cbforever

Also, keep in mind, we're not talking about some theoretical possible "someone who might kill." We're talking about actual people who have actually plotted to kill and taken part in it (if not actually killed.) At some point, there is a line that gets crossed, and we can't just say "socio-economic whatever" and have to say: "Sorry, we have to deal with you."

We can address the "socio-economic" thing to those who have not yet crossed that line, perhaps. But as much as I love the idea of peace and pacifism, this is not a problem that is going to be fixed without a willingness to address some manifestations of violence by returning it in kind.

We could just leave. King Salman probably has enough money to just move Mecca somewhere nicer.

Relevant to root causes of radicalisation et al. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-w ... 36261.html

As I've recently commented elsewhere, what happened in Paris was in essence a criminal action and should be dealt with as such, but there are a variety of causes for moderates becoming extremists beyond religion, so holistic approaches will be required for more permanent solutions, rather than just remedial actions.

This is depressing for two reasons.

Is that including or in addition to the whole Statue of Liberty thing Rip mentioned above?

What's really annoying is they actually can't say "no" - States are not allowed to dictate foreign policy.

So they're just being dicks for no reason.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/1 ... -refugees/

It's posturing for the base in order to ensure future electoral success.

That, and a couple of them might actually be stupid enough to not understand how the Constitution works.


EDIT:

I have to admit I wasn't really paying attention to the map, so I didn't notice the hilarious... whatever is going on with New England there until someone else pointed it out to me. That must have caused some serious seismic activity. ;)