Muslims possibly facing extra checks when traveling

I 100% agree, just didn't want to be the first to post. If they are the one's causing harm, then it only makes sense to increase the security on them.

It also scares me that non-terrorist Muslims aren't standing up for their religion and taking it back. Makes you wonder about it.

Though i don't see how this will happen with all the PC nutjobs (ie liberals) here in the States.
 
[quote name='HumanSnatcher']Honestly, they have their own people to thank for the extra problems.[/QUOTE]

Yeah! And if the police harass blacks more than other groups, they have OJ Simpson to thank! So there! :roll:
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Yeah! And if the police harass blacks more than other groups, they have OJ Simpson to thank! So there! :roll:[/QUOTE]


Ahem....OJ was aquitted. Perhaps you should have named somebody like Rodney King.
 
Racial profiling may not be politically correct, but it really is the right thing to do when the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']Racial profiling may not be politically correct, but it really is the right thing to do when the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims.[/quote]

Exactly. It is in the countries best interests to do it. Though it will cause a S**tstorm among the democrats. That is why i don't see it ever happening here. We have to many idiotic special interest groups in this country who call racism or unfair treatment at the drop of a dime. Nevermind the fact that pretty much all terrorists are muslim.

Don't get me wrong though, we desperately need this. Our govt. is not taking this seriously enough. Urging Isreal to sign the cease fire was a HUGE mistake also.
 
[quote name='schuerm26']I 100% agree, just didn't want to be the first to post.[/QUOTE]

Didn't want to expose the old racism until other responses gave you the go-ahead, eh?

At any rate, if this makes you think that by focusing on the most probable group, we will be completely safe from further attacks, you're fooling yourself. The only surefire method of protection is 100% screening of all passengers, and developing technology that can screen for fluids in nonconventional containers; just because you can't take a bottle of Gatorade on the plane doesn't mean that you can't put the same kind of substance in the soles of your shoes.

I'm sorry that you're looking for psychological comfort instead of actual methods of securely protecting airplanes and passengers from being victimized. The problem with ANY random sampling of passengers is this: since 9/11, this is the first finding of a planned terrorist attack on airlines. 24 arrested thus far, and surely there are others remaining. Considering just how many people fly each day, 24 out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is not something that can be found by random sample. It's just statistically improbable, and there's no way, and no reason, to defend anything but 100% thorough screening of all passengers. Think that's inconvenient? Well, dying is a considerable degree more inconvenient than that.
 
[quote name='schuerm26']
It also scares me that non-terrorist Muslims aren't standing up for their religion and taking it back. Makes you wonder about it.

Though i don't see how this will happen with all the PC nutjobs (ie liberals) here in the States.[/QUOTE]


First off, who should "non-terrorist" Muslims stand up to. Especially the US ones, they are dealing with the terrorists threats like everyone else hear, plus they have morons who are their fellow citizens stare at them for wearing their religous clothing and the color of their skin. Thats like someone judging you in real life for idiotic posts. I dont see Christians standing up to the nut jobs that shoot abortion doctors, protest soldier funerals, or bomb oklahoma city, but Muslims should do this of course.


also when you attack liberals you just make yourself look dumb (ie you), our freedoms or even just one groups' are not worth giving up for any false sense of safety.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Didn't want to expose the old racism until other responses gave you the go-ahead, eh?

At any rate, if this makes you think that by focusing on the most probable group, we will be completely safe from further attacks, you're fooling yourself. The only surefire method of protection is 100% screening of all passengers, and developing technology that can screen for fluids in nonconventional containers; just because you can't take a bottle of Gatorade on the plane doesn't mean that you can't put the same kind of substance in the soles of your shoes.

