Thousands of pro-Palestine protestors gathered in Washington, D.C., raising concerns and sparking controversy amidst the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The demonstration drew attention to a bill proposed by Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, which seeks to halt Palestinian immigration into the United States. Democratic candidate Monica Tranel, who is running against Zinke in the upcoming election, publicly criticized the bill but failed to provide a clear stance on the issue.
Zinke’s bill, known as the Safeguarding Americans from Extremism (SAFE) Act, would render any foreign national with a Palestinian Authority (PA) passport or PA-granted travel document inadmissible to the United States. Furthermore, the legislation would prevent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from granting Temporary Protected Status (TPS), asylum, or refugee status to PA passport holders.
Tranel took to social media to voice her opposition to the bill, accusing Zinke of Islamophobia. However, when asked to elaborate on her position and provide her stance on the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, Tranel remained silent. This lack of response has raised questions about her willingness to engage in meaningful dialogue regarding the issue.
Zinke defended his bill, describing it as the most stringent anti-Gaza and anti-Hamas immigration and refugee bill to date. He criticized the current administration for its failure to effectively screen individuals seeking entry into the United States. Zinke has also expressed support for tougher sanctions on Iran and a ban on funds going to Iranian and Palestinian organizations.
The presence of individuals on the FBI terror watch list at the southern border has added fuel to the debate. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) statistics reveal that a record-breaking 169 individuals on the watch list were encountered at the border in the past year, up from 98 in the previous fiscal year. This alarming trend has prompted concerns about potential sleeper cells of terrorists within the country.
Experts, such as Lora Ries, the director of the Border Security and Immigration Center at The Heritage Foundation, have emphasized the need for Congress to address these potential threats. Ries argues that with the high number of encounters at the southern border and ongoing terrorist attacks on Israel, the United States must take proactive measures to preempt any potential attacks.
The issue of potential terror threats at the U.S. borders has gained attention from members of Congress and presidential candidates. They have called for a halt on Palestinians’ entry into the country, citing the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the emboldening of violent extremists.
Sen. Steve Daines, a Republican from Montana, has raised concerns about the vulnerability of the United States to terror attacks, especially with the war in the Middle East and an open southern border. Daines argues that the possibility of a terror attack on U.S. soil is no longer a hypothetical scenario but a matter of when.
The pro-Palestine protests in Washington, D.C., have brought attention to the complex issue of Palestinian immigration and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The controversy surrounding Rep. Zinke’s bill and Tranel’s response, or lack thereof, have added further depth to the debate. As concerns about potential terror threats at the U.S. borders grow, politicians and experts continue to call for measures to address these issues and safeguard national security.
