So this means that guys who sing silly love, peace and hair grease songs can't even hide from 'da man'.

Cat Stevens should be deported from the US. He tends to hang around the Middle Eastern countries a lot, giving lectures on Islam, and courting suspicious groups. He has terroristic tendencies and even supports stoning executions of women, as well as the fatwa death sentence issued by an Iranian cleric to Salman Rushdie for writing his book "The Satanic Verses", which, by the way, is a very good read. The US is probably much better off without him promoting his filth.

Well, the US should make it a hassle for people who donate money to terrorist causes, whether on purpose or accidentally. Although in that case everyone should get punished for buying gasoline.

There is no way he should not be allowed on U.S soil. He is Muslim he is not an extremist. He is too high profile to be a terrorist. Not to mention there is no evidence linking him to any terrorist group. All they have against him is he is a devot Muslim. If this is the standard for deportation I think there are plenty of people you well have to be gone. And since we are at it Africa is a violent place better rid of the blacks. Oh and China is communist lets get rid of Chinese. Don't forget about those Nip's they bomed Pearl Harbour 60 years ago can't forgive them yet. And the wet backs are just free loading. Isreal is pretty violent lets ditch the Jews too. Gays they can go they are too much like the French. After all that America well be safe.

However, it is also moot.Maybe you could suggest some other fuel that we could miracously use to fuel the leviathan U.S. economy,preferably before I go to work tomorrow!O.K. drop me a note -------Stingray

We should allow the Cat out of the bag.Once we get him on our soil we should stone his ass to a seriouse amount of pain!At once we should put him on trail for crimes against the sensibilties of the peaceful community at large! His music is aghast at my ears!Bloody fool !

Why should Cat Stevens be deported for giving lectures on Islam and eing suspicious? Or even for having "bad" beliefs? What are we trying to start Neo-McCarthyism? Deporting everyone who we think is a terrorist like we deported everyone we thought was a communist?

Yusuf Islam supports terrorist groups like Hamas and their intifada against Israel. He gave a lecture at my university and stated that he supports the seemingly innocuous "right of return", which essentially would lead to the eventual disintegration of Israel.

The fact that he is so open about his extreme-right views and that he actively courts suspicious groups and possibly even gives moral and/or financial support to terrorist groups or charities which give to terrorist groups is reason enough to bar him entry into the US.

Read the fucking article.

"A second government official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said U.S. authorities think donations from Islam may have ended up helping to fund blind sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was convicted for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Hamas, a Palestinian militant group considered a terrorist organization by the United States and Israel.


In July 2000, Islam was deported hours after arriving in Jerusalem. A local paper reported then that the government claimed he had delivered tens of thousands of dollars to Hamas during a visit in 1988. Islam denied ever knowingly supporting Islamic terrorists"

Sounds to me like they DO have reason to suspect him; we know he gives money to Islamic charities, we know that many such charities have diverted their funds to terrorists.

In a War Against (Islamic) Terrorism, it would be irresponsible NOT to question people like this.

This part cracks me up:

"Crimes against innocent bystanders taken hostage in any circumstance have no foundation whatsoever in the life of Islam and the model example of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him."

Huh??? Muhammad was a "model example"??? He was a pedophile war criminal. I'm thinking the Jews in Medina might have disagreed with "Yusuf Islam"

[link]

"Mohammed at once led 3000 men against the Banu-Kuraiza Jews. On surrendering, they were given a choice of Islam or death. They chose death. Their 6oo fighting men were slain and buried in the market place of Medina; their women and children were sold into slavery."

What a peaceful man :rolleyes:

Don't fool yourself. All religions have, at one time or another fought wars but this is not to say its a bad religion. The crusade's ring a bell? What about the KKK? perhaps we should not let christians into the country either.

The goal of the Communists in America was to influence American politics enough to change our system from the inside. Generally, they wanted to do this through peaceful means. McCarthy overreacted, yes, but the threat was present. There is still a communist party in this country, and you're free to join it if you wish.

Terrorists have demonstrated a desire and capability to kill thousands of people. They are not interested in "converting" America, they simply want to destroy it and inflict casualties. They are not the agents of any single government, but of a shady network.

I don't believe a comparasin of the two would be appropriate.

