I'm just saying, the proof is in the pudding.

I voted for him, and i'm not even a hardcore liberal.

I think he means to let his actions speak louder than his religion. He was pretty outspoken about islam in college, though.

You can't racial profile a religion. A religion is not a race.

Racial profiling is ineffectual and lazy.

Buddhism is a religion people. The Dalai Lama is considered a living god. And yes they do "pray". I have been to enough Buddhist temples and have seen them pray. I have seen the prayer wheel.

Tell that to Mr. Singh.

This I agree with.

Buddhism can be considered both a religion and a philosophy, albeit an applied philosophy, which is basically how one can define religion.

Buddhists typically don't even want to consider themselves Buddhists at all. They avoid categorization because they intentionally let go of conceptual trappings. Any rituals, clothing, symbols, etc. used are mere aids. They aren't to be idolized or coveted as sacred. I am speaking generally, of course. There are variances between Buddhist groups.

Who is Mr. Singh?

Are you saying Muslims are a race?

No, I'm saying all Sikhs are Singhs. You want to profile Sikhs? Just look at their dress, and their passports.

And I think what biznatch was getting at was that it isn't always difficult to determine if someone is more than likely a Muslim. The look, the name, the nationality, the accent, the destination, etc. These aren't 100%, of course, but they try to profile Muslims at airports, I'm sure.

Oh, I didn't realize Singh was slang for Sihks. Thanks for the clarification.

But Sihks aren't Muslims so if you try and profile that then you have already failed. It's like all those people who attacked Indians in America after 9/11 cause they thought they were Muslim.

I think I get what you are saying Baraka, but I just don't think you can profile a religion successfully or with any accuracy (excepting extreme stereotypes). Muslims are not a racial (phenotype) descriptor. Again, barring extreme cliches, most Muslims i encounter tend to be white, wear jeans and sneakers, and are "normal" Americans. I think of all groups, Muslims would be a nightmare to profile - it is such a diverse group. Honestly, a smart terrorist should adapt a different look to beat the profilers. Blond, blue eyed, female, wearing a hooters shirt (loaded with c4), etc. Or how about all the Asian Muslims. Black Muslims. Etc etc etc.

If you really believe in "racial" profiling, well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

been there too, done that. and as I said, the non-orthodox versions of Buddhism do have their religious trappings. But then again, semantics being what they are, many adherents these days will find comfort in the term religion.

Buddhism is a religion. Dalai Lama may or may not be considered God (or reincarnation of Buddha) depending upon you agree upro it or not. None of my Buddhist friends say he is a God. They have Temples where you go and pray, they have religious leaders and philosophy of religion just like another making it a religion.
/end hijack

I believe profiling happens with Muslims, may not be much, but yes it is there.

Oh yeah, we have lots of fun at Western airports with ktspktsp being Lebanese. He makes sure to shave very well before flying, but he still has the look, the name, the nationality, not really the accent, the destination... hell, even me being an American citizen, just because I am arriving FROM Lebanon, I get special treatment as well. No one seems to care that he is a total atheist and wants nothing to do with Islam, Christianity, or any other religion. I have never been treated so poorly in an airport as when we flew back to the US from Beirut.

What? Again? Do bears still shit in the woods or has the Pope immigrated to Jonesville and converted to Sun-God Worshipping?

During the communist days, I was invariably held up at all U.S. borders for minimum 1/2 hour and questioned why it is that my passport had so many visas from communist countries. They would always try to intimidate me by ransacking my rucksack, squeezing my toothpaste tube, and cold-staring at me while they fired childish questions at me.

It's very queer that the communist countries never once questioned me why it was that I had so many "non-communist country visas". Actually the U.S. immigrations never bothered to ask those "non-communist countries" questions either! Very queer. Those American customs/immigration people are really extremely adolescent bafoons.

Man, so much racism in the world. Yeah, we know it. We see it. We are in it (strictly speaking whether you are a victim or a offender). But yeah, I agree witht he first post that the parents has no rights in stopping their child being what they want. Didn't they ever dream to be something else while their parents tell them not to do this because etc, etc, etc.? Well it seems that they agree with their parents or they wanted to inflict the same pain toward their children because they had the same experience as well.

I hate it when I see parents like that, forcing and bossing and nagging that the child should do this or that. It's a generalization if anyone didn't notice it at first. I see this in my area as well. Not just Muslims, but several different cultures as well.

Traditionally speaking .... no, not really. Or .... yes, actually. Arranged marriages and such things are tradition to some cultures, for example. Look, in the U.S. it is fully acceptable to spank your children. In my country you'd be off to jail the moment you raise your hand to any child.

The thing is, what you consider proper treatment to your child would probably astonish me. Yet generation upon generation of Americans say things like, "It was good enough for me to get a spanking and it didn't do me any harm so my children get more of the same stuff. It's the only way to make a man of them!"

