Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Hopefully, the US can put political correctness aside and stop being ignorant and check the obvious, not the anglo Grandmother that has a walker.
    The main reason for checking on (any) grand{ma|pa} is {she|he} may be distracted or doze off and somebody may slip something into h{er|is} bag or exchange it...

    ...but that is just another stereotype.
  2. #42  
    Profiling/Stereotyping is not inherently bad. We all do it all the time. It's how are brains work. We evaluate present circumstances in light of prior similar experiences.

    The question is, "to what extent can/should we use such reasoning to deny access or single out for further scrutiny?" I find It is defensible to justify restrictions commiserate with the level of risk associated with the profile.

    After Murrah, it was appropriate to me wary of people whose psychological profile matched McVeigh's. The absence of similar acts by similar people makes it reasonable to lower the alert levels on that profile.
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gasmeister
    And, by this reasoning you think we're actually safe from the so-called bogeymen? I don't know what I find more ridiculous- your ignorance or your naivete.

    We will be attacked gain- these people are not going to go away because in the idealized thinking of the appeasers and mollifiers of terrorism in this world that will happen if we simply stop being the terrible Americans that we are.

    Wake up. We're in a war that will last decades. The sooner we defend ourselves using common sense tactics like statistically-applied profiling, closer monitoring of our immigration policies and borders, and loosening our dependence on foreign oil alltogether, the sooner we'll protect ourselves against another attack.

    Fortunately for you, DaT, even people with warped thought processes like yours will benefit from a tighter self-defense from homicidal zealots bent on bombing their way toward a heaven occupied by their perverted vision of god.
    If you're suggesting we will always need to police against the use of large scale terrorist tactics like 9-11 and Oklahoma City then all I can say is DUH. We always have and always will.

    When you start using phrases like "we're in a war that will last decades", then I just think you're crazy. You think in "decades" the ability to carry out a large scale terrorist attack by ANY whack job will be removed? No. Get past the propaganda/hysteria please.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBrown
    I believe most of them were non-arab, weren't the majority of alleged plotters of Pakistani origin? Last time I checked Pakistan wasn't in the middle-east.

    Don't think I'm being 'soft' here, I'm worried that profiling could lead us to miss someone who isn't in a target group. Even if it's one bloke out of twenty five who's caucasian and all the others are semitic or south-asian, if that one bloke gets through because he didn't fit the profile then we have a victory for the terrorists. If the Israelis profile according to behavioural patterns then that sounds more logical to me than on appearance.
    In the other racial profiling thread a while back about the ACLU sueing over it, here is what I wrote 18 months ago:

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I heard an interview with one of the ACLU attorneys about their lawsuits against various important issues that happen due to national security. It was on my satellite radio, I think it was O'Rielly (which I disagree with or at least question as least as much as a agree with). Bill did not let up on him for one minute while the ACLU attorney tried to dodge all the questions and NEVER would he give a answer....just wiggle around to another topic.

    I missed the first part talking about the NYC lawsuit because they are doing random searches, but he was against it.

    ---------------------------------

    I personally think that profiling needs to be COMPONENT of the national security. Not the only method, but a resource. Profiling is also an adaptive process to change with the threat that is presented. Physical assets and nationality may be considered, but there is more than race, color, and nationality in profiling. A large part of profiling is also behavior. Sweaty, eyes dashing about, quick or nervous movements, demeanor, etc... There is also tone of voice, how confident they answer questions, innuendoes with possible anti-west meanings, ect......all together is profiling, again with common physical traits only being a part of it.

    source: http://discuss.treocentral.com/showp...9&postcount=15
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/16/2006 at 02:11 PM.
  5. #45  
    <<<< Sorry, Double Post >>>>>
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    If you're suggesting we will always need to police against the use of large scale terrorist tactics like 9-11 and Oklahoma City then all I can say is DUH. We always have and always will.

    When you start using phrases like "we're in a war that will last decades", then I just think you're crazy. You think in "decades" the ability to carry out a large scale terrorist attack by ANY whack job will be removed? No. Get past the propaganda/hysteria please.
    What you call propaganda/hysteria is reality, pardner. These extremeists aren't going away- they've been active for decades already in western Europe, and now they've penetrated the soft underbelly of a fat, soft, and under-protected USA. We'll be enduring random acts of terrorism for years. To me, your perception of my "craziness" is the warped interpretation here.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gasmeister
    What you call propaganda/hysteria is reality, pardner. These extremeists aren't going away- they've been active for decades already in western Europe, and now they've penetrated the soft underbelly of a fat, soft, and under-protected USA. We'll be enduring random acts of terrorism for years. To me, your perception of my "craziness" is the warped interpretation here.
    Whew! So once these extemists are dealt with no other extremists will exist on the planet or use the tactic of terrorism? Kewl. well then by all means please destroy civil rights and whatever else you need to do.
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Whew! So once these extemists are dealt with no other extremists will exist on the planet or use the tactic of terrorism? Kewl. well then by all means please destroy civil rights and whatever else you need to do.
    Wolf! Wolf! So sorry you feel your civil rights are being destroyed. You should actually get out of your fantasyland and travel- see what civil rights are like in other parts of the world- you'll see how free we actually are here. I've got nothing to hide- I don't mind if the gov't wants to scan my cell phone records to see if I'm calling Sudan ten times a week or wants me to take my shoes off before I board a plane. If you really believe in liberty than you aren't offended by a few minor inconveniences you have to tolerate to protect it. But to you, they're not minor and not merely inconveniences, I'm sure. Paranoia is a terrible thing.
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    After Mcveigh blew up the Murrah building it was all "angry white men." If you had a short haircut, an NRA sticker and owned a gun you were suspect #1. I don't recall anyone having much of a problem with profiling then.
    An angry/crazy white guy shot Reagan and angry crazy white guys carried out all of our other presidential assasinations.

    Your post reminds me of the song "happiness is a warm gun" by John Lennon. Paul McCartney said that even though it was written by John, it was his favorite song on the white album.

    "When I hold you, in my arms, and I feel my finger on your trigger, I know no one can do me no harm because happiness is a warm gun".

    How ironic that John ended up getting shot by an angry (and crazy) white guy.

    Anyone can go crazy and kill someone, its an unfortunate part of our society. I think having extreme views, having a whole lot of pent up anger, and a love of weapons can be a recipe for disaster whether we are dealing with mid east terrorists or any other people with radical idealogy.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gasmeister
    Paranoia is a terrible thing.
    Apparently, by your posts, it certainly is.
  11. #51  
    I noticed that Cell and Da did not respond to my post.....I am interested in the opinion of Da, Cell, and PeterBrown in my comment:

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I personally think that profiling needs to be COMPONENT of the national security. Not the only method, but a resource . Profiling is also an adaptive process to change with the threat that is presented. Physical assets and nationality may be considered, but there is more than race, color, and nationality in profiling. A large part of profiling is also behavior. Sweaty, eyes dashing about, quick or nervous movements, demeanor, etc... There is also tone of voice, how confident they answer questions, innuendoes with possible anti-west meanings, ect......all together is profiling, again with common physical traits only being a part of it.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    ...Anyone can go crazy and kill someone, its an unfortunate part of our society. I think having extreme views, having a whole lot of pent up anger, and a love of weapons can be a recipe for disaster whether we are dealing with mid east terrorists or any other people with radical idealogy.
    What often goes missing in such discussion is making proper distinction between ideologies. There are certain ideologies that are more prone to violence than others.

    To date, there is no need to target cigar afficianados--no matter how much they are into their cigars. You may want to stand clear between if two of them are debating the merits of hand-rolled versus {what ever other way they are rolled}. But, largely, we anticipate those debates remaining self contained.

    Certain other ideologies have demonstrably more risk to public harm.
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I noticed that Cell and Da did not respond to my post.....I am interested in the opinion of Da, Cell, and PeterBrown in my comment:
    I'm glad you noticed that but since you didn't take the hint, sigh, if when you refer to behavioral profiling you are referring to the Israeli method, then that would seem to be effective. "...the last serious attempt to bomb an Israeli plane was in 1986, by an Irish woman."
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    What often goes missing in such discussion is making proper distinction between ideologies. There are certain ideologies that are more prone to violence than others.

    To date, there is no need to target cigar afficianados--no matter how much they are into their cigars. You may want to stand clear between if two of them are debating the merits of hand-rolled versus {what ever other way they are rolled}. But, largely, we anticipate those debates remaining self contained.

    Certain other ideologies have demonstrably more risk to public harm.
    I'm talking about political or religious radicals, no not talking about cigars. I am sorry if this was confusing to you.
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I noticed that Cell and Da did not respond to my post.....I am interested in the opinion of Da, Cell, and PeterBrown in my comment:
    yes I agree and that is what I was inferring in my post too.
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I noticed that Cell and Da did not respond to my post.....I am interested in the opinion of Da, Cell, and PeterBrown in my comment:
    My main problem with it is the inclusion of "common physical traits", because there aren't any universal ones.
    Really I think the universal security checks that already exist should be made capable of detecting any known threat. Better scanners and suchlike, electronic 'noses', restrictions on hand luggage, whatever it takes.

    Anyway, I have to go, I'm having important etymological discussions about words beginning with 'p'. Currently: Puff and Puddling.
    Animo et Fide
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    An angry/crazy white guy shot Reagan and angry crazy white guys carried out all of our other presidential assasinations.

    Your post reminds me of the song "happiness is a warm gun" by John Lennon. Paul McCartney said that even though it was written by John, it was his favorite song on the white album.

    "When I hold you, in my arms, and I feel my finger on your trigger, I know no one can do me no harm because happiness is a warm gun".

    How ironic that John ended up getting shot by an angry (and crazy) white guy.

    Anyone can go crazy and kill someone, its an unfortunate part of our society. I think having extreme views, having a whole lot of pent up anger, and a love of weapons can be a recipe for disaster whether we are dealing with mid east terrorists or any other people with radical idealogy.
    So then you support profiling!
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    I'm talking about political or religious radicals, no not talking about cigars. I am sorry if this was confusing to you.
    I recognized your focus. I chose an inocuous example so as to illustrate the logical distinction itself, apart from the rhetorical baggage that religions and politics often carry.

    The same logical distinction, though, exists within religious and political views. Not all "extreme" religious views lead to violent acts. Not all "extreme" political views lead to violent acts. But clearly some do.
  19. #59  
    My attitude about profiling (necessary, but only if done correctly) has a lot to do with the consequences of profiling as well.

    Being originally from India, having brown skin, the likihood of being selected for extra scrutiny is higher in my case than most here. If the result is a few minutes extra, being questioned politely, and maybe a quick but thorough baggage search, then I'm OK with it.

    If it results in me missing my flight, deep body cavity search and harrasment, then I'm not for it (this pattern will end up antagonising many and wasting a lot of effort).

    There are no absolute answers (other than that random searches are really useless). Everything depends on the implementation of profiling.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    My attitude about profiling (necessary, but only if done correctly) has a lot to do with the consequences of profiling as well.

    Being originally from India, having brown skin, the likihood of being selected for extra scrutiny is higher in my case than most here. If the result is a few minutes extra, being questioned politely, and maybe a quick but thorough baggage search, then I'm OK with it.

    If it results in me missing my flight, deep body cavity search and harrasment, then I'm not for it (this pattern will end up antagonising many and wasting a lot of effort).

    There are no absolute answers (other than that random searches are really useless). Everything depends on the implementation of profiling.
    But this isn't the only way to go about it. In fact, its probably not the best way. Since your country of origin, your surname, your flying habits and possibly your religion and ethnicity are logged into a computer somewhere then why rely on a minimum wage TSA agent to do the profiling?
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions