ACLU ends our "picking on" Muslims - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

sob · 12-14-2004, 11:34 PM

You can't make this stuff up.

Link

Quote:

HOMELAND INSECURITY

Fear of racial offense putting flyers in peril
Companies punished with 'sensitivity training,' while pilots act out of fear of Muslim litigation

Posted: December 7, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

Despite the lessons of 9-11, airline security policy continues to operate on the premise that bigotry poses a greater danger to America than terrorism, handcuffing the ability of crews to protect passengers by dangling the threat of federal litigation.

Such are the findings documented by Heather MacDonald in the City Journal, a publication of the Manhattan Institute, a New York City think tank.

Pressed by concerns about racial profiling when it was introduced in 1997, the Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System intentionally left out a passenger's national origin, religion, race or sex in assessing the risk that an individual passenger might be a terrorist.

Consequently, the system employed random hits "to ensure that airline screeners would devote as much time searching Lutheran matrons from Minnesota as young men from Saudi Arabia," writes MacDonald.

Sept. 11, 2001, only spurred Norm Mineta's Department of Transportation to heighten its sensitivity to ethnicity, threatening airlines with stiff penalties if they selected more than three passengers of the same ethnicity for additional scrutiny on a flight.

This "incoherent system," MacDonald contends, fails to acknowledge the 9-11 commission's assessment that the "enemy is not just 'terrorism,' [but] Islamist terrorism."

[Nevertheless, MacDonald says, the 9-11 report did not contain one word about what the proper role of Muslim identity should be in locating such terrorists.]

Department of Transportation lawyers have extracted millions in settlements from four major carriers for alleged discrimination after 9-11.

The threat of future litigation puts pilots, who are responsible for the safety of a flight, in the position of worrying about the possible ramifications of good-faith efforts to protect passengers, Mac Donald says.

American Airlines, for example, was taken to court over just 10 interventions out of the 23 million passengers it carried in the last four months of 2001.

The Department of Transportation, which brought the case, declared the airline's discriminatory conduct would "result in irreparable harm to the public" if not stopped.

The allegation pertained to the months after 9-11 when public officials warned three times of an imminent terrorist attack and urged airline personnel to be especially vigilant.

Shoe bomber discrimination victim?

MacDonald notes the DOT failed to mention in its complaint the case of Richard Reid, a Muslim who was kept off a flight from Paris to Miami. After French authories insisted he be cleared to board a flight the next day, Reid famously tried to set off a bomb in his shoe.

"Had he been kept from flying on both days, he too might have ended up on the government's roster of discrimination victims," MacDonald writes.

Typical of the complainants in the case, she says, is Jehad Alshrafi, a Jordanian-American scheduled to fly Nov. 3, 2001, from Boston's Logan Airport, the origin of two hijacked planes on 9-11.

Alshrafi was denied boarding after a federal air marshall told the pilot the passenger's name resembled one on a terrorist watch list and that he had been acting suspiciously, creating a disturbance at the gate. Alshrafi later was cleared and upgraded to first-class on another flight.

The DOT insisted the Jordanian-American was singled out because of race, color, national origin, religion, sex or ancestry, but MacDonald argues that at least five other passengers of Arab descent were not given another look on the original flight.

In fact, she points out, on virtually every flight in which the DOT charged American Airlines with racial profiling, other passengers of apparent Middle Eastern or South Asian ancestry flew undisturbed, not to mention the thousands of others who traveled on other flights during that time period.

"Given the information presented to the pilot, the only conceivable reason to have allowed Alshrafi to board would have been fear of a lawsuit," MacDonald writes.

Although American Airlines vehemently denied guilt, it settled the action for $1.5 million, to be earmarked for more "sensitivity" training for employees.

Denis Breslin, a union official, spoke for the outraged pilots: "Pilots felt: 'How dare they second-guess our decision?' We just shake our heads in shame: 'How could the government be so wrong?'"

DOT lawyers brought identical suits against United, Delta and Continental Airlines, who also insisted on their innocence but were forced to pledge more millions for "sensitivity training."

The American Civil Liberties Union also has brought its own airline discrimination suits, including an action against Northwest Airlines seeking government terror watch lists, the airline's boarding procedures and its cabin training manual.

