and in fact remains so, despite this confidentiality order, which, while possiblyimportant, is really not going to do much to stop the NYPD from being involved in these kinds of things, which it was (note the date, well after the passage of EO 41).

so the EO helps by allowing some stuff to happen that wouldn’t have otherwise which is important (like letting immigrants, transgender people, etc, go to the city health department withouth worrying about reporting of their info), but it ultimately does nothing to stop the intersection of criminalization and enforcement that’s being used to create the basis for undermining immigrants rights (largely because of the loophole for reporting immigration status in the context of investigating crimes). which in turn proiabbly does little to encourage immigrants who are afriad of being reported to call the fire department. which in turn defeats the whole purpose of the executive order.

but, again, it’s probably better than nothing and i’d be interested if anyone has meassures of the real effects before and after the EO.

iknteresting sidenote: the commissioner of immigrant affairs for bloomberg while all this was happening was a desi woman named sayu bhojwani.

to what extent do countries of the Enlightement tradition hold a special place toward having just laws? I think the idea that the ideals in the Constitution and other products of the Enlightement are universal have led to an expectation that laws should be universally applicable; that is what is good in a universal sense should be a consideration of how law here is made

i wonder if the pre-eminence of countries of the Enlightenment economically helped make this the case

because so many nations are tied in some way to what happens here, it then does matter if the laws here are universal

in some way we expect Han chinese in China to be given special treatment in a way we don’t in the US in similiar situations

or maybe not

I could care less whether the law says Saleh’s blood should be drained and drunk from by the masses opposed to illegal immigration or says Saleh should be awarded a gazillion dollars in punitive damages and wed to Mariah Carey. I do care, however, when we sanction official disregard or abuse of the law. Note the “we”, a rather important concept since “we” affect this country and its rules – and hence affect me, the only person I truly need to care about – far more than any Mr. Saleh can ever hope to concern me. I would rather the law be ludicrous, because then at least it would be allowed and widely taken advantage of for its ludicrousness and eventually people’s opinions may change and steer this 280m passenger ship elsewhere.

What I don’t like, what is excruciatingly annoying and on par with having mistakenly rubbed my eyes with chili-laced fingers, is not only reading about an officer thus far not reprimanded for likely abuse of power, but having to wade through a chorus chanting ad nauseam the illegality of Saleh’s stay here when he has already been deported. If there is a clear consensus on whether we punish Saleh further, hunt and deport Saleh-like individuals, ignore the whole episode, fish Saleh back and restore the pre-imbroglio status quo, slap the officer’s wrist, or strip Hickman’s stripes, one of these things would become the standard and we could measure the effects. Instead, minor infractions occur now and again, some party randomly wins, a howl is made by the public, a lull follows, and the process repeats. This process of sedentary democracy lets victors keep their spoils however obtained; and, without any standards in place, the illegals silently become fodder for abuse and we lose all metrics which if gathered would strengthen future decision-making.

Either kick illegals out, or legitimize their stay! This teetering between the two is horrible. Execute Order 41 largely disambiguated how we should treat illegals, and I neither like nor dislike its stance that immigration status becomes protected information, but I love that it is a stance, a firm one, and an official one. Despite this, we’re still more concerned with Saleh’s former status than Hickman’s ability to circumvent E.O. 41 and exploit Saleh’s status? If anything, I see this as an opportunity to either undo the EO and legislate in the opposite direction, finding and evicting NYC illegals, or to strengthen the EO and attempt to legitimize within the city a federal illegality. City and State nonconformity with Federal stipulation isn’t uncommon – and both Bhagat Singh Thind and the NYC official who unwittingly granted him citizenship in the 1920s would, if still alive, attest both to the priority of local rules and the power of local officials. Personally, if my opinion is worth anything, I’d suggest that money be spent more wisely than paying for an impenetrable aegis protecting us from those who would’ve been freely admitted a century ago. Unless, of course, there are those who feel our 20th century was ruined because of 19th century immigration.

I take it you read my post with the link to the “Able Danger” group ? There seems to have been more than just trivial information to share.

I suggest you read this article which very clearly summarizes how information sharing between Federal and local entities could have helped, as well as the recent revelations of “Able Danger”.

