Skip to main content

It sounds like a no-brainer, right? It's like should Al Queda members and supporters be deported.  But they are here-see video below from the Netherlands. Those flags are ISIS flags.  How is this possible?

Yes we in the west are tolerant and believe in freedom of speech and assembly.  But to allow ISIS supporters--who support the murder or forced conversion of any non-Muslims,  enslavement of women, and murder of homosexuals to demonstrate. In Holland.  This is shocking.

I live in the USA and have not so far seen pro-ISIS demonstrations here. But it's occurring in European cities--in the open--and it's apparently allowed.  This goes too far.

To be clear, I'm not just saying ISIS shouldn't be allowed to demonstrate, but that it's simply too dangerous to allow ISIS members and supporters--like Al Queda--continued residence in western countries. We have to find a way to legally deport such individuals.



Should ISIS Supporters be deported?

55%87 votes
28%44 votes
16%25 votes

| 156 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, you can't deport your own citizens. (10+ / 0-)

    I mean, you could, but it's not cool.  So the only question I have is whether or not they're Dutch citizens.  

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:01:15 PM PDT

    •  And why are they speaking English? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mosesfreeman, G2geek

      The whole thing is a little weird.

      It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

      by Rich in PA on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:03:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  because they may be a mixed crowd: (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sandbox, k9disc, deepeco, mosesfreeman

        Almost everyone in the Netherlands speaks English.

        English is also a common-denominator language in Europe.

        For which reason I'm going to guess that some of the people in that crowd, including possibly the guy who is speaking, are not from the Netherlands, but are visiting for purposes of recruiting.  

        In which case, YES, they can and should be deported to wherever they came from.

        Though it's more useful to have the intelligence services follow them, surveil them, and track their activities in detail.

        Then, after they have no further value as intel targets, prosecute them under whatever human right statutes may provide grounds for doing so.

        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:36:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Iranian demonstrators in 09 carried signs (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        in English routinely. Was it you who questioned that on this board back then?

    •  Yes, it comes up. If they're already Dutch (0+ / 0-)

      citizens, then what to do with them?  IMO, you can't just allow them freedom of movement.

      •  Holy hell. (21+ / 0-)

        So being a member of the KKK should get you deported? Could allow the government to just "not allow you freedom of movement", otherwise known as imprisonment?

        See that's the thing - freedom of speech and freedom of association is kind of a big deal in this country (and many others as well). You might have heard of a little thing called the First Amendment and the Constitution?

        You don't get to decide to suspend constitutional rights exercised in support of groups you don't like. If people want to have a rally in favor of the KKK or ISIS, they can have their rally. They can't funnel money to terrorist organizations - that's a crime, but you don't get to lock people up or declare them noncitizens of their own country simply because they voiced their support of an odious group.

        •  If we're bombing and droning ISIS (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          marina, G2geek

          and Al Queda in Iraq, AfPak, Yemen, etc. then why would we let them hold rallies back in our countries?  

          •  The. Constitution. (14+ / 0-)
            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
            Notice how it doesn't say "the freedom of speech so long as it is not in support of bad people or murderers or people with whom we are at war or....." It just says freedom of speech.

            That's what is so amazing about our Constitution. It's beautiful in its recognition that the people in power don't get to pick and choose which groups or persons are allowed to have free speech - we all have it, no matter what our political bent may be. And that's the only way it can work, otherwise the people in power would stay that way by clamping down on the speech of the people against them.

            You don't like the fact that people are rallying in favor of ISIS? Lots of people don't like the Westboro Church members showing up at funerals, but rather than trying to limit their speech, people do things like holding counter rallies and blocking them from view of the funeral goers by wearing those big white angel wings.

            In other words, you win the argument by the better exercise of your own right to free speech rather than by trying to take away someone else's rights.

            •  The Westboro nuts are home grown. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              ISIS and other radical islamists are coming in from outside the country. That's a big difference, IMO.

              •  Well, we're lumping together many things. (10+ / 0-)

                I think we have to distinguish between US citizens and people immigrating to this country. We also have to distinguish between people who are members of ISIS (and who would admit they are a member of a terrorist organization as they apply for a Visa or green card?) or people deemed to be "too supportive of radical Islam". I mean, I think everyone would probably agree it is ok not to allow known members of terrorists organizations into the country, but beyond that, how do you draw the line on who is supporting ISIS? It seems like it would lend itself to a McCarthy-style slide into ugliness.

                I'll be honest - I read your diary as sort of sweeping up Muslims of these various groups up into one group and declaring they are all dangerous, they cannot be allowed to exercise free speech - the Muslims are dangerous!!! But it is late for me and maybe I'm reading too much into it.

                •  Let me just add this: (8+ / 0-)

                  I know it may be a little cheesy, but I love this speech. It gets to the heart of what I believe is true about our country and our Constitution.

                  For those that don't want to play the clip:

                  President Andrew Shepherd: For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was, to a certain extent, about character, and although I have not been willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character.

                  For the record: yes, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU. But the more important question is why aren't you, Bob? Now, this is an organization whose sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights, so it naturally begs the question: Why would a senator, his party's most powerful spokesman and a candidate for President, choose to reject upholding the Constitution? If you can answer that question, folks, then you're smarter than I am, because I didn't understand it until a few hours ago.

                  America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free".

                  I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.

                  You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character. And wave an old photo of the President's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism and you tell them, she's to blame for their lot in life, and you go on television and you call her a whore. Sydney Ellen Wade has done nothing to you, Bob. She has done nothing but put herself through school, represent the interests of public school teachers, and lobby for the safety of our natural resources. You want a character debate, Bob? You better stick with me, 'cause Sydney Ellen Wade is way out of your league.

                •  for which purpose we have other means. (0+ / 0-)

                  Clearly nobody is going to declare their membership in AQ or ISIL when they apply for a visa.

                  Therefore we have to have ways of finding out.

                  For example various NSA programs that have lately been subject to much criticism in these pages.

                  Someone applies for a visa, and writes that they like puppies.  NSA searches their stuff and discovers that they like puppies for carrying hand grenades onto buses.  Visa denied.  

                  We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                  by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:11:47 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Westboro Baptist (0+ / 0-)

              isn't recruiting for groups that behead people and bury them alive. At least, not that we know of.

          •  there is precedent (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Throw The Bums Out

            why deport?

            Internment camps served a purpose for the Japanese some time ago.

          •  Where that concept leads (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Detention facilities - like for citizens of Japanese and German descent in WWII

            “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

            by Catte Nappe on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 09:22:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  "My speech trumps your dead kid." (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Or more to the point, "My speech trumps your decapitated kid."

          Sorry folks, but the 1st is no more or less sacred than the 2nd.

          When terrorists twist a constitutional right into a means of inflicting murder on innocent people, directly or indirectly, whether at Wal Mart or at a women's clinic, or somewhere out of sight, it's time to put the brakes on.  

          Germany has laws forbidding advocacy of Naziism and Holocaust denial, and nobody in their right mind would argue that those laws have made Germany an un-free country.

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:41:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Bullshit. (8+ / 0-)

            Do not try to smear me with that odious argument.

            If my speech caused the death of your child, then we can have a conversation about restricting my speech. If I directly incite a murder or a terrorist act, then my speech is criminal and I am all for trying such to a jury. There can and should be reasonable limits on what qualifies under free speech, including restrictions on calls for violence, and time, place and manner restrictions.

            But don't try to lump in my defense of Free Speech with gun enthusiasts who refuse to accept any regulation on their right to be part of a well regulated militia.

            The First and Second Amendments are quite different animals textually and as interpreted in case law. And my argument was nothing at all like the "my right to have a gun is more important than your dead child" argument.

            •  smear you? dude, it's not personal. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Richard Villiers, marina

              1)  Under present US law, it's virtually impossible to prosecute speech as incitement.  The relevant case law is the Brandenburg decision.  As the late Ben Masel used to say when I argued this with him in these very pages years ago, the legal standard for incitement is imminent threat, operationalized as "There he is!  Get him now!"  Anything that is not "imminent" does not qualify.  "Wherever he is, get him a year from now!" isn't legally actionable.  

              2)  Reasonable limits on speech in the US, would entail overturning Brandenburg.  As the person who originated the theory of "stochastic terrorism," I've thought this through in detail.  The standard needs to be 'clearly foreseeable, with a reasonable person test."  But that is exactly my point with regard to "my rights trump your dead kid."  That blunt little phrase describes the present legal situation in the US.

              3)  Like it or not, the defense of rights as "unlimited" is isomorphic regardless of whether it pertains to speech or firearms or anything else.  Those who stand for unlimited 1st A rights, stand on the same ground as those who stand for unlimited 2nd A rights.  OTOH if you accept the premise that rights can reasonably be limited where they infringe upon the rights of others, then in fact we agree.

              4)  Sure the 1st and 2nd are different animals textually and as interpreted in case law.  But the trend of case law is to de-limit both, thus giving rise to "open carry" and to stochastic terrorism, with dead bodies as the consequence of both.  This trend also conveniently serves the purposes of the oligarchy, a) in building an unlimited Mighty Wurlitzer of propaganda such as hate-talk radio & TV, and b) in building movements such as Sovereign Citizens that can be used to commit violence against minorities and against government.  The two go together "hand in gland."


              Now as it turns out, someone who commented below, has a great solution to all of this: the European declaration of rights includes something we don't have (yet!) in the US Constitution, which is the principle that none of the enumerated rights may be construed to deny others their own rights, such as by advocating unlawful violent acts against particular individuals or groups.  

              To my mind, that solves it.  We need a Constitutional amendment based on that European wording.  That would put the hate-talkers and the open-carriers both out of business.  

              We got the future back. Uh-oh.

              by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:48:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Dude? Perhaps "Dude-ette"... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                cenphx is a woman

                And I've ALWAYS hated that comeback, it really seems like a put-down, and it detracts (and DISTRACTS) from the conversation

                "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

                by leftykook on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 05:28:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  I think there is a huge difference between (4+ / 0-)

            citizens and residents and the tourist recruiters you are talking about.

            I'm pretty sure I'm OK with terrorism recruitment tours getting shut down, or preferably not allowed to start, but I'm not OK with deporting citizens for speech and political beliefs based upon something as nebulous and fuzzy as "support for terrorists".

            I mean the US Government was supporting ISIS a few months ago. So were our "Allies" in the region.

            Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

            by k9disc on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:29:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  myth alert! (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              k9disc, leftykook, aimeehs

              The US & allies were not supporting ISIS, we were supporting other groups in Syria that were not ISIS, and were very much weaker and less well-known than ISIS.  

              As I interpret the whole "deportation" thing, clearly it's not about deporting citizens from their own countries (which isn't even possible); it's about deporting foreigners who come in on what you so aptly described as "terrorism recruitment tours."

              We got the future back. Uh-oh.

              by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:02:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I don't know how much of a myth that is. (4+ / 0-)

                You funnel weapons and violence into a region and it's not very precise, I'd imagine.

                I got the gist of the deportation distinction from the thread.

                Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                by k9disc on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:44:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  ideal case: disarm the entire region. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  k9disc, mosesfreeman, marina

                  If people want to fight genocidal tribe-wars for medievalist interpretations of religion or any other belief-system, they should be fighting with medievalist weapons.

                  Therefore, clean-sweep the place for anything beyond the level of swords and shields, and then we can stay out of it while they beat each other and eat each other.

                  However in a practical sense that isn't possible, since the place is already infested with everything short of atomic bombs, plus or minus someone stealing one from Pakistan.

                  In which case the only option left is to provide whatever assistance is needed to fend off a genocidal threat.  For the most part that means air cover and intel support for Turkish, Kurdish, and Iranian ground forces.

                  ISIL has accomplished one "good thing," which is to get the US and Iran cooperating, and Turkey and the Kurds cooperating.  Hopefully that leads to better relations all round, and an independent Kurdish state, after this is over.

                  We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                  by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:45:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I agree on your closing graph for sure. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    G2geek, mosesfreeman

                    I just don't see the threat coming out of there being appreciably greater if we are not there in a military capacity.

                    I agree with providing assistance, by all means. It's just the military stuff that I find counter productive.

                    I'd like to see the region fix this for themselves, but current realpolitik says keep these beasts at each other's throats and play them off each other, going on about 100 years of that now.

                    I'd really like to see us step back and support instead of lead in the ME.  

                    Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                    by k9disc on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 01:29:06 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  support = lead. solution: Feminism. (5+ / 0-)

                      He who provides clean drinking water, rules.

                      There is no disengaging from this, as I said, any sociopath can whip up a plague, and mark my words, it will happen if this shit continues for another decade or at most two.  We will either see change in our lifetime, or we will see an terrorist-designed global pandemic.

                      If the world basically locked down immigration from the entire Middle East, aside from humanitarian refuge such as women escaping from any misogynist hellhole in the region, that might create a pressure cooker effect that forces a solution internally.  But the problem with that is, locking down immigration and then letting them fight it out, only sets up a Darwin trap where the most ruthless tend to win.

                      There is one thing we can learn from Saudi in this.  Saudi funds the "Islamic schools" that propagate the Wahhabi heresy and inculcate children in hatred of Jews and others.  The Christian equivalent would be the Dominionist academies in the US that train up the next crop of anti-abortion terrorists.

                      What we can learn from that is, funding schools is a method for teaching values.  And that promoting cultural values is the way to change cultures.  It has worked for the Saudis in spreading the Wahhabi heresy.  It can work for us in spreading cultural values that are compatible with life in the modern world.

                      I have the very strong intuition about this, that promoting feminism is the key to the proverbial kingdom.  Equality for women throughout the region, will break these violent ideologies permanently.  That is where we should be placing our effort.  All US aid contingent upon full legal and cultural equality for women, and no compromises.  And pour on the feminist ideology in all forms and via all available outlets.

                      The most egregious problem in the region is what I call, with only a slight degree of rhetorical excess, "the female holocaust."  In almost all of those cultures and regimes, females are property, owned first by their fathers, then sold into "marriages" that are de-facto slavery, and owned by their "husbands."  Very often, pre-adolescent girls are sold off to men who are old enough to be nearly their grandfathers.  And at the slightest assertion of their own will as human beings, any female can be killed, legally, for the "honor" of the male who owns them.   That situation is already a human rights atrocity on a nearly Hitlerian scale, minus only the elements of mass murder and racial genocide.  

                      To be very clear about this, in my moral calculus the supreme evil is extinctionism, such as being practiced by climate denialists now that science has asserted the clear warning that global climate change could render humanity extinct within the next 200 years.  To my mind, that situation justifies the same measures as were justified in dealing with the Nazis, but more so.  

                      The next level down on the scale of evil, is occupied equally by genocide and slavery.  That would include the Nazis, and it would also include the USA for genocide of First Nations peoples and enslavement of African peoples.  But the facts of genocide and slavery in the history of the USA and Germany et. al., do not forfeit the moral legitimacy of those who came after those evils were abolished.  The sin is of those who committed the evil, and does not pass to subsequent generations.

                      The Middle Eastern situation of the enslavement of virtually the entire female population of the region, falls under that heading of the evil of slavery.  And that sin and that evil are presently status-quo in much of the region.  

                      Minus the female holocaust, the rest of the region's problems boil down to run-of-the-mill despotism, corruption, and miscellaneous human rights violations of the kind that are already common across much of the Earth's land mass.  Those issues we already know how to solve, witness South Korea's transformation from a despotism to a democracy.

                      So for all of those reasons, to my mind Job #1, after dealing with the immediate emergency of ISIL, or better yet coterminous with it, is to infuse the region with the strongest possible dose of feminism.  Once that takes hold, thorough change is inevitable, and peace and human rights will become the norms.

                      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                      by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 02:26:20 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I agree on feminism being the answer. I really (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        marina, G2geek

                        should do some study. What I have read has been very enlightening regarding biases and power disparity.

                        I think that has to be demonstrated, not taught. I don't think you can teach a culture to change. They have to be exposed to it and except it.

                        I can't think of a better start or a greater gift than water. We should be working full tilt on desalination for the region, and we should give it to them.

                        Give them water in exchange for keeping a bunch of their oil in the ground. It should be a win win. Still have valuable resources, don't have the global pissing match in your front yard, and you get water.

                        Pipe dream, though... Trillions more for war for the resource that is going to cause the extinction of the human race.

                        Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                        by k9disc on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:04:31 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  ooh, nice! excellent in fact! (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          Water in exchange for keeping the oil in the ground.  Brilliant.  A complete win/win solution.

                          That in turn requires energy in huge quantities, of the kind that would normally call for nuclear reactors.  And while thorium reactors are a potential solution, they are also more than a decade away.  

                          However, this is a job for which solar is also supremely suited and readily available.  Solar thermal to boil the water, to take out the salt and also destroy any bacteria and viruses.  Solar thermal is the simplest technology in the entire renewable repertoire.

                          This could also potentially solve the I/P problem: create a New Palestine in a desert that's made to bloom with the trees and crops grown with the solar-desalinated water.  There is more than enough desert right now to do that.  

                          All it takes is the will.

                          As for those trillions, the companies whose snouts are in that feeding-trough don't care whether they're producing weaponry or energy infrastructure.  Money is money.  Give them the contracts, with strict quality control provisions, and they'll be on-side for the project.

                          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                          by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:30:00 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  about demonstrating equality: (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          We already do that, with our very presence in those parts of the world.  

                          There was a blog post by someone in the military during one of our recent engagements over there, saying that one of the locals was shocked that he took orders from a women (who was his commanding officer).  

                          The fact that you can have a capable fighting force in which women have command authority, was a complete paradigm-breaker for the locals who observed it.  If only their wives and daughters had seen that!

                          But there are strong forces that mightily resist "Westernization" as they call it, and at some point we have to tackle them head on, and call them out in no uncertain terms. That point would be reached when there is sufficient feminist education on the ground, that women in large numbers are demanding equal rights.  The move by Saudi women to demand the right to drive automobiles, is one example of something we could support in the context of equality for women.  As with Obama's role in marriage equality, one needs to know when the time is right for a small nudge to tip the situation into a large change.

                          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                          by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:43:30 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  I think I agree with you about working (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        marina, G2geek

                        the angle of women's empowerment.  The lack of human rights for women in fundamentalist Islamic countries is deeply shocking and inhumane.  Often I find myself wondering why the West looks the other way… is it their oil that we value more?  Probably.    

                        It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                        by Radiowalla on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 07:02:03 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  and also because of... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          ... the history of misogyny in Western cultures.  We are less than 50 years away from the times of "coverture," the pernicious legal doctrine that when a women was married, her own legal existence was subsumed under (vanished into) that of her husband.  

                          And also because a slow-motion holocaust that is not accompanied by an attack on other countries, is something that can easily fade into the background as "just the way it is."

                          And also because the nature of it includes some things that, regardless of Western misogyny, are so shocking to our own sensibilities, that we would rather not face them.  Get on and keyword search "dancing boys" and "child brides," and step away from the keyboard if you find yourself needing to throw up or tempted to advocate extralegal violence.  For me, that stuff blasts right past my pacifism limits, so it takes serious self-control to not say something bannable when I write about it here.  

                          In any case, we should be bombarding the Middle East with the equivalents of Radio Free Europe and other outreach we did for Eastern Europe during the era of the evil Soviet empire.  The internet is useful but not the only tool in the tool kit.  It may take a generation or longer to have an effect, but as with the end of the Soviet empire, there will eventually be an end of the empire of male enslavement of girls and women.

                          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                          by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:37:20 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

          •  New gun-nut argument? Guns are like speech? (nt) (0+ / 0-)

            reality based, not really biased

            by NE2 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:32:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  no, you've got it reversed. (0+ / 0-)

              Speech is like guns, if it causes people to get killed.

              Dead is dead is dead.

              The position that rights are unlimited regardless of consequences is an extremist position, whether the rights in question are under the 1st A or the 2nd A.

              We got the future back. Uh-oh.

              by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:40:17 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Guns don't cause people to get killed. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                They kill people, full stop. I'm not sure if this is a better or worse argument than guns are like cars, but it's about as dumb.

                reality based, not really biased

                by NE2 on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:09:03 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  incomplete grasp of causality. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  leftykook, marina

                  There's a shotgun in the window, pointed at a city street below.  There's a string attached to the trigger.  How long does that string have to be, before someone can pull it, and not be guilty of, at minimum, negligent homicide?

                  Glenn Beck's rants incited a man to shoot five Pittsburgh PA cops, killing three, wounding two.  

                  Glenn Beck's subsequent rants incited another man to attempt to drive to the Tides Foundation in San Francisco with the intent of killing as many people there as he could.  Fortunately he was stopped by the California Highway Patrol.  Unfortunately he shot and wounded two cops.  Fortunately they managed to take him into custody.  Even better, he was finally sentenced to 450 years in prison.  

                  As they say in the Air Force, once is a tragedy, twice is enemy action.  Did Beck stop after the first time one of his fans shot five cops?  No, he kept doing the same thing, and another of his fans shot two more cops, and would have shot up an office full of people if he hadn't been stopped.

                  How long was that string?  Long enough to get from the shooters' hands to Glenn Beck's mouth.

                  As far as the victims and their families are concerned, that string was plenty long enough.  

                  Enough is enough.  Enough was enough long ago, and it still is.  

                  Germany is not a despotism because it has laws banning Nazi speech.  The US will not become a despotism for adopting the European standard whereby the limits of rights are to not violate the rights of others.  

                  Any more than the US would become communist for adopting the European or Canadian standard of single-payer or public health insurance.

                  Slippery slopes indeed.

                  We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                  by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:26:43 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  You have to wait until they commit a crime (10+ / 0-)

        Speech alone isn't enough, unless it's incitement or something.

        Freedom of thought, speech and movement should be respected in the absence of a crime.

        … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

        by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:04:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  see my comment under "smear you?".... (0+ / 0-)

          ... for more on the subject of "incitement."

          In point of fact, under current US law, it's practically impossible to prosecute speech that leads to murder, unless the speech is "imminent" such as "There he is! Get him now!"

          "Wherever he is, get him later!" isn't prosecutable.

          See also the Brandenburg decision.  I've debated this topic many times.

          That has to change or we are going to devolve into a Hobbesian nightmare of large proportions.

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:17:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think this is about deporting your own... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... citizens.  That isn't even possible without first revoking their citizenship.  

      In the US, individuals can also forfeit their citizenship by swearing allegiance to a hostile foreign force, such as by putting on a Nazi uniform in WW2 or joining Al Qaeda in recent years (e.g. al-Awlaki).

      Once someone is stripped of their citizenship, they can be deported to the hostile country (or subnational group's territory) to which they had sworn allegiance.

      But that's not what's being proposed here.

      What diarist appears to be promoting is to deport foreigners who go into the Netherlands to recruit for ISIS.

      There shouldn't even be any controversy about that.  If they are foreign nationals, they can be sent back to wherever they came from.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:07:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And you cant revoke peoples citizenship. (6+ / 0-)

        for better or worse, ISIS supporters are our own people. (I´m European). One couldnt have solved the original Nazi problem either by simply declaring 30% of Germans noncitizens. Or, not while staying a liberal society. This is simply an impossible approach to the problem.

        it is also not "foreigners". Face it, 10% of the Dutch population are muslims. Those people were not here 50 yrs ago, but now they are here, and are as much part of us as all those Americans are part of the US who hadnt been there too not long ago.

        At a time on the height of the Cold War, 20% of Italians were Communists. and then too calls for deportation went up. Had that been heeded that would have been the end of freedom and the end of Italy as a civilized state.

        •  i can't speak for Europe. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mosesfreeman, marina

          It may be that European countries have no mechanism for revoking citizenships, even when you're at war and citizens of a given country swear allegiance to a hostile country.  I don't know how European law functions.

          In the US we have those very narrow provisions for revoking citizenship.  

          If only our major competition in the world right now was from Communists!  At least they were rational people in the sense of being death-averse rather than viewing suicide terrorism as a ticket to a pleasant hereafter.

          I have to assume that in the years following WW2, part of the way of dealing with the Nazi problem was to educate children as to the evils of Naziism and that becoming a Nazi was 100% socially unacceptable with zero exceptions.  

          The same case should apply with regard to the ideologies that presently make for terrorism.  Al Qaeda and ISIL are not equivalent to Islam in general.  They are heretical to Islam, they besmirch Islam by associating it with something that raises a sense of fear rather than a sense of peace and mutual good will.  

          One of the root problems is that Saudi funding and influence are rampant in Islamic schools, including teaching hatred for Jews and others.  This has to be stopped.  Saudi is not a friendly influence in the world, any more than Francisco Franco's Falangists in Spain were a welcome or friendly influence.  

          If it's possible to keep overt Naziism out of the schools, even private schools, then it should be possible to keep the Wahhabi heresy and its hateful propaganda out of the schools as well.  The world only lets Saudi get away with this shit because of the global addiction to oil.  That, as well as climate change, should be taken as an incentive to "kick the habit" and move to clean energy.  

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 01:36:52 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well the biggest problem is that there are various (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            conventions and treaties that make it hard if not impossible to revoke citizenship if it would leave that person stateless.  To be specific, a bunch of stuff related to the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.  So if they had dual citizenship then it could probably be done but not otherwise.

            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

            by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 02:35:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  whatever the local laws provide. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I don't pretend to be an expert on European or international law.  In general there should be plenty of options in any country, to deal with terrorists, including recruiters for terrorist groups.  

              First option: prosecute, convict, sentence to prison.

              Second option: if foreign national, deport.

              Third option: prisoner of war until cessation of hostilities.

              Fourth option: under combat conditions, military target.

              The item about deportation becomes a source of confusion when it's discussed without reference to whether the suspect is a domestic citizen or a foreign national.

              We got the future back. Uh-oh.

              by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:33:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Also, what country would take them? (0+ / 0-)

              when you strip your own citizens of their citizenship for alleged or real crimes, what other country is going to take them?

              Happy just to be alive

              by exlrrp on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 07:20:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Who asked for those 20% Italian Communists (0+ / 0-)

          to be deported? From where to where?

          We know a hell of a lot, but we understand very little. Manfred Max-Neef

          by mimi on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 10:31:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  No, ISIS is really cool, (4+ / 0-)

    especially when they behead people and put their heads on stakes.

    Why is ISIS so misunderstood?

    < /sarcasm >

    -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

    by sunbro on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:08:06 PM PDT

  •  ISIS is a criminal gang (7+ / 0-)

    They are dedicated to murder, terrorism and enslavement.
    There's more to life than money!

  •  Keep your friends close (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    keep your enemies closer.

  •  I see it as better than the alternative (4+ / 0-)

    I would absolutely let them rally and use it as an opportunity to figure out who the organizers are for counter intelligence infiltration (must be done while respecting their basic rights).  

    I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

    by DavidMS on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:17:10 PM PDT

  •  ISIS are loco (7+ / 0-)

    but I am not worried that they are going to get a foothold here and start beheading and enslaving people right and left. I don't think there is much chance they're going to win a lot of adherents in this country.

    •  They alienate people wherever they go (2+ / 0-)

      Even the idiots that greet them with open arms have had enough of them in a couple of weeks. The only way they can stay popular is to keep moving.

      … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

      by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:11:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  this i wonder about. (1+ / 0-)

        in the areas they control, if you are right, they would have to be really unpopular already. If so, they would have to expend more and more energy just to stay in power which would have to make them weaker and weaker and give hope that they eventually will be rolled up from the outside.

        But, I wonder whether they really are getting unpopular where they rule. You say so and I hear it, but I´d like to see some .. eventlike .. evidence of it.

    •  they don't need a major foothold: only a... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sandbox, marina

      ... handful of adherents who are willing to commit suicide while taking out a bus-load or a train-load or a plane-load of innocent people.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:43:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I noticed that they were complaining about their (7+ / 0-)

    youths being detained for a mere 15 hours. It appears by their statements that the Dutch authorities are in alert and are taking some action.

    As for a general witch hunt to deport ISIS supporters how would the Dutch authorities distinguish between Muslims who are not in support of ISIS and those who are?

    A million Arcosantis.

    by Villabolo on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:22:07 PM PDT

    •  That's the issue (7+ / 0-)

      That's why no one should be deported in the absence of a crime.

      Remember Emma Goldman? Back in the day, they said she supported murder, robbery, mayhem, depravity etc. She was deported.  She was an anarchist, but not exactly guilty of what was put forth. Guilt by association isn't enough.

      If they commit a crime though, throw the book at them.

      … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

      by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:29:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  for this we have wiretaps... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... or more to the point, Prism and similar bulk collection & processing programs.  

      And it's as easy to separate Islamic terrorists from innocent Muslims, as it is to separate Christian terrorists such as Operation Rescue from innocent Christians.  

      Think about this: visit a few hundred church web pages and then visit some extreme religious right pages belonging to groups such as Operation Rescue and their spawn, and you can spot the differences easily.

      Same case applies to dealing with this kind of thing in the Muslim universe.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:46:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If the Klan can march in parades... (15+ / 0-)

    why can't a group of people demonstrate peacefully for their own fucked up, amoral beliefs?

    I loathe ISIS and all they stand for and do...but I also appreciate that we are part of our own atrocities against humankind that understandably result in extreme reactions. The first amendment is difficult...but it affords us the opportunity to fight back with ideas and facts. Much better to fight the war of ideas rather than dismemberment.

    •  The way I see it is why allow (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      marina, G2geek, MugWumpBlues

      individuals into our country who hate us and our way of life.  Why allow them in?

      •  That is a (10+ / 0-)

        somewhat different question. We pick and choose who is allowed to immigrate legally. Failing to select ISIS adherents is a little different than deporting those who may have been here 25 years and could have US born children, spouses, etc.

        •  Sedition is sedition (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          G2geek, Radiowalla, marina

          If people believe their religious group is being discriminated against unless they have control over others, seems to me that violates the equality laws Holland places on its citizens.    Even worse are the groups who believe force is necessary. There are already examples of Muslims allowed to immigrate to Holland killing journalists; in Germany a Yazadi family honor killed their own daughter for the crime (according to their religion) of marrying outside their race, in the reported case a German man.

          Basically separation of church and state requires the something along the lines of the following:  your group prays in your church; their group prays in their church; individuals can pray as they want (or not), join any church they want, etc; none of em get the right to kill others or use government force on the others.

          If people use "religion" or some other excuse not to play by these rules of equality, recognition and respect for other's rights, IMO they should not be allowed in or kicked out.   Refusing to agree to these rules shows that there is a really good chance they will cause trouble; even worse are the one who lie and promise to play by those rules then claim special circumstances warrant some other set of rules.   They want the benefits and refuse the burdens. In short, cheaters.  Who needs' em.  Let em fight it out wherever they came from.

          “Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers

          by MugWumpBlues on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:43:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  amen to that. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mosesfreeman, Radiowalla, marina

            And it should also be made clear to immigrants from countries where those practices ("honor" killings etc.) occur, that those practices are not tolerated in civilized countries, and will result in full criminal penalties including life in prison without parole.

            Or to put it more bluntly, people from cultures that are bloody with misogyny should be warned, personally and in no uncertain terms, that when they move to the civilized world, their wives and daughters are now persons, not property, and if they don't like it they can go back to the caves.  

            Let me be very clear about this:

            Cultural relativism is bullshit.  A dead girl is a dead girl, and "being from a different culture" does not make her any less dead, or make her death any less painful, or make it any more acceptable.  

            The price of admission to the civilized world, including the price of access to the civilized world's benefits such as international trade and modern technology, must be to give up brutalist primitive practices such as treating other people as a form of property.  

            What this particular culture war boils down to is whether males have an unlimited right to treat females as reproductive accessories who can be used like slaves and murdered if they refuse.  And the answer to that is not just NO, but HELL NO!

            The fundamental human right of women to live without fear of murder, comes before any right of males to treat females as vessels for their precious seed.

            Those who don't like it can go back to living in caves.  

            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:30:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  I'm sure that is what.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        a certain group of West Bank residents ask about a certain group of illegal settlers every single day!

    •  Do we have time? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sandbox, G2geek

      While we entertain ideas and words of persuasion, real people are actually being dismembered.

      •  another commenter on another blog... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ... came up with a phrase for that.

        People who sit around and speculate while others are being slaughtered, he called "white wine dribblers."  I'm not sure what kind of dribbling he meant, whether it's dribbling the wine out of the bottle into the glass, or dribbling it down their chins, but if nothing else it's an evocative image.

        If anyone here objects to besmirching an innocent beverage over the behavior of some of its aficionados, we can just use the word "dribbler," and it'll do;-)

        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:32:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  First world privilege nt (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          •  OK, but "dribbler" is more specific. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Or at least it's a neologism that can be given a specific definition: a member of a privileged elite who fails to grasp the gravity of a situation faced by others in less fortunate circumstances.

            "First World privilege" cuts with too blunt an axe.  Working class Americans don't exactly have it easy, and if they're living in Detroit, about 17,000 of them were denied access to clean water, which puts Detroit on the same level of primitivism as any part of the Third World where there is not an accessible clean public water supply.

            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

            by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:37:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  IMHO the Klan should also be prohibited... (0+ / 0-)

      ... from marching in parades or even conducting meetings and recruitment drives.

      The only reason to tolerate those groups existing, is as honeypots: to use them for intel tracking purposes, to keep track of individuals who hold the beliefs that make for terrorist acts.

      It's easier to keep track of individuals who are part of identified groups, than to spot every potential lone wolf in the absence of such groups.

      That, to my mind, is the only justification for letting them exist and letting them speak, publish, and recruit: to make it easier to collect intel and investigate them, and catch the ones who commit violent acts.

      Otherwise, it's "My speech trumps your dead kid."  That worked out real well for the 2nd amendment too.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:53:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If the Klan were presently (0+ / 0-)

      abducting and killing people, they would be actual criminals or co-conspirators.

  •  We allowed the teabaggers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sandbox, G2geek

    to have their free speech, and even laughed at them. Well, they're now in Congress and have caused not just obstruction but a reversal of rights.

    I don't think ISIS or any other such dangerous group should be permitted to brainwash any more desperate youths into their monstrous cult.

    I believe in free speech for most people, but when they have proven themselves so deadly, I want them removed from society.

    A nice long vacation on a remote, barely-above-sea-level island for all of them.

    •  How will you distinguish them from other Muslims? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Samer, marina

      A million Arcosantis.

      by Villabolo on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:42:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You talk to the guys in the video (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sandbox, G2geek

        Who seem pretty obvious. Use only the most ethical, stringent standards to focus on individuals. Speak out and oppose their speeches, often and everywhere.

        From there, I don't know. I'm not qualified to be president either.

        Given the broad destabilization of the Middle East, their followers will only grow in number--and strength, if they happen to recruit experts in high tech and weaponry, explosives, etc.

        It seems reckless to allow this group to fester in the open, and by our silence give consent. Will we look back and think how blind we were to not recognize their threat? How can we not recognize it when the proof lies all over Iraq?

        •  Yea, better for it to fester in the dark... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I disagree. They are odious and everybody knows it. Nobody is buying it.

          Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

          by k9disc on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:34:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  400 Brits and 500 Germans bought it. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            k9disc, marina

            Per reputable estimates, those are the numbers of recruits from each of those countries, on the ISIL recruiting tour.  

            I have not seen numbers of Americans, but I would guess somewhere between 100 and 1000, which is a shitty guess but it'll do for now.  Some of them will probably attempt to commit mass-murder terrorist acts in the US.  I would predict about 6 months before the first such are caught by the FBI before they would otherwise have blown something up, and that's a pretty safe estimate.

            The way I'm seeing this, war is war, and recruiters for hostile foreign forces are agents of those forces, thereby subject to capture as POWs and detention for the duration of hostilities.

            The only reason to let any of them run around loose, is to use them as intel targets for catching the people they recruit, before scooping up the lot of them.

            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:37:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  It could be a challenge, however many (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mosesfreeman, G2geek

        of the worst radical islamists like ISIS, Al Queda, Boko Haram are proud of their murderous ideology so, when asked, will simply acknowledge their jihadi intent.

      •  the same way you distinguish Operation Rescue... (0+ / 0-)

        ... who are anti-abortion Christian terrorists, from innocent Christians.  

        Most of us on DK can spot the difference between Christian terrorists and innocent Christians.  It's not difficult.  Same case applies to the Muslim universe, and individuals who are trained to spot terrorist material there.

        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:49:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're over simplifying. I'm just (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          saying deport the worst of the worst_ISIS, AL Queda, Boko Haram, LET.  Yes, there can be civil liberty issues and I'm afraid if we don't as a society address the worst cases of radical islam now--the obvious cases--then the general public will start to lose confidence in our law enforcement. That's happening now in the EU and it's not a positive development.

          •  I don't think we disagree. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Someone, it may have been you, made the point that the rise of unchecked Islamic militants in Europe, may be causing the populations of certain countries to lose faith in the ability of their governments to protect them against terrorism.  And that in turn may be fueling the rise of extreme-right political parties, some of which (such as in Greece) are overtly for-real Nazis.  

            Anywhere Nazis appear, is an emergency by definition, like an Ebola outbreak or a wildland fire in a drought.  

            But I would differ with you as to causes.  From my analysis, the rise of extreme right-wing politics in the present era is driven largely by population/consumption overshoot of resources, and can be expected to get worse as climate change impacts worsen.  The extreme right wing stuff is nothing more or less than genetic and equivalent forms of tribalism enacted via politics.

            In any case, sudden or large influx of "a different tribe" who are out to attack "one's own tribe" produces support for fascist politics.  Therefore, if need be, we should address that factor in order to reduce the threat of fascist politics.

            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:54:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  and when we're done with ISIS (14+ / 0-)

    then we "get rid of" the next group, and the next...

    until "we" are the only ones left. And then we start in on each other.

    Dear NSA: I am only joking.

    by Shahryar on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:43:38 PM PDT

    •  That's the danger (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shahryar, Radiowalla, G2geek, slinkerwink

      we always have to try to avoid. But while we're tiptoeing around ISIS' freedom of speech, their cohorts are crudely ending any possibility of any kind of freedom for the people they are butchering.

      I'm kind of playing devil's advocate here. I don't have the answers. I just keep thinking, we see what's happening, why can't we stop it? Then I remember, we're not in charge.

      •  Freedom of speech is vital (6+ / 0-)

        but if they commit crimes here, arrest them. it's simple really.

        … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

        by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:32:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Tiptoe? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        k9disc, ask, marina, Radiowalla

        Who said anything about tiptoeing? Ridicule is freedom of speech too.

        I would goad these guys mercilessly. What are they going to do in Holland, shoot me? Anyhow, the moment they get aggressive...BAM, they're busted and deported.

        Ridicule works wonder for guys like this. They must be insecure anyhow, it would make them blow up quickly.

        Taunt them. If they hold their cool and commit no crimes... they probably fit in here. If they can't control themselves and attack in anger, arrest them and send them away.

        Easy litmus test.

        … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

        by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:39:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  agreed about ridicule. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          marina, mosesfreeman, Radiowalla

          Goad the hell out of them.  Be sure to wear a bullet-proof vest when doing so.  

          But one can never be so sure about those who keep their cool.  They may in fact be the most sociopathic of the lot, emotional flatliners who serve up revenge ice-cold.

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:41:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've been knocking heads with those types (0+ / 0-)

            for years, although less lately than when I was younger. I've been threatened numerous times, but 99% of their threats are empty. Theo van Gogh wasn't so lucky, but cases like that are outliers.

            They aren't used to being challenged, and can't really withstand it without losing their cool, for the most part.

            The flat-liners, yeah, those are the dangerous ones to root out.

            … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

            by mosesfreeman on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 07:09:37 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  How quickly those who suggest such… (7+ / 0-)

      …actions be taken against the pariah du jour forget about that little slippery slope thing.

      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

      by DeadHead on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:10:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Slopes are slippery by definition, you know? (7+ / 0-)

        So who decides what an ISIS supporter is? And what are you going to base that decision on?

        Is someone who disagrees with State policy on addressing ISIS a supporter?

        I've been called an Assad supporter, a Saddam supporter, an Ahmadinejad supporter, all in "good faith" by Democrats here.

        Not sure how that power is going to work across the political spectrum. It really borders on thought crime and could easily devolve into rank McCarthyism.

        That said, ISIS certainly is a despicable organization.

        Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

        by k9disc on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:35:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe the best plan (5+ / 0-)

          would be to capture the actual killers, then try them through a real court process. They would be found guilty before the world and hopefully their followers would fall away.

          Real criminals who have hurt people. No political prisoners.

          •  Easier said than done, I suspect. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            marina, k9disc

            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

            by DeadHead on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:55:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  their propagandists are part of the same... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ... hostile force-structure, just as if they were propagandists wearing Nazi uniforms in WW2.

            For which reason I would treat them as hostile combatants, and capture them as POWs to be held until the war is over (in other words until the rest of them in Iraq and elsewhere are either captured or killed in action).

            The ones who are captured and found at trial to have participated in atrocities and war crimes and the like, can be sentenced to prison at the Hague, which is also, conveniently enough, in the Netherlands.

            The way I would do this is to obtain a proper declaration of war against ISIL (as with Al Qaeda), then make an announcement that ISIL members will be treated as hostile combatants, and then just start rounding the fuckers up and putting them away.  Announce the totals on the news every month, to make clear that this is being done.

            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

            by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:02:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yea, I'm not a fan of that approach. I don't (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DeadHead, tardis10, marina

              think they really are our business, like America's business. They are a rag tag band of vicious killers that are getting ready to face off against Iranian Army. Let Iran, SA, and those countries deal with it.

              We keep striding around like everything is our business. It's not.

              Sensible police work, diplomatic assistance, a massive shift from blowing shit up to civilian problem solving infrastructure.

              Then we focus on making the world a better place and sidestep the cycle of violence. Global food, water, health, climate, space travel - you know, the future.

              We are killing the planet in this rat race. It's got to stop.

              An unending war on an unending list of "freedom fighters" and  "terrorists", bad guys, good guys, used to be bad guys who are now good guys, good guys gone bad - it is never going to stop.

              Nero was sane.

              We are Sisyphus creating and whacking moles while we assist in the burning of the world.

              Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

              by k9disc on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:45:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  we can agree about a bunch of that: (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                marina, Radiowalla

                Sensible police work, diplomatic assistance, civilian infrastructure, global food, water, health, climate, space travel, and stop killing the planet in a rat race.

                That's a pretty decent list.

                Where we differ is as to what to do with groups whose express purpose includes genociding others.  In this case, they are our business because we broke Iraq in the first place.  But in other cases they are our business because there is a generalized moral obligation to stop human rights atrocities from occurring.  And in other cases they are our business for reasons of legitimate self-defense: preventing terrorist attacks on domestic targets.  

                In a world where the blueprints for smallpox and 1917 flu have been open-sourced, and gene-printers can be bought on Ebay, any sociopath with a grudge can whip up a plague in a backyard shed and unleash a holocaust.  

                In that kind of world there is no such thing as isolationism.

                We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:52:30 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Applying pressure, the kind of pressure you (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  marina, G2geek, mosesfreeman

                  are talking about is global Israel.

                  How's that working out for them? What are the chances of mopping that shit up with current methods of operation.

                  I manipulate behavior all the time. And I know what the methodology of coercion and intimidation yield, and it's not stable. It's not predictable, and is most assuredly not the only methodology available.

                  Let the people of the ME deal with these people. Reduce forward deployed troops, and force the rest of the world to deal with their own problems when it comes to the threat of violence.

                  We should be delivering farming, renewables, and desalination on the civilian front, logistics, and infrastructure, on the military/state front.

                  Our companies could be creating these goods. We could turn into Global Problem Solver in a few years and be that shining city on a hill, and bring people up instead of shooting crabs in a bucket and burning the planet to a cinder.

                  And I get you on the realpolitik front, but that shit is for sociopaths. If the sociopaths stay in charge much longer Earth is doomed.

                  Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                  by k9disc on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:33:46 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  *Sigh* just a reminder here (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    G2geek, k9disc, mosesfreeman

                    that TPTB probably have a whole different way of looking at the situation. While we talk about human rights for all, they're talking about the grand chessboard.

                    •  They are not. They are talking about battle chess (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      mosesfreeman, marina, tardis10

                      or battle chess for profit for the various military industrial sectors.

                      These guys don't know what they are doing. They know what they have to do, but they don't know what they are doing, any more than you or I do.

                      They have the intel, they have more knowledge, etc, but they don't have a fucking clue. Situational awareness suffers during war, and these guys have been at war for a long time. Israel is a prime example.

                      The only thing to do is bomb and kill. That's always it. Put pressure on them, starve their people to make them stand up for themselves. That doesn't really work either, you know. That situation leads to learned helplessness and Stockholm Syndrome

                      They don't have a clue about how to solve the problems in our world. All they know how to do is beat people up and bully people with belligerent foreign policy.

                      That creates a punishment callous. It requires harsher and harsher corrections. It is why we are here right now, that stupid fucking chessboard that is violence only.


                      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                      by k9disc on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:48:10 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Meanwhile the auditorium burns around them. nt (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

                      by k9disc on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:50:55 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  However rounding up US citizens and locking (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DeadHead, tardis10, CenPhx

              them up based on secret evidence is such a huge slippery slope I doubt it is worth it.  Keep in mind that it took a 6 year, multi-million dollar lawsuit just for one person to get off the no fly list who was put on because of a typo.  Do you really want to have innocent people's lives ruined by being locked up indefinitely and of course even if they eventually do manage to successfully challenge their detention they will still end up out on the streets having lost everything they own with no hope of compensation.

              Though I am guessing you don't consider the japanese internment camps (including seizing their property help to pay for the camps) a mistake either.

              You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

              by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:05:07 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  clearly there have to be laws, standards, and... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                .... explicit procedures including full-on due process.

                The no-fly list was a travesty, and "disappearing" people to POW camps would be a bigger one.  

                The problem of "sources and methods" is very real, and calls for developing a way to bring classified intel into legal proceedings in such a manner that it can be challenged and cross-examined by the defense.  

                On the other hand, in the post-Snowden era where sources & methods have been exposed, there would be no harm done to just straight up say, "Yes, you were picked up in an NSA keyword search, and here are the emails you sent where you were applying for a slot in an ISIL training camp and declaring your allegiance to ISIL.  That makes you a hostile foreign combatant as charged in the indictment."  

                Re. Japanese internment camps: that kind of ad-hom dig is beneath you.  Don't even go there.  But if you want, I'll accuse you of supporting the KKK and Operation Rescue, and then we're even, OK?  Better yet, stick to debating the actual debate, rather than indulging in attempts to press buttons.

                We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:54:58 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  With regard to Japanese internment camps, that is (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  CenPhx, capelza, tardis10

                  pretty much EXACTLY what we are talking about here.  Mass roundups of people to put them into camps most likely based on an automated system's say so.  Also, what happens when the standard is changed so that opposing sending ground troops into Iraq is considered "support of ISIS"?  Of course, this would all be secret and there would be no effective due process, just like with the no fly list only worse.

                  Oh, and merely being able to challenge your detention afterwards is no help as you will end up homeless and penniless even if you win.   There is no way in hell the government is going to be willing to even try to fully make whole anyone who was detained wrongly even if they could.  After all, do you seriously think the government will carefully put all your stuff into storage just in case that happens?  Of course not, the cost would be enormous.

                  As for the NSA, why not open the system up entirely?  Just give everyone a potential criminal/terrorist score which is publicly available and if that score gets too high then either lock them up or summarily execute them even if they haven't done anything and haven't made any plans to do anything yet?  You could even call it the Sibyl Precrime System.

                  You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                  by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 01:06:37 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  don't double down on your weakest point. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    Really: Japanese internment camps?  Sorry but I won't take the bait.

                    As for your paranoia about all those consequences, do you have a Facebook account?  Did you have to sign one of those "agreements" with your boss to give him full "friend" privileges to see everything you write?  Or do you use Google Mail or Google Voice?  Do you know what "scraping" is?  How do you like the idea that they're not only reading every word of your every email, but also transcribing every word of your every phone call?  

                    Did you know that at least one credit agency right now will ding your credit rating if you "friend" too many people on Facebook who have poor credit ratings?  That's called "poor by association."  

                    And if you ask 1000 Americans whether they're more afraid of being rounded up by Homeland Security, or more afraid of losing their jobs, 999 of them will tell you they're more afraid of losing their jobs.  Which goes directly to the issue of "social" media and Big Data being used as the private sector Stasi to keep people in line.  Big Brother dressed up like a TV game show host.  More "prizes" and "rewards" for those who conform.  The friendly fascism of chirpy consumerism, a tyrant in a clown suit.

                    We've become a "watch what you say" culture, not because of NSA, but because of Facebook and Google, and cellphones with batteries that can't be removed.

                    You can call that the Sibyl Precrime System, and if you know anything about the kinds of AI research being sponsored by those companies, you'd see it was right on target.

                    You get to vote for your government.

                    You don't get to vote for the Boards of those corporations.

                    We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                    by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 01:56:27 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  So that is an excuse to start rounding people (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      CenPhx, capelza

                      up and putting them into camps like you propose?  After all, if you don't want the standard for being rounded up to be that you oppose a war you can always vote to ensure that doesn't happen, right?

                      Oh, and there will be no due process because there are only two ways to make what you propose work.  Either amend the constitution or declare martial law and suspend the constitution and amending it isn't going to happen.  So that leaves declaring martial law and suspending the constitution which means the legislature and the courts then have no say in the matter.

                      You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                      by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 02:12:19 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  whoa there: out of bounds: (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        "rounding people up and putting them into camps like you propose?"

                        I proposed no such thing, and that kind of vicious ad-hom is a candidate for HRs.  

                        But while we're on the subject of camps, check out who's in the homeless camps.  Plenty of people who were former members of the working class and middle class, many of whom were gainfully employed and even paying mortgages.

                        If you want to even talk about "camps," start with the "camps" created by the destruction of the working class and middle class, that have nothing to do with anyone joining Al Qaeda or ISIL.  

                        Yes, I want to amend the Constitution.  I want to specifically amend it per Mark Lippman's comment about the item in the European equivalent of the Bill of Rights: that no right enumerated in the document includes a right to violate the rights of others.  

                        That would solve for open carry and for stochastic terrorism and hate speech generally.  

                        Sorry if that's too bland to feed your preconceived notions of what I'm up to.

                        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                        by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 02:35:41 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yes you did. You said that you would "treat them (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          CenPhx, capelza, tardis10

                          as hostile combatants, and capture them as POWs to be held until the war is over (in other words until the rest of them in Iraq and elsewhere are either captured or killed in action)".  You even suggested using the NSA's systems to determine who to round up.  Sure, you mentioned some stuff about due process but people on the no-fly list and even in guantanamo have "due proccess" but look how much that has helped them.

                          You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                          by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 02:51:26 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I said "treat them as POWs," and you said... (0+ / 0-)

                            ... "put them in camps."

                            Would those happen to be FEMA camps by any chance?

                            Let's turn up the fevered imagination another degree or two Fahrenheit, shall we?

                            Gotta go, I hear black helicopters coming.

                            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                            by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 03:42:06 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well what else would you do with POWs if not (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            CenPhx, marina, capelza, tardis10

                            lock them up?  And given that we are talking about "supporters of ISIS" which depending on the definition used could number in the thousands or even tens of thousands I doubt there would be enough room in regular places such as Leavenworth for them so where would you put them?

                            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                            by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:52:22 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You are correct (0+ / 0-)

                            in that we always have to be mindful of due process and human rights. In this case we are considering whether to allow ISIS recruiters to continue to operate while their fellow believers commit actual crimes.

                            We're just brainstorming here, a privilege not many people have. It's not wrong to talk about ways to deal with violence, and everyone's input is important.

                            And keeping the thought that whatever we do to others, shall be done to us also.

                          •  Except that we can't do both as there is no way (0+ / 0-)

                            in hell that the constitution is going to be amended.  That means you and g2geek have two choices.

                            1.  Do nothing special.
                            2.  Call on Obama to declare martial law, suspend the constitution, and round up suspected ISIS supporters with little to no due process rights and put them into internment camps.

                            Those are your only two options, so which one will you and g2geek pick?

                            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                            by Throw The Bums Out on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 09:56:06 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I would pick due process (0+ / 0-)

                            according to the Constitution and legal precedent, and operating along the lines of our standing treaties, probably moreso than the present administration. And with less secrecy.

                            I suspect this administration already has its eyes on ISIS sympathizers, and will act when they have firm evidence of crimes, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, or will play it out longer in order to catch more criminals.

                          •  more pre-emptive defeatism: (0+ / 0-)

                            "there is no way in hell that the Constitution is going to be amended."

                            Yes there is, you start by introducing the Amendment in Congress, and then get it passed by the states, etc.

                            Along with which we should also bundle the Equal Rights Amendment, for gender equality.  Separate Amendment but while we're doing one, we can do the other.

                            As for "there is no way...", then why even bother hanging out on a site dedicated to change via political process?   Why not just either drink yourself into a stupor or go out and incite a riot?  

                            We got the future back. Uh-oh.

                            by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 04:18:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Surprisingly binary coming from you. (0+ / 0-)

                      Why are you clinging to the idea that Big Data Corp. and Big Government are separate? Because of elections vs. corporate ownership? Way,way weak tea.

                      "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

                      by tardis10 on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 07:05:19 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed. (6+ / 0-)

          I'm sure most would have no qualms with any number of reviled groups "going away."

          Neo-Nazis, the KKK, etc.

          But, as you say, who's who?

          And, on a whim, who's next?

          As for ISIS, I'll see your "despicable" and raise you "fucking barbarians."  

          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

          by DeadHead on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:54:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Just throwing ideas out there (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DeadHead, k9disc

        I have questions but no answers.

        •  Wasn't referring to you… (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Just in case you might've gotten that impression.

          I didn't see your comment (above mine) until after I posted.

          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

          by DeadHead on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:02:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  we don't have to start on each other (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      really, it's not inevitable.

    •  that's just silly. (0+ / 0-)

      A defined external enemy is not the same thing as a cultural auto-immune reaction.   In any case there are plenty of Democrats having cat-fights in these very pages, without need of any foreign enemies.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:40:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hey if they want to practice a medieval form (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marina, G2geek

    of their religion. Make them live it. Sorry no computers,internet, cell phones...hell, take away their cars and electricity.

    •  and toilets and toilet paper. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Really, you're on to something here.

      If someone wants to practice a medieval version of a religion, then they get medieval technology to go along with it.

      They can learn to wipe their poopy derrieres with their hands or whatever.  

      That, plus prison food that isn't refrigerated, might make the strongest case of all for modern beliefs.

      And they can have all those nice technologies back, just as soon as they renounce the medievalism.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:05:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I expect ISIS to be a vile 'flash in the pan' (7+ / 0-)

    The atrocities they have trumpeted will alienate most, and although the dream of a united Muslim 'caliphate', as in ancient times, draws many, the murderous, sadistic reality will turn nearly all 'off'.

    May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

    by oldcrow on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:50:17 PM PDT

    •  Agreed (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      marina, mosesfreeman

      They have had a phenomenally huge success due to brilliant organization and military strategizing but their barbarism is a tactical mistake that will do them in.

      A million Arcosantis.

      by Villabolo on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:34:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Their 'success' is due mostly to opportunism (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        G2geek, wu ming, mosesfreeman

        they got the support of a lot of pissed off/alienated Sunni groups in northern Iraq,(including many former Saddam  military officers) groups with their own agendas, and the self proclaimed 'caliph' has in the past, pissed off nearly everyone else around him, so, not brilliant anything.  

        May you live in interesting times--Chinese curse

        by oldcrow on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:45:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  i wouldn't call it brilliant. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mosesfreeman, marina

        Their military tactics are merely an update of Blitzkrieg adapted to Toyota trucks with mounted machine guns.

        After the combined allied forces (Kurdish, Turkish, Iranian, and US, among others) take out a few of ISIL's most-feared brigades, ISIL will be on its way out as an effective fighting force.

        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

        by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:09:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  On July 4th in Amsterdam (14+ / 0-)

    some ISIS nutjobs,of indeterminate nationalities, had a meagerly attended rally. On August 11 this fact so enflamed some at the GOS that they are willing to toss away the 1st Amendment and other civil protections.
    Interesting times indeedy.

    "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

    by tardis10 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 07:50:29 PM PDT

    •  This diary and its approving comments are (10+ / 0-)

      emblematic of the declining understanding in our nation of civil liberties and a lack of familiarity with the concept of unintended consequences. (And with this comment, I fully anticipate I'll be thought to be sympathetic to ISIS.)

      Just HOW do we get our representatives to move in a populist direction without threatening electoral consequences for their willful failure to do so? (This is the issue routinely avoided by party loyalists at the GOS.)

      by WisePiper on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:13:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You should consider that the (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        marina, Radiowalla, G2geek

        inability of EU countries (as the case above) to address the issue of radical islamists being allowed to flaunt their murderous ideology in public is a cause of the rise of right wing parties in those countries.  

      •  I'm expecting re-branding and a (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CenPhx, DaNang65, WisePiper, G2geek

        rewrite (reRight) sooner rather than later. Let civil rights become civilized rights ™! Or maybe such a thing won't even be necessary to free us of the yoke of constitutional protectionism.  

        "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

        by tardis10 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:49:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ooh, thanks for the meme. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          You might end up hating my guts for this, but "civilized rights" does a very good job of expressing my point.

          I do not believe in the "my rights trump your dead kid" school of civil liberties.  Whether it's 2nd Amendment rights or 1st Amendment rights.  

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:13:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hey there G2G. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Nice to see you.You are welcome for the meme as long as you promise to never reveal the source.
            & yeah, likely we come out on different sides re: radical speechifying. As for the 2nd Amendment,I think it an artifact of an earlier age,so there's that ;)

            "George RR Martin is not your bitch" ~~ Neil Gaiman

            by tardis10 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:20:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  hey there Tardis10. (0+ / 0-)

              Good to see you too, and not to worry, I don't disclose sources (or methods;-).

              As it turns out, there is another solution for this: see the comment below under the title "the EU members' Declaration of Rights is..." by Mark Lippman.

              Basically there's an item in the European bill of rights, that specifies that none of the enumerated rights can be used to deny the rights of another person or identifiable group.  

              We need that in the US Constitution.

              We got the future back. Uh-oh.

              by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:58:25 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Technically no, but they should be returned to (0+ / 0-)

    their beloved ISIS Caliphate.

    Out the back of a C130 without a parachute. Maybe if they grip the Flag reeeeeeal tight. ;)

    •  I would treat those demonstrators as... (0+ / 0-)

      ... agents of a hostile foreign force, and capture them as POWs, to be freed upon the cessation of hostilities.  Any who are found to have engaged in war crimes can be prosecuted accordingly.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:14:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  BTW, technically that comment... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radiowalla, marina

      ... violates site rules because it advocates extralegal killing.

      Killing them in combat is permissible under the laws of war, and advocating going to war against a foreign enemy is not a violation of site rules.  But once they're captured, air-dropping them sans parachute qualifies as a war crime.  

      I'm not sure if this rises to the level of being HR-able, but I'd suggest a different approach in the future.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 11:57:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Deportation is a penalty imposed on foreign guests (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sandbox, marina, G2geek, mosesfreeman

    by the host country.  I suppose each country reserves the right to deport anyone who doesn't meet whatever their guidelines are.

    Incitement to violence probably falls within the realm of undesirable behavior.  

    Since this happened in The Netherlands, you'd have to ask the question to the Dutch.

    The question I have really been asking myself is rather:  Where are the anti-ISIS demonstrations?  We have seen all manner of demonstrations here and across Europe re Gaza, but I am not aware of any public outrage over ISIS.  

    Why isn't ISIS generating any passion among our democracies?  

    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by Radiowalla on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 08:27:02 PM PDT

    •  People might be afraid to counter-demonstrate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      G2geek, Radiowalla

      but they shouldn't be, these guys are actually pansies.

      Give me an hour and I'll make at least one cry. LOL!

      … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

      by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:41:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  hell yeah and I'd happily join you. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Radiowalla, mosesfreeman

        You & I both agree that ridicule is a legitimate and highly useful weapon.

        Pantomimes of ISIS fighters being (is there a nice way to say this?) porked by Saudi princes, might be appropriate.  

        Anything that makes them out to be cowards for lopping off the heads of women & children, is fair game.  

        And since much of their conduct (kidnapping women and selling them) is a reflection of deeply misogynist attitudes that are ultimately based in "male prerogatives" about spreading their precious genes, mocking those precious genes is also fair game.

        "Look at my nose!  (holds up a hand-mirror) It's a beautiful nose!  Don't you agree?  See these fifteen women I have kidnapped?  (gestures toward an imaginary group of kidnapped women)  I have impregnated all of them (makes vulgar gesture), such a man am I!  Now there will be fifteen more children with my beautiful nose! (holds up hand-mirror again)"  That kind of thing.

        We got the future back. Uh-oh.

        by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:05:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  if there was an anti-ISIL demonstration... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radiowalla, mosesfreeman

      ... I would certainly go to it.  

      ISIL are the kind of evil that really does bear comparison to Nazis.  They need to be stopped, which means military action in Iraq to stop them.

      What also needs doing, is counter-demonstrating where ISIL are demonstrating.  And one of the most effective ways of dealing with religious fanatics, is with relentless ridicule.  

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:20:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The EU members' Declaration of Rights is (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marina, Radiowalla, sandbox, G2geek

    roughly equivalent to the US Bill of Rights but it has one extra article. It says that none of the rights enumerated can be used to infringe upon the rights of another individual. That acts as a guarantee of equal rights for all.

    In practice, it means that no one can use their freedom of speech to advocate the use of violence against another group or any individual or call for their death.

    The legal system leans toward protecting the rights of the persecuted, the real or potential objects of hatred and bigotry. They have a right to live in safety, free of intimidation and fear, like everyone does.

    The system does not obligate itself to protect the rights of those who don't respect it.

    •  From what you're saying it appears (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      there is no legal prohibition to deport ISIS and Al Queda supporters. Then is it fear of violence that is preventing EU countries from acting?

    •  nice. we need that here. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mark Lippman

      I'd like to see it proposed as a constitutional amendment in the US.  

      That would solve a lot of our problems with people abusing rights at the expense of others' lives, and it would also de-fang the rabid right wing.

      No more "my rights trump your dead kid."

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:27:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  thinking about it further: this is EXACTLY what we (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mark Lippman, marina

      ...need here.

      This is potentially a real solution to much of the abuse of rights in the US.

      It would not surprise me if it was written with the thought in mind of avoiding falling into the same traps as we have in the US.

      No more open carry in supermarkets, no more stochastic terrorism on the airwaves, no more websites with targets on the faces of abortion providers and cross-off marks on the faces of the ones who get assassinated, no more Hobby Lobbyists with corporate religion inflicted on employees, no more any of that shit.

      It's all about live and let live.  Surely that's not too great an evolutionary leap for our culture to make in the 21st century.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:12:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm surprised to hear this because Americans (0+ / 0-)

        react so negatively when I talk about it I hesitate to mention it. What do you do with people who don't respect the fundamental freedoms, things like life, liberty, freedom of movement, your pursuit to live as you wish? Anyone who doesn't agree that these apply equally to all doesn't respect the system itself and is a danger to its preservation.

        There is no right to bigotry. It's not listed in the Declaration of Rights and it's contrary to the Declaration's intent.

  •  Internment camps. Deportation is a bit harsh. (0+ / 0-)

    Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

    by the fan man on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:21:51 PM PDT

  •  Making them martyrs (0+ / 0-)

    will only help them build their cause.  Let cooler heads prevail.

    •  that's why life without parole. (0+ / 0-)

      The death penalty is particularly counterproductive when dealing with terrorists, because it makes them martyrs.

      Life without parole denies them their martyrdom, so it's a stronger deterrent.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:27:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What if they're demonstrating (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lefty Coaster, Euroliberal, capelza

    in favor of overthrowing Assad?

    “The answer must be, I think, that beauty and grace are performed whether or not we will or sense them. The least we can do is try to be there.” ― Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

    by 6412093 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 09:36:28 PM PDT

  •  The hysteria here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lefty Coaster, CenPhx

    about ISIS is remarkable.  Assad has killed a lot more people for less reason, but toppling his is Wrong.

    Neither Assad nor ISIS have killed people outside Syria and Iraq and Lebanon.  ISIS seems to be a real army, not a terrorist group per se like Al Qaeda.

    •  it's both. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mosesfreeman, polecat

      It's an army and it's a terrorist group.

      See also John Robb's theories of warfare in the era of superempowered subnational groups.

      The fact that it engages in warfare as an army makes it a legitimate military target.

      The fact that it engages in terrorism makes it a legitimate target for criminal prosecution.

      Thus we have the largest number of options for dealing with it.  As was the case historically, and still is, for dealing with pirates: haul them in for trial if possible, otherwise sink them.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:34:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Should Jewish Defense League Supporters be (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DeadHead, mosesfreeman

    deported too?

    "The Democrats and the Republicans are equally corrupt where money is concerned. It's only in the amount where the Republicans excel." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 10:56:14 PM PDT

    •  while I'm not familiar with JDL beyond... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... knowing that they exist, the general principle is that if persons who are not US citizens come to the US advocating terrorist acts and recruiting for same, we can legitimately revoke their visas and deport them.

      If there are JDL members who fit that description, then they can and should be deported.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 12:36:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  For visitors (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        there is no discussion. Heck even Geert Wilders was disallowed to enter the UK once. That wasnt wise, but for country to country visits its well established that states get to control that, since there is no real harm done to the persons - they are inconvenienced but not fundamentally harmed if they have to stay at home - just because they have a home.

        the real issue is with the citizens and legal residents of ones own state. Can you take away their home for good by revoking their citizenship, for any reason (except clearing up muddled cases of multiple nationalities)? The UN said no, and so many countries signed the respective declarations that that has passed into customary international law by now, which eventually also binds the US.

        That was all enacted when world war II was still fresh in everyone´s memory, a time when that was one of the greatest crimes performed overall - the massive expulsion of people at the discretion of whatever a given states powers defined to be the interests of the state.

        isis is indeed completely unacceptable, on a par with nazis or .. dunno ... the ebola virus maybe. But if we mean our commitment to human rights seriously then these rights have o extend to the most hated persons we can come up with, including ISIS supporters. If they do so much as lift a finger to break laws we can jail them, socially we can (and must) shun them with extreme prejudice, but we can not take away their right to life, and not their right to a home. If its amongst us then its amongst us.

    •  France is considering making them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe

      an illegal group.  I am not sure if that proposal was approved, but I saw a segment about it on the French news a week or so ago.  

      France does deport residents who go to Syria for jihad.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 07:23:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I suppose it depends on what each EU country's (0+ / 0-)

    civil rights and immigration laws say.

    As for the U.S., it depends. Natural-born citizens cannot be deported against their will. Naturalized citizens can be 'denaturalized' and deported in certain circumstances.

  •  No, deport them and they'll just go to Iraq and (0+ / 0-)

    wave their flags there.  But if there was ever a case for close surveillance and wiretapping, this is it.

    Ted Cruz president? Pardon my Vietnamese, but Ngo Pho King Way.

    by ZedMont on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 06:22:58 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely not (0+ / 0-)

    well until they break the law. It is so dangerous for a country to start detaining and/or deporting people for a thought crime. As much as I'd like to see the anti-abortion fascists go to jail, they have a right to speak their mind.

    I also think it's better to see who is supporting ISIS so that we can monitor them for illegal behavior. By making thoughts illegal, you don't stamp out the thought, it just gets sublimated. Then the organizing and proselytizing happen behind closed doors.

    Either we are free to think our own thoughts, have our own beliefs, and share those with others or we don't. We punish actions, not thoughts.

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"- usually attributed to Voltaire

  •  Are you now, or have you ever been... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

    by Greyhound on Tue Aug 12, 2014 at 11:17:30 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site