Racial Profiling for Terrorists: Good or Bad?

[Dâriûsh]

I hope the "good" voters will one day have to undergo security checks with a gloved hand up their behind.

[Pannonian]

Profiling Muslims-Unfortunately an absolute neccessity, and remember 100% of the terrorists are Muslims.

Wasn't the first use of the new anti-incitement law against a pro-life activist who supported attacking abortion clinics or something? IIRC there have also been firebombs from animal rights activists in the past few months as well. In NI there is still some tension between the Loyalists and the Republicans, and between the Loyalists themselves. Then there are the neo-Nazis.

Profiling the "Muslim Race"-Impossible no such thing exists

Why does everyone insist on equating Islam with a race?

So yes I am in for of profiling, however I am for religious, not racial profiling.

So how would you go about doing this profiling? How would people qualify to be profiled? Would all Muslims have to register to be profiled, or only a subsection? How would you define that subsection? Would converts have to register upon conversion? How much data do you think this will throw up? How are you going to deal with all this data and turn it into useful information?

Most of the intelligence we here in the UK get from the Muslim Community comes from bugging mosques, or from under cover agents who blend in with the in crowd of the terrorists, the latter method not an anonymous phone call is how we defeated the most recent plot to blow up ten civilian jets.

Any cites for this? Also, how are you going to get undercover agents into the incrowd of these terrorists if you're going to alienate the entire Muslim population?

[AntiochusIII]

I hope the "good" voters will one day have to undergo security checks with a gloved hand up their behind.

Ah, but Whites have greater tolerance for such alternative caressing activities by complete strangers, especially considering on how I suspect just about everyone on the far right likes to do that in their closets!

...

I'm not sure, but I'd rather have political forces on full swing dealing with actual issues and actual things than scanning the hell out of my very tender behind because of my Asian look and such. It wouldn't be too soon before the Southeast Asian terrorist organizations -- many of which are heavily tied to your old friends -- are utilized by the beloved Al-Qaida for another spectacular round of global destabilization, and then I shall find the privacy of my bedroom to be but a myth. The actual job of fighting this incredibly catchy-sounding War on Terror ought to be fought with more innovative ways than the logically-flawed, racism-encouraging, partisan-inspiring, resource-wasting, distracting system of racial profiling.

But who can say? Since so many in this thread have expressed the sentiment of "face it, you're scared of the other colored person too (I could shorten it to racism, but for the courtesy of it...)" and a few even go to the legendary "but my Muslim/Arab Christian/Cyrodiilic (and I'm not Camonna Tong! [Morrowind reference]) friend!"

[Horatius]

Wasn't the first use of the new anti-incitement law against a pro-life activist who supported attacking abortion clinics or something? IIRC there have also been firebombs from animal rights activists in the past few months as well. In NI there is still some tension between the Loyalists and the Republicans, and between the Loyalists themselves. Then there are the neo-Nazis.

1. You forgot the IRA

2. Yes Animal Rights and pro-life groups are such a threat to Britain that it is so equivalent to Islamic Terrorist , and I would like to know when was the last terror attack attributed to Nick Griffith.

So how would you go about doing this profiling? How would people qualify to be profiled? Would all Muslims have to register to be profiled, or only a subsection? How would you define that subsection? Would converts have to register upon conversion? How much data do you think this will throw up? How are you going to deal with all this data and turn it into useful information?

You are acting like M15 is incompetent first off by assuming that the amount of information this would require processing before it becomes useful is too much for it.

Secondly somebody with a very heavy German accent named Ali bin Allah might be a convert, while not all Muslim Converts change their names enough do for religious profiling without racial profiling. I do concede that any profiling is unfortunate, and I wish that it wasn't needed, however the danger is clear and present.

Any cites for this? Also, how are you going to get undercover agents into the incrowd of these terrorists if you're going to alienate the entire Muslim population?

1. It's called secrecy, hence the term undercover.

2. The Muslim Population already feels extremely alienated.

3. I will look for that one to, although I am doing a bunch of things at the same time.

Anyway Pannonian just as I acknowledge you don't hate me, or Tony Blair Loyalists I hope you acknowledge I do not hate you, Muslims or Leftists.

[Redleg]

To put it simply Racial Profiling equates to poor police work. I prefer behavior profiling as the method to catch the individual who has committed himself to breaking the law.

[Tribesman]

I would like to know when was the last terror attack attributed to Nick Griffith.

Well you had the two friendly bombings in London by the nice BNP member from Camberley , then you had Kirk Barker a nice BNP campaigner in North-Hampshire who was implicated in those bomb attacks getting caught trying to firebomb a Hindu wedding , then Kirks drinking and campaigning partner Luke Gardiner getting arrested for a racist attack and the police search of his house turning up explosives and illegal firearms .
Though of course Nick Griffith doesn't do terrorism ..... his followers do .

[Pannonian]

I would like to know when was the last terror attack attributed to Nick Griffith.

Well you had the two friendly bombings in London by the nice BNP member from Camberley , then you had Kirk Barker a nice BNP campaigner in North-Hampshire who was implicated in those bomb attacks getting caught trying to firebomb a Hindu wedding , then Kirks drinking and campaigning partner Luke Gardiner getting arrested for a racist attack and the police search of his house turning up explosives and illegal firearms .
Though of course Nick Griffith doesn't do terrorism ..... his followers do .

Did you count the nail bombings in Brixton, Brick Lane and Soho?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland

[Papewaio]

I haven't seen very much in the way of help coming from any Muslim communities in the United States or the United Kingdom. On the contrary, it seems that their is quite a bit of "Allah Aqbar" going on in many mosques any time that 9/11 is mentioned in sermons. What in the world is one to make of such an attitude? I guess I am just to overlook the fact that over 80% of Muslim s in those communities hate the west, and wish to see the restoration of the Caliphate. We might as well just start living in the middle ages again if that should ever happen. Trust such people indeed! I might as well invite a rapist to date my daughter or a thief to do my banking. Come on man! Are you really that naiive? Let's imagine that 9/11 happened in Austrailia. Do you think that the Australian people would have such restraint? Many of them understand exactly what it means to let a wolf in among your sheep. I doubt they would be so docile as you claim to be towards so dedicated an enemy.

Ignorance leads to fear, fear leads to anger, anger leads to mistakes.

I would like to see where you are getting your information from because it is essentially wrong. It is also racist. When you equate an entire people to rapists and thieves it shows how much out of your depth you are indeed.

Lets dissect your insipid arguement down to the marrow.

it seems that their is quite a bit of "Allah Aqbar" going on in many mosques any time that 9/11 is mentioned in sermons.

I'm pretty sure there is a lot of "Amen" when going in many churches any time that 9/11 is mentioned in sermons too. Oh my Gawd all christians must be terrorists because they say Amen!

I am just to overlook the fact that over 80% of Muslim s in those communities hate the west.

Care to backup this claim? There are plenty of types of Muslims and you do realise that the Caliphate really only applies to a portion of the sects not all, It would be like saying all Christians want to see world dominiation by the Catholics, or all Buddhists want to see China dominate the world.

Trust such people indeed! I might as well invite a rapist to date my daughter or a thief to do my banking.

Thats plain racist. Insert any group based on ethics, creed or skin colour into that statement and you will see how wrong it is.

Let's imagine that 9/11 happened in Austrailia. Do you think that the Australian people would have such restraint?

Not only did we show restraint over the Bali Bombing, when the Tsunami hit we were the biggest contributor on the ground and in funds per capita in helping out Indonesia. We have the ability to discern the difference between facism and democracy and Islamofacism and Islamic Democracy. Australians as a whole also don't believe in collective punishment as this is another form of racism.

What is wrong with terrorism is that it is a form of collective punishment that attacks all regardless of age, gender or actions. Collectively punishing an entire community is from the same poor idea of ethics. Be it internment camps, death camps, second class citizenship etc.

