Effective and Practical Counter-Terrorism Measures (Ron Paul 10/15/2001)

RON PAUL LIBRARY (ARCHIVES) ^ | 21 OCTOBER 2001 | CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

TEXAS STRAIGHT TALK BY RON PAUL

Over the past month I have introduced several bills designed to address terrorism and make Americans feel more secure. While many counter-terrorism proposals were considered in Congress last week, my belief is that the most effective steps we can take do not infringe upon the civil liberties of American citizens. In fact, I believe only a free society can ever be truly secure. The goal should be to make terrorists feel threatened, not the American people.

Here are some concrete steps Congress can take immediately to make our borders, our cities, and our skies more secure:

• Arm Pilots: It is unthinkable to leave pilots defenseless in the cockpit after the events of September 11th. We trust pilots to operate multimillion dollar machines filled with human cargo, yet incredibly we do not trust them with firearms. While airport security certainly can be strengthened, pilots must have the choice to carry weapons as a last line of defense against future hijacking attempts.

• Immigration Restrictions: Common sense tells us that we should not currently be admitting aliens from nations that sponsor or harbor terrorists. Remember, only U.S. citizens have constitutional rights; non-citizens are in the country at the discretion of the State department. While we should generally welcome people from around the world whenever possible, we cannot allow potential enemies or terrorists to enter the country now under any circumstances. My legislation would restrict immigration, including the granting of student visas, by individuals from nations listed as terrorist threats by the State department.

• Better intelligence gathering: Burdensome regulations and bureaucratic turf wars hamper the ability of federal law enforcement personnel to share information about terrorists. My proposal would slash regulations and make sure the CIA, FBI, State department, Justice department, and military work together to coordinate anti-terrorism efforts.

• Harsher criminal penalties for terrorists: The federal statute of limitations for terrorist offenses should be eliminated, so that suspects can never breathe easy even 10 or 20 years from now. Jail sentences and penalties should be increased, and the death penalty should be possible for many offenses. Terrorist attempts and conspiracies should be treated as harshly as completed acts.

• Letters of marque and reprisal: This constitutional tool can be used to give President Bush another weapon in the war on terrorism. Congress can issue letters of marque against terrorists and their property that authorize the President to name private sources who can capture or kill our enemies. This method works in conjunction with our military efforts, creating an incentive for people on the ground close to Bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. Letters of marque are especially suited to the current war on terrorism, which will be fought against individuals who can melt into the civilian population or hide in remote areas. The goal is to avail ourselves of the intelligence of private parties, who may stand a better chance of finding Bin Laden than we do through a conventional military invasion. Letters of marque also may help us avoid a wider war with Afghanistan or other Middle Eastern nations.

• End legal preferences for terrorist suspects: Congress should clarify all federal criminal statutes to insure that so-called "extralegal" preferences for criminal terrorist suspects are eliminated. In some past terrorist investigations, federal rules have been interpreted to require law enforcement to show something more than standard probable cause to obtain warrants. Law enforcement officials should never have to demonstrate anything more than standard probable cause when seeking a warrant in the war on terrorism.

[Petronski]

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

PAUL PING

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

My pic of Washington crossing the Delaware trumps your Thorazine!

[Petronski]

The Thorozine is L.Ron’s and YOUR picture is off topic.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

The Thorazine is a photo-shopped work of fiction. Washington did cross the Delaware my man! ROFL

[Petronski]

Yes, but the Thorazine is directly on point, while The Crossing has nothing to do with the topic.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

So do you disagree with the article posted or are you just going to discuss which .JPEG is more worthy of debate?

[JTN]

[JTN]

Letters of marque and reprisal: This constitutional tool can be used to give President Bush another weapon in the war on terrorism. Congress can issue letters of marque against terrorists and their property that authorize the President to name private sources who can capture or kill our enemies. This method works in conjunction with our military efforts, creating an incentive for people on the ground close to Bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. Letters of marque are especially suited to the current war on terrorism, which will be fought against individuals who can melt into the civilian population or hide in remote areas. The goal is to avail ourselves of the intelligence of private parties, who may stand a better chance of finding Bin Laden than we do through a conventional military invasion. Letters of marque also may help us avoid a wider war with Afghanistan or other Middle Eastern nations.

