Sure, lets compare history.
A former Israeli security chief and now security consultant contradicts you. They profile, but not based on race. I think it's entirely prudent for Israeli security to profile those with home addresses in Gaza...
Shoul racial profiling be considered off limits?
- Thread starter ansutherland
- Start date
Sure, lets compare history.
A former Israeli security chief and now security consultant contradicts you. They profile, but not based on race. I think it's entirely prudent for Israeli security to profile those with home addresses in Gaza...
How many planes have been hijacked from Ben Gurion?
Perhaps if you reread my post and picture it in sarcastic purple, you might get the point.
Israeli's have the add issue of looking like the usual suspect.
No I didn't. How many of those compared to similar looking people do they find anually? The Israeli's face a threat from a specific group, 24/7, but I guess in your efforts to look like "ya got me", you over looked that part...:roll:
Good goin' chief, ya got me. Feel better now?
Hmmm, interesting. I wonder if the white Christian aid worker will draw the first flag, as apposed to the black Somalian immigrant?
Critical thought and deductive reasoning dictates otherwise.
Last edited:
What similar looking people are you talking about? I have no idea what your question even means. How many Germans and Japanese compared to...Scandinavians and Koreans?
...in my first response to you I noted that they profile based on residence, like someone from Gaza. I didn't overlook that at all. For the record, profiling based on residence is not racial profiling.
Feeling better would mean I felt worse before. Sorry chief, but that ain't the case.
:roll: You really need me to point out that Palestinians, Arabs in general and Israeli's look similar to one another?
Agreed. But you're talking about an area where the people are of similar appearance. And at no point in time, have I advocated for "racial profiling" to be the sole criteria.
In Israel it isn't remotely sound to use as the main criteria. Here, not as the main criteria, but it should be very much PART of the criteria. Race should and is, part of the criteria in any area, as it should be, because it actually applies. Note the word part. As I have said since the get go, in more then just this thread on this topic. If you think the Israeli's immediately Flag the white Christian aid worker from Yemen before they flag the Black Somalian immigrant, with one way tickets. You need a lesson in deductive reasoning and critical thought.
Then there's some other issue you have?Feeling better would mean I felt worse before. Sorry chief, but that ain't the case.
Look Ton, I know the whole though of using race in a profile flies in the face of your liberal politically correct ideology. But stats, which I know for a fact you believe and employ, show that race is part of the equation. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it is wrong.
Last edited:
No. I don't. In fact that's one of the many difficulties and surely one of the many reasons why they don't racially profile.
I know, and again, I know
What part though? The only situation where the race would be even a primary or secondary consideration for screening that I can think of is when Intelligence agencies put out warnings about specific individuals. Race in that case is obviously important. I would think things like behaviour, travel specifics like place of departure and luggage amount, method of payment, even age would all come before race for non-specific screening though.
Sometimes it's just in the eyes of the beholder. I suggest you need more caffeine
Then why ask?No. I don't. In fact that's one of the many difficulties and surely one of the many reasons why they don't racially profile.
I know, and again, I know
:lol:
I won't argue that. But that still doesn't rule out race. Again, at no time have I stated it should be the primary, secondary, or tertiary criteria. But it is and should be part of the criteria, because it is relevant.
It's a fact that not all Muslims are from the Middle East. It's a fact that not all Muslims are terrorists. It's a fact that most terrorists, are Muslim. The stats would indicate the fact that the majority of Muslims are not North American Caucasian, that makes race a consideration.
It's a sad state of affairs, but it is a very real truth.
I'll concede to that. Having an issue with people reading into my posts, I can see that maybe I read to much into your, my apologies. BTW...I'm not allowed caffeine anymore, thanx for pointing that out and making the long, long, long, long withdrawal just that much more difficult...:lol:Sometimes it's just in the eyes of the beholder. I suggest you need more caffeine
No caffeine? I'll have another bodum full for you. Real cream and dark sugar with lots of molasses.
Best coffee in the hood.
Best coffee in the hood.
Definitely.
For that matter, how many 80 year old ANYONEs tried to hijack a plane of drive a carbomb into a building?
People trained to spot anamalous activities or people are a little more observant than Joe Average, you know. lol
It's a point.
And my point was use any profiling that's available.
What happens if you have a Afro-American bar and an Asian goes in wearing trench coat that bulges in a weird spot? You look closer and the Asian has Triad tats.
Right. Politicians should be wary of racial profiling, cops and whatnot shouldn't. They should just be objective (not biased) and use whatever profiling is necessary.
Dead wrong. Profiling is a psychological tool, and criminals of various types have certain behavior patterns.
Actually, a lot of those bombers are quite intelligent. Just because you or some Christian, Buddhist, Inuit, or whatever isn't as dedicated to your beliefs as someone else might be doesn't make you any smarter than them.
lol You been peeking in our kitchen window? We use a bodem, real cream from a cow, and demerara sugar.
I realize that the bombing of other countries can be considered terrorism, but we do not pack our smart bombs and F22 Raptors on board a commercial jet. There is a very drastic difference between the terrorism that the west engages in and the terrorism that the others that I am referring to engage in. Sure the end result is the same in both, death. The way they are carried out is far different. There is not much protection from the terrorising that the west does, but there is for the sort that is perpetrated against us, it's called profiling.
Just a challenge to those who say that people of all faiths, cultures, nationalities, and colours are equally likely to terrorize in the matter that we have been discussing....and by that I mean the kind of terrorizing that can be detected from means such as profiling. Here is the challenge: Come up with a couple of examples.
Racial profiling is difficult at time when names of perps give away much of their background and gender.
Profiling seems a bit incidental when some terrorist acts murder thousands of people in one event.
More "magic" legalese (now you see it now you don't).
Profiling seems a bit incidental when some terrorist acts murder thousands of people in one event.
More "magic" legalese (now you see it now you don't).
A few problems with racial profiling:
Does the terrorist look hispanic:
Unraveling the case of confessed terrorist Bryant Vinas - CNN.com
Or blond:
Jihad Jane, American who lived on Main Street - CNN.com
Or agnostic:
YouTube - Timothy McVeigh interview (60 Minutes) 2000
If we overly focus on race, more can fly through the radar.
Does the terrorist look hispanic:
Unraveling the case of confessed terrorist Bryant Vinas - CNN.com
Or blond:
Jihad Jane, American who lived on Main Street - CNN.com
Or agnostic:
YouTube - Timothy McVeigh interview (60 Minutes) 2000
If we overly focus on race, more can fly through the radar.
No, but no one said they were looking for a hispanic, in this instance they were looking for a Caucasian male. Sometimes racial profiling is needed.
Whoopy looks dangerous to me!
I don't know about dangerous but I would not want to wake up and find her next to me.
I don't know about dangerous but I would not want to wake up and find her next to me.
I think that is why it should only be one type of profiling, not the whole shebang.
EG, if one hears of an impending threat to a particular aircraft, would one not profile pilots? Or anyone else having to do with aircraft? That would be profiling on the basis of career.
To think lowly paid airport security guards will stop terrorism is really pushing it. However there are other people checking and you have to have a system and start somewhere. You have to devlope a system a bit more sophisticated than
brown skin=danger.
The idea of all these basic limits on terrorism does feed the fear, meaning, there is nothing we can do about it, so let's not try and stay in state of constant fear forever. Just like Israel, which has reasons to fear its national security in ways Canada does not. And Israel uses advanced racial profiling with information because it works.
brown skin=danger.
The idea of all these basic limits on terrorism does feed the fear, meaning, there is nothing we can do about it, so let's not try and stay in state of constant fear forever. Just like Israel, which has reasons to fear its national security in ways Canada does not. And Israel uses advanced racial profiling with information because it works.