Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (41824)	11/30/2001 3:51:11 AM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Respond to of 50167

<We ought to take our fundamentalists, put them in a jar with your fundamentalists, shake them up and let them fight it out.> This is a new kind of world we live in now, we are part of a very connected world, we have now begin to realise how important it is for our children to know that world beyond our little confines of mind. The whole concept of dying for some believe irrespective of nobler or coward causes is nothing new for human society, what has changed now is that integrated world pains are so much interrelated. World with all its mental distances is one country, the importance of recognition of basic tenet of respect of life cannot be ever more emphasised. The fringe lunatics in our part of the world command attention of a lot bigger portion of population than in your part of the world. The poverty trap along with self imposed restrictions on learning or quest of education have wreaked havocs in our society. The very concept that ‘God is out there to take care of my crimes against humanity’ is the biggest single factor that arises from ashes of lack of means and education. Human mind should not take pride in how well they keep their time honoured culture or tradition alive, I was telling my sons last night that we should take pride only if we are relatively free we from dogma that we inherited from our previous generations. This is a ongoing struggle to make our minds free and this is not restricted only to east, west needs to bridge that huge yawning gap(opened up very recently as a result of cyber connectivity) between development and collective knowledge of other societies, knowing them particularly will infuse that spirit that may help stem the decay in eastern societies. That ‘freedom of dogma’ if we have obtained can only express itself in one-way that of respect of other people believe and practices, non-violent means to bring change that may be based on mental interaction and true deep exchange of ideas. We are at the infancy of the age of understanding, on one hand the society is being torn apart by the likes of OBL and on the other even educated societies consider knowledge of the world a burden far too in excess of their capacities. In my opinion fringe and extremist attitude evolves from lack of adjustment to progress, much as it is rooted in tradition and poverty, allow me to make a point that sometime in its rarest from it raises its ugly head from cultural illiteracy. If basic education and inconsistencies of mind to relate with massive development that world has seen is the cause of fringe attitude in our society, in the west it is rooted in inabilities to appreciate the risks of a multi-tired mental and material world that is connected physically and go through massive interconnection but has no connectivity of knowledge. Knowing other cultures and going where no man has ever gone before is the art of submitting extremism to condition where it may die its natural death. The root cause of problems is attachment to fallible system of belief in east. The society is crushing under the ‘wait for Allah’ that may never come. Talebin were waiting for those nightingales promised in Quran with stones in their beaks, that prophesy never really materialised. The book that gave them 'blind and unchecked power' also helped them to self annihilate! Interesting poetic justice. Every system that is not self-questioning and adaptable to test of times self destroys, that is exactly what happens with extremism, in any shape and form it will self-destruct. Fringe attitudes are inconsistent with the progress of mankind. The umbilical chord that connects these attitudes feeds hatred, fortunately we are a result of love and love making not hate forms the bedrock of our collective, in the end every form of hatred finds no place, we do move forward, look at the history of mankind even in the bleakest of our moments hopes were kept alive. It is hope that will clean this world from outdated thinking.

To: Bilow who wrote (41824)	11/30/2001 12:58:45 PM
From: Skywatcher	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 50167

Wake Up, America By ANTHONY LEWIS BOSTON It is the broadest move in American history to sweep aside constitutional protections. Yet President Bush's order creating military tribunals to try those suspected of links to terrorism has aroused little public uproar. Why? Because, I'm convinced, people do not understand the order's dangerous breadth — and its defenders have done their best to conceal its true character. The order is described as if it is aimed only at Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders. A former deputy attorney general, George J. Terwilliger III, said the masterminds of the Sept. 11 attacks "don't deserve constitutional protection." But the Bush order covers all noncitizens, and there are about 20 million of them in the United States — immigrants working toward citizenship, visitors and the like. Not one or 100 or 1,000 but 20 million. And the order is not directed only at those who mastermind or participate in acts of terrorism. In the vaguest terms, it covers such things as "harboring" anyone who has ever aided acts of terrorism that might have had "adverse effects" on the U.S. economy or foreign policy. Many onetime terrorists — Menachem Begin, Nelson Mandela, Gerry Adams — regarded at the time as adverse to U.S. interests, have been "harbored" by Americans. Apologists have also argued that the Bush military tribunals will give defendants enough rights. A State Department spokeswoman, Jo-Anne Prokopowicz, said that they would have rights "similar to those" found in the Hague war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. To the contrary, Hague defendants like Slobodan Milosevic are entitled to public trials before independent judges, and to lawyers of their choice. The Bush military trials are to be in secret, before officers who are subordinate to officials bringing the charges; defendants will not be able to pick their own lawyers. And, unlike the Hague defendants, they may be executed. The Sixth Amendment provides: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. .. ." That covers citizens and noncitizens in this country alike. On a few occasions, acts of war have been treated as outside Sixth Amendment protection. Roosevelt set up a military tribunal to try Nazi saboteurs landed on our shores in World War II. But that example — a tribunal for a particular occasion, limited in time and scope — shows the very danger of the Bush order. It is unlimited, in a fight against terrorism that could go on for years. "It's worth remembering that the order applies only to noncitizens," a Wall Street Journal editorial said. I hope The Journal's editors, who are usually supportive of immigrants and their role in building this country, will consider the pall of fear this order may put on millions of noncitizens. And the Bush order could easily be extended to citizens, under the administration's legal theory. Since the Sixth Amendment makes no distinction between citizens and aliens, the claim of war exigency could sweep its protections aside for anyone in this country who might fit the vague definitions of aiding terrorism. But George W. Bush would never let his order be abused, one of its defenders said the other day. It was a profoundly un-American comment. From the beginning,Americans have refused to rely on the graciousness of our leaders. We rely on legal rules. That is what John Adams meant when he said we have "a government of laws, and not of men." The Framers of our Constitution thought its great protection against tyranny was the separation of the federal government's powers into three departments: executive,legislative, judicial. Each, they reasoned, would check abuse by the others. There is the greatest danger of the Bush order. It was an act of executive fiat, imposed without even consulting Congress. And it seeks to exclude the courts entirely from a process that may fundamentally affect life and liberty. The order says that a defendant "shall not be privileged to seek any remedy . . . in any court," domestic or foreign. I do not doubt that leaders of Al Qaeda could properly be tried by a military tribunal. But the Bush order cries out for redrafting in narrower, more careful terms. Under the Constitution, that is the duty of Congress. Its leaders have so far been afraid to challenge anything labeled antiterrorist, however dangerous. It is time they showed some courage, on behalf of our constitutional system. NOW THAT'S SCARY....WRITE NOW AGAINST THIS INCREDIBLE ANTI CONSTITUTIONAL MOVE CC