Preserved Topic: Land of the Free? (Page 1 of 3)

I saw this on the news today and I was pretty shocked:

US begins entry checks on Muslims

All our freedoms are being eroded since 9/11 (polls here in the UK show a smallish majority in favour of such a thing if it will help fight terrorism) and this strikes me as another worrying development. If a country decided to do such a thing against Jewish people the outcry would be deafening.

I was just wondering what people thought about this move.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

It's just a scare. We'll do it, get it over with, and apologize in two to four years.

njuice42: I do hope so but by then we will have identity cards (by another name I'm sure) and increased surveillance (for our security) and those kind of things are trickier to claw back once we have given them away. It always seems like the goverments use such scare tatics to push the boundaries of what we find acceptable - here in the UK we are getting 'entitlement' cards (I read somewhere that the number one thing you have to do to get an ID card sytem in is to call it anything but and ID card) because of scares over asylum seekers, the retention of more genetic samples to form a database which can be checked against any crime samples because of peadophile (and other) scares, greatly increased (200-300% in some areas) CCTV coverage because of our fears of street crime and now we have longer retention and greater monitoring of communication data (thanks to The War Against Terror).

This kind of thing is fine in our 'enlightened' times as I'm not going around committing a crime but we never can be sure what could be construde as a crime in a few generations time (sedition?).

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Ah, yea...I will read it in a second.

But about ID cards, it seems that in America you can't do anything without a Social Security number, a drivers license and a Credit Card. You can't even get a membership at a video rental place without a picture ID and a credit card. What's up with that?

-^^-
--::--
\___/

Ah, yea.

Everyone needs to just become a Christian, and than all these problems would be solved.

quote:

---

scares over asylum seekers

---

Yeah, I thought we were getting a lot of new people in here. Personally, I say we just take them with open arms and let Wakkos initiate them. I'm also a little nervous about the ID card thing--Wolfen already has hers, and I'm just waiting for the day when she decides to issue them to all the inmates as a security precaution.

quote:

---

Everyone needs to just become a Christian, and than all these problems would be solved.

---

Uh, where did that come from?

[The Management would like to note that the above post was not meant to belittle the issue at hand, and the poster does realize that it is almost an entirely useless post. The Management does not, however, apologize, and suggests that those who are offended join us in the basement for shock therapy treatment. Thank you.]


Cell 270

Just kidding Suho... I'm not even a Christian. More into Nature stuff, ya know...Shamanism..

-^^-
--::--
\___/

Like many things Americans end up doing after such tragic events, this is simply one more thing to help ensure that we *DO* have repeated terrorist actions and increased global hatred.



[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 10-01-2002).]

Suho1004:

Why didn't I see that one coming??

I think GRUMBLE and some others also have ID cards (it all started a while ago - nothing sudden just a gradual shift).

Gilbert Nolander: I'm sure we all spotted it was a joke (but you get shock treatment anyway - singing the Ramones all the way).

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I always liked this song from The Clash

quote:

---

This is a public service announcement
With guitar
Know your rights all three of them

Number 1
You have the right not to be killed
Murder is a CRIME!
Unless it was done by a
Policeman or aristocrat
Know your rights

And Number 2
You have the right to food money
Providing of course you
Don't mind a little
Investigation, humiliation
And if you cross your fingers
Rehabilitation

Know your rights
These are your rights
Wang

Know these rights

Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.

Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................

Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run
You don't have a home to go to
Smush

Finally then I will read you your rights

You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you

Listen to this
Run

---

Kinda 'in tune' with this thread...

Well, there's two quotes that can pretty much sum up what I think about it:

"Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace" - John Lennon's "Imagine"

and...

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Amen. Very nice...

And true.

Give me freedom and give me death???

Shouldn't we be discussing where to draw the line as opposed to there being a line at all? We are at war right now. It's perfectly natural to scrutinize people based on the current threat. A huge portion of the Islamic world agrees with the attacks and that is why we just can't ignore the facts on this one. If it were a smaller contingent it would be a very different story.

Imagine what it is like to jump from the WTC. And I think even Ben Franklin would understand protecting the nation from attacks from foreign nationals to be a little different than allowing people to criticize their government.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm concerned too... we should all be concerned to protect against going too far but it's almost sounding to me like you're all saying we should have no scrutiny of visitors. Is that really what you're advocating?

. . : slicePuzzle

I have to agree with Bugs on this one. I don't mind being tracked and or watched. I'm not doing anything wrong. I want there to be some huge safety breaks inserted in the implementation of 'ID cards' or whatever it is. I'm not going to get nailed for something that was just made illegal the day before and I hadn't read the paper yet, sort of thing. It isn't like they're talking about putting mikes and cameras on everyone. If they want to track me as I move around... go ahead. It already happens anyway.

What is this essential liberty that I'm giving up? The right to Privacy... Freedom? Are they going to tap my phone and put cameras in my house to watch me in the shower? Get a kick out of me buying my fiance some kinky underwear? I'm still free to do whatever I want providing I don't break any laws. I haven't given up the right to privacy in any way what-so-ever. They don't have the right to access any of the information compiled about me until I'm arrested for a crime or under suspicion of commiting a crime, just like they can't do that today with the information that they have on me already. You see, it's when I commit a crime that I give up my rights.

Profiling goes against my basic principles but when faced with an insurmountable number of people to watch you need to make some choices to narrow the field or you don't watch anyone well enough to make a difference.

And Emp... The Jews aren't portrayed as dangerous, are they? If the Jewish community suddenly went on a 'I hate Americans' killing spree we'd be watching and checking them as they entered our country to protect ourselves. How is this different?

GrythusDraconis
"Be careful not to anger the Great Dragon for you are crunchy and taste good with Ketchup" T-Shirt Somewhere

"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably"

- STNG

During war, mistakes are made and things are done in the best way they can given the circumstances. The Americans of Japanese descent that were imprisoned during WWII are no longer in the camps. And reparations were paid after the fact. I do *not* want to argue whether it was right to intern them, but I just wanted to point out that not all trangressions against freedom are permanent. Especially in a country like the US where the system is designed to allow for corrections.

Respectfully, I disagree.

The only thing I see wrong with the idea is that it applies only to a certain group. IMHO, such checks should be run on everyone entering the country, including my fellow citizens.

If you read the article closely, it says that those deemed to be an elevated risk will be formally registered and will have *30 days* to say where they are living, working or studying.

It does not say they will be turned away at the border, nor does it say they will be taken into custody.

I live 60 minutes from where the "sleeper cell" was arrested recenty. I'm also 60 minutes from the Canadian border. No one has said anything about the Canadians turning away US citizens at their borders. I myself was denied entry to Canada in 1998. (Four years later, I don't blame them a bit.)

Since 9/11, anyone with any sort of criminal record, including traffic violations, is turned away at the Canadian border. My roommate had a DUI 12 years ago. He had to file with the Canadian embassy, pay $200 (US by the way, they're not stupid) and submit reports from the FBI, NY State, the county and city, proof of completion of alcohol rehab and seven letters of recommendation. Then it took nine months to process his application. Result? He can now enter Canada freely as a tourist. I also know he was not singled out. I personally know three others who have gone through the same thing.

Every soverign nation has the right to grant or deny border crossing to anyone for any reason. Full stop. It is the governments' duty in order to protect its citizens.

Again, the only problem I see here is that particular attention is being paid to a small segment of the 35 million foreign nationals who enter the US every year. The same rules should apply to all.

"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

Why should the same rules apply to all?

because profiling (racial or not) is what you do when a crime has been recently commited to cut down on the investigative work needed to catch the criminal.

If you know his race or face or hair color you look for those characteristics.

In this case, the terrorists we're worried about are from these certain arab and muslim countries.

This of course is also a flawed because not every terrorist is a registered citizen of these countries nor flying in straight from them. But they do this because checking everyone is too hard. Yeah well, tough cookies.

And I don't know what this talk of rights is. They are visitors to our country, not citizens. They don't have the rights we do and we can toss em out as frequently or infrequently as we care to.

note: due to the totally skewed headline on this subject (oh look it's the BBC, what a surprise.) I must clarify the US procedure.
We ARE NOT profiling on their religions, as we would check all people from these countries regardless if they were muslim, jew, or shinto, lima, lentil, soy, or pinto.

If Israelites blew up our military headquarters, I'm sure we'd check anyone from there as well. And in turn BBC would post some fucked up headline like "US begins entry checks on Jewish". What a crock.

quote:

---

If you know his race or face or hair color you look for those characteristics.

---

Oh so if 1 Islamic blows himself up for martyrship than that means they all will?

quote:

---

We ARE NOT profiling on their religions

---

No one ever said we were. We are trying to simply say that religion has been the cause of several political frustration and global for that matter. No one wants to check these people for terrorist activities, no one wants to find any sort of relation to terrorist activity, they are doing it to ensure safety in this country. It's logical.

Now I agree with brucew. Everyone entering the country should be interrogated equally. But since it would be impossible to actually sit down with every american and have a pep talk on weather or not you're a terrorist, we select a group of people which has been statistically proven by majority to be related with terroristic activities, if had not been for certain statisitcs, it would be completely asinine and or stereo-typical for the country to select the muslim ethnicity to interrogate.

Jamie is also absolutely correct. Selecting the muslims and only the muslims will cause the muslims to feel insecure and they won't feel so strongly for the american government. But if they have nothing to hide than it shouldn't be much of a problem. Now the ones that are going to get pissed are the ones that are involved with terroristic activity, and the ignorant ones that have nothing to hide but get pissed anyway because they feel that it is unconstitutional and unfair to select them from a vast majority of ethnic groups residing in our country.

I see no problem with racial profiling.


_____________________
Prying open my third eye.

Well I do. It sets a precidence, and one not to my liking. Every journey starts with the first step. Are we really sure we wish to take this road? Where does it lead? We should be damned sure of where this is going, before implimenting this.

Yes, we have a right to defend ourselves. However, do we have the right to penalize others because of this? Remember, Innocent before proven guilty. On this cornerstone, is our justice system built. We should take great care before smashing it.

All options should be explored before doing this, IMHO. There must be a better way.

Oh so if 1 Islamic blows himself up for martyrship than that means they all will?
No, if we believed that, they would all be immediately arrested.
And even though you first question my argument, then end your post agreeing with me, I will still clarify.
Statistically, now people from the same background as the terrorists are more likely to commit the same crime. They are from the same country, lead by the same propaganda, taught by the same Madrassa's etc.
That's statistics. When 12 people die from lung cancer because of cigarettes, then others with the same habit are believed to be susceptible, so in turn their life insurance rates are raised higher than non-smokers.
Come on... get with the program.

We ARE NOT profiling on their religions
No one ever said we were.
The BBC's headline said exactly that, Insider. You must read all my paragraphs in context with the other sentences. BBC Headline: "US begins entry checks on Muslims".

However, do we have the right to penalize others because of this? Remember, Innocent before proven guilty.

You believe giving them a background check and making them check in with us within 30 days is tantamount to labeling them guilty?

May I remind you that they do not have the right to be here in the first place.
It is a privilige the US government is bestowing upon them.
We don't have to let them in, we can chunk them back in the plane and send their asses back.

They are not US citizens.
No US citizen is being tagged here.
I, for one, am all for militarizing the borders and banning any flights in from terrorist-risk countries.

genis, this

quote:

---

I, for one, am all for militarizing the borders and banning any flights in from terrorist-risk countries

---

is the stupidest thing I've ever heard...do you think that terrorists would have any problem getting around that? It would only keep innocent people from traveling...terrorists have access to passes...and can go through other countries first...

Are you then suggesting, that bussiness people from these countries shouldn't be able to do business with us anymore? Because they surely wouldn't be allowed to enter our country under this...rule. No, that is definetly not a reasonable solution.

