Repercussions of the Boston bombings

I suspect that the Boston Marathon bombings may complicate the two big issues facing Congress right now.  On gun control, I daresay that when the citizens of Boston and its environs were told to stay inside and not to open their doors to anyone other than a uniformed police officer because a terrorist is roaming around somewhere, those who owned firearms were glad they did and many of those who did not wished they did.  On immigration, the bombings reminded us that the issue is not just about letting Mexican workers in and letting them stay.  It also needs to be about immigrants such as the bombers and keeping them out.  Do you agree that this may shift public opinion on those two issues?  What other repercussions do you see?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Tom Hering

    … those who owned firearms were glad they did and many of those who did not wished they did.

    Perhaps, but that doesn’t mean the majority of Bostonians – armed and unarmed alike – stopped supporting common sense proposals like expanded background checks.

  • tODD

    I certainly don’t think this will shift public opinion when it comes to guns, for the simple reason that most people are well enconced in their position on guns now and pretty much nothing will cause that to change.

    Still, I think you do get at the thinking for many gun owners:

    I daresay that … those who owned firearms were glad they did and many of those who did not wished they did.

    In other words, it’s all about a perception of safety. “I feel safer with this gun”, whether or not the gun ever gets used in that way — or, indeed, in spite of the evidence on such safety.

    Because gun proponents always talk about the way guns would make you feel in situations that are very rare. Very few guns get used in self-defense, much less successfully. A lot more guns are “successfully” used in suicides, accidents, and homicides (i.e., not in self-defense). While some people will feel a peace of mind knowing that they could potentially ward off some terrorist roaming the neighborhood, the reality is that more of their guns will harm people (accidentally or on purpose) than help anyone. But gun proponents will spend vastly more time talking about these largely theoretical self-defence scenarios than they will kids accidentally shooting each other in the face.

  • tODD

    As to immigration, again, I don’t see much reason for this to shift public opinion. Obviously, anti-immigration types are speaking even more loudly (and boorishly) now, but that’s certainly not a change.

    I mean, what’s the proposal? That we ban everyone who’s Muslim from entering the country? Or everyone from “Muslim” regions?

    The bombers immigrated here quite legally, as far as I know. It’s not like it was in 9/11 where there were obviously problems with illegal visa overstays and all that.

    But, again, certain corners of the right-wing world, ironically, will no doubt “not let a serious crisis go to waste.”

  • SKPeterson

    I expect we’ll also see the increasing federalization of most crimes. The tortured reasoning to make this case “federal” being a perfect example; again the abuses of federal authority under the guise of the Commerce Clause run rampant. Moreover, the virtually explicit rationale for treating the bombing as a federal case is to skirt the laws of Massachusetts that have rescinded the death penalty. Will we see changes of position regarding those laws, or will we see states do away with death penalty laws to mollify those who are opposed and then simply allow federal law to take over if the death penalty is deemed expedient?

  • Julian

    I think the bombings could affect the gun control debate, but possibly in a different way.

    1. Bombs are arms too.
    2. Pipe bombs at least are not protected under the 2nd Amendment …see http://www.volokh.com/posts/1246401854.shtml
    3. The argument goes, “There is no possible lawful use of a pipe bomb by a law-abiding citizen”.
    4. The conventional wisdom is that this same argument can be applied to assault rifles, high capacity magazines, etc.

  • reg

    As a resident of greater Boston I can say that I have no heard one person say they wish they had had a gun during the events of last week. Quite the opposite, law enforcement did their job and as a citizen I feel secure entrusting protecting the public to them. This is the sentiment I hear from pretty much everyone. Many of us in Massachusetts could get a permit for a gun if we wanted to, we just don’t particularly want them or feel safer with lots of guns in amateurs hands. Can you imagine what last Friday would have been like if we had a bunch of vigilantes roaming the streets with their weapons looking to find the bombers. Likely there would have been multiple more “accidental” casualties. So to go back to Todd’s comment, I feel safer without guns in my house or and with few in my community.

    On immigration this event has little to do with our illegal immigration issues other than as an excuse for those who do not want any reform to recalibrate their argument to try to derail the reform effort.

  • fjsteve

    Arrggh! If I hear terms like “common sense proposals” or “common sense reform” again I think my head is going to explode. Talk about political claptrap. Sorry, Tom, I have to say it. You might as well say “if you don’t agree with these reforms you’re either insane or evil!” Indeed, that’s probably implied. Common sense is the understanding the expanded background check legislation is nothing more than a stepping stone to tighter legislation. Everyone, on all sides of the issue, understands this. Why else trot out the victims of Newtown, an incident that would not have been affected one iota by expanded background checks?

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    As to the boorish anti-immigrant types that wish to blame all Muslims, I’d like to point out that the Via Rail terrorist plot was foiled because Islamic religious leaders in the Toronto area tipped off authorities about the rising extremism of some specific members of their mosques.

  • fjsteve

    reg, @ 6, so the job of the police is to apprehend people after they commit a crime?

  • Tom Hering

    You might as well say “if you don’t agree with these reforms you’re either insane or evil!” (@ 7)

    If you don’t agree with these reforms you’re either insane or evil! There, I said it.

  • Paul Reed

    I don’t think it will shift public opinion much — but it will be of more effect than 100 Gosnell trials.

  • fjsteve

    Thank you, Tom, you’re nothing if not an honest man.

  • Joe

    tODD – I’m not sure how you are defining whether a gun is “used” in self defense but according to the most comprehensive look at the data that is available suggest that guns are “used” (if used is defined to include brandished by not fired and verbally informing the attacker that the victim was armed) by civilians to defend themselves millions of times a year. The study was done in 1995 and has been subject to lots of peer review and criticism. The author has systematically answered these criticisms over the years. The study is published here: http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/kleckandgertz1.htm

    Gary Kleck is the main author. He is (or at least was) a criminologist at FSU.

    Kleck’s study generated this response from a anti-gun fellow criminologist:

    “What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. Maybe Franklin Zimring and Philip Cook can help me find fault with the Kleck and Gertz research, but for now, I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research.”

    http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Wolfgang1.html

  • Random Lutheran

    Well, we can hope that this will help reduce state-funded terror, at least on our shores.

  • Carl Vehse

    Klasie @8 tosses out a claim regarding an unnamed imam, who more than a year ago allegedly passed a concern to a Toronto lawyer who passed it on to Canadian police, who state that the arrest of the two islamoterrorist plotters was the result of an investigation that began back in August of last year.

    One can contrast that claim with the examples in this “List of Islamic Terror Attacks For the Past 30 Days,” as well as these additional examples from earlier this year and from previous years.

    BTW, the spin about an “imam tip” is an ideal format to use if there were undercover police informants in the islamocommunity, since it uses anonymity, a span of time, and a legal go-between for security.

  • Fred

    Another issue that is being lost here is the 4th Amendment, preventing the government from conducting illegal searches and seizures. Hundreds of people in Watertown had that right trampled last week. Armed men came to their door and, without any search warrants, ordered them from their homes and searched them. The government has no right to invade anyone’s home without a warrant, which must specifically state what they are looking for. I, frankly, would have politely told the police that no fugitive was in my home, I am safe, armed, and protected, and they can move along. I wonder if anyone did that. I know that people will say these were extraordinary circumstances. But what will the next “extraordinary” circumstance be? Firearms in the home? A Bible? Once we allow the camel’s nose in the tent, how long will it be before the whole camel is sitting in our living room?

  • Tom Hering

    Re: @ 14. “Funding” means money is given with the understanding it will be used for a specific purpose. So, seriously, Ms. Hemingway? Massachusetts helped out the Tsarnaev family so the brothers could commit acts of terrorism? Liberals help the needy so they can commit acts of terrorism? I believe it’s time for you too seek out some professional cognitive counseling. It really is.

  • Kirk

    @15 and one can contrast those lists with the billion or so Muslims that did not commit terror in the past 30 days, or ever.

  • MarkB

    Plus 1 to Fred @ 16.

    Also, Plus 1 to Joe @ 13.

    I have a hard time believing that tODD @ 2 would make unfounded statements like he did, since he is always dinging everyone else for unsubstantiated claims.

  • Random Lutheran

    #17: surprised you couldn’t tell that her story was half-in-cheek…

  • Carl Vehse

    You can spin in your tutu all you want, Kirk @18, but the fact remains –

    The list of Islamoterrorist attacks, whether as absolute numbers or relative numbers, is still enormous when compared to the absolute or relative numbers of similar violent or deadly attacks over the same time periods by professed Christians claiming their motives are to advance the Christian religion.

  • Kirk

    @21 True, but Muslims have about five centuries of warfare to wage before they catch up to Christians on that account. I’m not saying that terror attacks aren’t perpetrated by Muslims, I’m just saying that I know I wouldn’t want to be judged on the violent history of my religion. I’ll afford Muslims the same courtesy.

  • Carl Vehse

    Mark B @19: “I have a hard time believing that tODD @ 2 would make unfounded statements like he did, since he is always dinging everyone else for unsubstantiated claims.”

    Nevertheless, you have essentially stated the modus operandi for tODD’s comments on Cranach.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, your religion is a religion of hate, hate hate. Virtually every comment you make here brims with hate. Your god is a vile being who delights in blood and hate. You delight in hating your neighbour, whether that neighbour is a muslim, a non-Lutheran Christian, a democrat, a non-LCMS Lutheran, a LCMS Lutheran who does not agree with every single precept you believe in, etc etc. Your god sits between your ears, and preaches self-righteousness, arrogance and vile hatred to all.

    And after this post, you are going to cry about persecution, and vilification, and who knows what. Suck it up buttercup, you deal it out all the time! You really are the schoolyard bully, and this is me telling you to bugger off.

  • Joe

    I don’t mean to suggest tODD has committed an act of wrongful commenting. I find his comments to be generally well thought out and on point. But I also know that information about Defensive Gun Use is hard to get right because there are folks on both sides that fudge it. For instance, the anti-gunners always talk about the likelihood of a death in your own family outweighing the likelihood of defending yourself, but those numbers mislead because they generally include suicide and intentional murders. Moreover, the same could be said of a kitchen knife – it is more likely that you will cut your own finger than the finger of a person who you hope will never set foot in your home. It is also more likely that you will stab your wife than a guest.

  • Carl Vehse

    @22, “True, but Muslims have about five centuries of warfare to wage before they catch up to Christians on that account.”

    Kirk, your claim is ridiculously false.

    But your response is also insane in that it promotes the notion that “on that account” (that is, your admission that my statement @21 about Islamoterrorism is correct, and your false claim), Muslims have a period of time (“centuries”) to “catch up” before they become, in your consideration, as bad as Christians.

  • Joe

    Krik @ 22 – really? I’m not going to argue that Islam has a more violent past than Christian Europe but to argue that Christianity has a more violent past than Islam is a stretch. The crusades only happened because the Muslims first took the Holy Lands via warfare. I’m not going to argue that this justified the crusades but lets not forget that both sides were willing participants in those wars. Also, did the Muslim’s just take all of Northern Africa and the Iberian Peninsula after asking nicely or did they wage a continuous war? And lets not forget about the fact that Mohammed himself only got traction after he went to war against Mecca and took it (and various other cities) by force.

    We don’t need to set up the scales. Both religions have had their share of war issues. The question is whether there is anything inherent in the religion that requires war or whether a substantial body of believers in either thinks there is.

    Kirk @ 18 — I agree with you there.

  • Kirk

    @26

    Way to miss the point, good sir. I’m making not comparison between the relative goodnesses of our religions. What I’m saying is that certain Christians have perpetrated insane amounts of violence and evil on non-Christians over the past 2 millennia, claiming that they were advancing the cause of Christ. By the same token, certain Muslims have perpetrated insane amounts of violence and evil on non-Muslims in the name of advancing their religion. If I, as a Christian, don’t think that I should be held accountable for the actions of Guy of Lusignan, the IRA, or Terry Nichols, then why should I hold all Muslims accountable for the actions Osama bin-Ladin, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade or the Tsarnaev brothers. See what I’m getting at?

  • http://www.christlutheran.net Jeff Samelson

    I had some points to share in response to Dr. Veith’s original question about how some feel the bombing will/should affect the immigration issue, then found that this article laid it out in a lot more detail than I would have been able to: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346464/what-boston-means-immigration-policy

  • Kirk

    @ Joe,

    That’s not taking into account the wars amongst Christians in Europe before, during and after the crusades. I don’t want to quibble about who is more or less violent, because pretty much everyone has been extremely violent since the dawn of history. My point is that it’s unfair to cast aspersions if we, as Christians, don’t wish to be held to the same standards.

  • Joe

    Krik – I granted you the point (everyone has a violent history and it is not just to label everyone with the sins of others) in my comment at 25. That is what I meant by my agreement with your comment at 18.

    I was taking issue with your suggestion that Christianity has a more violent past (the bit about a 5 century head start on Islam). But If you agree that this is not the main point, I am content to move on. Cheers.

  • Carl Vehse

    @28,

    The point is not missed. You have stated your point in #22 regarding the Muslims not being judged for murder and terrorism done in the name of their religion:

    “I’ll afford Muslims the same courtesy.”

  • Jon

    More cameras in public areas.

    States bringing back death penalty for murder committed in mayhem/terror.

    No more backpacks/coolers at public events. Metal detector entrances, and random metal detector wanding and pat-downs during public events. Ticket-registered only attendance at public events.

    More visible armed security patrols stationed at public events. More ambulance/first responder required for on-scene presence at most public events.

    More use of “exigent circumstances” warantless searches.

    A new federal agency the “PSA,” similar to the TSA, that will approve and monitor all public events.

  • Kirk

    @32

    Ah, got it. you just chose not to address the point.

    And, you’ll have to forgive me, but I’m not understanding how that photo leads to the conclusion that other Muslims are culpable for the Boston bombing.

  • reg

    fjsteve @ 9. The answer to your question is “yes” unless we are in a fictional Tom Cruise Sci-Fi movie world.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist

    I don’t think this will have any bearing on firearms ownership or even the immigration conversation. But I do think it will have lasting repercussions on law enforcement tactics. All kinds of lines were crossed in hunting these terrorists – some of them even enshrined in our constitution (4th comes to mind). Are we comfortable with that? I’m reminded of Britain’s Directorate of Military Intelligence, Section 5. They work tirelessly behind the scenes to make life safe for Brits – but they cross all kinds of lines that we as Americans have typically sanctified (we actually had a pretty big argument with the Brits over this back in the 1700s). I think the real and lasting legacy of Boston will be the direction we go with our law enforcement and the power we grant peace officers in the face of extreme situations.

  • Kirk

    @36

    I wonder if Bostonians and Wateford-ers(?) will bring suit against the police for violating their rights. I’m thinking particularly of the video of family forced from their home at gun point. Law enforcement tested the bounds of the 4th Amendment, but unless someone is willing to challenge them, what we saw last week will become the new standard. Given that the various agencies involved managed to catch the terrorist alive, I kinda wonder if anyone will bother.

  • Carl Vehse

    Kirk@34: “Ah, got it. you just chose not to address the point.”

    I did address your point – You want to afford the Muslims the same courtesy of allowing their devout fellow religionists to pursue death and slaughter (as shown in the photo) in the name of their religion until they catch up to the quantity you claim Christian have committed in the name of their religion. That is a sick point.

    Furthermore your statement @28 (“I’m making not comparison between the relative goodnesses of our religions.”) is a LIE, because you make comparisons @18 that “one can contrast those lists with the billion or so Muslims that did not commit terror in the past 30 days, or ever” and you make more comparisons @22 when you assert “Muslims have about five centuries of warfare to wage before they catch up to Christians.”

    Later @30 you try to extract yourself from those ridiculous claims when you tell Joe, ” I don’t want to quibble about who is more or less violent.”

    A better point than yours to adopt relates directly to the title of this thread. That point is that the U.S. should restrict the immigration of people with a religion/culture/philosophy, and thus a propensity, toward terrorism and violence (as part of their religious teachings) against nonIslamists and even fellow Islamists.

    In the past, restrictions involving a group of people on the basis of their religion have been used against Mormon polygamists. The application of immigration restrictions to Muslims is warranted even more.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    My apologies for my rant @ 24, but hate-mongering always gets my goat.

    I’d like to ask a parallel question, one that would also gauge the public/governments response to a crisis: Will zoning laws change in Texas after the fertilizer explosion?

    As to camera’s – they are everywhere already. In the UK, for instance, there is an anti-cctv camera movement – http://www.no-cctv.org.uk/. But I’d really like to ask – why are people so against this? These are public places – would you prefer live policemen everywhere? Do these camera’s really infringe on freedom? I’m not choosing a side, but would like to get beyond the easy slogans….

  • Carl Vehse

    Klasie239: “My apologies for my rant @ 24, but hate-mongering always gets my goat.”

    Non-apology apology translation: “My apologies if anyone was offended by my rant, but not what I said in the rant.”

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, I had no idea you were an expert on apologies…

  • DonS

    I suspect that many people at the time of the lockdown, particularly in those neighborhoods where the police were going from house to house, wished that they had a gun during that moment of fear. It’s a natural human reaction.

    It seems as if many more guns are used for evil purposes than for self-defense in a given year, because the former stories are more publicized. By their very nature, successful self-defense stories hinge around the idea that nothing happened because the homeowner had a gun and the perpetrator was scared away from the property. When nothing happens, there is no story. On the other hand, gun violence is a story, and gets publicized. So tODD @ 2 has fallen into the trap that many of us fall into at times, relying upon anecdote to make conclusory statements.

    The bottom line on the gun issue is that, except for brief spikes in public opinion after major gun incidents like Newtown, when the media and certain politicians exploit the tragedy to go into their typical gun control mantra, the public supports our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The bomber episode won’t really sway the public’s support of gun rights significantly, but it probably accelerated the swing back to normalcy more rapidly.

    As for immigration, clearly the bombers represent a fail in our policy and execution of that policy. Just as the 9/11 terrorists did in 2001. Just last week, the Gang of 8 dropped an 842 page immigration reform bill on Congress, and want to ram it through in record time with only two committee hearings and almost no debate or amendment. That is the absurd way we do legislation these days. We would be idiots not to take a pause to evaluate our entire immigration system and figure out how we can accommodate immigration while keeping the American people safe. How can we assimilate immigrants into an American “melting pot”, as we used to, where they are taught what makes America unique and special, and how to love their new country and its people? To be identified as “Americans”, rather than “Chechens”, or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians or Italians or …..?

    We NEED to reconsider our entire approach to the immigration question. Not for the sake of politics, but for the sake of our future as a vibrant and free country.

  • DonS

    By the way, a judge has now ruled that Obama’s “Dream Act” order, that many of us immediately labeled unlawful for defying our current immigrations laws, IS unlawful, in all likelihood: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-04-23/obama-deportation-progam-likely-to-be-blocked-judge-says

    It’s a shame that the ICE officers had to go to court to force the administration to let them do their jobs.

  • Grace

    Read the article below – There is a whole different side of this story. WELFARE?

    The Weekly Standard

    Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Family Received Welfare

    6:54 AM, Apr 24, 2013 • By DANIEL HALPER

    “Tamerlan Tsarnaev was on welfare, sponsored by tax payers. Tsarnaev, now dead, is suspected of bombing the Boston Marathon last week.

    “Marathon bombings mastermind Tamerlan Tsarnaev was living on taxpayer-funded state welfare benefits even as he was delving deep into the world of radical anti-American Islamism, the Herald has learned,” reports the Boston Herald.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/tamerlan-tsarnaev-and-family-received-welfare_719056.html

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    DonS, but aren’t you falling into the same trap you accuse Todd of falling into?

    How many acts of mass violence are committed by immigrants. Then how many religious-inspired acts of mass-violence are committed by Muslims? Then, as a percentage, how many Muslim immigrants become terrorists?

    If you look at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html , post 9-11:

    In 2009 a Muslim convert (thus not Muslim immigrant) shot 2 men in Arkansas.
    In 2010 Faizal Shahad, a Muslim immigrant, was convicted for the attempted Time Square bomb. In the same year, a bomb outside a Mosque in Florida (ie anti-Muslim terrorism) did not kill anyone.
    And now 4 people were killed by the events in Boston.

    So 6 people killed in 12 years, with 4 Muslim immigrants involved. Now, Just in 2009, well over 100 000 Muslim immigrants landed in the US.

    It is very clear that to the anti-immigration knee-jerk response to the events in Boston is a hell of a lot bigger than the anti-gun response after Newtown. This is a clear example of an ideological-driven agenda.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Ok, I somehow omitted the Fort Hood shootings. Still doesn’t invalidate my point.

  • Kirk

    @38 Ok, let’s run with your logic. If a member of your persuasion commits a crime, then you and all others in your group should be held accountable. Do you accept responsibility for the Oklahoma City Bombings?

  • Grace

    WHOA!… Zubeidat Tsarnaeva Tells CNN: “I Don’t Care if My Youngest Son Is Killed. I Don’t Care If I Am Killed. I Will Say Allahu Akbar!” (Video)
    Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, April 24, 2013, 12:09 AM

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/04/whoa-zubeidat-tsarnaeva-tells-cnn-i-dont-care-if-my-youngest-son-is-killed-i-dont-care-if-i-am-killed-i-will-say-allahu-akbar-video/

  • Grace

    Dr. Veith wrote:

    “On immigration, the bombings reminded us that the issue is not just about letting Mexican workers in and letting them stay. It also needs to be about immigrants such as the bombers and keeping them out. Do you agree that this may shift public opinion on those two issues? What other repercussions do you see?”

    What this means is: NO ONE who comes to this country illegally can be trusted, they broke a very important law, which keeps those who should not be here OUT. When they step over the border, lie, cheat and take advantage of the American people, as in WELFARE, EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE etc., they cannot be trusted. In the same way those who come here legally, who are not citizens but break the laws, ie; theift, drugs, or any crime, should be deported right away. If they won’t work, and try to receive WELFARE, the same should apply.

    If we don’t close the borders, putting a moratorium on immigration for the next 4 years, to let this settle down, it is only going to get worse.

  • John C

    Does that mean all welfare recipients are terrorists, Grace?

  • Kirk

    Bombs don’t kill people. Welfare kills people.

  • Grace

    John C.

    “Does that mean all welfare recipients are terrorists, Grace?”

    That is an ignorant question. Read my post again.

  • DonS

    Klasie @ 45: DonS, but aren’t you falling into the same trap you accuse Todd of falling into?

    How so? I didn’t say anything except that we should re-evaluate our immigration system in light of this documented failure. We shouldn’t rush an 842 page bill to passage without going through full regular order — normal committee hearings, amendments, and investigations into this crime in particular, but others in general to make our system better.

    We have two major documented immigration system failures — 9/11 and the Boston bombings — which have cost thousands of Americans their lives, loved ones, and limbs. Thoughtful, unpoliticized analysis of these failures is called for.

  • Carl Vehse

    @47: “Ok, let’s run with your logic. If a member of your persuasion commits a crime, then you and all others in your group should be held accountable. Do you accept responsibility for the Oklahoma City Bombings?”

    First, Kirk, it is not my logic, it is the branch of logic known as Bayesian logic or Bayesian statistics which uses prior occurrences and their conditional probabilities to calculate the likelhood of the outcome from a specific set of events.

    Second, Timothy McVeigh did not bomb the federal building in Oklahoma City to advance Lutheranism, Christianity, or even Roman Catholicism.

    Third, no one is suggesting anyone other than terrorists, in your words, be “judged” or “held accountable” or are “culpable” or “accept responsibility” for terrorist crimes.

    However, with the large number of violent and murderous acts committed in the lists linked previously, it is much more likely that a Muslim male will commit criminal acts than a Christian male. Immigration laws need to include such considerations (and others) in deciding who should be allowed to immigrate to the U.S.

    In the same way, although I don’t have actual data, I would suspect the probability that a pro-abortion person will commit a violent crime is higher than a person who is a pro-life person. People who favor a pro-abortion position also should be restricted from immigrating to this country. As we have seen, pro-abortion voters have damaged the U.S. by electing pro-abortion and liberal political politicians.

  • kerner

    Grace @48:

    So what?

  • Grace

    Kerner @ 55

    “So what?”

    Typical blither, if you don’t no how to respond any other way.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, Bayesian stats should be applied intelligently, and is not a quick answer to anything. 3 events on US soil, by immigrants in 12 years is not enough to make a concise judgement. See my answer to DonS above. Furthermore, in a Bayesian approach you must update with all data: It is estimated that over 60% of US Muslims are immigrants. Furthermore, Pew estimated in 2010 that the US Muslim population was about 2.6 million – thus over 1.5 million Muslim immigrants.

    So, you want to stop the immigration of a group based on the actions of 4 out of 1.5 million people over a 12 year period. That sounds a bit much.

    You also made a claim that pro-abortion people will be more likely to commit violent crime – based on a hunch??

    Furthermore, such measures as what you propose are in violation of the US constitution, and the entire basis for the American project. It seems that you favor a theocratic state – such as the adherents of Rushdoony. Care to comment?

  • kerner

    If I may make an analogy to a different religion (like all analogies, this one will not be perfect), during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Jews were associated in disproportionate numbers with revolutionary Communism. Not the least of whom was Leon Trotsky.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky

    At the same time, Jews were immigrating in large numbers to the USA.

    When they got here, some Jews became prominent in American organized crime.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Mafia

    And tended to be left wing in their politics.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_and_politics_in_the_United_States

    So, do those of you who believe in modifying our immigration policy to keep people from dangerous groups out of the USA believe that Jews should have been, or should now be, kept out of the United States? Because it sounds like that would be consistent with the principles you are advancing now. Just asking.

  • kerner

    Grace:

    I really don’t know why you feel that her statement is significant. So, what was the point of posting it?

  • Grace

    C C @ 57

    “You also made a claim that pro-abortion people will be more likely to commit violent crime – based on a hunch??”

    Those who can take the life of a child, are in a category all their own. Many of these same people find nothing wrong with suicide. Life is either precious or it can be discarded like trash, which is what is done in the case of abortion – trashed — it means nothing, it wasn’t worth caring for, it wasn’t even worth the time to carry to fruition, and adopt it to someone who would love the sweet babe.

  • Carl Vehse

    Klasie @57: “3 events on US soil, by immigrants in 12 years is not enough to make a concise judgement.”

    Klasie, Bayesian statistics are not applied intelligently by limiting data on islamoterrorist occurrence to just those on U.S. soil.

  • Grace

    Kerner @ 58

    “I really don’t know why you feel that her statement is significant. So, what was the point of posting it?’

    If you don’t understand the meaning of what the mother of those to men stated, I can’t help you.

  • Grace

    Carl,

    You gave a great LINK regarding the number of attacks, and where they emanated from, and statistics. I think it would be good to post it again.

  • Jon

    And, apparently, another consquence of the Boston bombing…

    …more petty bickering and cat-fighting between posters here on Cranach. :-)

  • kerner

    Grace @ 62:

    I guess you can’t help me then.

    So, do are or Carl or anybody else who wants to attribute the misbehavior of a fraction of a group to that entire group going to answer my question @58?

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Carl, sorry, you cannot mix like that. The information input into your model must be relevant to your model. Your assumptions (about Muslim behavior) are not supported by the data. Islamic terrorism is not homogeneous (your first wrong assumption), and all Muslims aren’t the same, are from the same theological school (your second wrong assumption). Furthermore, the subset of Muslim immigrants into the US has not been proven to be biased to the terrorism-prone subsets of Islam as a whole.

    You misuse Bayes.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    BTW, by terrorism-prone subsets, I assume that they exist. One could assume, for instance, that ultra-conservative Wahhabi’s are more likely to fall for violent rhetoric, based on their history. Other triggers have been alienation within adopted societies – the very thing you and your ilk are trying to encourage. As such, you are as much an encourager of terrorism than any fundamentalist imam.

  • Carl Vehse

    kerner @58: “So, do those of you who believe in modifying our immigration policy to keep people from dangerous groups out of the USA believe that Jews should have been, or should now be, kept out of the United States?”

    While known Communists, members of the mafia or other criminal organizations, and pro-abortionists should not be (or have been) allowed to immigrate to this country, there is nothing in the Jewish religion that indicates Jewsqua Jews are one of the “dangerous groups” as your post @58 sounds like it is trying to imply.

  • Grace

    Kerner @ 58

    “So, do those of you who believe in modifying our immigration policy to keep people from dangerous groups out of the USA believe that Jews should have been, or should now be, kept out of the United States? Because it sounds like that would be consistent with the principles you are advancing now. Just asking.”

    You cite three LINKS. You must have had a grand EAGER moment, looking for some way to include the Jewish people in your diatribe.

    I have lived in some of the highest populated Jewish communities – what you render in your post is not correct. The Jews have done more to build hospitals, give free care for the sick, add to that their dedication to medicine in general – some of the finest doctors in the country, and you come up with this garbage. Who do you think supports in the vast millions, and millions of dollars, medical universities, and teaching hospitals, builds their research labs to find cures for disease?

    When they got here, some Jews became prominent in American organized crime.”

    You cite Wikipedia and the Mafia in one of your LINKS – I’ve lived right in the hub of the Jewish community surrounding UCLA, Beverly Hills, West LA in general, Pacific Palisades to name just a few. I knew no one who fits your label. It doesn’t surprise me that YOU, would make such claims having GOOGED your time in an effort to justify what, – - Nazi Germany, or the crimes that have been foisted on American soil by terrorists? So you turn this blog around to the Jewish people, after 6 million Jews were killed at the hands of Nazi Germany, and thousands have been slain, and hurt on American soil, by terrorists!

    Kerner, there have been all ethnic groups represented in the Mafia, or did you just find out, after your GOOGLE moment? Excited that their were some Jewish people who took part? The shame of Nazi Germany, certainly inspires some to …………

    The Mafia didn’t originate in the U.S. it originated in Sicily.

  • Carl Vehse

    @66,

    I disagree. The data and the subsets on world-wide islamoterrorism are indeed valid for use in Bayesian modeling.

  • Tom Hering

    Now admit it, Kerner. Arguing gun control with me is like spending a pleasant hour in Reason 101, compared to an argument about anything with Grace. :-D

  • fjsteve

    reg @ 35, I’m glad you agree that the police aren’t necessarily there to protect you but to catch the law-breakers. I was confused because you also said that you “feel secure entrusting protecting the public” to the police.

  • kerner

    Carl and Grace:

    I imply nothing and I am not particularly eager to point out the evil in the history of any particular ethnic group or religion. I DO NOT seek to justify any hatred toward nor any harm done to Jews, or any other ethnic group.

    But I am simply pointing out FACTS. Every group has its share of bad apples, and Jews are no exception. Jews (Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel) built Las Vegas into the sinkhole of corruption it was until recently. “Murder, Inc.” was a Jewish organization. But so what? Just because Jewish criminals, and Communists exist, that is no reason to hate or attack the rest of them. Nor is it a good reason to believe they are all like their worst element.

    Grace, you now say that you know many many Jews, and none of them are like the people in these historical articles. Fair enough. But There are almost certainly many many number of Muslims who are not like the Al-Qaeda or the Tsarnaev brothers. Yet you and Carl want to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Everything about you position is pure emotionalism. You have many Jewish friends, so when the negative aspects of Jewish-American history are brought up you fly into a rage and claim that I am trying to justify the holocaust (WHICH I CERTAINLY AM NOT). But apparently you have few or no Muslim friends, because when the negative behavior of a few Muslims comes up you are willing to attack them all.

    Carl, you say, today, that there is nothing about Jews qua Jews to indicate that they are all dangerous. But before WWII plenty of people reacted to Jews just like you are reacting to Muslims now, and said that the behavior of the Jewish gangsters and revolutionaries and other leftists was predictable based on observations of Jewish culture. These people concluded that the best thing for any culture was to keep Jews out. Again, you today sound just like earlier bigots sounded 80 years ago.

    One of the best points made on this thread was by DonS @42 when he indicated we need to :

    … assimilate immigrants into an American “melting pot”, as we used to, where they are taught what makes America unique and special, and how to love their new country and its people“.

    Maybe if conservatives had been friendlier to Jews when they arrived more of them would be conservative now.

  • tODD

    Now that I have time, I was going to reply to those who replied to me, way back when, but frankly, this discussion has become a cesspool, so I really don’t feel like spending much more time on it.

    Suffice to say that the articles I had in mind when I wrote what I did (@2) appear to have based their arguments on Arthur Kellermann’s work. Having read some more about him, I can see that, at the least, his data would likely not be accepted without question by pro-gun people. I don’t have the time (or desire) to look into it more than that, so I’m just gonna retract the comparison between guns used for ill vs. guns used for harm (also in light of Joe’s comment @13; I didn’t read the study, but his comment seemed reasonable, all the same).

  • Grace

    Kerner @ 73

    “You have many Jewish friends, so when the negative aspects of Jewish-American history are brought up you fly into a rage and claim that I am trying to justify the holocaust (WHICH I CERTAINLY AM NOT). “

    Hysteria won’t change what you wrote Kerner. It won’t FLY, not even an inch. You zeroed in on the Jews, and it back-fired.

    Have you purchased a Quran, if so, have you taken the time to read it, or understand what it means?

  • Tom Hering

    Let’s take a vote. How many people think Kerner is being hysterical and the comment @ 58 “backfired” and/or tried to justify the Holocaust as Grace claims? I vote that Kerner made perfectly reasonable points.

  • BW

    I vote that Kerner made reasonable points and wasn’t trying to justify the Holocaust but was pointing out that different groups of people have not always been viewed positively. Like Japanese Americans in WWII. Or Eastern and Southern Europeans around the start of the 20th century.

  • BW
  • Grace

    The Lutheran Church’s base comes from Germany / Martin Luther. I doubt on this blog being Lutheran, there would be a vote any other way than Kerner.

    The fact that Kerner jumped on the Jews is too obvious to miss. Telling, that the Italians were not mentioned.

  • Tom Hering

    The votes for or against Kerner will have nothing to do with Lutheranism. They’re about whether or not Kerner “jumped on the Jews” in any way whatsoever. And your implication that the Lutherans here will vote to support Kerner’s supposed anti-semitism because the Lutherans here are more or less connected to Germany and its history is reprehensible.

  • Carl Vehse

    kerner @73: “But before WWII plenty of people reacted to Jews just like you are reacting to Muslims now”

    That’s just a lie, kerner. Those people before WWII did not present valid lists of Jewish terrorist attacks to advance the Jewish religion equivalent to all those islamoterrorist attacks to advance the islamic religion from the links I posted here.

    “Again, you today sound just like earlier bigots sounded 80 years ago.”

    Another lie, kerner, and for the same reason.

  • Grace

    Kerner post 73

    “But before WWII plenty of people reacted to Jews just like you are reacting to Muslims now”

    No Kerner, that is false. Germany was anti-semitic, they followed Martin Luther’s hateful small book on the Jews, which had been written centuries earlier. The book was handed out in the 30′s, talked and written about in their news. Himmler loved the book!

    “Luther was the most widely read author of his generation, and he acquired the status of a prophet within Germany. According to the prevailing view among historians, his anti-Jewish rhetoric contributed significantly to the development of antisemitism in Germany, and in the 1930s and 1940s provided an “ideal underpinning” for the Nazis’ attacks on Jews. Reinhold Lewin writes that “whoever wrote against the Jews for whatever reason believed he had the right to justify himself by triumphantly referring to Luther. “According to Michael, just about every anti-Jewish book printed in the Third Reich contained references to and quotations from Luther.

    Heinrich Himmler wrote admiringly of his writings and sermons on the Jews in 1940. The city of Nuremberg presented a first edition of On the Jews and their Lies to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer, on his birthday in 1937; the newspaper described it as the most radically anti-Semitic tract ever published. It was publicly exhibited in a glass case at the Nuremberg rallies and quoted in a 54-page explanation of the Aryan Law by Dr. E.H. Schulz and Dr. R. Frercks. On 17 December 1941, seven Protestant regional church confederations issued a statement agreeing with the policy of forcing Jews to wear the yellow badge, “since after his bitter experience Luther had already suggested preventive measures against the Jews and their expulsion from German territory.” According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium of Luther’s writings shortly after Kristallnacht, for which Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church in the University of Oxford argued that Luther’s writing was a “blueprint.” Sasse applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, “On 10 November 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.” The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words “of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.” According to Professor Dick Geary, the Nazis won a larger share of the vote in Protestant than in Catholic areas of Germany in elections of 1928 to November 1932.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

  • fjsteve

    For the record, I’m not Lutheran. Have I said that already?

    I don’t think kerner is the slightest bit antisemitic nor do I think his post suggested such. I don’t consider myself antisemitic either but I can recognize and don’t mind saying when Jewish people do bad things. Going through horrors, even the horrors of a holocaust, don’t give any people a free pass for wrongdoing. On the flip side, I also don’t mind saying they have done good world in the world quite disproportionate to their numbers.

    All of that is beside the point. kerner was using the history of Jews in America to make a point. He could just have easily used the Irish… of course, then I’d have to sock’m in the nose… but that’s also beside the point.

  • Grace

    fjsteve @ 83

    “All of that is beside the point. kerner was using the history of Jews in America to make a point.”

    No, …… the moment Kerner brought up the Mafia, tied it to the Jews, he was wrong. The Mafia was designed in Sicily, but of course that was never mentioned, meaning the Italian Mafia. Instead Kerner thought it rather clever to make his point using the Jews. After 6 million died in the camps. That’s is not a comparison – it’s a weak attempt to shift blame.

  • SKPeterson

    Can we finally just kick all the Irish out?

  • Kirk

    “Germany was anti-semitic, they followed Martin Luther’s hateful small book on the Jews, which had been written centuries earlier. ”

    I’ll just go grab some pop-corn…

  • BW

    Well at one point people got tired of all those Chinese coming over here and stealing jobs and working for cheap, and tried to keep them out.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act

    Also Grace, you’ll notice Kerner mentioned that “some Jews” became involved in organized crime. Not all, and not that they invented the Mafia.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 84 – I guess we’ll just ignore the Lehi and Irgun.

    I will leave aside the incontrovertible fact that almost every organized criminal activity is described using the term “mafia” and that it’s use is not limited to the Sicilian or Italian ethnic groups. Hence we see references to: Russian mafia, Mexican mafia, Jamaican mafia, Chinese mafia (though they are often correctly described as the tongs, but more rarely nowadays). Your objection is noted, and refuted.

    Also, citing wiki as an authoritative source on Luther, Lutherans, Germany, German culture or the social pathologies of nationalist socialism is an exercise best left for the 6th grade. Why don’t we bring up Spain, the Expulsion and the persecution of the conversos? Oh, I know why, it doesn’t fit the argumentative construct of Luther = Anti-Semite therefore Lutherans hate Jews leap of logic.

  • Grace

    BW @ 87

    “Also Grace, you’ll notice Kerner mentioned that “some Jews” became involved in organized crime. Not all, and not that they invented the Mafia.”

    RIGHT –

    The reason Kerner brought the Jews into the mix, he couldn’t find anything else. After all, ya gotta find something that measures up to those who fly into building killing thousands.

    Why not find something about the Jews, even if they didn’t start the Mafia, that won’t matter, at least they had some part. Why not compare it to the Italians? But no, the Jews should be singled out in the Mafia –

    It’s obvious to anyone who knows WWII history regarding Nazi Germany, why the Mafia / Jewish connection was attempted!

  • Grace

    SKP @ 88

    “Also, citing wiki as an authoritative source on Luther, Lutherans, Germany, German culture or the social pathologies of nationalist socialism is an exercise best left for the 6th grade.”

    I was suggest most go back to the 6th grade and study it. After all, Kerner used Wikipedia for his info on the Mafia and Jews – See Kerner at 58.

  • Grace

    My post @ 90 should read:

    “I would suggest ……..

  • Fred

    What other repercussions do you see?

    Here’s one for you: those (mostly Repubs, natch) who voted against Pres. Obama’s gun control legislation will soon find themselves out of a job. A Repuglican from New Hampshire saw her popularity rating drop 15 POINTS. Nice going, Repuglicans. Legislators work for the voters and when they vote against the will of the larger public, their days are numbered. This is as it should be.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/kelly-ayottes-approval_n_3147834.html

  • Fred

    In case the right-wingers on here haven’t figured it out, I’ll spell it out for you again.

    Poll Shows ‘No’ Vote On Background Checks Political Poison for Kelly Ayotte
    “Ayotte won her seat in 2010 by 23 points. But in a very early hypothetical match up between her and new Democratic Governor Maggie Hassan, she trails by a 46/44 margin. This issue is really giving her some trouble.”
    That’s an understatement!

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/poll-shows-no-vote-on-background-checks-political-poison-for-senator-kelly-ayotte/

  • kerner

    Carl @81:

    That’s just a lie, kerner. Those people before WWII did not present valid lists of Jewish terrorist attacks…

    Oh come on Carl. Anti Semitism prior to WWII did exactly that, but the emphasis was on allegedly Jewish politics rather than religion. The Nazi and KKK propaganda of the day sometime went like this:

    1. Communism is a revolutionary movement that embraces violence as a means of political change and that is responsible for numerous terrorist acts. (true)

    2. There is a notable Jewish presence in the leadership and rank an file of the Communist movement (also true)

    3. Therefore, all Jews are bad and should be deported (grossly false, but exactly your line of reasoning)

  • Grace

     ‏

    The British knew the situation in Germany, they were never shy, when it came to repudiating false ideas, but putting straight the truth.

    The era of Nazism never needed to germinate, but it did through hatefulness to the Jewish people. The history books are full, it’s no secret. The envy of the Jews success, was always a problem.

    I interviewed many Jewish and Gentile people who lived in Germany and Europe at the time of WWII – I asked WHY did the Germans hate the Jews, the answer – “they had the money, education, and many other things, it was pure jealousy” –

    TIME MAGAZINE

    Religion: Luther Is to Blame

    Monday, Nov. 06, 1944

    “William Ralph Inge, now 84 and ten years retired as Dean of London’s St. Paul’s, rarely breaks into public print nowadays. But when he does, the “Gloomy Dean” is as pungent and provocative as ever. In the Churchman last fortnight he wrote:

    “If we wish to find a scapegoat on whose shoulders we may lay the miseries which Germany has brought upon the world . . . I am more and more convinced that the worst evil genius of that country is not Hitler or Bismarck or Frederick the Great, but Martin Luther. . . . Lutheranism is essentially German.”

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2c9171%2c803412%2c00.html

  • kerner

    Grace, the difference between you and me is that I try my best to take people as individuals, not groups. Just because some Jews have done some bad things, I really don’t blame “the Jews” as a group for anything not do I mean them any harm.

    The reason you don’t believe me is that you DO judge people by groups. The way you talk on this blog about Muslims, Germans, Lutherans, and Hispanics proves it. And you simply can not believe that anybody else thinks differently than you do.

    I do blame Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel for turning Las Vegas into a hotbed of organized crime, because they were, in fact, largely responsible. I blame Julius and Ethel Rosenburg for giving our nuclear weapons secrets to the Russians, because they did.

    But when I say I don’t blame all Jews for the sins of a few, you just can’t believe me, because you always blame entire groups for the sins of a few. And you just can’t believe that anyone can note the faults of individuals without hating the entire group they come from.

  • Grace

    Kerner @ 96

    “Grace, the difference between you and me is that I try my best to take people as individuals, not groups. Just because some Jews have done some bad things, I really don’t blame “the Jews” as a group for anything not do I mean them any harm.

    Kerner, you DID/DO talk about people, as in the Jews being involved in the Mafia. Most all ethnic groups were, but the beginning of the Mafia was in Sicily. You ZEROED in on the Jews as a group. You left out the FOUNDERS Kerner, the Italians. How smart or accurate was that? What was your reason for bringing the Jews into the mix in the first place, leaving out the Italians?

    “The reason you don’t believe me is that you DO judge people by groups. The way you talk on this blog about Muslims, Germans, Lutherans, and Hispanics proves it. And you simply can not believe that anybody else thinks differently than you do.”

    Kerner, When it comes to the Jews, and this blog, you’ve set your foot on Jews in the Mafia. Make no mistake, you certainly are not innocent. Muslims? Who drove the planes into buildings on 9-11? Or have you forgotten?

    “I do blame Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel for turning Las Vegas into a hotbed of organized crime, because they were, in fact, largely responsible. I blame Julius and Ethel Rosenburg for giving our nuclear weapons secrets to the Russians, because they did.”

    Vegas has always been full of crime. LOL, you certainly need to bone up on facts Kerner.

    You lump Rosenburg’s, into the mix, that’s not what we are talking about. You’re all over the map,…. is this how you present a case in court, and then ramble about anything you think of? Where I live you would be laughed out the door. Disjointed to say the least!

    “But when I say I don’t blame all Jews for the sins of a few, you just can’t believe me, because you always blame entire groups for the sins of a few. And you just can’t believe that anyone can note the faults of individuals without hating the entire group they come from.”

    I don’t “always” do anything Kerner. LOL

    I hate no one Kerner, however you’re only argument, is to accuse me of something that isn’t true. I have no respect for those who lie, cheat and come to the U.S. illegally, if that upsets your grocery cart, I don’t care. No one deserves special treatment when they lie, and take what isn’t theirs thinking we owe them. We have 11 million plus illegal aliens, that’s a lot of dishonest people taking advantage of health care, education, welfare and host of other goodies they don’t deserve. You see Kerner, they don’t know how to stand in LINE, they push and shove their way to the front, and then demand they get special privileges for such behavior as in (permanent resident)

  • SKPeterson

    Irgun – terrorists. Lehi – terrorists (proudly proclaimed even). Yitzhak Shamir former Israeli political heavyweight was a member of Irgun. He was a terrorist and recognized as such by the British government. Should we now make the argument that all of Israel is a terrorist state, or that every action by the state of Israel is essentially “State-supported terrorism.” I mean, if we can go from Luther to anti-semitism to Germany to Nazism in a few quick steps, we should be able to easily go from Irgun to Shamir to Jewish terrorism to terror as Israeli state policy just as easily.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace – I think it would also be a good idea if you actually defined what you mean by “anti-semitism.” I would argue that Luther was not anti-semitic as much as he was anti-judaic. He did not oppose the Jews as an ethnicity or a race, but he did oppose them for being anti-Christ.

  • BW

    Grace – It ought to be clear you are reading far too much into Kerner’s statement about various organized crime members that were of Jewish descent.

    Don’t forget too that the Nordic nations also are/were Lutheran and did not join Germany in its campaign of violence towards the Jewish people.

    Also, for instance, don’t forget the example of Chinese immigrants in America, that they were taking jobs from native born Americans and working for cheap, and so they were banned from immigrating till WWII.

  • Cincinnatus

    Well, this was an “interesting” discussion. I have two factual contributions to make:

    1) On welfare, the debate isn’t purely ideological a la “SEE! This is what ALL welfare recipients are like! And therefore we should eliminate all welfare!” Rather, the question in this case is whether, in fact, the Tsarnaev’s were directly funding their terrorist activities via government benefits. That is, not only were they receiving food stamps and subsidized housing–which is problematic enough, given that such benefits allowed them to avoid work while plotting crock-pot bombings–there is some suspicion that government-provided cellular phones and welfare checks directly financed and enabled the bombing. If that is indeed the case, then there might be some question about who gets welfare and why, and whether we ought to be more diligent in determining who should get it. Or not. The question seems valid, though.

    2) Similar logic applies to the immigration question, I think. Some suggest that we should crack down on all immigration as a result of the bombing. Some react that the bombing is evidence of nothing, and that anyone who suggests otherwise is an anti-immigrant bigot.

    Both of you are wrong. This in itself is not a reason to forbid immigration by all Muslims, for example. But it should lead us to ask a few questions. For example, why did the United States permit immigration by residents of what is effectively a terrorist state and an al-Quaeda recruiting ground? (I’m speaking of Chechnya, of course). And even if we welcome immigrants from Chechnya, why did we accept these particular Chechnyans that could not contribute in the least to American society but were instead government dependents (who may even have exploited their dependency to make bombs with our largesse)?

    These seem relevant policy questions to raise at a time like this.

  • SKPeterson

    Cincinnatus @ 101 – Why do you hate Jews?

  • helen

    I know… way off topic (or is it?) but why does every recipient of any government aid program need a cell phone with 250 free minutes/month plus texting? The original “reason” for subsidized land lines was for emergencies! Who talks 250 minutes a month about emergencies!?
    [Unless they are building a bomb or something???]
    Why are the taxpayers required to fund this?
    Do we also pay for the TV’s that every welfare household seems to have?

    Why not “sequester” this, before police, fire departments and air traffic controllers?

  • Grace

    Helen @ 103

    Phones? – it’s called votes. Votes for those who give them what they want. If it’s phones, that’s the plan.

  • sg

    I kind of like the free phones for free loaders. Think how many crimes can be traced and date, time, location stamped because the user has a free loader phone. Also, I think that I read Carlos Slim holds one of the big contracts for these phones.

  • Grace

    SG @ 105

    “I kind of like the free phones for free loaders. Think how many crimes can be traced and date, time, location stamped because the user has a free loader phone.”

    The American people cannot afford such nonsense. Tracing calls isn’t the issue. These people have phones, they just don’t want to PAY FOR THEM. ETC., ETC, ETC -

  • Grace

    How does a phone know a crime is being committed? Does it dial 911?

    Are we going to employ a whole agency to listen in, and moitor all the phone conversations of ALL the FREEBIE phone receipents, in the United States? LOL Think about it!

  • Cowboy
  • sg

    If a person commits a crime, the date and time of the crime are often known. If the suspect made a call shortly before or after the crime, it may be possible to establish that he was near the location of the crime at the time it was committed. It is a way to establish that it was possible for him to have done it. Also, there would be the number he dialed and that person’s phone could also be traced and that person questioned. Unlike the suspect himself, that person can be forced to testify. A suspect’s phone may also have stored text messages sent and received, etc. And so on. So yes, phone usage can be used by police in investigations.

  • Pingback: Hitler and Nazism - Dick Geary - InstantDownloadNow


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X