Ashcroft + Fascim = Fashicroft
<div class="IPBDescription">No Flames Please</div> www.libertythink.com
THERE WAS A NATION...
There was a nation that lived in fear. A prominent building had been destroyed by terrorists, lives were lost. The leader of the nation acted quickly to restore order and security for the homeland. He called upon legislators to give him the powers to protect the homeland. And without hesitation, they did. After all, the people lived in fear - afraid even to go to the store for food. There were so many rumors.
After that things changed. The government became very powerful. They hunted down the terrorists and executed them. They enlisted soldiers to enforce the laws. They organized the children into a corp to inform on people who might be dangerous. The children wore national uniforms and were happy to help in any way they could. They knew their role was important to protect the homeland.
Slowly, the nation became a police state. Guns were banned for all but the police and soldiers. Certain classes of people were identified who couldn't be trusted and might be a danger to the homeland. National identification cards were issued so the government agents would know who could be trusted. People were stopped, questioned, searched and could no longer travel freely. Detention camps were established and many people were sent there. But national security was at stake and there was a war to win. The leader of the nation promised to destroy the terrorists and provide security for the nation. So the people traded their liberties for security - and were totally enslaved.
The nation was Nazi Germany in the 1930s. It was later determined that the Reichstag Parliament building was burned to the ground in 1933 by government agents using terror to coerce the people into surrendering their rights. Upon assuming control of the nation, Chancellor Hitler took the radical steps of denying all legal guarantees of personal liberty, freedom of speech and the right of assembly by official decree.
Hitler put it succinctly in "Mein Kampf": "The efficiency of a truly national leader consists primarily in preventing the division of the attention of a people and always concentrating it on a single enemy." - ratcat
_________________________________________
Now, in an orderly fashion, please proceed to post your mature comments on the War on Terrorism, President Bush, Fascism, Police states, and other current political issues.
(I would actually like to start an intelligent discussion on these topics)
THERE WAS A NATION...
There was a nation that lived in fear. A prominent building had been destroyed by terrorists, lives were lost. The leader of the nation acted quickly to restore order and security for the homeland. He called upon legislators to give him the powers to protect the homeland. And without hesitation, they did. After all, the people lived in fear - afraid even to go to the store for food. There were so many rumors.
After that things changed. The government became very powerful. They hunted down the terrorists and executed them. They enlisted soldiers to enforce the laws. They organized the children into a corp to inform on people who might be dangerous. The children wore national uniforms and were happy to help in any way they could. They knew their role was important to protect the homeland.
Slowly, the nation became a police state. Guns were banned for all but the police and soldiers. Certain classes of people were identified who couldn't be trusted and might be a danger to the homeland. National identification cards were issued so the government agents would know who could be trusted. People were stopped, questioned, searched and could no longer travel freely. Detention camps were established and many people were sent there. But national security was at stake and there was a war to win. The leader of the nation promised to destroy the terrorists and provide security for the nation. So the people traded their liberties for security - and were totally enslaved.
The nation was Nazi Germany in the 1930s. It was later determined that the Reichstag Parliament building was burned to the ground in 1933 by government agents using terror to coerce the people into surrendering their rights. Upon assuming control of the nation, Chancellor Hitler took the radical steps of denying all legal guarantees of personal liberty, freedom of speech and the right of assembly by official decree.
Hitler put it succinctly in "Mein Kampf": "The efficiency of a truly national leader consists primarily in preventing the division of the attention of a people and always concentrating it on a single enemy." - ratcat
_________________________________________
Now, in an orderly fashion, please proceed to post your mature comments on the War on Terrorism, President Bush, Fascism, Police states, and other current political issues.
(I would actually like to start an intelligent discussion on these topics)
Comments
Albeit Bush is not a good speaker (as a metter of fact a terrible one at that) he does have Americas support. The connection is:
America is at a current state of decline (unemployment is the worst its been in over a decade and our national debt is growing horribly) and people are living in fear of attacks (and loking for guidance as you've been so nice to state yourself).
Bush and his administration have made it so easy to deny americans of ther rights and if you think about it, their guise is very transparent. HJomeland security? I dont feel any safer and according to recent polls taken by magazines and news centers neither does anyone else. This war on terror is shaping up tot be like a war on drugs. And a war on drugs has not and will not ever be won. The harder you fight these sort of things the more personal freedoms you take away from the poeple.
thats all for now.
<a href='http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,56954,00.html' target='_blank'>This article on Wired</a> also strikes a central nerve. :/
I think all of that is correct, if I'm wrong, enlighten me.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm with him.
