July 3, 2007


Seven doctors held over al-Qa'eda bomb plot (Duncan Gardham, Nigel Bunyan, Auslan Cramb and Richard Edwards, 03/07/2007, Times of London)

The suspected al-Qa'eda terrorists behind the attempted car bomb attacks on Britain were almost all foreign doctors working in the NHS, it can be disclosed today.

It comes as an eighth person - also a foreign doctor who has worked in the UK - was arrested in Australia in connection with the attacks.

...is that anti-immigrationists who are trying to not sound nativist often protest that they are really just concerned about security and favor letting the highly skilled immigrate.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 3, 2007 7:20 AM

The horse is dead.

Posted by: AWW at July 3, 2007 8:02 AM

Does this finally put to rest the notion that terrorists are starving, uneducated victims of the imperialist running dogs of the great satan.

Physicians of Arab persuasion up front and personal: Some time ago, before terrorism, as we have come to know it, was even a gleam in the eye of a mad mullah, I opted to never again engage a Moslem/Arab/Middle Eastern health care provider because as a woman, I was treated with not to be believed condensation and rudeness.

Just a couple of weeks ago, that decision made by much a much younger version of myself was confirmed as correct. My husband was sent to a specialist with an Arab name, who when he entered the room, introduced
himself to my husband and completely ignored me. When my husband, stopped him and introduced me as his wife, the good doctor barely nodded.

The consultation went nowhere after that and my husband switched off to one of his associates. Racism? Not a chance. Unless the good doctor considers women a race apart.

Posted by: erp at July 3, 2007 8:38 AM

Who let the docs out?

Posted by: obc at July 3, 2007 10:41 AM

An interesting aside in this on TV. The, "vaunted Socialist," medical system in Britain is short tens of thousands of doctors.

What say you Michael?

Posted by: Genecis at July 3, 2007 11:48 AM

But do not let them in without investigating them. It is the fast track provided by "jobs the natives won't do" that brought your WOGS in to minister to the yobs through the NHS.

Posted by: Jim Burke at July 3, 2007 1:31 PM

That's "tens of thousands" - minus 6 as of today.

Posted by: obc at July 3, 2007 1:32 PM

Us anti-illegal-immigrationists tend to support background checks for immigrants. Obviously the pro-illegal-immigration crowd considers such details unimportant.

Posted by: PapayaSF at July 3, 2007 2:35 PM

Horses come, horses go. There are always new pricks to kick against.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 2:41 PM

Given a choice between shorter NHS waiting times and the occasional car bomb, the aging Euros will take the docs.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 2:43 PM

. . . but unwilling to recognize that these same "docs" can kill them just as easily in the operating room as with a car bomb. And they can make it look like a "natural" death, too.

Posted by: obc at July 3, 2007 2:58 PM

AWW is right.

OJ you are a real work of art. What you lack in rationality, politeness, you more than make up with the stubborness that would awe a frigging mule.

Not one to rub it in, I have attempted to just let this issue die, but it's time somebody told you YOU LOST!!! COULDN'T EVEN GET A MAJORITY TO VOTE FOR CLOTURE Which is probably a first in the annals of filibusters.

Posted by: h-man at July 3, 2007 3:14 PM

. . . and as a result, what slim chance McPain thought that he had for the nomination has evaporated completely.

Posted by: obc at July 3, 2007 3:50 PM

Having lost makes him (oj) wrong? Not.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 3, 2007 4:43 PM

No it doesn't make right or wrong, but with 77% of the public supporting him you might suspect he would win. (77% heh heh..)

BTW a young McCain could make a comeback, so I doubt the immigration bill is as much a factor as his age.

Posted by: h-man at July 3, 2007 5:25 PM

People who are polite to racists are beneath contempt, though not beneath racists.

You mistake a minor setback on a marginal issue for a loss. The Mexicans are here to stay and they'll be your fellow citizens. We're just quibbling about the time frame within which the crackers lose.

