Printable View
Well lets see....
We have arabs doing the majority of terrorist actions. So Tada! Watch out for arabs. Theres nothing wrong with watching out for someone we know is the enemy. Of course, only a small precentage of arabs follow the radical policy terrorists follow, but then again, I havent seen many white men blow themself up lately in the name of Allah.
Yes, it's really those thousands of grandmas everybody here is talking about that keep the security staff so busy that they cannot take care of the real terrorists...Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar010
I think this will sum it up:
Racists on an Airplane
Let's just call it International Profiling of People who come from Countries that Terrorists Originate or that Support Terrorists, or IPPTOST for short. I can think of nothing more appropriate then to put the governments of such countries on notice that their people are no longer welcome if they continue to believe in the "nutcases who want to have 72 virgins when they die a martyr for the cause of Allah." If they no longer wish to let antone to travel to thier countries, no problem. I didn't lose anything there in any case. Count me in as a yes until these insane fools are finished trying to tell the rest of the world that they must believe in their way or else. Screw them! Why should my people be the ones to suffer and not their people as well. Let them pound camel dung as far as I am concerned. They are acting like complete maniacs and deserve every bit of what comes thier way. It's like dealing with an errant three year old, except this child wants to kill you. Maybe they should have thought it out a bit better. Now they've got all the negative attention they could possibly want. For those countries who are against the Terrorists, welcome any day.
Are you finished with your rant?Quote:
Originally Posted by rotorgun
Who are you talking about?
Do you know what this discussion is about?
Racial profiling is stupid and misses the point, profiling Muslims however is not. This does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists, merely that all our current terrorists are Muslims, or claim to be.
This avoids picking up my Arabian Christian friends.
I've been thinking over this for awhile, and I cannot quite understand. How is it possible to no an answer? I'm sorry, but I'm not God and I cannot simply invalidate something; you see, it must already be false or true prior to my coming to it and its validity is separate from anything that I could hope to do to it.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceasar010
But surely if this antagonises the general Muslim population, the side effects are worse than the benefits to be gained? Better to openly disavow such profiling, engage the Muslim communities, then profile extremist trends and individuals based on information thus gained. John Smith in MI5 isn't likely to be able to distinguish suspicious Muslims from ordinary Muslims. Meanwhile, Shazeer Mohammed in Barnsley might see an outsider distributing leaflets outside his mosque, and a regular group of kids who cluster around this outsider. Data-mining in central HQ might not reveal anything out of the ordinary, as each of these events is quite legal. However, Shazeer would be able to see this as unusual, and report it to the police via whatever channels he feels comfortable with, and the police will have something concrete to focus on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall
Most advocates of increased surveillance miss the point that there is already too much data to practically deal with. When investigators don't already know what they're looking for, there is practically no chance of finding it until after the event. The only way they can make sense of it is if an insider gives them a lead that can focus their investigation. Therefore every effort should be made to cultivate such insiders, and moves that can hinder this should be avoided where possible.
Yes I am finished with my rant. I'm sorry, but I had to get that off my chest. As for who I am talking about, why the Muslim extremists who claim to speak for all Muslims. You know, folks like Al Queda and Hezbollah, etc. These I call "the nutcases who want to recieve 72 virgins by becoming martyrs for Allah."Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are speaking of wether racial profiling is justified to aid in the war against the terrorists, are we not? I realize that I may have gone a bit over the top, but in all seriousness, don't you think it would be the easiest way to prevent these groups from further entering our countries to inflict harm on our citizenry?
I'm not talking about going after those muslim people who are currently law abiding citizens of the United States or the United Kingdom, but merely denying access and immigration to any more from the muslim world until the terrorists are defeated. I would make allowances for those who are on official business with our governments only. No other visas or passports would be approved! If this upsets the governments of such muslim countries or the sensabilities of non-muslims who feel that we ought to make it easy on the terrorists to visit our shores, than perhaps they should move to the muslim world and see how welcome they are.
PS: Just because a few wolves have made it into the pasture because our fences were damaged, doesn't mean that I should open the gates as well. I mean really!
Thanks for your concern,
So how many Saudi's were in 9/11?
Do you really want to stop all non-government business with them?
I understand what you mean, but what about arabs trying to escape their country?
Why base your judgements on the minority, there are more kinds of terrorists than just Arabs. The war on terrorism can't be won. There are terrorists in Europe, the Basque ETA are terrorists.
So that would make Muslims never able to enter the US. Though it would just mean that they would enter illegally. In my opinion it wouldn't solve the problem. And what about the Muslims in America already who can't get their families to the country, but can't leave because they won't be allowed back. It is an interesting thought but would it keep the American Muslims happy?
No, you would probably end up turning more Muslims already in America against the government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanamori
Yeah.... I noticed that:help: I'd edit it but I can't...it says my warnings are removed but I still can't edit:inquisitive:
Sun Tzu's Art of War: Know Thy Enemy ...well we know they aren't 80 year old war vets, and Grannies with a handbag...
I've been profiled by airport security before.... just not racially. I once commented to a screener that "I must look suspicious" since I had been selected multiple times for "random" screenings when boarding my flights during a business trip.
I was told by the screener that no, it wasnt that- it was just that my carry-on (a small duffle bag) was very easy to search, so they were selecting me. ~:eek:
Here is a twist!
Baby bombers and fanatical moms!
Best argument I have seen yet against profiling. All your "civil liberty" arguments are poop. Now we expand the net to include muslim women and mothers. Crazy freaks.Quote:
By JOHN KAY
Chief Reporter
and SIMON HUGHES
HATE-filled mums willing to sacrifice themselves and their BABIES are being hunted in the war on terror.
Security sources confirmed last night that alleged “baby bombers” were among those arrested over the plot to massacre thousands by downing transatlantic flights.
Those being quizzed included a husband and wife with a six-month-old infant.
The discovery prompted fears that there were fanatical mothers in secret al-Qaeda cells in Britain ready to become suicide bombers — and to die with their tots in their arms.
And it emerged as the reason why women at airports were ordered to drink from their babies’ bottles before being allowed to board flights during last week’s massive alert.
One senior Government security adviser warned of a race against time to identify individuals who might pose a threat.
The adviser said: “It may be beyond belief, but we are convinced that there are now women in Britain who are prepared to die with their babies for their twisted cause. They are ruthless, single-minded and totally committed.”
The nightmare is that mums carrying tiny tots would provide “very good cover” and not raise suspicions among even the most alert security guards.
The threat was identified along with an additional warning that as many as two dozen terror cells may still be active in Britain.
The source added: “We believe all the known players involved in last week’s plot have been detained. Our biggest concern now is all the unknown players who may be out there.
“And that includes mothers who are ready and willing to see their little ones die. It is a race against time.” Women around the world have carried out suicide attacks in the past.
Two female Chechen terrorists blew themselves up on separate flights in Russia two years ago.
An intelligence source said: “Al-Qaeda specialises in attempting the unexpected. What could be more unexpected in Western eyes than women willing to die with their babies?”
Actually it disproves profiling. If only young Arab males was the profile target, then a married Pakistani couple with a baby would be outside the parameters and hence missed from that search.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eclectic
Now if you search everyone, then everyone will get searched. Setup holes in a search program and the holes are what will be used. As anything that is not part of the profile is now a hole.
What's your next poll going to be - identifying badges for "undesireables"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eclectic
I think the answer to your question is quite obvious. When datamining and wiretapping of phones and email increases, terrorists will start making the attacks alone, without any communication at all, and their terror will remain, while the datamining has removed freedom, democracy and integrity from our countries. To use datamining and wiretapping against terrorists is the most contra-productive strategy ever suggested in any conflict in the history of mankind. In fact it's so stupid of an idea with so clear contra-productive consequences, that it makes you think that the real intention of it probably isn't anti-terrorism, but a gradual coup to transform our countries into dictatorship regimes just like what happened in the early 19th century where practically every country in Europe except France and Britain got dictators. This gradual removal of freedom and democracy has been going for about 4 years now, and our leaders have achieved just as much as Hitler, Stalin, or anyone else achievied in 4 years when it comes to removal of democratic rights and increasing of demonization and fear of protesting. So what can we expect in the coming years?
Er....yikes? :anxious:Quote:
Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix
LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix
wanna lay off the naziness amigo? Just cause I wanna cath te bad guys dont make me a ****ing nazi!!!!!
It makes me sick to be called abigot by complete strgangers. youuo dont knwo a damn ting about me. Yes I am drunk and posting but damn. I dont care fi you are a craker, a beaner, a nip, a negor, or a chink. I'll be your friend either way. That crap means nothing to me you arse. I care about the politicas of th matter, namely: are you coming to my country byt millios with nothing tooffer but poverty? Are you attempting to kill mt famiuly? Get a clue man. This never nevr never had anything to do with race.
I expect these knee-jerk racism accusations to stop. :stare:
If you disagree with the effectiveness of "racial" (or whatever) profiling please let us know why.
Simply accusing other patrons of being racist is not acceptable.
