Here Today... Gone To Hell!

The next time someone tells you that profiling mid eastern men is wrong, make them take this test:

HISTORY TEST

Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following multiple choice test. The events are actual Events

from history. They actually happened.

Do you remember?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by

    a. Superman

    b. Jay Leno

    c. Harry Potter

    d. a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:

    a. Olga Corbett

    b. Sitting Bull

    c. Arnold Schwarzenegger

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:

    a. Lost Norwegians

    b. Elvis

    c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of  17 and 40

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:

    a. John Dillinger

    b. The King of Sweden

    c. The Boy Scouts

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:

    a. A pizza delivery boy

    b. Pee Wee Herman

    c. Geraldo Rivera

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was

 murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:

    a. The Smurfs

    b. Davy Jones

    c. The Little Mermaid

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers

was murdered by:

    a. Captain Kidd

    b. Charles Lindberg

    c. Mother Teresa

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:

    a. Scooby Doo

    b. The Tooth Fairy

    c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:

    a. Richard Simmons

    b. Grandma Moses

    c. Michael Jordan

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of  17 and 40

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:

    a. Mr. Rogers

    b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems

    c. The World Wrestling Federation

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers

and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers.

Thousands of people were killed by:

    a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd

    b. The Supreme Court of Florida

    c. Mr. Bean

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:

    a. Enron

    b. The Lutheran Church

    c. The NFL

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:

    a. Bonnie and Clyde

    b. Captain Kangaroo

    c. Billy Graham

    d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

Nope, ..I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you? So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest they be guilty of profiling.

As the writer of the award winning story "Forrest Gump" so aptly put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Come on people, wake up!!!

And guess who just bombed London?

And white men between the ages of 17 and 40 NEVER commit any crimes right?

Tell me something, how to you know a muslim from a christian?  based on skin color?

How do you 'spot' an extremist?  based on skin color again?  It doesn't require a certain race or gender to create an extremist, only misguided ideals.

.   

Billy Graham?  :yes:

I'm not in a political mood.

14. In 1995 the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was blown up by:

a. Bill Clinton

b. Jarmo

c. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

d. White righ-wing extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

neither am i... however... i guess you better lock em all up eh?

hey didnt the allies do that with the japs in WW2?

fracking hell..... may the gods pee on you for being so anti anything other then your own intrests...... there wa a time when i would have loved to be an amercian citizen... and live within the borders of the most powerful country on earth.... you know what not a chance now.. id rather live where i am.... and stay canadian..... at least here i know that for the most part tolerence is our middle name

So I take it that you all think that profiling is a bad idea?  Well everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but if it were completely up to me I'd search every muslim looking (yes that mean middle eastern looking) male between 17 and 40 that entered every airport, subway, hospital, church, school, bus stop, restaurant, bookstore, theme park, etc, etc etc.  That does not mean that I think all muslims males are bad people.  Hardly.  It only means that I recognize that our biggest enemy right now is the radical extremeists that happen to be muslim males betwen the age of 17 and 40.  We are talking here about an enemy that is very very recognizable.  I think it is safe to say that a huge majority of terrorists are muslim males between 17 and 40 years old.  Searching old ladies so that we don't infringe on the rights of muslim males is so ridiculous to me.  And yes, there are white men that commit atrocities as well, just like in Oklahoma.  However, I think you can see that stopping a pattern of hatred like these extremeist muslim terrorists are displaying is an easier task than trying to find a needle in a haystack like it would be to find the next timothy mcvey.

jesus lets go right to hell with it.... lets just erase them from the planet...... hey... wait didnt the nazis try that with the jews?


fuck sake......seriously....... some peoples kids

This is a toughy situation, but the original poster is right.  Forgive me if I don't keep an open mind to the opinions and ideals of others who wish to destroy my country.  This isn't a black and white scenario, but the reality of the fact is that America has to protect its own interest and only islam extremist who are ethnic middle easterns are committing these crimes.  Timothy McVay was a fucking wacko (but I'd hardly call him a right-winger) and no one but Nazis and loonies defend him.  Yet, many of you defend the Islamic nutjobs.  Why the double standard here?  I know there are Muslim members of this board, and my comments are in no way meant to offend you.   My opinions are my own, but I don't discriminate when it comes to religion, I believe them all to be bullshit and forms of control.  Christian extremist who want the bible in our schools and in my life are no different than the Islam extremist, except they don't blow shit up on a regular basis, but that's not to say the Christians wouldn't if given similar circumstances.  But I digress, whether you like America and its policies, America has a right to defense and will defend itself.  Currently, only ethnic middle eastern ,extremist men pose that threat and any prudent person would focus on them.  If only McDonalds sells Big Macs, why the fuck would you walk into Wendy's and Burger King to see if they sell them too.  This is just politically correct nonsense.  Again, this isn't a black and white issue, but it's not white, black, yellow or red people blowing up every target of oppurtunity they can.  It's not women and it's not little kids.  It's Arab male extremist, so why should our security focus on any other segment than what has been doing the crime?  Rather than provide rhetoric or some other buillshit excuse, offer a logical reason with all the facts considered.  America being "nice" to the rest of the world and stepping down as the final and last superpower isn't a viable option.  The reality of the situation is that America does what it does so that the average American can enjoy the standard of living and comfort they have.  Every other nation in the world wants to be America or has been in a similar situation as America in the past and been held to the same ridicule.  Let us not forget the sins of our English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Chinese and Russian brothers.

Very well put.  But it is funny to watch the left wing nutjobs go over the top with comparing my ideals to the Nazis because I wan to search these people.   ::)  Get some perspective people.

one question

how do you know the guy is muslim ?

i look like an arab - see gallery - (because my father is from tunisia) but i am no muslim.
so what do you do ?

and profiling is indeed stupid, because, islam is a RELIGION. and a white man can be muslim too.
i was thinking about that. if western countries start on profiling muslim-looking people, terrorist will just hire and brainwash normal white men and use them as  kamikaze, it's simple.

peace,

Profiling sucks anyway. People don't act according to a formula...  :P

Your pathetic

How dare u infer Muslims are wicked people.

Insanity is not limited to a particular ethnic group as u clearly demonstrate.

Quite why such blatant rascism is allowed on this board.....

Who invaded and slaughtered an innocent race of people to set up their own country? Who created a group solely commited to the murder and eventual end to anyone with a different skin colour to theirs? Who exploits the poorest countries in the world and makes money from their citizens by using their lack of knowledge of modern technology and economics? Who put millions of Jewish, Homosexual, Disabled and Gypsie people into concentration camps to be gased because they thought they were the source of all their problems? Who went in to a Middle Eastern country claiming to know of the where-abouts of WMD's (which they think the have the perfect right to own) that was already suffering from a violent dictator and made their problems worse? Who colonized Africa all those years ago and made the people their slaves?

I'll tell you who, White Christians. We are behind just as many (if not more) crimes against humanity as our Muslim brothers. Extreme action against these people, who have been brainwashed by corrupt leaders, just like George W's troops, will only harden their beliefs and make the problems worse, not improve them.

You miss the point of my post.  I am not questioning the fact that all types of people do bad things.  I am simply stating that as of right now, the group of individuals that is causing the most terror in this world (and yes by most I mean a huge majority of it) is muslim men between 17 and 40 years old.  And someone said that islam is a religion and how do you know someone is muslim because white people or black people can be muslim too.  Well, watch some TV.  Go to any site on the internet dedicated to news coverage.  read a paper.  Every single terrorist you see in the news is middle eastern.  I have not seen too many white or black terrorists on tv.  Look at the guys they caught in England last week.  They are middle easterns.  The thought that if we begin profiling the terrorists will recruit white people is assinine.  You can't possibly think that would happen?

Someone posted "i look like an arab - see gallery - (because my father is from tunisia) but i am no muslim.
so what do you do ? "  I'll tell you what we do.  We ask you kindly to show us your bags and we search you when you enter an airport or a public place or what have you.  If you are innocent and have no bad intentions, the search is over in 4 minutes and go about your way.  If you are a terrorist with a bomb, then we just saved a bunch of lives.  This is pretty much common sense people.  A small price to pay if you ask me.

Izzy, I don't see a conversation about profiling as being a racist conversation.  It is a prominent topic in world politics right now.  Read a paper.

Well, Muslim men aren't the only terrorists around. You could be checking a completely innocent Muslim man and a white man with a bomb could walk past unchecked, if one person is to be checked everyone should be checked.

And no matter how smart and intelligent checking Muslim men because of the recent political climate may seem. It is still racism and the Muslim community as a whole should not be treated with fear and suspision just because of what a bunch of nut cases are doing in their name.

but charity case, but what will you do when terrorist will brainwash "white men" and use them as kamikaze ? uh uh ?
you'll search all the arab lookin people and let the normal white guy with a bomb go through ?

uh uh ?

Do you actually think this could happen?  Who would they prey on?  Europeans?  American?  What group could possible be brainwashed into thinking the way they do?  I mean they brainwash their own people now based on their religious beliefs.  Unless you are born and raised a muslim in the middle east, I doubt you would be brainwashed into thinking the way they do.

It is an interesting topic.  I feel that profiling is perfectly acceptable in this case because we know what the enemy looks like.  Others don't.  It's all good.

haha, look at the two biggest TOOLBAGS get together on this one.

Who destroyed Nicaragua?

