This comment is written in the spirit of sadness and sympathy for the victims of the horrendous March 15 massacre of 49 worshipers at two New Zealand mosques, and as a warning of growing white nationalist terrorism around the world.

Yes, Donald Trump of course said the right things in condemning the horrendous Friday, March 15 massacre of 49 people at two mosques in New Zealand last Saturday as a "horrible, horrible thing", and in expressing his sympathy and condolences to the people of New Zealand. And, of course, Trump had no connection whatsoever with the attack or with the lone gunman.

But we still have to ask ourselves an uncomfortable but unavoidable question: How much did Trump's rhetoric of hate against Muslims and against non-white immigrants in general, as a candidate and as the president of the most powerful nation on earth, contribute to the mentality of the gunman who, in a lengthy manifesto posted right after the attack, praised Trump as a "symbol of white identity" and also warned of an immigrant "invasion" - the same word that Trump used later that same day in his veto statement in support of his bigoted border Wall fantasy? See: NBC News, March 17:

After New Zealand Shooting, Trump downplayed white nationalist threat. But experts say it's growing

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/after-n...xperts-n984136

And as an even more uncomfortable, but equally unavoidable question, did the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 majority, in putting its stamp of approval on Trump's Muslim Ban executive order last year, also, albeit indirectly and of course unintentionally, provide encouragement to those in America and around the world who look on adherents of the Muslim religion as somehow inferior, more threatening, and entitled to less protection of their basic human rights than other people?

I would rather not have to write about these questions. As a practicing immigration lawyer, I would rather be writing about other matters of more immediate concern to my clients.

Now that H-1B filing season is starting, how many fully qualified candidates who do not happen to have US master degrees will be shoved out of the running by the Trump administration's latest changes in the lottery selection rules?

What will be the preferred USCIS pretext for denying clearly approvable H-1B petitions this year? Will it be the same as in the recent past, namely that the offered job is "not a specialty occupation" despite overwhelming evidence that a specialty bachelor degree is normally required?

Or will an arguably Stephen Miller inspired USCIS bureaucracy think of new excuses for H-1B and other legal immigration petition and application denials, as part of the Trump administration's continuing efforts to roll back the number of highly skilled computer and other STEM professionals from India, and elsewhere outside Europe, who can come to the US with legal visas? See: Mercury News, August 20, 2018:

H-1B: U.S. officials cracking down on Indian citizens, report says:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/...s-report-says/

Questions like these are interesting and vitally important, and one can write about them at great length. They should be receiving top priority - even if the New Zealand Massacre had not taken place.

But it did take place.

Is it realistic to think that a powerful leader and world-wide public figure can spread hatred against Muslims as "terrorists" and all non-white immigrants as "violent criminal", "drug dealers" and "MS-13 gang members" who are "infesting" the United States without letup for almost for years without thinking that anyone will listen and act on these words?

And when the highest court in the United States puts its stamp of approval on a ban against people entering the US (let's stop using absurd euphemisms such as "travel ban" - they are free to travel anywhere they want - just to not to the United States) because of their religion, using an obviously transparent, "Trumped-up", "national security" pretext, is this not also a message to the haters of the world that Muslims are somehow lesser human beings?

Do words have no consequences? Do they never lead to violence?

The above NBC news reports states:

"Between 2008 and 2016, far right plots and attacks outnumbered Islamist incidents inspired by groups such as ISIS by almost 2 to 1, according to and independent database compiled by the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute.

The number of hate groups operating across America also rose to a record high of 1,028 in 2018, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The vast majority of these groups adhere to some form of white supremacist ideology, the center said..."

And USA Today reports that Richard Cohen, president of the SPLC, warns:

"We - and that includes policymakers and the law enforcement community, in particular - muatt begin to view what we call 'domestic' terrorism through a global lens, just as we do the threat of groups like ISIS, because the growing white supremacist movement represents a clear and present threat to democracies across the world."

And the same article quotes New York University communications professor Helio Garcia as follows:

"We are seeing a growing number of people who are never on any terrorist watchlist suddenly commit these acts and they often use language that has been a staple of the president's rhetoric, such as calling immigrants 'invaders'.

See: March 16,

New Zealand mosque shootings: How Donald Trump. US racism contributes to hate around world

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...sm/31/52/2002/

The horrific New Zealand massacre of 49 innocent Muslim men, women and children at their Friday prayers by a gunman who was openly proud to claim Donald Trump, the president of the United States of America, as his inspiration, should be a wake-up call to all of us.

Unless we all stand up together and oppose violations of the basic human rights of Muslims and other non-European immigrants who may look, speak or pray differently from members of America's white, Christian majority, and recognize the common humanity of all people in the world, regardless of their countries of origin, instead of building physical and legal Walls of hatred and prejudice against them, we will be putting the essential human rights, and the safety, of all Americans and the citizens of every country in the world, in clear and present danger.

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law