On 3 May 2005 02:51:52 -0000, Freddy the OT poster hater
wrote:


It is going to be a bad year for OT posters. Better get used to it.

you could save some bandwidth and be a little more truthful if you
changed this sn to simply "freddy the hater". also, all those extra
returns at the end of your posts are unnecessary.

bb

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
s
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Soldiers are just civilians in uniforms...

...wearing flak jackets, driving heavily armored vehicles, and
carrying fully automatic assault rifles. Some of them even have
the ability to send 500 lb. bombs at terrorist targets.

Soldiers are aware of the job description when they sign up.
Wouldn't you rather have terrorists fighting well-armed US
combatants halfway around the world, rather than blowing up unarmed
men, women, and children in your own backyard?

Actually, the article is right. Threats are almost nonexistent. The
insurgents don't make threats. They just do the deeds.

As far as who is attacked where, I'm not picky. Soldiers can't
defend themselves against vehicles loaded with explosives unless
they see them coming, and apparently, they do NOT see them coming
most of the time. And, they don't have the armor they need, so in
effect, they're often as defenseless as if they were driving down
route 95.

With a .50 caliber mounted on your roof.

No gun helps when a car blows up next to yours, professor.


Not too many cars can get close enough when a Mark-19 is unleashed on
'em.

You really do live on another planet, don't you? Not only that, but you
never quite got past the age of 12. Have you noticed the return of
suicide bombings in Iraq, or are all those reports fabricated?


They're blowing up Iraqi men, women, and children attending weddings.
However, there's been a 35% reduction in US casualties over the last 3
months than in the 3 month period prior to that.

OK, boy. If you think that last paragraph is NOT a non-sequitur, we're
done with this.

You said there had been an increase in the number of car bombings recently.
Since the bombings are effectively targeting Iraqi civilians, why are they
relevant to a discussion about terrorist attacks against US citizens?

An increase in the number of car bombings against Iraqi wedding parties
isn't of much interest to the average American. The fact is...the US
mainland has not been attacked since 9/11, and US military casualties have
fallen 35% in the last 3 months. We're winning the war on terror.

"harry.krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

s
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
.earthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
tl.earthlink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

Soldiers are just civilians in uniforms...

...wearing flak jackets, driving heavily armored vehicles, and
carrying fully automatic assault rifles. Some of them even have
the ability to send 500 lb. bombs at terrorist targets.

Soldiers are aware of the job description when they sign up.
Wouldn't you rather have terrorists fighting well-armed US
combatants halfway around the world, rather than blowing up
unarmed men, women, and children in your own backyard?

Actually, the article is right. Threats are almost nonexistent. The
insurgents don't make threats. They just do the deeds.

As far as who is attacked where, I'm not picky. Soldiers can't
defend themselves against vehicles loaded with explosives unless
they see them coming, and apparently, they do NOT see them coming
most of the time. And, they don't have the armor they need, so in
effect, they're often as defenseless as if they were driving down
route 95.

With a .50 caliber mounted on your roof.

No gun helps when a car blows up next to yours, professor.


Not too many cars can get close enough when a Mark-19 is unleashed on
'em.

You really do live on another planet, don't you? Not only that, but you
never quite got past the age of 12. Have you noticed the return of
suicide bombings in Iraq, or are all those reports fabricated?


They're blowing up Iraqi men, women, and children attending weddings.
However, there's been a 35% reduction in US casualties over the last 3
months than in the 3 month period prior to that.

OK, boy. If you think that last paragraph is NOT a non-sequitur, we're
done with this.


You said there had been an increase in the number of car bombings
recently. Since the bombings are effectively targeting Iraqi civilians,
why are they relevant to a discussion about terrorist attacks against US
citizens?

An increase in the number of car bombings against Iraqi wedding parties
isn't of much interest to the average American. The fact is...the US
mainland has not been attacked since 9/11, and US military casualties
have fallen 35% in the last 3 months. We're winning the war on terror.





How utterly naive you are. Terrorist attacks are way up around the world


Not against American citizens they're not.

, and we'll be hit again,

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as they
returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the Department of
Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were targets of ethnic and
religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained dozens
of others from their conference in December, subjecting them to
interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing. Four carried U.S.-issued
passports; the other had a New York state driver's license, which is an
acceptable form of identification at the Canadian border.

The plaintiffs traveled separately and arrived at the checkpoint throughout
the afternoon and night. Travelers who told agents they had attended the
conference titled "Reviving the Islamic Spirit" were held for questioning,
and women wearing hijab were asked whether they had attended the conference,
according to the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court by the New York Civil
Liberties Union and the Council for American-Islamic Relations.