Yes, I'm aware that they are not American citizens. However, Innocent before proven guilty is more than just a 'lawyers' saying...it is a cornerstone that our country is built on. It is also a conerstone of what we believe. To say 'Well, they are not US citizens' hardly means that they should not be given just and good treatment. By throwing all those innocents into a basket with a few bad apples, one is doing them an injustice. But you seem to justify this with the 'US citizen' bull...ok, that's your opinion. One must consider, that 'Muslim' countries don't have to sell oil to us, either...or allow our citizens into their countries...without a 'full body cavity check'. Not a very good idea for business, is it?

Remember, we believe that the 'little guy' should be protected from the masses...and that groups shouldn't be penalized because of a few...ring any bells?

This will simply not accomplish anything...other than 'stirring up' the already unsteady situation...

Now, tightening up all the 'control checks' for entering the country...of that, I have no problem with. Just as long as it doesn't 'single out' a particular group, nationality or religion.

And I think WS says it the best - we should be assumed to be innocent before being proven guilty. A lot of these new laws are going for blanket monitoring but there is now evidence that will work at all - the great failure leading up to 9/11 was specific focused intelligence about the activities of a small group.

So its now OK to monitor Arabs from certain countries but there are militant religious leaders in this country (the UK) and young Moslems have been going out to places like Yemen for training so we should really monitor them.

You should also take into account that some of the Arabs who are now US citizens may also be sleepers so we'd better monitor them too.

There is some discussion that militant Moslem groups may be meeting up with far right groups as they have a common hatred of he US government so we'd better keep a closer eye on them.

And lets be honest the Anthrax attacks probably originated from an American (probably with high security clearance in one of a couple of military labs) so we should keep an ear open for evidence flowing from there.

And some of the left wingers have been anti-war all along................

And.........

This isn't a structured war with geographical or temporal limits and I doubt it will ever be 'over' (in fact if poorly handled by our governments it could just get worse) there will be no point where we can really say the threat is over.

And we still have unspecified numbers of Moslems imprisoned without trail in a nuber of locations.

Its much quoted (in many variations) and a little emotive (I apologise in advance if it upsets anyone) but this comes to mind:

quote:

---

â??First they came for the Communists,
but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists,
but I was neither, so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Jews,
but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.â?�

Martin Niemoller

---

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Amen Emps, that quote is gold, baby...pure gold! Though I've seen it before here...it applies, 100%...

Thanks for posting it.

A lot of these arguements are based on what the Media has decided to focus on. No one has said that we aren't paying attention to other groups that are a threat. We're just placing specific attention to a specific threat. I can't imagine we've stopped watching those we were watching before. If you look at it in the context of trying to protect the country it wouldn't make sense to ONLY focus on arabs/muslims trying to enter our country. it would be beneficial to continue watching everybody but pay more attention to those of the same ethnic background as those the attacked us already. We aren't assuming they're all "guilty" we're assuming that there will be other attacks from that ethnic group and want to scare the attackers off, or catch them. This isn't any different then getting a police sketch of a criminal and having the cops only looking for that type of person. We have evidence that proves that people of that ethnic background are a greater threat to us.(WTC Attack)

So Yeah, You're right it would be foolish to look at only one group of people to try and protect us. It would also be foolish to spread our surveillence so thin that we don't get any infromation anyway. We don't have the personel to handle that amount of background checks. Checking in isn't terribly different in most other countries. I know when my x-wife went to Sweden she had to tell them where she was staying. She also had to have a job first. She was there on a 1 year visa or something. Even when she was just visiting she had to shell out a ton of information. I agree that it should be for everyone. But until we have the structure and capacity to handle that sort of information load we need to focus on where the threat is percieved.

GrythusDraconis
"Be careful not to anger the Great Dragon for you are crunchy and taste good with Ketchup" T-Shirt Somewhere

quote:

---

Why should the same rules apply to all?

---

1) As a demonstration that the concept of equal treatment under the law (although in this case its a policy, not a law) begins at our border.
2) The entire argument of profiling goes away.
3) Why screen only for terrorists? Why not all criminals?

Part of the screening is already carried out in some visitor's home countries through the process of obtaining entry visas from the US embassy or consulate. It doesn't have to take place on the jetway.

It took two years for a friend of mine to get a tourist visa simply because he's Nicaraguan. He'd done his masters here (in IT) on a student visa a few years before and works in the IT department of a bank. Frustrating? Yes. A bit over the top? No doubt.

Still, that process is already in place and has been for some time. I agree with it on basic principles and feel it should be all inclusive.

quote:

---

However, Innocent before proven guilty is more than just a 'lawyers' saying...it is a cornerstone that our country is built on.

---

This concept applies only *after* arrest. No criminal investigation could ever be undertaken if everyone was presumed to be innocent all the time. Suspicion is a requirement for investigation. And it is screening--investigation by another name--that we're talking about here.

Presumption of innocence is part--an important part, but only a part--of the checks and balances in place protect against mistakes on the part of the investigators. It does not apply, however, prior to arrest.

And the screening process isn't neccessarily based on a presumption of guilt. Remember "Trust but verify"?

<edit>typos</edit>

"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

[This message has been edited by brucew (edited 10-02-2002).]

Please read the above quote, then think about what you posted...

Ad another thought, that may sound really terrible to say but...

If they are being labelled poorly by a small constituant of their race, why don't they publicly condemn them and take action against them. I'm not only speaking of muslim/arabs in America, I'm speaking of them all. Even though they don't really like agreeing with each other they are all rolled into one group for the most part. If they would take some action or stand up and say 'We do not agree with the actions of these fanatics and we will do our best to remove them from our country' I've heard the words before but I've never seen any action on those words. We can't fix this from the outside, and we are outside because we're America. Whether they hate us or not... we aren't a part of them. If they would actively oppose the militant groups within their own borders some of the "terrorists" might realize that not all of the muslim/arab community agrees with what is happening. This won't reach all of them mind you, but it might help some of them before they sacrifice their lives to perpetuating this stupidity.

GrythusDraconis
"Be careful not to anger the Great Dragon for you are crunchy and taste good with Ketchup" T-Shirt Somewhere

Well while we are talking apt song lyrics:

quote:

---

Dead Kennedys
California Uber Alles


I am governor Jerry Brown
My aura smiles and never frowns
Soon I will be president...
Carter power will soon go away
I will be Fuhrer one day
I will command all of you
Your kids will meditate in school

California Uber alles
California Uber alles
Uber alles California
Uber alles California

Zen fascists will control you
Hundred percent natural
You will jog for the master race
And always wear the happy face
Close your eyes, can't happen here
Big Bro' on white horse is near
The hippies won't come back you say
Mellow out or you will pay

California Uber alles
Uber alles California

Now It Is 1984
Knock knock at your front door
It's the suede denim secret police
They have come for your uncool niece
Come quietly to the camp
You'd look nice as a drawstring lamp
Don't you worry, it's only a shower
For your clothes here's a pretty flower
Die on organic poison gas
Serpent's egg's already hatched
You will croak, you little clown
When you mess with President Brown

California Uber alles
Uber alles California

---

And WS a number of my friends would kiss you for throwing the Clash in there

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Oh but 'they' (man, I really despise it when someone uses that word...) have done so...I think you forgot about Pakistan...and the fact that they allowed us to get that Al Queda member there (and his buds). They also threw a huge amount of support our way during the war in Afghanistan.

There are also other 'signs', if you will, of such...so yes, the 'Moslems' have recognized that this is damaging their image. And they are sending out signals (and gestures, etc) that they wish to do something about it.

It's just hard, in a religious government system, to do exactly that.

I realize its hard and vocal support is better than no support. 'Actions speak louder than words' is a commonly accepted phrase for a reason. I just think it would be nice to see active support from Moslem organizations and other middle eastern communities on a continuing basis rather than in specific instances only.