Many Arab cultures (not all, and certainly not all Moslems either) see it as a Godly sin to marry out of the Islamic tradition, ie. for a Moslem girl to have a relationship with a non-Moslem boy/man. You can call my view prejudgiced or racist, if you like, but you've got to look at the facts if you want to understand the problem.

I know that. They read his first and last name, his country of origin (Morocco), and that's enough.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ighmugshot.jpg

Maybe he didn't fly a plane into a building, but he parked a truck filled with explosives next to one, and detonated them.
He didn't do it with a plane, but he very well could have. He's pretty close to your description of people who shouldn't be profiled..should they? What about those kids who shoot up their schools, and malls? They're not necessarily arab. The mall shooter was white, the Vtech shooter was asian. The DC snipers were black. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.
Profiling is wrong, it's useless, and it's incredibly insulting to those treated differently.

That is far too much level-headed logic than most of our small brains can grasp. Would you mind saying it once again, more slowly please, so that EVERYONE can understand it? :)

Although you have a good (but obvious) point, you seem to be way off topic. "Control of the airport" I think is the subject, yes? You seem to be talking about spotting terrorists by the colour of their skin, any minute of the day. This thread is discussing how to control terrorists who enter the U.S. from abroad. You've missed that point I think.

The point of the SSSS is not to impede only terrorists from entering, but also those who are already in. The searches are the same whether you are coming in from abroad or you are catching a domestic flight. So it doesn't matter if you've lived in the US for 20-something years, if you're skin is brown and your last name sounds middle eastern, you're a likely candidate for SSSS.
What I'm saying is that finding a terrorist based on origin/name/skin color is stupid. When the Oklahoma City Bombing happened, everyone thought it was a muslim, arab terrorist who did it, not some confused/angry average white american.
Even if you were gonna try to find a muslim person(for whatever reason), racial profiling can prove inneffective as muslims can *gasp* be of any descent/ethnicity.
So while "control of the airport" might be the subject, my argument is that Timothy McVeigh could've hijacked a plane instead of blowing up a truck, he just happened to be more proficient with explosives. Hell, the first attempt of an attack on WTC was done with a truck filled with explosives.
And if McVeigh had the means/desire to learn to fly, he certainly could've done so just like the 9/11 terrorists did, at any amateur aviation center.

xxx!!!

DOUBLEPOSTIT

Dead muslim girls have very little to do with McVeigh.
This thread is awry.

WTF? What are "Muslim rights"? Ugh! This is why liberals sicken me. There are HUMAN rights. Then there are non-rights. What exactly would a "Muslim right" be? In the US we already have freedom of religion. Is there something specific outside of that that should be applied to Muslims? Catholics? Agnostics? Atheists?

Maybe it's not your intended point, but it pisses me off to no end that so many people feel everyone needs special rights for their religion, race, gender, educational level, ailment, disability, et cetera. That's a huge part of what proliferates racism and other "-isms" in western culture today. You can't demand to be the same and then ask to be different all at once. It's bullshit.

Again, what would a "muslim" right be? The right to worship Allah (God) and believe in the Prophet Muhammed? They already have that right. The right to strangle your daughter to death for not wearing a specific piece of religious garb? They'll NEVER have that right. I don't understand...

I guess you think that the NAACP should be shut down then? I mean fuck, it's not like specific groups of people are mistreated more than others. What kinda of crazy person would think that?

willravel... as an aside, I am about 1000 miles to left of you, politically.

So you hunt down Tories and destroy them, too?

no Will, thats the difference between us.

ALL capitalist parties are my enemy.

You simply want a more social, kinder form of capitalism - the iron fist in the velvet glove... a few concessions from the master classes.

I believe in the abolishment of the master class.

I am outside of the system and opposed to all forms of liberal capitalist democracy. Is the Labour party better than the Conservative? Not especially... after 10 years they had become more right wing than the opposition in any case. Some of their people were more forward thinking and more enlightened, but the result of government was the same oppression of the people as always.
____

But back to Islam and its extremism...

It may be true that in Iran there is drinking and whoring and so on in Tehran... this will exclusively be taking place amongst the rich and the elite.

The ordinary youth, the student movements, are becoming more radical and more conservative. In the country, there is no movement towards liberalisation that I see. The world situation is polarising... and in my own view, the West is not helping.

Of course, there are Christian murderers, and grotesque violence against women legitamised in Western African, Hindu and Sikh religions... and in Christianity's too.

Usama Bin Laden reflects on Islam in the same was as the Spanish Inquisition did against Christianity. Someone like Fred Phelps may be just as mad and hateful as Bin Laden (and a lot less clever) - but there is a difference, since one if a powerless hatemonger, and one is followed by millions.

