Multiple Attacks In Brussels Leave Dozens Dead, Over 100 Wounded. The capital of Belgium was rocked by three separate explosions on March 22, two in the city's airport and one at the Maelbeek metro station. The attacks came days after the capture of Salah Abdeslam, the man allegedly responsible for the Paris terror attacks last November:

A Belgian government representative told CNN that 10 people were killed and 100 wounded at Brussels' international airport. At least 20 people died and 130 were wounded at the Maelbeek metro station, officials said.

[...]

Authorities in Belgium have been trying to crack down on terror threats for months as they raided homes in the area in search of suspects.Tuesday'sviolence came just days after investigators closed in on Europe's most wanted man, Paris attacks suspect Salah Abdeslam, who was hiding out in a Brussels suburb.

The “working assumption” is that the attackers came from the network behind November's massacres in Paris, which left 130 dead, Belgian security sources said, while cautioning it is very early in the latest investigation. ISIS also claimed responsibility for those attacks. [CNN.com, 3/23/16]

Ted Cruz Calls For Law Enforcement To “Patrol And Secure Muslim Neighborhoods”In Response To Brussels Attacks

Ted Cruz: “We Need To Empower Law Enforcement To Patrol And Secure Muslim Neighborhoods Before They Become Radicalized.” In a statement in response to the March 22 attacks in Brussels, Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said that he would be in favor of “empower[ing] law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized”:

"Today radical Islamic terrorists targeted the men and women of Brussels as they went to work on a spring morning. In a series of coordinated attacks they murdered and maimed dozens of innocent commuters at subway stations and travelers at the airport. For the terrorists, the identities of the victims were irrelevant. They -we--are all part of an intolerable culture that they have vowed to destroy.

"For years, the west has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods.

"We will do what we can to help them fight this scourge, and redouble our efforts to make sure it does not happen here. We need to immediately halt the flow of refugees from countries with a significant al Qaida or ISIS presence. We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.

“We need to secure the southern border to prevent terrorist infiltration. And we need to execute a coherent campaign to utterly destroy ISIS. The days of the United States voluntarily surrendering to the enemy to show how progressive and enlightened we can be are at an end. Our country is at stake.” [TedCruz.org, 3/22/16]

Media Figures Across The Political Spectrum Condemn Cruz's Plan

CBS' Norah O'Donnell To Ted Cruz: “It's Impractical What You're Suggesting ... It's More Of A Political Point That You're Making.” On the March 23 edition of CBS' This Morning, co-host Norah O'Donnell challenged Cruz on his proposal to “patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods,” saying his suggestion was “impractical,” and asking the senator to “name one community, one city where we have a large group of radicalized Muslims”that present a clear and present threat to American security (emphasis added):

NORAH O'DONNELL (CO-HOST): Let me ask you this. This raises a lot of civil liberty concerns. Let me ask you. How many Muslims are in America?

SEN.TED CRUZ: I don't know the number off the top of my head.

O'DONNELL: So you're saying that law enforcement should surveil a number of Muslims, and you don't even know how many Muslims are in America? There are three million Muslims in America. Law enforcement is overwhelmed.

CRUZ: So you're saying we can't defeat radical Islamic terrorism?

O'DONNELL: We have a chief of police, one of the mostrespected chiefs of police who was here earlier, who said there are no Muslim neighborhoods. It's not like Europe, it doesn't exist that way. It's impractical what you're suggesting. Also, it doesn't suggest it would lead to anything. It's more of a political point that you're making.

CRUZ: Norah, actually you brought up Europe and it's a good example. If you look at the attack in Brussels, it's a direct result of the failed immigration policies in Europe that have allowed vast numbers of radical Islamic terrorists to come to Europe and they have been ghetto-ized in neighborhoods that have become isolated,thathave become separate, and they become incubators for radical Islamic terrorism.

O'DONNELL: That's not a similar problem that we have here in the United States.

CRUZ: Of course, it is. There are communities in America --

O'DONNELL: Name one community, one city where we have a large group of radicalized Muslims.

CRUZ: You have communities,for example,in Minnesota, you have communities in Michigan with heavy concentration, and you have incidences of radical imams preaching jihadism, preaching Islamism. [CBS, This Morning, 3/23/16]

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough: What Cruz Is Proposing “Is The Exact Opposite Of What We Need To Do. It Makes Us Less Safe.” On the March 23 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, co-host Joe Scarborough blasted Cruz's call to “patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods” as “the exact opposite of what we need to do,” adding that Cruz's proposal actually “makes us less safe” and ignores the fact that millions of Muslim Americans “have successfully integrated into this country” and are “pursuing the American dream” (emphasis added):