"They were the victims once again of our government's overzealous and
counterproductive ethnic and religious profiling in the name of national
security," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU.

The lawsuit seeks to prevent government agencies from detaining,
interrogating or photographing Muslims returning to the United States from
religious conferences. The five Muslims want their fingerprints and
photographs taken at the border destroyed or expunged.

Homeland security officials said that 34 people were selected for the
secondary questioning at Queenston Lewiston Bridge and four others at
Rainbow Bridge in Niagara Falls. None was charged with a crime.

"In this instance, we had credible intelligence that conferences similar to
the one from which these individuals were leaving were being used by
terrorist organizations to fundraise and to hide the travel of terrorists
themselves," said Kristi Clemens, spokeswoman for U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.

Clemens declined to elaborate on the sort of conferences that draw
heightened scrutiny or whether people were held at other border crossings.
She said U.S. citizens have the right to refuse fingerprinting and that the
department has not received complaints about agents forcing citizens to
submit fingerprints.

Sawsan Tabbaa, 43, an orthodontist in Buffalo, took her four children in the
family van for their third trip to the conference, which featured imam Hamza
Yusuf. Yusuf is a prominent scholar who visited the White House in the days
after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to pray with President Bush and endorse
his plans for military action.

Tabbaa, who wears hijab, said that at 2 a.m. Dec. 27 she arrived at the
border checkpoint where agents asked her about the conference and instructed
her to wait inside the customs building. Inside, she said, "I saw all the
people from my Islamic community."

Tabbaa, a Syrian-born naturalized citizen, said agents refused to let her
leave unless she submitted to fingerprinting. After several hours, she said,
a female agent escorted her to a room to demonstrate the procedure.

"She just grabbed my hand and [began] fingerprinting it," Tabbaa said. "I
was just forced to do it. She grabbed my hand."

As part of the lawsuit, the NYCLU and CAIR have filed a Freedom of
Information Act request about policies related to the fingerprinting or
profiling of U.S. citizens at border crossings.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"harry.krause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
.earthlink.net...


s
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
tl.earthlink.net...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


"NOYB" wrote in message
.atl.earthlink.net...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
. ..


Soldiers are just civilians in uniforms...

...wearing flak jackets, driving heavily armored vehicles, and
carrying fully automatic assault rifles. Some of them even have
the ability to send 500 lb. bombs at terrorist targets.

Soldiers are aware of the job description when they sign up.
Wouldn't you rather have terrorists fighting well-armed US
combatants halfway around the world, rather than blowing up
unarmed men, women, and children in your own backyard?

Actually, the article is right. Threats are almost nonexistent.
The insurgents don't make threats. They just do the deeds.

As far as who is attacked where, I'm not picky. Soldiers can't
defend themselves against vehicles loaded with explosives unless
they see them coming, and apparently, they do NOT see them coming
most of the time. And, they don't have the armor they need, so in
effect, they're often as defenseless as if they were driving down
route 95.

With a .50 caliber mounted on your roof.

No gun helps when a car blows up next to yours, professor.


Not too many cars can get close enough when a Mark-19 is unleashed
on 'em.

You really do live on another planet, don't you? Not only that, but
you never quite got past the age of 12. Have you noticed the return
of suicide bombings in Iraq, or are all those reports fabricated?


They're blowing up Iraqi men, women, and children attending weddings.
However, there's been a 35% reduction in US casualties over the last 3
months than in the 3 month period prior to that.

OK, boy. If you think that last paragraph is NOT a non-sequitur, we're
done with this.


You said there had been an increase in the number of car bombings
recently. Since the bombings are effectively targeting Iraqi civilians,
why are they relevant to a discussion about terrorist attacks against US
citizens?

An increase in the number of car bombings against Iraqi wedding parties
isn't of much interest to the average American. The fact is...the US
mainland has not been attacked since 9/11, and US military casualties
have fallen 35% in the last 3 months. We're winning the war on terror.





How utterly naive you are. Terrorist attacks are way up around the world



Not against American citizens they're not.


, and we'll be hit again,


Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.
Looking for an out already, eh?

If we are holding people without charging them, and not bringing them to a
speedy trial, we've lost the war against terrorism.


Bull****. They're traitors...and, therefore, they have no rights.

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...



Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.
Looking for an out already, eh?

If we are holding people without charging them, and not bringing them to a
speedy trial, we've lost the war against terrorism.

Maybe it's a new trick Bush's gang has learned from Putin. It's an old
Soviet tradition, ya know? Chinese tradition, too.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as they
returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the Department of
Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were targets of ethnic and
religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained dozens
of others from their conference in December, subjecting them to
interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with actions of the
Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit terrorist
attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time they started
racial profiling...especially for people who travel to "conferences" that
have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly qualify as
"detainment". So what's the big deal?

On Tue, 03 May 2005 18:51:13 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as they
returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the Department of
Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were targets of ethnic and
religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained dozens
of others from their conference in December, subjecting them to
interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing. Four carried U.S.-issued
passports; the other had a New York state driver's license, which is an
acceptable form of identification at the Canadian border.

The plaintiffs traveled separately and arrived at the checkpoint throughout
the afternoon and night. Travelers who told agents they had attended the
conference titled "Reviving the Islamic Spirit" were held for questioning,
and women wearing hijab were asked whether they had attended the conference,
according to the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court by the New York Civil
Liberties Union and the Council for American-Islamic Relations.

"They were the victims once again of our government's overzealous and
counterproductive ethnic and religious profiling in the name of national
security," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU.

The lawsuit seeks to prevent government agencies from detaining,
interrogating or photographing Muslims returning to the United States from
religious conferences. The five Muslims want their fingerprints and
photographs taken at the border destroyed or expunged.

Homeland security officials said that 34 people were selected for the
secondary questioning at Queenston Lewiston Bridge and four others at
Rainbow Bridge in Niagara Falls. None was charged with a crime.

"In this instance, we had credible intelligence that conferences similar to
the one from which these individuals were leaving were being used by
terrorist organizations to fundraise and to hide the travel of terrorists
themselves," said Kristi Clemens, spokeswoman for U.S. Customs and Border
Protection.

Clemens declined to elaborate on the sort of conferences that draw
heightened scrutiny or whether people were held at other border crossings.
She said U.S. citizens have the right to refuse fingerprinting and that the
department has not received complaints about agents forcing citizens to
submit fingerprints.

Sawsan Tabbaa, 43, an orthodontist in Buffalo, took her four children in the
family van for their third trip to the conference, which featured imam Hamza
Yusuf. Yusuf is a prominent scholar who visited the White House in the days
after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to pray with President Bush and endorse
his plans for military action.

Tabbaa, who wears hijab, said that at 2 a.m. Dec. 27 she arrived at the
border checkpoint where agents asked her about the conference and instructed
her to wait inside the customs building. Inside, she said, "I saw all the
people from my Islamic community."

Tabbaa, a Syrian-born naturalized citizen, said agents refused to let her
leave unless she submitted to fingerprinting. After several hours, she said,
a female agent escorted her to a room to demonstrate the procedure.

"She just grabbed my hand and [began] fingerprinting it," Tabbaa said. "I
was just forced to do it. She grabbed my hand."

As part of the lawsuit, the NYCLU and CAIR have filed a Freedom of
Information Act request about policies related to the fingerprinting or
profiling of U.S. citizens at border crossings.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

As it should be.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as they
returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the Department of
Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were targets of ethnic and
religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained
dozens of others from their conference in December, subjecting them to
interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with actions of
the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit terrorist
attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time they started
racial profiling...especially for people who travel to "conferences" that
have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly qualify as
"detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Perhaps. But only if the ACLU continues to dismantle the President's
authority to detain illegal combatants in this war on terror.

You mean, the government's new hobby, detaining people like these?

And, don't hand us any bull**** about the source, as you usually do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Apr20.html


Muslims Detained at Border Sue U.S. Homeland Security

By Michelle Garcia
Special to The Washington Post
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A08

NEW YORK, April 20 -- American Muslims detained at the border as they
returned from a religious conference in Toronto sued the Department of
Homeland Security on Wednesday alleging they were targets of ethnic and
religious profiling.

The five Muslims, all U.S. citizens, say customs officials detained
dozens of others from their conference in December, subjecting them to
interrogations, fingerprinting and photographing.

I have no problem with the "source" of this story...nor with actions of
the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Those 5 folks who were detained are certainly more apt to commit
terrorist attacks than an 80 year old grandmother. It's about time they
started racial profiling...especially for people who travel to
"conferences" that have suspected ties to terrorism.


Besides...questioning, fingerprinting, and photographing hardly qualify
as "detainment". So what's the big deal?

But professor, you objected to the exact same type of policies when
practiced by the USSR. Sorry. Can't have it both ways.

No I didn't. I'm all for a National Photo ID card and fingerprint and/or
retinal scans at the airport and border crossings.