It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Racial Profiling Of Muslims

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   
I dont understand why we cant just have dogs sniff everyone. They work better then machines do, and guess what, they dont discriminate. Of course there will be somebody somewhere that disagree's but so what.

And for you people that dont agree with it, wait until the next "arab looking" man sets off a bomb on your plane then you can - .....oh wait you wont be able to.

Nobody said that weeding out terror is going to be easy, but if thats what it takes so be it.

[edit on 15-8-2006 by R3KR]




posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
So what color or how you should look like as no to be targeted?

Can somebody tell me?


sure I'll tell you.,.....dont wear head scarfs or turbans and dont chant things in arabic(they do that too lol).

I think your insulting people's intelligence by saying latinos can be mistaken for Arabs. maybe by just looking at them but once you hear them speak you know the difference


Also, Id like to know why mexicans and puerto ricans refer to themselves as "latinos' since its their native side they are proud of and not the european and hence "latin" ancestry?



posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
What are the chances that the people thinking up and supporting these racist ideas are the Neocons, The AIPAC supporters and Pro-Israel crew? . . .

. . . At the very same the people who are supporting these laws make it easier for their own people to migrate here and recieve dual citizenship as well as the benefits that most americans enjoy. At the same time holding no allegiance to this country whatsoever.

emphasis added


How did you get from "neocons" and "Aipac supporters and pro-Israel crew" to people who are migrating here?

Do you think all conservatives are immigrants?

Or, when you say neocons, do you really mean "JEWS" ? Take your time, I'm interested in your answer.



These are the very same people who will scream anti-semetism at the slightest cristicism of Israeli policy. I guess its ok as long as its not someone who practices Judaism being the ones profiled.


I'm not levelling a charge of anti-semitism because of your policy stance (whatever THAT may be). I'm leveling the charge of antisemitism at YOU because you imply that Jews cannot be good Americans, are disloyal, or that all Jews vote monolithically for one party (and you think it's not for the Democrats, apparently.)

The irony here is that, in a thread about racism you insert a whole cartload of racist insinuendo into your characterization of the people you assume are "behind" this policy stance. It doesn't help you argument one bit.

.

[edit on 16-8-2006 by dr_strangecraft]



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

How did you get from "neocons" and "Aipac supporters and pro-Israel crew" to people who are migrating here?

Do you think all conservatives are immigrants?

Or, when you say neocons, do you really mean "JEWS" ? Take your time, I'm interested in your answer.



These are the very same people who will scream anti-semetism at the slightest cristicism of Israeli policy. I guess its ok as long as its not someone who practices Judaism being the ones profiled.


I'm not levelling a charge of anti-semitism because of your policy stance (whatever THAT may be). I'm leveling the charge of antisemitism at YOU because you imply that Jews cannot be good Americans, are disloyal, or that all Jews vote monolithically for one party (and you think it's not for the Democrats, apparently.)

The irony here is that, in a thread about racism you insert a whole cartload of racist insinuendo into your characterization of the people you assume are "behind" this policy stance. It doesn't help you argument one bit.

.


First of all if its OK to be an arab-basher or Muslim basher (No Im not a muslim) Why is it not ok to be using things that the minority of Jews do to describe the majority? Many of the people that think this profiling is an ok idea, are also the very same people who are of the opinion that since there are a few extremist Muslims that the entire religion/region is evil and extreme.

You know damn straight what a neo-con is, please don't act like its the first time since 2000 that you have heard the word.

AIPAC is not just a domestic lobbying group..they lobby for a foreign interest and are foreign agents. Another thing Im sure you are well aware of and trying to play the naive one about.

Netanyahu made it clear when he showed his hand, when he declared after finding out about 9-11 and the alleged Muslim/Arab ties to the attack "This is very good for Israel" and it has been good for Israel. Aid societies that collect and give humanitarian aid to Palestinians as well as hezbollah humanitarian funds found themselves frozen. Meanwhile Israeli funds sending thousands upon thousands to arm israeli settlers go through legal as well as illegal channels (ie:Jack Abramoff funneling phoney inner city childrens group funding. I doubt he is the sole inventor of this scheme)



AIPAC

AIPAC APPLAUDS PASSAGE OF CONGRESSIONAL
RESOLUTIONS BACKING ISRAEL
AIPAC President Howard Friedman and Executive Director Howard Kohr released the following statement
regarding today's House passage of H. Res. 921.
"AIPAC commends today's overwhelming House passage of a bipartisan resolution, approved by a vote of
410-8, reaffirming Congress' steadfast support for Israel and condemning Hamas and Hizballah's
unprovoked acts of aggression against the Jewish state. The Senate approved a similar resolution on
Tuesday by unanimous consent.
"AIPAC applauds Congress for standing strong behind America's ally and friend and backing the Jewish
state's right to self-defense. Recent polls indicate that U.S. support for Israel is at an all-time high and the
resolutions are a reflection of the American people's desire to stand by Israel in this time of crisis.
"The House and Senate recognize that Israel has been forced to respond to unprovoked attacks and, like the
United States and all sovereign nations, has the right and duty to defend its citizens. Congress has called for
the immediate and unconditional release of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers and has backed Israel's efforts to
deter further aggression by Hizballah and Hamas.
"Congress recognizes the destabilizing role the governments of Syria and Iran have played in the region.
The resolutions condemn those governments for their continued support of terrorist organizations and call
upon the President to bring the full force of U.S. financial, diplomatic and economic sanctions against these
state sponsors of terror.

"Both resolutions also call on the U.N. Security Council to condemn the attacks on Israel and to implement
U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, requiring the dismantlement of Hizballah and the departure of all
foreign forces and militias from Lebanon. Despite the U.N.'s demands, the Lebanese government has
allowed Hizballah to hold seats in the parliament and cabinet, while at the same time enhancing its rocket
arsenal and carrying out attacks against Israel.
"Israel's full withdrawal from both southern Lebanon and Gaza were carried out as acts of peace and
goodwill.
Unfortunately, these Israeli steps have been met with ongoing acts of violence by groups
committed to the destruction of the Jewish state.

"AIPAC commends the bipartisan leadership in both houses for their support and for their efforts to secure
the swift passage of these important resolutions."

Nothing more then the vilification of arabs and muslims. Unprovoked attacks? LOL
Scare tactics and they are working. Causing us to come up with racist solutions intended to attack the supposed enemies of Israel.

As far as your opinion of anti-semetic. Im probably more semetic then you will ever be. google assyrian maronite when you have time. Its just sickening to see the same people who sit there and can gripe about Iran making christians and jews to wear badges that didn't even exist , but yet here at home in AMERICA they can suggest profiling a person because of the region of origin and the color of his skin. Its absolutely abhorant. Don't try to place suspicion on me for racism when this is obviously and openly rascism at its worst.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Well, slap me, beat me, make me write bad checks.....

I happen to think since the perpetrators of this entire terrorism mess (supposedly) are Muslims, i think they should definatedly racial profile these people. That's right. I think these people should bear a "mark" and THESE are the people that should be profiled.

I say leave the old ladies alone and anyone who isnt Muslim should be safe. Its come to that. LET THEM be inconvenienced for their religion and beliefs.

I wouldnt have said this last year, but the time has come. If Catholics were the perpetrators, i'd say mark all the Catholics (myself included), flag them, and make them strip naked at airports.
OUR president says Muslims want us dead. SO, lets go after them. The hell with inconveniencing an entire nation- pfffft.


Never mind being PC. For what?? So we dont hurt someone's feelings?

Too bad.

Mark them like Lepers and run with that.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Well, aside from dg's hyperbole
, profiling based on the demographics of the historical record of hijackings makes sense. And as long as data is not excluded when setting up the profile, it's not discriminatory - it's using statistics to minimize the impact on the public.

And as far as how they can determine who is from the middle east (or is white and has been to the middle east!) versus an hispanic to has never been to the middle east - that's why we all fly international with a passport.
Taking a set of data from a database and creating a "check list" of things to watch for that would cause you to take about 5 more minutes of checking is the most OBJECTIVE way to try to minimize the grief you put the majority of the public through. And having to have your crotch wanded isn't that dehumanizing, I know, because I've hit the check list twice (once due to my femur rod setting off the alarm and once because we got a one-way ticket just minutes before the plane was to take off - neither of those were because of my race, but because of OTHER data pulled from the database). I haven't had to have therapy to re-instill my worth as a person over either instance.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
I seriously doubt that "therapy" would be needed in my case either. However, i do believe that if Muslims are the suspects, then Muslims are the ones they should go after.

It should be mandatory for Muslims to register in some database accessible to airports. I recent being searched and sized up and down. Some may like the attention, i'd rather go thru, not having to bother.

It really has come to that. I happen to think the majority of Muslims are very nice people, and i have some of Arabic decent in my family. BUT, drastic times call for drastic measures. Hyperbole or not, i'm all for this.





posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Well, I think if your intention is to persecute Muslims for their religion, you should definitely start a petition to have them branded and demand your government search their houses on a regular basis - without warrant or notice.

Until we get to your planet, I think we ought to approach public air transportation like we are - using the most objective criteria that minimizes the impact to the majority of travelers, and treats all people - even the ones that get a check in a box - with the most respect we can afford.

Maybe Utopia exists some where - it's not here.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
Anyways, however crazy it may seem, there is a logic to the racial profiling that I neither approve nor dissaprove with. According to a reporter (AND NOT BY ME) "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all those recent terrorists who threatened the U.S. WERE Muslim."


The reporter should have studied history. America has created more racial crimes in its history to be deemed a country where almost every major race has at one time been discriminated against; where many of its actions can be viewed as terroristic. If it hadn't been in the 1800's with African Americans, it was with the Chinese labor camps used to mine and detonate explosives, or the near genocide of certain Native American tribes during our pillaging of their land which also occured with the Treaty of New Echota, or the concentration camps made for Japanese and German decendants living in the US during WWII in camps such as Manzanar, or the concentration camps created during the Philippine-American war on territory of Batangas, or US's lack of interest in stopping the Herero and Namaqua genocide (which claimed over a hundred thousand lives by Nazis), or the racial cleansing of the Chagos Archipelago islands. Notice how anytime during these periods in history, when ever the race was discriminated against, racism against that specific race was always viewed as the norm, rather than something we admonish today. Racism and stereotyping against Arabs (or those who look Arabic) and Muslims will be another point in the West's history in which we will look back and frown upon.

Also the most recent terrorist attacks in the US have been by non-Arab descent, non-Muslim groups such as the JDL, KKK, and Miami Seven (Seas of David).



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
And how do they tell if someone is a young Muslim? His skin color? Skin color doesn’t determine religion, affiliation, or intent.
This is racism. Racial profiling is racism period.

This is also a free pass to everyone else who want to transport drugs bombs or whatever if they are not brown in color.



Ex-Scotland Yard chief Lord Stevens said the controversial move would help reduce check-in chaos


Racisim for convienience. Briliant.
For all those in favor. Wait ‘till it is your day to be singled out just because of the color of your skin. This is sick.


This is so brilliant.................If a white guy 6 ft tall with blonde hair, blue eyes, wearing a red shirt robs a bank, the police must now look for 70 year old women in wheel chairs..........bloody brilliant isn't it.................

Simple logic to look for those whom commit the crime...........of terrorisim...........

Political correctness has directly "let" terror attacks take place. It is insane.......



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Well if were going to use racial profiling in the UK to help stop terrorism, I want all Irish people checked after all there is still a small group of people who would like to bring the IRA back. I would also like all Americans checked and any other nation that supported the IRA and other terrorists. OH i know why not just search people, regardless of race or colour, it would make things so much safer.

And no this isn't a Anti US or Anti Ireland post, i was just making a point.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Its totally stupid and PC to be against this, its quite right to go after them seeing as its only Muslims who are the terrorists.

Would people want to see the police go after women if there was a serial rapist on the loose so it doesnt offend the make population? How about going after black people in order to not offend white if there was an outbreak of KKK violence?

Its exactly the same as this, dont waste manpower just to be PC, its going to cost lives.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

So what color or how you should look like as no to be targeted?


Short answer. Awake and aware.

The other important question is "Why are we targeted"?

I mean terrorists target us, military targets us, police targets us, governments target us... Maybe it's about time to pull this big target sign of our backs.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempeI happen to think since the perpetrators of this entire terrorism mess (supposedly) are Muslims, i think they should definatedly racial profile these people.


"Racial profile" a Muslim? That's kind of like saying "let's go out and by-god racial profile the Christians!"

Muslims are Blacks. They're also Caucasians as pale as I am. They're also Hispanics. They're also AmerInd. They're also Pacific Islanders. They're also Australian... etc, etc. They're men and women and children.

It's a religion. Anyone can join -- and the "Shoe Bomber" is Muslim and he's as paleskinned and Joe Whitebread looking as George Bush.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:44 AM
link   
In recent history which religion has been involved in the most terrorist attacks?

Muslim

Even though it is the Islamofacists which are the terrorists and not your everyday 'peace loving' muslims, logically you would look at young adult muslim males.

That's right...the 80 year-old white/black grandmothers have been attempting to blow-up airplanes and constantly chant death to America those are the ones we shold definitely be checking out.

Politcal correctness has gotten out of hand....thank you Bill CLinton.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by dgtempeI happen to think since the perpetrators of this entire terrorism mess (supposedly) are Muslims, i think they should definatedly racial profile these people.


"Racial profile" a Muslim? That's kind of like saying "let's go out and by-god racial profile the Christians!"

Muslims are Blacks. They're also Caucasians as pale as I am. They're also Hispanics. They're also AmerInd. They're also Pacific Islanders. They're also Australian... etc, etc. They're men and women and children.

It's a religion. Anyone can join -- and the "Shoe Bomber" is Muslim and he's as paleskinned and Joe Whitebread looking as George Bush.


Understand your point however as im sure your probably aware we English for some strange reason call everyone with a Pakistani, Arab, Middle eastern appearance "muslims". Its not the religion we mean when we say "muslim" but more the appearance. Im sure i have read somewhere on here that the US use the term of "Arabs" to define such an appearance



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Well lets put it this way then..... how many Icelandic terrorists have there been in recent memory? Or Norwegian, Belgian, moldavian.........? In the current climate the majority (notice I didn't say 'all' and generalize), are muslims, therefore its only good sense to search the people in the highest risk groups.

The same thing happened during the 80's with AIDS and HIV, gay's, addicts etc were all targeted as high risk groups, is this really any different? Most muslims aren't terrorists and wouldn't know a bomb from the hole in the ground one makes. However the vast majority of reported terroists are fundementalist muslims. If they really want this sort of attitude to go away, how about stopping wearing blinkers and blaming the fact that their young people are doing this on anything but themselves.

You cannot expect for a country you have moved into (or your parents or grandparents) to change to the extent of adopting Sheare law (spelling?) and adding muslim holidays before you say you'll try to stop this. That is nearly getting into blackmail territory isn't it? We all live according to the laws of the land we live in and that applies to ALL citizens wether they be black, white, muslim, christian, buddist or little green men from the planet Zog. If muslims want to be part of the country they live it it is wrong to expect the whole country to change around them if they refuse to change themselves.

It's as simple as that, if you don't want measures like this (and worse) to be introduced then for gods sakes do something about these people in your communities. It's in your hands to a large degree isn't it? I disagree with fundenentalism of any type, whether it be of islam, christianity or anything else. It breeds hate and division between us all, is that really the way we want the world to be?

Wayne...
PS The stuff about what muslims 'wanted' before doing anything at a recent meeting with the british goverment is on record and in just about every british paper today so it shouldn't be to hard to find.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Does anyone remember this guy?
valariekaur.blogspot.com...

He was a Sikh riding into boston on 9/11. He was stopped in Providence, told, at gunpoint to "Get off the F***** train", handcuffed and brought through a crowd of people screaming for him to be killed.

He fits the description of a terrorist doesn't he? He has a turban, he's dark skinned, and he's traveling. He was of course innocent, but not many people remember that part, or cared.

The analogy to hunting for black people with an outbreak of KKK violence is rediculous. I'll ask you, would it make sense to search every white person who looks like they might be racist during that outbreak? How would you tell?

I was at the bus stop the other day, right outside my office building. A cop rode in on his bicycle and started talkingto this black guy sitting next to me. Same age as me, but his skin was a little darker, and he wasn't wearing a button down shirt like I was. Before long they were searching his pockets and holding him until backup arrived.

He missed the bus, and I felt it was my duty to miss the buss too. I stood and waited for them to finish. They found nothing afterwards, and told him he could go on his way. He just sat down and waited for the next bus.

I know this is nothing new. I know that it has been going on since the first explorers found those filthy savages running around acting less than human. I would hope that the racial thing would be over by now. At least on the governmental level.

[edit on 16-8-2006 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by thesaint
It says security at airports etc are to target young Muslims for security checks.


Carlos Mencia had a great response to this. I can't remember it word for word, but it effectively went like this. "Middle Easterner's, it's your turn." Every race in America gets to take its turn getting hazed before being accepted into society. Every race in America gets demonized at some point (even whitey...especially whitey, actually). Right now, it's the Middle-Easterner's turn. It doesn't make it right, but it's nothing that everyone else hasn't gone through at some point or another under different circumstances.

However, he was a lot more funny when he said it.

Anyway, he raised another good point.

Whites, Latinos, Blacks, etc... aren't blowing up stuff. We don't have a list of elderly Native American women who have been strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up buildings. There's no list of Mexicans who are hijacking planes to ram them into buildings. There's no list of Caucasions and Blacks who are plotting to detonate nukes or biological weapons in America.

What we DO have, is a whole slew of past and present incidents by young "muslim" males who are actively trying to commit acts of terrorism. I put Muslim in quotes and lower-case in the previous sentence on purpose, because these men are no more Muslim than Ted Bundy was a Christian, or Kim Jong Il is a Buddhist. These men are monsters, through and through.

Unfortunately, these monsters are different in mentality, not appearance. If becoming a terrorist magically made someone's skin turn green, you can bet that green-skinned people would be profiled, and "normal" Muslims would be left alone.

I agree it is dehumanizing, and unfair. And real Muslims should be so f---ing outraged about it that they absolutely never condone nor turn a blind eye to anyone who is a terrorist. Their clerics should constantly and consistantly denounce terrorism, and the thought of becoming a terrorist and suicide bombing should be so completely difficult and unappealing to anyone who believes themselves to be Muslim that being a young male of Middle Eastern descent should be no more of a flag than being an elderly Latino woman.

The unfortunate reality is that a blind eye is turned when it is not openly encouraged or condoned, and that the terrorists of the last few years have been young Middle Eastern men (shrug). If we had a series of hijackings and bombings by old Catholic women, then they would start profiling old ladies who wear crucifixes. It's just reality.

I'm very sorry it ever came to this, but political correctness is no longer worth the safety of innocent lives. If you look, sound, and have a similar name to the last string of terrorists, you're going to be profiled and checked out more closely than those who aren't.

I need to stress, however, that I myself have no problems with those of Middle Eastern descent. I don't want my defense of profiling when ensuring the safety of hundreds of innocent lives to be considered racism. It's just common sense. It doesn't mean I won't be friends with, do business with, or associate with them. And if Mencia's right, give it another decade, and a completley different race will be profiled for some other reason.



posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   
If we are really going to get serious about airline security, then we will need to adopt Israel's El Al screening process. EVERY passenger is literally grilled with 30 minutes of questioning. The purpose is to find inconsistencies in a passenger's statements or discover that they may have been given a package by someone who they recently met. Anything out of the ordinary during this questioning will require that passenger to go through a more intense search (up to and including a strip search). While it may seem extreme to those of us in the US, it is extremely affective.

Now the arguments against it are that no one will want to show up 3 hours before their flight and that it is an invasion of their privacy. However, IMO, it is the route we need to go if we want true airline security.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join