You have heard the calls for moderate Muslims to take a stand against the Islamofascist. How about some “Liberal” Arab Journalists? Did you catch that? Liberal Arab Journalists. I never thought I would ever say those three words in one sentence, much less in a positive connotation. I am going to include some excerpts but please do yourself a favor and read the entire article here.
Arab Liberals on the “Terrorist Doctors” Plot
By MEMRI FrontPageMagazine.com| July 11, 2007
The recent failed terror attacks in London and Glasgow provoked a great deal of commentary among liberals in the Middle East and North African media, in particular due to the alleged involvement of a number of doctors in the plot. Some writers dwelt on the paradox of those trained to save lives becoming terrorists; others pointed to the suspects’ backgrounds in order to argue that poverty and ignorance are not the main cause of terrorism; and a number of writers addressed the issue of Muslim immigration in Europe and the U.S.
’Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed: How Can One Explain the Fact That a Doctor Could Plan to Kill Innocent People?
In a July 5, 2007 article in the Al-Sharq Al-Awsat daily, Al-Arabiya TV director ’Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed wrote of his shock at learning that doctors were implicated in the attack plot:
“[Al-Qaeda and its sponsors] have not left the Muslims any area where they can be free of them. They have succeeded in presenting Islam as an evil religion that even uses doctors to kill innocent people - despite the fact that they spent years studying and training in order to save people’s lives, without regard to their religion, race, or gender.
Mustapha Hammouche: Misery and Ignorance Are Not the Main Cause of Terrorism; Islamism is a Point of Moral Rupture
On July 4, 2007, Mustapha Hammouche wrote in his column in the liberal Algerian daily Liberte: “That the failed attacks in London and Glasgow were the act of doctors was unsettling, especially to those of the Hippocratic profession… [But] as long as… politicians busy themselves with tracing the reassuring limits of the danger instead of considering the extent of the menace, terrorism will continue to progress and to surprise us.
“The illusion that knowledge should be a sufficient bulwark against terrorism corresponds to that other mistake that manifests itself from time to time: that of believing that misery is the primary catalyst for terrorism. Misfortune certainly does often furnish the cannon fodder required by this ideology, but Islamist terrorism has had no lack of operatives from educated or wealthy backgrounds.
Pick me up off the floor. These next two snippets echo the thoughts of many of us. They are not bound by the political correctness that pervades our media.
Kurdish Journalist Tariq Hemo: The Western Countries Are Reaping the Harvest of Overly Liberal Immigration Policies
In a July 5 article on the liberal Elaph website, Tariq Hemo, a Kurdish journalist living in Germany, criticized Europe’s immigration policies for being too liberal:
“…The Western countries are currently reaping, in these terrorists, what they sowed when they flung their doors open wide to every malevolent fundamentalist and failed in putting in place a mechanism for managing and controlling immigration in an appropriate manner…
“The West’s generosity in allowing the organizations of political Islam to penetrate into Islamic societies [in Europe], spread among their youth, and enlist them in order to achieve their own ends and realize their agendas, was a mistake, and was the prelude that led to the appearance of these disastrous consequences now. He who sows the wind reaps the storm…
Here is the real bomb shell.
Khudayr Taher: Europe and America Should Deport All Muslims - Including Myself
Khudayr Taher, an Iraqi Shi’ite writer living in the U.S. and a regular contributor to the liberal Elaph website, had a quite illiberal suggestion - he asked why Europe and America shouldn’t deport their Muslim populations. He wrote:
“Countries have the right to defend themselves and assure their citizens’ safety from terrorism. Likewise, it is clear that the source of the terrorist crimes in Europe and America is the Muslims who live in these countries.
“The security services cannot know people’s intentions and sort out who is the noble immigrant and who is a terrorist criminal. [But] wherever there are Muslims, their presence has produced crimes of terrorism and murder.
“Among those Muslims in Europe and America who do not practice terrorism, most of them do not have loyalty and sincere attachment to these countries that have offered them all of the means of life in dignity - housing, studies, work, and citizenship…
“The legitimate question is this: Since the security services cannot sort out the good immigrant from the bad terrorist… why don’t these countries deport all Muslims, of all races, from Europe and America, and [thus] find rest from the danger of terrorism, and protect their peoples?
“I, as an Arab Muslim immigrant, sincerely call on the countries of Europe and America to deport all Muslims from their territories - including myself, despite my love and my sincere attachment to the U.S…”
I’m listening. I only wish that my country and her politicians would listen too.
Cross Posted at squawkboxnoise.com
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
44 Responses to “Wisdom From Liberal Arab Journalists?”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Can someone please forward this to GW, and then have someone read it to him. There are some big words included within.
Koranimals….
Here’s one and his thoughts of Daniel Pearl’s death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq9MTeA7V_k
(from the thread on lgf….)
I will not go to any Muslim doctor and hope to break them financially to force them to leave. I also intend to walk in a place of business and if a Muslim is there i will simply say i do not do business with anyone hiring Muslims.
I mad as H_ll and ain’t goin to take it anymore.
Dow I am with you. It’s ironic these writers are considered liberal…….. yet they nail it. Our media wants to have tea with the enemy, wash their feet, look in wonder as they pray and chant death to non believers.
#4
How about adding to that all establishment that have illegal workers - come on they are easy to spot so we have no excuse?
#3 dowjones25k
I’m Mad Too, Eddie!
Got into an argument w/ a liberal at a party this past weekend about that very idea. He had the nerve to say “that’s how Hitler got started - by calling for boycotts on Jewish businesses.” Last time I read my history books - the European Jews weren’t blowing people/buildings/things/themselves up! He didn’t have much of a response - or at least not one that wasn’t emotional drivel. He thought we should reach out to them - Ha! That’s what the Surge is doing!
Did anyone hear about the attempted Terrorist attack in Bryan/College Station last night?
A guy tried to to blow up a car in front of the Dixie Chicken. He burned his lips…
#7
“Reach out to them”!?
Our version: “reach out and touch someone”
Islamofascist version: “Reach out and blow someone the hell up”
Don’t see a lot of “common ground” there, ya know?
Where’s the MSM on this? If they were talking about Abu-Graib, Guantanamo or blaming America for global warming, they’d be on the front page.
Fasternu 426
You, me, LST and bloggers in general ARE the MSM.
Yeah its embarassing when those sips come to visit and show us what they are learning at that institution on I-35.
#8 Faster
You need to finish the punch line:
“he burned his lips on the exhaust pipe”
HAHAHAHAHAHA! NOW it’s funny!
Sorry Faster - had to actually go work for a little bit. About the terrorist attempt outside the Chicken in College Station . . . It’s a well documented fact that t-sippers suck!
oh yeah… I knew it didn’t look right
I am so sick of all these Muslims, Arabs, etc. and Middle Easterners and other minorities. I want to see and be around real Texans and real Americans. It’s making me uncomfortable, especially when I call Dell Computer and Embarq, Earthlink and other corporate companies and get their Customer Service Reps who can’t speak English very well. Nothing outrages me more and I demand to speak to someone who can speak clear and concise English and can understand what the real problem is. We can’t trust any Middle Eastern people…I don’t care who they are. No more going to those people.
That name Mustapha Hammouche…made me so mad I went and fixed a mustard and ham sandwich and couldn’t eat it.
If you recall the leftwing terrorists (such as the Weather Underground) that came out of the U.S. in the 1960s, they were notably well-educated upper-middle class individuals, as was the Unibomber. They were not driven by the hopelessness or despair of poverty. Why should Muslims be any different?
Great post, Meester.
If it’s paradox they want, how about the paradox of God’s own creation, made in His image, taking it upon themselves as though they were God Himself killing His creation? 70 virgins? I can’t speak for God, but…I don’t think so.
Deport them? No. That isn’t what America is about. We did a tremendous wrong to thousands of people by putting the Japanese in camps during WWII. I am not saying ignore them and hope for the best. I think profiling by security is well justified and would be effective if implemented properly. I think American muslims should be willing to accept a higher level of scrutiny and surveillance as a price of the acts by their religious cohorts. But deporting them all goes against every principle that our country was founded upon. I would rather suffer another terrorist attack than to take a bunch of innocent people who have earned their shot at the American dream and send them home because somebody who claims to share their religious beliefs decided to blow themselves up.
How would any of you feel if another country decided to kick out all Christians because a couple of them decided to blow up abortion clinics? Religious freedom is religious freedom…even for muslims.
I do have to say that I am glad to see those messages making it into the middle eastern press. It is more important for that message to resonate over there than it is for the PC crowd to see it here. The end of muslim radicalism won’t come at the end of the barrel of an American weapon (we can only strive to keep them from our own shores with that)…the end to muslim radicalism will only come when other muslims refuse to tolerate it and start to recognize it for the crime against humanity that it is.
Thank you Bill F! I was despairing over some of the posts here. However, that “American weapon” does have a place over there. I do agree that the anti-terror message coming from Muslims themselves is the most powerful weapon we have, but our military presence is absolutely necessary to show we’ll back up what we say. Not that we have handled it the best we could have. It clearly should have been an overwhelming force from day one and stayed that way.
You’re way off though by comparing the situation to the Japanese internment camps of WWII. There were not Japanese terrorists actively operating during that time and no distinction was made between potential sympathizers and innocents like children.
I fully understand the anger that we all feel. Who is a terrorist and who isn’t!? Why does the government not restrict immigration from Muslim countries and close the borders?! This whole argument about poverty and suffering causing terrorism has been b.s. from the beginning. Osama himself came from a wealthy family, for goodness’ sake!
These are all legitimate and maddening questions. But they don’t mean that we give up our principles of freedom for those already here. Muslims in the U.S. need to be prepared for a higher level of scrutiny for sure, but to take the attitude that you won’t even go into a business employing a Muslim is ridiculous.
Let me clarify that there was Japanese espionage during WWII, of course. I simply meant that there was not the kind of terrorism that we’re dealing with today. And that the internment camps, in my opinion, don’t equate to the current situation.
Here is an illegal that should have been deported.
Because he was not, a sweet young girl will never grow up and enjoy life and her relatives and friends will be forever hurt and without her.
It is enough to make me sick, and make my rage almost limitless.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
Erika,
I wasn’t comparing the current situation to the japanese camps. I was comparing the suggestion that we should deport every muslim immigrant to that. Deporting everybody, good or bad, would be the same as not trying to make any distinction with the japanese before putting them in camps.
I agree that the American military is where it needs to be right now, which is overseas going after terrorists. But our military will not end the war on terrorism. We may help win it, but we won’t be the ones to end it. Only the muslim community and nations as a whole can accomplish that by joining the fight to stamp out the inhumanity of radical islamic teachings. They will only do that when more moderates speak up and when populations as a whole get tired of being unable to travel the world freely and unable to grow economically because nobody will invest in terrorist friendly economies or allow people from terrorist friendly countries into their nation..
I also agree that we have made quite a few mistakes (letting the poppy production come back in Afghanistan under terrorist protection was a huge blunder). I think Petraeus is the right guy in the right place right now…and that he needs to be promoted into a more important role as soon as he is done with what needs to be done in Iraq.
What I think we need to do more of at home is internal profiling and closely examining the muslims and middle easterners we have here now. We should have agents infiltrating mosques and looking for imams preaching terrorist ideas. We should be examining the backgrounds and activities of others we allow into the country, to make sure that they are not bringing anti-american ideas with them. Most of all, we need to stop being afraid to recognize that young muslim men are more likely to be terrorists than 80 year old ladies from Georgia. It is the equivalent of getting a police sketch and profile of a mass murderer and then not giving it out to officers or the public for fear of prejudicing their judgement. As long as people like CAIR refuse to stop supporting terrorists, they should have no right to bitch when we treat them differently than the average citizen in a security line.
Papa Ray, Nothing I said above has anything to do with illegal immigration. We should go after illegals and the companies that hire them mercilessly and start sending some CEOs and hiring managers to jail. We should also station troops on our borders and start firing shots at the invaders as they cross the border. There is no reason to treat anybody crossing the northern or southern border illegally as anything but a potentially lethal threat to national security. There are enough murderers and rapists in our jails who came here illegally to justify that attitude.
As nice as ya’all are……. you have no idea which Muslim likes you and which muslim is plotting to kill you. The camps for Japanese were used because ………. Pearl Harbor was a shock and we didn’t know who our ememy was here. I have no regret we did that for the safety of America. none. I am not ashamed. I wish we had half the nerve now.
Bill F said “How would any of you feel if another country decided to kick out all Christians because a couple of them decided to blow up abortion clinics? Religious freedom is religious freedom…even for muslims.”
Nope, Bill, you’re wrong.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say I should murder people who perform abortions. My God does not promise me a special place in Heaven if I kill those who break His laws. In fact, His laws specifically say “thou shalt not kill”, and his Son tells me to “turn the other cheek”. The anti-abortion murderers are condemned not only by right-thinking Christians, but by all the holy scriptures of our faith!
Anyone who adheres to a faith which encourages the murder of innocents should NOT be accorded freedom of religion.
In fact, I’d go so far as to say it’s NOT a religion but a cult, and should be treated as such.
Deport ‘em all.
#28 So you are saying that the US should ban the muslim religion? Doesn’t that kind of violate the constitution or something? Their religion doesn’t advocate killing innocent people…it specifically forbids it. A small but not insignificant segment of the practitioners adhere to a misguided faith that says non-muslims are not “innocent” and should be killed. The Christian religion was pretty damn bloodthirsty during the crusades…and how about all that killing in the name of prostestant and catholic faiths in Ireland?…but that doesn’t mean christianity is a violent religion. You can twist plenty of phrases in the bible to advocate violence just as you can with the Koran. That doesn’t make either group right when they do it.
We can choose to make this a religious war between christians and muslims if you want, but that is exactly what Iran and the other radicals want us to do. If we deport every muslim, there will no longer be any way to deny that we are at war against islam, and we will have succeeded in uniting a billion muslims against us. Right now, we have an opportunity to join with the moderate muslims and drive the radicals out of their relgion…alienating the moderates by deporting them will forfeit that opportunity forever.
If you want to see firsthand what can be done, go read Michael Yon’s latest dispatches. He spent part of a recent day riding around Baqubah with the former leader of a rebel group that is now fighting side by side with us against Al Qaeda. If their ideology was as you say, why would they turn on Al Qaeda and work with us? We will win this war with information and outreach as mush as with bombs and guns. If we walk away from Iraq or if we deport all the muslims, we lose any opportunity to reach out to anybody.
AW…again…are you saying we are at war with islam? It was clear we were at war with Japan in 1941. Who is our enemy now? Radical islam? All islam? Sunnis? Shia? Who? It you treat them all as one and deport them all, then you make that answer pretty clear. The leader of Iran believes his destiny is to unite the entire islamic world in a war against the west. Do you want to deliver that destiny to him on a silver platter? If so, then go ahead and start deporting all muslims.
Bill F
Well we meet again. During WWII anyone that espoused the destruction of the United States was considered and treated as a traitor. The speeches and lessons that are coming out of the very Mosques of those you defend preach and call for the destruction of America. Are we to just ignore this truth.
Oh silly me I forgot they are exempt from that type of scrutiny. However if a make a true verbal threat towards you across this forum I can be charged with a terrorist threat. Wahazzat that all about.
Their religion forbids killing? Are you kidding? Islam has waged a war of world conquest since before Mohammad died. The Crusades have, in many ways, gotten a bad rap: they were simply going after the bloodthirsty killers who had taken over some of their lands, and they wanted it back. Islam == war for world domination, from the day it was formed. Without question.
Bill F, you seem to know little of the Quran. It specifically states that non-believers (anyone not Muslim) and apostates (Muslims who do not adhere to the strick rules of Islam) are to be enslaved or killed. No quarter, no exceptions.
There is no such thing as a “moderate” Muslim any more than there is a Tooth Fairy or Easter Bunny. There are Muslims who adhere to their faith as written in the Quran (those like OBL) and there are apostates who would be considered moderates by someone like you.
And then, you drag out the old “Crusades” canard. I suggest a book by Thomas Madden, professor at St. Louis University, if you want a true understanding of the crusades. They were for the protection of Christian pilgrims in lands that were originally Christian, not Muslim, like the area now known as Palestine.
And yes, in the Anbar Province, Muslims are joining the U.S. forces to drive out AQ, but not because they are moderates but because AQ is killing tribalists in record numbers. “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” is a famous Muslim saying. That is what the U.S. forces are, the enemy of the enemy (AQ) of the Anbar tribes.
We are at war with Islam, or perhaps I should say that Islam is at war with us. And Islam has been at war, although not actively, since the Muslim hoards were defeated at the gates of Vienna. Incidently, the defeat date in the 17th century at Vienna was September 11th.
Islam is not a religion. It is a cult. A cult build around a phophet that was a pedophile. A cult that speads by death. A cult that owes no loyality to any nation, only the cult itself. A cult that is divided within itself and who has murdered its own since the 9th century.
Only the United States would allow immigrants from nations know to harbor terrorists. Only the United States would not profile based on religionl. And the United States will use political correctness to destroy itself.
#32 retire05
VERY well said !
As a lover of the US Constitution, I think it would take the wisdom of Solomon to deal well with this problem. Nevertheless, I’m sure that the founding Fathers etc. would expect that anyone who is actively trying to either make War with the US or to undermine the Constitution, would be outside of ,at least some of the ‘rights’ guaranteed IN The Constitution. Since The Constitution is the contract, by which the people of the Country lend their power to the Government.
#32,Bravo!
#30,
You are talking about a totally different situation than I am. If there is somebody espousing the destruction of the united states or the murder of innocent americans, then you will be in line behind me in trying to get them thrown out of the country. If you are talking about trying to deport the many muslims who live in my subdivision (near a mosque) at peace with their neighbors and whose kids play in our streets (even if they play cricket instead of baseball sometimes), simply because they believe in a religion you disagree with, then you and I will have something to fight about.
I am right there with you when it comes to rooting out imams spreading hate, and I said so in my very first post. We should actively go into their mosques and groups and try to root out the ones practicing a religion from the ones plotting violence and imprison or deport the latter. But targetting the others simply because of how others interpret their religion is wrong and goes against the principles on which our country was founded. You can’t make the assumption that somebody might be violent on the basis of their religious beliefs and use it to throw them out of the country. Just like any other citizen you cannot presume their guilt of anything until you have ample evidence to prove it in a court of law.
retire05, the Koran does not condone or encourage violence anymore than the bible does (particularly the old testament). Both were written in times that are very different than today and when violence was much more accepted as a fact of life. What the Koran says about killing infidels or non-muslims is written in the context of jihad or holy war…meaning battles where muslims or muslim lands are under attack, and is in essence an instruction of “no quarter”.
That phrase in the Koran has been twisted by the radical clerics to be used whenever there is somebody they want to attack, and they simply declare it to be a “holy war” or jihad, in which the violence becomes acceptable under their twisted version of Islam. For most muslims, jihad is a much more restricted environment in which they can only use violence or kill others in order to defend themselves or their homes, when being attacked by outsiders or infidels.
Now how many believe in the radical and how many are moderate is up for debate, but the fact is that there ARE a huge number of muslims for whom the violence against non-muslims is just as repugnant as it is to us…but their voiced get drowned by the explosions of the radicals and the media coverage of the violence.
Please go read some of Mike Yon’s latest dispatches about how Al Qaeda moved in and took over those areas they are now being routed from. The atrocities committed were unspeakable, and the people can hardly be blamed for giving in to Al Qaeda in the face of those heinous acts. Now that they see an opportunity to free themselves from Al Qaeda, they are taking it. The situation over there is beyond complex, but those radical groups that once fought against us and are now fighting with us were just as taken in by their imams as the palestinians are today. You cannot possibly overestimate the role of deliberate undereducation of the masses as a tool to keep people under the thumbs of the imams. The radical islam anti-technology crusade is a mission of survival. If people learn that there is something else out there besides the brand of radical islam being preached to them, then they might open their eyes and begin to question everything. The attacks on power plants and electric transmission lines are not being done to take away air conditioning and lighting…they are being done to turn off TVs and computers that bring in news from the outside world.
In many cases, simply meeting our soldiers and seeing that they truly are there to help has been enough to turn around the attitudes of those groups and convinces them to turn against the imams and the other leaders who were prodding them to attack us in the name of “jihad”.
I am not defending radical islam, or suggesting that we be naive about who our enemy is. We are in a life or death battle against a certain brand of islam. But taking the advice of the writer orignally referenced and deporting ALL muslims would play into the hands of Iran and make it impossible for us to deny that we are at war with all muslims. In case you haven’t checked lately, muslims outnumber americans by about 3 to 1, and at least a 3rd of us are limp-wristed pansies who faint at the sight of blood and turn into code pink banshees at the thought of handling a firearm. So it is probably in our best interest to try to keep most of the muslims on our side instead of trying to take them all on.
Bill F
No actually we are not on the same page at all. Here go argue with this guy.
You would ignore that reality quoted above and would rather suffer another attack on our country? Frankly that scares me more than hurting someones feelings. Look at the bright side, if we deport them all and we still get hit they will miss all the fun huh?
It is not clear at all that the source of terrorist crimes in America are the muslims who live here. Most of them are committed or attempted by people who are here on short duration student or tourist visas who overstay their visa. If we had a foolproof national ID system and a visa tracking system that allowed us to track down such people within a few days of not leaving on time, then we would be much better equipped to root out such a threat. If we had the guts to actually enforce border security, then we would close off another avenue used by people planning the attacks. I can’t think of any recent significant attack that was carried out or planned by somebody who was here legally, other than the 1993 WTC attack, and that was a clear case of feds ignoring undeniable evidence that the blind sheik and his followers were planning an attack. Had we acted on the intelligence we had at the time, that attack never would have happened.
We have shown a great ability for our security sources to root out the good from the bad, but an absolutely terrible ability or willingness to do something about it before it is too late. We are progressively handicapping ourselves by allowing partisans at the CIA and elsewhere to leak our most sensitive national security methods to the NYT without sanction, but that doesn’t change the fact that we have known who the players were in every major attempted attack and had reason to bring them in for questioning or even deport them, but did not do so prior to the attack taking place. That alone should argue AGAINST deporting legal residents or citizens who are muslims. Many of the best tipsters we have had on recent thwarted attacks have been people inside of mosques or other muslim communities who helped tip us off to players planning attacks. Some inventive cover stories have been developed to make the discovery of the various plots seem to be random chance discovery by every day americans, but I know for a fact that several of the tipoffs have come from inside the muslim community.
But I am sure none of that matters to you does it? Let me ask you the same question I asked above Squawk…do you think we should outlaw the muslim religion and arrest or deport every practitioner of it? If so, how are we different from China? They have banned Falon Gong and are picking the followers of that religion off one by one against the strident protests of the US. So if we suddenly decide that the entire muslim religion is bad and that we have to arrest or deport millions of people who have been peaceful law abiding citizens up until now, how do you justify that under the constitution? Above all, conservatives should value and believe in the absolute power of the constitution over everything that is done in America. Arresting or deporting people based on their religion breaks at least three of the ammendments that I can think of right off the top of my head, and I am sure that the procedure that would be needed to deport or arrest millions of people in a short time period would require breaking a few other constitutional rights. So how do you reconcile such a program with the conservative view of constitutional rights? How do you set about rooting out who the muslims are once you announce you plan to deport or arrest them all? Do you look for the ones drawing strange characters in the sand with their toes? Do you arrest guys with dark skin and beards? How about all guys with foreign sounding names? How far into the xenophobia do you want to go with this?
Also, since you will be arresting an/or deporting people based on their future capacity or potential willingness to commit violence, do you also arrest anybody who owns a gun? Do we ban ownership of guns, since we are ignoring the constitution and have tossed out the requirement of actually having to commit violent acts before being arrested? I mean truly…where do you draw the line Squawk? Once you toss out the presumption of innocence, freedom of religion, and half of the rest of a person’s constitutionally guaranteed rights, why stop there if you truly want to make the country safe? Why not cameras on every corner, in your house, and elsewhere? Why not a ministry of truth?
Since every liked to toss out quotes in the other thread as if they meant something, how about this one from somebody you might recognize?
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” - Benjamin Franklin
Do you understand what that means? That isn’t arguing against vigilance or doing logical things to be safe. It is arguing against giving up ESSENTIAL Liberty. It means deliberately depriving people of their constitutionally protected rights without due process so that others might find TEMPORARY Safety in such acts is WRONG! Don’t ask me, ask the founders of our country! They were well versed in what countries could and would do in the name of protecting the country…which is why they revolted, and wrote a article of governance describing a new republic where such acts would be impossible without respecting the essential liberties of those involved. So since we are now threatened by something that is scary and dangerous…we should throw away 218 years of constitutional law?
I think you really need to check yourself Squawk. What the writer suggests is an easy, gut level reaction to a dangerous and evolving threat to our personal security. But in carrying out the act, we would create a dangerous and evolving threat to the very foundation of our nations. Islamic terrorists can blow up as many bombs in America as they want and they will never change what America is if Americans stick by the values upon which our nations was founded. But if Americans choose to violate our own constitution and willfully give the government power to ignore the rights enumerated in it, then America will have already ceased to be.
Check myself? Nope Bill I have been studying these people since 1978. I have been studying our government for a little longer. An a little longer yet I have been studying folks like ummmm well you.
What the witers suggest is truth, bald and plain.
Our governments primary purpose is to protect us by any means necessary.
I can’t wait to here your tune when the mall bombings etc start on our soil.
When you can’t go to Walmart for fear of a car bomb going off.
And finally it is the easy gut level reaction that should have been taken by Jimmy Carter in 1978, his action worked well for us now didn’t it?
No…our government’s purpose is to do a very limited set of things, which are enumerated by the constitution! The constitution limits those means very strictly, yet in a way that is open for ammendment should conditions change enough to warrant it. The fact that the constitution has been ammended so few times in over 200 years is a testament to how well they did at laying out the boundaries that government cannot cross. Nowhere in the constitution or any subsequent document is the government given ANY power to do ANYTHING “by any means necessary”. If you don;t know that by now, you have spent too much time studying muslims and not enough time studying the US constitution.
You still seem to be confused about my feelings towards muslim terrorism squawk, and I don’t think it is because I am being ambiguous in what I believe. I am right there with you about Carter in the late 1970s. Carter should have invaded Iran if necessary to get our hostages back and should have dropped the bomb if they were killed prior to being rescued. We should have assassinated Khomenei before he returned to Iran. The state of our military and especially our special forces was deplorable at the time due to the post-vietnam influence of the democratic pacifists in congress. That probably had a direct role in why Carter’s response was as anemic as it was (although his incompetence and personal pacifism were more important in his mishandling of the affair).
We don’t suffer from the same lack of military capability that we had back then now, and our intelligence apparatus is fully capable of taking on the terrorist networks on their level if we let them. We could be out killing these guys off one at a time or in groups ala “Teeth of the Tiger” by Tom Clancy if we wanted, but we won’t…for whatever reason. You seem convinced that every muslim is a terrorist…yet you haven’t answered the question yet. How do we deport them all or arrest them and stay within our constitution? Are you for outlawing a religion? Are you truly suggesting that we ammend the constitution to outlaw islam? How do you find them after you do that? What is your plan? I truly would like answers to those questions Squawk. It is easy to throw out 2 sentence suggestions that sound good on paper, but are impossible to act upon. So tell me how you put this idea of kicking the muslims out of the US into action? You have studied the issue so much…how do we go about doing it?
The fact is that as soon as the idea came about in public discourse, the radicals would go into hiding. They would dress like us, stop going to mosques, etc. If you think it is hard to find them now, wait until you outlaw them. It is easy to find the radicals now…just go to the mosques…read the websites…track the phone calls to other known radicals..send in informants and decoys. How easy will it be when they all go underground? Tell me how your plan makes it easy to root out the bad guys Squawk…put those 29 years of study to good use and give us a plan that doesn’t violate the constitution. You can’t do it, because it can’t be done, which is why it has never been seriously proposed.
Time for a reality check there Bill.
Our governments primary purpose is to protect it’s citzenry.
This discussion and your book length comments are nothing more than a circle jerk anyway.
We have a country governed by a bunch of people like ummm….. well you, that think we can negotiate with politic with an enemy that uses our laws against us, that cannot be trusted to abide by any treaty and are guided by religious beliefs. So don’t worry your self about it.
One only has to look at what has happened between Israel and the Palestinians in modern history to get a real good view of what I speak. One only has to look at the actions and words of Iran in modern history. Too ignore the historical facts of the very ideals and peoples that follow those ideals is foolish. Oh wait unless you are one that believes Arafat deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. If then never mind and don’t bother reading further.
Do not be deceived Bill, just because we have not suffered a major attack or a series of attacks for 6 years now does not make us safe.
Mosques are going up faster than Christian based churches and they are being funded by folks that wish to do us harm. Those mosques are not empty like the churches in England and here in the states. And what they are preaching ain’t pretty.
Like I said I cannot wait to hear your change of tune when the crap really hits the fan.
So you can’t answer the questions I asked? How will you deport all the muslims without violating the constitution? It isn’t a rhetorical question.
My tune won’t change squawk. I have said and will continue to say that we need to target muslims for closer scrutiny, we need to revamp our whole immigration and national ID systems. We need to protect our borders. We need to go after the terrorists regardless of where they are using whatever means are effective at that location. We can target these guys and deal with them harshly without turning our constitution on its ear…we just haven’t shown the political guts to actually do it. Maybe another attack will generate the will to do so and maybe it won’t. But the day we throw away the constitution in a misguided attempt to defeat the enemy is the day we lose.
Bill F
Answer why? It ain’t gonna happen, never will. However if it was was possible and it is not, I would support deporting the whole and you don’t.
And your tune will change. It is real easy to be an amature Constitutional professor until the crap hits close to home. Apparently the Twin Towers were not close enough to you.
Right now you so many ither feel gooders do not have the will to do what it takes to protect this country in the face of mounting evidence of what is coming.
Have a nice day
Squawk you have no idea how badly you misread what I am saying. You really need to stop setting up strawmen with what you think a person is saying and instead actually READ what they are saying. The twin towers were plenty for me. 1979 in Iran was plenty for me…the Cole…1984 Beirut…how many others do I have to name? We have plenty of reasons to target radical muslims and the governments that sponsor them. We should have started with Iran instead of Iraq and moved on to Syria next. I think we need to take countries where the people as a whole support and elect terrorists to represent them and destroy them. Not destroy and then try to rebuild them as we are doing in Iraq. If a country sponsors terrorism, just level it. Then let the survivors rebuild and decide if they want to keep sponsoring terrorism. It worked for Japan, Germany, and Italy…why not use it again. Bomb them until they have had enough and decide to change their ways.
We can do those things without violating our constitution. Our politicians are too chickensh*t to do it, but they could do it without violating the rights of our citizens. I knew you wouldn’t answer the questions, because doing what you suggest would cause you to have to face up the reality that outlawing a religion violates the very constitution that you would otherwise defend. Saying “deport them all” is a nice platitude like the ones fed to us by politicans…but it is impossible to actually do it, not just legally, but logistically.