Who blew up a mosque in beirut missing the cleric they were targeting, yet killing 80 women and children and wounding 250? Hint: A car bomb was used

Who was the only nation to be  condemned for "unlawful use of force" by  International Court of Justice?

Who masacred civilians in El Salvador?

Who massacred civilians or "soft targets" in Guatemala?

Answer: United States Of America.

Using your own standards then, Americans should be profiled as terrorists.

profiling is a tool to fight crime that is proven to work. it should be used at all levels of crime prevention.

thus, it certainly should be used to fight terrorism.

and if blond-haired irish guys blow up a bunch of planes and threaten to do it again, i'm screwed. but i'll be first in line to have the proper authorities search me at the airport.

but given the difference between all the suspects (irish guys, arab guys, black guys, russian guys ...) < profiling loses its strength.

profiling isn't the be-all-end-all solution to anything.  However, it can be used effectively tohelp curtail crime.  If you know that a blond-haired, blue eyes white guy killed a kid, are you gonna detain black females and question them?  No.  This is common sense. 

slcpunk, as usual you miss the point of the thread.

It's pointless to argue for something that will hinder civil liberties with anyone here. If you name 100 bombing perpitrated by Middle Eastern men between the ages of 17-40 they will point out the 2 bombings in that time frame that were done by White Males. It's a losing battle, for every 100 Muhamed Atta's there is 1 Eric Rudolph.

When the next attack on US soil happens, the Civil Libertarians will cry for weeks about how the Government didn't do enough to stop the attack, but for the months leading up to the attack they will be full of complaints about how we try to do it.

no my friend it is u that seems to miss the point....... to stop everyone that fits that discription..... which is everysingle male.... not jsut a blonde har blue eyed white man..... your talking about every single muslim "middle eastren muslim" if you can tell that they are from teh middle east and not 2nd gen westren born... you got some fucking eyes on ya....... maybe we should drop you off over the the ghan and you will do what billions of dollars in tech cant... find the bin laden.... fuck sakes..... what do muslim "terroists" dislike about westren civilization? the fact that for teh most part our laws allow freedom for every race and promotes equality among all.......... so if its going to be equality.... you better be stopping that soccer mom with the 10 kids in the van and searching her for explosves... every freedom that we loose is a victory for the terroists... im amazed how the right wing neo cons cannot see that to win in this manner is to loose the war..... the people that your protecting now are the loosers..... its not what we were raised under its not what our grandfaters/mothers faught for and died for....... i just can not see how short sighted you neo cons are..... SLC ill send ya a plane ticket buddy..... get your ass on some liberal soil....


the thing that you people fail to see is that the next one... no matter what we do to protect from it is going t be huge.... its going to make a statement that no matter what we can still get you... its not going to be small like the london bombings... its going to be bigger tehn the WTC......the only thing i can say about 9/11 is he should have done it bigger just to show exatly how naive the US really is when it comes to the small fries....

you underestimated the VC .... and you had thousdans dead... your are understmating the teroists and thier resolve... you CANNOT FIGHT TERRIOSTS with guns... you hvae to fight them with words and actions....... because you can kill 10,000 in a year only means you'll have another 20,000 recruits..... you have to hit them where their numbers are in easy to exploit countries help them to stand up like a brother nad you willhave a brother for sure.

wait i guesss that is toooo far over the wall for you eh?

i agree. i talked about that once ... and you dis-agreed ...
i think you're pushing it a little on the 9/11 ...

but overall. the "cowboy" technique, fighting back, war, profiling, isn't the right way at all.

the key is education. i think. and also, We have to change. western countries have to re-evaluate their positions and views on the world.
until we realize that we're as evil as them, we wont get nowhere.

You make some good points, but if you think the way to stop terrorism is with words and education, then you are even more left wing than slcpunk.  How come liberals are always satisfied with inaction?  I don't want to make this  political debate between left and right, so I'll stop here.  I agree with some of your post, but I feel that you have to take this fight to the terrorists and not sit back and wait for it to happen again.

as for the next one being big, unless they get a nuke or a WMD, I doubt it will be all that big.  I mean we kicked their asses into the ground in Afganistan and they didn't retaliate at all.  I would think that if they had the capability to do so, they would have done so by now.  Who knows, maybe they will in the future and maybe you will be right.  But if that is the case, they will do so whether we are fighting them or not.  They attacked us at thw WTC and we were not at war with them or Iraq at the time.  Inaction is definately NOT the way to go IMO.

"you underestimated the VC .... and you had thousdans dead... your are understmating the teroists and thier resolve... you CANNOT FIGHT TERRIOSTS with guns... you hvae to fight them with words and actions....... because you can kill 10,000 in a year only means you'll have another 20,000 recruits..... you have to hit them where their numbers are in easy to exploit countries help them to stand up like a brother nad you will have a brother for sure."

So you want to wish away the terrorists?? Maybe we can put them in time out? I agree that guns arent the way to deal with them. We (Americans) have the most advanced military on the planet, why put troops in harms way when you can remove terroist strong holds from existance with MOAB's. Sure there will be loss of civilians, but for the most part they are sheltering and protecting these people anywya, which makes them terrorists..

"so if its going to be equality.... you better be stopping that soccer mom with the 10 kids in the van and searching her for explosves... every freedom that we loose is a victory for the terroists... "

If soccer mom's aren't boming train stations why would you check them? All you are doing is wasting time and possibly letting an acctual terrorist on to his target. It's a sad situation, but you have to work with what you have. Right now the enemy are Middle Eastern Muslim Extremists, sure in New York for example the ratio of innocent hard working Egyptian Cab Drivers to crazed Muslim Extremist Bombers is very weighted in favor of the hard working cab driver, but we can't risk Grand Central Station being blown off the map to save the feelings of a foreign Med Student just looking to catch a ride to class on the sub way. It's unfair, but why waste time checking the Soccer mom just to be "P.C."

If there was a serial killer loose in Boston, and the description was 17-40 year old white males with dark hair and green eyes. I would be horrified If I wasn't stopped every chance the Boston PD got.

Picture this senario. You and your significant other are heading to the subway for work. You both take different trains. As you are approaching the turn style you notice that they are doing random searches of people in line. just as you are about to reach the search area a 20 something Middle Eastern male with a back pack is waved thru without a search the next person in line is your significant other (who isn't a 17-40 yearold Middle Eastern Male) and they are pulled aside and searched. You then pass thru kiss your significant other and head to your seperate trains. Shortly after your significant others train leaves the station, the person who passed thru right before you detonates a 20 lb. backpack bomb killing everyone in your Significant Others car and wounding 100 on the train...................

I have a feeling that you would then change your mind about the search procedures and get off your high horse.

once i was lost in a nasty area of philadelphia (north philly). it's all black and infested with drugs and prostitutes. i had left a party in a neighborhood nearby and made a wrong turn.

cops drove past me, then they turned around, followed me and pulled me over. white guy driving in this neighborhood at 1am isn't looking for the local wawa. they realized i wasn't a junkie or looking for hookers, and i thanked the officers for pulling me over and told them good job.

profiling is ONE tool of many that should be used. no one is saying that ALL middle eastern men should be searched.

it's common sense.

white christians have killed more people in the name of god than any other race in existance.

Hey, isn't calling "the japs" supposed to be racism? ::)

If you want to profile based on the crusades go ahead. I'm more concerned about trains and buses being blown up in 2005.

i guess you wouldnt bother the guy thats dealing dope outta his van next your local school cause hes not going to blow up the school


seriously you have a double standard...... people get shot everday in the civilian world.... people od on drugs.... etc yet the inaction that is prevelant on the home front is somewhat amazing...... just think what everyday life would be like if they actually profiled and stoped people based on everything.. you would not be able to move now would you... hmmm


and well i cant take that idea that your talking about... as there are no trains here... and where im too.... it would most likely be a whit person that would be doing it...... I get profiled everyday when i go to stores and what not... i get tailed by security all the time... get hard looks when i got to small stores they watch me like im going to steal the whole store.... and guess what im a 25yr old white male that has not broke the law short of underage drinking and speeding.......

get off my high horse... you know what i love my view from here......


 and as for liberal inaction... im hoping to join the Army within the next few months..... to fight for the freedoms that I enjoy and that are enjoyed by my fellow citizens... i feel it is my right to do that....


oh and again to the train thing.... its a moot point..... you ask anyone that and they will agree..... comeon its a bad tactic to use in open debate....... but if you want to use it...... your a muslim male and everywhere you go you are watched stalked and tormented by the cops......... are you happy to deal with it?..... you will say yes im betting...... how about you get picked up by the cops and held under that hold with out being charged crap........just because your 20th cousin was once a member of a terror group... you have never met them.... now you are on a watch list... everythign you do goes through miles of red tape.......you see my point.... the west holds to innocent b4 guilty... seems now we have the guilty till you can prove your not...... are you at all seeing what im saying?



bugging... yes i did argue your point but you argued it back... i think it was a wording problem on our sides...

I do, dear :D

Any insinuation that muslims are all evil is clearly rascist, but of course thats not what ur thread was doing ::)

haha


and ya the japs comment was most likely in bad taste..... i just did not what to spell it out

If you think i was just talking about the crusades you're very blinkered. And if you think the only terrorist attacks that have taken place lately were in london then you're even more blinkered. The IRA have done far more damage to london over the past 40 years than any other group. Not many muslims in their ranks.

We are talking about world wide terror here, not localized terror that affects one country.  Please don't even insinuate that there is any other group in the same league as far as world wide terror goes than those of the muslim extremeists between the age of 17 and 40.  They are causing the majority of it and they are theerefore the enemy.  That is in no way to say that all muslims men between 17 and 40 are terrorists.  Why are some of you having a hard time with this concept.  Profiling is smart, bottom line.  If you are against using intelligent tactics to fight terror, well then what is there left to say. 

It never ceases to amaze me how many people on this board seem to be obsessed with America. There's no doubt, we've made terrible mistakes in the past. Some that we'll never get over, nor should we. But we're not all "great satans" as some would suggest. Most of us poor slobs get up everyday and go to a job we hate so we can take care of our families, just like you. Again, we're not perfect, we've made mistakes(still do), but for the most part we just want to keep our children, family and friends safe, happy and healthy, just like you. And if we are so horrible as so many here seem to think, why are people risking life and limb to come here by the thousands. Because we are free, safe(for the most part), and have many opportunities for someone who is hard working, and sincere. Blast me if you want, I'm just a poor slob who goes to work everyday to try and provide a better life for my family.

keep watching tv. in that little box there is all you need to know ever. If they say the only terrorists are muslim then thats what the truth is.

 its not the domestic relations that we dont like... its the foriegn relations.... the whole we got bigger guns you should be afraid of us....... and its not so much that i dont like the us..... its i dont like the leadership as of late.... sees to be hitting rather low in the brain cell dept.

Sure as hell isn't the first president we've had that excelled in that area. :yes:

thats for sure.... but unilaterialism doesnt work... multilaterialism is what needs to be done..... force alone will not defeat an enemy like this...... the more force that is used... and every one that is killed reinforces the resolve of them..... you have to snuff it out from teh ground up and the top down ..... take out the leadership..... but take away the recruits... its like a cancer cell... with out fresh blood it will die... stop the blood win the war.....

Side step left......


Intelligent tactics?

None of the 9-11 hijackers were from Iraq.

Once again SLC Punk is here to lower the IQ of everyone in the forum.  What the hell does Iraq have to do with profiling?  If you want to start another debate on the decision to goto Iraq, go ahead, but no one with an IQ above 90 is impressed with your bullshit.  Rather than look at the issue rationally, you let your liberal bias blind you to only one view.  Are there any postions you hold SLC that aren't endorsed by the left?  You're just another fucking tool in the box. 
  Izzy, saying that Muslim extremist are evil isn't racism.  As many have already pointed out, Islam is a religion just like Christianity.  If I say that all Christians are fucking idiots, that isn't racism.  I love how someone throws out the term racist or bigot anytime they lack an intelligent repsonse; just more liberal, reactionary measures.  I've made this argument before and I'll do it again.  The actual religion someone holds really doesn't matter.  What is important is there culture and financial situation.  How many of the 9/11 bombers or any other suicide bomber for that matter came from educated countries that didn't have laws similar to the Middle Ages.  Like it or not, most of the countries in the Middle East are 200 years behind the rest of the world.  It's the same ignorance that was utilized by Christian leaders for their crimes in the past.  No one is free from this guilt, but once again, who ethnic and religious group is currently using terrorist tactics? 
   Some of you dipshits can call America terrorists until you're blue in the face, but at least we have UN Resolutions and a legitimate government supporting what we do.  If you call the United States' actions illegal, then you're putting the entire system of international law on trial.  Yes, it may be a pain in the ass to innocent Arab males to be under constant watch, but the day another 9/11 happens SLC and his crew of morons will be the first in line for another Michael Moore movie saying we didn't do enough.  - - It always amazed me how a fat fuck like Moore can live in a 10 million dollar mansion and weigh 300 pounds yet have the audacity to talk about American excess.
  America lost Vietnam and will lose in Iraq because the American people don't have the stomach or the conviction to support what must be done.  they love the luxury and security we have, but aren't willing to do a damn thing themselves to do a damn thing about it.  A 14 year old middle-eastern kid is a fuckin man already.  He has a purpose and a goal.  Most 25 year old Americans sit on their ass and worry about what's on TV, come to places like this and lecture on how it should be.  Most of you don't have a damn thing invested in any of this and aren't willing to put the time in to at least research the issue.  It's easier to be hand fed an opinion and take an argument here or there to back that preconceived belief.  Right or wrong, Arab extremist are the group that poses the greatest threat to our security right not.  But rather than close the border, liberals scream that it's racist not to let illegals come across freely.  Rather than focus on the people who attack our soldiers and civilians, liberals call that racism and focus on the 90 year old grand mother because that's "equality."  Rather than fight a fucking war the way it should have been fought, liberals want Kennedy and Schumer to run the war from Congress.
   You Europeans are lucky that SLC's and his gang's view wasn't teh standard 60 years ago or you'd all be speaking German right now.  I'm not saying America won WWII, because Russia kicked more ass than us.  But then again Russia put up an Iron Curtain that destroyed much of the Eastern block.  Luck for the rest of the world it was the realist mentality of George Marshall, Eisenhower, Bradley and Patton that didn't care about political corectness and did what needed to be done.  Rather than badmouthing America, you should be thanking it for giving you the Marshall Plan and helpinig rebuild your ass not after one but two World Wars.  If we listened to SLC, we would have sent a UN official to investigate the death camps and to negotiate peace with Germany 20 times before any action was taken. 
  Profiling is a proactive method to stop violence.  If you idiots should have learned anything by now it's that appeasement doesn't work and pussies always get the shit kicked out of them.

Guns N RockMusic, you're one bitter man ;D

How intelligent... stoop to insults.? That does a lot to strengthen your argument.


Perhaps not... BUT... to suggest that all people who possess the physcial attributes of a middle eastern man between the age of 17 and 40 may be a muslim extremist and should therefore be searched IS racism.? All extremists... be they muslim extremists, christian extremists, or whatever, are whacked and potentially dangerous, but to operate under the assumption that all people who match a physical profile are potentially a threat is racially driven and WRONG.? Not all muslims are extremists.? Most muslims are peace loving individuals,?
 
Should we assume that all white males from the south are KKK members and should therefore be watched?

Should we assume that all white males between the ages of 17 and 35 might become a serial killer since past statistics have shown that most serial killers fit that profile?

 
I have been told by my hubby that I'm one of these so called liberals. ?However, I am against ?an open border. ?I would argue that we don't do enough at our borders to keep illegals out. ?I think that we have a responsibility to take care of ourselves before we start extending benefits freely to people who don't take the time to cross our borders legally.

I support profiling when used to solve a crime that has already been committed. ?However, when profiling is used to accuse someone of a crime that has not been committed, we are going against what ?our forefathers fought to protect -- FREEDOM. ?A person is not free if they are living under a profiled watch.  They have become GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.

No, I'm tired of being continually insulted by SLC when he offers no reason for his statements.  He just delcares them as if it's common sense that they're true.  Then he has his 3 or 4 followers who show their faces in support but offer no intelligent response, a smiley face seems to be sufficient to back of their opinions.  I'm not as arrogant as to claim my point of view is the only way to look at things, but most of the people here subscribe to a blanket of ideals and ridicules those who dare think for themselves.  God forbid someone do some critical thinking and formulate a different opinion from the horde.

Perhaps that's so, but it still pales in comparison to the number of people killed by atheists in the name of idiotic ideology such as Marxism. Take the death toll from the Soviet Union alone and you have that contest won by a landslide. Should I add Mao? Should I add non Marxist atheists such as Hitler? I just thought I'd point that out since you come off as one of those Christian hating Bolshevik types.

As far as profiling is concerned, I'm not muslim or middle eastern, but I'm a half european/half indian immigrant and my skin is a little tanned so I could easily be falsely stereotyped as one. But you know what? While I would be inconvenienced, I'd rather be profiled than be dead, or have my leg blown off and live as a cripple for the rest of my life. Police SHOULD be checking people who fit the profile. Yes, profiling isn't going to catch everyone. Yes, a lot of people will be wrongly searched and inconvenienced. But profiling will increase our chances of catching terrorists because it prevents the squandering of limited resources on searching grandmothers and 6 years olds in the name of political correctness. In times like these, we have to make sacrifices in order to defeat our real enemy, which (some people seem to forget) is the terrorists, not the cops or airport security.

you can't really put athesit as a group.
It's like putting the people that are not crazy as a group.
Lack of something (here faith) is not the glue for a community. or shouldnt.
2 christians have a lot in common.
2 atheists are like night and day.
cause with you're reasoning, we'd just be better saying " see the number of people killed by human being ..." ?___?

and, i have to say, that me too, i don't care if i'm being checked cause they think i'm this or that.
well, i've been in the us several time. i passed thru security check with my ray ban glasses on, my CCCP (old russia logo) tshirt, not well shaved... and they didnt do nothing. i even passed faster than a lot of old white women that were being checked ...
is that bad ?

i dont care for profiling, in my case. cause i dont care what people do or think about me. but i can see how some people can be offended.
and i really think it's a useless solution.
because terrorists can use not "typical" people to do these acts.
you know, like i heard, they shave their beard before they go to suicide bombing.

and al quaida can use asian guys, white guys, balck guys, they dont care. you think it's hard for them to find some nutjob that would do anything for money ?


profiling is useless.