"If these materials got loose, they would be gold to terrorists trying to figure out airline security procedures," MacDonald says.

'Heavy on platitudes'

Mac Donald says the DOT guidelines on nondiscrimination rolled out 10 days after 9-11 were "heavy on platitudes about protecting civil rights" but "useless in advising airlines how to avoid the government's wrath."

The easiest summation of the department's rules, she says is, "Deny passage to someone who is or could claim to look Muslim only under the most extreme circumstances."

But when the threat at issue is Islamic terrorism, MacDonald writes, "it is reckless to ask officials to disregard the sole ironclad prerequisite for being an Islamic terrorist: Muslim identity."

Bush adminisration officials, she says, are unwilling to acknowledge a reality admitted unequivocally by Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, general manager of the influential Al Arabiya television station, after the Beslan, Russia, attack: "It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims."

MacDonald argues that while the government is concerned about racial profiling, the issue actually is religious profiling. But since religious identity is not always apparent, national origin or ethnic heritage should be available as surrogates, she contends.

In addition to individual discrimination suits, Mac Donald writes, the government has continued to apply "disparate impact" analysis on anti-terror measures -- assigning bigotry to neutral policies if they affect different demographic groups differently.

This is suicidal in a war-fighting situation, MacDonald asserts, effectively ruling out every security procedure that might be useful in combating Muslim terrorists.

Practically, it means a screening device for Muslim terrorists cannot by definition have the same effect on non-Muslims.

MacDonald places much of the blame for the government's "irrationality" regarding airline security on Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, who has said a grandmother from Vero Beach, Fla., should receive the same scrutiny at the airport as a young Saudi male.

Mineta also has warned that the domestic internment used in World War II, of which he was a part, might be just around the corner.

Rekna · 12-14-2004, 11:45 PM

and your comments are?

sob · 12-15-2004, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

and your comments are?

I was kind of waiting for the comments of others.

However, since I have a trip via air planned, I don't appreciate the ACLU and others endangering my family and me.

Did you have something you wanted to say?

Kadath · 12-15-2004, 06:08 AM

Ugh.

{sorts through varied knee-jerk responses, discards, attempts to express rational response}

Okay. While I grant that it is more likely for a terrorist to be a young Saudi male rather than a grandmother from Missouri, the image that sticks with me is from about a week after 9/11. My whole family was flying somewhere, out of a small regional airport with somewhat lax security. Don't get me wrong, there was still a guy with an M-16, but they didn't do stripsearches or anything. We waited patiently when the rush to board came, and it turned out to be just as well. A man with "Middle Eastern" skin entered the plane. Half a dozen people ran off looking over their shoulders.

It is indeed difficult to balance national security with personal freedom, but I'd submit that the way things are these days if you shoot for what you want you'll fall short, but if you overshoot, you might get your intended result, like starting a haggling price higher than you actually expect to get. That might be the technique of the ACLU in this case.

Locobot · 12-15-2004, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

I was kind of waiting for the comments of others.

However, since I have a trip via air planned, I don't appreciate the ACLU and others endangering my family and me.

Did you have something you wanted to say?

there is a policy against posting content without comment, mods please lock the thread

Lebell · 12-15-2004, 08:09 AM

As people have said but to put an official spin on it, please post some comment of your own when you start a thread.

Thanks,

lebell

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 09:55 AM

Even I would concede that on one hand this is a sticky situation. Although at the same time I don't buy into all of this racial sensitivity as in regards to national security. As pointed out, this "war on terra", is one against "Islamofacists". Until we got some jerk off red neck like Mcveigh blowing up planes too, I think a solid game plan would be to screen those most likely to try and execute a terrorist attack, being Arab/Muslims. I would rather offend one or two people, and have a couple hundred safe and at ease; then not searching those most likely to try something because the ACLU finds it discriminating, and have a plane blown up over the Atlantic.

Master_Shake · 12-15-2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

While I grant that it is more likely for a terrorist to be a young Saudi male rather than a grandmother from Missouri,

Yeah but isn't the terrorist just as likely to be a clean cut white boy from Oklahoma? If you want to profile the muslim men then I think we should profile other groups in relation to the number of people such groups have killed.

Let's see,

19 muslim men killed 3000, or about 157 each,
3 white boys killed 168 or about 56 each.

The muslims are off to an early lead; muslim men should get about 3 times as much scrutiny as white boys. Any other numbers we want to add to this equation?

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 10:24 AM

So far all 21 people to attempt fucking planes have been Arab/Muslim.

Master_Shake · 12-15-2004, 10:28 AM

That's just because they thought of it first. Do you really want to ignore every other terror group and hope they don't get the idea?

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 10:34 AM

When the threat is plausible and material comprable to that of what Al Qaeda has done in the past, and what you can safely assume what they are trying to accomplish in the future, then yes we should look at Billy Bob from Kansas the same as Muhammed Sheik Bin-Il Laden Bin Arafat, until then no.

Unless you are in favor of screening everyone before they enter the plane.

Coppertop · 12-15-2004, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

However, since I have a trip via air planned, I don't appreciate the ACLU and others endangering my family and me.

Funny, I should think it is would-be bombers or terrorists that would endanger you and your family. But I guess that's just me...

Master_Shake · 12-15-2004, 10:52 AM

Do we have plausible and material threats that Al Qaeda is planning to do this again? Or, since we know the white boys like renting Ryder trucks and buying fertilizer, perhaps we should strip search every midwestern farmer who needs a delivery van?

vox_rox · 12-15-2004, 11:55 AM

My gawd. Look at this thread. This is a perfect example of the kind of thing that chased me away from other boards and into the patient, tolerable, intelligent arms of TFP.

Why does this thread exist? Do you people really want to deabte the reliability of ethnic profiling to weed out terrorists, or are you just throwing that out there as bait?

Geez, this thread should be locked. The idea of such a ridiculous arguement just seems so out of place here, and yet everyone's jumping into the fray to have their say, regardless of how pathetic they sound.

What next? Proportion of black males vis a vis white males in federal prisons and how that MUST make them, as a race, more prone to crime. This was a thread on another board that I participated in that degenerated into racial mudslinging, white supremist reactionary diatribe, and even personal attackes and threats.

Come on, we can do better here than just try to stir the pot with crap like this, can't we? And the fact that it was posted without comments, as was already mentioned, makes this look all the more like trolling.

Let's get some better topics going about THINGS THAT MATTER, not about an individual's considerable fear about something intangible based on nothing at all.

Peace,

Pierre

roachboy · 12-15-2004, 11:57 AM

i agree with the last two posts.
i had considered posting something about this as well, but they said basically what i would in a nicer way than i think i would have managed. an absurd, repellent spectacle, this thread.

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 12:19 PM

This thread surely is divisive and and I guess for a lack of a better word shocking. But perhaps there is something to it. Regardless of all of that maybe there is something to this. As pointed out in the article linked, not all muslims are terrorists, but as it appears in the world today most terrorists are muslim. Maybe that is a different topic altogether, but I think there is legitimacy to this discussion.

Maybe if someone had acted "ignorantly" in the first place and raised flags of racial profiling on Arab muslims "learning" to fly planes, minus landing said planes, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Manx · 12-15-2004, 01:46 PM

I'll start supporting racial profiling as soon as we start using it to capture white collar criminals.

I wonder what type of race associations we can make to target embezzling, bank fraud, securities fraud, etc. Billions billions of dollars are stolen.

40 - 60 year old white males would be my best guess.

Strange how we never see people arguing for racial profiling of this group of criminals.

Locobot · 12-15-2004, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Maybe if someone had acted "ignorantly" in the first place and raised flags of racial profiling on Arab muslims "learning" to fly planes, minus landing said planes, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Why would "arab muslims" skipping the landing portion of flight training raise any more red flags than people of other races and religions doing the same? Was this ever a cause for alarm before 9/11? Is there evidence that non-arab non-muslim flight students skipped the landing and were investigated for it? Would ethnic profiling have prevented the Oklahoma City bombing or the Atlanta Olympics bombing? It's not satisfactory to me to prevent one type of terrorist by becoming more vulnerable to another type of terrorist.

boatin · 12-15-2004, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

I'll start supporting racial profiling as soon as we start using it to capture white collar criminals.

I wonder what type of race associations we can make to target embezzling, bank fraud, securities fraud, etc. Billions billions of dollars are stolen.

40 - 60 year old white males would be my best guess.

Strange how we never see people arguing for racial profiling of this group of criminals.

I think it's because when you factor in all the entertainment value that is provided to the american public through newspaper/magazine/TV 'news' shows by these types of criminals, the economy actually makes money. Those media take a lot of commercials to run.

Plus, those people have grandkids. You meany.

boatin · 12-15-2004, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot

Why would "arab muslims" skipping the landing portion of flight training raise any more red flags than people of other races and religions doing the same? Was this ever a cause for alarm before 9/11? Is there evidence that non-arab non-muslim flight students skipped the landing and were investigated for it? Would ethnic profiling have prevented the Oklahoma City bombing or the Atlanta Olympics bombing? It's not satisfactory to me to prevent one type of terrorist by becoming more vulnerable to another type of terrorist.

Well, now you're just talking crazy. You aren't unpatriotic, are you?

/just doing my best to help close a ridiculous thread...

Manx · 12-15-2004, 01:53 PM

I think there was probably more media coverage of 9/11 than Martha Stewart (though not by much I grant you). So does that mean those terrorists actually helped our economy?

filtherton · 12-15-2004, 02:21 PM

I think if all the, presumably, white folks were subjected to racial profiling on a daily basis, they'd quickly change their tune on this matter.

Lebell · 12-15-2004, 02:32 PM

It would seem prudent to focus on groups of people that are related racially to those with the propensity for violence.

In otherwords, my 88 year old grandmother is statistically less likely to be a terrorist than a 22 year old male from a middle eastern country.

To ignore this is to ignore reality.

sandinista · 12-15-2004, 02:38 PM

That said, the foundation of any liberal society is that every person has equality under the law. To ignore this is to ignore the progress of our society since feudal times. If we were to go back on this, we would be returning to the days of dictators who can do whatever they want to do because the court system is biased. It's better to be unbiased and let a few mistakes happen than to be biased and see people abuse the system (halliburton; enron to name a few)

filtherton · 12-15-2004, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

It would seem prudent to focus on groups of people that are related racially to those with the propensity for violence.

In otherwords, my 88 year old grandmother is statistically less likely to be a terrorist than a 22 year old male from a middle eastern country.

To ignore this is to ignore reality.

It would seem to be anything but prudent to me to imply to all of the nonarab races out there that they are not percieved as credible terrorist threats. Focusing solely on one race completely ignores the reality that all races are capable of terrorist acts.

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 02:45 PM

Do you know of any non-Arab non-Muslim credible terrorist threats facing America? Historically I can name three lone wolves, being the unibomber, Mcveigh, and Atlanta dude.

Last time I checked Billy Joe Ray didn't declare Jihad, nor does he have the support of several Theocratic regimes and tens of Millions of worshippers world wide who preach death to America.

filtherton · 12-15-2004, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Do you know of any non-Arab non-Muslim credible terrorist threats facing America? Historically I can name three lone wolves, being the unibomber, Mcveigh, and Atlanta dude.

Last time I checked Billy Joe Ray didn't declare Jihad, nor does he have the support of several Theocratic regimes and tens of Millions of worshippers world wide who preach death to America.

That's not the point. The point is that by needing to focus on a certain group, we are essentially admitting that our security measures are flawed. Either we are doing everything we can to prevent another terrorist attack or we aren't. If we need to focus on one group, that means we are being less secure with everyone else, which to me, is at least a little shortsighted.

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 03:00 PM

Well as stated before several times, this current war on terror isn't with some fat red necked bastards, It's with Arab/Muslims. So why would we focus else where? It seems self defeating. Red necked terrorists have an upper hand because guess what??? We live in a country with a bunch of honky ass peckerwoods! Our current problem as it relates isn't with disgruntled federal government hating crackers, it's with American hating Arab/Muslims.

MSD · 12-15-2004, 03:13 PM

I say we make it fair. Strip search everyone and go through every bag that goes onboard the plane.

Lebell · 12-15-2004, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

It would seem to be anything but prudent to me to imply to all of the nonarab races out there that they are not percieved as credible terrorist threats. Focusing solely on one race completely ignores the reality that all races are capable of terrorist acts.

No, it would be foolish to say that others are not capable of terrorism, as it would be foolish to use no security measures when dealing with them.

But we both know the reality of the current situation and I'm sure you would not deny it: if you put two people side by side and one was an old white guy from Wisconson and another was a young guy from Syria, the young guy from Syria is statiscally more likely to be the terrorist than the guy from Wisconson.

This isn't racism, it's reality and it can be used to our advantage if we were willing to do so.

filtherton · 12-15-2004, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Well as stated before several times, this current war on terror isn't with some fat red necked bastards, It's with Arab/Muslims. So why would we focus else where? It seems self defeating. Red necked terrorists have an upper hand because guess what??? We live in a country with a bunch of honky ass peckerwoods! Our current problem as it relates isn't with disgruntled federal government hating crackers, it's with American hating Arab/Muslims.

Your point is completely irrelevant unless you're trying to imply that the u.s. currently only has an interest in stopping terrorists from the middle east. If that is what you're trying to imply, you are wrong. If you have an interest in stopping terrorists, you will treat all air travelers as potential terrorists with equal zeal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

No, it would be foolish to say that others are not capable of terrorism, as it would be foolish to use no security measures when dealing with them.

But we both know the reality of the current situation and I'm sure you would not deny it: if you put two people side by side and one was an old white guy from Wisconson and another was a young guy from Syria, the young guy from Syria is statiscally more likely to be the terrorist than the guy from Wisconson.

This isn't racism, it's reality and it can be used to our advantage if we were willing to do so.

Well, statistically, most of us should live in china. I always suspected that most of you were filthy commies.

Statistically, all americans have a greater chance of dying from smoking related illnesses than terrorism.

Mojo_PeiPei · 12-15-2004, 04:20 PM

So we are in agreement, smokers are terrorists.

Manx · 12-15-2004, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

It would seem prudent to focus on groups of people that are related racially to those with the propensity for violence.

In otherwords, my 88 year old grandmother is statistically less likely to be a terrorist than a 22 year old male from a middle eastern country.

To ignore this is to ignore reality.

I see no reason to limit racial profiling to violent crimes. If your contention is that it is essentially beneficial, it should be applied to all crimes. So I'll support your desire to use it for terrorists if you support mine to use it for bank fraud, et. al.

White males between the ages of 40 - 60 can be stopped and identified and have SEC and/or IRS investigations performed to determine if they have stolen large sums of money. They are statistically more likely to have commited those types of crimes.

I'm sure we'd catch more criminals this way.

powerclown · 12-15-2004, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manx

I see no reason to limit racial profiling to violent crimes. If your contention is that it is essentially beneficial, it should be applied to all crimes. So I'll support your desire to use it for terrorists if you support mine to use it for bank fraud, et. al.

White males between the ages of 40 - 60 can be stopped and identified and have SEC and/or IRS investigations performed to determine if they have stolen large sums of money. They are statistically more likely to have commited those types of crimes.

I'm sure we'd catch more criminals this way.

What are we talking about here? National Security or White-Collar Crime? I agree with both you guys as far as how to deal with each type of situation, but I would say that the subject of National Security is what concerns more Americans these days, as voiced in the presidential election.

I think the situation speaks for itself. If one reads the news and is up on current events, one knows what the situation is and who is doing what. Yet I don't see how it helps the situation for us ordinary citizens to get worked up about it by singling out a certain ethnicity/religion. Leave matters of national security to the professionals.

roachboy · 12-15-2004, 04:49 PM

every racist measure i know of has been legitimated with reference to fear...this one is no different.

what i find absurd here is that the entire thread is framed by an article from the manhattan institute, which seems to argue that americans should embrace racism on natinal security grounds. it also argues that such incoherence that exists is the fault of the threat posed by the aclu, which is presumably a fifth column in the feverdream world of that think tank. the article is not a coherent analysis of anything.

