Richard Amerling, M.D.
Our feckless president’s reckless push to bring “refugees” from Syria, who are 97% Muslim and mostly men of fighting age, into the United States is analogous to his open border policy regarding potential Ebola carriers.
A little over a year ago, an Ebola-infected African immigrant was admitted to a hospital in Dallas with full blown Ebola. His stay at that hospital transformed it to the front line in a crucial battle. Two nurses who treated this man became infected. Miraculously, both survived and the disease didn’t spread further (though one of the nurses traveled in a jet with a fever, after being cleared by the CDC!).
Shortly thereafter, a young doctor, just back from treating Ebola patients in Africa, traveled around New York City with early symptoms of Ebola before being transported and isolated at Bellevue Hospital. Again, miraculously, no one else was infected by this individual.
I wrote in an op-Ed in November of last year, “There is simply no dispute that Ebola needs to be contained in West Africa. This clearly means limiting travel from this region to the United States, and requiring adequate quarantines when U.S. citizens return. Nigeria has done this and has successfully contained their outbreak. Australia became the first of the so-called developed nations to impose a travel ban…. Instead of travel restrictions, foreign health workers afflicted by Ebola may be airlifted into the U.S. for treatment. This is the opposite of containment.”
The Obama policy placed Americans at risk. Even one death from Ebola brought in from Africa would be one too many. The infected nurses were fortunate to survive, and went through an ordeal. A handful of infected people arriving in a city such as New York would place an enormous burden on the health system, and would have the potential to create a serious outbreak with many infections and deaths. This nightmare scenario did not materialize because Brussels Airlines, which has nearly complete control over flights from Ebola endemic regions, instituted an effective screening program.
The current “Syrian refugee crisis” is exactly analogous. A handful of ISIS recruits embedded into a migrant horde could obviously create havoc and death on American soil, possibly at a catastrophic level. The Paris massacre highlights this risk, since at least one of the attackers was a recent “refugee” from Syria. There is no way we can accurately vet migrants on anything like the scale that is being proposed. It is inevitable that many actual or potential terrorists will get in.
No sane American president, charged first and foremost with protecting the homeland and its citizens/residents, would pursue such a reckless policy. Yet, our so-called leader is pushing for tens of thousands of Muslim immigrants to be admitted into the United States. This country is under no obligation to accept any immigrants, let alone those from regions where the jihadi presence is so high.
Like the response to Ebola, this is another instance where Mr. Obama is acting in flagrant disregard for the safety of Americans and the homeland. And let us not forget that his precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, betraying the sacrifice of thousands of our best and bravest, led directly to the rise of ISIS. Let us also not forget his utter disregard for border security and for federal immigration law.
We cannot wait for an election still a year away, the outcome of which is obviously uncertain. There is an overwhelming case for immediate impeachment of the enemy in the Oval Office. The safety and survival of the Republic is in jeopardy.
Dr. Richard Amerling, MD, is a nephrologist practicing in New York City. He is the Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine for the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital.
Dr. Richard Amerling has written and lectured extensively on health care issues and is currently the President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. He is the author of the Physicians’ Declaration of Independence.
Dr. Richard Amerling’s position on Obama’s healthcare reform:
ObamaCare, beyond the enormous costs and dislocations, directly inserts itself into the doctor-patient relationship. It will make the practice of Hippocratic Medicine— “I will prescribe regimen for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment. I will keep them from harm and injustice.”—all but impossible.