Like I said, he has extreme right views, and he's suspicious, that's no reason to send him away. He's innocent until proven guilty.

True.. That's a good point about the Communists in America, I agree.

But no one has proved that Cat Stevens is a terrorist, and even if he does have a desire to kill thousands of people I'd say he doesn't have a capability to, nor have they proven that he wants to. I'm saying he hasn't done anything wrong actively so he shouldn't be shipped off.

There's a money trail between Mr. Stevens and those who fund terrorism.

Granted, there are a lot of less than reputable charities out there that donate money to terrorists. Islam is a very altruistic religion, which teaches that you should give to the poor regardless of what they do with it. You receive a blessing for giving, not for their action.

As you can imagine, this causes a lot of problems. Is it possible Mr. Stevens unwittingly gave money to a terrorist group through a charitable front? Yes. Is it possible he knew what he was doing and wanted the terrorists to get the money. Yes.

It definitely merits further investigation.

Ok so there is little bits of evidence that is all based on heresay and that is enough to kick him out of the country. Well then Gerorge W. should be gone because Farenheit 9/11 had just as much loose evidence linking him to terrorists.

I don't think it merits investigation, there's really no need to pry into someone's personal life unless you've got a really good reason. i.e., Cat Stevens donates 2 Million dollars to a Islamic charity, the next day a 2 million dollar bomb explodes somewhere and kills someone, that might be suspicious enough. But still, he shouldn't be deported or harrassed because people are suspicious.

you should shut up

Why should he shut up?

I've got a lot of respect for you, Majic, but you've got some faulty logic with that argument.

I believe that giving money to any group that is known to be or believed to be a front for terrorist groups is an excellent reason for investigation. Waiting for the body count to rise isn't an effective strategy at all.

Let's say it's a different situation. Let's say the police are tracking a man that they know or believe wants to have his wife killed. One day, he is spotted giving a large sum of cash to a man who is known by the police to be a middle-man for a hitman.

What should the police do? Wait for the murder to occur, or nab the suspect right there? One method ends in the death of an innocent person, the other ends in saving a life. Which is appropriate? Should we let people die because, heaven forbid, we might be concerned about who this man gives money to?

Keep in mind, the 9/11 operation ran less than $500,000. Car bombs come a lot cheaper.

And, in any case, the "next day" scenario isn't likely to happen. These things take time to plan and fund.

Majic, like I said, I've got respect for you. But right to privacy ends when you're funding or plotting the murder of somebody else. Their right to continue breathing is far more important than your right to privacy.

Why should he shut up?

Actually. You've got a really good point, perhaps suspicious lost of money is a good enough reason for a preliminary investigation, but certainly not for a deportation. Yeah. He should definately be searched if it's suspicious enough action going on.

Turns out they miss spelled his name. Opps sounds like bull shit to me. Apparently U.S officials cannot tell the difference between this name 'Youssouf Islam' and Cat's name Yusuf Islam. Sounds like they are trying to divert attention from the "watch list" because people would actually like to see who is on it and why.

Turns out they miss spelled his name. Opps sounds like bull shit to me. Apparently U.S officials cannot tell the difference between this name 'Youssouf Islam' and Cat's name Yusuf Islam. Sounds like they are trying to divert attention from the "watch list" because people would actually like to see who is on it and why.
[link]

Yeah, you heard me.

There isn't a set way of spelling arabic words in English, like there is in Chinese. (a process called transliteration)

Spelling Arabic names in English incorrectly is very common.

For example - Is it Osama Bin Laden? Usama Ben Ladin? Usama Bin Laden?

It could just as easily be any one of the three.

Keep that in mind.

It would help to have an administration that is friendly towards research into realistic alternative fuel sources, rather than one that axes such programs.

But in something this serious even if it was spelled incorrectly that shows that this is a seriously flawed system.

miss spelled?
mispelled?
misspelled?

See, even we can't it right in our own language.

I noticed we can't right our own language. But some can write our own langauge.

There is no correct method of spelling it at all. So, how can it be spelled incorrectly? How can the system be flawed due to spelling errors when there is no correct method of spelling the name, which forces the designers of the system to use a very broad set of names?

If I'm not mistaken, some of the same mistakes allowed some of the 9/11 hijackers easier access to the country. I'll thumb through my copy of the 9/11 report and see if I can find it.

There wasn't even a uniform system of spelling English words in English until the mid 1800's...

Are you suggesting Cat doesn't have a passport with his name spelled in it? The list had Yuslaf spelled a different way. How can the system confuse those two names. They should have them in both translated ways. I'm saying the system is flawed you can't deny that.

Are you saying you can't get another passport, and just change the spelling of your name on the form? It really isn't all that hard.

Are you arguing that we should completely scrap the use of any system used to track foreigners who may have ties to terrorism and attempt to deny them access to our country? I could've sworn we saw where that leads about three years ago, when the government barely tried to screen visitors... (read the 9/11 report, you'll find the best information on the subject there)

The system isn't 100% accurate, nor will it prevent all terrorist attacks. It is not the "silver bullet", but it's another layer in a comprehensive policy. The goal isn't to make terrorist attacks impossible; that goal is impossible itself. The goal is to make them more difficult and to substantially decrease the effectiveness of these attacks and increase the risk of capture involved with carrying them out.

Piss and moan about "the man" badgering people all you want. I'd rather have a false positive every now and then than have people who are connected to financing terrorist groups wandering around my country. I'd also prefer they aren't onboard large international flights heading for D.C.

I suppose the alternatives to deporting him would've been imprisonment, incredibly close survailence, or "neutralization", none of which are more appealing to a person that's concerned with the rights of the man involved.

peaceniks will always lose. Losers suck.bitch

I noticed we can't right our own language.,but some can write our own langauge.

*See, even we can't get it right in our own language.
*Sea, even oui can't get it write in are omh languish.

Try again looser.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. "
-Benjamin Franklin

I took that off someones quote. I agree a screening system is needed but it needs improvement. The government cannot just have a list that they show no one and have no criteria for. They have to have a good reason to keep you out not just because you have different views.

Since when are anecdotal quotes the basis for forming government policy? Franklin was speaking of a very, very different time than we're living in.

Guess what, by living in America, you've ALREADY given up a great deal of liberties. Do you pay taxes? Do you follow basic traffic regulations? Why? How could you possibly give up the liberty of doing what you please with your money and driving however you want? Do you deserve safety?

The government HAS criteria for screening people. They just don't publicize it for very, very obvious reasons.

When those "different views" go beyond, say, disagreements about US trade policy or the war in Iraq and enter the realm of "a lot of Americans should be killed/American interests should be damaged", then we have every right to keep those people out of our country at the very least.

I speak with foreigners living in this country everday that have differing and often radical views on what US domestic and foreign policy should be. Differing political views aren't what keeps people out of the country - it's the desire to kill or support the killing of Americans or the damaging of our interests overseas.

If this particular individual was funneling money to terrorist organizations, deportation is a fairly light punishment. If there's hard evidence of it (may be, as he had similar problems in Israel, but they're not always the best source), I'd honestly be surprised other "measures" weren't taken.

Is it possible it was all a simple mistake? Yes. Still, if I were placed in the position of knowing that a suspected terrorist was onboard a flight bound for D.C., I believe I'd do everything I could to divert that plane as well.

He can't exactly be tried for a crime in the US...

If our intel suspects him, keep him out. It's as simple as that, and it's our only real recourse.

or whatever the hell he calls himself, should have been locked up for making up such terrible "music".

Again I belive that people have the right to know if they are on that list and why. I think we are never going to agree on this.

How old are you?12?

Get some balls and quit posting as an AC.

fudgepacking piece of crapola?no habla espano`l ?,welll

My thuoghts turn to Ice! when you speak of a brother os this!

Did Jesus advocate the killing of innocents and those who surrendered? Did Jesus suggest that lynching was God's will? No? The STFU.

To this day, Muslim clerics use Mohammed's example in Medina as justification for terrorism. After all, if the prophet of your religion slaughtered unarmed men, raped 9 year-olds and sold women and children into slavery... it must be OK, right?

Every time someone mentions the exploits of Mohommed, some liberal douchebag has to mention the Crusades... though they haven't bothered picking up a history book to read about how the actions of the Crusaders- as immoral as they might have been- were in direct response to the immoral tactics of the Muslims who spread their religion through violence and terror.

I'm not gay. And you realize that useing gay as an insult only works if the person is straight thus making your insult no longer insulting.