December 18, 2004
LUNCHBAG LETDOWN
Nearly one-half of Americans favour restricting Muslims' rights: poll (National Post, December 17th, 2004)
Nearly one-half of Americans believe the U.S. government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslim-Americans, a national poll indicates.The survey conducted by Cornell University also found Republicans and people who described themselves as highly religious were more apt to support curtailing Muslims' civil liberties than Democrats or people who are less religious.
Researchers also found respondents who paid more attention to television news were more likely to fear terrorist attacks and support limiting the rights of Muslim-Americans. [...]
The survey showed 27 per cent of respondents supported requiring all Muslim-Americans to register where they live with the U.S. government. Twenty-two per cent favoured racial profiling to identify potential terrorist threats. And 29 per cent thought undercover agents should infiltrate Muslim civic and volunteer organizations to keep tabs on their activities and fund-raising.
From a headline that held out the exciting promise of calls for forced deportations, internment camps and denials of habeas corpus, it's a real drag to descend in a few paragraphs to basic wartime security measures that don't restrict anyone’s freedom in any significant way.
Posted by Peter Burnet at December 18, 2004 7:52 AMDenial ain't just a river.
Posted by: Bartman at December 18, 2004 8:05 AMWhat's the problem with surveillance and infiltration? The Feds used to do it an gun shows and at shooting ranges all the time. The fun was making one and starting a bull session about what dumb f**ks the BATF guys were. They used to sneak around and start up conversations out of the thin air about illegal activities. Who would ever have thought they were feds?
I don't doubt that pro-life people have had similar experiences.
We didn't mind, because we weren't doing anything wrong, and didn't have a problem with going after people who were. Why should the Hadjis feel differently. If you are a loyal citizen you should welcome the purging of enemies of your country from your ranks. If, on the other hand, . . ..
Posted by: Lou Gots at December 18, 2004 8:41 AMWhat's the problem with surveillance and infiltration? The Feds used to do it an gun shows and at shooting ranges all the time. The fun was making one and starting a bull session about what dumb f**ks the BATF guys were. They used to sneak around and start up conversations out of the thin air about illegal activities. Who would ever have thought they were feds?
I don't doubt that pro-life people have had similar experiences.
We didn't mind, because we weren't doing anything wrong, and didn't have a problem with going after people who were. Why should the Hadjis feel differently. If you are a loyal citizen you should welcome the purging of enemies of your country from your ranks. If, on the other hand, . . ..
Posted by: Lou Gots at December 18, 2004 8:42 AMAmericans will not be safe until we engage in mass deportations of the entire membership of that Death Cult of the Moon God.
Posted by: Bart at December 18, 2004 8:49 AMAmerican Muslim communities should be flooded with translqated versions of the Bible. The Quran can't compete. The role of Christianity within our history must be taught in the schools. Convert them and send them out into the Arab world as missionaries. Bart is correct regarding the origins of Islam. "The cult of the moon god" transformed into a monotheistic religion is Islam. "Do unto others..." is not a tenet of Islam.
Posted by: Tom C., Stamford, Ct. at December 18, 2004 9:37 AM1. The first suggestion, requiring all Muslim-Americans to register where they live, hits that rare trifecta: unconstitutional, useless and redundant.
As for the second suggestion, I don't have any idea what "racial profiling" means in connection with a religion, but I refuse to believe that only 22% of Americans think that TSA, for example, should look a little closer at airplane passengers with Arabic names.
The security services would be criminally negligent if they aren't already "keeping tabs" on Muslim organizations. Remember, though, that one of the changes made by the Patriot Act was to allow government agents to surf to religious oriented web sites as part of their official duties without probably cause.
2. Bart, your comments are either entertaining and knowledgable or vile. Particularly on Saturday morning, could we skip vile?
Posted by: David Cohen at December 18, 2004 10:01 AMI'd be curious if they'd find a similar response to a more generic question which wasn't specific to any religious or ethnic group.
Posted by: MB at December 18, 2004 11:28 AMFrankly I'm surprised the numbers aren't a lot higher.
Looking at the PDF at the Cornell website:
"The survey was conducted between October 25 and
November 23, 2004 and consists of 715 interviews from a national listed household sample."
Sample size seems a touch on the low side.
Would be interesting to see the original questions asked.
Posted by: Ali Choudhury at December 18, 2004 1:35 PMDavid,
We are at war. That is our enemy's choice. Let us give them full measure.
The Muslim contribution to the planet in the last 800 years is about zero. If they disappeared entirely, we'd be significantly better off.
Posted by: Bart at December 18, 2004 7:00 PMBart, is there any problem on earth for which you don't see mass slaughter as the solution?
Posted by: Peter B at December 18, 2004 10:19 PMPlenty. But if mass slaughter is the solution, we should not shy away from it because we are squeamish.
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 6:53 AMDefinitely not because we are squeamish. But maybe because we seek to be reverent and virtuous. If squeamishness helps, then long live squeamishness.
Posted by: Peter B at December 19, 2004 8:10 AMExtremism in defense of liberty is no vice and moderation in the defense of freedom is no virtue.
Since Muslims commit virtually every act of terror in America, we would be well-advised to remove them from our midst by whatever means necessary. Since every mosque in America is a fund-raising center for terrorists, we should close and bulldoze every mosque in America.
Maybe they should all move to Canada and fly planes into the igloos. Canadians are such wimps and cowards that they would give up their sisters, daughters and mothers to the Jihadniks in a nanosecond.
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 11:55 AMBart: Name an act of domestic terrorism perpetrated by a Muslim-American.
I'm tempted to leave it at that, but, as you want hard truths from which not to shy away, I'll add that 9/11 is a small price to pay for America remaining America.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 19, 2004 3:44 PMSgt. Akbar throwing a grenade into a tent in Kuwait killing his superiors. El-Sayyed al-Nosair killing Rabbi Meir Kahane(OBM). Juan Padilla on the plane with a weapon. Countless acts of fundraising like Sami al-Arian. There are currently 600,000 Muslims in American prisons, they are not there because they are good-looking.
How do you define Muslim-American?
I take it you didn't lost anyone near and dear to you on 9/11. And people here think I'm brutal and callous.
Posted by: Bart at December 19, 2004 5:34 PMSo, in other words, the answer is no, you can't think of any examples. Given that, deportation of all Muslims from the US does seem a little harsh.
As for 9/11, what I said wasn't brutal and callous. It wouldn't even quite be brutal and callous if I were to argue -- as I am not arguing -- that 9/11 was, in its consequences, a good thing. I disagree, but the argument is certainly there for the making.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 19, 2004 8:28 PMDavid,
I gave you 5. Now if you're going to be deliberately obtuse or play fast and easy with the English language, like OJ sometimes does, then we have nothing more to talk about.
Posted by: Bart at December 20, 2004 11:04 AMSgt. Akbar is closest, though not domestic and not, strictly speaking, terrorism.
El Sayyid A. Nosair is Egyptian, not American, and guilty of a targeted murder that was not even arguably terrorism.
Abdullah al-Muhajir, nee Jose Padilla, was arrested while getting off an airplane in Chicago; he was not armed and had some vague plan to try to make a dirty bomb.
Fundraising for terrorists is bad, but was not particularly aimed at domestic terrorism and doesn't differentiate Muslim-Americans from, among a host of others, Irish-Americans.
The large population of "Muslims" in American jails results largely from recruiting by gangs in jail, rather than from crimes committed by those born into the faith. Whether this strain of American Islam actually is Islam is doubtful. In any event, it has nothing to do with terrorism.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 20, 2004 11:37 AM