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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (98244)	2/2/2005 8:14:32 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793928

OUR FRIENDS THE CANADIANS By malkin A Canadian judge refuses to deport a suspected terrorist on the grounds that he may be tortured if sent back to Egypt, the Ottawa Citizen reports. The suspected terrorist, Mohamed Mahjoub, has met Osama bin Laden several times and was a senior official at a bin Laden-owned agricultural firm in Sudan in the early 1990s. When he first arrived in Canada in 1995, Mahjoub lived with the highest-ranking Canadian in al Qaeda, according to the Citizen. Canadian Security Intelligence Service contends that Mahjoub is a high-ranking member of Vanguards of Conquest, an Egyptian terrorist group that merged with al Qaeda in 1998. Mahjoub was convicted in absentia in Egypt for his involvement with the group. Mahjoub has not been convicted of any crime in Canada, however. His confinement (and that of other Arabs in Canada suspected of involvement in terrorist activities) has already evoked comparisons to Guantanamo Bay. If he is not going to be deported, one assumes Canadian officials will eventually let him go, as his defenders have urged. Virtually all Middle Easterners can make plausible-sounding claims that they will be tortured if deported. It is a safe bet that the decision in Mahjoub's case will make Canada an even more attractive destination for terrorists. As I've noted before, suspected and known al Qaeda operatives have exploited the asylum card here as well and lodged claims of "credible fear of persecution" that are almost impossible to document but are rarely rejected. Rep. James Sensenbrenner has been championing reform of these asylum loopholes since 9/11 and is working hard to pass provisions that were dropped from the so-called intel reform bill. He says: Terrorists are getting asylum today for two main reasons. First, our government cannot ask foreign governments what evidence they have about the terrorist activities of asylum applicants. Thus, the U.S. government must usually oppose an asylum request by arguing that the applicant is lying. The 9th Circuit has effectively barred immigration judges from denying asylum claims on the basis of credibility determinations. That is crazy - every jury in the country judges the credibility of witnesses. Our bill would have stopped that. In addition, the 9th Circuit has been granting asylum to applicants because their home government believes they are terrorists. It then says that therefore they are being persecuted because of the political beliefs of the relevant terrorist organization. Our bill would have stopped that nonsense as well. That issue is not going away either. michellemalkin.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (98244)	2/2/2005 4:55:43 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793928

Her quirkiest yet correct view: That landing on the moon was an intrinsically wonderful thing to do, and libertarian objections be damned. Chris couldn't make the Ayn Rand birthday party, but I took Ben, who, unfortunately, had a stomach "bug" so we got there late. I dropped him off and parked pretty far away, so missed almost all of it except the last half hour, the "free lunch," the birthday cake, and yack-yacking with the other attendees afterwards. One person observed that, with respect to government funded scholarships, Rand said that the money came from taxpayers via coercion, but that did not mean you should turn it down. Otherwise you would be compounding the error, for example, if a thief took $100 from you and then offered you $50 you should not turn it down. I would ask whether she thought you should take the $50 if the thief took it from someone else, but I truly believe I've paid far more in taxes than I've received. BTW, the room the event was held in, the Members of Congress room, has the fanciest ceiling I've ever seen. Lots of gold, lots of murals and the walls are also covered with murals and mosaics. The whole Jefferson building is like that. I think she would have liked it. She loved gold. I wore a lot of gold jewelry in her honor. I also chatted with a Librarian from the manuscripts division. She says that Leonard Peikoff, who was her heir, sold off most of her manuscripts, but that one major purchaser donated a large chunk to the LOC. So they have the largest collection of her manuscripts. And Peikoff doesn't. Peikoff needed the money and scattered the work to the winds. As was his right, but still,so much for the theory that private industry will do better at preserving creativity than governments.