Posted on 04/26/2005 7:55:09 AM PDT by jan in Colorado
What steps should Western border agencies take to defend their homelands from harm by Islamists?
In the case of non-citizens, the answer is simple: Don't let Islamists in. Exclude not just potential terrorists but also anyone who supports the totalitarian goals of radical Islam. Just as civilized countries did not welcome fascists in the early 1940s (or communists a decade later), they need not welcome Islamists today.
But what about one's own citizens who cross the border? They could be leaving to fight for the Taliban or returning from a course on terrorism techniques. Or perhaps they studied with enemies of the West who incited them to sabotage or sedition. Clearly, the authorities should take steps to find out more about their activities, especially given the dangerous jihadi culture already in place in many Western countries, including Canada.
This question arose in late December 2004, after a three-day Islamist conference, "Reviving the Islamic Spirit," took place in Toronto. The event, boasting a host of high-profile Islamist speakers such as Bilal Philips, Zaid Shakir, Siraj Wahhaj, and Hamza Yusuf, alarmed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), America's new border agency..
Excerpt... Read more at http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
(Excerpt) Read more at JewishWorldReview.com ...
With pardon to Yeats, I ask the tolerance of those on this thread to humor me by listening with me:
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre; The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand. The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert. A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds. The darkness drops again; but now I know That twenty centuries of stony sleep were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"
We know what rough beast has come..may God help us all to fight it.
Ari:
I'm ashamed to admit not being up on my Yeats...but a very good point regardless.
We CAN and MUST fight, as our nation and way of life depend on it and the resultant victory that must come. Those who seek to appease only make another disaster inevitable. To NOT fight would be cowardice of the highest order.
Consider that Neville Chamberlain avoided conflict--the result was catastrophe. Even when the Nazi was finally defeated, the Iron Curtain of Soviet Communism took its place--a curtain not lifted for nearly fifty more years. We cannot ever have a repeat.
SF71
PS: If FD is a the decent chap I know him to be, there will be a Most Excellent Green Froggie in your future!
"We CAN and MUST fight, as our nation and way of life depend on it and the resultant victory that must come. Those who seek to appease only make another disaster inevitable. To NOT fight would be cowardice of the highest order. "
I don't think anyone here believes that is in any way debateable - The problems come when some here use their fear as an excuse to target innocents and our own citizens.
I'm not going to sit here and debate you---as has been said, I'm not going to change my ideas. I have no idea where you are from, but I lost friends on 9/11. I'm getting tired of those alarmists that cry the Constitution is in trouble.
As for targeting innocents or citizens, I have faith that any investigations done on people-either citizens or foreign- will be done according to the book.
In some of the most famous words ...
...the centre cannot hold...
...he fears an extremist reaction to an extreme.
He warns against allowing the moderate to lose out to those who react in fear. Yes, we are in times as troublesome as his...let's not let ourselves plunge.
Fight the beast I will..but not at the cost of ourselves.
"As for targeting innocents or citizens, I have faith that any investigations done on people-either citizens or foreign- will be done according to the book."
Since the border patrol has decided to change their procedures so the incident will not happen again, it appears that if they were initially following the "book", it has been re-written to give more protection to our citizens.
Trust, but verify - hard to do when no one tells you what's in the "book".
First things first: here's to one of the finest poets of the 20th Century, W. B. Yeats:
Yeats' "Slouching Toward Bethlehem" was seared into my thoughts in the dark days right after 9/11; who among us can't relate Yeats words to the feelings we had? Apparently at least one other poster...I related to "Easter 1916" because I have long been fascinated by the strength of the commitment that the Irish leaders had towards achieving independence, and the haunting refrain of the "Terrible Beauty..." describes the birth of the Irish Republic.
09/11/01 also created a "terrible beauty" - Americans pulled together, rebuilt and set about making sure that it would not happen again, at a cost of reducing some freedom, but that;s the price to be paid for recovering what we lost: security and peace of mind. Perhaps if it had been done after the 1993 WTC or 1995 OK City attacks, 09/11/01 might have just been another day....
Now, for being so articulate, choosing Yeats and stimulating my fried brain, Ari, this is for you:
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I'm not going to debate this subject.
That said, I distinctly remember reading the Customs and Border site about a year ago (a good idea for I travel often out of CONUS). It made pretty clear (and I paraphrase here) that they reserved the right to detain and search anyone they might have doubts about or have reason to suspect. They busted some good naturalized citizens here in CT last year. Seems they weren't entirely truthful about who they really were. Unfortunately, we have a few native born citizens that seem to have gone to the dark side as well.
99.9999% percent of people cross the borders with little or no problem. The rest get checked, period.
BTW, if Ari has received subsequent awards of the Frog, does she get a star for the ribbon?
I too love Easter 1916 and the lines, "all changed, changed utterly..a terrible beauty is born."
Thank you FD, for the froggy and for sharing Yeats together with me.
I lost friends on 9/11, but I also lost my complacency, and my daughter (4 at the time) lost a sense of security and innocence. Can I ever forgive that? We all share a horrible bond.
Love you guys.
Ari
But truly, I don't think being vigilant in the protection of your homeland is reacting in fear. Fear is not what motivates many of us, it's love for our families, our homeland. It's all in the interpretation. Have a good night,
Ari
Gotta get to the office, where I am swamped, so my responses are limited by the time available, not interest. (Would love to discuss Yeats!)
But we also looked at the Customs and Border site pretty closely back on the original thread (check out the link Jan in Colorado posted). Bottom line is, they are not supposed to detain citizens without specific cause once citizenship has been established...and probable cause was not provided in this case.
Do we want law enforcement officers to have the authority to detain, interrogate, and fingerprint citizens without having to provide the basis for doing so?!?!?! Doesn't anyone here see a problem of letting any agency operate without accountability?? Am I in the Twilight Zone?!?
"It made pretty clear (and I paraphrase here) that they reserved the right to detain and search anyone they might have doubts about or have reason to suspect. "
The Customs and Border people do not have the power to decide that they will reserve the right to ANYTHING.
They have no rights, they have intructions and procedures, and their job is to follow them.
They do not simply decide what it is they are they are going to do, and to whom they are going to do it.
They overstepped their authority - and that is why the procedures have been changed.
You'd think that humanity would have learned the horror of religious-targeted terrorism. That's not true; from many of posts, we see that there are plenty of people who are OK with religious persecution just so long as *they're* the ones doing the persecuting. They never learnt that "Never Again" doesn't apply only to Jews.
A thread appeared yesterday, called "New vigilante group targets Muslims (Courtesy of LGF)", and it detailed reports of a new terrorist organization in the Phillipines called Bag-ong Ilaga, which allegedly targets people identified with Muslim terrorist organizations. Several FReepers applauded this group, and I replied in horror that so many would support a group modeled after Ilaga, which murdered adults and children alike, and reportedly used rape as a weapon, too. They killed not only Muslims, but also Christians whom they suspected of being Communist sympathizers--including an Italian Catholic priest.
So far, so good. I am not regretting expressing my horror at the posts that had been made prior to mine.
What I regret is a comment I made at the end of the post--a comment I can't check now because the thread was later pulled without explanation. What I do know is that it implied that AmericanArchConservative might have difficulty knowing whether to support this group or not, being that they kill both Muslims and Italian Catholics.
That comment was way out of line. I had meant to imply that AAC might have difficulty deciding whether or not to support a group that was against both Muslims and Italian Catholics, but the fact is, this group murders--and nothing at all suggests that AAC would support any group that murders anyone. In fact, I want to make it clear that I don't believe AAC would in any way approve - or even not disapprove - rape, murder, and general vigilanteism. Although it was unintentional, I believe that I had made that implication, and it was my fault for not being more careful before posting.
With that thread gone, I cannot post an apology there, so I am doing so here, not knowing how many or how few people saw my post before the thread was pulled. I apologize to both AAC and my fellow FReepers for my lack of judgement.
We may discuss; we may debate; we may agree; we may disagree...but nothing is helped by misrepresentation. I will continue to fight passionately for what I believe is right and best for this country, but I do not intend to start using techniques that obscure the truth in doing so.
You mean this one?
Posted by Gondring to Kretek; jan in Colorado; RS; AmericanArchConservative; Fred Nerks; ariamne
On News/Activism 05/02/2005 3:11:45 PM PDT · 10 of 15
The group [is] obviously patterned after the Ilaga vigilante group formed in the 1970s...
At the height of the Moro rebellion, Ilaga gunmen massacred tens of thousands of Muslim civilians, including children. They were also accused of raping women.
[...]many Ilaga leaders and members continue murdering Muslims and later Christians suspected of being communists.
Among the most notorious Ilaga leaders were Norberto Manero and his brothers. They shot and killed Italian priest Tulio Favali in 1985[...]
Scary to see FReepers giving cheers to such fellows.
Hmmm...which way will AAC go on this... Ilaga thugs murder both Muslims and Italian Catholics...does that get support or not? Such dilemmas.
That's the one...thanks!
Actually, the phrase "never again" in its most common usage specifically refers to the shoah, otherwise known as the holocaust of the Jews. You can find many ways to say you are against genocide, but most people use this specific phrase when referring to the Nazi extermination of Jews. You can use it anyway you want to of course, but this is what people generally associate it with, the attempt by Hitler at Jewish extinction. Which, ironically, a good many of our islamic friends support, and regret only that Hitler wasn't able to finish the job.
Agreed. But isn't that what we are seeing on both sides now...? "Creeping" totalitarianism is what concerns me.
But truly, I don't think being vigilant in the protection of your homeland is reacting in fear. Fear is not what motivates many of us, it's love for our families, our homeland. It's all in the interpretation.
As RS would say, "I'll drink to that!"
Meet you on Chestnut, just off Main...is it Trivia Night? ;-)
Have a good night,
You too, my FRiend!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.