Attacking an entire community when they can be your best tool in defeating terrorism smacks of idiocy much like Kitcheners solution in the second Boer War. The terrorists want to create a schism, they want to splinter communities, they want to create fear. It is not a good idea therefore to play to their strenghts to give into fear, to splinter communites and create gaps. This is playing to their plan and giving them the initiative, which is not the way to win any war let alone a fourth generation one.

Maybe next time I will go easy on you and just give the warning points.

[Divinus Arma]

I just watched a documentary from the Discovery Times Channel called the Media Jihad or something similar. Very interesting. It provides a look at the propoganda methods of muslim terrorists.

I could be wrong, but it seems there is no larger group than muslims who truly hate the people of America. It's sad to see 8 yr old muslim boys watching Al Qaida propganda material and being taught to hate Americans in the Madrasas.

I found it especially interesting to see the Jihadi groups in Britain, which meet regularly and watch these videos. I guess there is a large population of these folks in Birmingham (is that right? 2nd largest city next to London).

Sad. What the hell do these freaks think we in the west want? To rape their women and convert their people? Sorry. No. Well, some want to convert them, but not by force, that's for sure.

[Horatius]

Tribesemen

1. That happened a very long time ago perhaps you could have saved yourself the time and just brought up World War Two?, and again the scale is no where close to the danger posed by Islamic Terrorists, and we caught the BNP perpetrators in part by profiling BNP member the fact that we caught them using that method strengthens not weakens religious profiling.

[Tribesman]

Horace 7 years is not a long time ago .
And it shows that your claim about fascist scum not doing terrorism was rubbish .
we caught the BNP perpetrators in part by profiling BNP member the fact that we caught them using that method strengthens not weakens religious profiling.

No they didn't and no it doesn't , Copeland was caught after a tip off from his face being published , Barker and Gardiner were both caught in the act of commiting a crime , though they have never got Barker for his gun smuggling activities and the racially superior welsh git managed to survive his prison sentance ....... by spending the whole time sectioned with the nonces .

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I just watched a documentary from the Discovery Times Channel called the Media Jihad or something similar. Very interesting. It provides a look at the propoganda methods of muslim terrorists.

I could be wrong, but it seems there is no larger group than muslims who truly hate the people of America. It's sad to see 8 yr old muslim boys watching Al Qaida propganda material and being taught to hate Americans in the Madrasas.

I found it especially interesting to see the Jihadi groups in Britain, which meet regularly and watch these videos. I guess there is a large population of these folks in Birmingham (is that right? 2nd largest city next to London).

Sad. What the hell do these freaks think we in the west want? To rape their women and convert their people? Sorry. No. Well, some want to convert them, but not by force, that's for sure.

Why would they not hate us?

In the 20th century alone, the Western Powers attacked the remains of the Caliphate (Ottoman Empire) splintering the Middle East into fragments, failed to honor their promises for complete autonomy following WW1, exploited the area's resources for decades, fought wars (WW2 & Colonial spats) in Muslim Africa wherein the natives were casual targets for stray rounds,and topped it all off by creating a Jewish homeland from Arab territory as they finally left. The West then supports this ersatz "Crusader Kingdom" allowing it to continue to steal what is theirs and to win wars in which it should otherwise have succumbed. Now the West calls for peace but continues to fund their pet kingdom as it squelches the Palestinian people.

[Horatius]

In the 20th century alone, the Western Powers attacked the remains of the Caliphate (Ottoman Empire) splintering the Middle East into fragments,

Incorrect, the Ottomans attacked Russia, and joined into World War One and got punished along with the Western Empires that where on the wrong side, and if the Arabs hate the set up borders let them stop complaining and unite with each other (Which is what Baathism is about, and Baathism is not popular which is why the closest to success the Baathists had was when Hafez Al Assad temporarily submitted to Gamel abd Al Nasser.

failed to honor their promises for complete autonomy following WW1,

Arabs failed their promise to seriously hurt the Ottoman Empire, shall we hate Arabs now? Niether side fulfilled their agreement.

exploited the area's resources for decades,

In North Africa yes, but not in the Middle East.

fought wars (WW2 & Colonial spats) in Muslim Africa wherein the natives were casual targets for stray rounds,

The other option was allow the Nazis to win which I know many Arabs wanted, however that was simply not an option.

and topped it all off by creating a Jewish homeland from Arab territory as they finally left.

Arab land that had a Jewish Majority at the time, which is a funny way for it to be Arab Land, perhaps Istanbul is still Greek Land?

The West then supports this ersatz "Crusader Kingdom" allowing it to continue to steal what is theirs and to win wars in which it should otherwise have succumbed.

Israel won all of it's wars on it's own, and it has not stolen any land, land captured in defensive wars that the enemy wants to commit genocide is not theft.

Now the West calls for peace but continues to fund their pet kingdom as it squelches the Palestinian people.

I don't know where to begin in countering that. Perhaps the fact that Hamas rejects the right of Israel to exist? Or perhaps the fact that Israel has consistently been willing to negotiate while in a classic example in 2000/2001 the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

[rotorgun]

To Papewaio and Banquo's Ghost I would like to say thank you for your honesty in expressing your thoughts about my latest response. After looking at it closer I realised just how it must have made me appear as a racist. I should like to revise my statement to be a more accurate representation of my thoughts and feelings about this subject.

When talking about "rapists" and "theives" I was speaking rhetorically about those who are using the call of radical Islamic doctrine to influence those Muslims who might otherwise be of a more moderate view. I am speaking of those who hide among the peaceful Muslim populations of the world and strike without warning the innocent people of the countries that they despise. I liken them to wolves, but on reflection perhaps they are more like rats. It is they who I "do not trust" and therefore I must take care in how I trust other people who hail from the region they come from. I would like to withdraw any statement that has caused offense.

As for the 80% figure I spoke of concerning the number of Muslims who hate the United States and the United Kingdom, I admit that I arrived at it from pure feeling. I had recently watched a news broadcast which showed two competely different mosques in the UK. I don't remember exactly where these were located, somewhere with a significant Muslim population, such as Birmingham or some place like that. I do remember an interview with an older Muslim cleric who said that many of the younger members of his mosque had stopped coming to his mosque, but now attended the one just next door. In this mosque, a much more radical sermon was being preached, with emphasis made on how deserving America was to have been attacked on 9/11. Every time that 9/11 was mentioned, or something about the "evil" United States, a round of "Allah Aqbar!" went up from the congregation.

In the interview with the youths, it was claimed that this was how the majority of the young felt about the United States, and that they hoped to someday see the restoration of the Caliphate. Many of them expressed a desire to fight along side Osama Bin Laden, Hamas, or Hezbollah. These were the actual words of those interviewed, not something I made up from thin air. I do admit that how I arrived at a figure of 80% is rather incredulous, but I guess I just felt that 80% represented a good figure for a majority. I realise that I was intellectually, morally, and spiritually wrong to express such a figure now.
Please accept my humble apologies for this obvious error.

As to my ability to even discuss this subject logically I must decline for the present. My feelings are just to strong about it. As you and others have mentioned, the terrorists have sought to spread fear and divide their enemies. In this they have admirably succeded. I hope that they are proud of themselves for what they have accomplished. I hope that Allah will be as proud of them as well, especially for all of the murders and atrocities that they have committed. In a way, I feel that I must pray for them that God may forgive them for their sins. For why they have wasted such a gift, as life is, by hating others so much that they must kill them and throw the world into fear and turmoil is beyond me. There are so many better ways to spend one's time on earth. I shall not pray to Allah to kill them, but to Jesus that he may teach me to forgive them.

I shall now retire from this discussion, or any others like it, until the second coming. You may now all say "Amen" if it should float your boat.

For the record, we do not ever speak of sovereign nations such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, or any other Islamic country with anything but respect in my church. I have never heard one "hateful" sermon about any of them in all my years as a Christian. As a matter of fact we have often prayed on our knees for the peace of these countries, and for a resolution to the woes in all of the middle east. To that we have often shouted "Amen!"

[Papewaio]

Fred Phelps, you wouldn't want the majority of Americans attitudes to be summed up by the majority of his congregation.

Idiots exist in every religion.

[Divinus Arma]

Comparing Phelps to people who simply offer a differing opinion from you on security strategy is a pretty low blow.

[Papewaio]

? I'm comparing Phelps to Islamofacists... and saying that there are idiot congregations in every religion and country who shouldn't be used as the measuring stick.

[Divinus Arma]

Ahh. Then I apologize for misunderstanding your statement. If I had a flood time of less than 300 seconds, I would have apologized even faster.

Edit: As for your comment- I think it is fair to point out that the proportion of nutters who follow Phelps is considerably less than the nutters who follow Bin Laden and similar hate-mongers. Considerably less indeed.

[Strike For The South]

Phelps isnt a good anaolgy anyway. He has 40 followers and does nothing violent. The islamofacists have millions of followers and even more people who would turn a blind eye. It is true all socites have idoits. But this one has them yeilding all the power.

[Papewaio]

And I bet you can name quite a few other idiots who also give Christianity a bad name.

KKK (who went on a recruitment drive at the Org), Christian Neo-Nazis and I'm sure quite a few others. Would you really sum up the majority of Christian opinions based on them?

Would you sum up the majority of adult opinions based on radical groups such as those that protest at the G8?

Radicals exist within every religion and thought system. Some of them are ultra-violent, even Buddhism has violent monks that intefer in politics.

[Strike For The South]

Once agian you are trying to say these men can weild 1/10000 of the power that these inams can. They cant. This kind of thinking is engrained in there socitey. It is tuaght in school and in mass.Could you imagine if a teacher told his class to hate the smelly brown people in the west? No. There is something bigger at work here it is not a few fundies

[Papewaio]

True there are more fundies, but lumping the moderates in with them is going to help the fundies not us. We need to support he moderates, it will be far more better for us.

[Strike For The South]

This is true but how to get the moderates on our side without breaking the floodgates?

[Papewaio]

The Golden Rule.

[Strike For The South]

Indulge me good sir

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Incorrect, the Ottomans attacked Russia, and joined into World War One and got punished along with the Western Empires that where on the wrong side, and if the Arabs hate the set up borders let them stop complaining and unite with each other (Which is what Baathism is about, and Baathism is not popular which is why the closest to success the Baathists had was when Hafez Al Assad temporarily submitted to Gamel abd Al Nasser.



Arabs failed their promise to seriously hurt the Ottoman Empire, shall we hate Arabs now? Niether side fulfilled their agreement.



In North Africa yes, but not in the Middle East.



The other option was allow the Nazis to win which I know many Arabs wanted, however that was simply not an option.



Arab land that had a Jewish Majority at the time, which is a funny way for it to be Arab Land, perhaps Istanbul is still Greek Land?



Israel won all of it's wars on it's own, and it has not stolen any land, land captured in defensive wars that the enemy wants to commit genocide is not theft.



I don't know where to begin in countering that. Perhaps the fact that Hamas rejects the right of Israel to exist? Or perhaps the fact that Israel has consistently been willing to negotiate while in a classic example in 2000/2001 the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

All pertinent points, most of which I agree with. If you've not read a number of my other posts, you might have missed on the point that ANY such summary from me is presented VERY tongue in cheek. Unfortunately, the version I was putting out while rolling my eyes is, I suspect, all too close to the version of history being fed to younglings by Islamo-fascisti. Look up a few of X Dangr's posts on Israel/Palestine and you'll see what I mean.

[Papewaio]

Golden Rule

aka do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

aka Recipriocity

[Strike For The South]

If it were only that simple my friend. Even if we did everything we could do they wouldnt stop. They are jelaous of what the west has and wont stop until they destroy us. Not to mention we shouldnt be listening to them anyway. Our polices should be decided by us. Id rather fall for my idelas than stand for something Im not.

[Papewaio]

The Golden rule means to apply the same rules we would have on us to them.

It means if we applaud the life of someone who spends their life hunting Nazis we are likely to applaud someone hunting down terrorists.

It means that if we demand trials by jury they too will be tried.

It means that if we have capital punishment for terrorism that they too will be under that law.

For the moderates it means that we will treat them with the dignity that we would expect from our own group. It means we will let them practice their faith as we would expect ours to be allowed. It also means for myself that if I can make fun and caricatures of my holy cows, that I will make fun of others too... that is probably stretching the definition, but fun things have a bit of give and take, condoms for instance.

It means that that rules that we apply to ourselves will be applied to others. It does not mean one rule for us and another set for another be it none or more severe.

So if you think it is okay to go to an internment camp because of what the IRA did then it would be okay to send all Muslims to internment camps based on what Osama has done. It you think it would be unfair to be sent to an internment camp based on the actions of others, then the golden rule would mean that you should be against sending others to an internment camp based on group think.

Essentially the Golden Rule is a very useful tool in increasing our Monkey Sphere... it is a reason that it is a core tenent of the major religions, it leads to the ability to create much larger social groups. The lack of the Golden Rule in the likes of Phelps would probably limit a lot of these groups from developing beyond their leaders Monkey Sphere limited mindset.

[Reenk Roink]

Incorrect, the Ottomans attacked Russia, and joined into World War One and got punished along with the Western Empires that where on the wrong side, and if the Arabs hate the set up borders let them stop complaining and unite with each other (Which is what Baathism is about, and Baathism is not popular which is why the closest to success the Baathists had was when Hafez Al Assad temporarily submitted to Gamel abd Al Nasser.

Firstly, how on earth does any of this make it "incorrect" that the Ottomans were attacked by the Allies? It's a war, both sides attacked each other, Allied and Central.

The Arabs do have a pretty good reason to hate the redrawn borders. Ethnic and religious groups never meant to live with each other are suddenly put in the same nation (Iraq), while others are separated.

Now, there is fault of Arab nations of not being able to unite, though western hands aren't totally blameless either.

The fall of the Ottoman Empire was in retrospect, a pretty significant event. A humiliation of the Muslim world, a destruction of the remnants of unity (ever disintegrating since the 10th century), and the opening of the floodgates to many conflicts (both between Muslims and others). After all, the Ottoman Empire was much better in playing down differences between various groups. And perhaps most relevantly, it led to the downfall of traditional Sunni authority among Muslims (no more Caliph, scholars have their power destroyed). The subsequent failure of Pan-Arab nationalism led to the current ideology: a mix of the literalist brand Wahabi/Salafi Islam and 20th century revolutionary ideas, from Qutb to Azzam to bin Laden...

Arabs failed their promise to seriously hurt the Ottoman Empire, shall we hate Arabs now? Niether side fulfilled their agreement.

In response to: "failed to honor their promises for complete autonomy following WW1,"

This is a very poor argument.

The other option was allow the Nazis to win which I know many Arabs wanted, however that was simply not an option.

I'm sorry, but how is this the other option to: "fought wars (WW2 & Colonial spats) in Muslim Africa wherein the natives were casual targets for stray rounds,"

Nice character assassination though, but you failed to mention Germans.

Also, it is interesting, that anti-Semitism in the Arab world coincided with the rise of Zionism and peaked with the creation of Israel. It just wasn't there before that...

Arab land that had a Jewish Majority at the time, which is a funny way for it to be Arab Land, perhaps Istanbul is still Greek Land?

This is blatantly false.

Israel won all of it's wars on it's own, and it has not stolen any land, land captured in defensive wars that the enemy wants to commit genocide is not theft.

Now this is a loaded statement. Well, I'd advise you to look up the scores of threads on the topic for more information. While you're at it, look up the statements of some early Zionist leaders as well...

I don't know where to begin in countering that. Perhaps the fact that Hamas rejects the right of Israel to exist? Or perhaps the fact that Israel has consistently been willing to negotiate while in a classic example in 2000/2001 the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

See above...