Cat Stevens can’t set foot in the United States, but Yanni is allowed to walk around free?
Man, talk about the terrorists winning…
PAD
Cat Stevens can’t set foot in the United States, but Yanni is allowed to walk around free?
Man, talk about the terrorists winning…
PAD
• 
Ever since “the Nightwatch” was created, or as the US government has called it, “Homeland Security,” I’ve been amazed to see how quickly the small majority of American people are prepared to toss aside the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” for the illusion of safety.
I don’t recall Cat being put on trial, other then by the media, so if I did miss it, could somebody please post the judges closing statement.
Meanwhile, people still have rights, whether they are Americans or foreignors.
Cat’s not on trial, and ‘innocent until proven guilty” only applies in the courtroom. If you think I’m just joking then think about the whole concept of bail. Basically, the court is telling you that “we don’t trust you, so someone that we do trust has to vouch for you, or you have to place something of value for us to keep to insure that you come to court for your trial. Otherwise you stay in jail until your trial.
Second, why do you feign surprise? Even before Bush thought to be President, there have been laws like the one that got Stevens bounced. Hëll, during the Clinton years alone, the government acted like the Gestapo in some cases. If you carry over $10,000 dollars in cash on you, the police can confiscate it, and you have to prove in court that you weren’t going to do anything illegal with it. Did you know that the bank you do business with is REQUIRED to let the police KNOW when you take that money out of your account? Did you know that certain fertilizers are required to be registered with the ATF when you buy it, because someone thinks you might make a bomb with it? But you can still go down to the nearest gas station and fill up three or four empty rusted out gas tanks and nobody would even raised their eyebrows in your direction.
Heck, I’m sure you remember the Elian Gonzalez incident in Florida? Jack -booted federal thugs knocked down the doors and came in and took Elian away. That was under Clintona and Reno’s Amerika, wasn’t it?
BTW, foreignors and non-citizens don’t have a “right” to be allowed into this country. They have to ask permission and it has to be granted. It can also be denied or taken away.
Heck, I’m sure you remember the Elian Gonzalez incident in Florida? Jack -booted federal thugs knocked down the doors and came in and took Elian away. That was under Clintona and Reno’s Amerika, wasn’t it?
A fair amount of parental rights were involved as well. Don’t oversimplify that one.
“Does this slow boat involve busty høøkërš paid for by Robertson as well? If so.. sign me up! I figure I should get out of town before the Gays, Atheists and other such undesirables cause another terra attack. Cause ya know.. them T.V. Preachers know the best høøkërš.. and have a direct line to God so they know why OBL had his buddies attack us. They hate we have the freedom to have busty høøkërš before going back in the closet to pray. :)”
Actually, Swaggert is the one who keeps getting caught with høøkërš. I think Bakker was also caught dipping into that pot as well.
Robertson is the one who hates the United States because it isn’t the theocracy he wants it to be.
A fair amount of parental rights were involved as well. Don’t oversimplify that one.
Nope. While I did side with the boy being with his father, the decision to remove him from his relatives’ house was a purely political one on the part of the government. It was spurred on by the fact that there were several cases similar to it worldwide that involved American kids.
Micko:
“What’s the difference between Stevens giving money to Hamas and USA giving money to Israel’s army? I’m not seeking a political answer, but an “humanitarian”.”
Bill Mulligan:
Off the top of my head i’d guess that one difference is that Hamas does whatever it can to kill as many Israelis as they can while the Israeli army does not do the same to Palestinians, as evidenced by the fact that there are Palestinians.
So, by that reasoning, Saddam wasn’t trying to kill as many Kurds as he could, as evidenced by the fact that there are Kurds?
The difference between Hamas and Israel is that Hamas doesn’t care about innocents, whereas Israel cares, but doesn’t let that stop them.
“So, by that reasoning, Saddam wasn’t trying to kill as many Kurds as he could, as evidenced by the fact that there are Kurds?”
Well, he was hampered a bit by the fact that we declared the Kurdish areas no-fly zones–essentially dividing up the country to protect some of the people he was oppressing.