The poverty enforced in many Islamic countries by the emerging robber bandit capitalist societies, reinforced by European and American colonialism - is creating a working class that is suffering under great misery. Of course, the capitalist will tell them to hate the American, to hate the Danish cartoon maker, or whatever else - anything other than the system that creates the poverty.

The future world will not have religion in the sense of as a definition. There is no reason why after the revolution people may not believe in God, but we will see the end of the SOCIAL power of organised religion, and its use as a classification and divide of the working class.

The violence of radical Islam is, really, the "sigh of the oppressed creature"

You know you can parade that guy out as much as you want but its an anomaly not a death cult we have in the mid east. When we have more than a couple of wack jobs doing it let me know, he is the exception that proves the rule.

New boss same as the old boss, you will be just as poor and powerless.

The real point is that Timothy McVeigh was a sociopath and a maniac

In the West Bank you are seeing ordinary people, who in other situations would lead ordinary lives, blowing themselves in the hope that they might kill a few Jewish school children in the process.

They are murderers not because of natural sadism or "evil", but because they are caught in a collective madness.

Check out any thread about socialism and then call me a capitalist. Jeez.

Let's name the terrorist attacks in the US in the past 15 years:
1992: 32 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1993: 20 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1993: WTC bombing 1
1993: Unabomber returns to bombing
1994: 15 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1994: More unabombings
1995: 16 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1995: Oklahoma City
1995: More unabombings
1996: 9 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1997: 16 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1998: 10 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
1999: 10 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
2000: 5 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
2001: 5 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
2001: New York City/DC/Shanksville
2002: 1 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
2003: 3 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics
2004: 2 separate attempted or successful bombings and arsons on Abortion clinics


Let's stop kidding ourselves, mkay?

really anti abortion clinic attackers are listed on terrorist watch lists?

or is that your consideration of lumping and recognizing them as terrorists?

You're right, we should keep religious zealots who resort to using explosives off the list. You know, unless they're Muslim. If you're Muslim and commit acts of terrorism, you're a terrorist! :shakehead:

will, I'm asking you honestly and seriously and you retort with a snarky comment.

Do you know of any organized christian groups that are recognized as terrorist groups or that are worthy of being included on terrorist watch groups?

That's true, I'm the only person that does this.
Many of the radical right wing/christian groups have names, including many associated with abortion clinic bombings. We don't know them because they're rarely published, as opposed to radical Islamic groups which are covered extensively.

I'm not accusing you of anything will, stop it already. I'm trying to discuss something with you and you are making it harder than it should be.

Please list a single one of these right wing/christian groups with names.

I already explained that this would be difficult, but for the sake of argument:
John Burt, a member of the KKK, a radical protestant religious group, broke into an abortion clinic and assaulted two female employees before being arrested. John was also a member of the organization "Rescue America", which is a vocal anti-abortion organization which has many militant members.

There's two names. If you need more, such as "Defensive Action", I can give you more. All I needed was google.

I believe the IRA is/was one of them.

I think because many of these Christian terrorists maybe acting independently as opposed to as an organized terror group.

Many of them were members of radical organizations, but I must say that even if one were acting alone, does that make it any less terrorism?

So if a white guy hijacks a plane and flies it into a building then cross-ethnic profiling will be appropriate?

Besides, I think profiling is a placebo to make us feel better.

Truth is, the only thing that's really going to keep planes safe is keeping dangerous paraphrenalia off of planes and they seem to be doing a piss-poor job of that, too.

This is, in my opinion, perfectly correct. Profiling keeps us feeling safe. The problem, though, is that this useless action is harmful to people. That has to be enough to outweigh the good of keeping the ignorant masses happy and quiet.

So if anyone sees me hanging around outside an abortion clinic feel free to profile me.

Seriously quit grasping, the IRA isn't going to be hijacking US Jets, nor are anti-abortion terrorists. Therefore its kinda silly to profile those people at airports. If the IRA decides to become active again in the US or they start performing abortions on aircraft, then feel free to change the profile.

YOU'RE WHITE?!

But seriously, two hijacking as a part of one plan and your panties are in a bunch? Comon. They should be spending the time they would spend profiling actually trying to find weapons on people or having marshals on planes.

I'm a middle aged white male, prime candidate for bombing an abortion clinic.

But as for the airlines, yea because thats the ONLY place 99% of us run into this. The TSA should be allowed to racially profile, period.

First off, if a terrorist organization were going to commit a terrorist attack, they'd probably not use planes anymore. They'd use a bomb. If they were stupid enough to use a plane again, they'd probably send whitewashed people who aren't likely to be profiled.

So since they aren't going to use planes anymore we can just do away with airport security?

I'm glad you know how to run a terrorist organization and the type of people involved, but if you don't mind I'll stick to the screening.

Oh so since I'm saying that one tactic that airport security uses doesn't work, we should do away with the whole thing?