Dear Editor:
Actually, the most effective solution to the terrorism problem which is
within our power to implement is to end all military economic and political
support to Israel, oversee real elections in Iraq and withdraw as quickly
as the new Iraqi government desires. But lacking that, the US has no
choice but to place a great deal of emphasis upon immigration as a means of
combatting anti-American assaults. To say that "the only effective measure
to stop the al-Qaida threat is to eliminate it at its source overseas" is
little different than saying that the only effective measure to stop the
Palestinian threat to Israel is to eliminate it at its source. If Israel's
occupation of Palestinian territories and assassination of their leadership
has not enabled it to thwart attacks on itself, how much less likely of
success are any conceivable US offensive actions against Al-Qaeda? The
only measure which has shown Israel any reasonable degree of success to
date has been the sealing off of the Gaza Strip, resulting in a radical
reduction of attacks from that area (virtually all successful attacks on
Israel now come from the West Bank). Given the fact that the US has
neither the will nor the resources to occupy the entire Muslim World to
begin with (Cheney et al to the contrary), nor the common sense to simply
leave it alone, then it appears that we must put our primary emphasis upon
defensive measures. Although we cannot seal ourselves off from the outside
world, the US nevertheless has no choice but to exercise the most
vigorous scrutiny of those seeking to enter from abroad. Nothing could
better vindicate Ann Coulter's charge that "liberals" are fundamentally
unpatriotic then to advocate putting the desires of nonresidents to enter
this country over the security of the people already here. It is, after
all, one thing to ask Americans to risk losing their jobs for the sake
of liberal immigration policies. It is quite another to ask them to risk
their lives.
Michael E. Piston
Attorney at Law
|