Connect with us

Government

Trump Signs Revised Travel Ban, Exempts Iraqis

Published

on

donald-trump
  • Trump Signs Revised Travel Ban, Exempts Iraqis

US President Donald Trump signed a revised ban on travelers from six Muslim-majority nations Monday, scaling back the order to exempt Iraqis and permanent US residents.

With his first attempt frozen by federal courts, Trump signed a second order halting new visas for Syrians, Iranians, Libyans, Somalis, Yemenis and Sudanese citizens.

The White House said Trump — who is embroiled in controversy over his aides’ links to Russia — signed the order behind closed doors Monday morning.

The new order is meant to address legal problems. It explicitly exempts Iraqis, legal permanent residents and valid visa holders.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, one of three cabinet members rolled out to present the order in Trump’s absence, described it as “a vital measure” for strengthening national security.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions added that it “provides a needed pause” allowing a review of how America deals with travelers from “countries of concern.”

“Three of these nations are state sponsors of terrorism,” Sessions said, referring to Iran, Sudan and Syria.

He added that others had served as “safe havens” for terror operatives.

Critics questioned the composition of the list, which includes citizens from countries that have never been involved in terror attacks in the United States.

They accused Trump of covertly pursuing his controversial and possibly illegal campaign promise of a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”

The question of Trump’s intent is likely to dominate new legal challenges that are already being flagged by organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union.

“President Trump has recommitted himself to religious discrimination, and he can expect continued disapproval from both the courts and the people,” said Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrant Rights Project.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said the measure should be repealed, adding: “A watered down ban is still a ban.”

– Travel ban, take two –

Trump’s first order had sparked a legal, political and logistical furor.

There was chaos at major airports and mass protests while several district courts moved to block its implementation and lawmakers expressed opposition.

The troubled rollout also dominated the first weeks of the new administration, leaving many with the impression that it was badly planned and badly implemented.

Polls show that American public opinion is deeply divided on the issue. Most indicate a slight majority of voters opposed, with strong support among Trump’s political base.

The Republican president criticized a court order suspending the ban as “a very bad decision, very bad for the safety and security of our country. The rollout was perfect.”

But he has now stepped away from a promise to challenge the matter in the courts. The second order repeals the first, spelling the end of any pending legal proceedings.

Whatever the legal outcome, Trump’s new ban is likely to polarize opinion further and be immensely popular with his core supporters.

– Shoulder to shoulder –

Iraq’s inclusion in the first order prompted outrage in that country, including from Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

It risked scuttling cooperation between Baghdad and Washington in fighting the Islamic State group.

The US and Iraqi militaries are currently fighting side-by-side in northern Iraq, trying to wrest the city of Mosul from jihadist control.

The Iraqi foreign ministry on Monday expressed its “deep satisfaction” with the new order, and described it as an “important step” in strengthening relations between Baghdad and Washington.

But the revised travel ban is also likely to sow further confusion about US immigration policies.

On Monday, Nigeria advised its citizens against all but essential travel to the United States, citing the lack of clarity on new immigration rules.

“In the last few weeks, the office has received a few cases of Nigerians with valid multiple-entry US visas being denied entry and sent back to Nigeria,” said special adviser to the president Abike Dabiri-Erewa.

According to a report released Monday by travel data firm Forwardkeys, travel from the United States to the Middle East has also fallen sharply, with bookings for departure in the next three months falling 25.4 percent behind the equivalent time last year.

– Roiled by Russia –

But the ban is likely to help Trump divert attention from rolling crises on his ties with Russia.

Since US intelligence publicly accused Russia of trying to swing the November election in Trump’s favor, questions have swirled about whether some in Trump’s campaign colluded with Moscow.

The last week has seen his attorney general recuse himself from election-related investigations, after it emerged he met the Russian ambassador in Washington twice during the campaign.

It has also seen Trump level unsubstantiated allegations that former president Barack Obama ordered a wiretap on the now president’s phone.

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Continue Reading
Comments

Government

Netanyahu Stands Firm as US Halts Bomb Shipment Over Rafah Invasion Warning

Published

on

Netanyahu

Amidst escalating tensions between Israel and the United States, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted a defiant stance following the US decision to halt a shipment of bombs and warned against Israel’s potential invasion of the southern Gaza city of Rafah.

In a bold statement, Netanyahu declared, “If we have to stand alone, we will stand alone,” emphasizing Israel’s resolve to pursue its objectives despite opposition.

The Prime Minister’s comments, delivered via social media and a subsequent interview with American talk show host Dr. Phil, underscore Israel’s determination to address security threats posed by the Gaza Strip, particularly by Hamas militants operating in Rafah.

Netanyahu reiterated the necessity of military action in Rafah to eliminate the remaining Hamas battalions, condemned Hamas’s history of violence and reiterated Israel’s commitment to achieving victory and ensuring the safety of its citizens.

The US administration, led by President Joe Biden, expressed concerns over the potential humanitarian impact of an Israeli invasion of Rafah, prompting the decision to withhold additional offensive weapons shipments to Israel.

Biden’s statement echoed broader international apprehensions about the escalation of violence and civilian casualties in the conflict-stricken region.

However, Netanyahu remained resolute in Israel’s approach, asserting the country’s right to defend itself against security threats. He emphasized Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties and facilitate the evacuation of civilians from Rafah before any military action.

Despite the US’s decision to pause the bomb shipment, Netanyahu affirmed Israel’s commitment to its longstanding alliance with the US. He acknowledged past disagreements between the two nations but expressed optimism about resolving current tensions through dialogue and cooperation.

In response, White House officials reiterated the US’s support for Israel’s security while urging restraint and emphasizing the need to avoid actions that could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The administration clarified that the decision to halt the bomb shipment was aimed at preventing potential civilian casualties in Rafah.

The confrontation between Israel and the US underscores the complexity of navigating regional conflicts and balancing strategic interests. As tensions persist, both nations face the challenge of reconciling their respective security imperatives with broader humanitarian concerns, seeking to avert further escalation while addressing the root causes of the conflict in the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Government

EFCC Declares Former Kogi Governor, Yahaya Bello, Wanted Over N80.2 Billion Money Laundering Allegations

Published

on

Yahaya Bello

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has escalated its pursuit of justice by declaring former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, wanted over alleged money laundering amounting to N80.2 billion.

In a first-of-its-kind action, the EFCC announced Bello’s wanted status in connection with the alleged embezzlement of funds during his tenure as governor.

The commission, armed with a 19-count criminal charge, accused Bello and his cohorts of conspiring to launder the hefty sum, which was purportedly diverted from state coffers for personal gain.

The declaration of Bello as a wanted fugitive came after a series of failed attempts by the EFCC to effect his arrest.

Despite an ex-parte order from Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, mandating the EFCC to apprehend and produce Bello in court for arraignment, the former governor managed to evade capture with the reported assistance of his successor, Governor Usman Ododo.

This latest development shows the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in holding powerful individuals accountable for their actions.

However, it also demonstrates the unwavering commitment of the EFCC to uphold the rule of law and ensure that justice is served, irrespective of the status or influence of the accused.

In response to the EFCC’s declaration, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, issued a stern warning to Bello, stating that fleeing from the law would not resolve the allegations against him.

Fagbemi urged Bello to honor the EFCC’s invitation and cooperate with the investigation process, saying it is important to uphold the rule of law and respect the authority of law enforcement agencies.

The EFCC’s pursuit of Bello underscores the agency’s mandate to combat corruption and financial crimes, sending a strong message that individuals implicated in corrupt practices will be held accountable for their actions.

Continue Reading

Government

Concerns Mount Over Security as National Identity Card Issuance Shifts to Banks

Published

on

NIMC enrolment

Amidst the National Identity Management Commission’s (NIMC) recent announcement that the issuance of the proposed new national identity card will be facilitated through applicants’ respective banks, concerns are escalating regarding the security implications of involving financial institutions in the distribution process.

The federal government, in collaboration with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS), introduced a new identity card with payment functionality, aimed at streamlining access to social and financial services.

However, the decision to utilize banks as distribution channels has sparked apprehension among industry stakeholders.

Mr. Kayode Adegoke, Head of Corporate Communications at NIMC, clarified that applicants would request the card by providing their National Identification Number (NIN) through various channels, including online portals, NIMC offices, or their respective banks.

Adegoke emphasized that the new National ID Card would serve as a single, multipurpose card, encompassing payment functionality, government services, and travel documentation.

Despite NIMC’s assurances, concerns have been raised regarding the necessity and security implications of introducing a new identity card system when an operational one already exists.

Chief Deolu Ogunbanjo, President of the National Association of Telecoms Subscribers, questioned the rationale behind the new General Multipurpose Card (GMPC), citing NIMC’s existing mandate to issue such cards under Act No. 23 of 2007.

Ogunbanjo highlighted the successful implementation of MobileID by NIMC, which has provided identity verification for over 15 million individuals.

He expressed apprehension about integrating the new ID card with existing MobileID systems and raised concerns about data privacy and unauthorized duplication of ID cards.

Moreover, stakeholders are seeking clarification on the responsibilities for card blocking, replacement, and delivery in case of loss or theft, given the involvement of multiple parties, including banks, in the issuance process.

The shift towards utilizing banks for identity card issuance raises fundamental questions about data security, privacy, and the integrity of the identification process.

With financial institutions playing a pivotal role in distributing sensitive government documents, there are valid concerns about potential vulnerabilities and risks associated with this approach.

As the debate surrounding the security implications of the new national identity card continues to intensify, stakeholders are calling for greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration between government agencies and financial institutions to address these concerns effectively.

The paramount importance of safeguarding citizens’ personal information and ensuring the integrity of the identity verification process cannot be overstated, especially in an era of increasing digital interconnectedness and heightened cybersecurity threats.

Continue Reading
Advertisement




Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending