Counterpoint: a tiny step in the right direction. Trivial, but hey, better than nuttin'.
More. But sure enough, Pepe is squeaking: the action on Sunday further establishes a global security system that treats people differently based on what country they are from, evoking protests from civil rights groups.
Monday, January 04, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
Like clockwork: Nawar Shora, the legal director at the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, says the rule wrongly implies that all citizens of certain nations are suspect.
“I understand there needs to be additional security in light of what was attempted on Christmas Day,” Mr. Shora said, adding that he intended to file a formal protest on Monday. “But this is extreme and very dangerous. All of a sudden people are labeled as being related to terrorism just because of the nation they are from.”
A gem: "Reasonable suspicion requires 'articulable' facts which, taken together with rational inferences, reasonably warrant a determination that an individual is known or suspected to be or has been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to, terrorism and terrorist activities, and is based on the totality of the circumstances. Mere guesses or inarticulate 'hunches' are not enough to constitute reasonable suspicion."
An apogee of Pinko Logic: Umar Abdulmutallab is not a uniformed agent of a foreign power, and he wasn't captured on a battlefield, where the exigencies of combat might justify an alternative legal process. He wasn't even going after a military target. The entire argument for trying him by military commission is based on the notion that he's guilty and therefore doesn't deserve certain legal rights, but those can't be denied to him without due process of law because of something called the Constitution.
See that, Mr Rot? Why didn't Chicago think of it?
Comment #2 is wonderful. Academic nihilism couched in big word talk.
If it were mere academic nihilism (or Pepean blabber) it would be harmless. But did you see who gave those explicit guidelines and criteria? I mean, when it becomes a matter of official policy at the FBI and/or CIA that hunches are not to be acted upon, even when evidence just about as solid as it gets is obtained (as was the case with both Hasan and Mutallab), then we're really in deep doo-doo.
By the way, didn't we go through more-or-less the same debate after 9/11, with those interminable 9/11 hearings? So what changed?
Ultimately, nothing changed. The Man from Hope was gone, and the Man of Hope and Change had not yet arrived. Yer cain't get one without the other, ye knuckledraggers.
Let's face it; we had two years of lucidity after 9/11. Before that it was darkness falling, and after that it was darkness returning.
Now? Pitch Black.
Different now, AA. We have a 5th columnist in the WH. That's new.
Hence, Pitch Black
Post a Comment