Security vs. Liberty

@xris,

xris;116931 wrote:

12% of british muslims are white. How you can tell from looking at someone who is more of a threat, I have no idea. It could or should be anyone who is acting suspiciously, not what colour he is or if he looks like a Muslim. Some poor fools think Sikhs are muslims. These are difficult times for all of us, just a little understanding by us all, might make this a little easier.

Profiling is not just looking at someone. And I think we would expect those who do the profiling to know that Sikhs are not Muslims. Among other things.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;116945 wrote:

Profiling is not just looking at someone. And I think we would expect those who do the profiling to know that Sikhs are not Muslims. Among other things.

Once again your reply makes me wonder about your ability to comprehend the simplest of statements. I know that those who do the profiling are aware of the differences but just ask a Sikh if he has been pointedly selected going through customs.

1 Reply

@xris,

The problem I see here is that in a democratic society we can't make a law especially against young male Muslims attacking planes. A law must have a more general character.

But if we make a law that will allow us to focus on young Arabs at the airport, the same law will be applicable to other cases. Somebody will be able to use this law against every race and every social group. If there is statistical evidence that certain crimes are more often commited by people of a certain race, this law will be applied against this people.

I think this would be an alarming developement.

0 Replies

@xris,

xris;116965 wrote:

Once again your reply makes me wonder about your ability to comprehend the simplest of statements. I know that those who do the profiling are aware of the differences but just ask a Sikh if he has been pointedly selected going through customs.

I hope that as things go on, we'll have more competent people who know the difference between a Sikh and a Muslim. But that does not mean that we should not profile people. As I have already pointed out, I expect that those who do the profiling will not simply look at the headdress of the person they are profiling, since a terrorist can wear a turban too.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

ok, the nigerian was a black man...why dont you profile all black men just to make sure they are not muslims? none of this makes very much sense to me. profiling is useless.

you must also understand that a terrorist would be willing to deny that he is a muslim, believing he will be excused for doing so, while an innocent muslim would not hide or deny his faith.

2 Replies

@salima,

salima;117150 wrote:

ok, the nigerian was a black man...why dont you profile all black men just to make sure they are not muslims? none of this makes very much sense to me. profiling is useless.

I agree wholeheartedly with you about such broad-brushed and insulting profiling as of an entire race or religion. But how do you feel about a profiling: (1) that infringes on the liberty of only a relatively small, more specfically identified segment of our citizens and (2) the segment is known to contain a relatively large number of terrorists?

Edit Note: I wish I had added this third proviso, even if it is idealistic: the segment receives extra educational and economical assistance as necessary to alleviate the conditions contributing to the excess of terrorism.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

salima wrote:

ok, the nigerian was a black man...why dont you profile all black men just to make sure they are not muslims? none of this makes very much sense to me. profiling is useless.

All profiling is not useless. Forensic profiling, for instance, is vital to forensic science. We profile many things daily - it's simply summarizing and extrapolating data. And though racial profiling is often considered to be racist, it is not necessarily so. Doctors profile races when considering susceptibilities to certain diseases. They even profile whole genders. Females are more susceptible to some diseases than males and vice versa.

There are many uses for profiling and they need not have anything to do with malicious intent. And even if there was malicious intent, it doesn't mean that the conclusion is incorrect. Profiling isn't wrong in and of itself. It's just the idiots who overgeneralize for no other reason than to hurt others who you have to look out for.

0 Replies

@salima,

salima;117150 wrote:

ok, the nigerian was a black man...why dont you profile all black men just to make sure they are not muslims? none of this makes very much sense to me. profiling is useless.

you must also understand that a terrorist would be willing to deny that he is a muslim, believing he will be excused for doing so, while an innocent muslim would not hide or deny his faith.

The profiling would, of course, have to be more expert and sensible than the kind you are thinking of. The terrorist was a male, but it would be idiotic to profile all males. It is not black men who have been terrorists. It is young male Muslims.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

i am not saying i believe profiling is some sneaky trick to defame anyone, i am not worried about losing or stealing any liberties (which i dont believe in anyway) and when i said it is useless i was referring to the subject of this thread, as far as airport and air travel security. it would make more sense to fingerprint everybody who came into every airport in the entire world. it would make sense to put fingerprints on passports as well as photos. i havent given it much thought but there must be better ways to go about it.

what i think is good is when the passengers of a plane actually thwart an attempt and are responsible for capturing a terrorist alive. if you want to stop terrorists you have to be able to think like a terrorist to know what to do. if they are prepared to die happily, and you show them they will be caught and kept alive, they would have reason to worry.

as far as whether terrorists are black, white or arab, take a look at the americans being held and tried in pakistan right now...

1 Reply

@salima,

salima;117587 wrote:

i am not saying i believe profiling is some sneaky trick to defame anyone, i am not worried about losing or stealing any liberties (which i dont believe in anyway) and when i said it is useless i was referring to the subject of this thread, as far as airport and air travel security. it would make more sense to fingerprint everybody who came into every airport in the entire world. it would make sense to put fingerprints on passports as well as photos. i havent given it much thought but there must be better ways to go about it.

what i think is good is when the passengers of a plane actually thwart an attempt and are responsible for capturing a terrorist alive. if you want to stop terrorists you have to be able to think like a terrorist to know what to do. if they are prepared to die happily, and you show them they will be caught and kept alive, they would have reason to worry.

as far as whether terrorists are black, white or arab, take a look at the americans being held and tried in pakistan right now...

The Americans you refer to are young male Muslims.
I think it is just frightening and shameful that the passengers had to thwart th attack. That is exactly what should not have to happen, and what reinforces my argument for taking much stronger measures like profiling. The man should never have got on that plane in the first place, let alone having been stopped by pure luck and the courage of a passenger who very well might not have been on the plane.

Suppose it was the case that it wasn't young Muslims, but say red-headed men who were attacking planes. Would you think we should profile red-headed men? If not, why not?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;117588 wrote:

The Americans you refer to are young male Muslims.
I think it is just frightening and shameful that the passengers had to thwart th attack. That is exactly what should not have to happen, and what reinforces my argument for taking much stronger measures like profiling. The man should never have got on that plane in the first place, let alone having been stopped by pure luck and the courage of a passenger who very well might not have been on the plane.

Suppose it was the case that it wasn't young Muslims, but say red-headed men who were attacking planes. Would you think we should profile red-headed men? If not, why not?

the muslims i am referring to were american citizens and by looks alone some appeared arab or middle eastern and some black. if you want to profile 'muslims' you have to first identify them. how are you going to do that?

if you want to profile young male muslims how are you going to separate them from young male christians? ask them to fill out a questionaire?

if you want to profile redheads, go do it-but dont you think they will dye their hair or shave?

let's see...we could profile people by conducting a dna test on everyone in the world or invent a dna screening channel we could use instead of a metal detector...would you feel warm and fuzzy then? but wait-being muslim doesnt show up on dna....anybody getting more scared yet?

if you want to eliminate terrorism (as opposed to terrorists) first you have to stop being scared...

1 Reply

@salima,

salima;117594 wrote:

the muslims i am referring to were american citizens and by looks alone some appeared arab or middle eastern and some black. if you want to profile 'muslims' you have to first identify them. how are you going to do that?

if you want to profile young male muslims how are you going to separate them from young male christians? ask them to fill out a questionaire?

if you want to profile redheads, go do it-but dont you think they will dye their hair or shave?

let's see...we could profile people by conducting a dna test on everyone in the world or invent a dna screening channel we could use instead of a metal detector...would you feel warm and fuzzy then? but wait-being muslim doesnt show up on dna....anybody getting more scared yet?

if you want to eliminate terrorism (as opposed to terrorists) first you have to stop being scared...

What do you mean "how am I going to do it?" I am not going to do it. Presumably officials who have a lot more information than I have will do it, and they won't do it my looks alone. You keep saying things that imply that profiling will be done by some ordinary person on the street, and he will have no more information than looking at these people. I assume that is not true. Don't you?

No, DNA will not work. Well, maybe profiling is, after all, the best way.

I think that we should be, and remain scared. Otherwise we are going to relapse into our relaxed attitude once again. I fly, but not nearly so often as I used to. And, unless the authorities begin acting as if they mean it, I (and my family) will stop flying.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;117597 wrote:

What do you mean "how am I going to do it?" I am not going to do it. Presumably officials who have a lot more information than I have will do it, and they won't do it my looks alone. You keep saying things that imply that profiling will be done by some ordinary person on the street, and he will have no more information than looking at these people. I assume that is not true. Don't you?

No, DNA will not work. Well, maybe profiling is, after all, the best way.

I think that we should be, and remain scared. Otherwise we are going to relapse into our relaxed attitude once again. I fly, but not nearly so often as I used to. And, unless the authorities begin acting as if they mean it, I (and my family) will stop flying.

i dont think officials who have information would likely be the ones doing it-some very lowly employees on the bottom of the chain would be expected to, like those fellows who man the checkpoints in iraq and afghanistan and have to make split second decisions on whether to shoot or ask questions first.

does anyone know what 'profiling' specifically entails? it is first done by looks alone as far as i could imagine, then round up those people who look suspicious and deter, interrogate, search etc...possibly put in jail or let go. is that what it is? is there some scientific method or tools that would help the process?

never try to think when you are afraid...it's a serious handicap.

1 Reply

@salima,

salima;117604 wrote:

does anyone know what 'profiling' specifically entails? it is first done by looks alone as far as i could imagine, then round up those people who look suspicious and deter, interrogate, search etc...possibly put in jail or let go. is that what it is? is there some scientific method or tools that would help the process?

It depends on what you are looking for. Profiling can be:
1) based on the person's race
2) Looking for all individuals with brown hair and blue eyes that are 5'8
3) Pulling aside anybody who is sweating, flying one way, paying cash, and is going to Detroit without a jacket.

There are many ways to profile...it is just a way of grouping individuals together with some predetermined traits - these traits can be anything.

Many police officers use something known as criminal profiling (some call it a gut feeling). This can just be profiling whereby they are told to search for anyone exibiting strange behavior.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

We all profile in the interest of our security all the time.
I (a white caucasian) do not stroll the streets of Watts or Harlem late at night.
I do not go alone into the remote bars of Mexican border towns.

Doesn't it make more sense to give extra attention to the young male of middle eastern origin traveling alone on a flight without luggage than to the 90 yr old grandmother with a walker or families traveling together?
Does our fear of being accused of racial, ethnic or religous profiling cause us to abandon common sense? Do random checks which end up including childern, the elderly, families and others make us safer than directed attention to high risk groups and individuals? Is the need to be politically correct causing us to deny the facts and the truth? I have no problem with religious or ethnic sensitivity except when it results in the denial of facts and truth. Truth takes precedence over political correctness.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

then the best way of profiling for people who are worrying about it is to stop flying, dont you think? if we profile by avoiding neighborhoods that are dangerous, shouldnt people who want to be erring on the side of caution avoid flying? i think if that happened, the airlines would find a more better way of not being blown up with the incentive being that if they dont they are finished-bankrupt.

of course for me it is a little difficult to avoid if i want to see my son. it takes from 24-30 hours for me to get to america from delhi (a full night's train ride from where i live already) but i could take a boat. i only mean to stay in usa five weeks, and i think if you deduct coming and going on a tramp steamer it would eat up all the time. actually there is some reason i already found that a boat is impractical for me, but i forgot what it was...i looked six years ago because i was afraid my eardrums would burst on the plane.

so i am more worried about my eardrums bursting than getting bombed on a plane.

the other thing is, i also used to avoid certain areas at night in the city where i lived in america until i realized i had to avoid the area where i lived at night also. it is about equal to me everywhere at night in america-i dont go out then. there is more to worry about there for a lady alone walking at night than there is for me to be flying in a plane. most people who avoid neighborhoods where they become a minority (in america) are afraid because they feel uncomfortable and paranoid, i dont believe there is any increased danger at all.

also, for anyone who is seriously worried, consider flying in a gulf country plane-i think they are less likely to be blown up somehow, though i havent checked the statistics. there-another method of profiling to try.

1 Reply

@salima,

Why is one man trying unsuccessfully to blow up a plane a national security issue that justifies extra-legal actions, but Goldman Sachs et al commiting the single largest securities fraud in human history, which nearly destroyed this country and cost the public trillions, considered normal? Which is a greater 'existential threat' to this nation - a downed plane or the total collapse of the world financial and monetary system? Would you be outraged in Osama Bin Laden was appointed Defense Secretary? Of course. Why aren't you outraged that a CEO of Goldman Sachs was Treasury Secretary during the commision of Goldman's epic crime, and then during the bailout?

1 Reply

@BrightNoon,

BrightNoon;119222 wrote:

Why is one man trying unsuccessfully to blow up a plane a national security issue that justifies extra-legal actions, but Goldman Sachs et al commiting the single largest securities fraud in human history, which nearly destroyed this country and cost the public trillions, considered normal? Which is a greater 'existential threat' to this nation - a downed plane or the total collapse of the world financial and monetary system? Would you be outraged in Osama Bin Laden was appointed Defense Secretary? Of course. Why aren't you outraged that a CEO of Goldman Sachs was Treasury Secretary during the commision of Goldman's epic crime, and then during the bailout?

What has Goldman Sachs to do with terrorism on planes? Anything?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;119227 wrote:

What has Goldman Sachs to do with terrorism on planes? Anything?

nothing at all of course-it was just a momentary injection of rational thinking...and for those who like irony, a bit of humor to boot.

1 Reply

@salima,

salima;119259 wrote:

nothing at all of course-it was just a momentary injection of rational thinking...and for those who like irony, a bit of humor to boot.

Oh. (Not sure at all that he sees the point). But look, if Goldman Sachs did commit an epic crime (or even a non-epic crime) I am outraged about that too. Better?

1 Reply

Security vs. Liberty

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know