Last edited by kr@cker (2006-07-07 15:47:43)
Except that not even all the terrorists have been Arab. Granted, most have been Middle Eastern, but some of them have been white. If some of them have been white...and I'm white...am I going to bomb something?Skruples wrote:
I submit to you that 100% of KKK members are white. Should we start questioning all young white males in relation to KKK related activities?
Profiling is a slippery slope. It's one thing to say 'all of the terrorists have been arab'. Its entirely another thing to say 'all those arabs are potential terrorists'.
If you live in a town where there is some bad shit being perpetrated by the KKK, go right ahead.Skruples wrote:
I submit to you that 100% of KKK members are white. Should we start questioning all young white males in relation to KKK related activities?
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-07-07 21:56:08)
They have good reason to believe that, under the Patriot Act.d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
kinda hard not to racially profile in this case because muslim extremists, and Arabic persons are the primary race of the group we are targeting. Look maybe we shouldnt racially profile, but there are good Arabic people in the U.S. that think they have to hide and are scared to use the phone, get on the net, much less talk to people.
Not all terrorists are suivide bombers, and most arabs would be nervous because of the very actions our government is performing.kr@cker wrote:
If you live in a town where there is some bad shit being perpetrated by the KKK, go right ahead.Skruples wrote:
I submit to you that 100% of KKK members are white. Should we start questioning all young white males in relation to KKK related activities?
Profiling is a tool, and you are oversimplifying the situation, I'm not going to stop someone for being arab, but they would receive extra attention if they were arab, acting nervous, and wearing a backpack.
Yes, absolutely, if they all of a sudden started sitting in on black church congregations and wore a fucking white hood and a fucking bed sheet!!!Skruples wrote:
I submit to you that 100% of KKK members are white. Should we start questioning all young white males in relation to KKK related activities?
Profiling is a slippery slope. It's one thing to say 'all of the terrorists have been arab'. Its entirely another thing to say 'all those arabs are potential terrorists'.
Just spitballing here, but is there ANYYYYYY chance whatsoever that because of the patriot act that this plot was foiled? Along with the other plots in NY and California etc.... Any chance at alllll that this just might be the reason they are finding it exceedingly more difficult to follow through with their plans in the US?? Tough shit if yourr feelings are hurt at the security checkpoint at the airport.Spearhead wrote:
They have good reason to believe that, under the Patriot Act.d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
kinda hard not to racially profile in this case because muslim extremists, and Arabic persons are the primary race of the group we are targeting. Look maybe we shouldnt racially profile, but there are good Arabic people in the U.S. that think they have to hide and are scared to use the phone, get on the net, much less talk to people.
Last edited by lowing (2006-07-07 21:51:44)
And here's me thinking that anyone wearing a backpack and acting nervous is worthy of extra attentionkr@cker wrote:
I'm not going to stop someone for being arab, but they would receive extra attention if they were arab, acting nervous, and wearing a backpack.
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-07-07 22:06:01)
Uh, most terrorists who have been caught have been foreign. Sure, there's a chance. But what it does do for sure is scare the shit out of the Arab community, because it's their job to monitor anyone who is under suspicion. And those people, my friend, are the Arabs.lowing wrote:
Just spitballing here, but is there ANYYYYYY chance whatsoever that because of the patriot act that this plot was foiled? Along with the other plots in NY and California etc.... Any chance at alllll that this just might be the reason they are finding it exceedingly more difficult to follow through with their plans in the US??Spearhead wrote:
They have good reason to believe that, under the Patriot Act.d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
kinda hard not to racially profile in this case because muslim extremists, and Arabic persons are the primary race of the group we are targeting. Look maybe we shouldnt racially profile, but there are good Arabic people in the U.S. that think they have to hide and are scared to use the phone, get on the net, much less talk to people.
Too stupid to respond to except for this being another classic bubbalo debate tactic.Bubbalo wrote:
Because sitting in on black congregations is so much worse than what the KKK actually does?And here's me thinking that anyone wearing a backpack and acting nervous is worthy of extra attentionkr@cker wrote:
I'm not going to stop someone for being arab, but they would receive extra attention if they were arab, acting nervous, and wearing a backpack.
Ok well if you absolutely refuse to give Bush any credit or positive recognition for the lack of successful islamic terrorist attacks in the US ( not forgetting that you will BLAME him for ANY negative thing that happens in this war). What do you attribute their failures and exposed plots to?Spearhead wrote:
Uh, most terrorists who have been caught have been foreign. Sure, there's a chance. But what it does do for sure is scare the shit out of the Arab community, because it's their job to monitor anyone who is under suspicion. And those people, my friend, are the Arabs.lowing wrote:
Just spitballing here, but is there ANYYYYYY chance whatsoever that because of the patriot act that this plot was foiled? Along with the other plots in NY and California etc.... Any chance at alllll that this just might be the reason they are finding it exceedingly more difficult to follow through with their plans in the US??Spearhead wrote:
They have good reason to believe that, under the Patriot Act.
It also gives yet another excuse for terrorists to recruit more people.
You always say this, and to me it reads "Oh crap, that makes sense, quick, better not respond without ignoring it!"lowing wrote:
Too stupid to respond to except for this being another classic bubbalo debate tactic.
We have been through this.........the 911 attacks were planned under Clinton's watch, based on our weakened intelligence ( at the hands of Clinton ) were those attacks able to be carried out.Spark wrote:
So why don't we give Clinton, Bush Sr. Reagan, Nixon, and whatever president you want to name credit too? 'Cos the only foreign terrorist attack EVER to occur in the US occured about 4.5 years ago.
I always say this because it is always true. You read my post, you know exactly the point I was making. You are the one who refuses to acknowledge or respond to anyone's posts based on the context of it, and what the writer was saying. You will dissect it and piece it out to draw a counter argument that is completely out of line with what was written and spend the next 15 post trying to maneuver that person into saying something YOU want them to say.Bubbalo wrote:
You always say this, and to me it reads "Oh crap, that makes sense, quick, better not respond without ignoring it!"lowing wrote:
Too stupid to respond to except for this being another classic bubbalo debate tactic.
Last edited by lowing (2006-07-08 04:22:34)