Muslims Allege Racial Profiling for 2010 Olympic Security Positions

[George Wallace]

Are you trying to tell me that the IRA, Red Army Faction, and all those guys in the FLQ were muslims?

 

[gcclarke]

Good point. Let's be sure to get all Catholics, all people who speak french, and all germans.

Oh wait, we forgot about Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski. Better be sure to get all white english speaking guys too.

And who can forgot Aum Shinrikyo. Better add the Japanese to the list.

And the Tamil Tigers. Well, there goes everyone who looks like they could be from Sri Lanka.

Oh, and Kach and Kahane Chai. Better add the Jewish folk to the list.

...

Who are we missing?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

First of all, for our Home Grown Terrorist, any person regardless of Age, Race, Sex or Appearance is capable of Terrorist Acts, and for you unacquainted or involved with detection, may I point out that the Bomber is useally the most nondescript, Innocent looking person in the crowd, until he/she screams out "DEATH TO AMERICA.

You B***h and Complain if Security was not carried out or enforced.
You B***h and Complain if it is.

For those concerned about Racial or Religious Profiling just remember.

Not All Muslims are Terrorists.

But all Terrorists are Muslim.

That should go into "The Stupidist Thing I've Heard Today." :

 

[owa]

I guess I'm a bleeding heart, but the way I see it is that it's people who are terrorists and it should be people who are searched.  What I mean is that if you're a living and breathing human you should be searched.  I try not to think in race, sex, religion, etc.  I just like to see people as people.  You know, all of humankind.

 

[Gunnar]

What I mean is that if you're a living and breathing human you should be searched.

Who's paying for this?  You?  Anyone who buys a plane ticket?  And what are we paying for?  Bargain basement, $8 an hour "agents" who will make certain to strip search every woman with a bouncy chest?  Or intensely professional security/intel people who will become intensely bored by the 8000 businessmen, housewives and kids they have to search every day and end up doing something stupid?

How about we racial profile by constantly changing profiles adapted to circumstances?  Shortly after Timmy McVeigh, it would make sense to pay closer attention to people from his neck of the woods, especially if there had been a cult link or some such.  Today, background screening should be sufficient for most white guys from that area.

People are inventive.  If I want to kill a large number of people, I can probably figure out a way to do it.  All the searches in the world will not make air line travel 100% safe....(I'm thinking of an ironic situation where everyone is 100% screened, and SAFE....then the plane takes a nosedive into a mountain due to bad electronics).

Or, do what they do in Israel--search your bags while someone talks to you.  Any idiot who packs something obvious in his bag will get caught---but the it is the guy who talks to you who decides whether or not MORE searching and questioning is required...because the real issue is not if you are carrying a sharpened ballpoint pen, but whether or not you are a whack job.

Perhaps for frequent flyers, you might consider white listing some of them to offset the problems theyundoubted had by being on the profile du jour....

 

[Sub_Guy]

Wrong.

Profiling is a good thing, if done correctly it is the most effective way to eliminate problems.  If we ran airline security in the same manner as our Israeli friends then we wouldn't have issues with C4 underpants.

Treating a 80 year old woman the same as some guy from Yemen is just wrong and a complete waste of time. 

We will never get a solid grip on security by being a bunch of bleeding hearts.  If you were sitting on a plane and you watched a group of middle eastern men board the plane I would be willing to bet that you would start to wonder if they were up to no good. 

Profiling is human nature, if you saw a group of white men walking down the road with shaved heads, one might think they are white supremacists.  If you witnessed a fella walking into the bank with a ski mask on you would tend to think that he is going to rob the place, but what if he is just cold?  Or covering up some bad acne?

Embrace it.

 

[FastEddy]

That should go into "The Stupidist Thing I've Heard Today." :

Maybe your right, but it just might have a ring of truth in Afghanistan, Iraq or maybe London.

Actually its quite a common expression, but I can't blame you or George if you haven't heard of it.

Oh! by the way, I think its spelled Stupidest.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Maybe your right, but it just might have a ring of truth in Afghanistan, Iraq or maybe London.

Actually its quite a common expression, but I can't blame you or George if you haven't heard of it.

Oh! by the way, I think its spelled Stupidest.

Actually, I've heard the paraphrasing used for other subjects, just not your own particular, racist spin. There is no truth to it in any of the places you mention. Common? Perhaps at a KKK meeting or some such. Go ahead, quote a couple of reputable sources, and perhaps you can also enlighten us on why George or myself haven't heard it. Nice try at the strawman though.

As to my spelling, you didn't have to think. I noticed you had to use the spellcheck to catch it

 

[VIChris]

Maybe your right, but it just might have a ring of truth in Afghanistan, Iraq or maybe London.

Actually its quite a common expression, but I can't blame you or George if you haven't heard of it.

Oh! by the way, I think its spelled Stupidest.

recceguy summed up my thoughts on your sentiments regarding terrorists quite well.

If you're going to call someone out on their spelling, you should keep your grammar in check too. It's one of those pot and kettle situations.

 

[mariomike]

For the first time ever in my life, I was concerned for my flying safety.
OWDU

I wonder if in-flight consumption of over priced airline mini-bottles has increased in recent years? To help steady the nerves.

 

[Journeyman]

Oh! by the way, I think its spelled Stupidest.

Oh! By the way, I think it's spelled "stupidest."

Perhaps this link is relevant.

No, don't thank me. 

 

[Rifleman62]

We (white grandparants) flew from San Antonio to Oklahoma City, return 23/28 Dec 09. No noticeable difference on 28 Dec 09. My wife has 2 pounds of titanium steel in each knee , so she was put into the additional screening booth in the middle of the TSA area. That took a few extra minutes. I think everyone should be screened. A sensitive grandmother could be blackmailed/threatened with harm to whoever and thus forced to smuggle a package on an aircraft.

I am glad this did not happen to my wife:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZfbTlYpKYo

 

[armyvern]

Maybe you're right, but it just might have a ring of truth in Afghanistan, Iraq or maybe London.

Actually it's quite a common expression, but I can't blame you or George if you haven't heard of it.

Oh! by the way, I think its spelled Stupidest. <--- already corrected by JMan.

I'm also thinking some Londoners just may disagree with you on that 'saying'. Them having actually experienced that already-mentionned IRA activity in their big old town. See below

Over 20 years, the IRA strategy shifted away from causing as many casualties as possible to trying to cause economic damage to London's financial centre.

The major incidents were:

1973, March 8: two IRA car bombs in London explode outside the Old Bailey and government's agriculture department headquarters, killing one person and wounding more than 150;

1974, October 5: two IRA bombs explode in pubs in the London suburb of Guildford; five dead, more than 50 injured;

November 21: two IRA bombs in Birmingham kill 19 and wound more than 180;

1982, July 20: two IRA bombs in Hyde Park and Regent's Park in London kill 11 British soldiers and wound more than 40, mostly civilian onlookers;

1983, December 17: IRA car bomb explodes outside Harrods department store, killing six people and wounding about 100;

1984 October 12: IRA targets conference of ruling Conservative party, killing five and wounding 24, but narrowly missing the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher;

1989, September 22: the IRA bombs the Royal Marines School of Music in Deal, killing 10 soldiers and wounding more than 30;

1991, February 7: IRA fires three homemade mortar shells at No 10 Downing Street, the British prime minister's official residence in London. No injuries;

1992, April 10: a massive IRA truck bomb in London's financial district kills three and causes hundreds of millions of pounds worth in damage;

April 24: an IRA truck bomb in London's financial district, killing one and causing heavy damage;

1996, February 9: IRA ends a 17-month ceasefire with a third massive truck bomb in London's financial district, killing two;

February 18: an IRA bomber accidentally kills himself aboard a London double-decker bus, five injured;

June 15: for the first time, the IRA targets a different English city - Manchester - with a massive truck bomb, wrecking the central shopping area and wounding about 200; and

2000, September 20: IRA dissidents fire rocket-propelled grenades at headquarters of MI6 security agency. No injuries.

:-\

 

[FastEddy]

I'm also thinking some Londoners just may disagree with you on that 'saying'. Them having actually experienced that already-mentionned IRA activity in their big old town. See below

:-\

Thank you for your chronological list of IRA activities.

The point in fact is that if you and your Friends persist on insisting that the use of the word "ALL' in the expression (ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIM) means, Every and all Acts of Terrorism Worldwide, that's your privilege, but this confusion will  continue.

 

[dangerboy]

The point in fact is that if you and your Friends persist on insisting that the use of the word "ALL' in the expression (ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIM) means, Every and all Acts of Terrorism Worldwide, that's your privilege, but this confusion will  continue.

How else do you interpet the word "All".  From the Oxford Dictionary "All: the whole amount, number, or extent of"

 

[Nauticus]

Wrong.

Profiling is a good thing, if done correctly it is the most effective way to eliminate problems.  If we ran airline security in the same manner as our Israeli friends then we wouldn't have issues with C4 underpants.

Treating a 80 year old woman the same as some guy from Yemen is just wrong and a complete waste of time. 

We will never get a solid grip on security by being a bunch of bleeding hearts.  If you were sitting on a plane and you watched a group of middle eastern men board the plane I would be willing to bet that you would start to wonder if they were up to no good. 

Profiling is human nature, if you saw a group of white men walking down the road with shaved heads, one might think they are white supremacists.  If you witnessed a fella walking into the bank with a ski mask on you would tend to think that he is going to rob the place, but what if he is just cold?  Or covering up some bad acne?

Embrace it.

Wrong.

Profiling can be good, yes, but racial profiling can not. If you see a bunch of Middle Eastern men on an airplane and suddenly question their intent, you are a racist. Pre-judging people is a terrible idea, and to this extent, it is not natural.

That said, I'm all for searching everyone. The people who conduct these searches ARE actually well-paid, well trained agents. I know, I used to be one several years ago.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Wrong.

Profiling can be good, yes, but racial profiling can not. If you see a bunch of Middle Eastern men on an airplane and suddenly question their intent, you are a racist.

What flavour of profiling is ok in your books then?  I am not a racist but if I am on a plane with a bunch of people from a country or ethnic background or whatever who have been known to blow shit up in the air, and I am more worried than them than I am about Hillbilly Bob and some other folks from the north mountain in the Annapolis valley, that doesn't make me racist ffs.  I believe in things like *history* and *probability* and other similiar concepts.  I don't remember very many Valley types being part of 9/11, as an example.  I would really like to kick people like you ( who chuck out the *racist* label at every possible chance ) in the junk.  Hard.  More than once.  Thats just me. 

That said, I'm all for searching everyone. The people who conduct these searches ARE actually well-paid, well trained agents. I know, I used to be one several years ago.

Uh huh.  I am sure the flying public feels safer now. 

 

[Dean22]

What flavour of profiling is ok in your books then?  I am not a racist but if I am on a plane with a bunch of people from a country or ethnic background or whatever who have been known to blow crap up in the air, and I am more worried than them than I am about Hillbilly Bob and some other folks from the north mountain in the Annapolis valley, that doesn't make me racist ffs.

So on a daily basis when you see a Middle Eastern person you pray they don't blow up, when you see an african american person you assume they can play basketball, when you see a redneck you assume they have a shot gun and when you see an asian person you assume they can tell you what 11.267 billion times 5892 is?

If what you said isn't racist then I don't know what is.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Then I guess you don't know what is.

 

[Sub_Guy]

Profiling can be good, yes, but racial profiling can not. If you see a bunch of Middle Eastern men on an airplane and suddenly question their intent, you are a racist. Pre-judging people is a terrible idea, and to this extent, it is not natural.

Profiling is good.  Lets say you see a car sitting in a high class neighborhood at 3am, inside this car are clearly 5 minority males dressed in what some might consider thug wear.  Would you think they are just sitting in there having a discussion on world politics?  Or would you consider checking the car out (if you were a police officer)?.  They are doing nothing wrong, but one could assume by profiling (behavioral) that they could be up to no good.  This would warrant a little investigating (IMHO) within a few minutes of talking to them you would know what they are up to.  If they were indeed doing nothing wrong then there's no harm done.

It is all about behavior and this exactly what the Israelis have down to a science.  Searching everyone is fine, treating everyone exactly the same is not.  By paying attention to their actions airport security could easily pick out who deserves a little more attention.