Quote Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
shooting a man in a van which you suspect has a bomb without prior warning is illegal yes. you can't prove he has a bomb unless you see it, otherwise he's a man in van whihc you suspect has a bomb. it may or may not have a bomb in it. you could have all the intellgence in the world but until you see that bomb he is a man suspected of having a bomb. iraq qas suspected of cupporting al qaeda, of having wmd, tora bora was suspected have housing huge bunkers where al-qaeda lived, many people have been in cuba with intelligence. is that the information with which you would kill this man you suspect? you can't go round shooting suspects can you? because we aren't talking about a man in a van with a bomb, we are talking about a suspected man. killing him without warning is therefore illegal.
If I thought the guy was going to blow up an entire city block unless I shot him, then I'd shoot him. Like I said, you can't take back a terrorist attack after it's happened. You can appologize to the guy's family and even give them money afterward for damages etc. This isn't like shooting a guy in the back of the head because he might have robbed somebody. That is wrong. But the question isn't "justice". It's a question of safety. The question is essentially whether if the worst case was true, which worst case would you be able to live with?

Case 1: The guy in the van is a terrorist with a bomb.
a.) You shoot the guy. He can't set off the bomb and therefore no innocent people are killed.
b.) You don't shoot him. He sets off the bomb and lots of innocent people die.

Case 2: The guy is not a terrorist
a.) You shoot the guy. He dies, but no one else does. you appologize to his family.
b.) You don't shoot him. nothing happens.

Obviously in a perfect world, you'd know whether there was a bomb in the truck, and then we would know which choice to make. The world isn't perfect. The cops on the scene are going to have to make a choice here. In my mind, it's far worse to have the bomb go off than not.

Quote Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
are we really saying here that "you're not american so you don't have the same rights because of where you live" isn't that a tad ridicolus? what happened to all men are born equal?

and as of this girl. are we to arrest everyone with a certain view? round up all the communists while we are at it? am i to be arrested for my views as well? it becomes a very very tricky area when you arrest someone for their views doesn't it? don't be so stupid as be doomed to repeat history here. i'm not even going to put in the reference to nazi germany because frankly it's so obvious here it's not necessary.
There is a difference between Jihad and Communism. Communism isn't by itself violent. Jihad is more like a person advocating the violent overthrow of a government or system. There is an implied threat in supporting a jihad that just doesn't exist in Communism or any other political theory. So writing a paper advocating Jihad is similar to writing a paper supporting the violent overthrow of the US government (which is illegal and will get you a night in jail talking to the FBI). You will only be arrested if you are advocating the violent overthrow of a government.