Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45
  1. #21  
    Terrorism's goal has little to do with physical destruction as many of you seem to believe. The physical damage these terrorists do is only the flame that lights the fuse. Our fears are the fuse, every threat just accelerates the fuse's burn which will ultimately detonate the destructor of peace and civility within and amongst ourselves. I'm trying to tell you people that the real chaos has not even begun. And if we continue to play the game the way they expect we are going to lose more than just lives.

    Understand that I'm not saying awareness is bad. It's just that the real damage they intend to inflict upon us is launched/carried by our fears. Their system of destruction is self fulfilling in that by us doing whats right and raising awareness we are also aiding their plan. I don't have a solution I'm merely pointing out something.
    .
  2. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #22  
    "The ironic thing, to me, is that the people clamoring most for increased actions of this sort tend to be the same conservatives who rail against government spending and want more and more tax cuts.

    TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch). Someday maybe everyone will figure out that you have to pay for what you get, sooner or later.
    "

    - meyerweb



    please highlight where i have stated i want all this for free. ironically,that sounds like something you`d hear from another party to be quite honest.
    i think ALL of us would be willing to pay more taxes so that we could ensure our border security. just knowing our border closure could more likely stave off a nuclear terrorist attack as well as the influx of illegal immigrants would have all of us sleeping more soundly at night - we would pay up in a heartbeat. its what you raise taxes FOR, its not simply the act of raising taxes, meyerweb, that ignites the people`s hearts and minds.


    "And just think, if we succeed, we'll have turned ourselves into what we profess be against: a police state where freedom is little more than a myth, where people are afraid to voice opinions contrary to current dogma for fear of being suspected a terrorist, or worse (just protesting against the war gets you an FBI file today). Sounds a lot like Iraq before the war, or Saudi Arabia today.

    For now, we'll just ignore the constitutional issues, since that would make the argument in favor of monitoring every Muslim even more difficult to make."

    - meyerweb

    see, you automatically assume i am saying people should be imprisoned for "voicing opinions contrary to current dogma for fear of being suspected a terrorist" .

    dead wrong. couldnt be further from what im talking about. i am talking about keeping watch over outwardly suspicious behavior, close monitering of such people who work to earn money here and then send it over to a group which funds, supports or trains al qaeda militants which fight us here or overseas. monitoring suspicious groups or individuals who are gathering information about our society here like spies and sending it over to the fiends in the caves cooking up their insane schemes against humanity.

    but sure, you could just continue to live as you want as we LET anyone come in and paint crosshairs on us without batting an eye about it, going to sleep wondering if anything is going to happen tomorrow on the subway. maybe its just me, but id feel more comfortable knowing those areas are heavily policed, knowing weve got strength in the appropriate places, as opposed to complaining that we are losing our freedoms to this security.

    everybody`s different. but this doesnt mean i consider you a terrorist.
    Last edited by vw2002; 07/23/2005 at 04:12 PM.
  3. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #23  
    "They have conditioned us via inflicted trauma to respond hastily to anything involving terrorism. Now anytime someone mentions anything new and plausible, we scramble around like erratic ants of anxiety... I say F^&K that!"

    - skillz

    let's look at it from this angle. what if there were credible reports that there would be a suicide bombing tomorrow at the school which YOUR kids attended? or the office building which your wife worked?
    would your response still be a cavalier... ... f&k that!?

    things that make you go.. hmm.

    I tell you what, I'd rather have THEM scattering like ants wondering what WE'LL do next, as opposed to living in our own country waiting for their next assault on us.
    frankly, I prefer the proactive approach, because they're sure as hell taking a proactive stance with us now aren't they?!!
    I gotta have more cowbell
  4.    #24  
    The rumored reports state that AQ has been planning a nuke strike for nearly 10 years now. Here are some interesting highlights over the last 3 years of that time:

    Retreating Al Qaeda terrorists in Afghanistan left behind nuclear designs written in Arabic, German, Urdu, and English; foul-smelling liquids; and a recipe for building a nuclear bomb that included detailed descriptions of how TNT can cause plutonium to begin its deadly chain reaction
    http://www.harpers.org/WeeklyReview2...930-2256312867
    Time Magazine: Al-Qaeda's Nuclear Contact?

    http://www.time.com/time/archive/pre...450968,00.html

    Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the No. 3 leader of al-Qaeda, who was captured in Pakistan on March 1, has been questioned extensively about..........another figure of much concern to Washington: Abdul Qadeer Khan, the maverick Pakistani scientist who has been called the father of the Islamic Bomb. U.S. intelligence, according to one official, has information that the al-Qaeda man and the nuclear scientist had connections with the same safe-house operator and may have crossed paths. They were "reported to be at the same place at approximately the same time," the official said.

    ..............

    The CIA believes that Khan had a key role in helping North Korea develop at least one or two nuclear devices, a senior official tells TIME.
    Pakistan's forgotten al-Qaeda nuclear link
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FF04Df05.html

    In late 2001, US officials investigating the activities of Osama bin Laden discovered that the al-Qaeda head had contacted some Pakistani nuclear experts for assistance in making a small nuclear device.

    ....................

    In the recent past, Saeed has stated in his public meetings and rallies that Pakistan's nuclear weapons should be used to benefit all Islamic nations and that Pakistan must share its nukes with such nations as Iran and Saudi Arabia. More alarming, in a 2002 statement Saeed released to the LeT website, he claimed that people loyal to his organization "control two nuclear missiles". He is claimed to have said that the two missiles with warheads would be used against "enemies of Islam".

    .................

    Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) is a terrorist group based in Muridke, Pakistan. Although founded by the chief promoter of the Afghan jihad and bin Laden mentor, Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, LeT claims ousting India from Kashmir as its main goal. But experts say LeT shared training camps with al-Qaeda and that many al-Qaeda-linked Afghan-Arabs have been found fighting for LeT in Indian-administered Kashmir.

    In a sensational claim, French journalist and author Bernard Henri-Levy stated that Pakistan's disgraced "father" of the nuclear bomb, Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, was in fact a member of LeT. What is definite is that Khan did attend the last openly held LeT moot, in April 2001, as an honored guest. Accompanying Khan on the dais was none other than Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, the plutonium expert who met bin Laden. According to the South Asia Analysis Group, bin Laden himself was known to address LeT annual meets over the phone for many years, even when he was hiding in Afghanistan and Sudan.

    .................

    Even if al-Qaeda never gets hold of a Pakistani nuclear warhead, thanks to US technical safeguards, the possibility of it building a Pakistani-designed radiation dispersal device or a "dirty bomb" looks plausible. A recent analysis by US nuclear experts David Albright and Holly Higgins found strong evidence that Pakistani nuclear scientists Sultan Mahmood and Abdul Majid "provided significant assistance to al-Qaeda's efforts to make radiation dispersal devices". Therein lies the most overlooked Pakistani threat - the knowledge in the heads of nuclear experts sympathetic to the jihad movement, and jihadi groups with weapons-of-mass-destruction ambitions such as LeT operating secure facilities and training camps in Pakistan with only the most minimal of restraints.
    TIME Magazine: Bordering On Nukes?
    New accounts from al-Qaeda to attack the U.S. with weapons of mass destruction


    http://www.time.com/time/archive/pre...782068,00.html

    A key al-Qaeda operative seized in Pakistan recently offered an alarming account of the group's potential plans to target the U.S. with weapons of mass destruction, senior U.S. security officials tell TIME. Sharif al-Masri, an Egyptian who was captured in late August near Pakistan's border with Iran and Afghanistan, has told his interrogators of "al-Qaeda's interest in moving nuclear materials from Europe to either the U.S. or Mexico," according to a report circulating among U.S. government officials. Masri also said al-Qaeda has considered plans to "smuggle nuclear materials to Mexico, then operatives would carry material into the U.S.," according to the report, parts of which were read to TIME.

    Masri's account, though unproved, has added to already heightened U.S. concerns about Mexico.
    The Washington Times: Al Qaeda sought nuclear scientists
    http://www.nci.org/02/04f/12-03.htm

    Two Afghan nuclear scientists, in the strongest indication yet that al Qaeda was trying to construct a nuclear bomb, have revealed how the terrorist group attempted to recruit them.
    The scientists disclosed how they had risked their lives by hiding radioactive materials, sufficient to make dozens of "dirty bombs," in the ruins of the old Aliabad mental hospital in Kabul and in the grimy basement of Kabul University's nuclear physics department.
    Last week, a team of specially trained British soldiers equipped with state-of-the-art instruments were led to the caches by the two nuclear physicists.
    What they found astounded them.
    There was a broken radiotherapy machine, containing enough cobalt 60 to kill a man instantly, in the lead-lined cancer treatment room of the hospital.
    In the basement of Kabul University, there were containers of solid and liquid radioactive material, some broken or with the lids off; chemical warfare agents; and instruments emitting radiation.
    "We've been finding stuff that's far more potent and dangerous than even 'dirty bombs,' which are made of nuclear waste," said Capt. James Cameron, who heads an eight-member team from the Joint Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Regiment, based in Bury Saint Edmunds, England, which also monitors the activities of Iraq's Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.

    ...................

    Although evidence found by the Sunday Telegraph last November and more recently, the joint team headed by Capt. Cameron in Mr. Mahmoud's house revealed that he was engaged in an experiment to float a helium balloon filled with anthrax over the United States, the Multi Group was clearly attempting to construct a nuclear bomb.
    "They said to me, 'We know you're working for the faculty of nuclear science, and we need you,'" Mr. Korbani said. "They offered me a lot of money and said that they wanted me to find 100 other nuclear scientists and technicians and come to Karachi."
    Mr. Korbani was then asked to write a paper on atomic energy.
    "They told me, 'Pakistan has a very powerful atomic bomb, and we are very keen on bringing such a power to Afghanistan,'" he said. The men told him that people in Pakistan's tribal areas would pay for the program. "They kept calling me, but I never returned [the calls]. I knew it was too dangerous."
    Capt. Cameron said there was little doubt that al Qaeda and the Taliban were attempting to make chemical weapons. If not for the Kabul University scientists, al Qaeda might have successfully constructed several "dirty bombs," he said.
  5. #25  
    to be honest there is nothing new about what this chinese general said, it is cold war all over again.
    And the US does the same thing, if a country nukes the US, the US will nuke them...
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  6. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #26  
    "islamic citizens are not the only ones committing acts of terror. Acts of terror are used by many religious, political, and environmental groups to get thier messages accross. Many of them live and were born in the US"

    tell me something, are there any other types of people other than islamic people planting bombs in areas with the purpose of killing or maiming people?

    these environmental groups you mention - their main intention is to damage the RESOURCES which people can use to exploit, but they don't go out planting bombs in subways or buses or out in public squares to kill PEOPLE!!!
    come on, let's get real here - seriously..
    the only people who are consistently going out with the single intention of killing PEOPLE, are the islamic radical psychos - THEREFORE, its necessary to eliminate THAT obvious threat.

    Listen, we are giving everyone in this country the best opportunity to enjoy freedoms as we have all appreciated since this nation was born.
    but if there continues to be ongoing killings, suicidal bombings, with no hope in sight despite heavy policing of the country - than it becomes necessary to make a significantly more aggressive move here.

    if we cannot produce a harmonious situation here in our western countries with those of the islamic people, then we must consider arranging for deportation. we must separate those who are at odds without hope of reconciling differences.
    I mean we all live together here, and though we have political, religious or philosophical differences, we all tolerate those differences which are respected by the principles of our constitution.
    but honestly, if there is a group of people who just simply won't coexist with us without deviously strategizing our demise whether it be through suicide bombings or through funding terrorist cells from within our country, than by god, there comes time when we must remove them all, for the sake of our survival.
    this would be a shame, but who wants to continue living this way?
    I gotta have more cowbell
  7. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #27  
    ok, correction, the oklahoma city bombings weren't caused by islamic radicals, but in the PRESENT day and age, since 9/11, the only consistent type of people doing these deeds are those I've mentioned above - al qaeda
    so my point here is that although this is terribly unfair for the many good people of the muslim faith who may not be participating in this movement somehow, how else can we possibly be sure? supposedly people who were responsible for other terrorist bombings were also "good people" as well! how the hell can we coexist here?
    this extreme move may not yet be necessary as we have not YET been victimized by another bombing, but I am sure that there is only SO MUCH we can take here before some extreme measures become necessary to combat extreme circumstances.
    I know this is against the beliefs of many here, but if we find that all of our police security and cutting edge technology still fails to prevent these attacks,despite increased funding, then how else can we remove this threat credibly?
    we can only take so much of this, and at some point it becomes time to say" ENOUGH IS ENOUGH'
    live here peacefully with us, or leave our country.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  8.    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    to be honest there is nothing new about what this Chinese general said, it is cold war all over again.
    And the US does the same thing, if a country nukes the US, the US will nuke them...
    I agree with the cold war scenario...but with some very important differences from our last one.

