I agree with the need for much tougher immigration laws and enforcement but you will have none of that.
President Bush seems to have to be held personally responsible for everything, as if he were some Castro-like dictator that actually possessed the power to decree draconian immigration and deportation laws and do things our constitution and public opinion, not to mention opposition politicians, will not allow.
We're not allowed to breathe a word about the possibility that some of those Japanese-Americans detained in camps during WWII might have had a few among them who would have done the Emperor's bidding had they had the chance to be free to do so. No. That's considered bad taste and racist talk, now. Yet you would have tens of thousands of Arabs rounded up and detained or deported on a regular basis? Well, surprise - so would I, Miss Pie, but that ain't gonna happen in this year of our Lord 2002, in PC America.
Even today the Arab interest groups and the liberal media whine about Arabs being treated 'unfairly', even when we foolishly refuse to profile the very same race of people who committed the 9/11 attacks. That's 'racist', 'unfair' and just 'mean', they cry, and many agree. Yet you expect Congress (half or more are liberals) to just immediately grant the AG and the FBI and CIA the right to round up illegal immigrants and ship them back and jail the rest? Really? John Ashcroft is villified here on FR for daring to impose some restrictions on our freedoms but yet, he's supposed to seal the borders and jail immigrants by the thousands? The liberals whined about the terrorist detainees in Cuba! Your demands for immigration action are valid but the expectations are unrealistic and blaming Bush for most of it is misplaced blame.
You dismiss anything the Bush people have accomplished as fluff and take the word of that paragon of virtue, Osma bin Laden when he tells you that the money-freezing hasn't hurt him a bit. You distrust our President but willingly accept what a chief terrorist claims? That's zealotry on stilts and I have to back away from that kind of skewed 'logic' you tout as pure and simple.
For the Nth time; I agree with the dire need for border security and immigration control, as well as getting as much security in place as possible, understanding that you can't put every Arab in jail or deport them all.
I also understand that no amount of 'security' will thwart a determined terrorist (or 20 of them) willing and able to die for Allah while taking out American lives in the process, a la Israel.
You're willful waving away what has been accomplished by the government is your choice of course but lacks credibility when looked at clearly. We're 'safer' than we were on September 10, 2001 but short of jailing every Arab and sealing off the Canadian and Mexican borders with tanks, it won't get a lot better than this for now.
Another deadly terrorist attack will radically change that - something you also constantly ignore - and we'll see immediate, tough action on immigration when fear drives Americans to demand it and they simply refuse to accept PC crap and the sometimes half-hearted measures that you decry.
Not until then will you get what you angrily demand and what is now impossible from the President and our government. Again I remind you that America is not a dictatorship, Bush is not a Caesar and without almost 100% public demand we'll not see the immigration and 'security' measures you want from Bush and Congress.
There use to be a President with a sign on his desk, "The Buck Stops Here", that is where it should stop, with the CIC. Clinton wasn't a bit shy about being thought a dictator, or issuing a blizzard of Executive Orders, and a few well placed ones would go a long way to protecting American citizens. Like zero admittance to this country by anyone from a terrorist nation or of Arab decent until a better identification system is in place.
Right after 9-11 everyone would have cheered that decision from a strong President taking charge of a bad situation. Politicans grasp at every poll, yet the polls showing at least 70% or more Americans want a halt to immigration goes ignored, now ask yourself just why is that? Why is the will of the people being ignored? Politicans claim they are real keen on the will of the people. We can no longer be sure of just which people they are talking about I suppose, American people? Third world people? I think we need them to define just which people's will they are keen on.
I'm pretty sure Bush doesn't have a sign on his desk saying "The Buck Stops Here", I'm pretty sure he must have a photo in a heart shaped picture frame of V. Fox, he must have, he keeps trying to sneak 245i past very opposed and frightened American citizens. Not very compassionate of him now is it. I have been adviced by Bush loyalists to watch what he does, not what he says, I have and I trust him less every day.
Pre 9-11 the blame can be placed squarely on the Congress, post 9-11 Bush gets the blame and congress comes in a close second. What you suggest may happen is a real shame, that after the next attack people will angrily demand change, not good, shame on ya for waiting for more innocent victims blood to be spilled before "angrily demanding" more be done. It's a shame that a politican won't step up to the plate until he is assured of which way the political wind will blow, I guess I can understand that self serving attitude. Here is the thing, I can't bear to see the innocents in Israel come to harm, and I hear the clock ticking on my fellow American's lives and yeah, I guess I am pre-angry about that, instead of post-angry. My bad, my timing is always off with everyone else's.