Travelers who match a 'certain description' will be required for extra screening - Polidicks

ITT: :patriot:

[img]http://chrisstubbs.com/AustinPowers.jpg[/img] I guess you could say that [i]the Jews did 9/11[/i].

On a related note; My friends name is the name of a terrorist so whenever he flies he has to be interrogated....

[QUOTE=Ragy;21121827]I'm not assuming every middle-easterner is trying to kill us. If you don't believe in extra screening people who are currently commenting attacks to protect American citizens then you shouldn't live there. Oh so you're afraid of hurting peoples feelings?[/QUOTE] So just because I look Middle Eastern I should be separated and given extra screening, despite the fact that I was born and raised an American? Do you really believe that? What about all of the Middle Eastern men and women serving in the military who give their lives for this country? I guess they might be potential terrorists too? What was done to the Japanese-Americans with the internment camps was disgusting and unfair. And so is this attitude that all Middle Eastern people are potential terrorists. Why can't we learn from history? I think your phrasing of "hurting peoples feelings" is way oversimplifying the situation. And when you believe that every Middle Easterner should be given extra screening because "it's a higher chance they're a terrorist", then yes, you ARE assuming every Middle Easterner is "trying to kill us".

[QUOTE=Dmarine;21134881]So just because I look Middle Eastern I should be separated and given extra screening, despite the fact that I was born and raised an American? Do you really believe that? What about all of the Middle Eastern men and women serving in the military who give their lives for this country? I guess they might be potential terrorists too? What was done to the Japanese-Americans with the internment camps was disgusting and unfair. And so is this attitude that all Middle Eastern people are potential terrorists. Why can't we learn from history? I think your phrasing of "hurting peoples feelings" is way oversimplifying the situation. And when you believe that every Middle Easterner should be given extra screening because "it's a higher chance they're a terrorist", then yes, you ARE assuming every Middle Easterner is "trying to kill us".[/QUOTE] Hardly. I'm not a big fan of this announcement, but I noticed you saying something about us learning from our history. What about recent history? If our recent history states, statistically, that a certain profile has generated the largest threat to general well being, is it not then logical to increase the precautions against such a threat? These people aren't being barred from using a service, they aren't being denied a right, they aren't being relinquished of anything they own. They're sacrificing a little bit of their time to purchase greater security for themselves and the rest of the populace. Now, of course, there is also the flip side of the coin. While a "downward spiral" argument is oft a rash overstatement, this whole situation begs to be put to the question. If they can get away with this today, what will they get away with tomorrow? Not only that, but are we resurrecting a specter we've only recently done away with? Is this going to lead to the assumption that our government is "okay" with racism in a certain context? Which might not be a far toss away from "our government is okay with racism". Personally I'd prefer the whole mess be avoided and it be maintained that all passengers have to undergo rigorous protocol to board a plane. That way you'd maintain the unity of the groups being "transgressed". Although this would undoubtedly exasperate the time requirements involved with flying. And I'm sure there are a whole host of other contributing factors that I'm not even aware of. What are the airline carriers doing? What is their view, what are they pushing for? Who's putting pressure where, and all that jazz. The long and short of it is, its not a pretty decision, but its the decision we've been handed. Either find a way to incorporate it into your own beliefs, or do something to counter it. For us to be flaming each other, and making huge leaps from what people have actually said in response... Well, its getting us nowhere. Create a group with a mission statement, make some noise. Create a support group for the decision. Get out there and do something to strengthen YOUR position, or present YOUR side of it in the best light you can. These rash posts succeed in nothing but creating another clash on the internet. Find your view and make a stand, else you'd be better off just moving along.

Well said.

[QUOTE=Veoto;21138269]Hardly. I'm not a big fan of this announcement, but I noticed you saying something about us learning from our history. What about recent history? If our recent history states, statistically, that a certain profile has generated the largest threat to general well being, is it not then logical to increase the precautions against such a threat? These people aren't being barred from using a service, they aren't being denied a right, they aren't being relinquished of anything they own. They're sacrificing a little bit of their time to purchase greater security for themselves and the rest of the populace. Now, of course, there is also the flip side of the coin. While a "downward spiral" argument is oft a rash overstatement, this whole situation begs to be put to the question. If they can get away with this today, what will they get away with tomorrow? Not only that, but are we resurrecting a specter we've only recently done away with? Is this going to lead to the assumption that our government is "okay" with racism in a certain context? Which might not be a far toss away from "our government is okay with racism". Personally I'd prefer the whole mess be avoided and it be maintained that all passengers have to undergo rigorous protocol to board a plane. That way you'd maintain the unity of the groups being "transgressed". Although this would undoubtedly exasperate the time requirements involved with flying. And I'm sure there are a whole host of other contributing factors that I'm not even aware of. What are the airline carriers doing? What is their view, what are they pushing for? Who's putting pressure where, and all that jazz. The long and short of it is, its not a pretty decision, but its the decision we've been handed. Either find a way to incorporate it into your own beliefs, or do something to counter it. For us to be flaming each other, and making huge leaps from what people have actually said in response... Well, its getting us nowhere. Create a group with a mission statement, make some noise. Create a support group for the decision. Get out there and do something to strengthen YOUR position, or present YOUR side of it in the best light you can. These rash posts succeed in nothing but creating another clash on the internet. Find your view and make a stand, else you'd be better off just moving along.[/QUOTE] I just think that if this extra screening is to happen, rather than a specific group being singled out, everyone should have to do it. It's only fair, plus, terrorist groups have been converting people to extremism, people who aren't of Middle Eastern background, to exploit this system of segregation. And for someone who has to go through these extra procedures just because of their ethnic background, it's not as easy as just saying, "Ah, yes, I'm doing my country a favor by keeping it safe!". When you are constantly being scrutinized because of what you look like, it's a low blow, and it hurts to be constantly reminded that the country you are a proud citizen of and that you've lived in your entire life and that you would die for is basically saying, "You're probably not a terrorist, but you might be, because we don't trust your people".

[QUOTE=Ragy;21132099]Actually yes you can. You can't change your face, skin color, race, etc... All of those are effective attributes to identifying terrorist.[/QUOTE] you obviously been living under a rock since michal jackson did all of that and also changed his religion so if the troll would stop trolling thatd be splendid

[QUOTE=IAmIchigo;21142589]you obviously been living under a rock since michal jackson did all of that and also changed his religion so if the troll would stop trolling thatd be splendid[/QUOTE] Seeing as how the current terrorist thread is from people who happen to be Islamic, and how Islam dictates that you cannot make any modifications to your body at all, and this is something followed strictly. It would be somewhat safe to assume that they won't be undergoing any kind of radical transformation any time soon.

[QUOTE=nullsquared;21132014]Unfortunately, you can't deny statistics. So, as much as you'd like to believe "oh, that's just a stereotype :smile:", it's actually true, and is an effective way to identify potential terrorists. I don't see why people are so touchy on the subject. If it's okay to identify potential terrorists by gender and age, then why is it not okay to also identify them by race?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Riutet;21145320]Seeing as how the current terrorist thread is from people who happen to be Islamic, and how Islam dictates that you cannot make any modifications to your body at all, and this is something followed strictly. It would be somewhat safe to assume that they won't be undergoing any kind of radical transformation any time soon.[/QUOTE] aaaaaah touche

[QUOTE]For example, if the U.S. has intelligence about a Nigerian man between the ages of 22 and 32 whom officials believe is a threat or a known terrorist, under the new policy all Nigerian men within that age range will receive extra screening before they are allowed to fly to the U.S. If intelligence later shows that the suspect is not a terrorist, travelers will not be screened against that description.[/QUOTE] Well if they have a specific description of the person who they think is a terrorist, then by all means, fuck their shit up. A lot of people look alike, we can't have a real terrorist slip through just because we don't want to appear racist.

I guess you could say this is a [i]screening deal[/i] [img]http://pici.se/pictures/TmmzTUbZS.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=radioactive;21119014]You know we wouldn't have to do all this terrorism bullshit if we just pulled out of the middle east and paid them reparations.[/QUOTE] Yes because the best way to stop terrorism is to pander to them. Because we were in a war with the Middle East when 9/11 happened. [editline]04:19PM[/editline] Pandering to terrorists and giving into their demands has never backfired, EVER. NEVER EVER EVER

[QUOTE=Lankist;21192904]Yes because the best way to stop terrorism is to pander to them. Because we were in a war with the Middle East when 9/11 happened. [editline]04:19PM[/editline] Pandering to terrorists and giving into their demands has never backfired, EVER. NEVER EVER EVER[/QUOTE] Give an example of when this hasn't backfired.

[QUOTE=Riutet;21145320]Seeing as how the current terrorist thread is from people who happen to be Islamic, and how Islam dictates that you cannot make any modifications to your body at all, and this is something followed strictly. It would be somewhat safe to assume that they won't be undergoing any kind of radical transformation any time soon.[/QUOTE] Oklahoma city bombing. In the mid 1990's the picture of a terrorist was a white, Christian, right-wing radical. Now it's Muslims. In reality, there IS no picture of terrorism. ANYONE can be a terrorist, for ANY reason. Muslims are more likely to be terrorists in the Middle East because, fuckin surprise, there's a shitload of Muslims in the Middle East. Here in the US there have been far more terrorist activities by Whites and Christians because, surprise, there's a shitload of White Christians here. We are under more threat by domestic terrorism here than we are foreign. Groups like the ALF firebombing testing clinics, nutjobs like the Unabomber, fucking assholes like Timothy McVeigh. But suddenly there's ONE terrorist attack here perpetrated by Muslims and suddenly Muslims are the big terror threat. There is no goddamn profile for a terrorist. [editline]04:21PM[/editline] [QUOTE=radioactive;21192928]Give an example of when this hasn't backfired.[/QUOTE] Are you being sarcastic too or are you just stupid.

Lankist, they're singling out Arabs because the specific terrorist group that's pissed off at us currently is made up of Arab Muslims. If you screen the Arabs more, you get rid of ~90% of possible terrorism cases, and while that's not perfect that's still pretty damned good. It's sad that the world has to operate this way, but it's true.

[QUOTE=Lankist;21192954]Are you being sarcastic too or are you just stupid.[/QUOTE] I'm being stupid, now give an example when paying reparations to terrorists backfired.

[QUOTE=WickedIcon;21193041]Lankist, they're singling out Arabs because the specific terrorist group that's pissed off at us currently is made up of Arab Muslims. If you screen the Arabs more, you get rid of ~90% of possible terrorism cases, and while that's not perfect that's still pretty damned good. It's sad that the world has to operate this way, but it's true.[/QUOTE] Uhh, no. Again, there has been ONE major terrorist attack by Muslims in this country. There have been DOZENS by angry, radical, white Christians. I don't get how the fuck you can say we can get rid of 90% of terrorism by fucking with muslims when there was only ONE goddamn attack by them in the last decade. [editline]04:28PM[/editline] [QUOTE=radioactive;21193096]I'm being stupid, now give an example when paying reparations to terrorists backfired.[/QUOTE] I'm going to take a moment here and let you realize you just suggested we give money to terrorist organizations. Mass-murdering fascists who take reparations as a victory and a signal to get more aggressive.

[QUOTE=Lankist;21193100] I'm going to take a moment here and let you realize you just suggested we give money to terrorist organizations. Mass-murdering fascists who take reparations as a victory and a signal to get more aggressive.[/QUOTE] Then when they get more aggressive, they'll just go to war with Israel, and they'll get wiped out.

That you just asked me for an instance in which we have paid people who prey on fear and kill thousands of innocents because they may have a legitimate point somewhere beneath the genocide.

Well, they believe in their cause of killing everyone who isn't like them, at least give them a chance before they mess with Israel.

[QUOTE=radioactive;21193200]Then when they get more aggressive, they'll just go to war with Israel, and they'll get wiped out.[/QUOTE] They are genocidal maniacs. I don't have any more words for you. You are suggesting we bribe goddamn mass murderers. Should we give Charles Manson money under the pretense that he'll stop being a sick fucking subhuman? Did we wrong Ted Bundy by not listening to him enough? Do you think Jeffrey Dahmer had a legit point and we may have had better results if we gave him some cash. Would the fucking Unabomber have stopped if we said sorry? Are you fucking retarded? They are KILLERS. THEY KILL PEOPLE.

Well, if you bribe them, they'll have a better reason for war, then that'll fund the war economy, and then the economy in general is better. [editline]09:41PM[/editline] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0[/media] And it's not like the Muslims are the only genocidal maniacs. [editline]09:41PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;21193265]They are genocidal maniacs. I don't have any more words for you. You are suggesting we bribe goddamn mass murderers. Should we give Charles Manson money under the pretense that he'll stop being a sick fucking subhuman? Did we wrong Ted Bundy by not listening to him enough? Do you think Jeffrey Dahmer had a legit point and we may have had better results if we gave him some cash. Would the fucking Unabomber have stopped if we said sorry? Are you fucking retarded? They are KILLERS. THEY KILL PEOPLE.[/QUOTE] A lot of states in the USA still kill people for killing people. That's backwards logic.

We're talking about paying terrorists. You said we owe terrorists reparations. Stop dodging. [editline]04:45PM[/editline] [QUOTE=radioactive;21193333]And it's not like the Arabs are the only genocidal maniacs.[/QUOTE] Arabs AREN'T genocidal maniacs. Terrorists are. [QUOTE=Lankist;21192954]In the mid 1990's the picture of a terrorist was a white, Christian, right-wing radical. Now it's Muslims. In reality, there IS no picture of terrorism. ANYONE can be a terrorist, for ANY reason. Muslims are more likely to be terrorists in the Middle East because, fuckin surprise, there's a shitload of Muslims in the Middle East. Here in the US there have been far more terrorist activities by Whites and Christians because, surprise, there's a shitload of White Christians here. We are under more threat by domestic terrorism here than we are foreign. Groups like the ALF firebombing testing clinics, nutjobs like the Unabomber, fucking assholes like Timothy McVeigh. But suddenly there's ONE terrorist attack here perpetrated by Muslims and suddenly Muslims are the big terror threat. There is no goddamn profile for a terrorist.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Lankist;21193511]We're talking about paying terrorists. You said we owe terrorists reparations. Stop dodging.[/QUOTE] Our soldiers in the military forces have been occupying the middle easy countries for ages since the 9/11 attacks, we've been killing dozens of their people and destroying their life and industry. They're fighting for their freedom, don't you think we owe them an apology for finding 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' in their country. [editline]09:50PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;21193511]Arabs AREN'T genocidal maniacs. Terrorists are.[/QUOTE] I'm watching House while typing this, sorry if I'm making a few mistakes.