After watching whats going on I see, the wishes and wims of our federal leaders are instated one way or another, and slowly we've become a social democracy, nothing wrong with that accept the extream taxes and lack of civil liberty that is gaining on us. True I don't want to live anywere else, I do however Wish at times for a smaller easier to run country run by leaders who know whats going on. Perhaps a more central head of state, which would not only help politics in general, but the filling out of canadas population, having our captial in lets say manatoba, would cuase that area to develop more and cuase a more even population density. This move would not only bring our country to a better balance but would jump start us to a country rivaling the US in poplation.
so look no farther then Canada if your looking to find germany, although were fighting hard to keep anything "anti anybody" were running over the whiteman by allowing anyone diffrent advantages over the whiteman.
Okay I kinda took a turn in that there rant but I think you'll figure it out.
You see, I don't understand how anyone could not take a stance on this. You have to have some sort of emotion towards the present condition of our country(USA). I think that the American public has let themselves be coerced into beleiveing that this war can be won and that our temporary security is worth the loss of our civil liberties. And thats what Hitler did to germany. He convinced the people to give up their liberties for a cause. Remember, Hitler didn't kill millions of Jews, he just ordered it. The german public led those poor souls into the gas chambers. They were the ones who gazed into the eyes of dispair and snuffed out their once strong life force. Somehow I see the lazy US public being led to do the same sort of things. Sound crazy? So would something like the US "Patriot" ACT to our founding fathers. (I use the word patriot extremely lightly here)
Back to what you stated...
Are guys for or against bush and his new tyrannical laws? I'm not sure i see your stance.
Its like he said himself, "You're either with us or against us." I'm not with him.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It was later determined that the Reichstag Parliament building was burned to the ground in 1933 by government agents using terror to coerce the people into surrendering their rights.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is up to today subject of many, and I mean <i>many</i> historical debates. Currently, odds are that a single, clinically insane communist burned the Reichstag (big parts of it were covered in wood and went into flames quite easily).
It only makes the parallels more obvious.
[edit]<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->On top of that the political system was very different from the United States, in which case a scenario like this is nigh impossible.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Germany had the Weimar Republic at that time. It had a constitution <i>partly based on the US</i>.
You may argue that back then, Germany was split up into countless parties whereas the US only have Reps and Dems, but those small parties had formed about three big political blocks. Big parts of the German population had grown politically disillusioned and apathetic, big conservative and restructurive movements were gaining ground.
Enough similiarities?[/edit]
My opinion on the topic is that we're pretty much where we were in 1920: Fascism is on the rise, everywhere: Ashcroft, Haider, Berlusconi, Möllemann, Fortuyn, you name it.
The whole western world has put all its hope into globalization, and when the current economic problems made obvious how it all went out of hand, how little power remained in the hands of the peoples governments and how unable they are to form strong international alliances to adress global problems, more and more turned towards the old refuge of the helpless - nationalism.
The Cold War has been over for about ten years now, and the world struggles with the ghosts of those times - Al-Quaida, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, all these contemporary 'dangers' were created by the two superpowers battling each other blindly.
But instead of searching for reasonable and long-enduring solutions for those problems, we turn our heads back to the 'good old days', which is pretty amusing because back then, we didn't have to fear one or forty-four nukes, we had to fear multiple dozen overkill capacities. But nonetheless, the old politics of strength and force worked back then, so they'll also work today. We won the War, after all, didn't we?
And so, we give the old politicians with their ideas that created todays problems a second chance. Our children will thank us.
Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si-
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>
This is a term often tossed about by the Left (U.S.) to describe the current administration. The irony is that the political movement of the Left in the U.S. fits this description almost exactly. Guns? Smoking? SUV's? Fatty Foods? According to them, all of these things should be prohibited. Taxes? There are never enough taxes. Or as they term them now, "revenue". What's the answer to the Nation's and the World's problems? More government and more money. Passing money around sounds great. "The world will build new infrastructure and improve their way of life." How many times have we heard this. Only to find that the dictators build palaces for themselves and starve their people. When their people complain, the dictator simply blames the U.S. for not sending enough money.
That being said, I don't agree with everything that Ashcroft is trying to do. President Bush has approved a number of new Democrat programs that will (of course) spend too much money in the wrong places. I would challenge you to give specific examples of these "tyrannical laws" that are being passed. You see, in order for laws to be passed, they need to go through the House and the Senate.
The U.S. economy is nowhere near the "catastrophe" you've described. The economy IS growing. It's simply not growing at a rate conducive spending money on wasteful government programs.
There are far too many factors that explain all of your implications to post here (ie: Nuclear plans "falling" into the hands of North Korea, Trial Lawyers, Social Security numbers used as IDs, lack of border control, etc). Simply boxing them into "Ashcroft is a Fascist" and "The sky is falling" only professes ignorance. I didn't say Lack Of Intelligence. I said ignorance.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This is a term often tossed about by the Left (U.S.) to describe the current administration. The irony is that the political movement of the Left in the U.S. fits this description almost exactly. Guns? Smoking? SUV's? Fatty Foods? According to them, all of these things should be prohibited. Taxes? There are never enough taxes.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not being as informed as you on domestic US politics, I won't try to argue much here, only one thing: Just because I (and many others in here) say we're against Bush doesn't mean we're pro-Democrats - in my perception, both parties have had their heads up their butts for a rather long time now.
If there's a political movement I can sympathize with, it's Attac, which you won't know.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I would challenge you to give specific examples of these "tyrannical laws" that are being passed. You see, in order for laws to be passed, they need to go through the House and the Senate.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK, let's see. We have the ***edited***, The Patriotic Act, we've had the imprisonment of 5,000 young Arab men without of <i>any</i> prove against <i>one</i> of them, we've had Guantamo Bay, and that's only what comes to my mind imediately.
Also, getting something through House and Senate isn't too difficult when both are held by your own parties representatives, now is it? And please don't start telling me that they're not bound to their party but their electors - they're nonetheless Republicans who support the current governments politics.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The U.S. economy is nowhere near the "catastrophe" you've described. The economy IS growing. It's simply not growing at a rate conducive spending money on wasteful government programs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We've had this discussion in numerous topics - it all stays the same: Our current economical systems can only stay upright if the markets are growing fast enough, which they aren't; on the contrary. We're in a recession, as paradox as the economic growth may make that seem.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are far too many factors that explain all of your implications to post here (ie: Nuclear plans "falling" into the hands of North Korea, Trial Lawyers, Social Security numbers used as IDs, lack of border control, etc). Simply boxing them into "Ashcroft is a Fascist" and "The sky is falling" only professes ignorance. I didn't say Lack Of Intelligence. I said ignorance. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now you're shortening my argumentation on purpose. When I made the remark that North Korea is a ghost of the Cold War, I was referring to a general political mindset.
The US supplied the Saddam with weapons, the Soviet Union helped creating the stalinist regime of North Korea, now both have to deal with those 'old allies'.
What I was saying is that the current curse of action reminds of the old policies during the Cold War - demonizing the other side for them holding 'weapons of mass destruction', at the same time creating own nuclear agendas (Bush wants to use 'mini-nukes', remember?) - that sort of thing.
McCarthy hunted Communists, Ashcroft hunts Terrorists. Both did nothing but harm democracy.
Actually, the majority of my post was focussed on Dezmodium's original and follow-up posts. But, what the heck.
1. U.S. politics is expressed in a singular fashion by the media. There are actually a dozen or so political parties outside of Republicans and Democrats. I support the growth of these groups in both local and state governments. However, in national politics (such as Presidential elections) too many parties can reduce the "mandate" of the population which is necessary for the office.
2. I'm not sure why the Homestead Act is considered tyrannical. The only info I can find refers to the land ownership legislation derived by President Lincoln. Are you sure that's what you were referring to?
The 5,000 arabs being held are not U.S. citizens. And there's a reason you aren't hearing about them in the press. It's because there isn't any bad news to spread about their treatment.
The Patriot Act is another story. I too feel a certain unease regarding this legislation. But there are already groups taking action to test the Constitutionality of these laws. I am confortable with these laws being tested. It will create public awareness and pressure the authors to prove it's legitimacy.
3. Yes, we've had this discussion before. You might be in a recession but we are not. The current economic state of the U.S. is not uncommon. The only question is, how do the elected officials AND the citizens react to improve it.
4. Covered. Though comparing Ashcroft to MaCarthy is a bit trite. MaCarthy was propped up by hysteria. Ashcroft faces actual threats.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm not sure why the Homestead Act is considered tyrannical. The only info I can find refers to the land ownership legislation derived by President Lincoln. Are you sure that's what you were referring to?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I got a name mixed up, again, sorry.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The 5,000 arabs being held are not U.S. citizens. And there's a reason you aren't hearing about them in the press. It's because there isn't any bad news to spread about their treatment.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's always about your country, isn't it? <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Last time I checked, the human rights weren't bound to US citizenship. I honestly don't care whether they're treated good - they're being held without of charges brought up against them, which plainly violates their personal freedom.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You might be in a recession but we are not.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Welcome on the global market. Aside from the fact that Germany isn't in a recession in the conventional sense, either, have you checked the stocks lately? Two years ago, people would've talked about a full-fledged crisis when the Dow hit 10.000. It's currently at 8.261.
I'm ready to agree that much of this is media-induced hysteria after the Dot-Com bubbleburst and the distrust waves of Enron & co, but the matter of the fact is that the economy is back where it was under Bush sen.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->MaCarthy was propped up by hysteria. Ashcroft faces actual threats. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I bet people would've said the same thing about the Communist Trials at their time.
Maybe, but the "Reds" were writing newsletters and making movies not blowing themselves up in the hopes of wiping out the "Zionists" and the "Crusaders".
The sniper victims, nobody else, and you might argue whether the sniper isn't just an ordinary criminal.
Now, as tragic and horrible as those deaths have been, they're nonetheless a ridiculously insignificant number compared to, for example, the amount of people who died during car accidents under alcoholic influence.
Would you support a policy that not only prosecutes drunken driving, but which also requires everyone buying liquor to provide the state with their name, a picture, fingerprints, DNA sequences, and open their complete communication up to the authorities?
This example may sound ridiculous, but ask yourself - how much of this is allowed to the state under the excuse of the arguably much smaller danger of a terrorist strike?
The current fear of terrorism is just as much a hysteria as the Red Scare.
About American citizens not being imprison by Ashcrofts new set of TYRANNICAL laws heres an example of US betrayal....
--------------------------------
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hundreds of Iranian and other Middle East citizens were in southern California jails on Wednesday after coming forward to comply with a new rule to register with immigration authorities only to wind up handcuffed and behind bars.
Shocked and frustrated Islamic and immigrant groups estimate that more than 500 people have been arrested in Los Angeles, neighboring Orange County and San Diego in the past three days under a new nationwide anti-terrorism program. Some unconfirmed reports put the figure as high as 1,000.
.......
The head of the southern California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) compared the arrests to the internment of Japanese Americans in camps during the Second World War.
......
One activist said local jails were so overcrowded that the immigrants could be sent to Arizona, where they could face weeks or months in prisons awaiting hearings before immigration judges or deportation.
-----------------------
www.RaiseTheFist.com
Thse were immigrants complying with the law coming forth and letting our government know that they made mistakes with their paper just trying to become honest citizens.
This betrayal of innocent poeple just makes me sick. What a cold stab in the back.
Ok, you may argue that these weren't American citizens but most were legit immigrants. This is but another incidence of Bush policies crossing the line and redrawing it on oppressive ground. I wonder when I'll have to go it to get my ID card.
.......
On another note I'd like to state how easy it is to be labaled as a terrorist these days:
A pregnant woman in an airport recently was forced to lift up her shirt so that a male officer could feel her breasts in search of weapons in front of a line of onlookers by airport security. She broke into tears after her husband came over to ask what was wrong. He istantly got **obscenity** and asked what they did to his wife (which was a violation of her rights). He was instantly "neutralized" by three police officers and at first was charged with an act of terrorism. Then his wife pretty much had to apologize to the officer and suck up to him to get those charges dropped. He got away with diturbing the peace and the officer on gaurd remove his Airport ban. He went to court to pay his $300 fine. Not once did he get to see a lawer and he was convicted of his crime without ever going to a judge. So is BUSH justice.
thats all for now.
--------------------------------
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hundreds of Iranian and other Middle East citizens were in southern California jails on Wednesday after coming forward to comply with a new rule to register with immigration authorities only to wind up handcuffed and behind bars.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right. As I said. Not U.S. citizens. I'm sure all of them just happened to make mistakes on their paper work. Changing your citizenship to another country isn't important enough to bother paying attention to the paper work.
Of course, the police and INS officials who arrested these men had a meeting prior to this event and decided they would be sure to arrest at least 500 people. Not for any real reason, just because. They all agree, of course, that "those people" should be behind bars.
We have laws defining immigration to our country. There's a reason for these laws. There are consequences for failing to follow these laws. If you don't like the laws, tell your representative to change them.
Glad to see the ACLU has another "cause" to rally around. Getting their names in the paper hasn't been easy lately. Maybe their lawyers will get to squeeze a few more millions out of the Federal coffers again.
As far as your "airport women" story I'd be happy to read any articles you can find to back it up. And once again, the President doesn't write laws. Complain to your representatives.
"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death."
- Adolph Hitler
^^^^YOUR LEADERS^^^^^
I hate looking up old articles. You guys are making me work for this one.
