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 : Bush Administration's Media Manipulation--MediaGate? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (4280)	7/19/2005 1:28:58 PM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9838

If I understand you correctly Republicans put the standard too high when they set it at being convicted (Rove). If I understand you Republicans are putting the standard too low when they set it at being convicted (Clinton). Hmmm. Something is out of balance here... Yes, what is "out of balance" is the Republicans putting the proper emphasis on crimes. Should Clinton have been impeached for lying about his personal life? No. That was abuse of Congressional power. Should Bush be impeached for misleading the nation into a war that has killed over 1,700 Americans and maimed many more? Well, that's up to Congress, but to me and other rational thinkers those charges are far more serious than Clinton's sexapades. I think it's a matter of applying the Constitution evenly. I'm not talking about convicting Rove. He deserves due process like anyone else. I certainly can't convict him myself. If the charges warrant prosecution, the grand jury will indict him and if warranted by the evidence, he will be convicted. I just want to see Rove held to the same standard as any other American slob who gets caught in our legal system. It would be bad if Rove is perceived as being above the law.

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (4280)	7/19/2005 1:28:58 PM
From: Rock_nj	Respond to of 9838

If I understand you correctly Republicans put the standard too high when they set it at being convicted (Rove). If I understand you Republicans are putting the standard too low when they set it at being convicted (Clinton). Hmmm. Something is out of balance here... Yes, what is "out of balance" is the Republicans putting the proper emphasis on crimes. Should Clinton have been impeached for lying about his personal life? No. That was abuse of Congressional power. Should Bush be impeached for misleading the nation into a war that has killed over 1,700 Americans and maimed many more? Well, that's up to Congress, but to me and other rational thinkers those charges are far more serious than Clinton's sexapades. I think it's a matter of applying the Constitution evenly. I'm not talking about convicting Rove. He deserves due process like anyone else. I certainly can't convict him myself. If the charges warrant prosecution, the grand jury will indict him and if warranted by the evidence, he will be convicted. I just want to see Rove held to the same standard as any other American slob who gets caught in our legal system. It would be bad if Rove is perceived as being above the law.

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (4280)	7/19/2005 2:15:50 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 9838

How to Lose a War on Terror By Melana Zyla Vickers Published 07/19/2005 techcentralstation.com After the London bombings, the first instinct of Italian police was to round up over 100 people in an anti-terrorism sweep. The first instinct of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, meanwhile, was to warn against human-rights violations. The responses illustrate the European weakness on terrorism: The suspects are plentiful, but the political and legal obstacles to thwarting them are more plentiful, still. More than ever, this weakness has become a global problem. That's because the worldwide center of gravity of Islamic terrorism isn't the Mideast -- it's Europe. Consider the following: - All of the London bombers were British residents. - The most serious plot against U.S. targets since 9/11 -- to bomb the IMF in Washington and financial buildings in New York and New Jersey -- was hatched and planned in Britain. - The 9/11 bombers prepared for their attack in Spain and Germany. - The October 2003 rocket attack against the Al Rasheed Hotel in Baghdad, where then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz was staying, involved a suspect from Italy. - Plans for suicide attacks in Iraq have been linked to plotters in Germany. That's not to mention all the attacks and plots on European targets that originated in Europe: Moroccans in Spain plotted last year's Madrid subway attacks, Moroccans in Italy were charged in 2002 with plotting a chemical attack on the U.S. embassy there, and a Dutch-Moroccan citizen killed Dutch film-maker Theo Van Gogh in 2004, in a radical-Islam-motivated attack. Going further back, Algerians in France bombed the Paris subway in 1996. None of this is surprising when one considers that whole chunks of Europe's Muslim population live on the fringes of their societies and economies, and easily become radicalized in mosques there. A German cabinet report says there are close to 60,000 "potentially extremist foreigners" in that country. Unemployment among France's Muslim youth is 40%, higher than the 16% national average. And Italian officials have said for years that their North African population is fertile ground for suicide bombers. To be sure, there are terrorism plotters in the U.S. and in the Mideast as well. But Europe's counterterrorism problem is large and changes are needed if it's to be tackled better. Some flaws: - Terrorism investigations in several European countries are hamstrung. Britain doesn't allow wiretap evidence, for instance. Several European countries, including Italy, severely limit the number of hours suspects can be held without charge. (It's 12 hours in Italy.) - Europe's open borders and geographical proximity to the Mideast make travel by terrorists easy. French anti-terrorism judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere noted several months ago, for instance, that terrorism suspects can travel undetected between France and Britain. At least one London tube bomber appears to have done just that. - Terrorism prosecutions in Europe have melted away when evidence was deemed insufficient or inadmissible, or when courts don't have the ability to consider secret intelligence. While this isn't unique to Europe, the fact that so many suspects dwell there makes it a large problem. - Human rights activists pressure politicians to back away from aggressive counterterrorism. In Italy, a politicized judge just three weeks ago ordered the arrest of 13 CIA officers after they were allegedly involved in "rendition," kidnapping a terrorism suspect and sending him to his home country for questioning, in this case Egypt. Rendition is hotly opposed by human rights groups. Similarly, human rights groups oppose close targeting or restrictions on the activities of radical mosques. - Muslim populations in Europe are often isolated and poor, and thus they produce "angry young men" that face the same conditions there that they would in their ancestral countries or countries of their birth. The isolation and lack of prospects makes them easy recruits for more-educated, savvy terrorist leaders. The Europeans have a long way to go in tacking their terrorism problem. Until they do, their problem is very much ours.