Yeah, Mother Theresa and whoever the pope was during the inquisition are one and the same  ::)

I can't believe I just dignified this post with a response.

you dignified yourself by responding to this post.
and great job answering with an "example". gosh, can't people think in absolute or generic. you're like 12 years old kids that always take a small exemple and makes a therory out of it.

Lack of something is RARELY the glue for a community. it can happen but rarely.
the marxist people you were talking about were working together not because they wrre atheist, but because they were marxist.

it's like saying al quaida people work together because they have beards .... ?____? homefuck ;)

Oh dear, some one else wants to take me on. I feel sorry for them sometimes

Saying that Muslim EXTREMISTS are evil isn't rascist.

But thats not what i said, or what the original poster said

They infered that Muslims between the ages of 17-40 can be sterotyped as terrorists in a meaningful way

Which is absurd, and is a racial slur

I don't see much point continueing this thread - a bunch of ultra right wing people terrified of those that look different should just be ignored not debated with

If u want to believe Muslims are all evil then so be it. Just by talking with u i feel dirty

You're quite right. The biggest killer of all time is certainly stalin.

Stalin was an asshole. Not because he was a communist. Because he was an asshole.

Hitler was an asshole. Not because he was a nazi. Because he was an asshole.

Bin Laden is an asshole. Not because he's a muslim. Because he was an asshole.

Profiling only leads to generalization and hatred of the unknown. People are asshole irregardless of race and colour.

Phrenology is as scientific as judging by race.

"They infered that Muslims between the ages of 17-40 can be sterotyped as terrorists in a meaningful way

Which is absurd, and is a racial slur"

It's not a racial slur. Until Bin Laden sends a Red Headed Irish Teenager in to blowup a airplane, 17-40 year old middle eastern men are the terrorist demographic.
It's sad that a 35 year old Middle Eastern Heart Surgeon from the Duke Medical Center could get treated like a terrorist at a train station, but the inconvenience of one is worth the life of 20-50 train passengers. What is the problem getting searched if your not doing something illegal?

He said intelligent tactics to fight terror.

I am showing that his belief in profiling goes hand in hand with how he thinks terror should be fought (in Iraq), which is not intelligent.

You start every post with a personal insult.....no class bro.....

Yeah and that "Red-Headed Irish Teenager" will probably walk past customs unchecked while a completely innocent Muslim man is being searched for what he looks like. Profiling may sound really smart because of what is going on in world politics at the moment, but all it does is give the message that Muslims are the enemy and that everyone should be afraid of them and check them. All it does is increase suspicion in the domestic community. How do you think the grandmother everyone keeps using in their argument (which by the way is completely baseless) is going to feel when she sees a Muslim man after everyone telling her that they're the enemy and they need to be checked. All thats going to do is make her feel intimidated and scared shitless everytime she sees a Muslim. Profiling breeds hatred and intimidation.

No. The last time I spoke to you directly, I took your statements and broke them down with logical fallacies. You then came back, said you were impressed with my knowledge, and ended the thread.

Now you come back here, hurling insults, and claim that I'm personally attacking you.

I back my statements with logic, and sources. You back your statements with insults, no sources and try to use logical fallacies to win arguments.....

In a perfect world there would be no need to do something as vial as Racial Profiling. Problem is, we don't live in a perfect world. I like to see my self as living in reality, and the reality of today is, a large number of 17-40 year old middle eastern muslim extremists have waged war on western civilization. The key to that last statement was 17-40 year old middle eastern muslim extremists, not Irish Muslim Extremists, and not African American Muslim Extremists. We haven't seen Seamus X or Mike Tyson hijack a Boston to LA flight and crashing it into a building. So why would we search them in a New York subway?? Why randomize a search when you know what it is you are looking for. Why make law enforcements job any harder than it already is, because it is only going to fall back on them as being incompetent when the next bombing occurs and they let them bomber on a train (or whatever the target was) while searching a 75 yearold asian woman.

Look, I understand that the majority of the people carrying out the attacks (and it pains me to say) are young Muslim men, but singling them out is only going to breed hatred amongst the people of the country the searches are being carried out in. The same happened during the IRA campaign, Irish men were being assaulted, beaten, and even murdered any time they stepped inside England, due to profiling. The English people were suspicious of us because, a small minority of us were causing trouble, and although it was quite obvious the IRA were behind the bombings we were all singled out and became victims of hatred, profiling Muslims can only lead to the same thing, fear and suspicion of he Muslim community being overblown, and the only thing that will lead to is hatred and hostility. Slapping every Muslim man with a label is completely wrong, as the Muslim community as a whole are a peaceful group. They are being profiled, and if we allow it to happen soon people will be hostile towards any Muslim man they see.

No SLC, you never open your post with any insults. ?::) ?You have yet to site any sources and you're not using facts or logic for your opinion. ?Isn't the first sentence in your wonderful conribution an Ad Hominem fallacy? ?Oh, wait yea it is. ?You repeat the same old tired rhetoric time and time again. ?All you've contributed to this post was that Americans have killed people too, but with no analyzataion of how under what terms. ?I repeat my earlier belief that you argue with the intelligence and outlook of an 8th grader. ?Afterall, only and 8th grader would condone a 14 year old molesting a 8 year old as "Dcotor." ?

Next time you're gonna tell me I have no class, make sure you don't start the bashing in the same damn topic.

A crime has been commited. Do we need to run through the embassy bombings, the bombing of the uss cole, 9/11, the Spanish train Bombings, the London Bombings, the daily terror attacks against coalition soldiers and Iraqi police. Everyone of these attacks have been carried out by 17-40 year old middle eastern men.

If you think that singling out middle eastern men durring searches is on par with the actions of the KKK, then how do you propose we stop you from getting blown out of the sky on your next family vacation?? Obviously you are willing to give your life to save the feelings of the innocent being searched, I'm not......

sometiems teh assumation that ones readers brain power is high enough to understand is a failing point on this board. for the most part if one was to assume that we were all on par... then GRM woul not have to ask for the statement of the times the US has killed people..... which were listed either  in this thread or in the nuke thread......but the perfect worl that you talk of does not exist which is true... but it is because not of inaction of the left but inaction of the right to be able to come to grips that it cant just be forec that creats this world.... but if the right could see that they would not be the "right". Any type of individual thought that occurs in the right moves them to the left, and with individual thought comes the loss of power and fear mongering that seems to be the modis operandi of the right.....

funny thing is I dont even like SLC.... just that our views cross and match most of the time.... to agree and support you dont have to like em... if they have  a similar viewpoint its natural...... its funny how the aforementioned toolbags seem to think that everyone is out to get them.... and how they accept everyones opnion.... well maybe if you can get some other rights in check with that i might be able to swollow that one, im stonchly agnist the idea that force is the only answer, however right now it is the needed reaction. Whats more as i have said many many times is that for this war to be a victory it must be a joint attack, not just by force but by aid and support for developing countries. if the world can see that this is necessary to help us as a whole then maybe that perfect world will come to be......... but to ask the right to see that picture is like asking to the pope to say its ok to be gay.....

You've twisted my words, I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as it is generally par for the course for the right wing to twist the words of the 'liberals' and then use it to support their claim that liberals 'cares more about the freedoms of terrorists than the lives of innocents' -- which is HARDLY the case.

Yes... those crimes HAVE been committed, and if profiling is used to CAPTURE those who perpetrated the crimes, that is one thing, but to search every man between the age of 17 - 40 who bears resemblance to a man from the middle east and to assume that they are guilty of crimes yet to be committed is racism? AND a violation of the freedoms this nation stands for. It's singling out one race and it's assuming one's guilty before proven innoncent.

My comment that all southern white males be watched for Klan activity was made to illustrate my point. And... yes, KKK activities are terrorist acts.? ?But to watch, detain, and question all white men from the south to avoid KKK terrorist acts would be preposterous!

As for how we combat? terrorist acts from groups such as al queda?? ?Well... my first suggestion would have been to go after OSAMA BIN LADEN rather than Saddam.? ?That idiot in the white house has even gone on record to say that he doesn't care about Osama, and that it's not his top priority to capture him.? He may have since changed his tune, BUT that doesn't change the fact that he did say that following the events of 9/11, and that instead of focusing the efforts on the capture of the man who claimed responsibility for those events, he targeted a man and a nation that was NOT involved, and we continue to fight that war, putting more lives at risk every day.? ?We have essentially terrorized a nation that was not responsible for the events of 9/11.

exactly nicely put

When was that?? Not saying it didn't happen but I'd like more than your word on that.


No one is looking to accuse all Middle Eastern men of crimes then round them up and throw them in concentration camps. We are talking about searches, a random search when looking to stop terroism is pointless. Why search at all?? We know "who" we are looking to stop, it's like an SAT question..... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim.