America is never racist in the long run, only in the short.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 5:27 PM

65% favor amnesty combined with enforcement, so that's what we'll get eventually. The nativists chose neither rather than permit the former now.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 5:42 PM

I favor amnesty, once we can be assured that we are diligently enforcing border security in the future. (that was most certainly not the case with this legislation, as you have reminded us many times) So you can count me in the 65%.

Constant harping on supposed racism is boring.

Posted by: h-man at July 3, 2007 6:45 PM

De Nile is where Cleo got a nasty piece of asp.

Look. There are a great many Americans who viscerally dislike Hispanics, illegal or otherwise. It oozes through the denials.

That's not to say that all or even most of those opposed to illegals are racists. But there are millions of racists, of all colors and stripes, in the "anti-amnesty" crowd.

There are also millions of recent legal immigrants, along with their families and friends, who are furious about the illegals. Them, I don't fault ... much. Legal immigration should be easier, illegal far more difficult.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 3, 2007 7:30 PM

By placing an unachievable condition you demonstrate your racism. Racism isn't boring. It's evil.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 7:40 PM

Indeed, overt racism is not the only reason for anti-immigrationism. There are a number of rational justifications:

(1) Darwinism: members of other ethnic groups are invasive species--you should oppose them if you believe.

(2) Libertarianism: if you favor freedom as your highest value you should oppose importing a hundred million poor people of faith who will vote for liberty instead.

(3) Unionism: if you think Labor ought to be able to command artificially high wages you should oppose people who are eager to work for less.

(4) Environmentalism: Man 9is the enemy. 100 million more men are obviously undesirable.

Sadly for them, America isn't a rational nation. Heck, it's not even a nation. So the isms will lose.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 7:46 PM

Good faith effort, even of the presently existing laws is not unachievable. That is what has been lacking.

No borders, no country.

Posted by: h-man at July 3, 2007 7:58 PM

Close. No borders, no nation. We aren't a nation. We have no borders.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 8:53 PM

We're more than an abstraction.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 3, 2007 9:27 PM

Indeed, overt lawlessness is not the only reason for pro-immigrationism. There are a number of rational justifications:

(1)Modern Liberalism: Increasing the franchise by importing Marxist minded socialists who have no problem availing themselves to government services and dependency.

(2)Capitalism, 1st way: Millions of cheap bodies fuel the corporate machine and propel executive compensation and 401k's for rich white guys.

(3)Racism: Can you spell reparations for black Americans.

Sadly for them, America isn't a rational nation. Heck, it's not even a nation. So the isms will lose.

Posted by: Perry at July 3, 2007 9:44 PM

There's nothing abstract about it. We're quite explicit about what we are in the Foundational texts.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 11:37 PM

Bingo! Liberalism (democracy) and capitalism are two legs of the End of History tripod. With the third, protestantism, they have the world in a vice grip and make the fight against the free flow of peoples a sure loser. Peoples who try closing their borders face such developmental retardation that their nations will fail.

Posted by: oj at July 3, 2007 11:41 PM

Foundational texts are codified abstractions. The American Dream, by definition, is an abstraction. Useful, probably necessary, but hardly sufficient to bind a people together. Never forget the landscape, both natural and engineered.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 3, 2007 11:56 PM

... and human relationships of various sorts. Although romantic love, again by definition, is another abstraction.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 4, 2007 12:05 AM

Which landscape? The Plymouth Plantation? The original 13? The Northwest? Louisiana? New Mexico? Alaska? Hawaii? The bloody one when we freed the slaves? Western Europe? Eastern Europe? Latin America? East Asia? Israel? Iraq? The Moon?

We have no borders. The Founding is universal and we spread it everywhere.

A codified abstraction is, by definition, an oxymoron. Nor is there anything abstract about love.

Posted by: oj at July 4, 2007 7:14 AM