Datamining and wiretapping can only catch terrorists who communicate. Terrorists working alone will not be caught. After a few cases of terrorists being caught, they will all change strategy and go alone, which means they can't be caught. Then you're back where you started - with no gains in the war against terrorism, but with one difference - you've made your country wiretap it's citizens, you've violated their integrity, and you've already created the hateful demonized feeling that has in history always ended with genocide. The end result is therefore the loss of something, without the gain of anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
If you look at previous examples in history where datamining and wiretapping of the citizens was carried out, you'll see that that's something that has only existed in malfunctioning, violent and authoritarian societies - for instance Nazi Germany, Communist USSR, Mao Zedong's China, DDR, Mussolini's Fascist regime and The Khmers in Cambodia, to mention a few. Interesting also to note is that previously to the usage of datamining, wiretapping and controlling the citizens, these societies worked a lot better than they did after a few years of all the surveillance.
Absolutely! This means Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, Iran, Syria, Lebenon, and let us not forget our dear friends, Pakistan. I would go as far as freezing the assets of the Saudis in this country until they were more forthcoming in helping to find their brother Osama Bin Killin' and promised the reforms that would help keep such groups as Al Kill Ya from being able to spread their brand of hatred.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
As for racial profiling, it is something that their people brought on themselves. If they want my respect, then perhaps the muslim world could do more to reign in the nutcases who want to have 72 virgins by dying for Allah. I really mean our peaceful muslim bretheren no harm, and I have every respect for the Koran (praise be upon it), but this is war-a war the west did not ask for and if we must take a hard look at one segment of our population to find the wolves among us, then to do less is to lack moral courage. We are not talking about your standard criminal element here, but a highly sophisticated enemy who is completely dedicated to causing us misery and harm.
Regards,
So you're arguing that we shouldnt catch terrorists because they might get wise to our methods and switch? That's like arguing against treating people with anti-biotics because the diseases may get resistent. Besides, they won't stop communicating- without planning and coordination it's impossible to pull off any large-scale attacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix
Is it the surveillance and racialQuote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
discriminationprofiling or regular police work that has stopped the latest two terror plots? You're putting words I never said into my mouth. Removal of democratic rights to fight a threat against democracy, is like murdering random civilians to fight murder.
To remove our democratic rights and using racial discrimination and concentration camps is no more a solution to any problem than murdering innocent Jews or Anti-communists was a solution to any problem for the nazis and stalinists.
Just to lighten the mood ...
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v.../terrorist.jpg
The fun thing about Islam is that it's a religion. The fun thing about Scary nutter Islam is that it's a perspective. This means that the entire human race can be a member of both. If you single out Arabs alienate them and give the terrorists an opening to exploit. It's almost a cert that their are white people out their who could plausably be terrorists. Their's also also large numbers of black, pakistani and Asian muslims out their anyway not to mention the Eastern europian ethnic groups. This isnt 'bleeding heartism' (aka a buzzword used by mildy bigoted conservatisves to make their enemies look naive when it's actually they themselves who are naive) it's basic logic.
What!!???
You mean to tell us that terrorists drive black mercedesses? Are you insinuating that we should race-profile Germans!? :furious3:
Except that both Blair and Bush will be gone in a few years and as soon as the Muslim terrorist threat disappears the erosion of the state will start again. That said removing double jeopardy and trial by jury are rather worrying, since I don't see that getting reversed.
Blair has ground to a halt and he's a lame, duck. I'd shelve the conspiracy theories for a while if I were you.
On topic: While I agree that profiling can be counter productive you have to admit that all the terrorists are Muslims, thats the link. You can't get away from it. They're not all Arabs, or blacks, or white, they're all Muslim. So in Britain we can discount the 58.2 million people in Britain who are not Muslim.
Just as in the same way when they were looking for an IRA plot they could discount the protasant Welsman with no Irish relatives. These things don't need to be made public, they just need to be done. The idea that the public needs to know everything going in is stupid. Thats what we have the security services for, to take care of these things so that we don't have to worry about it.
Right. They're white Christian Timothy McVeigh's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
The whole problem with this entire debate is that far too many people think Muslims = Arabs and terrorists = Muslims; therefore, to them, terrorists = Arabs. It just isn't the case. Not all Arabs are terrorists. Not all Arabs are Muslims. Not all Muslims are Arabs. Not all Muslims are terrorists. And most importantly, not all terrorists are Arabs or Muslims. So what freaking good does racial profiling do? If anything, it gives the terrorists an open invitation to recruit non-Arabs to be their suicide bombers. Meanwhile, the less than intelligent will feel safe because the geniuses we hire for minimum wage to work in airport security will think that some Hindi woman dresses like an Arab (even though she doesn't) and profile her for searching, or single out the Sikh in the turban, instead of the terrorist in the business suit. No thanks.
Actually, I was getting paranoid about the blue Mazda in the background. Let's profile Japanese and French people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
In fairness, after the Oklahoma City bombing, police were profiling young white men with extremely short haircuts and paramilitary clothing. I remember they caught a couple of guys that way. Nobody raised much of a fuss about it at the time.