The problem with the current philosophy of NO racial profiling and truely random searches is that baggage screeners actually stay away from Middle Eastern looking men because they feel they will be labled as racist and possibly fired. How does that help us stop this problem? What good does it do when a woman getting on flight 523 to LA is searched, whats the best thing you are going to get out of her 1/2 an ounce of medical marijuna? The little blue haired lady isn't going to hijack the plane, but the guy with the carry on bag that contains "How to fly but not land a 767, the terrorists guide to crashing into a building" that wasn't search beacuse the screener didn't want to lose her job for searching the brown guy.

gosh you wont understand.
al quaida dont care about muslim or arab or anything.
if you start profiling arab people. they'll use different people they dont care.

this is why palestine started using kids and girls as kamikaze. because 17-40 years male where being search exclusively ...

same thing gonna happen, you gonna search all the black guys, and alquaida will find a way to use that old white woman and blow her bag off ...
but you dont get it. profiling is useless.

gosh you wont understand.
al quaida dont care about muslim or arab or anything.
if you start profiling arab people. they'll use different people they dont care.

this is why palestine started using kids and girls as kamikaze. because 17-40 years male where being search exclusively ...

same thing gonna happen, you gonna search all the black guys, and alquaida will find a way to use that old white woman and blow her bag off ...
but you dont get it. profiling is useless.

Fine, when that happens then we'll start searching the old white women with the bags BECAUSE THAT'S WHO'LL BE DOING THE BOMBINGS. Right now, however, that's not who's doing it. So, we should probably live in the present, and search those who have been doing it lately. If a white 30-something American went to Afghanistan and killed 3000+ Afghanistan citizens, and I happened to go to Afghanistan, I would expect to be searched. I would not take it personally, rather I would think they were being CAREFUL. You know, trying their best to protect their citizens. That's what we're trying to do.

How is Bin Laden going to recruit these people?? right now they are being recruited based on their religion..... they are feeding on a misinterpretation of their religion...... so how are they going to get an 89 year old Catholic Woman to blow something up? get a clue before you start telling me that Irish teenage girls are going to hi jack planes in the name of Allah. 
The problem with liberals is they live in a fantasy world of how things should be, last I check the Wyld Stalyons album that creates World Harmony (sorry about the bad Bill and Ted Reference) hasn't been released. Until that drops (which will probably be before CD) we have to live in reality, which like I said before, is in a world where A Militant Wing of Islam has waged a war on Western Civilization. While they (Middle Eastern Men) are killing civilians in high traffic bombings, we have to make a tough choice which is to understand what demographic these terrorist are comming out of and focus on it. I do understand that this group is being handed a huge injustice, but bothering these people with minute long searches is worth saving one life. If you are more worried about someone getting bent out of shape becuase there bag was searched entering a subway station durring rush hour than you are about a rush hour train being bombed then your priorities are out of whack.

christ....you know what im a whit male between 17 and 40.... and if mr bin laden gave me a bomb right now id go to you ISP and blow it up.... jsut so i dont have to listen to your right wing close  mindedness ... fackin christ.

what is the major point of asymetrical warfare... it adapts faster then the enemy and changes tactics..... i loved teh line of teh its liek an SAT question..... not all muslims are terroists but all terroists are muslim..... damn funny thing... I could have sworn there were other "WHITE" people that done alot of bombings in westren worlds.

recruiting based off relgion... yup thats what is happening, dont forget all those poor countries that have nothing... think of the poor kids growing up there with nothing. nothing but hope.... and all bin laden got to do is offer teh cash for their family and they will do the bombing..... and they wont have to be muslim... its not to ficking hard to see that now is it?


or maybe i should use bigger words... or smaller i dont know what tell me what has to be said so you can see that there are other avenues that can be exploited... tell me..... please god tell me...... do you want me to convert to some strange right wing relgion????? i will i really will...... but i will be hung cause i think too much on the left..... free thinking.... frack open your eyes and see that it cant be done in just one manner... cutting off the head is one thing.. but when the body is just as deadily as the head... what do you do? kill them all?




as for searching everyone..... again your not putting them in concentration camps.... cause that would not be just..... what about gitmo? wait thats not one of those... thats for POWs... no wait battlefeild detaines....... if it smells like a chicken and looks like a chicken and tastes like it.... it got to be a "turkey" no that wrong  is it a chicken? at least if they were all jailed you could save money on homeland security... cause there would be nothing happening here......... no searches needed then us whites just need all the nigers locked up too and it would be heaven............. give me a fucking break.... racial profilng is one of the lowest forms of racsim that exists.... it automaticly makes all people guilty before innocent.......




***** note the nigger comment was used to illustrate a point which im sure was lost on c0ma.... cause well .... ya... so it was not meant in any type of racist manner. nor should it be construed as being anything but a point  maker in this case. If anyone is offended i am sorry. as you can see no edt done here.

You can find the full text on this at:? ?http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html? <Transcript during a press conference

Instead of making Bin Laden his top priority he turned his attention on Saddam.? It would seem to me that the key to stopping terrorist acts that are masterminded by Osama Bin Laden would be to... I don't know... CAPTURE Osama Bin Laden?? ?Perhaps?? Maybe??

That doesn't mean that terrorist acts would stop, I'm not that naive.? what I am saying is that it would certainly curtail terrorist acts that are masterminded by Osama himself.? Since 9/11 was the brainchild of Osama, it seems only logical that he should be our target, not Iraq.

edited to correct a typo!

However she feels, she'll feel that way because it is muslim men who have declared war on the "infidels" of the west and blown up airplanes, embassies, skyscrapers ... you name it. NOT because she's ?been told that they are the enemy.

Profiling does not breed hatred and intimidation. If I get searched because of my tanned skin color before entering an airplane or the subway, people will NOT hate me. On the contrary, they won't have anything to fear because I've passed the check. Neither will I feel intimidated by getting searched. On the contrary, I will safer because I know the security forces are doing their job and protecting me, as well as all Americans and peaceful muslims.

There is the problem.  We are not saying that we assume that all middle eastern men are guilty of terrorism, nor has anyone stated anything even remotely like that.  All we are saying is that they should be searched to ensure that they are not guilty of it.  When I went to the GNR concert in Boston I got searched.  Do I think the security was assuming that I was guilty of something?  No.  They were protecting the other concert goers.

It never ceases to amaze me how some liberals (and I say some here) can be such pansies and worry about the inconveniencies of a few.  I agree with coma, I am willing to sacrifice their convenience to increase my chance of survival.  And it just makes sense.  How can you be so ignorant as to not see the common sense here? 

How about we detain all white men from the south with 3 teeth, a beard, a shotgun, a truck and a white hood on?  That would make more sense wouldn't it?  See, your example is flawed.  In that case you could probably catch more KKK members.  However, being a KKK member is not illegial.  Being a terrorist is.

People are saying things to the affect that if we search muslims between the age 17 and 40, al Qaeda will just star using people who don't fit that profile so profiling is useless. This demonstrates a complete lack of strategic depth! Merely forcing them to have to recruit such people is a victory for us and a defeat for the terrorists. It makes mounting an attack so much more difficult for al Qaeda if they have to go the extra length of finding that rare, if at all existent, blue eyed, blond Swede, or an African American, who is willing to die in the name of Allah. At the same time, it makes it easier for our secret service agents to infiltrate them and foil their plans if al Qaeda starts accepting blonds or African Americans into their terror cells. This would be a great boon for us.

Good point.  The idea that al quaeda will start using white people to commit terror is retarded.  Instead of admitting that profiling makes good sense, liberals use stupid comebacks like "they will just start using white people".  A question for all you liberals.  What the hell is wrong with action?  Why do you always subscribe to the "do-nothing" approach?  I have yet to hear a single reason for not profiling.  And having some innocent middle eastern men inconvenienced is not a reason.

But this isn't a description of a terrorist: ?a 17 - 40 year old middle eastern male.

Not all 17 - 40 year old middle eastern men are terrorists. ?


My example is not flawed. ?Yours is... however. ?Do all KKK members fit your detailed description? ? It isn't illegal to be a KKK member, but the acts of terrorism they commit in their quest for racial glory are illegal. ?And since we never know when they might decide to commit one of these acts, why not detain all white southern males to prevent any future potential hate crimes perpetrated by the KKK? ?

As ridiculous as this suggestion sounds, that is EXACTLY what you're suggesting we do with a particular group of people based only on their skin color. ?Detain them, search them, question them in the hopes of unearthing some evidence that a potential crime has been deterred in the process. ?

Being a 17 - 40 year old middle eastern man is not illegal either, and to operate on the assumption that they are terrorists based only upon their age bracket and their race is called RACIAL DISCRIMINATION. ?


This argument is a 'confidence strategy' - and ultimately the weakness of your argument. ?It doesn't 'just make sense' to commit acts of racial discrimination in a free country, because it maligns the entire concept of freedom. ?To assume that others are ignorant not to see your point of view demonstrates that you have no real evidence that backs up your claim that racial profiling is a good idea, it's just something about which you feel emotional about and therefore support. ?

I am emotional about the safety of me, my family and Americans as well. ?It's not about inconveniencing a few for the well-being of the many, however, it is about the preservation of a much higher ideal upon which our country was founded... the ideal of freedom for all people, not just the people who fit within a certain preferred racial and/or religious belief system.

I am trying to stay neutral on this issue, but I think the analogy is very flawed.  When has the KKK ever been remotely as dangerous as the Al Qaeda?  I have never heard of a KKK killing of more than 5 people.  However, if there are random black churches being blown up by KKK members do you think it would be prudent to search Blacks or Mexicans?  That would be ludicrous.

actually that is the description of a terrorist. No not all 17-40 year old Middle Eastern men are terrorists, but all terrorists are 17-40 year old middle eastern men.


No one is saying assume they are terrorists, what we are saying is rule them out.........
Were not telling them they can't take trains and planes anywhere, we are just covering everyone elses ass by checking every person that fits the description. If you don't agree that 17-40 year old Middle Eastern Men fit the desciption of a terrorist than you don't shouldn't be debating this because you don't know the material.


Don't take everything so literaly. That was his sad atempt at dry humor, he means that he doesn't personaly spend his entire day looking for Bin Laden. The US is still looking for him and is being hampered by border politics (Pakistan).

Was there any doubt who you were speaking about?  No.  And I was SO surprised to hear that you were against real action and for non-action.  Shocker.   ::) 

I love to hear all the bullshit about how profiling sacrifices "the ideals this country was built on".  In case people haven't noticed, things have changed considerable since the birth of the US.  We have to chnage with it.  We have already lost many of our civil liberity....many because of these terrorist attacks.  How come you liberals are more outraged by the idea of profiling than you are about the actual terrorist attacks that take place?   Are you actually so demented as to feel sorry for the terorist?  Can you see and sympathize with their perspective?  Are you that pathetic?

Unfortunately, your net of freedom seems to extend to terrorists as well.  How is searching people who fit the description of terrorist sacrificing any ideals?  I would give up the freedoms of middle eastern men to make my kids safer...any fucking day of the week.  If they don't like it, then they can do something themselves to chnage it.  They can take actions themselves to fix this problem.  Otherwise, they can live with the inconvenience of a few searches.  Damn, smallest price I ever heard of to pay.

You take something from a thread a while back, then post your twisted version of it to say I condone molestation?

Usually I would not even respond to something like this (somebody bringing up another thread to "make a point"), but in this case, since child molesation is such a heavy thing to claim I advocate, I will.

So you make a post on this board claiming I condone child molestation?

Fuck you asshole.

I'm not outraged, I only responded in kind to the opening statement.

You guys always build up this strawman to tear down.

You put words in my mouth, assume what I'm thinking then attack what you just created.

Amazingly nuts!  :hihi:

Was there any doubt who you were speaking about?

If the boot fits............

The analogy is not flawed.? The KKK is a band of terrorists not unlike al queda.?

Hatred fuels terrorism.? While their scale might be a bit smaller than that of al queda, it doesn't make the KKK any less dangerous.? Anyone who is fueled by blind hatred and willing to terrorize and kill other human beings because of that blind hatred is dangerous.?



Incorrect.?

Timothy McVey was a terrorist.? He was not a middle eastern man.? He was using forceful methods against his target (citizens of Oklahoma) to intimidate government because of their actions against the branch davidians.?

Illich Ram?rez S?nchez aka The Jackyl was not a middle eastern man.?

There are many terrorist groups throughout the world and are certainly NOT limited to 17 - 40 year old middle eastern males.? For more details, you should read this:? http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/frd.html

Name a terror group that has been active in the last 5-10 years that isn't Islamic based.

like I said before......... I name 100 islamic terror attacks you give me Eric Rodulph or Timothy McVeigh (they are the exception, the Fundamentalist Islamics are the rule)

Revolutionary Organization 17 November:? Most recent attack in June 2000? (based in Greece)

There are guerrilla groups in south america that are still operating.?


These are two examples.? The very fact that there are exceptions makes your? statement that "all" terrorists
are 17 - 40 year old middle eastern men incorrect.


Incorrect.  It doesn't follow that just because most of the recent terrorist acts were committed by middle eastern terrorist groups made up of 17 - 40 year old middle eastern males that all terrorists are 17 - 40 year old middle eastern men.

You're good......

True, there are terrorists out there that are not middle eastern men, but they are not anywhere near the threat to us or in numbers that these islamic based terrorist are.  I hope that your arguement against profiling isn't that profiling won't work because there are guerilla groups operating in South America or there is a terrorist or two in Greece?  There is no way that you can reasonably argue that profiling 17-40 year old middle eastern men won't work because it is n't targeting the right demographic.

Profiling won't work. because if it worked they would have used it. they're not waiting for some guns n' roses fan to bring up the idea .....

appart from that. someone pointed out that "we need to look at the present"
that is exctly why the world is how it is.
this exactly why the us are in such a bad position.
because they think of the present.
they're attacked, they run to afganistan
then run to iraq
they dont think.

same here, oh !!! man !!  60 middle eastern male attacked us ! let's search all of them !!! yay !! so smart !
you are trying to fight a vague, moving, untouchable, slippery organization (terrorism) by looking at the past and making conclusion.
this is dumb.
even if the more basic strategy you wouldn do that.

you are in a castle. there are like 6 entries in your castle.
the ennemy attacks you on entry B.
what you are doing here, is put all your men on this entry to protect it. D U M B.

i'm sorry. i can see how profiling would give the impression of being secure. i can see GWBUSH doing that. because it will make his people think they're safe.
but that's not how it works. and i'm sure that somewhere in the white house there are smart people, who know that profiling wont work.
because it's a "that's all we got " solution.


i told you. palestine terrorist started using kids and female to bomb israel because male were being searched.

and yes al quaida can hire any non muslim looking guy. why ? because islam is a religion. i can find you white muslim, asian muslim. what ever you want.
and i'm keeping the "muslim" parameter.

but i'm sure that religion is just on of their tool.
they have money. and some people will do anything for money

The Muslims who have "declared war on the infidels" are a fierce minority. It is fine to be afraid of a dangerous minority. But pitching the blame of the minority on anyone who looks remotely like some of them people, is putting across the idea that Muslim extremists account for the majority of Muslims, if every Muslim is targeted, that poor grandmother is going to think every Muslim is to be feared. Fearing something leads to hating something, if people are brought to fear every last 17 to 40 year old Muslim man they will grow to hate him. Hate leads to murder. The exact same thing has happened in the past, in the West even, for over 30 years everyone feared Irish people because of the IRA, if the same happens to Muslims it will be a sad day for ethnic freedom

Well I agree with most of your post.  However, I do believe the KKK is less dangerous, and I think that is the key.  Show me an article of the KKK killing more than 5 people at a time in the last 20 years?  Of course, if the FBI received a tip that the KKK were going to carry out a bombing would you suggest that the FBI search those that are middle eastern, black men with fros, or white men with bald heads and army boots?

I agree, thats an absurd overgeneralization.?

Certainly, some type of profiling would be efficient wouldnt it?? Say checking all people 17-40?? I dont know, but certainly they can narrow it down so where they arent spending as much time on an 80 year old Irish Nun as they are on myself.? Perhaps middle eastern men is too narrow, but certainly there must be a way to be more efficient.? I would certainly think it would be more efficient to search people of a certain profile for 5 minutes, than every person for one minute.?

so here you go.
instead of searching all the middle eastern looking people
we think + analyse + and makes more specific profiles: like people who have records, who are linked to religious groups, we use inteligence systems....

see , we're getting somewhere. :)
:peace:

Which is all well and good (and the best way to combat this) but the second we pull 5 "suspected terrorists" out of Logan Airport in Boston the ACLU will be launching frizilous lawsuits against the Airport , the screeners, the government crying for the rights of a terrorist who is probably here illegaly. And their first argument is going to be "profiling" the whole reason I want "racial profiling" to be accepted in this case, is to take away the ACLU's power to intimidate groups like baggage screeners and security personel in airports. How can you do your job when you are looking over your shoulder the whole time.

If Muhammed Atta was pulled off of his plane on 9/11 a disaster would have been averted, but at the same time the ACLU would have launched a campaing that would probably be still going on now in defense of people who illegally over stay student visa's and how they deserver the same or more rights than an American Citizen. That group is the biggest Cancer in this counrty.

I started writing this big long winded break down of C0ma and CC and i was going to post it and this massive brick hit me in the back of the head...... so i dropped it all..... and decided to write this.


no matter what the evidence no matter what the occurances no matter what arguements cropup...... you will never look at any principals other then your own. You will look upon the left and think that they are we are all single minded, yet our ideas are multilaterial, they focus on many areas at once to bring about the required end game. You look at force and reduction of civil liberties as the only way in which to exist and to show that the ideals that are hated are the best. yet we no longer enjoy them. For years we listened to countless leaders spout on how the commies are then enemy, how they restrict everythingt hat their people do, now we do the same, under the guise of security. How much more do we have to give up to satisfy the appitie of the power hungry right? too much im afraid...... to much has already been paid for teh new security that we enjoy. But how secure are we really? Do we really live in a safer world post 9/11? Do we live in a safer country?

Air travel is at its safest level ever, which was not exactly a lax security level pre 9/11. Personal freedoms have been reduced, but not suspended. citizens can be held in jail with out being charged, and without legal council under the terroism acts. Most will say this is a fine price to pay for this, this new security. Let me ask you this, your a Middle eastren male between 17-40, and you have lived here for 10 years. you love this country very much. you have a gret job wife kids home in the burbs.. the reall amercian dream. then something happens, you get detained at an airport while flying domestically for business, you are held and interrogated all because you look like someone on a no fly list. The feds question your family frineds co workers investigate the business that you work for. Now when you go back to work what will happen to you? chances are you will be looked at as though you are a terroist, it will ruin your career progression it will hurt your kids at school. Children will beat them up because their dad is/was a suspected terroist........ would you want that to happen to you or your family? of course not!

by profiling in the manner that you both have so veminately supported you have condemmend innosent people to suffer because of what a vast minority have ever done. look to make it simple for you... would you want to get accused of rape? your 100% innocent..... but you know that the accusation will follow you for the rest of your life, in most cases this is the same thing that would happen as what i described for the ME above.

back in my prgional arguement about it i said that the only way to do it is to seach everyone.... you waant to keep the ACLU off your back ... SEARCH EVERYONE!!!!! plus you will be making it more secure without infringing on the right of the people........ no discrimination.... you realise that steping to the point of racial profiling is not too too far away from jsut deporting every single imigrant ... then what would the us economy do? no cheap labour... your fucked.....

Yeah, but, ya know...

We may be warmongering totalitarian fascists (or, our government might be)....

Buy you guys produced Celine Dion and Brian Adams.

(Note: I'm joking.....at least about the US being warmongering totalitarian facists...we all know the real facists are the best at parties. ?But I am pissed about Canada producing Celine and Brian...BLAME CANADA, dam it!)

(Further note: The above opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions of anyone, living or dead. ?Any resemblance to actual opinions is coinicidence. ?In addition, the above expressed opinions should not be construed as support of fascism, totalitarianism, warmongering, Celine Dion, Brian Adams, nor condemnation of any of the above. ?Any persons wishing to express displeasure at the above expressed opinions with their author should email "pullyourheadoutofyourass@itsafuckingjoke.com")

I'm NOT going to jump in the middle of this firefight, but...lets at least be fair.  Prometheus isn't espousing INACTION, he's espousing DIFFERENT actions.  Not using military force isn't inaction. 

You ask why the left wing always are always satisfied with "inaction"...it's the same reason the right wing always jumps up with their guns blazing: a difference in ideology.  Both paths have their uses, in different situations.

Someone may have pointed this out (I don't know and haven't finished the thread) already, but the 9/11 terrorists were actually relatively well off, well educated, intelligent men.   I believe most, if not all, of them were found to have a Western Education, some born in Western countries, and some from Saudi Arabia (hardly a downtrodden, uneducated country with laws similar to those of the middle ages).  Just to clarify...

Quotes from GW on Osama's importance:

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02
 
There are a few others...just google to find 'em.

I think the point they're trying to make (again, clarification only..not defending one way or the other) is that it's impossible to look at that 89 year old woman and know she's catholic....just like it's impossible to look at a middle-eastern man and know he's a muslim.

Here's the full quote:

"Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all.  Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time.  And the idea of focusing on one person is --  really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person.  And he's just  --  he's a person who's now been marginalized.  His network, his host government has been destroyed.  He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match.  He is  --  as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide  --  if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is.  You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you.  I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan.  There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly.  We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy.  We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means. "

He's not being dry, he's answering the question.  He says he thinks Osama's been marginalized, and that the focus should not be on one person.  How you can interpret that, in context, to be dry humor, I can't fathom.

Again, on the profiling thing, I'm staying out of it.  My opinion wavers too much for me to take a hard line stand, one way or the other.  I see both the pluses and minuses of both arguments... 

Interesting that you'd espouse changing with the times when, for the most part, the right espouses a literal interpretation of the Constitusion (ie: the words written 200+ years ago) rather than a living Constitution (taking into account the changes of the past 200+ years).    Just a point. :)

I understand the logic, but how many white 89 yearold Muslim women have bombed planes, trains, or shopping malls lately??

We are being attacked by a specific type of terrorist, and they don't look like one of the Golden Girls, so why search Bea Arthur at an airport looking for terrorist bombers?

If I called ahead to the local shopping mall and told security that i was comming by to abduct a child, and then told them that i was 35-30 years old ?6 feet tall, caucasian, dark hair, and green eyes would they go around following a 5'4" 65 year old asian man... I hope not.

You'd sacrifce their freedoms, but would you trully want to sacrifice your own?  See, this is one of the problems I have with the "pro" side of the argument: If you give the government the right to do this, trampling on civil liberties in the process, where does that trampling end?  Sure, today it's middle eastern men, because they're viewed as the violent threat.  10 years from now, once you've set the precedent, it's 30 year old white women who are protesting the government's newliy won right to ban abortion.  I think we all know that government, left or right, tends to use the powers granted to it, either directly or indirectly, to their fullest ability until they are put "in check".  That piece of allowing profiling is one of the things that bothers me.

Though I do agree it can be a useful tool, when used appropriately.

Again, a clarification: Atta would not have been pulled off the plane, nor would any of the other 9/11 terrorists, even if they HAD been searched.  They weren't carrying anything that was considered contraband (box cutters, small blades, and pepperspray were not prohibited at that time).  And, even if he had been, with the redundancy (4 on one, 5 on the others), his absence alone probably would not have aborted the mission.

Let me start by saying I see the logic in what you're saying.  But I recognize the real world inefficiency of what you're proposing.  If you search everyone, especially in the major metro airports, airtraffic will plummet because no one wants to stand for 4 hours in a line that barely moves to go anywhere.  In addition, the airlines (which pay for airport security, indirectly, through airport fees) could never afford the increased cost.  They can barely function with the increased costs and decreased demand, now.

Whatever the solution is, it's not that.  It's too inefficient and too cost INeffective to do.

From a % of population basis?? Probably not that many more than muslim extremists have committed terrorist acts in the past year.

Little old ladies who comitted terrorism: 0/110,000,000 (using '02 census info for the US only), or 0%

Muslims who committed terrorist acts in the past year (documented terrorism does not include insurgency in Iraq): approx 50/1,600,000,000 (estimated global muslim population is 1.6 billion) or .000003%.

Not such a big difference, eh?

Now, someone check my math on this please, but I think that computes to a 1 in 333,333 chance that profiling MIGHT find a terrorist (and that's being VERY generous).? That means, on the generous side, you'd need to search 333, 332 "innocent" muslims to find one terrorist.? And I've no idea what % of air travellers are muslim...so I've no idea what that would translate to in "time".? ?To me, that seems a pretty bloody inefficient way to do things....but, by the same token, I can see the benefit of using it as one MORE tool in the arsenal.? And that's why I'm not voicing a hard opinion one way or the other.

take into account that the "search" would ahve to include full backround checks of the profile fitters...


back to mine.... the cost can be agumented from military spending in the states..... if you took out 1% of the budget and put it directly toward these costs you should cover the increase in personal needed to do a standard search of everyone... or you can fund the mass xray machines where its a realtime feed that people jsut walk in line and they are passively scanned as they walk... it will show up most things on the body i know it was being feild tested at some point a few years ago... jsut that tehy cost a small fortuen but can screen 500+/h so a major hub would require about 5-10 cause you can limit them to long haul or certain size flights and do normal screening on the smaller commuter flights.

as well you can force an no carry on say for a small bag per person... something the size of a medium purse..... makes the searchmuch quicker


jsut a series of small things that can be done in concert to allow the floow of passengers to remain unchanged or improved in some cases.

and eveyone gets searched.

oh and they are doing teh large volume xrays of checked baggage now..... so that can be stepped up and well it even gets safer.....

I think both sides are guilty of this, and I think those on the left on this board are as guilty as those on the right as thinking they are right.  I hate when some people claim that they are open minded and look at things from all directions, yet others do not.  I dont see one person whose opinion is being swayed here.  Just because those on the left arent persuading those on the right doesnt mean those on the right are close minded, and vice versa of course.

i hvae neveer denied the need for force.. but i have also tried to show that one otion will not work!

I don't think there's even a question as to whether profiling is effective. It would certainly help us immensely and make it a lot more difficult for the terrorists to mount an attack. (Now, I know somebody will reply and say that it's not 100% effective and point to the 1 or 2 exceptions. YEah, I know, but in the real world, almost nothing ever is 100%, and if you're not gonna live in the real world, I'm not gonna bother arguing with you). The real question is whether it is worth to temporarily sacrifice some civil liberties so that we can have the upper-hand in defeating the terrorists? pilferk made a very good point about profiling setting a bad precedent for the future. But, fact is, that profiling has been used  by the United States in the past, like during World War II, and we did not emerge out of that as a police state. In applying profiling to the war on terror, we will not be "changing" the constitution. There is already a precedent set of curtailing civil rights during a time of war, and we are at war with terrorism right now.

I may be conservative, but being conservative does not mean I have to follow EVERY conservative opinion of belief.  For instance, I believe firmly that the Catholic church is a joke and one of the main reasons for this is its inability to change with the changing times (i.e. priests must still be single, no woman priests, etc)..  Just to clarify.

I just had to point out that this is a major distortion of the literal vs. living constitution debate. The constitution was written with built in provisions to account for changes of the times. So you are wrong to imply that literal interpretation supporters (many of whom are liberal) do not wish to take into account the changes of the past 200+ years.

A so called living constitution leaves the meaning of the constitution up to the whims of unelected judges. Essentially, it throws the constitution in the garbage.

figured i might as well agree with ya...... but temp loss of civil liberties...... who decides when the temp loss is up?...... if it was locked down with a time limit off the start then fine... but now ending time... im sorry temp will be perm IMO. nad to you "ww2 " bit.. was done in canada aswell... diff was after teh war was over which was a short war... it was easy to come out of it.. but with this type of war we will be looking at atleast a generation growing up not knowing what it was liek backin the day and the laws wont change for some time.

Nobody knew how long World War II will last before Hitler was defeated. It could have been decades before the Nazis succumbed. But ultimately, we won that war because we took every reasonable measure to ensure success. We are not doing this with the war on terror. Now, we are more concerned with being politically correct and not hurting other people's feelings. That only weakens us and prolongs the war. Had we been concerned about hurting Germans' and Japanese's feelings, that war could have lasted a generation as well.

Not taking a original meaning view of the Constitution basically turns the Supreme Court into an oligarchy.  Something I dont believe the framers intended.  Read the federalist papers.

What exactly built in provisions are you referring to?  I don't see any.  Such built in provisions would do exactly what you accuse the living Constitution of doing.

Amendments. Which are different form the living constitution concept because people get to vote on them, so they are still democratic.

fine can you at least agree that a unilaterial view will not work... that force is not going to work alone... or this falling off on deaf ears yet again?

Yes, I certainly agree that force alone will not work   :beer:

great point!  : ok:

and let me add to that by saying that if there was TV coverage of WWII, the U.S. would not have been able to fight the war the way we needed to to win. war is ugly, but unfortunately it is sometimes necessary.

Your a god damn idiot how dare you say im BrainWashed????? your a fucking peace of shit, your the mother fucker thats awfully ungreatful whether ur an american of foreigner there is something u can thank and american military man for, ya stupid fuck

 and i thought i stepped over the line with insults.......though you must fit the bill ..... or ratehr your self image must fall into that general line that was tossed down for ya...... and im waiting for your insults to me......

Are you done with the insults?




/jarmo

I'm not supporting either point of view (I've done that in other threads).? I'm just pointing out the differences in perception.

And it's NOT a distortion of the literal vs living constitution debate.  The crux of the debate is exactly how I laid it out.  The literalitst want to interpret 200+ year old words EXACTLY as they are written, and the supporters of the "living constitution" want to take into account the changes in society over the past 200+ when interpreting those same words.  That's the debate. How is what I said a distortion of that?  We're not talking about provision for amendment..we're talking about interpretation of the words AS THEY STAND NOW.

I'm not saying, or even implying, that literalists are mired in the society of 200 years ago....just that they want to literally interpret the words as they were written 200 years ago.  Thats it.  No hidden meaning, no agenda.

I've put my response on this issue on hold so that I could better formulate my argument.? ? First, as one of these "Liberals" I'd like to say that I have absolutely NO sympathy or compassion for terrorists.? I would like to see them all put before a firing squad.? ?There is no punishment too terrible for them.?

That being said,? when we choose to revoke the freedoms of ANYONE not guilty of a crime (and that includes people who fit within the physical profile of a terrorist, with no proof whatsoever that they are terrorists, operating only upon a physical description) we revoke the freedoms of every non-terrorist (and that includes you).? ?That is what is meant by my previous statement regarding the "ideals upon which this country was founded."? I am not taking a literal interpretation of any document, only a broad interpretation of the fact that persecuted individuals came to this country and created a new government in an effort to flee the control of their homeland.? They built this country so that people could live in freedom from persecution.? (Most notably:? freedom from RELIGIOUS persecution!)

This is where the idea of profiling goes wrong.? When we start profiling for crimes that have not and may not be committed, we are persecuting potentially innocent people, and we are creating a fascist nation, which goes against the basic ideals on which this land of the free was developed.? You sacrifice your own freedom and indeed the entire nation's freedom when you are willing to sacrifice the freedom of one innocent individual.?

It is not about an inconvenience. It is about preserving our own freedom.? The minute we start assuming someone's guilt before proven innocent, we are opening the floodgate to this happening to not just muslims, or even muslim - looking individuals, but every American.?

Brilliant!!!!

Thank you.

You're right. Sometimes I think too much into things (or maybe it's that I don't think enough :-\) and I see things that aren't there. You did define the argument correctly. Sorry about that? :peace:

No, I am not basing my argument against profiling based faulty demographics. ?I was merely pointing out your faulty non sequitur appeal. ? You stated that ALL terrorists are 17 - 40 ?year old middle eastern men, and I put that comment to task.

I am not even stating that profiling will not work. I'm simply against profiling because it's a violation of every non-terrorist's freedom, and one might even be so bold to argue that by violating and sacrificing that freedom, you're letting the terrorists win. ? ? ? ? ?

I'm an idiot? At least I put forward a decent argument, if all you can do is insult me, then fine, think whatever the hell you want

Instead of getting caught up in pointless political doubletalk and recrimination we should just ask, "does profiling work?".  In Isreal it seems to work pretty well.  Are there any other places where it has been a failure?

WWII Japanese Internment Camps

All people have potential for evil

Every race of people have been terrorist killers or evil at some point in history.

Although I am against such an action occuring again, the Japanese deternment camps were successful.  Thousands of Japanese renounced their citizenship and fled to Japan or made an attempt to after war had been declared.  Because the Japanese had not yet assimilated fully into American culture (please, I don't want to debate what defines American culture) they were an easier target to focus on than the German immigrants who essentially shared the same customs as America.  Interestingly enough, many Japanese Americans sued (and won) to have the deternment camps stay open after the war because of the higher quality of living and mortality rate that existed in the camps.  Again, I am against the concept of such a deternment camp again (although it was never ruled unconstitutional), but how many Jews asked to stay in a concentration camp following WWII?  That is the difference between a Democracy and Fascist state; democracies are still concerned towards freedom and human rights at the most trying times.

Of course you don't, because if somebody did you release you don't have one leg to stand on.

That's really not an example of profiling. 

HOW SO? racial pulled possible jap nationals and put them in campsfor our and their protection??

Yeah, it was successful as there were no Japanese sabotague on the West Coast.? But at what price?? You say there is a difference between facism and democracy; but internment is reminiscent of facism, not democracy.? Internment camps are not associated with freedom and human rights.?

You say the camps were never ruled unconstitutional...yet slavery and "seperate but equal" facilities were also ruled constitutional.? The US goverment apologized for the internment so clearly it was wrong; yet you condone it.?

Have you ever been to an interment camp; its no Club Med.? There's no way more than 1% of Japanese interned there wanted to stay after the war.? The conditions were poor and camps overcrowded.? The Japanese even rioted at one of the camps due to poor work and social conditions.?

Finally, the Jews were put into concentration camps to be killed.? The mere fact that you're comparing these two camps shows that you know these internment camps were dead wrong and a monumental failure of democracy.

The point is that you were wrong in claiming the Japanese internment camps did not work. Don't try to shift the subject. Guns N RockMusic explicitly said he does not support the idea of internment camps, he was pointing out that they did work in preventing Japanese attacks on US soil in the wake of Pearl Harbor.

I admitted they were successful in their purpose of preventing any possible sabotague.  But GNRockMusic also spent the majority of his post essentially giving supporting reasons.  Am I not allowed to address these points?

come on BC you know that if you post any type of supporting words any other idea that is with them mean nothing and are ignored bec they only have read what they wanted to read..... hence why no one has bothereed playing teh geneva card here ....and hwy it has not been commented on in the other thread.


funny how the left will conceede when beaten.... the right runs to pretend it never read the facts...... and the facts are that the US and Canada have both publicly denounced and offered rather long and wordy appoligies to the jap that were held in these camps and explained how even though it helped with the end victory it should not have and could not have been justified to treat another human in this manner........ Guess tough it will be said that it was only because the left was in why it was made......

I can't speak for Guns N RockMusic, but I didn't see his post as supporting internment camps. He did highlight some major differences between US Japanese internment camps and Nazi concentration camps, which was important, because many America haters point to the internment camps and say things to the effect that America was no better than Hitler, we're a fascist state, etc.

its not so much that you are a facsist stae its jsut that you dont try to show that you are not.......

Yeah, America has gotten terrible at PR since the fall of the Berlin Wall. But if we're not a fascist state, why should we even have to show that we are not? There shouldn't be a reason unless someone was unjustly putting that label on us.

To clarify, I am against any system that places groups of people in a camp or removes them from society.  While I do understand the reasons for japanese internment, the idea of forcing people into colllective camps sickens me.  That being said, profiling at airport security is a different issue all together. No one has a right to air travel, (hence all driver's license) it's a privledge.  The United States is at War with terrorist of middle eastern descent and those terrorist have used planes as their means of force.  I do support inspecting any and all Middle Eastern males that go through airport security.  Again, this is a private business outside of government control.  Middle Eastern Terrorist are the major terrorist threat as well as the only to use aircraft in their attack.  All people make a choice to utilize aircraft as transportation.  There is a difference between choosing to ride on aircraft and walking down the street and being searched.  In fact, most Arab Americans are willing to make a small sacrifice at Airport security for the safety of everyone.  I don't like the idea of inconviencing anyone, regardless of ethnicity.  I am a libertarian, the only group to believe and support true freedom.  However, the cost of rights comes with a cost both fiscal and in terms of liberty.  The rights and freedoms we enjoy is determined by the populace and the more freedoms and rights we have the higher the cost must be.  I truly feel sorry for Arab Americans that must be scrutinized during this trying time, but I would expect no less scrutiny if all White, Brunette Agnostics were a major terrorist threat against me.  Regardless of your poliical affiliation, there is no way that someone can deny that profiling works as an effective means of protection against terrorism.  I wish we did live in a utopia where everyone just got along, but I have to live in the real world; a place many of you have forgotten.

I'm glad we agree about that whole internment thing.? ?Airport security is fine with me.? Everybody and their belongings are x-rayed.? From my experience I haven't seen any racial profiling.? When they used to do those random searches at the gates themeselves, i haven't noticed any tendency to do extra searches for minorities.?