Willravel · 12-15-2004, 05:06 PM

There are terrorists from every counrty. Singling out any one group is ludacris. There are filipino members of the al queda, for example. If you're going to single out Muslims (that's a religion, not a race), you might as well single out gentiles. Shoot while we're at it we might as well single out albinos. Maybe we should single out ninjas? I'll bet we can single out kids. Remember that teen from San Francisco that we found in the middle east that had joined the al queda? Give me a break.

Bottom line? I back the ACLU on this.

bingle · 12-15-2004, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

This isn't racism, it's reality and it can be used to our advantage if we were willing to do so.

It is, however, racial discrimination. That is, given two people identical except for race, they are treated differently - race becomes a method for making distinctions between the two people.

Now, you can argue, if you want, that racial discrimination is necessary, or helpful, but call it what it is.

As others have posted, though, think of the logical extension of this policy to other arenas. Investigating black suspects more strenuously than white suspects, because statistically they are more likely to have committed a crime, is the one that stands out most in my mind. Once we start deciding that certain people are racially more likely to have a certain characteristic or act in a certain way, we revert to society 100 years ago.

Now, limiting the number of people of one race who can be searched is not the right approach to take - if someone is suspicious, they should be searched regardless of how many other people of that group have been searched. But limiting or even concentrating on one group of people ignores the fact that other groups are equally able or likely to commit terrorist acts.

Remember that, looking at the history of terrorism in the US, a terrorist is more likely going to be a white, Christian extremist than any other group. Or if you're focused on Islamic extremism, realize that focusing on one particular racial group leaves a huge hole in our defenses that can be exploited by a determined group. Truly random screenings can't be exploited in the same way.

Bingle

powerclown · 12-15-2004, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

There are terrorists from every counrty. Singling out any one group is ludacris. There are filipino members of the al queda, for example. If you're going to single out Muslims (that's a religion, not a race), you might as well single out gentiles. Shoot while we're at it we might as well single out albinos. Maybe we should single out ninjas? I'll bet we can single out kids. Remember that teen from San Francisco that we found in the middle east that had joined the al queda? Give me a break.

Abu Sayyaf in the Phillipines is an Islamic fundamentalist group, and so is Al-Qaeda, and so was the kid from Frisco. I don't believe that any one group is in fact entirely singled out, just as no group is entirely omitted. I'm sure there is Intelligence at the highest levels montoring any and all threats to National Security. As for Fear, I don't see anything inherently wrong with Fear; it's whats kept human beings alive since the days of the cavemen. A rational apprehension of a proven danger is an entirely logical emotion. It would be a neurosis only if the anxiety was based in fantasy.

roachboy · 12-15-2004, 07:01 PM

an enemy that is everywhere and nowhere: one that can strike at any moment but is invisible; one that is all powerful and powerless, totally organized and without organization, definable yet ephemeral--"islamic fundamentalists" that you cannot quite define, cannot quite locate, but are quite sure will be the death of you, but you have no idea when or how or why.....what could be more a neurotic fantasy than that?

sob · 12-15-2004, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master_Shake

Yeah but isn't the terrorist just as likely to be a clean cut white boy from Oklahoma? If you want to profile the muslim men then I think we should profile other groups in relation to the number of people such groups have killed.

Let's see,

19 muslim men killed 3000, or about 157 each,
3 white boys killed 168 or about 56 each.

The muslims are off to an early lead; muslim men should get about 3 times as much scrutiny as white boys. Any other numbers we want to add to this equation?

Yeah.

I did not compile this, nor can I vouch for accuracy in its details. That said,

History Test

1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
a. Olga Korbut
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzeneger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

4. In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American Passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davy Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a U.S. Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill' s women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

In medical school, they teach you that if you're at the Kentucky Derby, and you hear hoofbeats, it MIGHT be zebras, but it would be wiser to bet that it's horses.