JOE SCARBOROUGH (CO-HOST): Well, you know, I am the last person that's ever been accused of being politically correct in this fight against terrorism. I believe we need enhanced interrogation techniques. I'm not talking about waterboarding, but we need to be far more aggressive. We don't want to make the same mistakes we made leading up to 9/11 and then jerk too far in one direction. We're too far in the other direction now. So I am not politically correct. That said, what Ted Cruz said yesterday is the exact opposite of what we need to do. It makes us less safe. I won't even talk about American values. Let's not talk about American values. Let's talk about American safety. If we are going to win the war against Islamic terrorism in the United States, if we're going to make sure we don't end up looking like Europe, we do that by continuing to do what Americans have done for over 200 years, accept immigrants into this country and integrate. Muslim Americans have successfully integrated into this country better than any non-Muslim country in the world. They're pursuing the American dream. One percent of Americans are Muslim. Ten percent of doctors in this country, I've read, are Muslim Americans. Muslim Americans are entrepreneurs. They are leaders in this country. Ted Cruz could not have it more wrong. I'm not talking about values. I'm not talking about reaching out and touching someone. I'm not talking about teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony. I'm talking about beating ISIS. You beat ISIS by having Muslim Americans embrace the American dream. And I had one leader in this country, one Muslim American text me earlier in this show saying, “In Europe, Muslims look at themselves as Muslims first and European second, as far as identity goes. In America they see themselves as Americans who are Muslims.” We have to keep it that way. [MSNBC, Morning Joe, 3/23/16]

NBC's Savannah Guthrie To Ted Cruz: Is “The Mere Fact That They're Muslims, In Your Mind, Means Police Officers Should Be Securing And Patrolling Those Areas?” On the March 23 edition of NBC's Today, co-host Savannah Guthrie pressed Cruz on his plan, asking Cruz if he would" require some suspicion of radicalization before" directing law enforcement to “patrol Muslim neighborhoods.” Guthrie also noted that the program Cruz cites as precedent for his proposal “has been disbanded” and that “in six years, [the Muslim surveillance program] never led to even one piece of intelligence, not an arrest, not a conviction”:

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE (CO-HOST): Let me start where we just mentioned. You said yesterday,in a Facebook post, that “we need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”How would you define a Muslim neighborhood? Is there a certain percentage of Muslims that have to live there? And do you have to haveany particular suspicionthat they're being radicalized, or is itjustthe mere fact that they're Muslims, in your mind, means police officers should be securing and patrolling those areas?

TED CRUZ: Well, let's start out with what happened in Brussels yesterday. All of us, our thoughts, our prayers are with those who were murdered, those who were injured. Yesterday, I think, reminded everyone, really underscored, that we are facing a war. It is not -- this was not an isolated lone wolf. This was not an isolated incident. Radical Islamic terrorism -- ISIS has declared jihad on the United States of America.

GUTRHIE: There's no question about that. And I guess the issue this morning is the response and trying to understand what it is you're recommending.

[...]

CRUZ: Mayor de Blasio, in an example of political correctness very befitting of Obama and Hillary Clinton, cancelled the program, said “we're not going to target the bad guys because they will not acknowledge--”

GUTHRIE: You cite that program, but itof course, has been disbanded.Aformer supervisor of the program said that in six years, it never led to even one piece of intelligence, not an arrest, not a conviction. In fact, the supervisor was quoted as saying that it involved paying undercover officers to sit in cafes frequented by Muslims, drinking tea and eating sweets at taxpayer expense.

CRUZ: Look, what I know is if you want to stop radical Islamic terrorism, you need a concerted focus on doing so. Any law enforcement --like,for example, if you have a problem with gang violence, what law enforcement does with gang violence is you target the neighborhoods where gang violence is prevalent, and you work to root out the gang members to--

GUTHRIE: But that goes to my question. Would you then -- so, for example, you're saying gang violence, you look where is there gang violence, we'll go patrol those neighborhoods. When you talk about patrolling Muslim neighborhoods, would you require some suspicion of radicalization before you patrol the neighborhoods? [NBC, Today, 3/23/16]

ABC's George Stephanopoulos Asked Cruz About The Constitutionality Of His Proposal. On the March 23 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, co-host George Stephanopoulos pressed Cruz on his proposal, saying his “proposal to have police patrol Muslim neighborhoods is drawing a lot of fire.” Stephanopoulos later asked Cruz to clarify his plan, asking, “how is targeting Muslim neighborhoods constitutional?”:

Experts, Fact Checkers Agree That Cruz's Plan Is “Counterproductive” And “A Clear Violation Of Both The First And 14th Amendments”

Vox: Experts Say “Targeting Muslims With Police Surveillance Would Be Counterproductive.” In a March 22 reaction to Ted Cruz's proposal,Vox's Jeff Stein consulted experts who lambasted Cruz's plan, saying, “If you're looking for a way to radicalize someone, patrolling their neighborhoods and keeping a close watch on what they're doing is a good way to do it.” Moreover, experts say Cruz's suggestion “appears to be of a different magnitude” than the New York Police Department's (NYPD) now-defunct mosque surveillance program. Stein continued, noting that Cruz's suggestion is “a clear violation of both the First and 14th Amendments” (emphasis added):

Cruz's suggestion that American law enforcement specifically “patrol and secure” Muslim communities is both immoral and counterproductive. That's according to A. Trevor Thrall, a Cato Institute scholar who is also a professor of policy, government, and international affairs at George Mason University.

Stepped-up surveillance of some Muslim communities after 9/11 provoked a backlash. Cruz's proposal would likely lead to a similar reaction, according to Thrall.

“Having the FBI coming to their neighborhoods and mosques created an awful amount of resentment toward the US government,” Thrall said. “If you're looking for a way to radicalize someone, patrolling their neighborhoods and keeping a close watch on what they're doing is a good way to do it.”

[...]

After 9/11, the New York Police Department indiscriminately monitored thousands of Muslims who were under no suspicion of terror activity.

But Cruz's proposal appears to be of a different magnitude, said Ibrahim Hooper, the national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

“This goes light-years beyond that. Cruz is talking about police 'securing' -- what does that mean? Does that mean checkpoints on every corner? Does that mean papers on every street?” Hooper said. “To me, this sounds like an armed occupation of Muslim neighborhoods.”

[...]

Cruz's proposal is also “plainly unconstitutional” -- a clear violation of both the First and 14th Amendments, according to Marci Hamilton, a constitutional law expert at the Cardozo School of Law. [Vox, 3/22/16]

Wash. Post Fact Checker: Cruz's Suggested Tactics Were Employed In New York City And The “Program Actually Fractured The Police Department's Relationship With Many In The American Muslim Community.” In a March 23 fact check of Ted Cruz's suggestion, Washington Post fact checker Michelle Ye Hee Lee noted that such programs have “actually fractured the police department's relationship with many in the American Muslim community” in the past. Moreover, Cruz's characterization of why the NYPD dropped the program “is an inaccurate description.” In fact, “by the time that de Blasio and Bratton shuttered it, it was largely inactive. And over its six years, none of the information collected by the Demographics Unit led to a single case.”The Post gave Cruz's claims about the merits of the NYPD's Muslim surveillance program “Four Pinocchios,” a distinction the paper reserves for “whoppers” of misinformation:

In response to the attacks, Cruz called on police in the United States to “patrol and secure” Muslim neighborhoods. When his comment drew criticism, specifically from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, his campaign pointed to the New York Police Department's practice after 9/11 of spying on Muslim communities for potential terrorist activities. Then the campaign criticized New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio for shuttering the surveillance program, saying he “succumbed to unfounded criticisms” and “eliminated the efforts” of NYPD to work with Muslim communities.

How accurate is this characterization?

[...]

There are two elements to this claim. First is that de Blasio ended the program because he “succumbed to unfounded criticisms.” There was criticism, and whether it was “unfounded” may be a matter of opinion. But by the time that de Blasio and Bratton shuttered it, it was largely inactive. And over its six years, none of the information collected by the Demographics Unit led to a single case. The Cruz campaign's characterization makes it seem as though de Blasio disbanded an active program because of the criticism, but that is an inaccurate description.

The second part is that de Blasio's decision “eliminated the efforts of law enforcement to work with” Muslim communities. But this program actually fractured the police department's relationship with many in the American Muslim community in New York, and a group of Muslims sued the department over it. On both fronts, this characterization is false, and earns Four Pinocchios. [The Washington Post, Fact Checker, 3/23/16]

Civil Liberties Groups Have Condemned Cruz's Plan And Have Characterized Past Muslim Surveillance Programs As Being “Discriminatory” And Completely Ineffective

Council On American-Islamic Relations “Called On Cruz To Retract And Apologize For His Unconstitutional Policy Proposal.” In a March 22 response to Ted Cruz's proposal to “patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods,”the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) “called on Cruz to retract and apologize for his unconstitutional policy proposal”:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today decried GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz's call for law enforcement to “patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods” and the naming of notorious Islamophobe Walid Phares as one of leading GOP candidate Donald Trump's policy advisers.

CAIR called on Cruz to retract and apologize for his unconstitutional policy proposal and for Trump to drop Phares as an adviser.

In a Facebook post, Cruz said: “We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.” [Council on American-Islamic Relations, 3/22/16]

Anti-Defamation League Condemns Cruz's Plan, Calls It “A Misguided And Counterproductive Response To The Terrorist Threat.” In a March 22 statement, Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt said of Cruz's proposal: