Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 109
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Can 20 something Arabs, armed only with box cutters, kill 3000+ people?

    (I apologize for using the completely inhumane deaths of these people in something as trivial as a board post.)
    This is a stupid post Da even for you. WHat the hell does that have to do with the subject of arabs disguised as little old ladies? We know the answer is true.

    You miss the point. If it was webdesigning bleach blonde atheist gay rights activists that had pulled of the recent terror attacks I'd say search everyone one of them too. Eliminate the KNOWN quantity and then deal with the rest.
    Random searches are about as effective as no searches. And without profiling the terrorists know they dont have to disguise themselves because they wont be singled out so as not to offend them.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  2. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    John Walker Lind...



    Yep, there's an Arab looking character if ever I saw one. Profiling for Arab and Arab-Americans would sure find someone like him...

    (don't read this as I'm against profiling...just pointing out the flaws)
    another dysfunctional example. these are in all open societies. john walker lind LEFT america in search of acceptance somewhere else. it happened to be alqaeda. he left america to find it. he didnt bomb a plane in america on his way out. sure he fought against us when we took the fight to him, OVER THERE, but he didnt plot a bombing, HERE, in the US. he was going along with the group who he thought accepted him.

    Lind is an example of a person not so much bent on hating america, but bent on achieving acceptance that wasnt found in america - in his instance that acceptance came from the wrong group of people. there are going to be people like this all over. we have to search everyone to root possibilites like them out, but come on, we ALL know al qaeda is plotting to terrorize us, lets act like we`ve got a clue here vs learning the same lesson like its brand new to us every single time? we know what types of people REALLY hate us, lets be on guard for those types of people.



    i will say it AGAIN. while profiling may not be the 100% perfect solution, it is sure as hell, 100% more effective than the practices used before 9/11, london bombings, spanish bombings, etc. it would sure make it more difficult for them to carry out their bomb plots firsthand!

    i am all for bettering our chances at fending of these radicals, so UNTIL we design an airtight solution that will stop one and all kinds terrorists whether they are arab, american,green, purple orange or azure, i will continue to consider profiling as a step in the right direction from what was in place before we took massive losses from people like this time and time again!

    since the greatest world threat is probably now originating from radical arabs, how can you not consider this more effective? the theoretical situation you posed earlier are possible, but profiling would further limit all the possible movements they could make THEMSELVES directly without having to complicate their terror plans, making it tougher on them. shouldnt this be our goal here - to make it tougher for them?

    would profiling have prevented 9/11? what do you think? i sure think so. and if we had prevented 9/11. would you have considered that a flaw or a strength in the practice of profiling?

    lets go over some MAJOR flaws in NOT profiling, shall we?

    exhibit A - the terrorists behind 9/11
    exhibit B - the terrorists behind the bombings in spain
    exhibit C - the terrorists behind the bombings in london.

    as was said earlier, any open society is vulnerable to attacks by dysfunctional elements - there are people like this everywhere in the world. so sure we have to search everyone carefully, but we have to be looking in the right places for those who are our enemies worldwide!
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    lets go over some MAJOR flaws in NOT profiling, shall we?
    Blah blah blah...Enough with the sarcastic eye rolling crap. Did you not see in (PARENTHESIS) where I said I'm not against profiling, merely pointing out the flaws?
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    (don't read this as I'm against profiling...just pointing out the flaws)


    I swear sometimes I want to beat you guys over the head with an intelligence stick...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  4. #44  
    ACLU = Assholes, Communists, and Liberals United.
  5. #45  
    I think several folks here are missing the point ..

    If you had professional profilers at the train/bus stations and airports, who would take several factors into account (not just sex, age and race) and can make snap judgements about a person (based on years of experience and training) then I would fully support profiling.

    However the reality is that most of the screeners are underpaid, overworked and mostly poorly educated or trained. They would follow a formulaic approach to screening - "pick out ALL male, olive/dark skinned travellers (which would approximately include half the world population)". Even if this is overlaid on top of random searches, this still tilts the odds in favor of those who do not fit the profile.

    If we are really serious about truly improving safety, then the solution is to implement programs that allow screening of all passengers (using more technology-based measures), have more fully-trained professional screeners at key locations (major hubs) and maybe reverse-profiling (i.e. pre-screened frequent traevllers who get special ID passes that allow them to by-pass the routine screening).

    What we have in place (and the proposals such as profiling) are not real safety measures - but are merely in place to give the appearance of safety. I can tell you this from personal experience as I've travelled over a quarter of a million miles this year alone. For example just last month, I observed the TSA personnel (at a major airport hub) allow a woman to go though without taking off her shoes because she was too obese to bend over and remove them - and the line was backing up behind her. I spoke with the TSA supervisor and she immediately followed up on it - but I wonder how many times this happens elsewhere?
    Last edited by chillig35; 08/05/2005 at 12:41 PM.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    I think several folks here are missing the point ..

    If you had professional profilers at the train/bus stations and airports, who would take several factors into account (not just sex, age and race) and can make snap judgements about a person (based on years of experience and training) then I would fully support profiling.

    However the reality is that most of the screeners are underpaid, overworked and mostly poorly educated or trained. They would follow a formulaic approach to screening - "pick out ALL male, olive skinned travellers and frisk them". Even if this is overlaid on top of random searches, this still tilts the odds in favor of those who do not fit the profile.

    If we are really serious about truly improving safety, then the solution is to implement programs that allow screening of all passengers (using more technology-based measures), have more fully-trained professional screeners at key locations (major hubs) and maybe reverse-profiling (i.e. pre-screened frequent traevllers who get special ID passes that allow them to by-pass the routine screening).

    What we have in place (and the proposals such as profiling) are not real safety measures - but are merely in place to give the appearance of safety. I can tell you this from personal experience as I've travelled over a quarter of a million miles this year alone. For example just last month, I observed the TSA personnel (at a major airport hub) allow a woman to go though without taking off her shoes because she was too obese to bend over and remove them - and the line was backing up behind her. I spoke with the TSA supervisor and she immediately followed up on it - but I wonder how many times this happens elsewhere?
    My suspension is many agree with you on this post. But the objections to profiling that I am seeing and reading about are on the basis of racial discrimination or violations of civil rights rather than ineffectiveness.
  7. #47  
    vw2002
    If you read through my link on my initial post you would see that Nezar Hindawi's pregnant Irish girlfriend was not part of the plot. She was just used. The plot was averted because of the phenomenal Israeli intel and detection systems.
    The point is that we can never see where the next terrorist is going to be coming from (we certainly didn't see Timothy McVeigh coming).
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    I see it as giving additional peace of mind to my fellow travellers. I'm happy to do that.
    False peace of mind is worth diddly when I'm craping my leg off a wall.
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    You miss the point. If it was webdesigning bleach blonde atheist gay rights activists that had pulled of the recent terror attacks I'd say search everyone one of them too. Eliminate the KNOWN quantity and then deal with the rest.
    Random searches are about as effective as no searches. And without profiling the terrorists know they dont have to disguise themselves because they wont be singled out so as not to offend them.
    You miss the point. I don't care about offending someone. My point is that profiling airport searches creates holes in the security. It's simplle and as others have posted the same thing, don't think it's too crazy a concept.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    i will say it AGAIN. while profiling may not be the 100% perfect solution, it is sure as hell, 100% more effective than the practices used before 9/11, london bombings, spanish bombings, etc. it would sure make it more difficult for them to carry out their bomb plots firsthand!
    Regarding security prior to and after 9-11, you couldn't take over a plane with a hand gun right now much less a box-cutter. The passengers simply will not allow it.
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    ACLU = Assholes, Communists, and Liberals United.
    Yup, they just don't do a damn bit of good for anyone huh.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Regarding security prior to and after 9-11, you couldn't take over a plane with a hand gun right now much less a box-cutter. The passengers simply will not allow it.
    And regarding profiling before 9/11, (this really goes to vw2002, not you daT), its absurd to say profiling would have prevented it. Tell me Nostradamus, who exactly would you be profiling for say, on Sept. 10th? And on what basis??
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  13. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #53  
    And regarding profiling before 9/11, (this really goes to vw2002, not you daT), its absurd to say profiling would have prevented it. Tell me Nostradamus, who exactly would you be profiling for say, on Sept. 10th? And on what basis??"

    -insertion


    wow. I thought you wanted to do away with "all the sarcasm crap", insertion? nostradamus? uh. ok. sure.

    who would we profile on september 10th? well, who was responsible for driving the planes into the wtc?
    I believe they were saudi's, correct? men of arabian ethnicity?
    what were the cia's pre-9/11 concerns regarding alqaeda's plan to attack us in some spectacular fashion? they were warning us that bin laden and alqaeda were planning to attack us, so knowing that al qaeda is largely if not completely consisting of radicals of arab ethnicity, that would have been a start. we would have profiled those of arab ethnicity on the basis of the heightened warning of alqaeda's plan for an imminent attack.
    looking back at the videotape which caught a few of terrorists in line before they boarded the flight - we could clearly see that they were all arab.
    why do you think it is absurd to think profiling could have prevented it? do you know this to be a fact? can we prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that profiling wouldn't have made a difference? if not in all of the hijacked flights that day, at least a couple, which still would have been better than the result we witnessed.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You miss the point. I don't care about offending someone. My point is that profiling airport searches creates holes in the security. It's simplle and as others have posted the same thing, don't think it's too crazy a concept.
    But again, in reference to my POST # 15 on the first page about the proper way to profile, you are assuming it is THE method for security searches, when I say it is a viable tool among MANY, ie. random searches, electronic screening for metal, explosives, etc..

    It is a factor in the equation that needs to be addressed and added into the system, while still incorporating all the others.
  15. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #55  
    "But again, in reference to my POST # 15 on the first page about the proper way to profile, you are assuming it is THE method for security searches, when I say it is a viable tool among MANY, ie. random searches, electronic screening for metal, explosives, etc..

    It is a factor in the equation that needs to be addressed and added into the system, while still incorporating all the others"

    - HobbesIsReal

    nicely said. I think this sums up my position on this whole issue - that while profiling is not the only method, it may very well be a crucial PART of the whole system of security.

    electronic screening, xrays are the methods we should use for all people and all their belongings - to be safe - with profiling as a component of our overall system.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    who would we profile on september 10th? well, who was responsible for driving the planes into the wtc?
    I believe they were saudi's, correct? men of arabian ethnicity?
    what were the cia's pre-9/11 concerns regarding alqaeda's plan to attack us in some spectacular fashion? they were warning us that bin laden and alqaeda were planning to attack us, so knowing that al qaeda is largely if not completely consisting of radicals of arab ethnicity, that would have been a start. we would have profiled those of arab ethnicity on the basis of the heightened warning of alqaeda's plan for an imminent attack.
    looking back at the videotape which caught a few of terrorists in line before they boarded the flight - we could clearly see that they were all arab.
    why do you think it is absurd to think profiling could have prevented it? do you know this to be a fact?
    I think the point (not that Insertion ever tries to make one (jk ) is that 9/11 was probably the first attack on american soil. If we were profiling on Sept 10th, we wouldnt have known to profile anyone of arab decent. (And based on how well our intel services share information, it wouldnt have been likely that the CIA would have come out and told TSA to start profiling for arabs on Sept 10th either).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    My suspension is many agree with you on this post. But the objections to profiling that I am seeing and reading about are on the basis of racial discrimination or violations of civil rights rather than ineffectiveness.
    This is a good point but let me say it a little differently-

    If profiling is ineffective as a way of finding terrorists, then I am not ready to violate civil rights to carry on with an activity that is ineffective. The real question is how ineffective racial profiling would be?

    That being said, VW has made some good arguments as to why profiling would be better than not profiling (at least on a utilitarian basis) but I just disagree that we have gotten to that point.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #58  
    nicely put, t2gungho, and thankyou
    I gotta have more cowbell
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You miss the point. I don't care about offending someone. My point is that profiling airport searches creates holes in the security. It's simplle and as others have posted the same thing, don't think it's too crazy a concept.
    I actually am concerned about offending people (unnecessarily). While profiling would create a hole in one way, it's arguable that it would plug a hole another way.

    Example of creating a hole:
    Profile Arabs
    -If an arab looking shoe bomber boards a plane, he may (probably?) be caught.
    -Terrorists will find other ways to recruit/trick bombers and bombs...that person will most likely not be a person who is on the profile list (hence the hole).

    Example of plugging a hole:
    -Not have a public profile system: if an arab looking shoe bomber boards a plane, he may be caught in the 'random' searches
    -(or better yet...Every person gets searched. I mean, if we really want to get serious on limiting these types of attacks, then we need to invest in the best technology. I fear the biggest problem is economics. The airlines can't pay for this [we bail out one airline a year it seems] and 'they' don't want to hurt business by making it more cumbersome to fly/travel.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I think the point (not that Insertion ever tries to make one (jk ) is that 9/11 was probably the first attack on american soil. If we were profiling on Sept 10th, we wouldnt have known to profile anyone of arab decent. (And based on how well our intel services share information, it wouldnt have been likely that the CIA would have come out and told TSA to start profiling for arabs on Sept 10th either).
    The only fault I find with this argument is that there were profiling systems available for airport screening on Sept 10th. There was a lot of coverage on these systems shortly after 9/11 that were asking why they were not using them, and that if they would have been aloud to have been using them, it would have greatly increased the chances that some at least some of them might have been caught or at least delayed to have missed their scheduled flight. But it was also reported at the time that one of the big reasons it was not used were liberal complaints that is was racist and targetting innocent demographics without just cause or reasoning. Nevermind that each of the 9/11 suspects fit the profiling of Jihad terror attacks on US facilities throughout the world over the 15 years prior to 9/11.
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions