|
We seem to be arguing over the man instead of the situation.
There's no doubt he's taken some serious asshole-like stances. Condemning Rushdie to die and his "charity" work. The problem I have with it is that the whole thing seemed arbitrary to begin with.
Millions of people fly across, into and out of the United States everyday and of all the folks to pull off the no-fly list they pick Cat Stevens...excuse me, Yusef Islam in Bangor, then they fill the papers with innuendo about his terrorist ties and then, instead of keeping a hold of him, they deport him back to England.
If he's a terrorist (and seriously, who can say he isn't for certain) then publish some evidence to prove the fact. Give us something other than "think" "supposed" "maybe" and "potentially." If he has terrorist ties (and that's what we've been led to believe) throw them out there for the world to see. We seem to have no problem doing this to guys like Bin Laden, Al Zaqwari and Hussein. What makes Ol' Cat Stevens special?
If he does have established terrorist ties, why not keep him around for questioning a little longer. We (American Government) feels the evidence is strong enough to deport him, but not strong enough to warrant a serious interrogation. Homeland Security calls it a "very serious matter," but the interrogation Islam describes didn't seem like anything other than a groupie get together with laughs and autographs for all the infidels.
Either he's a threat, or he isn't.
How are supposed to take this no-fly list seriously and feel safe when we fly when stupid shit like this happens?
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
|