Deadly tale of incompetence

An excerpt:

The CIA feared al-Mihdar and al-Hazmi might try to slip into the United States. But the CIA lost track of them after they left a terror meeting in Malaysia in early 2000 for Bangkok. Worse, the CIA waited until the summer of 2001 to tell the FBI that two suspected terrorists had visas to enter the United States – and might be here. The story of the lack of cooperation between the CIA and FBI is well-known – and well-documented by the 9/11 commission. But the story is even more troublesome with the revelation that even before the CIA knew of suspected terrorists trying to enter the United States that the Able Danger team had its own set of information. Imagine what might have happened if Able Danger was cooperating with the CIA and the FBI. On the phone last week, the former Able Team member I interviewed told a depressing story of that cooperation that never took place. His story, he says, tells us just how close U.S. officials could have come to breaking up the 9/11 plot before it unfolded. But there was one problem: The U.S. government did not want to hear what this sleuth and his 10 teammates had to say – before and even after the 9/11 plot. By mid-2000, the Able Danger team knew it had important information about a possible terrorist plot. Because of a peculiar series of computer links that went through Brooklyn, the team began referring to the four future hijackers as the “Brooklyn cell.” Their movements and communications were raising too many suspicions. The Able Danger sleuth, whose interview with me was arranged by the staff of Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., asked that his name not be revealed so he could maintain his top-secret counter-terror role. He emerged from the shadows of spying and intelligence analysis last week because he wanted to set the record straight. One of his targets is the 9/11 commission. The commission’s staff, he says, ignored him when he approached them on two occasions to spell out Able Danger’s work. Another target are Pentagon lawyers. The sleuth says he and other Able Danger team members became so concerned during the summer of 2000 that they asked their superiors in the Pentagon’s special operations command for permission to approach the FBI. Their superiors approached Pentagon legal experts. Those experts turned down the request.

Cmon dude- what exactly would be different? We’re not debating whether people should be arrested and put in jail for speeding. That would be the only way they could have stopped Jarrah. The article itself says that he wasn’t on the FBI’s watch list. No amount of information sharing would have made a difference- there was no information to share! But better intelligence perhaps would have made a difference. Who knows, more resources dedicated towards specific intelligence may have caught this guy or one of the others, there’s no way for us to know. But dumping money into blanket policies of intimidation and targeting would not have helped in this case, and has not helped us catch a single potential terrorist. Seriously, go through all the policies since 9/11. Do any of them make you feel safer? It’s because our government repeatedly confuses immigration with national security.

Everytime the argument gets tough for the folks on your side of this debate, your first instinct is to invoke some 9/11 related story and use that to justify your policy choice without making any type of actual policy argument. As if the story is the policy argument. Dig deeper man! There is no scenario related to 9/11 in which information sharing between federal and local entities would have helped.

Not the same but connected very closely. In case you are not aware, you do go through FBI and police checks, to check guess what: whether you could be a criminal or a terrorist. National security checks are the first steps for weeding out unwanted immigrants.

If this Maryland police officer had access to better information or been more agressive about arresting Ziad Jarrah for excessive speeding, history may have been different. Sometimes finding that proverbial needle just requires one to have an eye unhindered by red tape and dangerous political correctness. A law like Executive Order 41 will allow such situations to repeat if the police are not allowed to make judgements as to what a situation might potentially be connected with.

Look, if you are a CIA agent, and you are investigating a suspected Al Queda member in flight school when you know that OBL is trying to blow up WTC with planes, that information should be passed along. No one is arguing otherwise. The dumb fucks who run our intelligence agencies can’t get their acts together, and so, no one took this CIA agent’s memo seriously. If they did, maybe things would be different, but it’s hard to say.

But because of their failures and lack of real solutions for their MISTAKES, they are diverting attention away by enacting blanket policies like across the board information sharing even when wrongdoing is not suspected, special registration, targeting of communities for deportation, etc. These are fake solutions.

You can’t find the needle in the haystack. It’s not gonna pop up and prick you in the ass.

Instead of wasting time enacting these blanket measures that don’t help you find terrorists, they should pour this money into better intelligence and support. Immigration and national security are not the same thing.

It doesn’t seem like that bit about Mr Saleh’s breaking the law and the policeman doing his job is of much concern for the people rushing to his aid. It is just another platform for their agenda.