Did you know that 100% of Caucasians smoke crystal-meth and watch NASCAR?

I need my fix! Go Dale!

I don't know about that. First, country of origin should be established as the first way to begin the process (which by default means we need to find better ways at preventing the falsification of travel documents). Passengers from rogue nations should be flagged right from the beginning for airport security. This doesn't excuse domestic passengers, but this would be a start in weeding out the type of hijackers that have succeeded thus far.

Yep. And all African-American's love fried chicken. Almost as much as all Mexican's go 28-a-car, and all Asian's are amazing at math, all Jews are cheap as bums, and so on.

I'm just saying, if we make it a point to check Muslims/those of Middle Eastern decent/a white guy with a tan/person of ambiguous decent in airports, we should make it a point to force our African-American citizens to slap special stickers on their automobiles, so we can perform racially-charged highway-side cocaine checks.

Show me a stat where white guys are committing acts of terror against American airplanes as frequently as Arab-Muslims are since 9/11, and I'll be the first one out there with the crack stickers.

So did anyone else see those raging white grandmas who were going to hit JFK?

Err...nevermind.

That these would be terrorists are of Muslim desceent is not surprising. But were they apprehended as a result of a thoughtful investigation, based on specific information, or was the arrest the product of random, racial profiling of airline passengers?

My point was directed more towards the fact that, once again, it isn't a bunch of white grandmas who were trying to hit the U.S., it was Muslims.

I think that says it all.

The bottom line is, saying we should randomly search Muslims in airports on the basis that more Muslims/Arabs commit acts of terrorism, statistically and generally speaking, is like saying we should be able to arrest African Americans randomly on gang-related charges, on the basis that more African Americans are involved in gang-related crime, statistically and generally speaking.

It's just absolutely... what's the word... Retarded. It's fucking retarded. You're just going to alienate Muslim-Americans and make our government look like more of a ridiculously pompous and arrogant College fraternity than it already does. If you're going to search one group, search them all.

Speaking on the basis of generalizations, more Latin and Hispanic people are going to attempt to smuggle drugs. Should we use the same method of racial profiling to make it a point to search all Latin passengers?

It's not random searching. It's very specific, frankly.

And furthermore, you still haven't shown me anything about how those white grandmas are even remotely as likely as a Muslim to try and execute a terrorist attack.

I've got my stickers waiting, LLC.

All Al-Qaeda and similar organizations are full of muslims. With some exceptions, all the terrorists (atleast the ones against US) are muslims. 9/11 was executed by muslims. What is the new information in all these? How does it justify searching a vast majority of muslims who are peaceful? If you have specific information (as with the latest case of conspiracy), search them, arrest them, punish them, whatever. And moreover the latest bunch of people arrested were American citizens, their religion notwithstanding. If it turns out(I am convinced that is the case, still) that the number of 'islamic american citizens' involved in any type of terrorism is ridiculously small, then you are going back to the cavemen era, by implementing arbitrary laws based on racial prejudices. I agree with LLC, the logic is totally retarded.

DJ, I posed a question in this thread regarding the demographics that you would want to remove from the present search category. I know it has a lot of questions, but it shouldn't take much time to answer them considering the length of posts that I usually see from you. I am just curious to know your opinion and also some other people who have quoted statistics in this thread and elsewhere. Mind giving it a try?

What the fuck are you talking about? If they want to get on an airplane, they should be more closely scrutinized. That's all. Nobody is going to their houses for an illegal search and seizure.

The only retarded logic here is trying to keep afloat a sinking ship argument that continues to ignore the fact that the overwhelming number of terrorist attempts (successful, failed, or thwarted by law enforcement) over the past decade or so have been executed by Muslims (citizens or not).

If this isn't a case for racial profiling, I don't know what is. Maybe when Bin Laden is fucking your daughter?

This doesn't require any great logic here. Like I've said countless times, security should be increased regardless of any race, creed, etc..

I doubt I'd remove any of those people from that list. But I'd scrutinize a few of them much closer than the rest, and for obvious reasons.

If you can't understand that, then I'm not sure what else I can do.

Frankly D. Roosevelt?

Nope, Harry S. Trueman.

Actually, that's not a bad idea.

Good. All the better. Than maybe the American Muslims, who are becoming alienated, will finally do something and step up, speak out, and help to expose those that are preaching a message of hate and extremism in their own communities.

And just because they have become American citizens means absolutely nothing. Their taking the time to become American citizens, rooting themselves in a community and establishing themselves as pillars in their community, is in itself proof of how they are patient and manipulate the system that we've built just to turn around and use it to destroy America's economy and murder it's people.

How many times have we seen, over the last few years, an extremist Muslim get arrested for being part of a terror plot, only to hear what a longstanding and upstanding citizen he was for so many years within his community?

It's all part of their strategy. it's what they are taught to do!

And a majority of the innocent Muslim people that live in those communities have continued to turn a blind eye to these people because in their eyes it is more honorable to protect one of their own then to go against their religion and protect the non Muslim infidel.

Why would we do that when we can just tap their phone lines?



It doesn't matter who's likely to do what, speaking on generalizations. Because that's what they are; generalizations. And it's so highly unconstitutional (you know, that whole "all men created equal" thing...) that I want to find a board of wood with a nail sticking through it, and do an headstand on it.

You know what? Fuck it. Let's just start racially profiling in airports so we can spend all our time and energy searching anyone and everyone of Muslim descent. Then we can allow the actual terrorists to scheme up more elaborate plans and decoys to work past our efforts, while we simultaneously feed them bullshit to brainwash their disciples with. "Hey, look what the Americans are doing! They're ridiculing innocent members of our community simply for belonging to that community!" Meanwhile, we'll just let the next Unabomber slip under our noses, while we're investing all of our time in wasteful and racist procedures. Then, when some whacked out Caucasian blows up a plane or building, I can say "told you so!" and laugh like a maniac.

Great idea.

If that happened you wouldn't laugh. You'd be both angered and sad just like the rest of us.

I think the kid is just being over the top in order to show just how ridiculously divided we are as a nation.

Cuz if he meant it, I'd drive up to Gooberville and kick his ass.

Loffles.

I know that the kid is just trying to make a point. And I also know, agree with him or not about certain things, that he is not that kind of person.

It's called a hyperbole.

Angered? No. What the fuck would that do? Angry is probably the worst/stupidest thing to be when involved in politics and/or war.

Sad? Perhaps.

Good to hear.

Well I don't know about you, but when I watched 3000 people get murdered, of course I was very very sad, but I'd be lying to you if I told you that I wasn't angry about it.

Well, I was 11 at the time... So I was a bit confused.

But even still. I never understood how one could be angered by a war-related attack. I can understand saddened. I never understood anger. Which is odd, I can become angered over some pretty stupid shit.

I can't explain it, really. I'm mentally exhausted right now, and my wit is almost nonexistent for the time being. I can just say my views on war are... I don't know. Strange? Unorthodox.

Well, that was a weak response... Sorry for that. My mind is far too focused on other matters for me to put together any sort of satisfiable answer to anything but what is consuming my mind right now. But, once I regroup, you can expect me assuming the role of a self-humored asshole yet again.

listen - let's say someone just committed a murder, & they jumped in their white jeep & fled the scene; police officers all over the city are looking for this criminal, so they start checking cars in the specific area he was heading in. now should every car driving in that particular vicinity be checked? yes - safety precautions for our wellbeing, always. should an emphasis be placed on checking white jeeps in that area? of course. at airports, should everyone have security procedures followed through on them? yes - safety precautions for our wellbeing, always. should an emphasis be placed on muslims, who are immensely more likely to commit a crime? of course.

this isn't rocket science, folks.

I don't think the two can even be compared. You're completely ignoring the entire notion of civil rights.