Greatest threat to humanity in 2017?

a reply to: AboveBoard

So which is it?? Ally with them and get them to help root out the problem OR lock them up for the "duration of the war" on terror -- all "sympathizers" or even "people who simply came from 'that country'? (Or, given your argument, all those who are Muslim from 'terror prone' countries and their families?)

No, no.. you missed my point. I wasn't calling for people to be locked up today. I was trying to point out that we have 3000 known terror suspects on a watchlist roaming free - sworn enemies, they are not even tagged, let alone imprisoned. Yet during WW2 we were much more severe to even suspected enemies, and no one really objected. It was simply a comparison to highlight how attitudes have become a lot more soft towards our enemies, even so far as to place their human rights above our safety. I then went on to point out that the Media is largely to blame for these attitudes, which is my main point of the thread.

I think you're jumping to too many conclusions. Perhaps it's my fault.

a reply to: 0racle

We look back at internment camps with shame. That was a particularly harsh "solution" and incredibly authoritarian.

There is so much opportunity for people to be abused by the "lock 'em up" philosophy - you would inevitably incarcerate innocent people or people who are guilty only by association or even people accused of crimes for no reason other than the bigotry of their accusers.

Slippery slope to becoming the very kind of bad guy we claim to be against. It is simply the wrong approach, one that caused great harm to American citizens in the past.

Are you willing to look at the Neo-Nazi American White Nationalists with the same "watch list = lock them up" rule, or just the Middle East heritage folks? I guarantee our Constitution was not founded with "guilty before the crime is even committed" as part of the justice system.

The mistakes of the past made in fear and anger should not dictate our actions now.

I appreciate you showing the comparison between the past and the present. Personally I don't think the media are at fault for looking at human rights before preemptively jailing potential terrorists. I think the Constitution itself is to "blame" for that.

Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

Thanks for your reply as it does help to clarify.

a reply to: crayzeed

Let me put this asinine excuse to rest for good. Just because some-one bombs some-ones country does not automatically produce terrorists. Two prime examples for you. The Allies in WW2 dropped over 3.5 MILLION tons of bombs on Germany killing over 3.5 MILLION Germans. In the Vietnam war America dropped over 7 MILLION tons of bombs on Vietnam killing over 1.1 MILLION North Vietnamese. So, by your reckoning there aught to be millions of German and North Vietnamese terrorists. But this is not the case is it? Please don't use the semantics of their deaths as in WW2 and Vietnam those people (men ,women and children) died just as horrifically as any bombing victims now.

Well put , i hadn't thought of it in that way before .

a reply to: 0racle

But today we have a situation where our own governments are refusing to imprison known enemy sympathizers, because of we don't want to take away their "human rights".

That's their excuse, it's a lie.

a reply to: AboveBoard

I admit it's difficult to know sometimes what the appropriate response should be.

Having dealt personally with Islamism from a young age, and seeing the cult - brotherhood / mafia / criminal street gang style of these extremists first hand in my own country... i cannot help but see them as an invading force. I don't want to tell you how many miles I live from where the three ISIS terrorists who attacked London lived.. but i cant tell you I heard the helicopters and police sirens the next morning when they were making arrests... It's scary to live with this. I haven't been indoctrinated to hate islam, or muslims.. my feelings have developed from a lifetime of personal experience and reflection from a wide range of encounters of muslims. If it was what someone else had told me, I could easily reject it.. but I cannot deny my own experiences.

What I would do is give islamists and supporters of sharia or isis sympathisers, or anyone with any extremeist religious views 5 years to find another society to live, and have their citizenship permanently revoked when they leave, or have them renounce their ideology in writing, and if they are found to ever express views that contradict their signed testimony they will be immediately deported.... idk just a policy I made up on the spot.. but could work ... idk .. i do know these people really dont like our liberal democratic values though, so... why are they really here?...