Proactive instead of Preempt...

Submitted by Aamir (Pakistan), Oct 3, 2007 at 14:08

Dear Daniel Pipes

I agree with you in a sense that a country should be active regarding its security. Being alien and out of USA I dont know the exact background of Mayfield case mentioned in the article but the so called evidence provided by you are mostly cannot be considered as evidence to proof that he is a terrorist.

If a peaceful citizen or individual expresses point of view in favour or against some issue then this will not fall in the category of "Preempt"..Infact this will lead to a "tight lipped attitude" on key issues if people think that airing ones view may lead to link with terrorism.

If your room mate commits crime then you cannot be considered as terrorist. If your class fellow is sentenced to 18 years of prison even then you cannot be considered as future terrorist (Preempt??). If you give a comment which is against government's policy even then you cannot be considered as terrorist. In my view the whole idea of free speach and society is in danger when a peaceful citizen is dragged in to something which he / she dont deserve just because he/she follow a religion which is deliberately labelled as "Linked to terrorism".

I strongly accept that US has every right to take care of security, but the example of Iraq is something which is not in this category. Iraq in my opinion was no threat of any sort for US security infact none of the Iraqi citizen were linked to Al-Qaida before invasion of US forces. I strongly believe that US is more unsecure after invasion of Iraq and the US citizens are worried because of the same reason.

In my opinion "Proactive" is the right word and approach for security of a country.

Regards

Aamir Ali Ansari

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".