I'm sorry that you're looking for psychological comfort instead of actual methods of securely protecting airplanes and passengers from being victimized. The problem with ANY random sampling of passengers is this: since 9/11, this is the first finding of a planned terrorist attack on airlines. 24 arrested thus far, and surely there are others remaining. Considering just how many people fly each day, 24 out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is not something that can be found by random sample. It's just statistically improbable, and there's no way, and no reason, to defend anything but 100% thorough screening of all passengers. Think that's inconvenient? Well, dying is a considerable degree more inconvenient than that.[/QUOTE]

Might have to start cavity searches as well...
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Didn't want to expose the old racism until other responses gave you the go-ahead, eh?

At any rate, if this makes you think that by focusing on the most probable group, we will be completely safe from further attacks, you're fooling yourself. The only surefire method of protection is 100% screening of all passengers, and developing technology that can screen for fluids in nonconventional containers; just because you can't take a bottle of Gatorade on the plane doesn't mean that you can't put the same kind of substance in the soles of your shoes.

I'm sorry that you're looking for psychological comfort instead of actual methods of securely protecting airplanes and passengers from being victimized. The problem with ANY random sampling of passengers is this: since 9/11, this is the first finding of a planned terrorist attack on airlines. 24 arrested thus far, and surely there are others remaining. Considering just how many people fly each day, 24 out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is not something that can be found by random sample. It's just statistically improbable, and there's no way, and no reason, to defend anything but 100% thorough screening of all passengers. Think that's inconvenient? Well, dying is a considerable degree more inconvenient than that.[/quote]

First off, It isn't racism at all. It's seeing it for what it is. The terrorist are muslims. Don't call racism when it isn't there.

Obviously it isn't going to make us 100% safe. Nothing will. It obviously makes us safer by a large margin. You can never get rid of terrorism. There are steps to help make us safer. This would be one of them.

WHO SHOULD NON-TERRORIST MUSLIMS STAND UP TO? Are you joking? The one's that are high-jacking there supposedly peaceful religion.
 
[quote name='schuerm26']First off, It isn't racism at all. It's seeing it for what it is. The terrorist are muslims. Don't call racism when it isn't there.

Obviously it isn't going to make us 100% safe. Nothing will. It obviously makes us safer by a large margin. You can never get rid of terrorism. There are steps to help make us safer. This would be one of them.[/QUOTE]

Why did you ignore my post about searching everybody to the same degree? Do you understand that 24 terrorists out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is a statistical improbability to find using only random searches?

Will searching muslims make us safer? Well, sure, compared to not searching them more in-depth. You know what would make us safer than that? Searching everybody equally. Can you entertain the notion that the next terrorist attack could come from someone who isn't muslim, or ethnically doesn't look like it? Would you like to be the one who is wrong about such a selective method of screening passengers?

Really, I don't think you want to harm muslims, though I still think you're a racist. Don't give me that "intent" bullshit, because plenty of people are plenty racist without having any intent whatsoever; you seem to admit as much in hiding your own opinions until others agreed with you.

You can support racial profiling all you want, but you cannot deny that screening all passengers will make us exponentially more safe than a random/biased sample of a few. That's all there is to it. If you think terrorists are idiots, who won't try to seduce non-muslim looking folk into doing things such as this, who's really fooling who?
 
How do you pick out the Muslims? Dave Chapelle's a muslim. Most of Indonesia, many in India, many in eastern Europe, the Philippines and Africa. So you don't mean muslims, let's be clear, you mean brown people. Now, when Bali gets bombed, do you think it's an arab or an asian? Does that mean we check all asians? What about secular Iraqis? Christian Iranians? Turkish Kurds? The London bombers were British, should we search all Brits? Or just the brown ones? Tim McVeigh was Irish, the IRA were terrorists, will we start strip searching Mc's?

Look past your nose.
 
[quote name='Cheese']How do you pick out the Muslims? Dave Chapelle's a muslim. Most of Indonesia, many in India, many in eastern Europe, the Philippines and Africa. So you don't mean muslims, let's be clear, you mean brown people. Now, when Bali gets bombed, do you think it's an arab or an asian? Does that mean we check all asians? What about secular Iraqis? Christian Iranians? Turkish Kurds? The London bombers were British, should we search all Brits? Or just the brown ones? Tim McVeigh was Irish, the IRA were terrorists, will we start strip searching Mc's?

Look past your nose.[/quote]


Exactly.

PS: the level of ignorance in this thread astounds me.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Why did you ignore my post about searching everybody to the same degree? Do you understand that 24 terrorists out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is a statistical improbability to find using only random searches?

Will searching muslims make us safer? Well, sure, compared to not searching them more in-depth. You know what would make us safer than that? Searching everybody equally. Can you entertain the notion that the next terrorist attack could come from someone who isn't muslim, or ethnically doesn't look like it? Would you like to be the one who is wrong about such a selective method of screening passengers?

Really, I don't think you want to harm muslims, though I still think you're a racist. Don't give me that "intent" bullshit, because plenty of people are plenty racist without having any intent whatsoever; you seem to admit as much in hiding your own opinions until others agreed with you.

You can support racial profiling all you want, but you cannot deny that screening all passengers will make us exponentially more safe than a random/biased sample of a few. That's all there is to it. If you think terrorists are idiots, who won't try to seduce non-muslim looking folk into doing things such as this, who's really fooling who?[/quote]

Of course screening EVERYONE will make us safer. That is completely unreasonable though. Can you imagine the delays? Do we really need to be searching old grannies? Middle aged white families? You might say yes, most reasonable thinking people would say of course not.
 
[quote name='Cheese']How do you pick out the Muslims? Dave Chapelle's a muslim. Most of Indonesia, many in India, many in eastern Europe, the Philippines and Africa. So you don't mean muslims, let's be clear, you mean brown people. Now, when Bali gets bombed, do you think it's an arab or an asian? Does that mean we check all asians? What about secular Iraqis? Christian Iranians? Turkish Kurds? The London bombers were British, should we search all Brits? Or just the brown ones? Tim McVeigh was Irish, the IRA were terrorists, will we start strip searching Mc's?

Look past your nose.[/quote]

You can come up with all the exceptions you want but that doesn't change the fact that right now our biggest threat is the extremeists and they happen to be Arab Muslims. That requires extra caution with them. Any reasonable person can see this.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Why did you ignore my post about searching everybody to the same degree? Do you understand that 24 terrorists out of the millions who have flown since 9/11 is a statistical improbability to find using only random searches?

Will searching muslims make us safer? Well, sure, compared to not searching them more in-depth. You know what would make us safer than that? Searching everybody equally. Can you entertain the notion that the next terrorist attack could come from someone who isn't muslim, or ethnically doesn't look like it? Would you like to be the one who is wrong about such a selective method of screening passengers?

Really, I don't think you want to harm muslims, though I still think you're a racist. Don't give me that "intent" bullshit, because plenty of people are plenty racist without having any intent whatsoever; you seem to admit as much in hiding your own opinions until others agreed with you.

You can support racial profiling all you want, but you cannot deny that screening all passengers will make us exponentially more safe than a random/biased sample of a few. That's all there is to it. If you think terrorists are idiots, who won't try to seduce non-muslim looking folk into doing things such as this, who's really fooling who?[/QUOTE]

You make a good point that doing in-depth searches of everyone is the safest way to go but that's not feasible. And as you said, doing random searches is virtually useless in terms of significantly increased likelihood of picking up a terrorist out of millions of air travellers. But if you have limited resources and time available, doesn't it make the most sense to focus your attention on a profile that is objectively the most likely fit for a terror suspect?
 
But as stated, how would you know who's a muslim? Are you able to tell the difference between Indians and Pakistanis? Indonesians and Filipinos? Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield? (Tyson is muslim, by the way).
 
