US fingerprint & photograph all foreign visitors except those on visa waiver

In article , nobody
wrote:

Vareck Bostrom wrote:
The Arab world has no legitimate argument with the US, above arguments
that any nation has with any other nation.

It is your right as an american to believe what you want. But when you have
large buildings destoyed, and your government act like a headless chicken
that
is scared ****less, you should perhaps ask yourself if all those
preconceptions are right or not.

My opinion was formed from time spent in the mideast and during study of
the situation in foreign relations and cultural anthropology classes.


The USA's handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict is more than enough
reason
for the arab world to have a big beef against the USA. And now, you can add
the illegimate invasion of Iraq to the list of big beefs.

thought that the 9/11 attacks were executed by either Israel or the US

And I have spoken to americans who think that the 9-11 terrorists came from
Canada.

If you want to argue that the US education system needs some work, you
won't hear me complain.


Al Queada is not a rational faction. They are extremist and
fundamentalist, their target selection and choice of targets can't be
considered rational.

They use emotion to recruit and brainwash people. And the USA has provided
plenty of "emotion" to cause enough people to get mad at the USA to jointhose
terrorist movements.

North Korea has engineered events designed to terrorize, I'm sure you're
aware.

Are you aware that Rumsfeld decided to break the peace treaty that Clinton
had
reached and this is what precipitated North Korea to restart its nuclear
project, exactly what Rumsfeld had wanted ?

The North Koreans broke the same treaty before the current
administration was even in power.


Rumsfeld, in the newamericancentury.org web site had promised back in 1998 to
scrap the deal Clinton had reached.

governments to perform. Fortunately, our governments are more rational
and long-term thinking than we are.

Which is not the case with the current regime in the USA.

could have this viewpoint? Do you honestly believe that there are no
Americans besides the administration that have some support for this
view?

It is hard to know if an american who supports the Bush regime is well
informed or if he supports them because he only watched media outlets that
show the Bush regime's side of the story ?

I read on a daily or weekly basis, arabnews, haaretz, gulf news (when I
was in the mideast), several japanese newspapers (in english), deutche
welle, and have read many books on the situation in general, I don't
follow American media except for local stories.


Now more than ever, the "information society" is critical. Population is
controlled by information released by the government to the media. And rogue
governments such as the Bush regime want orwelian data collection on all
their
citizens, and even citizens from outside their own country.

So considering I do not gain my opinion from the mainstream US media,
how do you explain my support (in general) for the current foreign
policy?


We have foreign soliders stationed on US soil. A Canadian air force
officer is present at NORAD, for example.

they are not "soldiers" in the same sense as americans in middle east. They
may be military, by they are more civil servants, administrators than
soldiers. They coordinate computers and provide a bridge betwene two separate
military organisations.

And there are plenty of soldiers or future soldiers studying at US
military schools. Whatever the case, the US does have a large number of
foreign citizens in this country with diplomatic immunity - the number
of people in the US with diplomatic immunity is well over division
strength, we may as well have an army of foreign soldiers here.


However, until not too long ago, the yanks id have a military base in
Newfoundland.

Back in the 1960s, the USA had Bomarc nuclear missiles stationed north of
montreal and in north bay whose sole purpose was to detonate any soviet
planes
before they reached USA territory. (in other words, explode soviet nukes over
canada to protect the USA).


Nuclear weapons will not be detonated (generally) by the nearby
explosion of another nuclear or conventional weapon. Exploding an
enhanced radiation (cobalt jacketed) weapon near the core of another
nuclear weapon generally has the purpose of creating a fizzle or other
effects from the core of the incoming weapon.

It seems there were two bomarc bases in canada - at La Macaza, Quebec
and North Bay, Ontario, under joint command of NORAD, it's unlikely they
could have been used without Canadian authorization.