the hiring of illegal immigrants and tonight I announce I will sign an Executive Order to deny Federal contracts to businesses that hire illegal immigrants.
Trump: You can be very, very strong. It can be a huge financial penalty, it can be beyond a financial penalty. You can do that with E-Verify. I’m for it.

Many people are also comparing Trump’s ban to a memorandum Barack Obama signed in 2011, limiting Iraqi refugees for a period of six months because of a terror threat. To me, the comparison is moot.

President Trump was elected because people wanted what he offered on the campaign trail. One of those things was extreme vetting. Trump’s ban is broader and is part of his promise to “Make America Safe Again.”

Looking at Obama’s time in office, worldwide terror attacks increased about seven percent, from 10,999 in 2009 to 11,774 attacks in 2015, according to Politifact.com. One terror event occurred on United States soil every year during Obama’s two terms in office.

According to Pew Research, a total of 38,901 Muslim refugees entered the United States in fiscal year of 2016, making up almost half (46 percent) of the nearly 85,000 refugees who entered the country in that period.

It’s scary to think that although most are immigrating to the United States to find a better way of life, all it takes is one bad apple to ruin a bunch. All it takes is one terrorist to get into the country and then we are all put in danger. Extreme vetting is necessary- and long overdue.

Trump is doing what Bill Clinton proposed back in 1996. Question is, “How, in 1996, did Clinton get a standing ovation at his State of the Union address for saying essentially the same things that Trump has said and is now doing?”

It’s because have a heavily biased media. The media has become fully politicized which is where things like #MuslimBan hashtags come from. News networks rarely give all the facts. Many spread a lot of propaganda instead factual evidence. When people their homework, they will see through the veil.