    • With Russia a specific spot of land that both have swore to defend, ie Taiwan, was not a major issue.
    • Russia was still a relative new Gov, while China's comm control has been well established.
    • China is just now trying to reach out to the world community with free trade, while keeping a comm gov control. The two don't mix well for very long. There is going to be nothing but building pressure and unpredictability within the gov as they meet these challenges, that potentially could overflow their borders.
    • It is now obvious that China has radical generals in power....but how much power and influence they continually get is going to very important.
    • The Military report released to Congress yesterday shows the true situation about China's military. They are actively building up a substantial army. The report shows how much money is being poured into what time of military arsenals. Bottom line, is they are actively rapidly building up their armed forces and weapons.


    There was a radio interview with Donald Rum the other day. The day before the interview he asked his audience to email him ANY question they would like to ask about, be it Iraq, our soldiers coming home, WOT, etc.... The number one question was China....what is the true situation. Donald was very diplomatic in his answer, but basically said they are building their army and arsenal at an historic speed for that country. They are trying, with both success, grudging compromises, and failures, to step into the free trade international arena. But does not see an immediate threat, as in this very day or next week, but that all signs are pointing a situation that we need to monitor and actively remain involved in.
  9.    #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    ok, correction, the oklahoma city bombings weren't caused by islamic radicals, but in the PRESENT day and age, since 9/11, the only consistent type of people doing these deeds are those I've mentioned above - al qaeda
    so my point here is that although this is terribly unfair for the many good people of the muslim faith who may not be participating in this movement somehow, how else can we possibly be sure? supposedly people who were responsible for other terrorist bombings were also "good people" as well! how the hell can we coexist here?
    we can only take so much of this, and at some point it becomes time to say" ENOUGH IS ENOUGH'
    live here peacefully with us, or leave our country.
    You know we rounded up all the Japanese into concentration camps during WWII? I actually visited one of them in CA during my travels for work. Unless we were under true attack in an occupation force invading, I don't see ever happening again. I think the same would be true with mass "get the hell out of here" philosophy.

    One thing that I feel could be stepped up is the enforcement of preaching and teaching resistance to the US gov in a violent way. I know we have free speech, but that does limitations....like I would go to jail for purposely yelling "FIRE!" in a packed theater, when I knew there wasn't one. We cannot preach terrorist actions against the gov. I think that we do need to crack down on ANY group or persons teaching, promoting, or supporting these ideas of violence.
  10. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #30  
    "We cannot preach terrorist actions against the gov. I think that we do need to crack down on ANY group or persons teaching, promoting, or supporting these ideas of violence. "


    SPOT ON. this should be the rule within mosques in this country. if you preach violence against our country from within your mosques here, you are either imprisoned indefinitely or deported. period. zero tolerance policy. free speech and the right to express differences with government peacefully and respectfully is, without question, the way our forefathers always wanted for us. but those who,like hobbesisreal stated above , use "free speech" to preach violence, should be subjected to immediate imprisonment or deportation.
    this is a dangerous world now. We need to adapt to it..
    Last edited by vw2002; 07/23/2005 at 04:17 PM.
  11. #31  
    I hope the last few people who posted were just playing.

    Stereotyping any group, race or religion take america 50 years into the past. It goes against ever thing American Troops have died for.
    Evil is committed by all people. In 1996 over 11000 people were murdered in the US alone. Rember Colobine High school. Should we now depart all 15-17 year old white boys. Should
    we deport 16-22 year old Black Males.

    We a bunch of idiots. Depart a person, because a member of his religion commit a terrorist act. If that the case all white male need to be departed for the action of the KKK "a terrorist organization.
    Build Systems, Not Products
    <center>All Comments Copyright Clarence C Middleton 2005-2006, All Rights Reserved<br /> <a href="mailto:ClarenceCM3@gmail.com">ClarenceCM3@gmail.com</a><br /><ahref ="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx">http://www.middleton.ath.cx</a><br /><a href="http://www.middleton.ath.cx"><img style="width: 124px; height: 54px;"src="http://www.middleton.ath.cx/photos/middletonlogo.gif" /></a></ahref><center />
  12. #32  
    "...free speech and the right to express differences with government peacefully and respectfully is, without question, the way our forefathers always wanted for us. but those who,like hobbesisreal stated above , use "free speech" to preach violence, should be subjected to imediate imprisonment or deportation.
    this is a dangerous world now. We need to adapt to it..
    Ignorance is at a all time High"

    VW: I also agree with yours (and Hobbes) free speech issue. The problem I have though is that there are some gray areas in what would be considered "preaching violence". That type of standard is a little vague. In addition, since we are both interested in protecting free speech, I also want to point out that we should be interested in protected a person's due process rights as well. Hence, I wouldn't be in favor or " imediate imprisonment or deportation." The reason why is that if the speech wasn't truly violent, that tactic could be used to stiffle unpopular speech and without a hearing or due process, those rights would not be protected either.

    I think we can still work against terrorism (at least domestically) within the confines of the U.S. Constitution. :-)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  13. #33  
    Clarence: I don't think its ignorance but rather desperation. We are fighting an enemy who does not follow any rules. We are already starting with a handicap.

    I would rather we put more effort into coming up with solutions that still fit within the confines of our constitution and its protection for all citizens.

    IMO-one of the many terrorist goals are to disrupt this country and its way of life. By going the more extreme direction of immediate deportation (or what you were alluding too...racial profiling) then we are heading down the direction of less freedoms.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  14. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    I hope the last few people who posted were just playing.

    Stereotyping any group, race or religion take america 50 years into the past. It goes against ever thing American Troops have died for.
    Evil is committed by all people. In 1996 over 11000 people were murdered in the US alone. Rember Colobine High school. Should we now depart all 15-17 year old white boys. Should
    we deport 16-22 year old Black Males.

    We a bunch of idiots. Depart a person, because a member of his religion commit a terrorist act. If that the case all white male need to be departed for the action of the KKK "a terrorist organization.
    here we go with the race card, clarence. come on, man, we are talking about terrorism brought on by al qaeda. you are missing the point here. of course we can bring up all the other instances where tragedies were NOT done at the hands of islamic radicals. instances such as columbine and the oklahoma city bombing are prime examples and equally tragic - but such instances are not part of an INTERNATIONAL JIHAD against western civilization! we are not at war with hundreds of thousands of dysfunctional teenagers, misguided madmen (oklahoma city bomber), we - the world - are at war with RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS. these, currently, are public enemy number one - how can you deny this?

    never in the HISTORY of america have civil rights of all individuals been so broadly upheld, so the KKK analogy is just inappropriate.

    "we are a bunch of idiots" yes we are,clarence, if we dont take the proper steps to proactively prevent the REAL IDIOTS from bombing us again.
    we are a bunch of idiots when we are so concerned with the treatment of such fiends when incarcerated, while upon releasing them they return to their terrorist clans only to kill, maim and terrorize mercilessly innocent people all over the world once again. yes we ARE IDIOTS, for allowing that to happen!
    (incidentally, this also applies to our "brilliant" legal practice of releasing convicted child molesters back out into society after "rehabilitation" as well, only to find that they simply return to committing murders even more depraved than before, but that is for another thread)

    as far as "departing" - (i believe you were trying to say - deport), if you read what i have posted above a little more closely youll see that i didnt say such an extreme move is what we SHOULD do right now! by NO means is that my stance here.

    all i am saying we need to follow ever more closely the movements, associations, and monetary networks of certain individuals more than others unfortunately because all of the terrorist bombing worldwide is being brought about by ISLAMIC RADICALS, not white 15 year olds, and the like.

    but if it gets to the point where there are suicide bombings EVERY week or EVERY MONTH despite top draw security and increased funding, and there becomes an epidemic of terrorist bombings within western nations, clarence, then there is only SO MUCH people will take before they will want extreme measures to be taken. that is when "enough is enough".

    deportation is THE last resort. thats the point i am making. but i would think it would not be out of the question if our current system simply proves incapable of effectively and efficiently preventing widespread periodic al qaeda attacks, if it gets to that point. its simply becomes a issue of doing what is necessary for the sake of survival. we cant have a "**** and jane" approach to a threat that is becoming deadlier each day.
    Last edited by vw2002; 07/23/2005 at 04:19 PM.
  15. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #35  
    "Ignorance is at a all time High"

    - clarenceCM3

    yes it certainly is.
    Last edited by vw2002; 07/23/2005 at 04:25 PM.
  16. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #36  
    VW: I also agree with yours (and Hobbes) free speech issue. The problem I have though is that there are some gray areas in what would be considered "preaching violence". That type of standard is a little vague. In addition, since we are both interested in protecting free speech, I also want to point out that we should be interested in protected a person's due process rights as well. Hence, I wouldn't be in favor or " imediate imprisonment or deportation." The reason why is that if the speech wasn't truly violent, that tactic could be used to stiffle unpopular speech and without a hearing or due process, those rights would not be protected either.

    I think we can still work against terrorism (at least domestically) within the confines of the U.S. Constitution. :-)
    - t2gungho

    my definition of preaching violence would be telling muslims or anyone for that matter to donate, contribute somehow or join the effort to kill people of the western society - those who dont share the radical beliefs of al qaeda or any radical group - that goes for people of ALL colors, clarence. i dont care who it is. if you preach death or violence to others out of allegiance to some radical belief system, youre outta here, pal ... bon voyage. pretty, straightforward policy. and just for the record, here, thats not ignorance at an all-time high, that is , quite frankly, just the way it oughtta be. period.

    preaching about differences people have with the way government conducts itself militarily, politically, economically, or whatever is absolutely without question natural and encouraged. this should and will always be defended.

    the mention of deportation, is like i said, not even close to being a possibility here - right now. i bring that up only to make a point where if we fail to prevent such horrible nightmares from happening over and over again, after devoting our best and brightest together with increased funds all within the confines of our US constitution, then honestly, what other choice have we? i dont want to live that way. no one else wants to live that way.

    i would without question prefer that we could reach the solution to this nightmare in a fashion which is representative of the highest values and ideals of our constitution. thats a given. i mean this is america. but like you said, these enemies dont play by the rules - whatsoever, and such tragedies like those in london simply make it necessary for one to consider all the possible ways for a civilized nation to extract the embedded, invisible enemy.
    Last edited by vw2002; 07/23/2005 at 04:22 PM.
  17. #37  
    vw: if it ever got that far, then I would support Constitutional limitations (just as Pres Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the civil war). However, due process should be upheld whenever possible to protects groups and individuals from over reaching Governmental agencies.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    vw: if it ever got that far, then I would support Constitutional limitations (just as Pres Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the civil war). However, due process should be upheld whenever possible to protects groups and individuals from over reaching Governmental agencies.


    "In time of war, the laws are silent. (A Latin phrase: inter arma silent leges)"


    i can agree with that completely, t2gungho. such an approach is effective as long as it is done within reason.
  19.    #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by ClarenceCM3
    I hope the last few people who posted were just playing.

    Stereotyping any group, race or religion take America 50 years into the past. It goes against ever thing American Troops have died for.
    Evil is committed by all people. In 1996 over 11000 people were murdered in the US alone. Rember Colobine High school. Should we now depart all 15-17 year old white boys. Should
    we deport 16-22 year old Black Males.

    We a bunch of idiots. Depart a person, because a member of his religion commit a terrorist act. If that the case all white male need to be departed for the action of the KKK "a terrorist organization.
    Who said anything about stereotypes or demographics? How did you get racism from my comment like :
    I think that we do need to crack down on ANY group or persons teaching, promoting, or supporting these ideas of violence
    We were talking about ANYBODY, no matter their religion, color, sex, or whether they like Big Mac or Whopper more.......if they are supporting killing innocent civilians of any nation through terrorist acts or groups, that is something that should not be tolerated.



    I also never intended to give the impression that I would support immediate deportation or sentencing.....which is what I meant by stating:
    I think the same would be true with mass "get the hell out of here" philosophy.
    There should always be the due process of law....though the due process of law concerning terrorist relate acts are in a league all their own.
  20. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #40  
    "I also never intended to give the impression that I would support immediate deportation ..."

    - HobbesIsReal

    the whole mention of deportation was a hypothetical - as to what we'd have to do if terrorist attacks happened everywhere all over the country repeatedly beyond our control despite our best efforts to police the situation.
    looking back, you will see we would all rather see a solution born of the ideals of the constitution vs any extreme measure.
    I gotta have more cowbell
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions