>
> "A bunch of Middle Eastern guys?" That's
like saying "World War II was fought against a
bunch of Europeans and some Asians." It's
important in times of war to restrain ourselves
in defining who 'the enemy' is, lest we alienate
our allies and those who are merely neutral.
Someday the war will be over, and if we've
started to fear and hate a people, not just an
organization that we can attack and dismantle,
the next war will be just around the corner.


We declared a war against terrorists. Not a
specific country. These terrorists *are* just a
bunch of Middle Eastern guys. They come
from all countries. They cross all borders. You
*can't* define it any more exact than that. And if
you talk to just about anyone who was alive
and conscious during World War II, they aren't
exactly the biggest fans of Japan. That's just
the way people are. Not to mention the fact
that the entire Middle East *already* hates
America.


>
> > Most of the Middle Eastern guys being
held by
> > our government, if I am not mistaken, are
not
> > citizens of this country. Therefore, they are
not
> > protected by our Constiution and the other
> > laws we have in place.
>
> They're not entitled to the same
Constitutional protections as US citizens, true,
but they still do have rights. It's essential in a
free world that citizens retain some rights
outside of their own country, just as in the
United States citizens retain most of their
rights from state to state. I don't want to travel
to France or Britian only to find out that I can be
arrested and detained indefinitely. Now, of
course, as a US citizen that probably won't
happen to me in most countries since I'm a
citizen of the biggest kid on the block. But
don't citizens of less powerful nations also
deserve some degree of protection from
governmental authority?


Britain hasn't declared war on the United
States, either. If they did, I guaran-damn-tee
that they would not be welcoming Americans
into their country with open arms. I
guaran-damn-tee that they would keep a
*very* close eye on Americans in their
country-even kick them out or imprison them.
That's they way war is. The rules change. You
*don't* welcome your enemy into your land.
And in this war, our enemy is very broad: Men
of Middle Eastern descent who come to this
country on temporary/student visas. That's the
way it is.

>
> >
> > The writer of this speech wonders about
the
> > suspension of habeas corpus becoming
> > common. I'm sure the same thing was
said
> > when the greatest president we've ever
had,
> > Abraham Lincoln, did the same thing
during
> > the Civil War. The same thing happened
> > during World War II when FDR ordered
> > Japanese-Americans put into internment
> > camps.
>
> And these were both terrible decisions that
should not be repeated (I've got a friend in the
Navy who is a history buff and refers to Lincoln
as a facist). And the effects of these bad
decisions would have been worse if
Americans had not stood up and told their
government that Constitutional protections are
especially important when they are
inconvenient. It's also worth noting that the
majority of people in the internment camps
weren't foreign nationals. They were US
citizens.
>

Nowhere did I say that they were the right thing
to do. As they say: hindsight is 20/20. I was
merely pointing out examples of the rules
changing during wartime.

>

> >
> > The Other "Step 1: Open mouth. Step 2:
Insert
> > foot." Matthew
>
> Bal"'give pause to our allies' my
eye!"anthalus

The Other Matthew