The NSA doesn’t rely on HUMINT (Human intelligence sources) that much, but instead relies on electronic surveillance that is still protected (on both sides) in some instances. I think that you really can’t get a ‘mass’ program through the Congress, because this decade is now the ‘Age of Snowden’, as opposed to the 9/11 decade. The Snowden element will have to be addressed, because while a small majority might think that a massive undertaking is needed to combat this threat, what are the safeguards to prevent ‘the guy in the trench coat’ from interfering in my business.
What role did Saudi Arabia play in California the other day? If you can’t fix it here at home just what do you plan on doing in Riyadh? We all know the origins of this stuff. But man we are way past all that.
Sorry, I disagree to some extent. To pretend that religion is not an enabling, much less a motivating factor in this or the Christian PP attack is simply denial.
The magical thinking of religion is akin to having foot on a banana peal of rationality.
Doesn’t make all religious people a danger. But like alcohol, some abuse it, and some destroy their lives and that of others because the can’t manage it at all.
Well then Liberals should see that as the problem and stop it. I have no sympathy for the plight of American Liberalism. It’s where it is because it did not fight to be where it wants to be. Go watch the Rahm Emanuel vid from 2 days ago. The one where he shuts down the very deserving Allen of Politico. It can be done. But no one is going to do it for you.
I expect all Republicans in the Presidential race to milk this for all it’s worth. I’m thinking it’s be a tie between Trump and Cruz for the most offensive statements.
Of course that’s how they will play it. But if these were Christians at church it would be even better for them. Less cognitive dissonance (mild as it is in this case) and far more useful propaganda-wise.
I can only hope they find a loving, nurturing family for the child she left behind who hopefully won’t remember her. Lord only knows how much child abuse would have happened to this child and any siblings that were born to these most unnatural and violent of parents.
and short of recreating the scene from ‘The Marching Morons’, their dialogue will be treated as ‘thoughtful entreaties’ in regards to a complex situation.
Now they could play at closer scrutiny and this thing and that…but unless legislative is willing to go for a truly restrictive society, the public will have to ‘dine’ on the ‘meal’ that’s before them
She was here legally.
Immigration considered her a hardship case and though it took a measure of time, that period resulted in her being able to come here. If Trump has a distinct answer to stop these types of foulups…the floor is his.
Let’s put aside donkeys and elephants for the moment and say what exactly you would do. Restrict the rights of citizens based on religion? How would that make American Muslims less likely to be radicalized?
“There is a real problem of radicalism in Islam, namely the extreme Salafi movement, that seems to seduce some small number of people.”
I am NOT jumping on the anti-Islam bandwagon here. But I do want to note that, according to an article I saw yesterday in the NYT, there are perhaps 300 million Salafi and Wahabi Muslims worldwide, out of 1.6 billion Muslims overall. That number stunned me–I had no idea there could be anywhere near that many. Now obviously being Wahabi or Salafi does not mean you like ISIS. It does not mean you are a terrorist. But it does suggest that you have a radical and pretty odious view of your religion. It’s definitely worrisome.
If Trump has a distinct answer to stop these types of foulups…the floor is his.
It will be pretty simple: let no Muslims in the U.S. for the foreseeable future, regardless of status. And I expect the entirety of the Republican Party to endorse that approach, as well as a solid majority of Americans, unfortunately.
It’s exactly what ISIS and other Islamists want, but it’s nigh unto impossible for average scared people to resist. Revenge attacks on Muslims here legally in the country are guaranteed, and I also expect a chilling effect to extend to higher education, since many universities have whole departments studying South Asia and the Middle East. Those departments require frequent travel between the U.S. and South Asia, and that’s going to receive a lot more scrutiny now. I also expect that Mein Trumpf will start suggesting punitive actions against American Muslims, Manzanara-style. It’s going to get very ugly.
It’s going to put the Obama Administration as well as the Democratic Party as a whole in a very uncomfortable political position.
At the point where you move from digital surveillance to real-world surveillance, the resources needed expand massively, so choices have to be made. What would have put this guy anywhere near the top of the list, since his family, co-workers and neighbors had not the slightest inkling apparently? And that’s what a real-world investigation involves, talking to actual people.
What would be the constitutional basis for imposing a religious test on entry? Would that include tourists? Business people here to do deals? No more Saudi and Emirati investors? How do you even tell who is Muslim? Some Muslims hold passports from Europe, Canada, etc. Some might not even have obviously Muslim names.
Then someone should remind Trump and Preibus that there will be at least three major consequences to that:
one: this country risks alienating and in turn radicalizing those here (by birth and by passage).
two: While the current religious/geopolitical (Sunni v Shia/Saudi v Iran) civil war that’s occurring in Syria is clearly over their heads, they need to realize that if ISIL starts changing their assets religious priorities around, then the US (and western) intelligence infrastructure is going to be in for it.
Three: All Muslims are not brown skinned. If ISIL (and other Islamic terrorist groups) really start to play off of three…
Some GOPers have already argued past that by asserting that Islam isn’t a real religion. Others simply will make the argument that the Constitution was written by Christians for Christians, and therefore it doesn’t apply to Muslims. That’s essentially what the GOP base believes already.
I noted you didn’t answer my other questions. How do you tell someone is a Muslim, particularly if they have a passport from countries that are not Muslim majority? And what would be the economic fallout? And the military fallout (bases in Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia)? It would make fighting ISIS almost impossible, among many other things. And you would still have millions of US citizen Muslims.
