Catching them would be a super James Bond adventure. The Fear Factor (no pun intended) rules supreme, it probably would be tied the the religious leaders, peoples in charge. Their beliefs are tops with them. My prersonal belief is they are known by many muslums, but they are silent about it, which makes them a killer also. They should be checked out before being allowed to come in. It's better to step on a few toes that to have funerals with no bodies.
sea green queen Wrote:It's better to step on a few toes that to have funerals with no bodies.
That`s true, SGQ; I`m sure the relatives of the bereaved would agree. Not even having the semblance of a body left to bury must be extra devastating.
It`s a fine line.
A balancing act between being over politically correct, and over-draconian. I think "easy does it" should be the approach.
The radical Islamic preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed has been excluded from the UK today - his presence has been deemed "not conducive to the public good", by the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke.
He has been freed by the authorities in Lebanon a day after he was arrested at Syria`s request, and will not be allowed back into the country.
I think this is fair enough. He was clearly a dangerous inciter of hatred amongst impressionable, young British muslims.
The key phrase here is "USING EXISTING POWERS". This is important. No new laws have been past, infringing civil liberties to do this. (carefulwiththataxeEugene has rightly voiced some concerns in this respect).
AlternateGilmour also has a few valid points on over political correctness, but we MUST stay within existing laws to protect ourselves, and think VERY carefully, if new laws on detention etc.need to be passed.
As I say, getting it right would seem to be a very tricky operation. I don`t think the British government has over-stepped the mark as yet (this particular expulsion even gets the backing of moderate British muslims who are just as appalled by this agitator as anybody else): but we shall see. :blues:
Edited By Philintheflesh on 1123894662
Alternate Gilmour Wrote:carefulwiththataxeEugene Wrote:Okay, I've reread all my posts in this topic and have not found one insult. You, however, insulted me quite a bit. But never mind, we'll put that behind us.
I do believe we did exchange ideas until it descended into this squabbling about insults. I was expressing my concern that deportation will not work, and it got heated pretty fast. This was not my intention.
Also, you responded to my argument by quoting bits and pieces of what I said and responding out of context.
Don't take this as an insult, but I don't care if you consider me a coward or a traitor. I do not side with the terrorists, and I see nothing in what I said that would indicate that I do. I said I value individual rights and I don't want to see innocent people persecuted. I said that deportation would not work. I said that rights of all people should be protected. How does that equate with siding with the terrorists?
We're both to blame for losing our tenuous hold on rationality in our argument, and that's a shame because I for one thought it was healthy for a while.
It went sour at this line of yours:
"You know, you're trying to be deliberately antagonistic and it's irritating."
I find the dichotomy of your beliefs amazing. You are attacking someone with ideas about anti-terrorism and trying to shut them down while at the same time you are standing to protect questionable rights of the terrorist quest to spread terror.
Also at this line of yours:
"Don't call me a coward or a traitor just because I am against deportation."
I never said you (at first)
I said: "to not have a line that must be crossed is tantamount to cowardice or treason."
(To not have...get it?)(you equated your lack of...to being cowardice)
[I later agreed]
Also, I never said I liked this idea.....just that I knew it would
come to this. I don't like it....but I'll support it.....for the lack of a better plan. If you got something better, please share it!
You are either part of the plan or part of the problem. Give us something new or shut up. I always liked the part of the movie about Patton; where 2 jackasses are blocking a convoy
on a bridge. Patton solved the problem quickly and efficiently.
Now the General could have tried to reason with the animals but I think they were not going to listen. It was after all war.
Regardless of how things tally up in the end, it comes down to this. Only one side can claim victory. If I were you I'd get off the bridge.
Alright, I'm sorry for what I said, but at the time I found your post very antagonistic. Looking back it's not as bad as I thought, but at the time it rubbed me the wrong way. Yes, that was the point where it went sour.
I'm not trying to shut down someone (you) who has anti-terrorism views, I am simply expressing my concern that deportation will do more harm than good. And I listed my reasons: that it will deport innocent people based on nothing more than their country of origin; that the people deported will merely hate the country that kicked them out; and that anyone who was really intent on doing harm within the U.S. or any other country would simply find some illegal means of entering to carry out their deeds.
I don't stand for the right to spread terror; that is not a right. But I stand for the rights of people who are deported who are innocent of involvement in this minority of extremists who are out to wreck havoc on the civilized world.
Enough of the "coward and traitor" label, please. I do not stand with the terrorists nor would I aid and abet them. I am trying to say that a policy that hurts a higher proportion of innocent people than bonafide terrorists is not right, that's all.
Philintheflesh Wrote:sea green queen Wrote:It's better to step on a few toes that to have funerals with no bodies.
That`s true, SGQ; I`m sure the relatives of the bereaved would agree. Not even having the semblance of a body left to bury must be extra devastating.
It`s a fine line.
A balancing act between being over politically correct, and over-draconian. I think "easy does it" should be the approach.
The radical Islamic preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed has been excluded from the UK today - his presence has been deemed "not conducive to the public good", by the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke.
He has been freed by the authorities in Lebanon a day after he was arrested at Syria`s request, and will not be allowed back into the country.
I think this is fair enough. He was clearly a dangerous inciter of hatred amongst impressionable, young British muslims.
The key phrase here is "USING EXISTING POWERS". This is important. No new laws have been past, infringing civil liberties to do this. (carefulwiththataxeEugene has rightly voiced some concerns in this respect).
AlternateGilmour also has a few valid points on over political correctness, but we MUST stay within existing laws to protect ourselves, and think VERY carefully, if new laws on detention etc.need to be passed.
As I say, getting it right would seem to be a very tricky operation. I don`t think the British government has over-stepped the mark as yet (this particular expulsion even gets the backing of moderate British muslims who are just as appalled by this agitator as anybody else): but we shall see. :blues:
That's right, Philintheflesh, all these people target the kids, teach them hatred and a honor to die for religious beliefs, like many others, they are cowards hiding behind rights/ constitutions. They know the civilized world honors their rights and they use them to kill people.
OK, let's all admit that this has turned into an ugly argument. Let's consider possible solutions (if there are any to be had).
Obviously, one choice is deporting people. This is a complex issue with a lot of problems, and it won't FIX what's wrong, but it does seem to be an opton. It's the benchmark of this thread, so we can consider what may be better.
"Killing them all and letting God sort them out" WON'T work. The other end of the spectrum (which I consider equally difficult and painful - wouldn't work) is to allow anyone in if they want to, let them freely come on over and soak up all the lavish and liberal benefits they want, and offer to feed all their family members back home as long as they have to live in tyranny. So we can probably all agree that both of these are opposite ends of the spectrum, and than neither helps. Correct?
So we need to find something that a) doesn't kill everyone, and b) doesn't allow terrorists access to do their evil deeds. What comes to mind is a way to remove their motivation. Since their motivation is (as is EVERYTHING in this world) money-related, we need to take away their sources of income. Where do they get it?
1) Fraud. Better watches on fraud are good - keep your finances free of unsecured info; minimal credit cards, shred your mail, good computer security, etc... We're doing this, and it's tough, but it's a "living technology" and there is no "silver bullet." This will be ever-ongoing. In this, we find solutions shortly after the terrorists start using a new tactic - but the population is incredibly lax.
2) Drugs. The poppies of Afghanistan are a CASH COW for the heroin trade, one industry the terrorists currently rule. Maybe we can try the heroin dealers on accessory to commit terrorism charges, punishable by STIFF sentences, possibly including death. Marijuana sales and other gang-related drug trafficking should be stopped, but I really have my doubts about the benefits of legalization (I think we need to clamp down HARD on gang activity). We're doing some of this NOW - there was that one gang a few weeks ago, don't know what happened.
3) Extortion. This is what terrorism is all about. Extort someone with the threat of violence, they pay "insurance" to keep the rest of the family alive. The terrorist gets his money, and he's happy 'til he needs more. Hard to do, but go after the money-laundering, then follow the breadcrumbs to the terrorists. We're doing it, and we're finding them.
4) Scams. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. When the former president of Zambia's younger brother wants to make you such a deal on some money locked in a safe in his country, where you'll get a 20:1 ROI, you *might* wanna be suspicious.
5) Motivate them to go onto a battlefield to bring them out of hiding. Doing it in Iraq and Afghanistan.
6) Make sure the public is aware of WHAT THE TERRORISTS ARE DOING - not just the horrible atrocities they're facing in prison. As organized combatants meaning harm to innocent people, they have waived their rights to the rights we are afforded, so deserve a bit of a less-than-ideal place to stay. The news media are DOING A PRETTY LOUSY JOB AT THAT.
Really, we're doing fairly well for now. I think the news media focus a LOT more on the flaws in our forces than they do the evil aspects of the terrorists. IMHO, the terrorists own our airwaves already, knowing that the media react as they do. Also, the war on drugs needs to focus MUCH more heavily on Heroin and high-dollar drugs than before (maybe they are?).
I caught a blurb in the news about IDs being required to vote in Atlanta, and the point was to eliminate voter fraud. If you couldn't get an ID, the city would send someone to your house and take pictures of you for free. I have NEVER voted without an ID - I don't know what's going on in Atlanta (probably a lot more to this than is in the news), but I do think the requirement that you have an ID to vote is valid and fair. How about if we require ALL visitors here to have valid IDs, and anyone caught with a fake ID is automatically marked as a possible terrorist - and on the FBI Watch List.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8851310/
I don't know - sure don't have the answers, but let's compare constructve alternatives.
Very well made points, artie
Alternate Gilmour Wrote:In great britain alone there is a list of known dissidents that numbers somewhere between 1600 to 16000. These are people that believe it is there duty to establish Islam as the religion of the Nation. They also believe all infidels should die.
Are you saying you want to protect the rights of these people?
you are proving how much of a bigot you are. name one person that agrees with your thread.
right, here i go. your an asshole. the english were 900 years in my country. one man stopped them, and 7 herooes. the one man is michal collins. the seven heroes i am not mentioning, because you will think im a member of the i.r.a. the brits created a monster and a second middle east in 1922 ---northern ireland.
you are a horrible person. you dont belong on this site. your attitudes are that of a coalition of warmongers. you ideals are that of a bush administration. your voice is like enoch powell. in the words of the moody blues.....go, NOW.
you've said your piece of dribble. you attacked anyone that answered, and still you believe you are right. last century, there was one man alone that had your attitude. he came from austria and idolised charlie chaplin.
i want you to remember one more thin. sarajevo. who helped the children there? oh! i forgot. no oil. no monetary gain.
get of that immoral high stance , because i'll attack you every time you post.
why are you bringing up past things that a country did and is doing. you were warned is right. enoch powell said it im his rivers of blood speech. do you think that ordinary citizens are going to stand back and let you kill children by bombing them?
would you?
(Killing them all and letting God sort them out" WON'T work)
I agree
(So we can probably all agree that both of these are opposite ends of the spectrum, and than neither helps. Correct?)
No, deportation is the option Nations are using now and one must expect it will help to some degree.
(Since their motivation is money-related, we need to take away their sources of income.)
We need to interrupt their cash flow but money is not what motivates these people.
(Drugs. The poppies of Afghanistan are a CASH COW for the heroin trade, one industry the terrorists currently rule.)
we should have nuked those fields when we had the chance
(Motivate them to go onto a battlefield to bring them out of hiding. Doing it in Iraq and Afghanistan.)
These guys don't operate in a battlefield
(I don't know - sure don't have the answers, but let's compare constructve alternatives)
I think this is all about who will control a religion. Islam.
Somehow that possibility must be removed from the equation.
Scream Thy Last Scream Wrote:[ right, here i go. your an asshole. the english were 900 years in my country. one man stopped them, and 7 herooes. the one man is michal collins. the seven heroes i am not mentioning, because you will think im a member of the i.r.a. the brits created a monster and a second middle east in 1922 ---northern ireland.
you are a horrible person. you dont belong on this site. your attitudes are that of a coalition of warmongers. you ideals are that of a bush administration. your voice is like enoch powell. in the words of the moody blues.....go, NOW.
you've said your piece of dribble. you attacked anyone that answered, and still you believe you are right. last century, there was one man alone that had your attitude. he came from austria and idolised charlie chaplin.
i want you to remember one more thin. sarajevo. who helped the children there? oh! i forgot. no oil. no monetary gain.
get of that immoral high stance , because i'll attack you every time you post.
why are you bringing up past things that a country did and is doing. you were warned is right. enoch powell said it im his rivers of blood speech. do you think that ordinary citizens are going to stand back and let you kill children by bombing them?
would you?
You are one frakking moron. Everytime you post it gets more hilariously pathetic. You dolt.
Scream Thy Last Scream Wrote:you are proving how much of a bigot you are. name one person that agrees with your thread.
Scream:
Hold one... Pause for just a moment... I'm not agreeing with either you or AG, not disagreeing. You both bring some valid points, and I DO think we could all find some common ground. Consider your post, particularly what I quoted. Remember, the TERRORISTS are ALSO bigoted, but they want to KILL. AG's post sounds bigoted, but he merely wants to DEPORT. So, let's all think of who the enemy REALLY is, and let's stay on focus and discuss the subject rationally (to all). "Divide and conquer?" Hell, we're DIVIDED already. Let's pull it together and share ideas constructively.