12-15-2004, 06:08 AM	#4 (permalink)
Kadath Muffled Location: Camazotz	Ugh. {sorts through varied knee-jerk responses, discards, attempts to express rational response} Okay. While I grant that it is more likely for a terrorist to be a young Saudi male rather than a grandmother from Missouri, the image that sticks with me is from about a week after 9/11. My whole family was flying somewhere, out of a small regional airport with somewhat lax security. Don't get me wrong, there was still a guy with an M-16, but they didn't do stripsearches or anything. We waited patiently when the rush to board came, and it turned out to be just as well. A man with "Middle Eastern" skin entered the plane. Half a dozen people ran off looking over their shoulders. It is indeed difficult to balance national security with personal freedom, but I'd submit that the way things are these days if you shoot for what you want you'll fall short, but if you overshoot, you might get your intended result, like starting a haggling price higher than you actually expect to get. That might be the technique of the ACLU in this case. __________________ it's quiet in here

12-15-2004, 08:09 AM	#6 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	As people have said but to put an official spin on it, please post some comment of your own when you start a thread. Thanks, lebell __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

12-15-2004, 09:55 AM	#7 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Even I would concede that on one hand this is a sticky situation. Although at the same time I don't buy into all of this racial sensitivity as in regards to national security. As pointed out, this "war on terra", is one against "Islamofacists". Until we got some jerk off red neck like Mcveigh blowing up planes too, I think a solid game plan would be to screen those most likely to try and execute a terrorist attack, being Arab/Muslims. I would rather offend one or two people, and have a couple hundred safe and at ease; then not searching those most likely to try something because the ACLU finds it discriminating, and have a plane blown up over the Atlantic. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 10:24 AM	#9 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	So far all 21 people to attempt fucking planes have been Arab/Muslim. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 10:28 AM	#10 (permalink)
Master_Shake Addict Location: Pennsylvania, USA	That's just because they thought of it first. Do you really want to ignore every other terror group and hope they don't get the idea? __________________ ------------- You know something, I don't think the sun even... exists... in this place. 'Cause I've been up for hours, and hours, and hours, and the night never ends here.

12-14-2004, 11:45 PM	#2 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	and your comments are?

12-15-2004, 10:34 AM	#11 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	When the threat is plausible and material comprable to that of what Al Qaeda has done in the past, and what you can safely assume what they are trying to accomplish in the future, then yes we should look at Billy Bob from Kansas the same as Muhammed Sheik Bin-Il Laden Bin Arafat, until then no. Unless you are in favor of screening everyone before they enter the plane. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 10:52 AM	#13 (permalink)
Master_Shake Addict Location: Pennsylvania, USA	Do we have plausible and material threats that Al Qaeda is planning to do this again? Or, since we know the white boys like renting Ryder trucks and buying fertilizer, perhaps we should strip search every midwestern farmer who needs a delivery van? __________________ ------------- You know something, I don't think the sun even... exists... in this place. 'Cause I've been up for hours, and hours, and hours, and the night never ends here.

12-15-2004, 11:55 AM	#14 (permalink)
vox_rox Psycho Location: Comfy Little Bungalow	My gawd. Look at this thread. This is a perfect example of the kind of thing that chased me away from other boards and into the patient, tolerable, intelligent arms of TFP. Why does this thread exist? Do you people really want to deabte the reliability of ethnic profiling to weed out terrorists, or are you just throwing that out there as bait? Geez, this thread should be locked. The idea of such a ridiculous arguement just seems so out of place here, and yet everyone's jumping into the fray to have their say, regardless of how pathetic they sound. What next? Proportion of black males vis a vis white males in federal prisons and how that MUST make them, as a race, more prone to crime. This was a thread on another board that I participated in that degenerated into racial mudslinging, white supremist reactionary diatribe, and even personal attackes and threats. Come on, we can do better here than just try to stir the pot with crap like this, can't we? And the fact that it was posted without comments, as was already mentioned, makes this look all the more like trolling. Let's get some better topics going about THINGS THAT MATTER, not about an individual's considerable fear about something intangible based on nothing at all. Peace, Pierre __________________ --- There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people. ---

12-15-2004, 11:57 AM	#15 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i agree with the last two posts. i had considered posting something about this as well, but they said basically what i would in a nicer way than i think i would have managed. an absurd, repellent spectacle, this thread. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-15-2004, 12:19 PM	#16 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	This thread surely is divisive and and I guess for a lack of a better word shocking. But perhaps there is something to it. Regardless of all of that maybe there is something to this. As pointed out in the article linked, not all muslims are terrorists, but as it appears in the world today most terrorists are muslim. Maybe that is a different topic altogether, but I think there is legitimacy to this discussion. Maybe if someone had acted "ignorantly" in the first place and raised flags of racial profiling on Arab muslims "learning" to fly planes, minus landing said planes, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition. Last edited by Mojo_PeiPei; 12-15-2004 at 12:22 PM..

