Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 109
  1. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #81  
    "The reason why Israeli profiling is so effective is because it is done by professionally trained profilers as well as backed up by massive intel - two things still lacking in our infrastructure.... "

    -chillig35

    very true and an excellent point! I completely agree that we need professionally trained profilers reinforced by a highly sophisticated intel program here in the US.

    you are right. it IS hard to take our current system seriously when, as you described, many if not all of the individuals in such airport security positions are nowhere near as well-trained as those who are in place in the israeli system.

    they have been dealing with this situation for years! let's take some lessons from those who have been adapting to the same problem and put them in place.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  2. jstpa's Avatar
    Posts
    218 Posts
    Global Posts
    220 Global Posts
    #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    I'm of Mexican heritage and I have some arab features. That the security forces at the airport don't give me a second or third look as I pass the little old barefooted lady getting frisked, always makes me nervous. I'd search me if I were airline security. I don't know what their problem is. But then, maybe they have already screened my name, birthplace, etc. One can hope.
    Maybe they are profiling. Maybe they're just searching the little old lady because they're afraid of what will happen if they actually find someone with a bomb.

    I've often wondered about the screening process itself, whether random or by profiling. I was waiting in line in Houston to go to my plane and I noticed that there were several thousand people (or so it seemed) waiting in line or waiting around the ticket counters, etc. This huge congregation was created to a large extent by the screening process itself (much like the lines of applicants waiting to enroll as police officers in Iraq.) If a bomber decided he wasn't going to get in - or if he decided to target the congregation itself - well, you know...
  3. #83  
    I don't know if anyone else has noticed this - but it does seem that many of the screeners at the airports seem to fit a "profile" themselves - mostly immigrant backgrounds?
    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."
  4. jstpa's Avatar
    Posts
    218 Posts
    Global Posts
    220 Global Posts
    #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    ...many of the screeners at the airports seem to fit a "profile" themselves - mostly immigrant backgrounds?
    I would have liked for George and Jeb to fill a couple of those positions, but unfortunately they already have jobs.

    Sorry, once again I couldn't resist.
  5. #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by jstpa
    I would have liked for George and Jeb to fill a couple of those positions, but unfortunately they already have jobs.

    Sorry, once again I couldn't resist.
    maybe the GW twins could work instead?
    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. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    I'm of Mexican heritage and I have some arab features. That the security forces at the airport don't give me a second or third look as I pass the little old barefooted lady getting frisked, always makes me nervous. I'd search me if I were airline security. I don't know what their problem is. But then, maybe they have already screened my name, birthplace, etc. One can hope.
    You seem to be making the argument that it doesn't make you nervous or singled out when you get profiled and that is fine. The fact that 'subjectively' it doesnt offend you is not my point. I am simply sharing my opinion from a legal standpoint (that we should profile because it's blatant discrimination). I am not arguing (at least completely ) that it doesnt work (it may well work...but once 'they' who are being profiled against see what the standard is, then they most likely will take steps to disguise themselves or find other alternative means of delivery).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    I am labeled "black" or "african-american"
    I am aware of others so classified who are opposed to "racial profiling" because of past experience. However, there is a significant difference in harrassment based on ethnic bias of the authority, and legitimate suspicion based on demographic trends of perpetrators

    When ever I see a news report indicating a suspect is "black" I jokingly say to my wife that I will have to stay home, even when the suspect is a 5'4" and 200 lbs female because of racial bias (I'm 6'0", 175). However, when the suspect's features are really close to my own, I am prepared to answer for my whereabouts, because there is a legitimate cause for further questioning me.
    You make a good point but is it completely the same?

    In your example, the 'type or description' of the person committing the crime is 'black'. You are 'black' and you would fit that 'type or description'.

    However, with the terrorists (at least my limited understanding of them) is that they are ISLAMIC fundamentalists first, middle eastern (for lack of a better label) second. Now, how do we profile?

    We profile based on how they look (not whether they are islamic fundamentalists) so I can see how people who are from the middle east (and have facial characteristics to match that) but who are not islamic fundamentalists, would be offended (and hence would be discriminated against).

    The other part of your argument that concerns me is that you (maybe unintentionally) didn't address how the bias of each 'profiler' would factor in. In your example, you cite that if it was done with "legitimate suspicion based on demographic trends of perpetrators" then it would be ok. I like the standard but how would we know if it's a 'legitimate' suspicion or if it was not a legitimate suspicion (i.e. bias). The standard at least appears to be subjective and not really based on an objective standard that we might better be able to control.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    absolutely right, nunoste! im with you on every point you made, particularly when you mention how the israeli security forces consider our profiling methods laughable. it IS irresponsible to limit the available solutions to eliminating the problem - you hit the nail right on the head.
    Is it really fair to compare our system with the Israeli system? Don't the Israeli citizens have much fewer rights than those of us in the U.S. due to our constitution and bill of rights? (That's my argument why it's really not irresponsible...)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  9. #89  
    In '94 in Guantanamo Bay, my unit was performing security operations on our camps of Cuban and Haitian migrants. We did A LOT of profiling to help find those who were up to no good. Was it racial? Hardly! What would we look for in the Cuban camps, dark skinned males who spoke Spanish?

    We profiled behaviors. It really helped to find weapons, contraband, and other dangerous activity.

    If white grandma is sweating profusely and has darting eyes, pat her down.

    Stick to behavior and avoid the race question. Races don't kill people, killers do.
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
  10. #90  
    I agree.....and is exactly what I said on the first page of this forum.
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    In '94 in Guantanamo Bay, my unit was performing security operations on our camps of Cuban and Haitian migrants. We did A LOT of profiling to help find those who were up to no good. Was it racial? Hardly! What would we look for in the Cuban camps, dark skinned males who spoke Spanish?

    We profiled behaviors. It really helped to find weapons, contraband, and other dangerous activity.

    If white grandma is sweating profusely and has darting eyes, pat her down.

    Stick to behavior and avoid the race question. Races don't kill people, killers do.
    Good point. I don't see much of an issue if you profile for behavior but what has (mostly) been proposed so far focuses on the person who we think represents an 'Islamic Terrorist'.

    As an aside...the really cool, calm and collected bomber would be the tough one to find. They aren't going to give themselves away with a simple mistake.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  12. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskanDad
    In '94 in Guantanamo Bay, my unit was performing security operations on our camps of Cuban and Haitian migrants. We did A LOT of profiling to help find those who were up to no good. Was it racial? Hardly! What would we look for in the Cuban camps, dark skinned males who spoke Spanish?

    We profiled behaviors. It really helped to find weapons, contraband, and other dangerous activity.

    If white grandma is sweating profusely and has darting eyes, pat her down.

    Stick to behavior and avoid the race question. Races don't kill people, killers do.

    we need to train our airport security teams rigorously to be competent enough to recognize those behaviors effectively then.
  13. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Good point. I don't see much of an issue if you profile for behavior but what has (mostly) been proposed so far focuses on the person who we think represents an 'Islamic Terrorist'.

    As an aside...the really cool, calm and collected bomber would be the tough one to find. They aren't going to give themselves away with a simple mistake.

    i agree, t2gungho. what if the terrorist was one cool customer who could keep a great poker face while going through the process? to me, its just a logical step to keep a special eye out for the most likely suspects while also checking the entire group. if we look at the videos of these suspects who were all caught on tape, they are all of one particular appearance. whats wrong with making sure all of those who fit such an appearance are checked thoroughly? its not to make a racial issue out of it. its based on the hard facts, which are simply that 98% of all terrorists after 9/11 have been of islamic origin. search everyone, but pay close attention to those who fit this description. i dont see anything wrong with such an approach.
  14. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
       #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Is it really fair to compare our system with the Israeli system? Don't the Israeli citizens have much fewer rights than those of us in the U.S. due to our constitution and bill of rights? (That's my argument why it's really not irresponsible...)

    good point. well, if we can intercept terrorists by focusing on behavior rather than through profiling, then that would be great. but if we find terrorists are still getting past our security, then we need to do something different.
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    As an aside...the really cool, calm and collected bomber would be the tough one to find. They aren't going to give themselves away with a simple mistake.
    I agree....that is why it is not an either/or situation and that there needs to be an element of demographic profiling as well.

    Again, the point is to integrate a variety of tools, that does include demographics profiling (age, race, etc.), behavior, conversation, randomness, physical searches, electronic sniffers and x-ray, etc....

    If there is an absolute, the system will be easily stepped around. For example, if we only focused on demographics, then they are going to plan to get around that. If you add in behavior profiling, it becomes trickier to plan. If you add in random searches on top of that, you add the luck of the draw. If you add in electronics, they can find things that the person may not even know they have (i.e. a terrorist switches identical bags with an innocent). You just made the terrorist job a lot harder, and hopefully made us a lot safer.

    People are focusing in on just one tool in the whole toolbox. If you throw any one tool out, you are severally limiting yourself and how effective you can be. Imagine trying to build a table if you were offended about using a table saw. You could get the job done, but it may take a lot longer and some of your joints may crooked.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/09/2005 at 11:04 PM.
  16. #96  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I agree....that is why it is not an either/or situation and that there needs to be an element of demographic profiling as well.

    Again, the point is to integrate a variety of tools, that does include demographics profiling (age, race, etc.), behavior, conversation, randomness, physical searches, electronic sniffers and x-ray, etc....

    If there is an absolute, the system will be easily stepped around. For example, if we only focused on demographics, then they are going to plan to get around that. If you add in behavior profiling, it becomes trickier to plan. If you add in random searches on top of that, you add the luck of the draw. If you add in electronics, they can find things that the person may not even know they have (i.e. a terrorist switches identical bags with an innocent). You just made the terrorist job a lot harder, and hopefully made us a lot safer.

    People are focusing in on just one tool in the whole toolbox. If you throw any one tool out, you are severally limiting yourself and how effective you can be. Imagine trying to build a table if you were offended about using a table saw. You could get the job done, but it may take a lot longer and some of your joints may crooked.
    Agreed. BUT if we search EVERYONE then the profiling issue is moot.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  17. #97  
    That is what I meant by randomness =)
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    That is what I meant by randomness =)
    I don't get it? If we search everyone, how is randomness applicable or relevant (sometimes I don't see the obvious so forgive me.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    You seem to be making the argument that it doesn't make you nervous or singled out when you get profiled and that is fine. The fact that 'subjectively' it doesnt offend you is not my point. I am simply sharing my opinion from a legal standpoint (that we should profile because it's blatant discrimination). I am not arguing (at least completely ) that it doesnt work (it may well work...but once 'they' who are being profiled against see what the standard is, then they most likely will take steps to disguise themselves or find other alternative means of delivery).
    They already know the current standard, one of which is to blindly look past the sixth through n-th Saudi names on the passenger list because to look at more than five people from the same country would legally be considered profiling. These people have been promoting terrorism and anti-Western hatred from within our shores because they know our noodle spined culture all too well. They have taken full advantage of the limp wristed multicultural self-victimization self-loathing mentality of the West all to well.

    To say that we cannot profile because we don't have the properly trained personell, to me, is a simple dodge of the problem. Like Rumsfeld says, "you go to war with the Army you've got, not the one you wish you had." This is a long term war. The most important aspect of which is to change our mentality in how we deal with a culture that at best is ambivelant about the blind hatred of the more fanatic amongst them. Once our approach has changed, we can work on the mechanics on the fly. We have unlimited resources to do this. What we currently don't have is the cultural resources to be successful. Until then, we will be giving credence to arguments like, "we aren't properly trained" and "but not all terrorists are Arab". Tick tock, tick tock.
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    They already know the current standard, one of which is to blindly look past the sixth through n-th Saudi names on the passenger list because to look at more than five people from the same country would legally be considered profiling.
    Two questions for you. 1) How do you 'know' that they know what you stated underlined above? 2) What is the law that you are using to make the conclusion that it is considered profiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    These people have been promoting terrorism and anti-Western hatred from within our shores because they know our noodle spined culture all too well. They have taken full advantage of the limp wristed multicultural self-victimization self-loathing mentality of the West all to well.
    Assuming what you say is true...isnt that what makes our country great...freedom from discrimination? Shall we have martial law?

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    To say that we cannot profile because we don't have the properly trained personell, to me, is a simple dodge of the problem.
    How is it 'dodging' if its a legitimate concern? I am not saying that we CANT but that its likely not to give us the 'bang for the buck' so to speak when it comes to costs (violating freedoms). The 'problem' is that we don't want terrorists to gain entry to our mass transit. I don't see how we are dodging it?

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    Like Rumsfeld says, "you go to war with the Army you've got, not the one you wish you had."
    Interesting quote to choose. Isnt it said another way... "when you aren't ready, you just have to suck it up!" My question is...why aren't we ready? Why are we reactive instead of proactive. Don't we have the greatest minds in the country working on these issues? Have these things not been thought of before? As far as Sec. Rumsfeld...he doesnt come across as someone that contingency plans (and I base that on how we have prosecuted this war thusfar.)

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    This is a long term war. The most important aspect of which is to change our mentality in how we deal with a culture that at best is ambivelant about the blind hatred of the more fanatic amongst them. Once our approach has changed, we can work on the mechanics on the fly.
    I would actually prefer we figure it out first before we throw caution to the wind and have to try a couple things out before we can get it right. Being from the military, we didnt start by saying...lets complete an amphibious landing and THEN figure out how we will secure the beach and setup our supply lines.

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    We have unlimited resources to do this.
    We do? We can just go into deficit spending for 10-20-30 years and then....what? I'm not sure what you mean by unlimited resources?

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    What we currently don't have is the cultural resources to be successful.
    Please define cultural resources?

    Quote Originally Posted by nunoste
    Until then, we will be giving credence to arguments like, "we aren't properly trained" and "but not all terrorists are Arab". Tick tock, tick tock.
    Both of those statements seem to be valid. If there is some level of validity, then doesnt that imply that they have some credence?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions