The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
The terrorists have won if…
: Howard Dean just said in tonight’s debate that “the terrorists have already won” because we have the Patriot Act.
What a horrid attitude from someone who would be President.
The terrorists have won?
Those words should never pass your pursed lips!
You left an italics tag open, and everything is super slow today.
Dean is right, again. Maybe if you put aside your blind fear and hatred you would see that.
So let’s sum up Dean’s so called errors to date. All of them are paraphrased.
1–The US is not safer with Saddam in custody, since Saddam was never a threat to the US to begin with.
2–Every man is innocent until proven guilty, even Osama.
3–Dead people have a worse standard of living than living people do.
4–The terrorists have won because Americans have become so afraid that they have exchanged values for the illusion of safety.
Have I missed any?
All those UN resolutions just for nothing, there was nothing to fear after all. And why the concession not to take Baghdad in 1991 if Saddam would give proof he had given up his weapons? He wasn’t a threat after all.
And those Iraqi’s fed to plastic shredders? Real Americans can’t careless.
high horse
We all know what he means when he says that. Terrorists have taken away our civil liberties and freedoms, thus reaching their goal. A win for them. Not such a hard concept. Why is this so shocking?
Jarvis, Dean is so last week. Shouldn’t you be practicing your reasons why you hate Kerry now?
It never ceases to amaze me that there are Saddam butt blowers like Robert in America.
You hate Bush so much you’d be willing to pray with your butt in the air smacking your head and don a tea towel.
Flamers: Sure, we can all divine some rational meaning for what Dean meant, like that he was really just saying the Patriot Act is precisely something the terrorists would have wanted (however inane that may be); to declare that they have won is just plain stupid, inflammatory, and an overstatement in regards to a serious policy matter wholly unbecoming of a pretender to the presidency.
you’d be willing to pray with your butt in the air smacking your head and don a tea towel.
Any more racism to spew? Go on, let it all out.
Saddam supported terrorists, including one who is indicted in the 1993 WTC bombing. There was a hijacking training center in Iraq at Salman Pak (sp?). Seems to me that the US is safer with Saddam locked up.
Besides all the Iraqis Saddam and his sons would murder a year, Saddam also diverted much of the money from the food for oil program to his palaces. While this was overplayed by the press (the sanctions kill 500,000 Iraqi babies a year claim), if you sum things up, there is a net saving of lives due to the invasion. The only Iraqis really worse off, are the Sunnis, who were priviledged under Saddam. (Unless they can now find work in the UK, like that Pax guy…)
I would also like to see some of the abuses of the Patriot Act – I keep hearing about them, but they apparently don’t actually exist (according to a very recent investigation of it). All it really does, is make warrants easier to get in terrorism cases. Just about all the abuses have come for other reasons (overstepping the goverment’s power), not because of the Patriot Act.
>Saddam supported terrorists
Look, it’s Jeremy, the talking right wing rhetoric doll.
Firas: mocking or disparaging religious beliefs and practices is not “racism,” but rather, antireligious bigotry. Get it right.
>You hate
Don’t confuse you feelings with mine. I hate nobody. But the hate list of you right whingers is long indeed.
Hey, Howard was right. Lots of people are bent out of shape about it, but facts is facts. Give the guy some credit.
Robert up there makes the mistake many of the vein-popping Democrats on the left do. This thing with Osama is not a criminal justice matter, even though his videotapes gloating over the death inflicted on America would persuade most juries in countries that don’t speak French or make chocolates. No, it’s war. The chattering classes haven’t quite grasped that yet. It’s a shame what the schools since the 60s have done to thinking skills. Encouraging people to don the holy shroud of victimhood at every opportunity does not quite fill the void. Saddam not a threat? Whose word should we take on that, the hero of Chapaquedic (sp)? The double-dealing French who were being paid off on the side while they paralyzed the Security Council? Every intelligence service warned that Saddam was dead set on WMDs. Turns out Saddam’s own scientists were conning the old brute and his generals. If the Baghdad Butchers didn’t know things were years behind schedule, how were the CIA, the SIS, whatever the cheese-eating surrender monkey’s equivalent is, and all the others expected to know?
The funny thing about the Patriot Act is that it most of it was proposed by Clinton/Reno. I guess that just means the terrorists won in the 90s.
Oh, and Robert? Saddam was the largest money-launderer in the world. Somehow I think some terrorist money was included. Don’t believe me, buy the book.
It took an unprovoked slaughter of 3000 innocent civilians for Americans to finally awaken to the reality that twenty four years of world-wide terrorism directed towards the West has indeed hit home. This war is far from over, and we need to have some patience and endurance in the years ahead.
It is my hope that during the decades to come we will remember this war is against terrorism, not each other.
Except for Lieberman, all the democratic candidates are far too short-sighted on this subject. And, I would add, forgetful.
> Don’t believe me, buy the book.
What book is that? The Big Book Of Right Wing Lies.
Andrea: I’m inclined to concur, but would you say that antisemitism is racism?
>vein-popping Democrats. . .countries that don’t speak French or make chocolates. . .chattering classes. . .holy shroud of victimhood. . .hero of Chapaquedic. . .double-dealing French who were being paid off. . .cheese-eating surrender monkey’s
Wow! I’m convinced by your astounding debating skills.
Hi Jeff,
I’m with you. I think that sometimes politics go too far. If it were for the sake of being elected only, I think a grand strategy would be to support the presidents actions. I don’t view myself as Democrat or Republican, but I just can’t take all the whining and Monday morning quarterbacks. Let’s instead talk about how we can improve things.
Great site by the way. Keep up the good work.
Well, if I am a bigot for blaming muslims for terrorism and trying to forcefeed islam on others, what does that make Dean for wearing the same thing the bus bombers wore today?
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/040120/480/pcs11201200446
The terrorists are muslims–they praise allah every time they kill an infidel and they make no excuses about wanting to turn the world into one under allah. I have no respect for such people and I have no respect for moderates who condone by silence. I will never forget 911–and either should you–muslims killed those people and many others were silent or they said we deserved it–I say bull~~~~!
Bush did the only thing he could–finally confronted the terrorists instead of finding excuses and covering up.
“The Big Book Of Right Wing Lies.”
Ooops! You meant “Right Whinger Lies,” didn’t you? Let’s try to be consistent, dear. ;)
It never ceases to amaze me that there are Saddam butt blowers like Robert in America.
Robert, by his own provided link, is Canadian. A few minutes spent on his blog reveals his anti-American rantings and paltry reading list. He is afforded more civility on this site than he provides on his own.
Consequently, now that I know Robert’s agenda, I’m not surprised that below in comments about the BBC’s behavior, when he is rebuked with facts, he gadflies to the next topic.
Well, if I am a bigot for blaming muslims for terrorism and trying to forcefeed islam on others, what does that make Dean for wearing the same thing the bus bombers wore today?
Normal? Can you really not see the difference between cultural attire and psychotic murderousness?
angell, you are exactly right. I find it hard to understand why so many people can’t see the dynamic of the war we are engaged in. I guess so many people have had it so easy for so long, they just forget how little effort it takes to topple their own skyscraper next time.
No… the comment is dead on… the fear of communists brought us Mccarthyism and the fear of terrorists brings us Ashcroftism…
HOWEVER…
Jeff is dead right. What sort of a politician would ever utter those words???!!! They can be quoted and taken out of context until the cows come home. How do you defend: “Bin Ladin has already won.”
It’s just stupidity. It shows again why Dean should never and can never be nominated.
I have other politically stupid things he might say… just some suggestions:
1) The US is doomed to go the way of Britian. Our empire is in it’s dying days. Bring on the Chinese century!
2) The war on drugs can never be won.
3) I will raise your taxes (wait! he’s already said that!)
it is horrid to think that someone who would run for president in 2004 would actually say what he thinks.
dumbass should know by now that you’ll never win playing the game that way.
anyway, go to any airport in the usa and tell me the terrorists didnt win.
“it is horrid to think that someone who would run for president in 2004 would actually say what he thinks.”
Depends on how dumb the things he thinks are.
>dumbass should know by now that you’ll never win playing the game that way.
But hasn’t Dean gone against the mainstream from the beginning? I think it would betray him if he became just another one of the pack at this point.
“Bin Laden has already won.”
George Bush appears publicly just about anywhere he wants to. Osama is stuck in a cave indefinitely.
Sheer brilliance General Clark, sheer brilliance.
anyway, go to any airport in the usa and tell me the terrorists didnt win.
Terrorists haven’t won at the airports, Tony.
They haven’t boarded any planes since 9/11.
Score 1 US citizens. Score 0 for terrorists.
No, I haven’t read the above comments, but I bet I can paraphrase them. First post: “Jane, you ignorant slut…” Second post: “You’re calling my candidate an ignorant slut? Well you’re…”
C’mon folks, this used to be a pretty nice place.
Firas–did you mean ‘cultist’ attire?? I suppose you consider a swastika cultural attire? I don’t think I want a president dressed like Arafat, would you?
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/death-cult-02.jpg
Right, because Osama’s real goal was to frighten the sheeple [everybody but you] into allowing the government to subpeona library records. Killing 3000 people pales in comparison to such true horrors.
I’m with Jeff, Joe Biden, Dianne Feinstein, and those other vile neocons at ACLU on the Patriot Act. There are some valid criticisms but most discussions ignore those and quickly devolve into exactly the sort of mindless, meaningless rhetoric that Dean used.
>They haven’t boarded any planes since 9/11.
Did you forget about that “shoe bomber” guy?
The Palestinian headdress is a traditional piece of clothing that was around before Arafat.
The swastika is indeed a cultural symbol, and when I see a Hindu using it, I won’t immediately come to the conclusion that he/she is is antisemite (the person probably wouldn’t even know that there’s such a thing as judaism).
angell, I hate LGF with a passion. I find it to be the ultimate example of the kind of sickening product the internet can sustain. I think it’s a really sad manifestation of the kind of mindset Bush’s policies are creating, and is one of the reasons I’m so against the guy being president of the US. If you’re into LGF we’re obviously coming from totally different perspectives, and we might have to agree to disagree.
Boarded in France, Robert. Boarded in France.
Wasn’t Robert banned recently? Maybe I’m confusing him with another Robert, but I don’t think so.
Firas–I’m not one dimensional like you–I am right but I like reading leftist material, centrist, Iraqi blogs, BBC, Ha’aretz, Jerusalem Post, Jihad Watch,etc. I will not be brainwashed by anyone–I need to know all I can and make up my own mind. Bush is not right on immigration and I have no problem saying so. No one is perfect, but the Patriot Act is right–911 happened because we let our defences down and the very democracy that gives us our rights and freedoms was used against us. It gave the terrorists the freedom to murder Americans–terrorists can not be allowed to operate freely ever again and to use our country to raise funds for terrorism and train terrorists on our soil. Terrorists have no rights and I could care less if they lock them up and throw away the keys. I have as much sympathy for them as they had for the passengers on those planes and in the WTC.
They would like nothing better than to have the Patriot Act repealed so they could go about their business planning to blow up buildings.
“would you say that antisemitism is racism?”
No, because Jews aren’t a race. And Zionism isn’t racism either, because Jews aren’t a race. In fact, the bigot who first started casting Jews as “semites” thus coining the phrase “antisemitism” started the whole wing of anti-Jewish hatred in which Jews were a separate race, thus leading to Hitlerism. Until then, Jew-hatred had been based more on religion (supposed deicide).
But Jews are an ethnicity, as are Hispanics. There is some genetic consistency because most of the culture is passed along via family, but it is not a determining characteristic. Which is very easy to see when you visit Israel and see blond Jews from England and black Jews from Ethiopia.
Antisemitism is just plain bigotry.
So back on topic: how many threads does Robert have to hijack to get banned?
C’mon folks, this used to be a pretty nice place.
Hey, nobody’s changing anyone’s mind here. Might as well get in a little lighthearted abuse.
Hey, nobody’s changing anyone’s mind here. Might as well get in a little lighthearted abuse.
And there, folks, is Campaign 2004 in a nutshell.
Antisemitism is just plain bigotry.
Yup. That’s what I thought.
To be honest, I’m guilty of far more threadjacking around here, Robert stays on topic.
/shuts up.
>Terrorists have no rights and I could care less if they lock them up and throw away the keys.
I couldn’t either. In fact, I’ll go one better and say that I couldn’t care if convicted terrorists are taken out back and shot. But where the problem lies is how many innocents are being swept up in the enormous dragnet Bush and Ashcroft have cast? You just don’t realize on what specious grounds people are being labelled as terrorists. It amounts in some cases to, he knows a guy who knows a guy who might be connected to a guy in Al Qaeda. If you don’t believe me, just read up on the Maher Arar case and you’ll see just how tenous the link between some of these people and terroism truely is.
Yeah, but Robert is a major pain in the ass and adds absolutely nothing to the conversation. I mean, I have never agreed with anything Mithras or Firas or Hipocrit have said (wait: I did agree with Hip about the fact that one should never talk about a candidate who “should” have won, but then he started talking about theorums (theori? theorie?) and mathy stuff like that and I got woozy) but Robert just basically calls everybody a boogerhead and screams that he’s smarter than all of you! he is too! you’re all stoopid!!! you suck!!! you make me laugh!!!
I mean, at least Mithras and Hip and those guys have arguments – I think they’re wrong, and wrongheaded, and sometimes terribly silly, but they’re cogent and reasoned and based on an interpretation of a reality we all share. McClelland, he’s the vaguely scary creepy guy at the train station who wants to explain to you how it’s all a big conspiracy, see, you just don’t know how you’re being lied to, see, if you were as smart as him, you’d understand, you pitiful Yanks…
I don
The terrorists have won? Those words should never pass your pursed lips!
Well, I guess Jeff’s a liberal after all. Look at him imposing political correctness on people. :-/
[A]t least Mithras and Hip and those guys have arguments – I think they’re wrong, and wrongheaded, and sometimes terribly silly, but they’re cogent and reasoned and based on an interpretation of a reality we all share.
Thanks … I think. Yeah, thanks.
“Did you forget about that ‘shoe bomber’ guy?”
Well, he was like Jim Henson’s Muppet Terrorist. You might as well count that guy who got hammered and took a big shit in the drinks cart if you’re going to count the Shoe Bomber.
Good comment, Gary. But, the name you are looking for, I believe, is Merry. Plus, wasn’t it Pippin who said that?
I wish I hadn’t read the books before seeing the movie, either. I think I would have enjoyed the movie more. But, isn’t that always the case?
Angus: hey, lay off Izzy Stradlin. I like him. Oh wait. I think Izzy just whizzed in the drinks cart; he didn’t take a big poop.
I
Look at the wingnuts on Simon and BuzzMachine whine. Ooh, those nasty people that disagree with us, LETS BAN THEM! OH PLEASE CAN’T WE BAN THEM!
Ooh! Ooh! You disagreed with me! THREADJACK! THREADJACK! TROLL! TROLL!
At the same time, they rant about hate filled dems, and idiot libs, and stupid immoral libs and dems that can’t argue their way out of a paper bag.
“Ooh! This used to be such a nice place!” No. This used to be a place where simple, shallow, snark ruled the day. Don’t worry, Jeff’s supply will exhaust us all, just wait us out.
Have the terrorists won? Habeas has lost. We are as dependent on foreign oil as we were before. Our troops are out of Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan has it’s department of Vice and Virtue again and it’s been a bumper year for heroin. By the way, yehudit, the department of vice and virtue is known for taking girls off the street and giving them virginity tests.
But remember! Only George Bush would fight terrorism this way.
I cannot believe the “The Terrorists Have Won If…” cliche is back. That’s so 2002.
It’s been a while since I read Osama’s speeches and his old 1996 Fatwah where he declared war on the U.S. If I recall, he wasn’t too clear about specific objectives – sometimes he said he wanted to destroy us, sometimes he said he wanted our soldiers out of Saudi Arabia (he got his wish on that one), and sometimes he said he wanted us to abandon Israel (and Kuwait and East Timor and the Russians out of Chechnya and the Indians out of Kashmir and the Christians out of Sudan and blah blah blah).
I don’t recall anything about airports and libraries though. Have I missed something?
anne.elk can always be guaranteed to bring the discussion to a higher level. By the way, I wonder where these rarified website forums are that don’t ever engage in the “SNARK SNARK SNARK!!!” that anne so disapproves of? And I wonder how many of them have banned ms. anne.
Have the terrorists won? Habeas has lost.
I’ve become fascinated by this assertion. What I’ve not seen, though, is a confirmed, documented case of this actually happening.
I would take the “habeas has lost” viewpoint posthaste if so . . .
The terrorists aren’t a race.
“…hands Dean a shovel.”
“anyway, go to any airport in the usa and tell me the terrorists didnt win.”
That’s exactly what we need: A president who can’t imagine that Al Qaeda could have any worldview other than that of a comfortably well-off American who has no problems in life worse than having to spend an extra half hour at the airport every few months.
Brian-
The War on Drugs can’t be won. For Dean (or any candidate) to admit this would be a sign of their common sense, ability to reason, and electability by the half of the electorate that will probably sit out this year’s election due to lack of interest in the Demopublicans.
-Regards
Anne: Would you please take a hike. If you don’t like it here, leave. Please.
I want the Patriot Act to continue. We finally have a system which allows us to go after criminals instead of protecting criminals.
And, I do not care if the government reads my library card as they will find nothing of interest. As for everything else, I pay my taxes, am a law-abiding citizen, and am not involved in any subversive action so I really do not care what the government knows about me. I have nothing to hide.
In addition to terrorist wanting to kill me, what also concerns me are the criminals who want to steal my identity, my money and my credit history.
The irony is that people are concerned with the government having the ability to access personal information, yet, the criminals ALREADY have access to my personal information and yours.
The government is the least of my worries. The tendency for our culture to protect, coddle and defend criminals just to simply spite the government is what worries me.
Well, I did read up on Arar–and I can’t for the life of me figure out why he maintains a citzenship to a country he fears. I don’t understand why he trained with Al Queda and Canadian officials say they are 100% sure he did–they even name the camp–same one Ressam used. (Khaldoun or something)
I also can’t figure out why Canada is using hundreds of thousands of dollars to bring home that other terrorist, Khadr. Send him to Osama, I’d suggest. It will cost 30 thou. just to fly the terrorist home and then tens of thousands for medical. That is political correctness run amock–he gave up his right to these things when he picked up that rifle and shot infidels.
Do I believe Arar? No. But I could be wrong. The CMA, CAIR, AMC, always claim every terrorist s innocent and they have the funds they raised here for legal costs. I have no regard for rights of terrorists. I wish people were as concerned about the victims of islam as they are about the poor terrorists.
while susan dismisses the right to privacy, angell shrugs off due process.
America indeed.
angell,
Arar keeps his citizenship because it is his identity. He fears the government, He doesn’t hate where he was born, He doesn’t hate his country. Is it difficult to understand?
I am sure there are millions of Americans who hate Bush and Co., but still love their country and perhaps they hate Bush because they love their country.
BTW, who cares if you believe Arar or not! He was tortured for about year for the action of your government and jerks like Ashcroft, and everyone of you stayed silent. Well, it would hurt your “patriotic feelings” to speak up!
And about Khadr and why Canada spends so much money to bring him home: It’s simple: Because Canada values its citizens more than you can imagine. And because In Canada “Innocent until proven guilty” still exists. It is a shame to America that he spent two years in your civilized cages without being charged for anything and then let go. Hard to understand for you, right?
Better make that 2 shovels Hugh. One for each side of his mouth.
I feel a pain in a sensitive area whenever I hear Canadians talking about how much more decent and civilized they are than just about, well, anybody. Canada values its citizens more than the barbarians south of the border, Faramin says. Why do they continually compare themselves to others? Because they are afraid of disappearing altogether as an irrelevancy. Second-rate culture in danger of becoming third-rate as their brand of socialism reduces people to wards of a clotted nanny state.
Faramin, if Canada values its citizens more than we can imagine, then why did it allow the Saudis to hold, torture, and extract false confessions out of that Canadian businessman a couple years ago (this was after the spate of Saudi bombings, assassinations, and terror attacks within the country that didn’t get much play anywhere save the blogosphere) without so much as a firm protest until something like 11 months had elapsed?
(just for the record, I don’t disagree with your other assertions, and my opinion on the subject of
Oh, and as an aside: Anne.Elk does seem like an awful person – in writing at least, for all I know in person she’s delightful – but I say she should stay around, Jeff. Just gives people like me something to get worked up and post about. Trolls are usually deleterious little buggers, but sometimes they act like the irritant sands in the shell of an oyster: all the heat and friction their appearance causes can lead to some real conversational pearls.
But you’re still a condescending jerk, Anne. Nobody’s screaming BAN THEM! BAN THEM ALL! and you know it – neverthless you made the comment, just to anger us. I don’t like that sort of intentional rhetorical dishonesty. To me it speaks of cynicism and disingenuous nastiness. Either play nice and respect decorum (rule: return fire if you’re insulted, fine, but don’t open with sleaze), or get out. Jeff’s not the type to ban folks – that’s why he’s asking politely.
Aaagh! My scattershot writing style leaves me with haphazard, unclosed paragraphs and incomplete sentences! Okay, to finish that dangling sentence above:
(just for the record, I don’t disagree with your other assertions, and my opinion on the subject of this post are another matter entirely – how’s that for shameless threadjackin’?)
Firas,
you are dismissing the fact that criminals have already taken away your right to privacy!
When your identity is stolen then come and talk to me about how your right to privacy is protected.
I do not think you realize how easy it is for anyone and everyone to invade your privacy.
And when your idenity is stolen, you can experience the “due process” you will not receive.
Due process for the criminal but not the victim, is this what you are fighting for?
In America, law-abiding citizens have the right to be protected from criminals, terrorist and lunatics, not the other way around.
Jerry,
Can you please show me where I said “barbarians south of the border”? If you want to lie and accuse people of something they haven’t done, be smart enough and say it where they can’t see.
Jeff B.,
You should have seen Mr. Sampson attacking all the Canadian officials in a committee where at least ten high ranking officials were present. He made them seem like jerks. I agree with you, it was a shame that he was held in Saudi Arabia for such long time, before being freed. But Mr. Sampson’s issue is still alive and hunting those Canadian officials who did not do their job right. But the explanation of those officials was that, if it wasn’t for soft diplomacy with Saudi Arabia, Mr. Sampson could have be beheaded in a matter of hours (how true it is, I can’t comment).
Faramin – thanks for the update on Sampson’s investigation. I was under the mistaken impression (received due to a lack of coverage down here in the US) that his cause was ‘dead.’ I’m very glad indeed to see that the hunt is on for the government people who let him down.
I just wrote a long comment which I lost due to connectivity problems I’m having at my job. Anyway, to sum up. The amount of trolling here is really starting to depress me, and some of the trolls honestly disturb me and make me worry for my (and everyone else’s) safety. I don’t see the big issue with banning and generally think that bloggers who have open comments should be more willing to do so. Saying it’s a free speech issue is like saying your First Amendment rights have been trampled because the newspaper didn’t publish your letter-to-the-editor. I realize banning can be a bullying tactic if applied to freely, and I’m not saying anyone should be banned simply for disagreeing, but I think repeatedly making comments that are insulting, needlessly provocative, or otherwise annoying and un-productive would be fair grounds for banning. Some of the trolls are people with no lives who have tons of different IPs, which is sad and pathetic but also kind of disturbing as I said. I think Jeff should talk to Charles Johnson about how to ban big blocks of IP addresses.
I haven’t always been the most decorous net citizen myself I’m sure but the amount of abuse and nastiness going around here lately is kind of frightening.
As to the actual topic, yes, yes, yes, there may be some germ of a defensible point in what Dean is saying, i.e. if we give up our freedom and way of life we’ve in effect ceded the terrorists a victory, but for that to be true you would have to think that the Patriot Act in and of itself represented the end of the American way of life. Though there might be fair disagreements with some, or even many, of the Patriot Act’s provisions, to phrase it this way is pure demagoguery.
Can someone point me toward this list of “innocents” swept up by the Patriot Act. Forget the first round-up of suspect Arabs in the U.S. The Patriot Act wasn’t in force then.
Look, I care quite a lot about our civil rights. I care about threats as well as actual violations. But, it does little to advance the cause to make baseless or non-fact based accusations. J. Edgar Hoover really did violate people’s rights. So did Janet Reno. Is John Ashcroft? I suspect he may be or he might in the future, but surely Howard Dean would call him “innocent until proven guilty” wouldn’t he? Wouldn’t he? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? . . . Crickets chirping.
“you are dismissing the fact that criminals have already taken away your right to privacy! ”
What on earth are you on about?
Identity theft is something completely different from civil rights!
The government owes due process to everyone. Do you really want to judge your government by criminals’ standards?
Oh… wait. Nevermind. You’re already doing that.
Honestly though, it seems us non-Americans may have to introduce you to a document called The Constitution of the United States of America. Specifically, Amendment XIV.
The terrorists can only win if we allow our political correctness to handcuff us from going afer them. Yes, Canada values terrorists–that is why over 50 terrorist groups call it home. Canada is afraid to ruffle their feathers–they may blow up in a crowd or steal a plane.
>I don’t understand why he trained with Al Queda and Canadian officials say they are 100% sure he did–they even name the camp–same one Ressam used. (Khaldoun or something)
This is, of course, wrong. The entire case against Arar is one of guilt by association.
This site has comprehensive coverage of the entire affair.
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/maher_arar/index.html
>McClelland, he’s the vaguely scary creepy guy at the train station who wants to explain to you how it’s all a big conspiracy, see,
I’m not the one that believes in a global network of terrorists that is controlled by an old man hiding in a cave and whose sole ambition is to bring the angelic US of A to its knees in order to push radical Islamism down the throats of every man, woman and child on the planet.
I’m not the one who believes that rogue nations are intent on obtaining WMDs for the sole purpose of destroying the mighty and magnificant US of A.
I’m not the one who believes that anyone who disagrees with my opinions is out to sabotage my way of life.
Dood, you better add a few more layers of tinfoil to your hat.
angell,
Thank you for your “intelligent” answer.
McClelland
You are a gadfly, bouncing off comments, trying to get, where you can, your anti-American licks in.
I’ll repeat again, I’ve visited your one-themed(all things American bad) site. There is no dialogue happening there.
It’s not that Canadians don’t have valid opinions; but your sole purpose, your pattern here, has been nothing but any anti-American rebuttal that you can think of.
Either, and I suspect, you are in or around age 15, or you are the recipient of those fabled liberal Canadian benefits that allow you to rant from your PC all day.
I’m guessing, that after you tuck yourself in at night, you sleep soundly, exhausted after a day toiling at the monitor trying to get the Yanks to see how stupid they are.
Out of curiosity, name any American city you have spent significant time in?
JorgXMcKie-
Can someone point me toward this list of “innocents” swept up by the Patriot Act.
The concern about the PATRIOT Act is, among other things, that it gives the government too much surveillance power, through things like Sec. 315 orders and national security letters. Even if people aren’t arrested as a result of such surveillance, it still violates our right to be left alone when the government has no reasonable grounds to suspect us of doing anything wrong.
So, how widespread is the surveillance? We don’t know, Ashcroft won’t say. Civil rights and civil liberties organizations have been trying to find out. They filed FOIA requests, but the Justice Department sent back responses that were largely blacked out.
Until and unless Congress does a thorough job in reviewing how PATRIOT has been implemented, PATRIOT shouldn’t be reauthorized.
Such surveillance powers were options under the RICO act. Why would you object to extending this kind of surveillance which was already available in drug and organized crime cases to terrorism investigations?
Eric, the RICO spin was sooooo last week.
RICO did not do what you were spun it did.
http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/rico/18usc1968.txt
Eric-
Sec. 315 orders and national security letters are secret forever, which is not the case with Art. III warrants. Also, a warrant requires a showing – to a judge’s satisfaction – that there is probably cause to believe crime has been committed. A 315 order flips that and requires the judge to issue the order if the AG requests it. And a judge never even is involved in the issuance of a national security letter. This secrecy and lack of judicial oversight are the main flaws in PATRIOT surveillance.
“probably cause” – sheesh. I meant “probably cause.”
Mithras:
Thank you for actually attempting to answer the question instead of responding with condescension and nastiness like Hipocrite. What you say is interesting, and I will definitely try to seek out more information on it. Of course, you realize, that the idea of the law being drafted this way was probably because the level of information that it would take to get probable cause and have a judge issue a warrant might not be available or it might simply take too much time to go through these channels. This is a serious argument when we’re talking about trying to stop the Brooklyn Bridge from being blown up before it happens as opposed to trying to make a drug bust after the fact.
That last setence was poorly written. What I meant to say was if you’re investigating a drug case or something like that the point is to catch them in the act and then arrest them. With terrorism you’re trying to stop them from doing anything in the first place. This is more difficult and is going to require faster and less complicated methods of getting warrants etc., or maybe even bypassing that process in some situations.
Robert–what makes you such an authority on Arar? You know squat about whether the story is wrong or not–that is just your opinion.
Robert Fife
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Maher Arar has denied he is a member of al-Qaida
Eric-
This is more difficult and is going to require faster and less complicated methods of getting warrants etc., or maybe even bypassing that process in some situations.
Fine, I understand the problem. But there are a variety of ways to address it that are better than PATRIOT. Here’s a suggestion: Have 315 orders be issued only on a showing of reasonable suspicion, not probable cause. Give the judge the ability to nix the 315 order application if he finds there is no reasonable suspicion. Have all 315 orders and national security letters reviewed by a judge within 30 days of their issuance. If there is by then no probable cause, the judge can revoke. Have 315 orders and national security letters be secret, but the secrecy expires in a year, subject to re-approval by a judge upon a showing of evidence of potential harm from disclosure.
Just one proposal. The point is, there are a lot of ways to do this that don’t violate the principles of due process, reasonable search and seizure, and open government as much.
partiot: its national security, and they really shouldn’t be too concerned with due process for investigations and such. In civil matters (normal crime, regulatory enforcement, etc) it is better that 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent men be imprisoned. When national security comes in to play, that luxury is not available.
as for the canadian government response to arar vs sampson: they gave the appearance of not wanting to offend the saudis vs being willing to offend and insult the us so as to maintain politically correct and multicultural bonafides. and some much rougher diplomacy could also have been applied to the saudis vis a vis immediately executing sampson: threaten saudi diplomats in canada, as they were willing to execute a canadian to hide their internal problems, canada should have been willing to respond in kind.
angell, while correct in the aspect of his distasteful post, could have used better phrasing, as he came off bigoted. but the goal of terrorism and jihad really is global forced conversion to islam, and acquiescing in that would be wrong (deciding that a nice, peaceful islam is the religion for you is great, warrior islam, not so much)
I am just sick and tired of pussy footing around the issue. The truth is that there are likely close to half a billion muslims who believe the following–and if the rest had to choose, they’d choose islam over us. It’s that simple. I don’t buy the US policy garbage. If it was just that–why the murder and decapitation of monks in Bangladesh last nite–do they disprove of Buddhist policy too. Wake up and smell the coffee. I do not want my great grandchildren praying with their butts in the air.
On that basis, and in compliance with Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.”
This is in addition to the words of Almighty Allah: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? — women and children, whose cry is: ‘Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!’”
We — with Allah’s help — call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan’s U.S. troops and the devil’s supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.
Almighty Allah said: “O ye who believe, give your response to Allah and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that Allah cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered.”
Almighty Allah also says: “O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things.”
Almighty Allah also says: “So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith.”
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
World Islamic Front Statement
23 February 1998
Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin
Ayman al-Zawahiri, amir of the Jihad Group in Egypt
Abu-Yasir Rifa’i Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group
Shaykh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
Fazlur Rahman, amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh
When did this place become LGF?
Since when did speaking the truth become a crime? Why is it wrong to address the real root cause of terrorism? I know not all muslims are terrorists, but I know all terrorists these days are muslim. This has to be acknowledged. You can not solve a problem by sweeping it under a rug. We need to confront this and moderate muslims need to admit there is a problem and start doing something about it. That is all I ask. I want to respect moderate muslims and I don’t want to distrust them–but they need to give me reason– and not by refusing to accept liability.
I want just half a dozen mullahs to go on TV and bash the fanatics.
When did this place become LGF?
angell is a clear Islamophobe. Don’t waste your time.
angell writes “T know all terrorists these days are muslim.”
Really? Aum Shinrikyo is an Islamic organization? The Irish Republican Army is an Islamic organization? Kahane Chai is an Islamic organization?
‘Terror and Liberalism’ by Paul Berman…Read it. When you are done read ‘The Crisis of Islam’ by Lewis. You might learn something.
You still haven’t told me why the Buddhist monks were decapitated the other day.
{Aum Shinrikyo is an Islamic organization? The Irish Republican Army is an Islamic organization? Kahane Chai is an Islamic organization? } Are they rampaging around the world killing tens of thousands? Most people wouldn’t have a clue what two of the three are.
Everyone knows who the islamofascists are.
You are truly sad little apologists of the most barbaric creeps on earth.
Are they rampaging around the world killing tens of thousands?
Maybe not TENS of thousands, but certainly thousands. Where do YOU draw the line?
Most people wouldn’t have a clue what two of the three are.
And yet the Secretary of the State includes them on its list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (in fairness, it’s the offshoot “Real IRA” and not the parent organization on the list).
Or are terrorists only terrorists if “most people” (by which I assume you mean YOU) have heard of them? Is your definition better than the State Department’s?
You are truly sad little apologists of the most barbaric creeps on earth.
I will never apologize for terrorists. But neither will the vast majority of Muslims, and just because they aren’t jumping up and down in front of you constantly to reassure you of that, doesn’t give you moral justification to treat them as if they were terrorists.
In conclusion, you’re an idiot and I’m done wasting my time trying to explain anything to you.
In February 2002, Gallup Poll released the results of polling data that may yield a more scientific estimation of the size of Islamic Fundamentalism. About 10,000 adult Muslims in nine Islamic countries were polled. 15% of those polled said that the September 11th attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon were morally justified. If this percentage is found to be representative of the entire Muslim worldwide population, then it could be argued that there is statistical evidence to support the claim that there may be as many as 180 million adult Fundamentalist Muslims who believe that the September 11th attacks were morally justified. If an equal number of Muslim children agree with their adult counterparts, then it could also be argued that there may be as many as 360 million Fundamentalist Muslims who believe that the September 11th attacks were morally justified. A somewhat conservative figure, considering that few have one child and many have spouses who support their ‘careers’.
>then it could be argued that there is statistical evidence to support the claim that there may be as many as 180 million adult Fundamentalist Muslims who believe that the September 11th attacks were morally justified.
I think that would be comparative to the number of Fundamentalist Americans who believe that the invasion of Iraq was morally justified.
Your numbers are irrelevant though since it only matters how many Muslims are willing to resort to violent actions and/or directly support violent actions. The rest do not matter since it is not a crime to hate the US, even if you would like it to be one.
I don’t care if they hate the USA–I just care if they live here and hate the US. I care if they steal our planes and blow up innocents. I care that they have the gall to come here and preach and practice their hatred. I guess you’d rather see more Iraqi mass graves than have the US defeat your hero, Saddam. I hear he is in bad health–I extend my sympathies.
> I guess you’d rather see more Iraqi mass graves than have the US defeat your hero, Saddam.
Don’t be absurd. I’d rather see more American graves than have the US defeat my hero, Saddam.
angell, stop trolling and get a life. You said:
“I don’t buy the US policy garbage. If it was just that–why the murder and decapitation of monks in Bangladesh last nite–do they disprove of Buddhist policy too. Wake up and smell the coffee.”
Well I am sitting here in Bangladesh and couldn’t find out such news from all the news sources. There was one such incident in 2002 where Buddhist monk Gyanojyoti Mohasthobir was killed by armed criminals on April 21 in a Buddhist temple cum orphanage. The incident is still under investigation and the latest reports are that the murder was not at all for religious motives but due to a dispute over family wealths.
I would request you to know your enemy. Do not reach a judgement based on false or outdated information.
We are at war in our country too! We are trying to protect ourselves from the bigotry of the fundamentalist parties and their followers who are funded by sources in the middle east. They are exploiting our corrupted political leaderships. Does that make people of Bangladesh your enemy because they are mostly muslims? Wake up! Because I know most of them are too busy trying to make a decent living. They are not born fundamentalists and wouldn’t care what US is doing unless they are personally affected. They are no threat to US or its installations in Bangladesh or elsewhere.
Well I am sitting here in Bangladesh and couldn’t find out such news from all the news sources.
Heh heh. I love it.
Well, the media in Bangladesh must be politically correct if you can’t find anything.
Two Buddhist monks and a policeman have been killed in Muslim-majority southern Thailand in attacks believed to be linked to separatist unrest in the region, the government and police said today.
“Two monks were killed while they were walking to receive alms and one monk was seriously hurt at about 6am” this morning (local time) in separate but simultaneous attacks, police in Yala said.
One of these two monks was almost decapitated by his temple, and a third was hacked to death on Thursday. Local television also reported that two villagers were slashed to death in their homes. The Prime Minister said there was no need to worry.
BREAKING NEWS
This story is from our news.com.au network Source: AFP
Monks, policeman killed in attack
From correspondents in Bangkok
January 24, 2004
It only gets better. Angell confused Bangladesh and Thailand!
No, I confused Bangkok and Bangladesh–sorry–but is it ok if the monks were from Bangkok? I think the barbaric deed is more to be considered than the location–unless of course, fanatic muslims show no preference to where they murder. Bangladesh is a muslim republic–Thailand is not. 95% of Thailand is Buddhist–I think less than 4% muslim–and this 4% is causing a lot of barbaric killing. Must be wanting to install sharia in southern Thailand. US policy must be to blame.
