Posted on 06/24/2002 11:05:33 AM PDT by pabianice
WORCESTER (MA)-- When a Worcester public school fourth-grader was called a terrorist by one of his classmates, his teacher sent a note home explaining that the accuser did not understand the difference between her son's Palestinian ethnicity and the term terrorism.
“I know we are talking about a child here, but using 'terrorist' synonymously with 'Palestinian' really troubles me,” said Imrana A. Soofi, a refugee resettlement director with Catholic Charities.
One of several area residents who attended a rally for civil liberties and the rights of immigrants in Boston yesterday, Ms. Soofi said she believes the government's anti-terrorism campaign is responsible for the confusion children might be having in distinguishing terrorism from ethnic groups.
She was particularly critical of the anti-terrorism measures formulated by President Bush and Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and enacted by Congress as the USA Patriot Act.
According to Ms. Soofi, the changes in trial and detention procedures under the Patriot Act are eroding human rights in the name of security and anti-terrorism.
Hundreds of Arabs have been detained without any charges under the new legislations, she said.
“If you look different, it becomes a problem,” she said. “You cannot target people just because they look a certain way. That is disturbing.”
Ronal C. Madnick, executive director of the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, was also among those who attended the Boston rally.
He and Ms. Soofi later held a press conference outside City Hall to highlight the nature of the rally, which featured several speakers, music, information booths and skits that highlight post-Sept. 11 government action that they say threatens civil liberties, encourages racial profiling, scapegoats immigrants and punishes dissent.
Mr. Madnick said his organization opposes the use of military tribunals to try suspected terrorists, as is permitted under the Patriot Act.
He noted that Mr. Bush had previously assured Americans that U.S. citizens would not be subject to military jurisdiction.
That apparently has changed with the apprehension of American citizen Jose Padilla and the government's decision that he can be militarily retained as an “enemy combatant,” Mr. Madnick said.
Mr. Padilla is accused of plotting to detonate a radioactive weapon in the United States.
“Does the president alone have the right to decide which Americans have constitutional rights and which Americans do not?” he asked. “Can Americans be held indefinitely in military detention, denied counsel when interrogated and, if tried, denied a regular open jury trial?”
Mr. Madnick said there is no need for the military tribunals.
“We tried the 1993 World Trade Center bombers and the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, in our traditional system of American justice,” he noted.
“The transfer to the military raises the question whether the government is pursuing justice in the less-stringent military courts because it has insufficient evidence to try and convict in U.S. court,” he said.
“American citizens must not be held indefinitely on the president's mere say-so. Who is next?”
Mr. Madnick also said that under the new laws the government “can search your home, go through your papers and your computer database without your consent or your knowledge.”
“Can we trust our government? No. It is time for us all to be concerned. We cannot just lie back because we are citizens and others are not.”
Mailing Address: Worcester Telegram and Gazette, 20 Franklin St., Box 15012, Worcester, MA 01615-0012
Telephone: (508) 793-9100
editor@telegram.com
The political correctness police do it, and they're self-elected ! Think about that !
“Can we trust our government? No. It is time for us all to be concerned.
The sell out of our nation under Clinton, or the protection of our nation under Bush? So quit your bitching. Had you not supported the massive terrorist influx in the first place, we wouldn't be having these problems today. Blame yourself.
In that time, any American citizen, when they wished, could visit and tour the White House, and leave a business card for the President. No tour group required. No metal detectors or bomb dogs. A real "open door" policy.
I couldn't comprehend it. I've had the pleasure of traveling through some southern towns in my life, and witnessed first hand what hospitality really was: people just wave hello just to wave. No prior introduction needed. It was a great thing to see. But that kind of hospitality and trust in the White House? Airports? Everywhere?
After finally digesting that this was, in fact, what the U.S. used to be like a short time ago, I was ofcourse halted by a very large question: What the hell happened?
The answer was a very short one: Islamic Terrorists happened. They are responsible not only for the giant amount of resources we spend trying to secure our civilian population, but the even much more critical price we pay: distrust and fear of everyone we do not know personally. Aside from petroleum, that is Islam's most influential contribution to the West (actually, to anyone): terrorism.
So, when I read another article about how "badly" some Arabic citizen was treated, I want to point them towards the middle east, and tell them "You reap what your brethren have sown".
Truman used to take walks with reporters in the morning. No Secret Service, I believe.
You bet there's been a big change in just a few years.
I'm reminded of my good friend who lost his job after 9/11...he would eat at a ME restaraunt almost everyday, and kinda knew the owners...after 9/11, he couldn't bring himself to go there......in all honesty, I can't blame him.
FMCDH
FMCDH
Nah, they were just Moslem Arab squatters, leftovers from those deported from Jordan and Egypt, among others.
But though you are correct so far as the last decade goes, to the best of my knowledge- there's some doubt about at least one recent sniper attack in which the perpetrator was not apprehended- the *Japanese Red Army* attack on Lod Airport in May of 1972was a devestating and successful act of terrorism that cannot be allowed to happen again- and the shooters were orientals sympathetic to the Arab revolutionaries' cause.
That gives the Israelis good cause for suspicion of those beyond those that fit the *usual terrorist* profile.
-archy-/-
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.