If I were a terrorist...

[ QUOTE ]
"2. Al Qaeda has historically shown a preference for "large" demonstrations of terror"

This is exactly my point- killing americans isn't the primary goal, it is simply an effective way of getting mass publicity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont see your point at all. To the extent that the Patriot Act disrupts networks and cells, and helps law enforcement and intelligence prevent more large-scale terrorist acts, this is a goal we should applaud. If Patriot Act serves this goal--and that is the central point up for debate--we should continue to support it.

[theweatherman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"2. Al Qaeda has historically shown a preference for "large" demonstrations of terror"

This is exactly my point- killing americans isn't the primary goal, it is simply an effective way of getting mass publicity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont see your point at all. To the extent that the Patriot Act disrupts networks and cells, and helps law enforcement and intelligence prevent more large-scale terrorist acts, this is a goal we should applaud. If Patriot Act serves this goal--and that is the central point up for debate--we should continue to support it.

[/ QUOTE ]

My father has been a NYS trooper for 25 years, and scary as it is he has told me that there are guys he "knows" are gulity, but that they dont have the evidence to arrest. He told me thet the patriot act helps remedy this obvious "flaw" in the due process system.

Its ridiculous, Unconstitutional, and should be abhorred by anyone who truely believes in democracy, but the Patriot act has no doubt taken criminals off the streets. (Plus a number of innocents, but people like Despot seem to think that it is ok so long as itisnt them.)

BTW despot, I thought of a great way to keep Al Qeada from killing any more americans ever, WE should kill all the Americans first!! Terrorism drops to zero and we win the war. Booyah!

Why aren'tyou aplauding my ridiculous idea to stop terrorism, but you will the patriot act?

[ QUOTE ]
Under no circumstances should America keep tabs on any of its citizens unless they are being investigated under due process fo the law. Anythign else would go against the very fundementals of our national ideals.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, a couple of things. There is a material difference in my mind between citizens, and legal residents, and illegals.

Illegals from suspect (read: Islamic) countries should be deported. Well, first we should turn their prints over to Egyptian/Jordanian/Saudi intelligence, and see if they come back hot--if so, we send them to Gitmo for a talk. But if they come back negative, we should ship em home.

Second, legal residency can be revoked. If any of these guys are remotely involved or supportive of terrorism, they should be deported also. It is unacceptable for the US to become a safe haven like London has become, for imams preaching hate and anti-western calls to jihad. Omar Rahman should never have been allowed to stay in this country--we should have sent his bearded ass back to Cairo.

Now as for citizens, I hate to say it, but muslims fall into two groups here. There are the American born and educated muslims, who should presumptively be given a pass on loyalty just like you or I would. I have little reason to suspect a domestic fifth column, so I agree we need to be careful about having government oversee these guys.

There is a second group of citizen, namely naturalized citizens. For these guys, I think a little background work is in order. Born in Pakistan, lived there until age 20, then moved here and finally got naturalized? Hmm... used to go to summer camp in Afghanistan? Time for a visit from the FBI.

Granted lots of these guys will be law abiding, tax paying guys who are just trying to make their way here, and I got no problem with them. We should definitely try to respect their rights as much as possible.

But we've got some naturalized American muslims in this country who hate the country. Those guys need to go. Surveil them. Tap their phones. If they spit on the sidewalk, send their ass back to Egypt.

I am much more scared of my gov't taking my freedom away than a few teraists.

[theweatherman]

You keep repeating things like, "i hate to say this" etc. Thats because your post is full of flagrant racism.

This may suprize you, but there have been a number of waves of immigrants to this country (there is a good chance that you come from an immigrant line, i most certainly do)

Everytime there is a wave of immigrants, there are people who filp out about the end of the world caused by the evil Irish/Italian/black/arab/ people destroying our country. So far it has yet to happen.

Obviously this is slightly different because there is a numbe rof people who are pissed off at America (for what may be good reasons, but thats another thread)

Illegal Arab immigrants should be dealt with in the same way as any other illegal in our nation. To suggest they be treated any differently is outright racist and dumb. I hope every one of the people you hope to treat like this sue the government until we are broke.

Citizens, native born or naturalized, are granted full rights and protection by the Constitution. Assuch they should not be subject to anything outside of due process. Regardless of their skin color, or the fact that they happen to be from a predomiantly Arab or Muslim nation. Again see the quote i posted earlier in the thread.

Ben Franklin is right, compromising our national ideals by falling into thetrap of "security" means we have already lost. Whats thepoint of America if it is going to be like every other tyrannical state in history? There is none.

When the terrorists make us destroy our own nation from within they win big time.

FYI, you realize that the term Muslim is a religious denomination, not a nationality. Hence you cant deport Muslims anywhere, you can deport Arabs to their nation of citizenship.

[ QUOTE ]
(there is a good chance that you come from an immigrant line, i most certainly do)

[/ QUOTE ]

I am first-generation ethnic immigrant.

[ QUOTE ]
Everytime there is a wave of immigrants, there are people who filp out about the end of the world caused by the evil Irish/Italian/black/arab/ people destroying our country. So far it has yet to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Historically, anti-immigrant sentiment has related to issues like jobs, intermarriage, etc. This is not the basis of my concern. My concern is narrowly limited to keeping out terrorists and terrorist sympathizers. While religious belief/nationality is an imperfect proxy for this, it is nevertheless a proxy (albeit one with an imperfect correlation). My anti-immigration views are anti-terrorist views, and religion/nationality is only the proxy I use to measure for terrorism.

[ QUOTE ]
Illegal Arab immigrants should be dealt with in the same way as any other illegal in our nation. To suggest they be treated any differently is outright racist and dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree in theory with your statement, the fact is that resources are limited, and it should not be a national security priority to expel every illegal Mexican, Chinese, or Central American--until those groups start blowing up buildings. Muslims/Saudis/Pakistanis/etc. however, have shown a propensity to terrorism, thus expelling these illegals should be first priority. That is all I am saying.

[ QUOTE ]
I hope every one of the people you hope to treat like this sue the government until we are broke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice implicit self-hating Americanism, I see. Typical.

[ QUOTE ]
Citizens, native born or naturalized, are granted full rights and protection by the Constitution. Assuch they should not be subject to anything outside of due process.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this, within limits. Naturalized citizens, in fact, do not have the same guarantees as native born citizens. Naturalized citizenship can be, and has been (rarely), revoked. For example, former Nazis have had their naturalized citizenship stripped.

That said, I generally agree with you that we should be careful not to single out groups of citizens for special treatment, as we begin to run into problems. This is why I favor solutions like National ID. Let the government observe all of us--then based on statistical profiling (which is, by the way, extremely good at flagging certain terrorists), the government should dig deeper on certain citizens. At that point, religion/pre-naturalization nationality should be considered a "plus factor".

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of their skin color, or the fact that they happen to be from a predomiantly Arab or Muslim nation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, profiling works. Soccer moms didnt hujack the planes. Young Arab/Pakistani males did.

[ QUOTE ]
Whats thepoint of America if it is going to be like every other tyrannical state in history?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a slippery slope argument at its worst. Just because certain "liberties" get curtailed doesnt mean we become one giant gulag. The fourth amendment has developed plenty of exceptions to the search warrant/probable cause requirements--for example at national borders. Random drunk driving stops. Checks at the airport.

Look at a country like Israel. Undoubtedly "democratic" and "free" in the way you and I both agree on the term. But I promise you that if an Arab tries to fly on El Al, he gets extra scrutiny. Why? Because El Al security knows that profiling works--since the Hassidic jews dont happen to be hijacking too many planes.

The reality is that we CAN make all sorts of sensible changes that wont, as you so dramatically put it, "let the terrorists win." We will have to make many changes to our society to become safer. 40 years ago, airplane passengers were routinely permitted to board the cabin with rifles & shotguns, which they left in the cockpit during the flight. We no longer do this.

If you go to a major sporting event, there is a good chance you will pass through a metal detector and subject yourelf to a pat-down. The social security number, which was originally introduced with express limitations about how it was not to be a "national ID", has become the de-facto national ID in this country since without it you cant get credit, get insurance, get a loan, open a bank account, etc.

We've made all of these changes but our country today is as free as ever. Why? Because the cornerstones of liberty aren't found in the details. They are found in the free press, the independent judiciary, the balance of powers, the electoral process, etc.

Singling out a few higher profile Americans for some extra scrutiny won't turn is into an Orwellian nightmare by any means.

[ QUOTE ]
FYI, you realize that the term Muslim is a religious denomination, not a nationality. Hence you cant deport Muslims anywhere, you can deport Arabs to their nation of citizenship.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes obviously. And I recognize that the set of muslims is not coextensive with the set of arabs. Muslim is the overall risk factor--and within that group are arabs, pakistanis, indonesians, etc. Ideally we would screen for religion, but since we can't do that perfectly, nationality is the proxy. We need to re-inject ethnicity also to deal with situations like naturalized British/German/French muslims.

[ QUOTE ]
WE should kill all the Americans first!! Terrorism drops to zero and we win the war. Booyah!

Why aren'tyou aplauding my ridiculous idea to stop terrorism, but you will the patriot act?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because my goal is to prevent Americans from being killed, not stopping terrorism for its own sake. I couldn't give a damn about, for example, terrorists in Chechnya except to the extent that it harms american interests. Your (joke) solution would harm Americans.

[PoBoy321]

[ QUOTE ]

Historically, anti-immigrant sentiment has related to issues like jobs, intermarriage, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. There was a huge fear of an influx of communists and anarchists coming over and destroying America in the late 19th and early 20th century.

[Exsubmariner]

It's one of those problems which determines whether a civilization lives or dies. That's what it is.

X

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
"I would hate it, because it makes it harder to kill Americans."

Eitehr the terrorists are imcompetant or killing americans isn't really their primary goal. Getting people into this country isn't that hard, and killing people isn't that hard. They don't do the second very often.
Why is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

They don't want you to get used to it, that would dull the pain when it happens, shock and fear and surprise are the goals as much as death.

Mack