Home » Red flags: protection vs. liberty

Comments

Red flags: protection vs. liberty — 37 Comments

  1. Maybe his parents were some of those Muslims who cheered 9-11. The ones the MSM tells us don’t exist.

  2. Cornhead:

    Yes, I’m pretty sure they cheered it.

    But the MSM didn’t tell us they didn’t exist. They said that there were no broadcasts that showed thousands of them celebrating on roofs, as Trump had claimed he saw broadcast on TV.

    Here.

    I have no disagreement with the claim that the MSM has minimized Muslim pro-terrorist sentiment in this country. But I’ve not seen a claim by the MSM that no Muslims here might have privately or even publicly expressed approval of 9/11. The correction was to Trump’s specific claim of broadcasts of thousands on Muslims visibly celebrating in NJ.

  3. As I.understand the Countering Violent Extremism policy no federal officer may initiate any investigation of any Muslim unless there has been some complaint or warning by an accepted member of the Muslim community, e.g. an imam or other spokesperson properly vetted by CAIR.

  4. Nolanimrod:

    I don’t think there’s any question that the investigation process is too restrictive re Muslims and too respective of PC considerations, a direct result of Obama’s presidency.

    I’m talking about a more general problem involving predicting dangerousness and finding remedies in the absence of actionable offenses, by Muslims re terrorism or anyone else re violence.

  5. There will have to be some truly awful “man-caused disaster” to reconcile those Americans who have grown up believing America is evil and that any perceived underdog is always “good” — to reconcile them with what will undoubtedly be unfair collateral damage wherein “good” Muslims will be victims if and when the United States is ever truly de-Islamicized like Germany was de-Nazified after WW2. No such process is ever pretty, or “fair”, or sans human error.

  6. The Islamists get it that the war between civilizations is now fought on the level of emotions, and inducing shame, and they feel no shame vs the infidel while we are still fighting ourselves.

  7. Since there’s no practical way to “predict dangerousness”, all we can do is protect ourselves. In this case, the Florida statutes prevented both the patrons and management from carrying firearms for protection. That’s just absurd. It’s time those (and similar) statutes were changed everywhere.

  8. Couldn’t they have required a psciatric evaluation or family therapy sessions after his early outbreaks? It might have been very helpful to have te results in his record. We really need to rethink some of our mental health policies. Certain types of juvenile records should not be sealed, and parents should be able to have their over-18 children sent for exams. Also we should think about whether a person can be retained for treatment even if they don’t pose an imminent threat to themselves or others. Allowing investigators access to this kind of info might keep investigations open for more than 6 months. We do have sexual offender registries.
    This is another example of how parents raise their kids the way they were raised. It is why there are so many second generation terrorists.
    We also have to get CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood organizations out of government advisory positions.

  9. Well, some countries limit the amount of damage he could do by limiting the type of weaponry available to do it with.

    He’d have been hard pressed to kill that many without a military weapon.

    But, hey, America has it right on gun control and pretty much every other country in the world is obviously wrong.

  10. Who will instigate a Reign of Terror in non-performing Federal bureaucracies and get rid of the soul-destroying and neutering rules of engagement and PC crap?

    Who will laugh at and issue creative executive order end runs around activist Federal Judges?

    Who will understand that words are words and actions are actions, and facts are facts — precisely because he is too uneducated and unintellectual to have had his brain damaged by the disastrous detours into unreality that our high culture has taken?

    Some Milquetoast dredged up by Romney and pals in a backroom?

  11. Chester Draws:

    Let me know how your plans to outlaw and reverse the Industrial Revolution proceed. Good luck.

  12. Some of you would go do well to go read the Diplomad blog. Jewish guy who has lived in the real world and seen how the sausage is made.

    Well worth reading.

  13. the problem didn’t start with obama, of course, recall gitmo under rumsfeld, focused on a very narrow cadre of propagandists, direct action specialist, but the levick group whitewashed them all, including effendis shehri, (behind the underwear bomber plot, bin qumu, (behind benghazi) and
    sharbi (the subject of that last discovery in april)

  14. take this msn excerpt, please:

    In what was the first such known interview in connection with the nightclub shooting, two federal agents met with the man at the mosque for about 30 minutes ahead of Friday prayers, according to Omar Saleh, a lawyer for the Council of American-Islamic Relations who sat in on the session.

  15. RebbelYell —

    Thanks for reminding me of Diplomad. I read him all the time a few years ago. Once when my computer crashed I lost many “favorites” and then just forgot the names.

  16. Okay, the government can’t/won’t protect us. So we need to be disarmed.

  17. Chester Draws,

    Are you forgetting Paris? Or purposely ignoring it?

    Some of the toughest gun laws in the world. No access to military weapons. Much higher death toll.

    Note: AR-15 is not a military weapon.

  18. Some Milquetoast dredged up by Romney and pals in a backroom?

    Do the job yourself, instead of expecting politicians to save you. Do you seriously expect the political class, of whatever stripes, to fight this war for you.

  19. Essentially permanent liberal/leftist SCOTUS entrenched. … Illegal immigration doubles. Path to citizenship established. Resulting in permanent one party political rule. … Muslim migrants tripled. … ISIS gets nukes. … TPP starts to erode national sovereignty. … Hate speech laws enacted. … Military fully ruled by political correctness. … Leftist indoctrination extends into pre-schools. … Reparations to non-whites for white privilege. – GB

    I was hoping for what would realistically happen in the next four years.

    Of these, only changing the balance in SCOTUS is something that is real, as we know that one seat must be filled, but that alone does not lead to permanent entrenchment of a liberal SCOTUS. Liberal for the next four years. True. Permanent – needs something else than one election cycle.
    .

    How SCOTUS will decide specific cases and the legal implications it may have beyond the case itself, IDK.

    In the case of the 9th’s ruling, they effectively punted it back to the states to decide concealment laws, and did not comment on open carry, nor the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, the Heller case was limited to the home, leaving the door open to such an interpretation.
    .

    The rest is nearly as much a speculation as we have about what Trump would do better.

    How we get to doubling and tripling the population of groups, permanent one party rule (non sequitur, if we never bother to make the case for conservatism), all the way to pre-school “indoctrination” (don’t like the added social expenditure, but calling it that, really?) and reparations (seriously, in your books this is highly likely?), all happening in the next four years, when, if it were so easily so, is something that Obama could/would have done? IDK.

    Certainly a move leftward on all fronts, that I find troubling, but does it necessarily lead to all these?
    .

    There is still the House of Representatives, that, even if Trump loses, is likely to remain in GOP hands. As much as we would have liked the GOP to be more vigorous and public in its opposition, it has been able to put a bit of a damper on Obama (Neo had some good articles on how many have under-recognized what has been done). Much of the above speculation assumes that there is a complete acquiescence. If anything, I’d expect renewed vigor following a Trump loss.
    .

    To trade a certainty for Autocracy (your assessment) against the speculation of permanent one party rule to reparations is a lopsided one.

    Meanwhile, it may well be looking lopsided to a great many others, if the polls are any indication.
    .

    We are wasting time defending Trump for the indefensible and unpredictable, and asking people to see something more than there is to see about Clinton, who is easier to understand and predict, even if unlikable and untrustworthy to them all.

    Forget the sunk cost and move on to something that might have a chance to beat Clinton.

    The door is open unlike any other election year in our lifetimes, where both major party candidates are very unsatisfactory to a large proportion of the population.

  20. Perhaps one of the first steps in this direction would be for investigations into potential jihad threats to be on a different footing than straight-ahead crime investigations. Because the US is ‘at war’ against (jihadi) terrorism, the investigation and concomitant powers should have powers to forestall acts of ‘war’

  21. I am related to a woman whose son went from treatment to jail to treatment to lousy life to jail to treatment to suicide in jail.
    She and others in her situation have been pushing for new legislation. Their view is that an individual who isn’t competent enough to walk in asking for treatment, or who, like her son, figures everybody else is the problem, needs to be treated anyway.
    This brings up the questions of personal liberty, unaccountable ‘crats with month-end coming up and empty beds, people with grudges “reporting”. Apparently there will be some kind of court proceedings. But not like criminal proceedings. We’ve agreed to disagree–which is to say not discuss–the civil liberties issue.

  22. The best strategy for tackling this admittedly difficult problem is a combination of (1) reducing Muslim immigration to reduce the number of potential terrorists; (2) permanent electronic surveillance of suspected terrorists; (3) professional sanctions for investigators who miss these red flags; and (4) frequent FBI stings where the targets are approached in person or online by agents acting as ISIS recruiters. This last one may get close to entrapment but is the best way to separate the talkers from the doers.

  23. All good points Neo. And it IS worth remembering how the Soviets used their “mental health system” to go after political dissenters.

    We’ve already seen how the bureaucrats that are only suppose to be concerned with collecting taxes have been used to stifle political dissent in the USA; do we really want to see doctors and other healthcare professionals do the same?

    Do we want to see the US healthcare system (Obamacare aside for a minute) become a political arm of the US government?

    Just how concerned will your doctors be about your health if they are also looking over their shoulder to see if they should be doing more than just treating you illness?

  24. But, hey, America has it right on gun control and pretty much every other country in the world is obviously wrong.

    That is correct. In the late great USSR gun ownership was prohibited but they had an overall murder rate twice the US rate. Some of the republics had murder rates like Chicago.

  25. Richard Aubrey:

    This is mostly OT from the this thread, but what you are describing as your friend’s “solution” sounds like what we used to have – state-run mental hospitals where many people were warehoused without a lot of due process. This was attacked from both the left and right for different reasons and has been greatly diminished. But it did cover up a lot of societal problems. A discussion for another thread, I think.

  26. My comment overlapped neo’s link, yes that is exactly what I am talking about. I agree with Coulter that the push to close the institutions came mostly from the left but the right did not resist too much because 1) libertarianism and 2) gov’t spending.

  27. FOAF:

    The de-institutionalization push also came with a promise to replace larger institutions with more halfway houses and smaller venues. A kinder, gentler mental health system. For the most part, that fell by the wayside.

  28. Big Maq,

    Just stopped by briefly to see any responses. I can easily cite evidence in support of my claims and will do so tommorrow. It being father’s day, I have other priorities.

  29. No-fly list. No-buy guns list. Involuntary treatment protocols. Connecting them is a good idea, or a bad idea, depending on a couple of things. Most important is do you trust the government.

  30. GB – will be out of pocket for better part of two weeks.

    Also, looks like I messed up by posting to wrong tab / article. Apologies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>