Well, Muslim is pretty broad. If they narrowed it down to muslims of middle eastern descent, then they'd have a pretty good group to monitor. I'm not going to pretend like I'm unbiased or that I give a damn about fairness -- they're the ones behind the acts of terrorism so this is the only way. Yeah, I realize not all muslims are terrorists -- I get it -- but you don't see a white/black/asian or Christian/Jew/Athiest doing this shit. If that makes me a racist, then I guess that maybe I am.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']Well, Muslim is pretty broad. If they narrowed it down to muslims of middle eastern descent, then they'd have a pretty good group to monitor. I'm not going to pretend like I'm unbiased or that I give a damn about fairness -- they're the ones behind the acts of terrorism so this is the only way. Yeah, I realize not all muslims are terrorists -- I get it -- but you don't see a white/black/asian or Christian/Jew/Athiest doing this shit. If that makes me a racist, then I guess that maybe I am.[/QUOTE]

1) How would you know they are muslim? It doesn't say so on their passport and I know I wouldn't tell a cop my religion, it's none of his business.

2) You're talking about blaming 2 billion people for the actions of a few thousand. That'd be like searching all white folks, world wide, because some might be in the Aryan Nation.

You will never be safe, you never have been, you never will be. But that's life. No reason to sit at home worrying about it. I just saw Tom Ridge on Hardball, when asked if metal detectors, strip searches, shoe searches had ever caught a bad guy he said, under his breath, "um.. not to my knowledge." So searching people doesn't make you safer anyways.

And you do see asians, whites, christians, etc. doing this shit. In Bali, Dublin, Oklahoma City. People are batshit all over.
 
[quote name='Cheese']1)

You will never be safe, you never have been, you never will be. But that's life. .[/QUOTE]

this really sums it up nicely i think

the world is divided into two groups

those who believe they are 'safe' and listen to those in power who tell them they will be protected

and those who understand what you wrote above is the truth

the people who need to be made 'safe' by politicians and figures in authority are those ripe for being swayed by popular/public opinion
 
[quote name='Cheese']1) How would you know they are muslim? It doesn't say so on their passport and I know I wouldn't tell a cop my religion, it's none of his business.

You will never be safe, you never have been, you never will be. But that's life. No reason to sit at home worrying about it. I just saw Tom Ridge on Hardball, when asked if metal detectors, strip searches, shoe searches had ever caught a bad guy he said, under his breath, "um.. not to my knowledge." So searching people doesn't make you safer anyways.

And you do see asians, whites, christians, etc. doing this shit. In Bali, Dublin, Oklahoma City. People are batshit all over.[/quote]

You can bring up as much of this junk as you want but the fact remains their needs to be profiling. No we will never be 100% safe. There are steps to be taken to make us safer though.

Click the link
http://www.danzfamily.com/pictures/pictures02/hijackers.jpg

I don't think any more needs to be said on profiling.

This whole topic is about screening at AIRPORTS!! Not sure why everyone is bringing up other stuff. Yes other stuff can happen but so far the only people trying to blow up planes are of middle eastern descent. Yes profiling will work.
 
Ladies and gents, I give you lower class America at its finest!

Are you also that asshole starting all those emails saying how we should teach prayer in school because our money says "In God We Trust"?

You can't blame him folks. He can't help being stupid. Just like Muslims can't stop being terrorists and blacks can't help being violent. :roll:

[quote name='schuerm26']First off, It isn't racism at all. It's seeing it for what it is. The terrorist are muslims. Don't call racism when it isn't there.

Obviously it isn't going to make us 100% safe. Nothing will. It obviously makes us safer by a large margin. You can never get rid of terrorism. There are steps to help make us safer. This would be one of them.

WHO SHOULD NON-TERRORIST MUSLIMS STAND UP TO? Are you joking? The one's that are high-jacking there supposedly peaceful religion.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Cheese']1) How would you know they are muslim? It doesn't say so on their passport and I know I wouldn't tell a cop my religion, it's none of his business.

2) You're talking about blaming 2 billion people for the actions of a few thousand. That'd be like searching all white folks, world wide, because some might be in the Aryan Nation.

You will never be safe, you never have been, you never will be. But that's life. No reason to sit at home worrying about it. I just saw Tom Ridge on Hardball, when asked if metal detectors, strip searches, shoe searches had ever caught a bad guy he said, under his breath, "um.. not to my knowledge." So searching people doesn't make you safer anyways.

And you do see asians, whites, christians, etc. doing this shit. In Bali, Dublin, Oklahoma City. People are batshit all over.[/QUOTE]

I often disagree with you, but your posts have been outstanding in this thread.

I think everyone should take a step back and ask themselves if we want to be like France or other European nations, with large disenfranchised and discriminated-against Muslim populations, or if we want to welcome them the same way we have with other immigrant groups. Most Muslims are not terrorists, just like most whites aren't members of the KKK and most blacks are not members of the Black Panthers. Singling people out like that is not a good idea and can only lead to (1) anger and (2) lawsuits.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I often disagree with you, but your posts have been outstanding in this thread.

I think everyone should take a step back and ask themselves if we want to be like France or other European nations, with large disenfranchised and discriminated-against Muslim populations, or if we want to welcome them the same way we have with other immigrant groups. Most Muslims are not terrorists, just like most whites aren't members of the KKK and most blacks are not members of the Black Panthers. Singling people out like that is not a good idea and can only lead to (1) anger and (2) lawsuits.[/quote]

yeah ur right...
 
hijackers.jpg


Alright, look at them. Which one has the words, "I AM A TERRORIST" written across their head. I don't know how old you are, but do you know about the internment camps during WW2? We imprisoned thousands of innocent japanese because they 'might' be collaborators. It's one of the most shameful things the US has done in the 20th century. It's reactionary and short sighted, much like what you are advocating. Blaming an entire group of people for the actions of a few is very near the most unAmerican thing you can do. White folks have caused more death and destruction through out history then any other race, creed, etc. If anything, they shouldn't let us on planes.
 
[quote name='Cheese']
hijackers.jpg


Alright, look at them. Which one has the words, "I AM A TERRORIST" written across their head. I don't know how old you are, but do you know about the internment camps during WW2? We imprisoned thousands of innocent japanese because they 'might' be collaborators. It's one of the most shameful things the US has done in the 20th century. It's reactionary and short sighted, much like what you are advocating. Blaming an entire group of people for the actions of a few is very near the most unAmerican thing you can do. White folks have caused more death and destruction through out history then any other race, creed, etc. If anything, they shouldn't let us on planes.[/quote]

Your points are ridiculous. Of course they don't say I AM A TERRORIST! If they did what the hell would we need secruity measures at the airport for? Step off your liberal high horse for right now and look at the picture. Why should we be searching white people or black people to the same degree we search middle easterns? Nobody is saying imprison middle easterns once they step in to the airport just because they might be a terrorist. They are advocating extra precaution as they are the one's wanting to blow up the airplanes. Of course it is reactionary as we weren't prepared for it on Sep. 11, it is also proactive so it doesn't happen again.

Good post from another message board:
we are all profiled all the time. When I was younger, I was subjected to higher auto insurance premiums becuase I was between 16-25 and male, as profiled by insurance agencies.

This isn't racism, this is called using information and knowledge gained from previous experience.

ANother good post from another message board:
Airport security officers aren't 'hassling' people just to get their jollies or whatever, they are doing more intensive searches of people who are seen as most likely, by security experts, to attempt a hijacking/explosion/whatever. Or at least that's what's happening in other countries, and SHOULD be happening in the US, but isn't. Instead, our airport security has resorted to 'random searches' whereby an 85 year old grandmother has just as much likelihood to be searched as a group of young Arab men, possibly even a greater chance if the security is bending over backwards to appear 'fair'. This is simply insane. The day that the IRA, KKK, ETA, Black Panthers (notice how Tater never brought them up) or whatever other radical non-Muslim group hijacks or blows up a plane, then we should start searching them in airports too. Until that happens, however, it's not 'racist' to focus extra attention on people who fit the profile of those people who both successfully and unsuccessfully set about hijacking/blowing up airplanes. If we start putting political correctness and/or people's feelings above the safety of the masses is the day we put everyone in jeopardy.

On another note, profiling, racial or otherwise, is not inherently wrong or illegal. Assuming that all black people or all Muslims or whatever are criminals, and rounding them up in internment camps is both wrong and illegal, but if 3 young black men rob a liqour store, the police shouldn't be looking in retirement homes for the criminals, or locking up white women, they should be looking for people who fit the description of the criminals. In the same way, this is at least the second attempt that young Muslim men have made to hijack airplanes, not to mention the mulitude of other terrorist attacks that that 'profile' of person is responsible for. No one is seriously advocating locking every young Muslim man up, but giving them a closer inspection when they are passing through a security station is only being pragmatic

yet another:
even Bill Mahr said that until a tall blond woman tries to commit an act of terrorism in the USA, he has no problem saying why SHOULDN'T we treat arab/muslim/middle-eastern people differently? It's no different than the police sending out an APB.

I am not saying they get hassled, or that you or I get to breeze through security unchecked, ok? I am just saying that until we have a change in the pattern of terrorists, it is a waste to treat an 80 year old retiree from florida exactly as a 24 year old arab exchange student.
 
[quote name='schuerm26']I am not saying they get hassled, or that you or I get to breeze through security unchecked, ok? I am just saying that until we have a change in the pattern of terrorists, it is a waste to treat an 80 year old retiree from florida exactly as a 24 year old arab exchange student.[/QUOTE]

So...you're basically admitting that you aren't concerned about 100% protection (or as near as we can realistically come to that) from terrorist attacks. Your message is to tell terrorists that they need to change their methods to this degree (and with cosmetic surgery and identity theft, appearances mean shit these days) in order to get around security. You're ADMITTING to wanting to leave a hole in security measures, and TELLING people what that hole is - if you look like Whitey McWhiterson, then you won't be scrutinized.

And here I thought it was the left who was supposed to be weak on terrorism...

EDIT: The short version is this: if you think that terrorists, be they all muslim or otherwise, will not try to hide their appearance or disguise their appearance in order to avoid this kind of profiling, you're just plain wrong. Don't forget for a single moment that they are very savvy people, warped ideals or no.
 
Im done talking about this. You guys on the left miss the forest for the trees on pretty much every single issue. This one especially.
 
[quote name='schuerm26']Im done talking about this. You guys on the left miss the forest for the trees on pretty much every single issue. This one especially.[/QUOTE]

Don't forget that other issue you brought up and were promptly put in your place over! We're still waiting for secret spy photographs of Obama filling up with unleaded.
 
It's sad to say but unfortunately it appears it is going to take another terrorist attack before you people actually wake up to reality. Unbelievable how you people have forgotten how it felt after September 11th. It's actually pretty scary.
 
I'm gonna be the asshole racist one here I guess.

I dont believe in attacking all people of one race, for the crime of a few - but if it was White people being the Terrorists, everyone else would freak out around white people. Not to mention, most minorities would be like "Good, F*ck'em".

Maybe you guys didnt grow up like I did, but most white people who sympatize with other racial hardships are usually the most blind to whats really going on.

If it were a list of white people getting checked 8 times through metal detectors... most minorities wouldnt give a shit.

I grew up poor as F*ck, white boy/black neighborhood. I went to a school 82% minority, that was on MLK street. I got beat up every F*cking day for being white, my friend had his ears cut off while walking down the street, for being white. I've been robbed, kicked in the temples with steel toe boots, been a F*cking ashtray and been hit with a hammer.

Tell me minorities arent F*cking racist, and I'll show you the scars.

That being said, I dont feel sorry for them getting checked extra at the airport... its not like they're getting forced to have barcodes tattooed on them or anything. The Arab people (Who lived in america) - killed thousands of people in one of the most horrific events of our generation. They should be so lucky they live in the US right now, cause in any other country there would be hundreds being shot in the streets.

My point being, this is very minimal.. not even worth discussing and for our (Meaning everyone, not just white peoples) protection. If would of been much, much worse anywhere else. Do you think white people are being treated kind in the middle east? Do you think that the most americans have to worry about is minor inconviences there?

America is a country just like all the rest, and we have the right to protect ourselves. Its not a race thing, or a genocide thing... its a stop F*cking killing innocent civilians thing.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']if it was White people being the Terrorists, everyone else would freak out around white people. Not to mention, most minorities would be like "Good, F*ck'em".

[/QUOTE]

prove it

(hint: you can't b/c you are talking out of your ass)

thanks for playing!

p.s. if you really believe that it must SUCK to be you

sad
 
[quote name='PKRipp3r']prove it

(hint: you can't b/c you are talking out of your ass)

thanks for playing!

p.s. if you really believe that it must SUCK to be you

sad[/QUOTE]
Are you 16?

P.S. Are you 16?
 
[quote name='PKRipp3r']prove it

(hint: you can't b/c you are talking out of your ass)

thanks for playing!

p.s. if you really believe that it must SUCK to be you

sad[/quote]

LOL, you even live in LA, one of the most fucked up racist places to live. Awesome. If you've never seen a minority not care about a white person, then you need to get out more.

All I'm getting at, is that we're all racist in some way or another, but we dont have to slam white people everytime something of this magnitude happens. I'm white, I've never owned a slave, so I owe them nothing. But I've been robbed a few times by black people, so I feel akward showing most black people I dont know my things. I dont have an undying hate for their race, I just dont want my shit stolen.

Same rules apply for extra checks at airplanes. Arabs fly jumbo jets into buildings, and I'm racist for wondering if Arab people should get checked a little extra in airports? I dont have hate for their race, I know nothing about their culture, so I dont hate that either. But I dont want to be taking a flat spin into the sears tower either.

It's only racist when white people do it, but heres the thing... there is more than white people in power now.
 
So you advocate being suspect of 2,000,000,000 people because of the actions of 19. There was also that white kid that flew his cessna into a building in Florida, or the guy that few his into the White House, or the one in paris. There's three 'plane into building' events done by white guys. Start strip searching them all. A white guy blew up a building in your home town, should we stop all white guys and search them, just in case?
 
[quote name='Cheese']So you advocate being suspect of 2,000,000,000 people because of the actions of 19. There was also that white kid that flew his cessna into a building in Florida, or the guy that few his into the White House, or the one in paris. There's three 'plane into building' events done by white guys. Start strip searching them all. A white guy blew up a building in your home town, should we stop all white guys and search them, just in case?[/QUOTE]

Dude, that's only three people - there were NINETEEN Muslims. Jesus, don't you know *anything*?
 
[quote name='Cheese']How do you pick out the Muslims? Dave Chapelle's a muslim. Most of Indonesia, many in India, many in eastern Europe, the Philippines and Africa. So you don't mean muslims, let's be clear, you mean brown people. Now, when Bali gets bombed, do you think it's an arab or an asian? Does that mean we check all asians? What about secular Iraqis? Christian Iranians? Turkish Kurds? The London bombers were British, should we search all Brits? Or just the brown ones? Tim McVeigh was Irish, the IRA were terrorists, will we start strip searching Mc's?

Look past your nose.[/quote]

Theres a difference in a terrorist and a suicide bomber. big difference. im sure you will try to make me look racist/unamerican or something for going against your opinion but fuck man come on. most of those groups arent gonna get on a plane and blow themselves up. muslims, different story. thats like the most holy thing they can do or some shit. Searching everyone is totally a damn good idea but im not gonna question at all why they would choose muslims over everyone else. Still do random, but more caution with the muslims for sure. it makes sense, look at the past.

and schuerm I totally understand your not wanting to post first about agreeing with the topic. alot of times I choose not to post because I know people are gonna tear apart what I say and use way too much sarcasm. It has something to do with their insecurities I think.
 
[quote name='Cheese']So you advocate being suspect of 2,000,000,000 people because of the actions of 19. There was also that white kid that flew his cessna into a building in Florida, or the guy that few his into the White House, or the one in paris. There's three 'plane into building' events done by white guys. Start strip searching them all. A white guy blew up a building in your home town, should we stop all white guys and search them, just in case?[/quote]

But none of those "White Guys" caused this.

Sept. 11 Numbers:

Total number killed in attacks (official figure as of 9/5/02): 2,819

Number of firefighters and paramedics killed: 343

Number of NYPD officers: 23

Number of Port Authority police officers: 37

Number of WTC companies that lost people: 60

Number of employees who died in Tower One: 1,402

Number of employees who died in Tower Two: 614

Number of employees lost at Cantor Fitzgerald: 658

Number of U.S. troops killed in Operation Enduring Freedom: 22

Number of nations whose citizens were killed in attacks: 115

Ratio of men to women who died: 3:1

Age of the greatest number who died: between 35 and 39

Bodies found "intact": 289

Body parts found: 19,858

Number of families who got no remains: 1,717

Estimated units of blood donated to the New York Blood Center:
36,000

Total units of donated blood actually used: 258

Number of people who lost a spouse or partner in the attacks:
1,609

Estimated number of children who lost a parent: 3,051

Percentage of Americans who knew someone hurt or killed in the
attacks: 20

FDNY retirements, January–July 2001: 274

FDNY retirements, January–July 2002: 661

Number of firefighters on leave for respiratory problems by
January 2002: 300

Number of funerals attended by Rudy Giuliani in 2001: 200

Number of FDNY vehicles destroyed: 98

Tons of debris removed from site: 1,506,124

Days fires continued to burn after the attack: 99

Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100

Days the New York Stock Exchange was closed: 6

Point drop in the Dow Jones industrial average when the NYSE
reopened: 684.81

Days after 9/11 that the U.S. began bombing Afghanistan: 26

Total number of hate crimes reported to the Council on American-
Islamic Relations nationwide since 9/11: 1,714

Economic loss to New York in month following the attacks: $105
billion

Estimated cost of cleanup: $600 million

Total FEMA money spent on the emergency: $970 million

Estimated amount donated to 9/11 charities: $1.4 billion

Estimated amount of insurance paid worldwide related to 9/11:
$40.2 billion

Estimated amount of money needed to overhaul lower-Manhattan
subways: $7.5 billion

Amount of money recently granted by U.S. government to
overhaul lower-Manhattan subways: $4.55 billion

Estimated amount of money raised for funds dedicated to NYPD
and FDNY families: $500 million

Percentage of total charity money raised going to FDNY and NYPD
families: 25

Average benefit already received by each FDNY and NYPD widow:
$1 million

Percentage increase in law-school applications from 2001 to 2002:
17.9

Percentage increase in Peace Corps applications from 2001 to
2002: 40

Percentage increase in CIA applications from 2001 to 2002: 50

Number of songs Clear Channel Radio considered "inappropriate"
to play after 9/11: 150

Number of mentions of 9/11 at the Oscars: 26

Apartments in lower Manhattan eligible for asbestos cleanup:
30,000

Number of apartments whose residents have requested cleanup
and testing: 4,110

Number of Americans who changed their 2001 holiday-travel plans
from plane to train or car: 1.4 million

Estimated number of New Yorkers suffering from post-traumatic-
stress disorder as a result of 9/11: 422,000

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

You cant save everyone, you cant search everyone. I'm sure that some Government official would love to put chips and barcodes all over us and make us wear clear clothes and ban all liquids but water... but its not feasible for a country of our size.

As well as searches. It takes 2 hours to get though the airport as is, It would take 4-5 if we searched everyone.

Its more than about safety, its about money. If half the planes are up in the sky because security checks take half the time... then Airports make half the money. And half the money doesnt keep those planes in the sky.

It costs Billions to retool every airport in the US with more security staff and metal detectors... and technology that hasnt even been invented yet that mykevermin seems to think we need to be fair.

But in the end, we have to make due with what we have. Business isnt exactly booming for the plane industry, and the Govt. only regulates it so much, and people dont want a 10% tax increase to fund it anyways.

Its cheap, its safer, and we can do it with what we have now without delay of business. Its not polically correct... but there is more at stake than being PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top