<a href='http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/monahan1.html' target='_blank'>The story you where looking for... christ it took me forever to find it again</a>
On a side note as to why I'm against the war on Iraq:
"Do you know if we send 300,000 troops to Iraq, the accepted U.S. casualty rate is 15%? That's 37,000 dead American soldiers, our brothers and sisters to avenge 3,000 civilian deaths. Is it worth it?"
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Right. As I said. Not U.S. citizens.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if I have to sing it - should you really believe the nationality of a person means <i>anything</i> when this persons civil rights are in danger, you contradict the ideas your country was founded on ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...").
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm sure all of them just happened to make mistakes on their paper work. Changing your citizenship to another country isn't important enough to bother paying attention to the paper work.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have you ever had to do with the bureaucracy around immigration? I fancy myself rather fluent in English, but I'm ready to bet my next years salary that I'd get lost in the paper jungle surrounding the regulations. Now imagine being an Arab immigrant who maybe even had to flee his country.
Chances are that, if you're honest enough to stand up yourself and admit the mistakes in your papers (contrary to simply trying to slip through), you are indeed trying to become a honest citizen of the United States.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Of course, the police and INS officials who arrested these men had a meeting prior to this event and decided they would be sure to arrest at least 500 people. Not for any real reason, just because. They all agree, of course, that "those people" should be behind bars.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't see where anyone suggested a conspiracy. There is a new law, that managed to get multiple hundreds of honest would-like-to-be citizens in jail. Period.
That alone is bad enough - you don't have to come up with some fancy smokeroom stories.
I won't comment on the remarks on how the ACLU is trying to cash up on the US' costs. I try not to build conspiracy stories up, please don't, either.
Dez, that link you posted was written by an author of movie screenplays. Not an actual news reporter. But if you are willing to take his word, go right ahead.
I don't want you to misunderstand. I despise the idea of women, children and elderly being subjected to strip searches in airports. If we agree on that then you should understand that this isn't an intentional policy of the White House. If airport screeners were using intelligent discriminitory measures to inspect suspected individuals none of these stories would arise. What you would hear are the screams of your heralded ACLU. "Ethnic Discrimination" this and "Racial Profiling" that. And once again, all the old white guys would be racists.
Nem, you're making a habit of personalizing each of my threads. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> I was pointing out the err in Dez's post. The mention of American citizens being imprisoned and then pointing out that they weren't American citizens. You don't need to start singing. Though I'm sure you have a lovely voice <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Yes I'm absolutely positive that the bureaucracy and "red tape" involved in immigration is outrageously overwhelming. But it's still law. If the law is wrong then we change the law. We don't ignore it (unlike certain judges). And you're probably correct in that the vast majority of the people who actually showed up to this registration had good intentions. The problem is we have a great number of people here who have dropped off the list of "visitors". Some of the people who showed up that day did not have proper identification. They were/are/or will be processed properly and set about their business accordingly. How do I know? Once again because we haven't heard any terrifying horror stories with blaring headlines about people being starved, wipped, or otherwise mangled while being held. The reporters who started these stories would be chomping at the bit to write those headlines. And yet, none.
Furthermore, having these otherwise harmless people properly identified means we can scratch them off the list of possibilities. I'm guessing that's why they showed up in the first place.
Finally, (and yes this is it for me) if you think the ACLU's successful attempts to pilfer money from any source they choose is a conspiracy theory, try a google search for "ACLU money". And please put that waggling finger away.
You don't know how wrong you are on that one <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
I'm sorry if I'm personalizing this discussion - should anybody not have noticed yet, I'm a <i>little</i> grumpy today. I guess I'll stop it.
Only one last thing: If somebody shows up, confessing that he / she did something illegal - for example slipping off a visitor list into illegal immigration or having faulty papers, no prosecutor in his right mind would put them in jail - they just <i>confessed</i>, after all. It's not as if there was a danger of escape or something.
Getting people in such situations behind bars just because they fit a certain 'profile' stays at least somewhat questionable.
I'll follow that ACLU issue.
I'm from the government...
<img src='http://www.trt-md.org/images/einsatzgruppen_8.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
And I'm here to help you!
And now for the fake news....
<a href='http://www.guerrillanews.com/media/doc857.html' target='_blank'>Mainstream News reporting Is what I consider Mind Rape. Read on !</a>
As for making a real post here, I don't have the energy to compete in such a spirited argument. I'll say that I would quickly side with dez and nem, but I don't want to put down in text what I have to argue orally with my classmates every day.