GrythusDraconis
"Be careful not to anger the Great Dragon for you are crunchy and taste good with Ketchup" T-Shirt Somewhere

GrythusDraconis: Here in the UK most of the mainstream Moslem organisations condemned 9/11 and anti-American sentiment and have been working with the police to keep an eye on the more exteme elements. Unfortunately a stereotypical view of Islam out to take out the Great Satan makes much better (easier) news.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

WS: It would be easier for me to address your concerns if you would share with me exactly what they are.

"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

Sorry about the confusion, brucew. That wasn't meant for you, but for the post above yours...I didn't 'notice' yours sneaking in there before mine. No hard feelings?

@Emps...oh, I wasn't aware that there were any The Clash fans still out there...besides myself...*sniff* Just brings tears to my eyes...Punk Lives!!!

[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 10-03-2002).]

quote:

---

do you think that terrorists would have any problem getting around that?

---

*sigh* - how about you bone up on the recent history of how the 9/11 hijackers got in.
... and i'm the stupid one?

quote:

---

It would only keep innocent people from traveling

---

Oh i see, because they are innocent it gives them a RIGHT to travel here? This isn't a borderless world, WS. If a country is at high-risk, we should keep their people out, plain and simple. Got any more secure ideas than that?

quote:

---

Are you then suggesting, that bussiness people from these countries shouldn't be able to do business with us anymore?

---

Yes if that's what it takes. Although in this age of instant communication, travel is far less necessary for doing business.

quote:

---

To say 'Well, they are not US citizens' hardly means that they should not be given just and good treatment.

---

Are we treating them badly by not allowing them into our country? No. Is it unjust to not allow them into our country? no. Our country, our choice. Can your hippie crap.

quote:

---

One must consider, that 'Muslim' countries don't have to sell oil to us, either

---

Good. You don't know how I'd love to see that come about. I actually know how many capped oil wells we have in this country because they can't compete against OPEC prices. An energy crisis is something we'd have for a short while and come out of smelling like daisies.

quote:

---

Now, tightening up all the 'control checks' for entering the country...of that, I have no problem with. Just as long as it doesn't 'single out' a particular group, nationality or religion.

---

Well if wishes were fishes...

As for the Niemoller quote. HOW FUCKING DARE YOU compare our security checks and our holding of detainees to the Nazi internment and slaughter of millions? You disgrace the memory of all those who died in those camps.

quote:

---

(I apologise in advance if it upsets anyone)

---

Oh gee, how nice.

quote:

---

Amen Emps, that quote is gold, baby...pure gold!

---

~pukes~

WS: No problem. There never were any hard feelings. Confusion? Yes. Especially since I don't always see errors in my logic or in expressing my thoughts. So there was every possibility there was something there I just couldn't see. Just checking.

"the most incredible feats are often accomplished by
those who have had the most incredible challenges"

Theres a fundamental flaw to this new policy. Afghanastan didn't declare war on the United States. A small Muslim radical group from various countries with virtually unlimited money and resources did. To penalize specific Muslim countries such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Sudan is a pretty assinine suggestion. Just as radical Republicans aren't limited to Texas, radical Muslims aren't limited to this area.

-Jestah
Cell 277

I'm going to stay outside of the political argument on this one.

However, the fact remains that there are some powerful ideas and memes running around that cannot be ignored. There is very powerful meme flowing through the Islamic culture that the United States of America is evil. More dangerous than this is that a few of the members of this noble and rich culture have gotten it into their weak minds that it is a Good Idea to kill yourself in the name of faith. This cannot be underestimated. Dealing politically with the issue is tricky at best, but I am glad attention is being paid to it. Sadly, the media will present the enemy as a person, a human (male) who is out to get us. Really, the true enemy is a wicked idea born out of the fallacy of faith in hatred. All humans are succeptible to being consumed by such infomation viruses, not just Muslims. They are just in the spotlight.

- Ben