12-15-2004, 01:46 PM	#17 (permalink)
Manx Loser	I'll start supporting racial profiling as soon as we start using it to capture white collar criminals. I wonder what type of race associations we can make to target embezzling, bank fraud, securities fraud, etc. Billions billions of dollars are stolen. 40 - 60 year old white males would be my best guess. Strange how we never see people arguing for racial profiling of this group of criminals.

12-15-2004, 01:53 PM	#21 (permalink)
Manx Loser	I think there was probably more media coverage of 9/11 than Martha Stewart (though not by much I grant you). So does that mean those terrorists actually helped our economy?

12-15-2004, 02:21 PM	#22 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	I think if all the, presumably, white folks were subjected to racial profiling on a daily basis, they'd quickly change their tune on this matter.

12-15-2004, 02:32 PM	#23 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	It would seem prudent to focus on groups of people that are related racially to those with the propensity for violence. In otherwords, my 88 year old grandmother is statistically less likely to be a terrorist than a 22 year old male from a middle eastern country. To ignore this is to ignore reality. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

12-15-2004, 02:38 PM	#24 (permalink)
sandinista Tilted	That said, the foundation of any liberal society is that every person has equality under the law. To ignore this is to ignore the progress of our society since feudal times. If we were to go back on this, we would be returning to the days of dictators who can do whatever they want to do because the court system is biased. It's better to be unbiased and let a few mistakes happen than to be biased and see people abuse the system (halliburton; enron to name a few) __________________ "Nature herself makes the wise man rich." -Cicero

12-15-2004, 02:45 PM	#26 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Do you know of any non-Arab non-Muslim credible terrorist threats facing America? Historically I can name three lone wolves, being the unibomber, Mcveigh, and Atlanta dude. Last time I checked Billy Joe Ray didn't declare Jihad, nor does he have the support of several Theocratic regimes and tens of Millions of worshippers world wide who preach death to America. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 03:00 PM	#28 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	Well as stated before several times, this current war on terror isn't with some fat red necked bastards, It's with Arab/Muslims. So why would we focus else where? It seems self defeating. Red necked terrorists have an upper hand because guess what??? We live in a country with a bunch of honky ass peckerwoods! Our current problem as it relates isn't with disgruntled federal government hating crackers, it's with American hating Arab/Muslims. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 03:13 PM	#29 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	I say we make it fair. Strip search everyone and go through every bag that goes onboard the plane.

12-15-2004, 04:20 PM	#32 (permalink)
Mojo_PeiPei Kiss of Death Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow	So we are in agreement, smokers are terrorists. __________________ To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

12-15-2004, 04:49 PM	#35 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	every racist measure i know of has been legitimated with reference to fear...this one is no different. what i find absurd here is that the entire thread is framed by an article from the manhattan institute, which seems to argue that americans should embrace racism on natinal security grounds. it also argues that such incoherence that exists is the fault of the threat posed by the aclu, which is presumably a fifth column in the feverdream world of that think tank. the article is not a coherent analysis of anything. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 12-15-2004 at 04:52 PM..

12-15-2004, 05:06 PM	#36 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	There are terrorists from every counrty. Singling out any one group is ludacris. There are filipino members of the al queda, for example. If you're going to single out Muslims (that's a religion, not a race), you might as well single out gentiles. Shoot while we're at it we might as well single out albinos. Maybe we should single out ninjas? I'll bet we can single out kids. Remember that teen from San Francisco that we found in the middle east that had joined the al queda? Give me a break. Bottom line? I back the ACLU on this.

12-15-2004, 07:01 PM	#39 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	an enemy that is everywhere and nowhere: one that can strike at any moment but is invisible; one that is all powerful and powerless, totally organized and without organization, definable yet ephemeral--"islamic fundamentalists" that you cannot quite define, cannot quite locate, but are quite sure will be the death of you, but you have no idea when or how or why.....what could be more a neurotic fantasy than that? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite