Profile or die

The sheer idiocy of this idea is breathtaking. The September 11th bombers boarded planes with no explosive devices, and had no metal weapons in their possession. Profiling would not have prevented them from boarding those airplanes.

http://www.absolutecelebrities.com/i/mugshot/McVeighTimothy.jpg

This man was executed for what was, prior to September 11th, the most murderous bombing in United States history. The ludicrous profiling guidelines which Rayban has posted would not have stopped him.

We do not address the root causes of the terrorism which targets us. In many examples, there is nothing that we can do to address the greivances of terrorists. The Shrub did pull United States forces out of Saudi Arabia, something long overdue, and a classic case of locking the barn after the horse is gone. A reality of life which Europeans lived with long before we were faced with this is that are going to be incidents such as these for the consequences of which a nation can prepare, but which cannot be prevented. Examples are IRA bombings in England, and the disco bombing in Germany targeting American service personnel. It is appalling to see people take on a mentality of a frightened mob howling for blood. Were such idiotic measures adopted as a palliative, when they soon failed, following the same line of "thinking" the parameters would be extended, until eventually we have lost almost all of our civil liberties, and travel and personal commerce are paralyzed.

Big Brother loves you.

0 Replies

Candidone,

You are not singled out for search because of your ethnicity. I promise you that you would feel different about being searched if this were the case.

0 Replies

candidone1 wrote:

After all, I can't recall any terrorist, homegrown or foreign, who was female or elderly.

The Moscow Theatre incident was a major attack, and there was at least one female terrorist. I guess there are a lot more, but as terrorism has become so everyday (at least in some regions), we just don't notice.

Here something from Israel:

http://web.israelinsider.com/Static/Binaries/Article/blowupart_0.jpg

Quote:

Female terrorist targeted hospital that was helping her

The 21-year-old Palestinian, with the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades (an offshoot of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction), was arrested carrying explosives at a Gaza checkpoint, where she admitted she planned to blow herself up in a Beersheva hospital. Wafa al-Bis had previously received treatment, as a gesture of humanitarian aid, for burns she incurred in a "cooking accident" at the hospital she intended to blow up.

According to army officials, when she was caught, she tried to blow herself up at the Erez crossing point between Gaza and Israel, but the explosives did not detonate.

Bis said on Israeli TV she wanted to be a suicide bomber, saying her "dream was to be a martyr," but then later told foreign journalists the explosives were planted on her without her knowledge.

source

0 Replies

Basically, having some (obvious) profiling rules in effect would just make things easier for terrorists.

"Oh, they are looking for middle eastern looking males? Good. Let's get a ticket for one of our sisters in arms. She'll just sail through all their stupid controls!"

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Candidone,
You are really basing your search on people who look like middle easter men.

...and young men generally.
That would be me.
Under my criteria, I would get searched. I should get searched. I fit the profile.
Search me, and let me pass. What's it take?...1 or 2 minutes?
These aren't tic-tacs we're looking for. They are bombs in backpacks or strapped to bodies.
I hate everything Rayban suggests, so you have to trust me on this one.
I'm with him so long as my criteria is the basis of the searches.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

candidone1 wrote:
After all, I can't recall any terrorist, homegrown or foreign, who was female or elderly.

Wasn't aware of that, thanks.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

By Freedom, I mean what freedom actually means. Our forefathers understood that Freedom meant being "innocent until proven guilty" and having the right to not be searched without due process and the right to choose, and follow your own beliefs regardless of how unpopular they were.
It is inevitable that freedom means a loss of security. If the police could search you house at will looking for drugs, their would be less drug crime. The fact that a judge can't force you to testify against yourself (the fifth amendement) means that some criminals have gone free-- and some have commited crimes again.

Forth Amendment actually says ". . . against unreasonable searches. . . .", not ". . . without due processs. . . ." I believe there is a difference. I suppose you do not.

Police searching houses without a warrant (which I happen to oppose), by no means equates to less drug crime. Certainly not if the police and DEA were spending their limited resources searching 50 houses because of suspicious activity in one house.

Now why, in case someone is getting ready to ask, would I support extra scrutiny of people fitting a profile at an airport or subway station, and not houses? Well, houses, even mobile homes, tend to stay in one place. They do not join large crowds, and they don't fly.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

The sheer idiocy of this idea is breathtaking. The September 11th bombers boarded planes with no explosive devices, and had no metal weapons in their possession. Profiling would not have prevented them from boarding those airplanes.

This man was executed for what was, prior to September 11th, the most murderous bombing in United States history. The ludicrous profiling guidelines which Rayban has posted would not have stopped him.

We do not address the root causes of the terrorism which targets us. In many examples, there is nothing that we can do to address the greivances of terrorists. The Shrub did pull United States forces out of Saudi Arabia, something long overdue, and a classic case of locking the barn after the horse is gone. A reality of life which Europeans lived with long before we were faced with this is that are going to be incidents such as these for the consequences of which a nation can prepare, but which cannot be prevented. Examples are IRA bombings in England, and the disco bombing in Germany targeting American service personnel. It is appalling to see people take on a mentality of a frightened mob howling for blood. Were such idiotic measures adopted as a palliative, when they soon failed, following the same line of "thinking" the parameters would be extended, until eventually we have lost almost all of our civil liberties, and travel and personal commerce are paralyzed.

Big Brother loves you.

I am merely suggesting that mass transportation has searches in effect in the airline industry and that could be passed on to other areas of transportation.
...but you're right, root causes need to be addressed, but that's where the war loving right begins calling us bleeding hearts who want to put the terrorists through councilling. Root causes are ignored because howling for blood is far more dramatic.

0 Replies

Yes. There have been white bombers. Little old ladies have been caught growing pot. But if you're an insurance company, you profile. Teenagers pay higher premiums. Teenage boys pay even more. Some people lose their right thumbs in industrial accidents, but if you're a glove manufacturer, you go with the numbers and make gloves with 4 fingers and a thumb.

0 Replies

I am Irish by descent. Although most Americans have idiotic stereotypes about what an Irishman looks like, i happen to have classic Irish features. I was questioned at length by an Immigration official as i was leaving the United States. (Carrying an obsession a little far, don't you think?) He eventually asked where i was born. Being a life-long American with many of the stereotypic faults of this citizenry, i had become angry and demaned to know what the hell he was getting at. He baldly stated that i looked "Arabic." I asked him if it were my green eyes or fish-belly pale skin which first gave me away--then i shoved my birth certificate under his nose, and he waved me on.

0 Replies

roger wrote:

Yes. There have been white bombers. Little old ladies have been caught growing pot. But if you're an insurance company, you profile. Teenagers pay higher premiums. Teenage boys pay even more. Some people lose their right thumbs in industrial accidents, but if you're a glove manufacturer, you go with the numbers and make gloves with 4 fingers and a thumb.

Well, if you would "go with the numbers", here's a question:

During the last 15 years or so, of all terrorist attacks within the United States, how many have been commited by young middle easteners?

0 Replies

roger wrote:

ebrown_p wrote:
By Freedom, I mean what freedom actually means. Our forefathers understood that Freedom meant being "innocent until proven guilty" and having the right to not be searched without due process and the right to choose, and follow your own beliefs regardless of how unpopular they were.
It is inevitable that freedom means a loss of security. If the police could search you house at will looking for drugs, their would be less drug crime. The fact that a judge can't force you to testify against yourself (the fifth amendement) means that some criminals have gone free-- and some have commited crimes again.

Forth Amendment actually says ". . . against unreasonable searches. . . .", not ". . . without due processs. . . ." I believe there is a difference. I suppose you do not.

Fourth Amendment wrote:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don't think anyone would say that someone having a middle eastern appearance constitutes "probable cause".

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

The choice is simple-- Freedom or security. I am dismayed that so many people are choosing security.

In the case of profiling, it isn't freedom vs. security, it's convenience vs. security.

Quote:

By Freedom, I mean what freedom actually means. Our forefathers understood that Freedom meant being "innocent until proven guilty" and having the right to not be searched without due process and the right to choose, and follow your own beliefs regardless of how unpopular they were.

It is inevitable that freedom means a loss of security. If the police could search you house at will looking for drugs, their would be less drug crime. The fact that a judge can't force you to testify against yourself (the fifth amendement) means that some criminals have gone free-- and some have commited crimes again.

Freedom means we live with less security from some types of crime, but not a total absence of security from every threat. If you fit the description of a criminal suspect, it is perfectly acceptable to detain and question you to help determine whether or not you may be guilty. Indeed, if you fit the profile of a serial killer and a serial killer is murdering people in your area, it's perfectly acceptable for you to be questioned and afforded additional scrutiny. We know that terrorists are operating in the world and in our country, why should we avoid profiling them?

Quote:

If you want to stop terrorism, we could outlaw Islam. We could get rid of the first, fourth and fifth amendments. We could lower the standard of proof for imprisonment. We could allow police to tap your phone, search your house at will, read your mail.

Or we could simply use statistically sound profiling to focus our attention and resources where they'll do the most good. With the data currently available (and I'm going by what's been in the news, the intelligence and law enforcement likely have additional data), a well designed profile probably wouldn't inconvenience most Arab or Muslim Americans, either.

Quote:

I wan't to live in a Free country and I am brave enough to live with the risk. I like the fact that people in my neighborhood speak Arabic (and Spanish and Creole etc.) I like the fact that the government can't treat me, or anyone else, worse because of my religion or my beliefs or my ethnic background.

I want to live in free country as well, and I accept the additional risks and inconveniences that come with that. However, I like to exercise common sense, too. In the current geopolitical theater, we know quite a bit about the characteristics of a likely terrorist, including that individual's ethnicity; it would be criminally stupid not to use this information and focus our attention and resources on likely suspects rather than grandma or Al Gore.

Quote:

I also want all of you who are in the disagreeable position of agreeing with rayban to go back and read her posts. Look at the amount of hyperbole she employs to make her case. Does anyone sane really think that we are under threat of an Islamic government? Come on now, the 9/11 attacks (the worst attacks we have faced) presented absolutely no threat to our government, or our way of life (except the Patriot act.)

Rayban is talking about trashing our freedoms, not saving it. So now you all can come back to an agreeable sanity.

Agreeing with Rayban about profiling is a far, far cry from fearing a global Islamic takeover. Profiling is not a slippery slope to fascism, and an inconvenience is not a loss of freedom.

0 Replies

Europe, I don't know. Are you suggesting the number is quite low, relative to their percentage of population.

A middle eastern appearance, in and of itself, e_brown? No.

0 Replies

Quote:

I don't think anyone would say that someone having a middle eastern appearance constitutes "probable cause".

If they did then the first thing I would do as a Middle Eastern Looking Guy would be to go over to Yeshiva University and buy a sweatshirt and a yarmulke.

0 Replies

Why are those on the left afraid to admit that those wanting to kill people in mass are Arabic men who practice Islam?

You can bring up people who are white all day but the difference is this. When they are captured they are done. Unibomber, Timothy McViey and Eric Rudolph were people who worked alone for the most part. They didn't have people to fill their places. Once they were captured their reign of terror was done. The same cannot be said for our current terrorists. They have plenty of people to full their places even if they are caught or if they die while committing murder. The others didn't have this.

When you look at who has caused more terrorists acts we see a list that goes like this.

USS Cole
US Embassies
World Trade Towers 93 and 01
Pentagon
London bombings
Bali bombings

All of terrorist's attacks have been committed by Muslims extremists who happen to be young Arabic men.

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

Why are those on the left afraid to admit that those wanting to kill people in mass are Arabic men who practice Islam?

I think you have mistaken the topic. The question is not: is the majority of all potential mass murderers worldwide of Arabic Islam-praciticing ethnicity (something I doubt, to be honest). The question is: would profiling help to identify potential terrorists, or would it merely help potential terrorists?

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Baldimo wrote:
Why are those on the left afraid to admit that those wanting to kill people in mass are Arabic men who practice Islam?

I think you have mistaken the topic. The question is not: is the majority of all potential mass murderers worldwide of Arabic Islam-praciticing ethnicity (something I doubt, to be honest). The question is: would profiling help to identify potential terrorists, or would it merely help potential terrorists?

It would help identify them. When the profile changes to include people who haven't been involved with terrorism before then we change the profile. Frisking grandma and grandpa and young children is a waste of time. We know who is doing this so target them.

When people start looking for a serial killer who do they look at first? Middle aged white men. Why? Because they are the biggest culprits of serial killings.

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

It would help identify them. When the profile changes to include people who haven't been involved with terrorism before then we change the profile. Frisking grandma and grandpa and young children is a waste of time.

Ah, perception. That's exactly the mistake. Because when would the "profile change"? After another attack, performed by somebody previously not included in the profile. Great. And why would somebody maybe have slipped through? Because everybody was paying attention to the potentially dangerous guys.

Baldimo wrote:

We know who is doing this so target them.

I don't understand this statement re profiling in the United States... Doing what? Terrorist attacks in the US?

Baldimo wrote:

When people start looking for a serial killer who do they look at first? Middle aged white men. Why? Because they are the biggest culprits of serial killings.

Which is why it took so much time to catch the Washington sniper. Because he didn't fit the profile. You've just presented the best argument against profiling, Baldimo. Thanks!

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

USS Cole
US Embassies
World Trade Towers 93 and 01
Pentagon
London bombings
Bali bombings

All of terrorist's attacks have been committed by Muslims extremists who happen to be young Arabic men.

Leaving aside your idiotic contention about what "the left" fears for the drivel that it is, your argument here is specious. Profiling takes place in this country. The United States embassies which were attacked were in Africa, the Cole was in the harbor at Aden, on the Arabian penninsula, you have disingenuously separated the Pentagon from the World Trade Center in the September 11th attacks, which were a set-piece operation, and about which i have already observed that profiling would not have stopped the terrorists, the London bombings were in, guess where? London! The Bali bombings were also elsewhere in the world, and the bombers happen not to have been Arabs, nor even "Arabic" looking. Another fine example of your inabilitity to present a cogent argument because of your addiction to slurring "the left" and deploying arguments from hysteria.

0 Replies

Profile or die

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know