My point is that if Hamas obtained a nuke on Monday there is virtually no doubt in my mind that Tel Aviv would be mostly thermic mist by, um, Monday night. On the other hand I’m pretty certain that Israel hasn’t nuked any of its enemies. Yet.
“The difference between Hamas and Israel is that Hamas doesn’t care about innocents, whereas Israel cares, but doesn’t let that stop them.”
I’ll take issue with that statement. If Israel wanted to obliterate the Palestinians it could do so almost at will. Israel uses force when necessary to locate, target, and remove those persons bent on its destruction, and usually only in relatiation for some act of violence perpetrated by those persons first. Unfortunately there is most always some collateral damage because those persons invariably situate themselves in shield situations.
You don’t see Israelis strapping bombs to their bodies, entering Palestinian areas, and arbitrarily blowing themselves up to kill as many innocents as possible.
If you really come down to it, all Israel wants is to be left the hëll alone so it can exist in peace.
You need to start thinking.
Yeah, well, I’ve sure Rev. Robertson would be happy to buy you a one way ticket on a slow boat to China as well.
More than likely, he’d rather send me to that mine in Africa he invested in so that I could work as another slave for him.
BTW, is he still claiming that the world is coming to an end in 2000? Oh wait, it’s 2004 and we’re still here. I guess not. What’s the new date for armagedden now? I want to make sure I’m pack for it.
Robertson is the one who hates the United States because it isn’t the theocracy he wants it to be.
Yep. And he’s also the one who invests in silver mines run by slavers and sells Christian vitamins because the makers of One-A-Day are apparently all satanists.
Even worse, John Tesch is a free man! If someone hasn’t noted this yet, the news reported that there was a “Yousseff Islam” that was on the list. So, it might all be a spelling error. But at the same time agreeing with the hit on Rushde and giving money to Hamas doesn’t seem very much like the Cat Stevens I listened to as a kid. At least he came out against 9/11 and for the WOT…
Ever since “the Nightwatch” was created, or as the US government has called it, “Homeland Security,” I’ve been amazed to see how quickly the small majority of American people are prepared to toss aside the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” for the illusion of safety.
I don’t recall Cat being put on trial, other then by the media, so if I did miss it, could somebody please post the judges closing statement.
I don’t recall him being put in jail or on probation either. Visiting this or any country is a privilege, not a right. We don’t have to let anyone in. It’s not a punishment and it doesn’t deprive anyone of anything they own or have a right to, so presumption of innocence has nothing to do with this.
Where were the howls of outrage when the British denied Louis Farrakahan the “right” to inflict his odious presence on their fair land?
People are denied entry to the USA every hour of the day. Since they are mostly poor Mexicans they just don’t don’t get Mr. Islam’s press.
You don’t see Israelis strapping bombs to their bodies, entering Palestinian areas, and arbitrarily blowing themselves up to kill as many innocents as possible.
No, the Israelis use helicoptors instead, and then people make god-awful comments that innocents are just “collateral”.
I can’t stand Cat Stevens
“I can’t stand Cat Stevens”
..and I can’t stand Britney Spears. So in the spirit of fairplay, I think she and her new hubby ought to be deported to Iraq for promoting an ‘alternative’ lifestyle and making wacky, off-the-cuff commentary in public. 🙂
KET
But, KET, we’re supposed to be rebuilding Iraq, not dropping another bomb on them!
Howzabout we deport them to North Korea? 🙂
If someone could deport Britney, sans husband, to my house, I’d be much obliged.
“People are denied entry to the USA every hour of the day. Since they are mostly poor Mexicans they just don’t don’t get Mr. Islam’s press.”
Actually, it’s quite different. Mexican citizens need a visa to enter US. But all citizens from Western Europe (UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain et al) do not need it – so the US government needs to have a really good reason to deny permission to a citizen of one of these countries. And I think they have it not in the case of Mr. Islam (or Stevens, or whatever…).
Mexican citizens need a visa to enter US.
Nah, they just need an unprotected part of our border.
“Howzabout we deport them to North Korea? :)”
Nah, they’d probably just turn around and send them back here, using “collatoral damage” as some sort of excuse. 🙂
“If someone could deport Britney, sans husband, to my house, I’d be much obliged.”
Buddy, she’s ALL YOURS….although I’d strongly suggest that plastic blow-up dolls are much cheaper maintenance. 🙂
KET
Buddy, she’s ALL YOURS….although I’d strongly suggest that plastic blow-up dolls are much cheaper maintenance. 🙂
Not to mention they carry less danger of you needing a shot of antibiotics later.
“But all citizens from Western Europe (UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain et al) do not need it – so the US government needs to have a really good reason to deny permission to a citizen of one of these countries.”
Or…what? Seriously, what exactly happens to the US government if they deny someone entry for what you or I believe are not good reasons?
My Statement: If CS/YI does indeed donate his lunch money to Hammas how does that make the other people on the flight with him any less safe?
Yielded the responses: It probably doesn’t affect the people on the flight. However, it certainly is a problem for people in the country.
Don, the reason this is scary is because the next person on a terrorist watch list to get on a plane might not be a singer with questionable charitable impulses. It could be bona fide ‘bad guy’ as Dubya would call them, and in the time it took for Homeland Security to figure out that person shouldn’t be airborne is the time it would take to bring that plane down.
I agree exactly. Which is why the no-fly list is junk. It casts a wide net and includes many who nobody thinks are a danger of violent activity, folks who are on it because of financial associations. It diverts labor from monitoring WHAT people take onto a flight and onto WHO is on a flight.
If you really need a more concrete explanation, consider this – prisons are filled with dangerous people. How many of them blew up this year? None, because we don’t let explosives in there. I’m suggesting a similar approach to aircraft.
So Don, you’re saying we should treat airline passengers like criminals?
Maybe for safety we should strip search and de-louse the whole bunch. Rip out all the seats on the plane and pull in cells instead?
All this “security” is why I quit non-business travel… and people wonder why the airlines are whining about going broke. Who wants to use a mode of transportation that has gotten more and more unpleasant as the years roll on…
Used to be the stale air and smokers, but now smoking is banned and mindless “random” searches and racial profiling has replaced it…
During a bail hearing, the District Attorney’s office has to prove there is a reason for a charge. Evidence is usually important, here. A judge determines bail based on evidence from both prosecution and defense. Sometimes the judge might think an accused person poses no threat and is Released on his own recogniscence(sp?).
As for Clinton and his administrations’ wrong-doings, I’ll go you one better and remind everyone of the Nazi War Crims that made it into the US simply because the government found them useful.
And if you don’t want people showing up, I might suggest that you tell the government to take down the “Welcome” sign, aka the Statue of Liberty, because if you don’t want people coming, that’s bûllšhìŧ advertising.
As for rights, aside from the rights granted under the bill of rights, let’s not forget that all important piece of toilet paper the UN calls the Charter of Human Rights.
But you notice how the only time The U.S. pays any attention to the UN is when they already agree with us anyway?
So, getting back to the subject at hand, does the UN charter on human rights say that everyone has the right to enter the US at anytime they want?
If not, how were Cat Stevens’ rights violated?
Oh, and the inscription on the Statue of Liberty reads, “Give me you tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” “
Again, how does that apply to rich ex-folk singer who advocates the murder of authors?
My Statement: If CS/YI does indeed donate his lunch money to Hammas how does that make the other people on the flight with him any less safe?
I’ll give you a straightforward answer. It’s the same as an accesssory to a crime. He made not be the one to pull the actual trigger but he helps facilitate it. Hammas, indeed, any terrorist group, funds their crimes through the funds that supporters give and divert toward their needs.
So yes, if CS/YI willingly and knowingly gives his money to a terrorist group, knowing what they will possibly use that money for, they have made them less safe.
So now, I’m going to get on PAD’s “enemies list” (like I’m probably not already there), and say that people should boycott Cat Stevens’ records and concerts if they believe the money they pay with would be used to fund terrorist activities. I know how PAD hates to take money out of people’s pockets, but this is probably a good thing.
How about if I boycott him just because his music sucks?
I disagree with the comment that Cat Stevens’ music “sucks”. No, it did not. His songs from the early 70’s were quite good. Listen to his songs like “The First Cut is the Deepest” and “Moonshadow”. They are quite good. Cat Stevens had a unique voice and was quite a good lyricist. I recall that the musicians that contributed to his albums back then included Peter Gabriel. He did not record commercial pablum. Instead, prior to converting to Islam, his songs had substance. Consider “Matthew and Son”.
So, you may not like the man (and that his your right), but do not just say his music “sucks”.
I’ve heard “Moonshadow” (more often than I’d like, on the local classic-rock station), and “Matthew and Son”.
His music sucks.
🙂
As for rights, aside from the rights granted under the bill of rights, let’s not forget that all important piece of toilet paper the UN calls the Charter of Human Rights.
There is no amendment or right in the Constitution or the UN Charter on Human Rights that gives anyone who is not a United States citizen permission to enter this country anytime they take a mind to.
BTW, not to nitpick, but the Bill of Rights has not existed for over two hundred years. A bill is a proposed law that is waiting ratification by Congress and the state legislatures to be included in the Constitution, in this case, several amendments. Once it’s ratified, it ceases to be a bill.
Give it a rest Clark, it’s called the “Bill of Rights” regardless of the fact that they are amendments. You’re pathetic
Cat Steven’s music is just about as bad as folk music gets, and there’s a LOT of bad folk music out there
*Give it a rest Clark, it’s called the “Bill of Rights” regardless of the fact that they are amendments. You’re pathetic*
Ummmmm, how does the United States’s ‘Bill of Rights’ cover a citizen of the United Kingdom again? Perspiring minds want to know! 😀
Give it a rest Clark, it’s called the “Bill of Rights” regardless of the fact that they are amendments. You’re pathetic
Ironically enough, if you really felt that way, you wouldn’t have said it.
I’ll give you a straightforward answer. It’s the same as an accesssory to a crime. He made not be the one to pull the actual trigger but he helps facilitate it.
So, when are we locking up those involved with giving Saddam and bin Laden all those wonderful toys in the 80’s?
Because they sure as farking hëll facilitated those situations.
So, you may not like the man (and that his your right), but do not just say his music “sucks”.
Personally, I couldn’t care less about the man, but I can and will continue to say his music sucks. I’ve listened to “Moonshadow”, “Peace Train,” “Morning Has Broken,” et al., plenty of times and it does suck. All of it. That’s not just my opinion, that is a scientifically proven fact. Scientists have observed lab rats, after being forced to listen to “Morning Has Broken” repeatedly, begging for more sacharrin so that they can get cancer and die.
So, I will say again and say it with emphasis: His music SUCKS!!!!
So, when are we locking up those involved with giving Saddam and bin Laden all those wonderful toys in the 80’s?
You can’t without violating sovereignty. Otherwise, Bill Clinton would have to go too for selling nuke tech to North Korea. On the other hand, CS/YI is an individual acting on his own behalf.
“You can’t without violating sovereignty. Otherwise, Bill Clinton would have to go too for selling nuke tech to North Korea. On the other hand, CS/YI is an individual acting on his own behalf.”
In other words, Republicans are god and can do no wrong…ignorant
Clarkles also bleated “BTW, not to nitpick, but the Bill of Rights has not existed for over two hundred years. A bill is a proposed law that is waiting ratification by Congress and the state legislatures to be included in the Constitution, in this case, several amendments. Once it’s ratified, it ceases to be a bill.”
You didn’t mention the UK anywhere here, but brought it up when I called you on it, how conveinient.
In other words, Republicans are god and can do no wrong…ignorant
You know, I think you’re right, Bladestar.
And trust a Republican to drag Clinton into it, when, either way, the N Koreans haven’t used those nukes on anybody (yet).
It’s never about them, always somebody else to blame…
Okay. For some light reading, may I recommend the following:
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/disappearance.htm
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/victims.htm
and my personal favorite
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/religion.htm
Interpretations vary widely on their meaning, but then again, that’s the nature of law makers.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/disappearance.htm
“Enforced disappearance?” How does that apply? CS/YI didn’t disappear. He was sent back to England.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/victims.htm
What crime was CS/YI a victim of? Denying him entry into a country is not a crime.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/religion.htm
CS/YI was not denied entry due to his religion. He was denied entry because he allegedly has supported terrorist organizations. Thousands of muslims enter the country every year without any problems.
Well, that’s 0-3 in the revelance to the Cat Stevens case
And back when Russia was still the “Communist Menace”, the AMERICAN government gave Afghanistan tons of weapons to fight them with, so we supplied the terrorists in Afghanistan, everyone who paid their taxes.
Geuss we all have to get kicked out of America now,,,
My Statement: If CS/YI does indeed donate his lunch money to Hammas how does that make the other people on the flight with him any less safe?
EClark replies I’ll give you a straightforward answer. It’s the same as an accesssory to a crime. He made not be the one to pull the actual trigger but he helps facilitate it.
Which is how he makes people in general/Americans/Israelis/whoever less safe. I do not disagree with being concerned with donations to hate/violent groups. I still dispute that he made the OTHER PEOPLE ON THAT PLANE less safe. And I am willing to bet that if you had been on that plane and had at least 1/2 your day screwed up by the alternate landing you’d be asking “and what immediate danger was I in that we couldn’t have continued on to our destination?”
Bladestar, I am boggled as to how you can find the idea of checking passengers for real threat material (as opposed to BS like nail clippers) to be more offensive than secret nebulous measures like the no-fly list. Maybe you really feel like you need that flare gun and bottle of turpentine with you at all times, I dunno. Personally I find the “papers, please” approach a lot more offensive than the suggestion that there are some things I shouldn’t carry with me into an enclosed space.
I don’t, Don, the “No Fly-List” is bûllšhìŧ McCarthyism pure and simple.
Where did I say I was against looking for bombs and guns?
What drugs are you on? I could use some of those…
“So, you may not like the man (and that his your right), but do not just say his music “sucks”. “
Sorry J Alexander, but you’re DEAD wrong. Or at lease totally Anti-Free Speech / Free-Thought.
Saying someone’s music “sucks” is strictly an opinion. You can’t treat anyone’s opinion of music as “Fact” as say they can’t express their opinion, be it “I love his/her/their music” or “Gøddámņ that performers sucks” unless you are a scumbag fascist bent on forcing kids to pray in school and forcing your beliefs down everyone’s throat as law, etc. etc. etc.
Me:
“You can’t without violating sovereignty. Otherwise, Bill Clinton would have to go too for selling nuke tech to North Korea. On the other hand, CS/YI is an individual acting on his own behalf.”
Bladestar:
In other words, Republicans are god and can do no wrong…ignorant
Well, I believe you’re putting words in my mouth, not that you seem to have any problems with the ethics of that…
Clarkles also bleated “BTW, not to nitpick, but the Bill of Rights has not existed for over two hundred years. A bill is a proposed law that is waiting ratification by Congress and the state legislatures to be included in the Constitution, in this case, several amendments. Once it’s ratified, it ceases to be a bill.”
(Clarkles bleats:) BAAAAHHHHH!
You didn’t mention the UK anywhere here, but brought it up when I called you on it, how conveinient.
If I didn’t mention the U.K., how could I bring it up?
So, Bladestar, have you gotten this contentiousness out of your system yet or do you wish to continue in a more civil tone? I find you amusing, actually, so it doesn’t matter to me.
BBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!
Point to Clark, it was Carl who ignorantly introduced the UK into this:
“Ummmmm, how does the United States’s ‘Bill of Rights’ cover a citizen of the United Kingdom again? Perspiring minds want to know! :D”
No Clark, I still find you an assinine blowhard repudlickan apologist. No “contentiousness” there, just hatred. I find you pitiable, but I’m glad I entertain you.
Don, I think I see where your confusion lies.
I don’t think TSA agents need to strip search old ladies or rip the heads off children’s teddy bears looking for bombs or weapons. THat’s what all that expensive but “neccessary” equipment is supposed to be for.
I was more parodying the idiots that support the ridulous measures being taken. Afterall, if the passengers were naked and locked up on the planme, wouldn’t that achieve the “Security at the cost of reason and freedom” that the rabid republicans endorse so heartily?