Question for the Yanks ??

[Rule303]

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, who now oversee the INS have introduced new laws and practices.

Namely.....
-All males over and under a certain age entering the US must be fingerprinted.
-Males of middle eastern/Arab appearance leaving the United States are frequently all directed from check in to enter a specific check in line where they are digitally photo-scanned, and undergo greater scrutiny then other males.
-Flights to Canada from the Western Pacific are frequently diverted to disembark at a US port (Hawaii, San Francisco etc..) to cause the males to go through fingerprinting and photographs, even though USA is not their intended destination. For some airlines, ALL flights must go via a US port, even though USA is not their destination.
-Obtaining a GreenCard has been delayed from months to over 2 years to obtain.(this includes applications from those married to a US Citizen)


-------------------------------
What do US Citizens think of this invasion of privacy and stereotyping. ??

[arson571]

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, who now oversee the INS have introduced new laws and practices.

Namely.....
-All males over and under a certain age entering the US must be fingerprinted.
-Males of middle eastern/Arab appearance leaving the United States are frequently all directed from check in to enter a specific check in line where they are digitally photo-scanned, and undergo greater scrutiny then other males.
-Flights to Canada from the Western Pacific are frequently diverted to disembark at a US port (Hawaii, San Francisco etc..) to cause the males to go through fingerprinting and photographs, even though USA is not their intended destination. For some airlines, ALL flights must go via a US port, even though USA is not their destination.
-Obtaining a GreenCard has been delayed from months to over 2 years to obtain.(this includes applications from those married to a US Citizen)


-------------------------------
What do US Citizens think of this invasion of privacy and stereotyping. ??

I don't know how accurate this information is.

[mikagami]

ya, sounds bogus. source?

[zap]

What do US Citizens think of this invasion of privacy and stereotyping. ??


Not withstanding what others have already said.....since we do not know the accuracy of your statements, I would also suggest it would be rather foolish to try to play football with a badmitten rachet ....or go to a gun fight with a knife.


Further, why would you characterize this as an invasion of privacy?

[Rule303]

ummm. by my personal experience, and by my peers traveling to and from USA, Canada and South America.

I will come back to this and quote some official sources for you if my word on it is not good enough.

[Rule303]

Need to Renew Your Non-Immigrant US Visa? U.S. Says You Need to Go Back Home First.
http://www.h1base.com/page.asp?id=333

Regarding fingerprints...
http://www.airnewzealand.com.au/travelinfo/planning_your_trip/entering_usa.htm
quote - Arriving in the USA under the US-VISIT Process
A US Customs and Border Protection officer will collect two fingerprints (using an inkless scanner) and take a digital photograph as part of the regular entry interview. This data will be used to verify your identity and be compared against watch-lists. The US-VISIT process will take place each time you arrive in the USA.

http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000098.html
Monday, 5 January 2004 USA starts fingerprinting visitors. Brazil reciprocates.

Effective today, the USA is fingerprinting and photographing all visitors arriving or departing from the USA (http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000046.html) except short-term tourist visitors from a few mostly Western European countries, and will retain the digital images in a new US-VISIT database (http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000085.html) .
Most countries have waived the usual international reciprocity of entry requirements when it comes to the USA. But not necessarily all countries: Brazil has imposed the same requirements on visitors from the USA to Brazil as are imposed on Brazilian visitors to the USA.



http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000046.html
Tuesday, 28 October 2003
USA visitor fingerprint and photo database to include travel data

Today the USA Department of Homeland Security gave its first public demonstration and explanation of the new systems for foreign visitors that will be deployed at USA international airports and seaports starting 31 December 2003 (press release, fact sheet, FAQ ).

As part of the 'US-VISIT" program, all visitors who require visas -- apparently including all transit passengers changing planes in the USA en route between other countries -- will have digital photographs and fingerprint scans entered into their "travel record" in a new database, the "Arrival/Departure Information System (ADIS)".

--------------------------------


Just a few for starters

[Rule303]

Further, why would you characterize this as an invasion of privacy?

If an Aussie student of Archeology is traveling to South America to hike around and study Mayan Ruins, why should the US INS obtain fingerprints and photos of the person not going to USA. Compare if you will the same travel plan, but Iran causes the flight to go by one of their ports for fingerprinting and photographing of passengers.

See my point?

[arson571]

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, who now oversee the INS have introduced new laws and practices.

Namely.....
-All males over and under a certain age entering the US must be fingerprinted.
-Males of middle eastern/Arab appearance leaving the United States are frequently all directed from check in to enter a specific check in line where they are digitally photo-scanned, and undergo greater scrutiny then other males.
-Flights to Canada from the Western Pacific are frequently diverted to disembark at a US port (Hawaii, San Francisco etc..) to cause the males to go through fingerprinting and photographs, even though USA is not their intended destination. For some airlines, ALL flights must go via a US port, even though USA is not their destination.
-Obtaining a GreenCard has been delayed from months to over 2 years to obtain.(this includes applications from those married to a US Citizen)


-------------------------------
What do US Citizens think of this invasion of privacy and stereotyping. ??

Well lets see...first of all, I think your idea about privacy and mine are different.

1. When I stop leaving my fingerprints on everything I touch, they will indeed be something I can keep private. Otherwise, when I go out into public, I leave them everywhere and they are available to anyone who wants to collect them.

2. Stereotyping is not a four letter word. We start every inquiry into things in our world by sorting and judging them, to some degree, at first blush. Sorting people by phenotype and other characteristics seems logical.

3. I get judged as an American every time I leave my country. Even your question is directed toward "Yanks" for a reason (or two). Why? Because of things said by George W. Bush, Condoleza Rice, Col. Tommy Franks, etc. etc. etc. Why are middle-eastern males being more carefully screened? Because of a handful of men who spoke for Islam on September 11, 2001. Were they authorized by everyone in the middle-east to speak and act for them? No. They and their ilk are self-appointed spokesmen for ALL of Islam; whether all Muslims like it or not. So if middle-easterners are inconvenienced from time to time in the West, they can direct their anger at them or not travel to the West. Americans have been told it is not safe for them to vacation in middle-eastern countries...what? No "shame on you" sentiments for the middle-east for being "stereotypers"?

4. Airline diversions? I don't really care. If you don't like the way an airline does business, do what others in the free-market economy do and boycott that airline. If they all agree to do it, start an airline of your own if you care that much. I for one am not going to complain about such inconveniences as long as there are brave men and women in my country's military who are in much more inconvenient situations than I. Maybe when the Jihad is actually stopped by the terrorists, will we live happily ever after.

5. No one has a fundamental right to a green card, regardless of who they marry. Once again, if this is inconvenient, direct all hostilities toward those responsible.

In sum, I am now living in a different world than I did on September 10, 2001. I don't like this new world like I did the old one; but that one is gone. If the airlines come out tomorrow and say that all passengers must have a flyer's license, requiring all to be fingerprinted and photographed to obtain one, I will gladly be fingerprinted and photographed. If I choose to travel to and from the middle east, I accept the fact that it will be a different flight, with different inconveniences, and different social dynamics than a flight to Las Vegas. That doesn't make me angry at my government but at the governments of the middle east that are not and have not been aggressively policing their own.

[zap]

If an Aussie student of Archeology is traveling to South America to hike around and study Mayan Ruins, why should the US INS obtain fingerprints and photos of the person not going to USA. Compare if you will the same travel plan, but Iran causes the flight to go by one of their ports for fingerprinting and photographing of passengers.

See my point?

Yes, I see your point. What ever this may be, I still fail to see it as an invasion of privacy, however. It would seem to me that one would expect to be scrutinized while attached to any international flight in this day and age. It makes sense to me that airlines (not to mention governments) would step up security to fight global terrorism. A parrallel might be drawn when my son hides a splinter from me until it is infected because he knows that I will use a needle to remove the splinter. Since he hates needles, he hides the problem. Pretending that we can combat global terrorism without making some people unhappy or uncomfortable is the same. Not realistic. This is what I meant by intentionally bringing a knife to a gun fight. You just can't win that way.

While I don't have time to read the links at this point, are you certain that the US government is the cause of these stops? No issues with connections, fuel or other causations?

[Rule303]

The redirecting of the flights to to other countries, causing them to pass through US Ports had been featured in the media at the time.
It was also then stated that previously, flights that were a transit flight, would no longer permit passengers to remain seated in the aircraft or to relax in a transit lounge, but had to disembark and pass through US immigration for printing and photos.
It would appear to be a US decision, as there were protests from the airlines and foreign government officials at the time.

(straight out of '1984'. big brother is watching?)

[arson571]

(straight out of '1984'. big brother is watching?)

Hmmm...Big Brother has always been watching...the technology is just getting better. But Big Brother is more interested in watching our little brothers Osama et al. Not really Aussies.

[Rule303]

But Big Brother is more interested in watching our little brothers Osama et al. Not really Aussies.

But they do.....




and in regard to visa processing times....
In 1989, my greencard application via my marriage to US citizen took nine months. Now taking up to 5 years.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=744893

On my last visit to US, my application for a visitor visa extension took 7 months to approve, which was some 4 months after I had left US (was seeking just a 3 week extension of a 6 month visa). This was through assistance and intervention of a Congressman. He personally advised me that Homeland Security had extended processing times to deter immigration and extended visits.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=744893

[Rule303]

"Green card, red tape" By LESLIE CASIMIR, New York Daily News (October
2, 2005) http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/351525p-299858c.html

"Backlog keeps immigrants waiting years for green cards" By Sergio
Bustos, USA Today (January 26, 2005)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-26-immigration-wait_x.htm

"For many in the US, the green card wait is long" Washington Post
(July 25, 2005) http://www.workpermit.com/news/2005_07_25/us/green_card_wait.htm

"State Department Expects Backlog In Employment Based Third Preference
(EB3) Immigrant Visa Category As Early As January 2005" American
Immigration Network (September 16, 2004)
http://www.usavisanow.com/09-16-04.html

"Visa Bulletin" US Department of State (July 2006)
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2943.html. The
page that links to the current "Visa Bulletin" can be accessed at
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html.

"LABOR CERTIFICATION BACKLOG TO BE ELIMINATED BY 9/30/2007"
Cella-Associates (June 2, 2006)
http://www.cella-associates.com/news.php/articles/articles/news.php?do=view&sid=180

[Rule303]

http://www.twmlaw.com/resources/generalgcbacklog.html
Quote - "The process may take 6 or more years for some applicants. "

[arson571]

That may all be true but, it is because the democratic expectation is to treat people all the same. Also, what do the American taxpayers gain by ramping up the immigration process? We have our tax dollars going to many other things that are more important than opening our arms to all who would come.

If the INS is back logged so that it takes a long time to come to America, tell me why I should care? Instead of implying that my nation is not egalitarian enough, sell me on the idea that we need a population explosion of immigrants.

Australia has plenty of open land; why don't you take them all? Why aren't peoples foreign to your land knocking down your doors?

[jmaccauley]

Green cards and entry visas are not granted as a "right" for foreigners. They are at the discretion of the American government. The same inconvenience that causes U.S. citizens headaches and long waits in airline terminals and passport processing have caused some delays affecting visitors here. That being said, don't put so much stock in liberal media "opinions" and you can expect things to eventually become more efficient and streamlined. Our borders have been porous for way too long and naturally will cause confusion and frustration when the system is changed. It will be changed when our country decides, not when foreign critics decide.

As for what I think about it? It is not an invasion of privacy. It is a protective and defensive system put in place during extraordinary times. There are enough problems in Australia that you needn't worry about our problems. Please don't jump on the "America is evil" bandwagon.

[Rule303]

Why aren't peoples foreign to your land knocking down your doors?


They are.

[Rule303]

Please don't jump on the "America is evil" bandwagon.

Please do not put words in my mouth that I did not speak.

[jmaccauley]

Please do not put words in my mouth that I did not speak.

I didn't credit you with saying anything. I asked you to avoid a particular group of people who have taken up the sport of complaining about American policies. Is that not what you are doing?

[Rule303]

Is that not what you are doing?

answer: No

[jmaccauley]

Than what would be your complaint?

[Road_Dog]

I'm mad because Australia confiscated the right to self defense with a firearm because of a couple nut jobs with guns. Now when I come visit I'm not allowed to bring my guns. Why shouldn't I have the same rights in Australia that I do in the US? Because it's a different country with different rules. Instead of getting upset with the Australian government, trawling Australian government websites for their stupid rules and regulations, I will just avoid visiting there and inconveniencing myself. Instead of making the rest of the world accomodate me and my ideology and forcing my gun ownership beliefs on them, I'll just stay at home where I'm allowed to defend myself and my family with whatever means are necessary.

Since a bunch of madmen came to my country and tried to cripple our economy and killed thousands of my countrymen and women my government has taken steps I believe will contribute to preventing future attacks and keep us safe. I'm not too concerned about the comfort and concerns of foreign citizens who are inconvenienced travelling to or through my country because I'm more concerned about the safety and security of my home.

I really don't understand why people in other countries are so concerned about we are doing here. If you don't like it, don't come here. I don't agree with the decisions of other countries and they way they run things but I'm not wasting my life worrying about them. I'll just avoid visiting there if I'm that concerned about it.

[Rule303]

Than what would be your complaint?

Not a complaint. Testing the waters to see what the consensus of opinion was from U.S. people for the way our Governments are making innocent people feel criminalised.

[Rule303]

To correct the misunderstood perception of Australian gun laws.....

I'm mad because Australia confiscated the right to self defense with a firearm because of a couple nut jobs with guns. Now when I come visit I'm not allowed to bring my guns.

In Australia, unlike the U.S., we do not have a "right to bare arms". We never had such a right even before the firearm regulations. All persons, citizens or visitors in Australia have a right to defend themselves, but nobody apart from police and other specialist employment are allowed to carry firearms or weapons.
It is worthy of putting in perspective that Australian enjoys a very low crime rate per capita, in comparison to other countries. That low crime rate is even lower now since the introduction of the national firearm laws.

In my part of Australia, we already had very strict firearm laws. With the national laws introduced, here in the Northern Territory, our laws barely changed at all.

At no time even before the change of laws, can a civilian visitor bring firearms into Australia for personal protection.

I have visited the U.S. many times and also lived there for a couple years. Not at anytime did I feel the need or urge to carry a firearm, except for when I went hunting.

[Rule303]

There are enough problems in Australia that you needn't worry about our problems.


I would be curious as to what critical issues in Australia are known to foreigners.

[Rule303]

If you don't like it, don't come here.


This is one of the points I make. People not even going to the U.S., are being diverted through U.S. ports for fingerprinting and photographs.

[Rule303]

The same inconvenience that causes U.S. citizens headaches and long waits in airline terminals and passport processing have caused some delays affecting visitors here.


Not so. U.S. citizens are not inconvenienced like foreigners. Citizens are not all fingerprinted and photographed as are foreign males.

[Rule303]

I moved this thread since it appears to be getting a little heated.

[zap]

Didn't I just hear yesterday that Japan has started fingerprinting all over 16 at their ports?

[Road_Dog]

In Australia, unlike the U.S., we do not have a "right to bare arms".

I honestly don't care what Australian gun laws are. My point was they are different than they are here. Your country has chosen how it thinks is best to respond to violence. I disagree strongly with that response but it's your country, your right. If it bothers me that much I won't go there. My country has decdied how best to respond to terrorism. As you probably don't care how your gun laws bother me I don't care how my anti-terror laws bother you. Feel free not to travel here or through here if it is that bothersome and invasive of your privacy. Seriously I don't understand why foreign citizens are so interested in our politics.

[arson571]

Not a complaint. Testing the waters to see what the consensus of opinion was from U.S. people for the way our Governments are making innocent people feel criminalised.

Increasing security makes people feel like criminals? Foreigner means "unknown one", that's why they are foreign to us.

100% of the terrorists of 9/11 were foreigners.

When I go through the airport, I have to take off shoes, belt, open my laptop, etc. I would like a special room; that would be special. I would let them cavity search me if the one doing it was really hot; but I digress.

The foreigners are responsible for their own feelings. If a middle-easterner is inconvenienced differently and scrutinized more than his counterparts from other counties, let him be pissed off at the terrorists - - then we will both have that in common.

What gets stupid about this kind of a discourse is the imputation of racism. It wasn't race that crashed planes into the WTC, it was political, religious, and economic ideologies. The increased security measures are a 'reaction' not a 'proaction' against terrorists.

By the way, there are plenty of Americans that whole-heartedly disagree with my opinion. So trying to get any kind of a useful read on our consensus is useless. In America, there is hardly a consensus about anything - - ever.

[Sipowicz]

While trying to remain neutral here, I think the underlying point Rule is trying to make is being missed. Comments have been made about if people don't like the rules here, don't come here. What Rule is saying is that people that don't necessarily want to come to the US are being "forced" to stop in the US en route to their final destination outside of the US.

Hypothetical example: A person has no desire in the world to ever come to the US for whatever reasons, and in light of this fingerprinting and photo law, has even less of a desire. Before the law was implemented, this person was able to travel freely directly from Point A to Point B (for whatever) - let's say Japan to Canada - without stopping. Now that person is unable to do so because the enactment of the new US law requires said flight to divert through Seattle. In fact, all flights for this route on every airline now divert to Seattle courtesy of the new law. So, what the person was freely able to do prior to the law they are now unable to do without going somewhere they have absolutely no desire to go to.

If there were reasonable alternatives to accomplish the same goal, I don't think there would be an issue. As I understand it though (which mind you I've not completely researched the topic) every flight that "comes close" (however that may be defined) to US soil is required to stop on US soil solely for the purpose of identification.

To draw a different paradigm, let's say Germany enacted a similar law. In that case, regardless of what the established flight patterns are, you are now going to stop in Germany for identification purposes. So, a flight to lets say France from NYC that would normally stop in London (as part of an established flight pattern, not for ID purposes) now goes from NYC to London to lets say Berlin and then finally on to Paris. What does the stop in Berlin accomplish aside from skewing the already accepted flight pattern? Nothing short of providing Germany with identification of people that don't want to be on record in Germany, let alone ever go there, even in passing. Without the law, Germany would have likely never dealt with nor had need to know about the person, but with the law they are authorized to "invade" the person's privacy of someone that doesn't want anything to do with Germany, let alone go there.

With my limited knowledge at this point, I can't say I support or oppose. I can and will say that this is certainly toeing what is becoming a very fuzzy line between counter-terrorism/right to know and invasion of privacy.

[zap]

While trying to remain neutral here, I think the underlying point Rule is trying to make is being missed. Comments have been made about if people don't like the rules here, don't come here. What Rule is saying is that people that don't necessarily want to come to the US are being "forced" to stop in the US en route to their final destination outside of the US.

I understand what Rule303 was getting at. I don't think it is out of line to divert aircraft that is going through US air space, for the identification of those onboard.


Hypothetical example: A person has no desire in the world to ever come to the US for whatever reasons, and in light of this fingerprinting and photo law, has even less of a desire. Before the law was implemented, this person was able to travel freely directly from Point A to Point B (for whatever) - let's say Japan to Canada - without stopping. Now that person is unable to do so because the enactment of the new US law requires said flight to divert through Seattle. In fact, all flights for this route on every airline now divert to Seattle courtesy of the new law. So, what the person was freely able to do prior to the law they are now unable to do without going somewhere they have absolutely no desire to go to.

I still do not see the invasion of privacy.

Is it an invasion of privacy to run a car's license plate just because it drove past you? No, even though it provides me with enough information to attempt an identity theft, that information is public record. Your identity is public record as well and you have to disclose your identity to get onto a commercial ariline. If you lie about who you are, why? You are then someone we NEED TO KNOW about and where you are.


If there were reasonable alternatives to accomplish the same goal, I don't think there would be an issue. As I understand it though (which mind you I've not completely researched the topic) every flight that "comes close" (however that may be defined) to US soil is required to stop on US soil solely for the purpose of identification.

To draw a different paradigm, let's say Germany enacted a similar law. In that case, regardless of what the established flight patterns are, you are now going to stop in Germany for identification purposes. So, a flight to lets say France from NYC that would normally stop in London (as part of an established flight pattern, not for ID purposes) now goes from NYC to London to lets say Berlin and then finally on to Paris. What does the stop in Berlin accomplish aside from skewing the already accepted flight pattern? Nothing short of providing Germany with identification of people that don't want to be on record in Germany, let alone ever go there, even in passing. Without the law, Germany would have likely never dealt with nor had need to know about the person, but with the law they are authorized to "invade" the person's privacy of someone that doesn't want anything to do with Germany, let alone go there.

With my limited knowledge at this point, I can't say I support or oppose. I can and will say that this is certainly toeing what is becoming a very fuzzy line between counter-terrorism/right to know and invasion of privacy.

I still don't see this as an invasion of privacy. I think a thumb print or such should be on your ticket.

[Rule303]

I understand what Rule303 was getting at. I don't think it is out of line to divert aircraft that is going through US air space, for the identification of those onboard.


Japan to Canada and Australia to Peru flights did not go through US air space, but now they must to divert through a US Port. I would agree with the point about going through US air space requiring such checks, but when a flight gets diverted, this is going to far in my opinion.

On my last trip to US, it was more than obvious that anyone of apparent middle eastern appearance were being directed through specific security check in lanes with greater checks. This is of course stereotyping. Australian David Hicks was caucasian and captured in Afghanistan by US forces. He was convicted of terrorism charges. Point there is that a persons skin color does not dictate a persons political/religious beliefs.
Such security measures give the appearance of something being done, but reality is that the avenues for terrorists remain open.

In regard to security measures... tweezers, nail files, and sewing needles are prohibited on flights, however, a pencil, large Cowboy Style Belt Buckles and glass bottles containing spirits are OK. Which of those produce the greater ability to be used as a weapon?
Consider a bottle of Asian distilled spirits like Saki.... over 60% alcohol and highly flammable.

[Sipowicz]

I understand what Rule303 was getting at. I don't think it is out of line to divert aircraft that is going through US air space, for the identification of those onboard.

And if it does not go through US airspace, as Rule suggests?

I still do not see the invasion of privacy.

Is it an invasion of privacy to run a car's license plate just because it drove past you? No, even though it provides me with enough information to attempt an identity theft, that information is public record. Your identity is public record as well and you have to disclose your identity to get onto a commercial ariline. If you lie about who you are, why? You are then someone we NEED TO KNOW about and where you are.

This seems a comparison of apples to oranges. Someone driving on US soil is here because they want to be. The person on the plane may not want to be here, but is forced to be. For the comparison to work, you as an officer would have to have jurisdiction enough to divert a vehicle traveling from Toronto to Winnepeg though they never come on to US soil. You can't, even setting aside jurisdictional aspects within the US. However, once they cross in US Territory, they're fair game. The catch is THEY have to cross into US territory, they aren't coerced or forced into US territory.

As for one's identity being public record, perhaps it is to some extent, but if so why all the hype about identity theft? If identity was completely public, identity theft would be commonplace, would it not? Why would so many things hinge on something that if indeed is so public, could be easily altered or duplicated? With a lost/stolen or fraudulently obtained credit card and an altered photo ID, anyone could get on to any flight they want.

I completely agree that the people that lie about who they are would be people of interest as to who they truly are. Those that do lie though are far more likely going to do so in a manner which minimizes detection and maximizes opportunity to succeed. Locally here the news has done many reports of security breaches that occur all through the process of traveling by air. Who's to say such failures aren't going to occur in these new areas?

I still don't see this as an invasion of privacy. I think a thumb print or such should be on your ticket.

I haven't gone as far as to call it such yet, only to say it is dangerously close to a very fuzzy line.

To Rule's stereotyping/profiling, that always happens to an extent, however the general continued suspicion towards a specified group is always going to piss someone off. Is it reasonable to think that anyone from the Middle East might be a terrorist and therefore they all get treated differently in searches? Could the answer be found along with the consideration of if it was reasonable for the Japanese in America to be segregated and treated as they were after WWII? This is another fuzzy line of ethics - how far is too far? Ethically, there should be no difference in how anyone is identified or searched. In reality, there are vast differences. Ethically, everyone should be searched and identified in the manner described as being reserved for those of Middle Eastern decent, but the reality of it would be an uprising by the rest of the patrons as well as those conducting the search and identification because of the patron hostility.

[Road_Dog]

On my last trip to US, it was more than obvious that anyone of apparent middle eastern appearance were being directed through specific security check in lanes with greater checks. This is of course stereotyping. Australian David Hicks was caucasian and captured in Afghanistan by US forces. He was convicted of terrorism charges. Point there is that a persons skin color does not dictate a persons political/religious beliefs.

Good. Middle Easterners attacked us on 9-11 and comprise the vast majority of Al Qaeda and Muslim terrorists. Of course checking everyone else is good too so we can catch the David Hicks of the world.

Your experience is vastly different than mine. I've seen 5 Middle Easterners get on a flight with me while security shook down a woman travelling with several small children, safety seats, and all the other accessories involved with children. Stupid political correctness. Luckily we weren't flying on 9-11.

I'm not a big fan of airline security regulations. Confiscating nail clippers is just dumb. There are better ways to secure flights.

[zap]

First, I don't understand how the US can force a commercial airline that is not in its airspace to divert. (yes, I can understand how it can physically and effectively be done. However, I think that would amount to a mild form of piracy and would not be permitted in the current world climate)

I am sorry. However, I am NOT a fan of political correctness. I have always said it is good to have an open mind ---just not far enough open that your brain falls out the back of your head!

Better than 90% of the terrorists and suicide/homicide bombers are those from the Middle East. Common sense would dictate it is prudent to look closely at those people when traveling to and from the US. After all, we ARE in a war. We certainly have fruitloops in the US who were born here (notice I did NOT say Americans intentionally) and subscribe to the idiology of our enemies abroad. They have that right because of the freedom that has been, and is still being, protected by the blood of our fallen soldiers. To dishonor the sacrifice of those in uniform past, present, and future by allowing political correctlness to bring about the destruction of the country they fight for, is unconcionable in my mind. Some may cry foul about the security measures of the US in a time of war, however, I would suggest that it is the US who protects and champions their right to do so.


....think very hard before you kill the goose who laid the golden egg because it shit on your carpet....

[Rule303]

First, I don't understand how the US can force a commercial airline that is not in its airspace to divert.

According to a article I read a while back, it stated that airlines that offered flights into the US, were pressured into agreement with the Govt to divert their flights to neighbouring countries via a US port. This was done by offering either preferential treatment and additional airport services or by declining such services if flights were not diverted through a US port.

Example - Airline has direct flights between home port and LAX, and also home port and Vancouver Canada. Airline is offered reduced airport fees and rebates in return for diverting flight to Canada via Hawaii.

[jmaccauley]

Name that airline so I can verify the story. Please.

[jmaccauley]

Not a complaint. Testing the waters to see what the consensus of opinion was from U.S. people for the way our Governments are making innocent people feel criminalised.

And how is your government doing this? Are they forcing you to spend time in the US? No, I believe what you are doing is what I suspected earlier. That is to jump on the bandwagon of the disenfranchised. Seriously, are you looking for support from those of us who have sworn to protect the Constitution and government of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic?

[zap]

According to a article I read a while back, it stated that airlines that offered flights into the US, were pressured into agreement with the Govt to divert their flights to neighbouring countries via a US port. This was done by offering either preferential treatment and additional airport services or by declining such services if flights were not diverted through a US port.

Example - Airline has direct flights between home port and LAX, and also home port and Vancouver Canada. Airline is offered reduced airport fees and rebates in return for diverting flight to Canada via Hawaii.

Well, that doesn't seem to me like anyone was forced to do anything. It sounds like DEAL was stuck and the airlines CHOSE to comply with the wishes of the US government. After all, they don't get to fly into LAX if there IS NO LAX ...right?

I think that situation is the strongest argument for this NOT being anything close to an envasion of privacy.

[Sipowicz]

While I know there is no need for me to "defend" Rule, I do want to caution about jumping on this like many do on the trolls. While good debate and discussion is always encouraged, jumping on a founding father of the forums is not. His, and for that matter anyone's question (usually), is asked based on their paradigm of something. With the trolls, it is usually obvious as the question is specific in nature. Here, a legit general question is asked from the paradigm of a foreigner. If our paradigm is different, that's okay; discuss it. Just because the paradigm is different doesn't mean anyone is jumping on any bandwagon.

Like I said, we're not opposed to debate, disagreement and discussion her at PW.N. It's likely members will have to agree to disagree in some instances. We do want to keep the forum a friendly place where people want to come, participate, and stay.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions or concerns, etc.

[Rule303]

Seriously, are you looking for support from those of us who have sworn to protect the Constitution and government of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic?

Answer : No

[Rule303]

Name that airline so I can verify the story. Please.

Qantas and Air New Zealand are the two I know of.

Of the others, perhaps like yourself, I have not so much free time on my hands to chase up the other names of airlines for what really is inconsequential to the relative status quo.

As for my earlier reference of the archeology student,... he spoke on "talk back" radio of his sudden change to flights to South America. Subsequent to his call, others who frequently flew called in reporting the same situation..

eg... brief lay over in Tahiti followed by significant detour through a US port before continuing to South America.

[Rule303]

I believe what you are doing is what I suspected earlier. That is to jump on the bandwagon of the disenfranchised.

Believe what you will, and say what you think. I won't try to change your opinion.....

in parallel...
"My Dad only buys Fords"
"Well my Dad says Toyota are better than Fords".
"Well my Dad says Toyotas are a waste of money"
"Well my Dad says Fords are faster than Toyotas"
etc...

Now if I came out now and said, "Hey, do you know that some U.S. people think that Muslims in the US should wear like a patch on their shirt to show they are Muslim, or may be get a number tattooed on their arm to show they have been "checked out" by the Government?"
You would say B.S., would you not?
And you would condemn me, call me a liar, call me a troll, and take out a focused attack on every thing I say to deride and attack my credibility. Would you not?

I could merely reply saying, "Well I know for a fact that some US people do think that"

Your reply undoubtedly would be "you are a liar because you can't show proof".


Quoting some words of wisdom, "The absence of proof, makes a liar not"

I could take such a tennis court volley of debate on forever until one got tired of the other, or the forum Admin chose to lock the thread or ban one or both of us. Or I could just simply post a URL of a link to a video where a Journalist asked people on the streets in the US, and you could see for yourself that the above way of thinking held by some US people.

I would be a liar no more, but....

What would happen next is I would get called anti-American for raising the point, would I not?

The messenger often is pierced by the arrows, while his war lord aggressor remains secure within his castle.

It is an interesting observation how history is repeating itself. We condemned Nazi Germany and the holocaust, and today our Govts are introducing laws and policies that edge towards some more than similar practices. Some of our citizens way of thinking even supports such intrusions. In WW2, the Germans were oft referred to as "krauts" which is essentially meaning a head of cabbage. Would we call a German today to his face a kraut?
30 years ago in our then reasonably free world, would it be socially acceptable to call Muslims, "rag heads" and similar ethnically biased statements and name calling. No, of course not. But we certainly hear it a lot today.

What a changed world within which we now live.

[arson571]

First of all, I think you are neither a liar or a troll. I think there are those that doubt your sources and that's all well and good too. Whether they read all your links or not, doesn't concern me. I have read none of them as I have better things to do with my time. I have to simply believe or disbelieve you. You have always been a pretty straight-up guy in my book so, I have no reason to think you are making it all up.

I do believe the media is about selling information and it has a tendency to gravitate toward hype over accuracy; so I am tentative with anything I read.

But to answer your questions on my own behalf,


Namely.....
-All males over and under a certain age entering the US must be fingerprinted.

I like this policy but think it should not be limited by sex distinction. But if fingerprinting the males only is plenty of work to do, then I guess its the best we can do. My government has my fingerprints and knows exactly who I am.

-Males of middle eastern/Arab appearance leaving the United States are frequently all directed from check in to enter a specific check in line where they are digitally photo-scanned, and undergo greater scrutiny then other males.
I really don't care. It is unsafe for Americans to travel or visit the Middle-East because of the danger of people who hate us as if we were all the same. We take their photos, they cut off our heads. I say we deal with both problems, starting with the most severe of the human rights violations. When that one is mitigated, we can stop all the picture taking. By the way, nobody is safe from being photographed in a public place. Ask Paris Hilton.

-Flights to Canada from the Western Pacific are frequently diverted to disembark at a US port (Hawaii, San Francisco etc..) to cause the males to go through fingerprinting and photographs, even though USA is not their intended destination. For some airlines, ALL flights must go via a US port, even though USA is not their destination.

They are diverted through political power not International Law. If these (some) airlines decide that it is a good thing for them to do, then I won't lose any sleep over how they do business. If US law enforcement gets a better idea of who they need to watch and who they don't, then I say "good deal".


-Obtaining a GreenCard has been delayed from months to over 2 years to obtain.(this includes applications from those married to a US Citizen)[/I]

I have answered this one but will again. I don't care if the US doesn't grant a green card or citizenship to other person ever again. It is not any person's right to enter the US, except citizen's of the US. If a US citizen chooses to marry someone from another country and this causes them some grief, we all live by the choices we make.


-------------------------------
What do US Citizens think of this invasion of privacy and stereotyping. ??

I refuse to blame the victims. My empathy extends to the people of New York and anyone who has had their head, or a loved-one's head, cut off in the name of allah. I just don't have the capacity to empathize with everyone who feels bad. All of the things you've listed, like fingerprinting, photographing, searching, and cataloging, are all things I would willingly go through along side and muslim American at the airport. The problem is, it is simply statistically stupid to pretend that treating all passengers the same is the best use of resources.

[jmaccauley]

Believe what you will, and say what you think. I won't try to change your opinion.....

in parallel...
"My Dad only buys Fords"
"Well my Dad says Toyota are better than Fords".
"Well my Dad says Toyotas are a waste of money"
"Well my Dad says Fords are faster than Toyotas"
etc...

Now if I came out now and said, "Hey, do you know that some U.S. people think that Muslims in the US should wear like a patch on their shirt to show they are Muslim, or may be get a number tattooed on their arm to show they have been "checked out" by the Government?"
You would say B.S., would you not?
And you would condemn me, call me a liar, call me a troll, and take out a focused attack on every thing I say to deride and attack my credibility. Would you not?

I could merely reply saying, "Well I know for a fact that some US people do think that"

Your reply undoubtedly would be "you are a liar because you can't show proof".


Quoting some words of wisdom, "The absence of proof, makes a liar not"

I could take such a tennis court volley of debate on forever until one got tired of the other, or the forum Admin chose to lock the thread or ban one or both of us. Or I could just simply post a URL of a link to a video where a Journalist asked people on the streets in the US, and you could see for yourself that the above way of thinking held by some US people.

I would be a liar no more, but....

What would happen next is I would get called anti-American for raising the point, would I not?

The messenger often is pierced by the arrows, while his war lord aggressor remains secure within his castle.

It is an interesting observation how history is repeating itself. We condemned Nazi Germany and the holocaust, and today our Govts are introducing laws and policies that edge towards some more than similar practices. Some of our citizens way of thinking even supports such intrusions. In WW2, the Germans were oft referred to as "krauts" which is essentially meaning a head of cabbage. Would we call a German today to his face a kraut?
30 years ago in our then reasonably free world, would it be socially acceptable to call Muslims, "rag heads" and similar ethnically biased statements and name calling. No, of course not. But we certainly hear it a lot today.

What a changed world within which we now live.

Was any of this directed at me? You just had a very weird conversation with yourself if it was.
I didn't put words in your mouth, I responded (as you asked for our opinion) to your list of verifications that the U.S. was indeed trampling on your rights to visit this country. Somehow you managed to drift into airliners being re-routed in order to pass through U.S. screening when they were never intending to cross U.S. airspace.

None of us in the U.S. have to agree, or even understand, the rules that are in effect. That being said, No one here called Muslims "ragheads"

Again, I say that you have aligned yourself with those who blog or the media who are extremely left winged about American viewpoints.

And I really don't think you can be considered neutral if you spend so much time researching the internet for examples of American biases against Muslims. And that, as you asked, is how i feel about it.

[Rule303]

Again, I say that you have aligned yourself with those who blog or the media who are extremely left winged about American viewpoints.

mmmmm? Now should I take this as a provocative and personal attack? Nah...

And I really don't think you can be considered neutral if you spend so much time researching the internet for examples of American biases against Muslims. And that, as you asked, is how i feel about it.

Interesting. I am asked to provide proof, I do a google search for less than 5 minutes, which was not even target at alleged US bias and voila.
Who said I should be considered neutral?? Stating the facts of the staged toppling of Saddams statue, the fabricated evidence of WMD's, the international survey that revealed that the US Govt is now the most untrusted Govt in the world is not bias, but mere truth. So stating a fact of how flights are diverted, persons fingerprinted and photographed, travelers stereo typed at airports is left wing??? Does this mean if I said some pro US Govt, love you George dubbya, good ol apple pie and other touchy feely warm and gooey compliments would make me a good bloke?? Are you suggesting that if I just say the good things that is OK, but if not so complimentary, that I am a 'left winger' ?

We must all look outside the fish bowl.

US, UK, Australia and other allied nations are losing the lives of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The civilian toll is by far higher. The Al Qaeda link in Afghanistan was clear and precise, but not so Iraq. The future will judge our actions of today, and I think the judgment already seems fairly clear in the many errors our nations leaders have made.

The National Geographic published a recent article about the unrest in Pakistan and mirrored the current events to that of the formation of the Taliban in Afghanistan. It all came about through corruption and dishonesty in Government resulting in the suffering of the people. Eastern European countries suffer similar. These are problems previously confined to within those countries.

Explosion of conflict in the middle east is imminent. Consider how there is a constant stream of Al Qaeda supporting militia from many countries sweeping across the border into Iraq with one main piece of motivation.... to kill US Soldiers.
Why is that?
They are not attacking Chinese or targeting China in Terrorist attacks, even though China has possibly the worst record of human rights abuses in all of the world. They are not attacking Israel in the manner in which they do US people and possessions, in spite of being arch enemies with Israel since time beyond memory.
Ask yourself this.... why do people from assorted countries hate the US so much?

Now this what I have been saying may be viewed by some as bias or anti-american. Is it?
All I have done is stated some facts and posed a few thought provoking questions. I do not claim to have all the answers, but from what I can see, we in the western world have some serious problems with our elected governments, and we should be asking a lot more questions.

[arson571]

Ask yourself this.... why do people from assorted countries hate the US so much?


Because American is known around the world for being 'consumeristic'. This was first pointed out to me in Russia by my Russian police and fire friends. The extravagance displayed across the globe of Hollywood, Big Business, and Military Power, demonstrates wealth and power. By wealth I mean 'ownership' and by power I mean 'influence' over others.

The fact that the US can influence airlines to make stops to screen for terrorists because not doing so my incur some 'trade restrictions' or something, makes egalitarian and democratically minded people bitter. They don't want to have someone else 'tell them what to do' or make them act a certain way.

But power and influence exist. It doesn't go away, it merely shifts from one's hands to another's. This is the age old debate between socialism and capitalism. Who gets to hold the power and influence? The government or the wealthy. The difficulty in America is that in the upper levels, these are one and the same.

[Road_Dog]

Stating the facts of the staged toppling of Saddams statue, So what? the fabricated evidence of WMD's, Ask the Kurds gassed by Hussein if that was staged. The mistake here was not failing to find the WMD's it was dithering around so long with the UN Hussein got the WMD's to Syria. We've got the satellites of the convoys going there, the high ranking officials there who admitted it, and the labs and small stockpiles of munitions. the international survey that revealed that the US Govt is now the most untrusted Govt in the world Who cares??? I don't and most Americans don't. We're supposed to roll over and take terrorism so other countries will trust us??? So stating a fact of how flights are diverted, persons fingerprinted and photographed, travelers stereo typed at airports is left wing??? No worried about foreign travelers. My safety is more important to me than your comfort. Does this mean if I said some pro US Govt, love you George dubbya, good ol apple pie and other touchy feely warm and gooey compliments would make me a good bloke?? I can't stand Bush. I think he has abandoned the core conservative constituency that got him elected (including me.) He's failed I think in just about every area of politics I care about except his handling of security. I have some serious issues with that as well, I think he could do a lot better tightening security and I think his kid-glove handling of Iraq and caused major problems.
Are you suggesting that if I just say the good things that is OK, but if not so complimentary, that I am a 'left winger' ? I am not at all concerned who you vote for in your elections and I'm baffled at why you take such interest in who I vote for here.US, UK, Australia and other allied nations are losing the lives of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The civilian toll is by far higher. The Al Qaeda link in Afghanistan was clear and precise, but not so Iraq. You are welcome to elect your own leaders who pull your troops out.The future will judge our actions of today, and I think the judgment already seems fairly clear in the many errors our nations leaders have made.I have some strong problems with the way we've handled Iraq. WMD's and global terror connections aside I believe that the humanitarian aspect of the mission was worth it. The human rights abuses in Iraq were horrific. We went to war in Kosovo for much less but that was widely celebrated due to who orchestrated it (Clinton.) The torture chambers, rape rooms, child prisons et al needed to end and on that alone I support toppling Hussein. Ending his WMD program and cutting off his financing for terrorists was icing on the cake.The National Geographic published a recent article about the unrest in Pakistan and mirrored the current events to that of the formation of the Taliban in Afghanistan. It all came about through corruption and dishonesty in Government resulting in the suffering of the people. Eastern European countries suffer similar. These are problems previously confined to within those countries.

Explosion of conflict in the middle east is imminent. Consider how there is a constant stream of Al Qaeda supporting militia from many countries sweeping across the border into Iraq with one main piece of motivation.... to kill US Soldiers.
Why is that? I agree Pakistan is a mess and their government is corrupt. More conflict in the Middle East is imminent. They've been doing that there for hundreds of years and they will continue doing it. I'm not naive enough to think we'll put an end to it.

The idea here is that the terrorists are pouring into the area to attack our soldiers. And our soldiers are killing them in droves. I'd rather this conflict take place there than here in my city. Our soldiers are better trained and better equipped to deal with it than our police forces. They are not attacking Chinese or targeting China in Terrorist attacks, even though China has possibly the worst record of human rights abuses in all of the world. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that China is funding them (North Korea is.) Our gutless politicians are too scared to deal with China because they are an economic asset to us. They are not attacking Israel in the manner in which they do US people and possessions, in spite of being arch enemies with Israel since time beyond memory.How many bombings have Israeli's faced at home??? Domestic terrorism there is far worse than it is here. Ask yourself this.... why do people from assorted countries hate the US so much?Again, I could not care any less what other countries think of America.

[jmaccauley]

[QUOTE=Rule303;77503]mmmmm? Now should I take this as a provocative and personal attack? Nah...



Interesting. I am asked to provide proof, I do a google search for less than 5 minutes, which was not even target at alleged US bias and voila.
Who said I should be considered neutral?? Stating the facts of the staged toppling of Saddams statue, the fabricated evidence of WMD's, the international survey that revealed that the US Govt is now the most untrusted Govt in the world is not bias, but mere truth. So stating a fact of how flights are diverted, persons fingerprinted and photographed, travelers stereo typed at airports is left wing??? Does this mean if I said some pro US Govt, love you George dubbya, good ol apple pie and other touchy feely warm and gooey compliments would make me a good bloke?? Are you suggesting that if I just say the good things that is OK, but if not so complimentary, that I am a 'left winger'

You obviously have strong feelings about the war, which you should. However, fabricated evidence of WMD's? No, we knew they had them because we gave them to Saddam years ago. They were successfully hidden and moved.

And I never asked you to love George or anyone else to be a "good ole bloke." You asked how we felt about profiling and giving extra scrutiny to Muslims or those who look suspicious. And to that I say, whatever it takes.

[DE P&P]

It’s nice to be challenged with another point of view. As noted in my sig, I’m retired USAF, served in the Middle East, Korea and Germany for many, many years. Served with other military members; Brits, Aussies, the French, South Koreans, Germans, Saudis, Pakistanis, Israelis, Russians, ect, you get the picture.

If only the real story could be told. Unfortunately the politics of the situation will only reveal itself decades from now, just as we are learning events in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam today. And yet, not even their entire stories will ever be told.

Please do not take these questions personally, but as food for thought. Have you ever talked to Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Saudis, Iranians, Israelis, etc? How might they really feel without a government official standing over them? Did you ever hear from a Kuwaiti or Iraqi what Saddam did to them? Did you see what the Iraqi army did to the Kuwaiti’s, both to them personally and to their land? I did.

The complexities of the Middle East date back before 2500 BC to the Sumerians fighting the Elamites and Akkadians for control of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and the rich farm lands. The Middle East has always been a battle ground for ages; first for water, then as a trade route, now for oil. Right or wrong, oil is a very important factor in this war. It’s free flow is paramount to everyone’s survival. And yes, Al Qaeda and/or Iran would love to control the oil flow, just as everyone else would.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad, his staff and most of the ruling Imams belong to a Shi’a sect (Qat'iyya) calling for the end of the world through apocalyptic wars heralding in the 12th Imam. Ahmadinejad personally believes the 12th Imam will come in his life time. He is sworn to make this happen and he believes it is his duty to make this happen now. Osama, a Wahhabi Sunni, doesn’t trust Ahmadinejad any more than Ahmadinejad trusts him. But as I was told in Bahrain, my enemy’s, enemy is my friend.

- As for the WMD’s in Iraq, I just hope Israel, Europe, Australia, or the US don’t get a taste of those make believe WMD’s.
- Not as many people hate the US as the papers let on. But then again loving the US doesn’t sell papers.
- As for the world coming to Iraq to kill us, again, there are more Arabs fighting Arabs as there are Arabs fighting the US, British, Australian and other NATO forces.
- WE WERE ATTACKED! Russia was attacked. China was attacked. That's right, China has been hit by Islamic terrorists. Afghanistan as well as other Islamic countries boarder China and like the Dali Lama, China considers Islam a threat.

The Iraqi’s are very intelligent people. If the politicians and other Persians/Arabs would stay out, Iraq would have been rebuilt by now. NOTE: Bin Laden wants Iraq for as his own. Iran does not want a unified Iraq, EVER!

Rule 303. On a personal note, you are a very informed debater and I believe you could argue either side of an issue. You love to stir the pot and I say keep on stirring!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Road_Dog]

Please do not take these questions personally, but as food for thought. Have you ever talked to Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Saudis, Iranians, Israelis, etc? How might they really feel without a government official standing over them? Did you ever hear from a Kuwaiti or Iraqi what Saddam did to them? Did you see what the Iraqi army did to the Kuwaiti’s, both to them personally and to their land? I did.

I have friends and co-workers who have been on multiple tours in Iraq. I have heard stories of liberated children's prisons, torture chambers, rape rooms et al. I firmly believe in this mission from a humanitarian aspect. Shutting down Hussein's weapons programs were icing on the cake for me.

[Rule303]

I have heard stories of liberated children's prisons, torture chambers, rape rooms et al. Stories are stories, but to see them for yourselves are an eye opener!!

Also having such facilities and still in use today are Pakistan (ally to USA), China, Russia and Nigeria, just to name a few.


As for WMD, there is still no evidence produced to show that Iraq had such, but ample to prove false the 'evidence' they had any. Interesting to note is that US, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and a whole host of other countries have WMD's.

[zap]

Rule...I must say...I am really starting to wonder what your intended outcome of this line of posting might be. If it is a question you want an answer to, why argue with those providing answers? Or, is it something else you have in mind?

[arson571]

As for WMD, there is still no evidence produced to show that Iraq had such, but ample to prove false the 'evidence' they had any. Interesting to note is that US, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and a whole host of other countries have WMD's.

No evidence does not prove anything.

Further as DE P&P points out, the conflict in the middle east is a religious conflict. Westerners like to frame it all as socio-political but it is not, fundamentally speaking.

I don't know exactly every reason, every person who hates the US, does so. I do know that Muslim extremists hate the US for who we are. Not what we do but, who we are according to their religious ideologies. Through the exercise of our freedoms, we provide them with what they consider 'evidence' according to their epistemologies.

1. Every time Brittany Spears shakes her thang, half naked, and it is broadcast around the world, Muslim extremists are confirmed in their thinking about our immorality. Add to it, Brittany, Christina, and Madonna tongue kissing, and they fuel the fire of the extremists' fury. THEY DO NOT WHAT THIS IN THEIR COMMUNITIES, FAMILIES, OR WORLD.

2. Every time a Walmart, McDonalds, etc. is opened in a middle eastern country, the Muslim extremists are confirmed in their beliefs that Satan is coming for them.

3. Every time George W. Bush makes a public reference or implication to his Christian beliefs, the Muslim extremists are confirmed that this is a battle for souls.

I have been taught that the Battle for the 'Promised Land' dates back to the age of Isaac and Ishmael concerning the 'Birth right' of its occupation. For Israel and Islam, this battle over the occupation of the Holy Land will not cease until one or the other is no longer willing to fight for it. Historically speaking, Christianity was originally considered a Jewish sect. So America is considered to be always the friend of the extremists' enemy and so part of their enemy camp. The US confirmed the Islamic belief by helping establish the state of Israel.

It is important to understand that all other religions are considered antithetical to Islam in the mind of Muslim extremists. Muslim moderates are even considered to be 'traitors' to Islam by extremists. The point is, no one falling outside the camp of Muslim extremists will ever be embraced as acceptable to them in the grand scheme of their ideology. It is all the comings and goings of Satanic forces to them; just in varying degrees. The US is just one of their most immediate projects (threats to deal with).

So we can tit-for-tat debate all day long about 'who' is responsible for the inhumanity in the middle east, when we point the finger in every direction besides the Muslim extremists. And that serves them well.

Rule 303, I think what you point out and what others have pointed out is, the people who are really in the tough spot are the 'minding-my-own-business' Muslims that simply want to pray in their homes and Mosques and practice their religion according to their consciences. The are held in suspicion by non-Muslims because of their cultural/national connections with the extremists while the extremists themselves consider them infidels. These folks who find themselves to be in the middle are the ones who are getting it from both sides. But most in the US would gladly be the neighbor of a Muslim of this sort but cannot tell the difference between them and extremists. It is because the extremists use 'blending in' with the community as a concealment strategy.

This leads me to one conclusion. The finger pointing must be directed at the extremists. They are convinced to the core of their souls in their ideologies and we can really do nothing to short of conversion to ever be considered acceptable in their sight. As long as Muslim extremists are motivated to convert or kill anyone that has a different religious paradigm as they have, all the rest of us will suffer from their terrorist activities.

[jmaccauley]

Stories are stories, but to see them for yourselves are an eye opener!!

Also having such facilities and still in use today are Pakistan (ally to USA), China, Russia and Nigeria, just to name a few.


As for WMD, there is still no evidence produced to show that Iraq had such, but ample to prove false the 'evidence' they had any. Interesting to note is that US, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and a whole host of other countries have WMD's.

What is the "false" evidence you speak of? If you mean we didn't find them, only means they were good at hiding or moving them,since we gave them months of warning that we were going to be looking for them. I'm sure you have lost your objectivity by now, since you have reverted to scanning the internet for "evidence" backing your assertion that the U.S. is evil. Now, what is it that you really want to hear? I'm pretty sure that it is not our opinions.

[Road_Dog]

Stories are stories, but to see them for yourselves are an eye opener!!I trust the direct eye witnesses who relayed the stories to me. These aren't blogs or anti war protestors making stuff up.

Also having such facilities and still in use today are Pakistan (ally to USA), China, Russia and Nigeria, just to name a few.Are you implying that because other countries have them that we haven't attacked, we shouldn't have attacked Iraq? I feel just as strongly that Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea, and most of Africa should and Asia should follow Iraq's footsteps but alas, one step at a time. I also feel strongly that we need to treat China like we treated the Soviet Union. Instead of feeding their economy we should collapse it. Then they can follow Iraq, Iran, Pakistan et al. If we actually had more of a backbone and demanded change or else a lot of places would change. But everyone knows most of Western Culture including the US is mostly a bunch of soft panty waists who don't have the stomach for real conflict. We could use our position of strength to end a lot of suffering and corruption if we could first send a couple of very strong messages. We've blown it though with all the dithering and whining about Iraq.
As for WMD, there is still no evidence produced to show that Iraq had such, There absolutely is. I don't know if you're drinking the cool aid or lying. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though. In 1988 Hussein dropped chemical weapons via cluster bombs on the Kurdish City of Halabja. Over the course of three days the town was repeatedly attacked with mustard gas and the nerve agents sarin, tabun, and VX. In a town of 70,000 at least 12,000 died from the attacks. Do you seriously think Hussein saw the horrors of his ways and cleaned up all this junk? We dithered around so long with the UN about Iraq he destroyed and/or moved his stockpiles.
Interesting to note is that US, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and a whole host of other countries have WMD's.Are you implying that because other countries have WMD's we again should have just let Iraq have them? As Hussein demonstrated in Halabja he couldn't be trusted with them. The moment countries like Pakistan and India lose their allied governments they need to follow Iraq's footsteps. I have no problem with that. We also need to shut down China as well, I have no problem with that either. As long as these other countries know we will annihilate them if they ever use these weapons on us I don't think we'll have too much trouble (it worked well with the Soviets.) They also need to know they face the same fate if they provide their weapons to terrorists.

[jmaccauley]

Interesting. I am asked to provide proof, I do a google search for less than 5 minutes, which was not even target at alleged US bias and voila.
Who said I should be considered neutral?? Stating the facts of the staged toppling of Saddams statue, the fabricated evidence of WMD's, the international survey that revealed that the US Govt is now the most untrusted Govt in the world is not bias, but mere truth. So stating a fact of how flights are diverted, persons fingerprinted and photographed, travelers stereo typed at airports is left wing??? Does this mean if I said some pro US Govt, love you George dubbya, good ol apple pie and other touchy feely warm and gooey compliments would make me a good bloke?? Are you suggesting that if I just say the good things that is OK, but if not so complimentary, that I am a 'left winger' ?

We must all look outside the fish bowl.

US, UK, Australia and other allied nations are losing the lives of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The civilian toll is by far higher. The Al Qaeda link in Afghanistan was clear and precise, but not so Iraq. The future will judge our actions of today, and I think the judgment already seems fairly clear in the many errors our nations leaders have made.

The National Geographic published a recent article about the unrest in Pakistan and mirrored the current events to that of the formation of the Taliban in Afghanistan. It all came about through corruption and dishonesty in Government resulting in the suffering of the people. Eastern European countries suffer similar. These are problems previously confined to within those countries.

Explosion of conflict in the middle east is imminent. Consider how there is a constant stream of Al Qaeda supporting militia from many countries sweeping across the border into Iraq with one main piece of motivation.... to kill US Soldiers.
Why is that?
They are not attacking Chinese or targeting China in Terrorist attacks, even though China has possibly the worst record of human rights abuses in all of the world. They are not attacking Israel in the manner in which they do US people and possessions, in spite of being arch enemies with Israel since time beyond memory.
Ask yourself this.... why do people from assorted countries hate the US so much?

Now this what I have been saying may be viewed by some as bias or anti-american. Is it?
All I have done is stated some facts and posed a few thought provoking questions. I do not claim to have all the answers, but from what I can see, we in the western world have some serious problems with our elected governments, and we should be asking a lot more questions.

So, I guess that explains why you have joined the ranks of those who despise the USA. At least you are honest about it. Thankfully you live in Gods Country and needn't worry about us.

[Rule303]

So, I guess that explains why you have joined the ranks of those who despise the USA.

That is untrue.

As stated above earlier, to compliment the US as a fact or even as a fallacy would draw support, but to stae the negative even though true, draws condemnation... go figure ??


Re bio weapons of 1988 used in Iraq... true and not disputed. Should we then attack Germany again now because they used mustard gas back in 1917?

All of the UN weapons inspectors came up with nothing in the months leading up to the invasion. The last weapon inspector leader said that if he had a few more months, he could say in total certainty if Iraq had any weapons or not. Instead, George W went against the UN and invaded.

Featured in recent media and confirmed by Washington was the "scientist" at a alleged biological weapons factory in Iraq, who was instrumental in his convincing the allies that Saddam had an active biological weapons program, turned out to be a cleaner and his entire story was fabricated to facilitate his immigration to a western country.

The bottom line is this, in the invasion of Iraq, the allied nations produced their "evidence" of WMD's in Iraq, and it was based on that the invasion occurred, and we now know that all of that evidence that supported the cause to invade Iraq was false.

While true that Saddam committed or dictated horrible crimes against humanity, his sins do not come close to some countries leaders who to this day remain in power and are doing far worse. (source Amnesty International and UN reports)
Recall also that the statements by Colin Powell in the speeches to the UN said that Saddam was funding and closely linked to Al Quaeda, to which we now know this is not true, but we do know that some of the rich and famous of Saudia Arabia did fund Al Queada and continued to do so even well after the invasion of Iraq. And the world does nothing to them, but happily buy their oil.

This thread has gone way off topic, and is becoming a personal attack against me for having well informed views based on facts that do not seem to agree with the social conscious of some.
Being that I Moderate this forum, if I was not involved in the thread, I would either lock it based on the personal hostility or refer it to Admin. I won't do this as this could be construed as some form of bias in the "I'm taking my ball and going home" syndrome. Should another Moderator consider this need be done, so be it, however, I am willing to continue this discussion with further evidence of proof as to what I am raising if personal attacks can be avoided.

[jmaccauley]

You put yourself in that position by asking for our opinion, then going on and on about how unfair the U.S. is. Now, if you honestly believe that your "well founded research" entitles you to an opinion, great. I'm sure any of us with an opposing view can find justification for our beliefs. If you just want to find support for your assertions, don't ask for opinions. There are many blogs in which to vent about the "evil empire."

And just as an aside to your research: Amnesty International and the UN are probably not the most credible sources for your comments, but you entitled to let them assist you in formulating your anti-US feelings. Sorry, you brought this all on yourself.

[Sipowicz]

Closed. Questions? Ask me via PM.

No, no one contacted me or requested that I do this.