BonoVoxSupastar said:
That's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. You don't think there are people who now live in these European countries or Canada that still don't have ties to their origin of birth? A terrorist could have citizenship in one these countries for the past 10 years of so and come here and pose as a tourist. If you're going to fingerprint, fingerprint them all. So now when the next terrorist attack happens and they realize it was implemented by someone with citizenship in Europe then we'll fingerprint them. So only after someone attacks us we'll fingerprint them? This logic makes absolutely no sense.
Exactly.
And keep in mind, Bunbury, once again, that we've had people right here in our own country commit terrorist acts (Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber). So should we start fingerprinting every white male in this country?
Any nationality is likely to harbor terrorists, we shouldn't be suspecting just a few. Like Rono said, Bin Laden has won, he's made us paranoid.
Headache, we definitely agree our government should do something. If they hear of any terrorist organizations being set up anywhere in the world, they should go after those people only. If they hear of any terrorists planning something, they should stop those people beforehand once they get the details of who's involved and everything (it also might help if we hadn't supported some of these terrorist regimes in the past, as well-something the U.S. should learn from).
But we shouldn't be fingerprinting people, most of whom are innocent and wouldn't dream of hurting anybody. And if we must fingerprint, then we should be fingerprinting
everyone, not exempting certain countries.
For crying out loud, when people like the Arabs see us exempting Canadians and Europeans, who are white, from things like this, that only makes them angrier with us. They see it as racist, and it allows for wannabe terrorists to continue to gain support against us Americans. Do we
want these people to hate us for all eternity?
Angela