[lfrancis]

Sounds like a loon. “Immigration restrictions” that’s crazy talk.

[George W. Bush]

	Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday] • Podcast • Weekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 •
	Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave

Pingeroo!

[JTN]

Sounds like a loon. “Immigration restrictions” that’s crazy talk.

And that stuff about, "Harsher criminal penalties for terrorists"? This guy's the Lyndon Larouche of the right.

[George W. Bush]

End legal preferences for terrorist suspects: Congress should clarify all federal criminal statutes to insure that so-called "extralegal" preferences for criminal terrorist suspects are eliminated. In some past terrorist investigations, federal rules have been interpreted to require law enforcement to show something more than standard probable cause to obtain warrants. Law enforcement officials should never have to demonstrate anything more than standard probable cause when seeking a warrant in the war on terrorism.

Ron Paul is exactly correct on this matter regardless of how you view the occupation of Iraq and its outcome. The bar for investigating and prosecuting terrorists in this country should never be set higher than for ordinary domestic mass murderers. The current law places the government at a disadvantage when prosecuting these mass murderers.

Similarly, the provisions for letters of marque and reprisal are more fitting in this current action in the Mideast because we have never before employed such a huge mercenary force in our history. Current estimates of total forces in Iraq alone are over 300,000. So we certainly are using mercenary forces very widely. While I have no objection to using armed civilians to support our troops, escort their supplies or provide other security, I do think the president should have the option to employ such persons directly to fulfill specific military missions legally.

My expectation is that we are likely to see some incident embarrassing or damaging to the Bush administration prior to 2009 because these methods were not authorized and used.

[CJ Wolf]

Nice Graphic! ;-)

[CJ Wolf]

But what about shrimp? lol

[rineaux]

Great Shot!

[rineaux]

Thanks for the ping.

Immigration idea makes way to much sense. Congress prefers the open gate policy on immigration like the one we share with Mexico.

[padre35]

I’ve gotta agree with you there, a painting of Washington destroys some hackish poster fro Thorizine any day of the week.

Funny, one would think that instead of a picture like that a picture of ....well....he is a smart man..he’ll figure it out...

[jmeagan]

****So do you disagree with the article posted or are you just going to discuss which .JPEG is more worthy of debate?***

As usual, Ron Paul’s ideas make a lot of sense. The only thing I see wrong with it is that we should be denying visas and student visas from any Islamic country at the present time. Saudi Arabia is not considered a terrorist country, but most of the 9/11 people came from there.

[takenoprisoner]

Ron Paul is making sense using common sense.

And he's winning straw polls in NH

[End Times Crusader]

Yet he can’t rise above 5% in national polls.

[dcwusmc]

Anything useful to say about the actual TOPIC of this thread or is it gonna just be your usual insipid, inane and meaningless comments?

[Wolfie]

I would have expected all of these (especially the first two) to have been passed on 9/12. The fact that they weren’t is why I don’t really pay any attention to the “War on Terrorism”. Its obviously just another tool of the elite ruling class, used to scare the sheep into submission. And of course, the Kool-Aid drinkers lap it up.

[lormand]

Stenchhippy Cameltoes for Paul - Ping!

[mnehrling]

Immigration Restrictions: Common sense tells us that we should not currently be admitting aliens from nations that sponsor or harbor terrorists....

Nice words, too bad he voted against putting the military and national guard on the border.

[ejonesie22]

Ok, TrippE, I’ll play...

“Letters of marque and reprisal”

Please explain to me why this would work in this day and age.

I ask this in light of the fact that no merry band of mercenaries as taken up our government's offer of 50 Million Dollars for Osama’s head. That’s pretty good scratch for a solider of fortune and his men.

[ejonesie22]

Ah details...

[Hemorrhage]

Many of his proposals sound reasonable to enhance the current War on Terrorism. A couple of problems ...

>>> Burdensome regulations and bureaucratic turf wars hamper the ability of federal law enforcement personnel to share information about terrorists. My proposal would slash regulations and make sure the CIA, FBI, State department, Justice department, and military work together to coordinate anti-terrorism efforts.

First of all - did Ron Paul not say that he wanted to disband the CIA ... now he wants to strengthen the CIA? Which is it? Inconsistency, or backpedaling?

Secondly, this is precisely what the PATRIOT Act does - an act that has drawn some derision from Rep. Paul.

Overall - I like most of the proposals he’s given here ... they seem reasonable additions to the current counterterrorist playbook. These proposals, however, are not a comprehensive counterterriorist plan, cannot replace the current (relatively effective) counterterrorist measures implemented by the Bush Administration, and are not a reasonable substitute for an international, offensive counterterrorist strategy.

However, he implies (or perhaps states outright) that we’re currently infringing on the civil liberties of American citizens, and that the American people can and should feel threatened by the current counterterrorism measures that have been adopted. What a bunch of ACLU nonsense. The rights of the American people have not been abridged in the current War on Terrorism.

Ron Paul has some reasonably good ideas here and there ... unfortunately, he’s also got some monumentally stupid ideas as well. The reasonableness of these proposals cannot make up for previous nonsense spouted by the congressman.

H

[mnehrling]

Paul falls into the same problem as many democrats. On one hand, he wants to eliminate the Patriot Act- the very act designed to meet the the problems identified by the 9.11 commission, but on the other hand, he complains that the President isn’t implementing the recommendations by the 9.11 commission. Add on top of that what you’ve pointed out, Paul wanting to eliminate the CIA and you’ll find what we have here is a populist opportunist.

[Lurker]

Exactly which of his ideas do you disagree with and why do you disagree with them?

L

[mnehrling]

..more like:

[elhombrelibre]

I suspect she looks like most Run Paul supporters and is every bit as bright.

[JTN]

Oh, yeah? Do you have that "on good authority"?

[JTN]

On one hand, he wants to eliminate the Patriot Act- the very act designed to meet the the problems identified by the 9.11 commission, but on the other hand, he complains that the President isn’t implementing the recommendations by the 9.11 commission.

Allow me to point out the obvious. The USA PATRIOT act was not among the recommendations of the 9/11 commission report, because the 9/11 commission report didn't exist yet.

[lormand]

ejonesie22, don't be silly.

Ron Paul will hire a Janet Reno type and do an early morning minivan raid using special Letter of Marque clerks to issue the letter.

< /rolling my eyes in disappointment >

[ejonesie22]

Pirates aren’t what they used to be...

Arrgh...

[383rr]

LOL

[JTN]

I have to give credit for that graphic where it belongs. I don’t know it it’s CJ Wolf’s work, but that’s the first person I saw post it. Thanks, CJ!

[CJ Wolf]

“I have to give credit for that graphic where it belongs. I don’t know it it’s CJ Wolf’s work, but that’s the first person I saw post it. Thanks, CJ!”

I put it together and feel free to use it. Actually where credit is due is to lormand who supplied the first graphic frame over and over and then 5th. We had a dueling static graphical arguments for a while.

[CJ Wolf]

Cameltoe? Why are you looking there? geeze lormand that’s nasty. sounds like you got a thing for that.

[lormand]

"sounds like you got a thing for that."

Hey, I telling people NOT to look at it :)

Maybe you are onto something though.

[Taiwan Bocks]

You gotta love Ron Paul for his patriotism and for his energy for no other reasons. He has fought and continues to fight for the little guy like no one else. And everyone is petrified of him. I won’t even venture to guess the reasons behind the vilification without consideration and the simultaneous running to empty RINO suits instead, what happened to the conservative right?

[Old 300]

Immigration Restrictions: Common sense tells us that we should not currently be admitting aliens from nations that sponsor or harbor terrorists.

Such as Saudi Arabia. We have pretty much open immigration and freedom of movement from there at this point. Yet the Saudis fund more extremist ideology across the world than just about anyone else. They provide a disproportionate number of jihadis fighting us in Iraq, as well.