Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Profiling

Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 9:58:50 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Republican Senator James Inhofe has said, "I believe in racial and ethnic profiling" which has got my liberal friends in a tizzy! His logic is that while not all Muslim and Middle Easterners are terrorists, that most terrorists are Muslim and Middle Eastern. Now sure, it pisses me off to hear a politician say this (friend says: all senators should be stopped and searched for illegal campaign contributions and private sector conflicts of interests -- it's not that we are discriminating against senators, they just have a much higher chance of being corrupt than your average citizen!), but I don't think it's unfair to make him seem like a bigot for saying this. I know the Texans would agree. What good liberal arguments are there to crucify this man for expressing his opinion?

http://thinkprogress.org...
President of DDO
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:05:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
There isn't, really. Any arguments made by "liberals" in an attempt to crucify that Senator is either a socialist/social democrat or way too politically correct.

In reality, the fact is that you are more inclined to do certain things based on your background. A teenage Muslim from Gaza is more likely to bomb Israeli or American targets than a middle-aged man from the Netherlands. And yes, a (US) politician is more likely to be corrupt and accept bribes than other citizens, which is why oversight is key.

That's called being practical. There are some simple facts of life, and this is one of them. Does it mean we should be locking up all Muslims? No - thats paranoid. There is such a thing as being overzealous, and there is such a thing as reasonable doubt. But you can't ignore the fact that profiling, when used correctly, is extremely beneficial to security.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:05:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I hate the fact being PC is more important than telling it how it is.

Yes, Middle easterners are the biggest group most likely to be a terrorist. It doesn't mean they're all terrorists. It just means you're average 40 year old Chinese ale with a wife and 4 kids accompanying him is less likely to take over a plane than a group of 4 25 year old Muslims from Egypt.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:07:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
You can crucify him for endangering America by telling terrorists all they have to do is convert a white guy and they won't get caught.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:12:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 9:58:50 AM, theLwerd wrote:
Republican Senator James Inhofe has said, "I believe in racial and ethnic profiling" which has got my liberal friends in a tizzy! His logic is that while not all Muslim and Middle Easterners are terrorists, that most terrorists are Muslim and Middle Eastern. Now sure, it pisses me off to hear a politician say this (friend says: all senators should be stopped and searched for illegal campaign contributions and private sector conflicts of interests -- it's not that we are discriminating against senators, they just have a much higher chance of being corrupt than your average citizen!), but I don't think it's unfair to make him seem like a bigot for saying this. I know the Texans would agree. What good liberal arguments are there to crucify this man for expressing his opinion?

http://thinkprogress.org...

mmm... I think it's a pretty grey area

Now I'm not for undue searches on anyone w/o good reason, specifically against that individual.

BUT, If there were threats from lets say KKK members, you be less suspicious of non-whites than whites.

If there were threats from Black panthers, you might be less suspicious of chinese people than blacks.

If there were threats from Muslim/middle eastern Terrorists , you might be more suspicious of apparent muslims/middle easterners, than apparent non-muslim/middle easterners.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:13:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:07:33 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You can crucify him for endangering America by telling terrorists all they have to do is convert a white guy and they won't get caught.

Haha!

But yeah, I agree with Volkov.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:16:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Lol, I love the fact that nobody takes into consideration that there's terrorists from other Non-Middle Eastern/Muslim backgrounds. What about Northern Ireland? That seems to be a great example, yet nobody screams out "terrorist!".
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:21:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:16:47 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Lol, I love the fact that nobody takes into consideration that there's terrorists from other Non-Middle Eastern/Muslim backgrounds. What about Northern Ireland? That seems to be a great example, yet nobody screams out "terrorist!".

lol

Yeah, I would, but they're not trying to attack my home.

plus that seems to have died down a bit. When people feel the need to create a group called the "real" IRA, you know it's dying off.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:21:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:16:47 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Lol, I love the fact that nobody takes into consideration that there's terrorists from other Non-Middle Eastern/Muslim backgrounds. What about Northern Ireland? That seems to be a great example, yet nobody screams out "terrorist!".

The English would take note of any Irish or Northern Irish going to any pat of the UK with any history of association with Republican movements.

The situation differs because the Irish have absolutely no reason to bomb anywhere other than the UK and maybe mainland Europe (Which they shouldn't as the 1916 proclamation states "Our gallant allies in Europe"). Not America, due to the fact they used America as a source of funding.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:23:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:13:44 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:07:33 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You can crucify him for endangering America by telling terrorists all they have to do is convert a white guy and they won't get caught.

Haha!

But yeah, I agree with Volkov.

While quoting a post that rebuts Volkov's applicability to actual security in a real world in which there are 6 billion people, most of them not being Arab, and doubtless some of whom are open to becoming Muslim martyrs?

It doesn't matter what the odds of a terrorist being Arab are NOW if they can simply be replaced with non-Arabs (or white-looking Arabs even) once the policy is implemented.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:24:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:21:48 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:16:47 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Lol, I love the fact that nobody takes into consideration that there's terrorists from other Non-Middle Eastern/Muslim backgrounds. What about Northern Ireland? That seems to be a great example, yet nobody screams out "terrorist!".

The English would take note of any Irish or Northern Irish going to any pat of the UK with any history of association with Republican movements.

The situation differs because the Irish have absolutely no reason to bomb anywhere other than the UK and maybe mainland Europe (Which they shouldn't as the 1916 proclamation states "Our gallant allies in Europe"). Not America, due to the fact they used America as a source of funding.

Well certainly groups like Al-Qaeda have reasons to bomb places such as America when they're invading their homeland.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:27:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:24:06 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Well certainly groups like Al-Qaeda have reasons to bomb places such as America when they're invading their homeland.

Like the couple of years pre-911 right.

Up, wait I forgot again...

Bush was behind 9.11 right, and it was all a conspiracy such that he could Invade the muslim homeland, RIght Insert.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:28:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:24:06 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Well certainly groups like Al-Qaeda have reasons to bomb places such as America when they're invading their homeland.

Hey Insert, why don't you just sign up then?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:29:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:23:53 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
While quoting a post that rebuts Volkov's applicability to actual security in a real world in which there are 6 billion people, most of them not being Arab, and doubtless some of whom are open to becoming Muslim martyrs?

It doesn't matter what the odds of a terrorist being Arab are NOW if they can simply be replaced with non-Arabs (or white-looking Arabs even) once the policy is implemented.

Background profiling is only one piece of the puzzle, Ragnar. The Israelis use it to a great extent with great results in their airports. The most threatened country in the world hasn't had an issue with their airports and planes since the 60's-70's.

The other part of this security plan is basic body language training that all security forces should be trained in. Even if they do start converting white males (which they have), body language is almost universal to all would-be attackers, and essentially uncontrollable. The Israelis also have used this to great extent.

But, we could have it your way - make them sign a contract, or something.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:27:16 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:24:06 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Well certainly groups like Al-Qaeda have reasons to bomb places such as America when they're invading their homeland.

Like the couple of years pre-911 right.


Up, wait I forgot again...

Bush was behind 9.11 right, and it was all a conspiracy such that he could Invade the muslim homeland, RIght Insert.

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:29:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:05:11 AM, Volkov wrote:
That's called being practical. There are some simple facts of life, and this is one of them. Does it mean we should be locking up all Muslims? No - thats paranoid. There is such a thing as being overzealous, and there is such a thing as reasonable doubt. But you can't ignore the fact that profiling, when used correctly, is extremely beneficial to security.

Can you provide an example of how it's extremely beneficial to security?

How is singling out someone based solely on their nationality or ethnicity for the "sin" of their brethren not unjust?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:29:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:23:53 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:13:44 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:07:33 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You can crucify him for endangering America by telling terrorists all they have to do is convert a white guy and they won't get caught.

Haha!

But yeah, I agree with Volkov.

While quoting a post that rebuts Volkov's applicability to actual security in a real world in which there are 6 billion people, most of them not being Arab, and doubtless some of whom are open to becoming Muslim martyrs?

There's a difference between finding a quote humorous and finding it to be cogent.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:31:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:28:06 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:24:06 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Well certainly groups like Al-Qaeda have reasons to bomb places such as America when they're invading their homeland.

Hey Insert, why don't you just sign up then?

Why would I sign up for Al-Qaeda? I have no reason too. Besides, they're extremists. I'm just saying they have reasons for doing what they do.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:31:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:29:17 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:23:53 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
While quoting a post that rebuts Volkov's applicability to actual security in a real world in which there are 6 billion people, most of them not being Arab, and doubtless some of whom are open to becoming Muslim martyrs?

It doesn't matter what the odds of a terrorist being Arab are NOW if they can simply be replaced with non-Arabs (or white-looking Arabs even) once the policy is implemented.

Background profiling is only one piece of the puzzle, Ragnar. The Israelis use it to a great extent with great results in their airports.
How did you determine that? controlled experiment? Or anecdotal evidence, for which any other variable could be responsible and you wouldn't know?


The other part of this security plan is basic body language training that all security forces should be trained in. Even if they do start converting white males (which they have), body language is almost universal to all would-be attackers, and essentially uncontrollable.
Demonstration?


But, we could have it your way - make them sign a contract, or something.
Make who sign a contract?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:32:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.

People who justify horribly inhumane acts, that do nothing at all productive, based off of far fetched conspiracy theories are quite a bit more Evil in my book.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:32:00 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.

People who justify horribly inhumane acts, that do nothing at all productive, based off of far fetched conspiracy theories are quite a bit more Evil in my book.

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:33:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:29:54 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:23:53 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:13:44 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:07:33 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You can crucify him for endangering America by telling terrorists all they have to do is convert a white guy and they won't get caught.

Haha!

But yeah, I agree with Volkov.

While quoting a post that rebuts Volkov's applicability to actual security in a real world in which there are 6 billion people, most of them not being Arab, and doubtless some of whom are open to becoming Muslim martyrs?

There's a difference between finding a quote humorous and finding it to be cogent.

Yes, but there is a difference between handling that issue right while quoting it and handling it wrong-- usually the right way includes a rebuttal.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:34:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:32:00 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.

People who justify horribly inhumane acts, that do nothing at all productive, based off of far fetched conspiracy theories are quite a bit more Evil in my book.

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...

You mean invading a socialist slave pen (Iraq) and killing anyone who supports the regime?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:36:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...

I quite agree, but I think he thought he had better reasons than that "he could".

Only one person is, demonstrably, as was described. That person is you.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:36:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:34:40 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:32:00 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.

People who justify horribly inhumane acts, that do nothing at all productive, based off of far fetched conspiracy theories are quite a bit more Evil in my book.

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...

You mean invading a socialist slave pen (Iraq) and killing anyone who supports the regime?

lol, "socialist slave pen". First off, Iraq wasn't socialist. Secondly, socialism isn't slavery to begin with.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:37:55 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:36:26 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...

I quite agree, but I think he thought he had better reasons than that "he could".

Only one person is, demonstrably, as was described. That person is you.

Well sure he had more reasons. There's resources in the middle east. American Imperialism continues to exist.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:38:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:36:33 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:34:40 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:33:41 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:32:00 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/22/2010 10:29:19 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Of course we won't know for sure, but the evidence I have seen certainly points towards that. Bush was an evil, evil man. That's all I can say about him.

People who justify horribly inhumane acts, that do nothing at all productive, based off of far fetched conspiracy theories are quite a bit more Evil in my book.

Invading any country you feel like and killing innocents just because you can is much more evil imo...

You mean invading a socialist slave pen (Iraq) and killing anyone who supports the regime?

lol, "socialist slave pen". First off, Iraq wasn't socialist.
It was by its own declaration. It may not meet your standards, but you haven't spelled out your definition. It was ruled by the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party.

Secondly, socialism isn't slavery to begin with.
You propose to get people to work for your government/proletariat/whatever WITHOUT forced labour?

What's your proposal for doing that?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:42:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:37:55 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:

Well sure he had more reasons. There's resources in the middle east. American Imperialism continues to exist.

Nice conjecture. I can do that too;

he was probably seeking to make Iraq an example of successful Mid-East democracy, such that other Mid-east countries would see that and follow them out of the dark ages, hopefully creating conditions where Religious extremists who want to impose their strict (and unreasonable) sharia law on their country and others wouldn't go and blow people (especially the US) up.

As I said before, Only one of the person is demonstrably as was described. That person being YOU.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2010 10:42:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/22/2010 10:31:52 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
How did you determine that? controlled experiment? Or anecdotal evidence, for which any other variable could be responsible and you wouldn't know?

Demonstration?

http://www.boston.com...

http://www.allacademic.com...

http://www.jpost.com...

http://www.frumforum.com...

http://news.sky.com...

I didn't get my knowledge from Google, but it sure helps me out now.