Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Critical Bill
In case you forgot. We HAD a catastrophe on 9/11. Spain, Bali, London, Morocco, Jordan......the list goes on.

Frankly I do not subscribe to the idea that we ought to concentrate on certain profiles.

The picture in yesterday's papers of the woman who was going to put explosives in her baby's bottle proves that we cannot be secure with profiling as the basis for searches.

As with Israel, we MUST consider everyone suspect.

Ranting about profiling might make good talk show fodder but is a vacuous argument.

9 posted on 08/17/2006 4:41:13 AM PDT by OldFriend (I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag.....and My Heart to the Soldier Who Protects It.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: OldFriend

Dedicating more effort on Muslims as opposed to Christians or Jews is not vacuous. It is wise use of finite resources.


11 posted on 08/17/2006 5:11:35 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Democrats soil institutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: OldFriend; All

Israel has for years considered everyone a suspect. We are not even close to understanding what the average Israeli has gone throught since the birth of their great nation. The need for profiling is documented by the text of the article itself. The FBI, the CIA, and all major law enforcement agencies use personnel called profilers to aid in the solving of cases, such as serial killers. The PC establishment has done it's best to make us all the same -- just like their favorite ex-country the USSR. The woman in question, if I am not mistaken, was a follower of the pedophile prophet and just means that we expand our "profile" to Muslim women as well. This technique is adaptable due to the changing nature of the threat.


12 posted on 08/17/2006 5:42:48 AM PDT by unionblue83 (Duty is ours; consequences are God's. -- Stonewall Jackson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: OldFriend
[...a bunch of anti-profiling nonsense.]

Forget race or ethnicity then. It isn't their race that must be profiled, but the violent worldview to which they've subscribed. It's called Islam.

Let's put it this way. If there was an organization that held Nazi beliefs and actually had collaborated with the Nazis in WWII that was discovered to be committing mass murder and had several members in the United States how would you react? What if that group had actually attacked the U.S. and killed nearly 3,000 people? What if that group was responsible for more mass murder worldwide than the number of Jews exterminated by the Nazis in WWII? What if the members of that group had a document that outlined the groups beliefs and that document included a call for endless violence against anyone opposed to them. And that document, in fact, detailed a strategy for world domination wherein everyone must join their group or lives as slaves or be exterminated. What if that group was violently anti-Semitic? What if members of that group kept kidnapping innocent people and then video taping themselves cutting their heads off? Would you want to know who the members of that group are within the United States? Would you want strong measures to be taken to deal with that group? If you permitted that group to continue existing (for whatever insane reason) what reasonable measures should be taken to ensure that the group is not engaging in murderous conspiracies as they had so many times before?

You know what group I'm talking about. I don't care if their worldview is a religion or not. If the Nazis called their worldview a "religion" should we have just let them alone? Islam openly seeks world domination. Islam insists that you and your family either convert, or become a slave (a Dhimmi) to them, or be exterminated. Unchecked, it is only a matter of time until you and your family will have to make that choice - join, live as a slave, or have your throats cut. Islam is spreading throughout the globe with over 7 million members of that group in the United States alone. They don't get a pass just because they're considered to be a religion. Given their stated goal and the historical record they should be treated accordingly.

18 posted on 08/17/2006 6:59:11 AM PDT by Spiff (Death before Dhimmitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: OldFriend
"Ranting about profiling might make good talk show fodder but is a vacuous argument"

This is exactly why we keep losing the debate with the left. No matter what we want to do, if your opponent can cite 1 or 2 examples that would get around it well then the argument is wrong.

NOTHING we do will be 100% effective but even though the occasional Tim McVeigh will get by, profiling, based upon a number of criteria, will always be better than screening kids in strollers and grandmothers. Resources should be focused mostly (NOT COMPLETELY) on the cancer that inhabits this earth called mudslimes.

July 4th 2002, at Mt. Rushmore, we were prevented from entering the viewing area with a nail file. What the hell were we going to do with a nail file? A kid in diapers, in a stroller, was taken out of line and wanded and patted down. (I really wanted to see the diaper leak all over the JBTs hands but no such luck).

21 posted on 08/17/2006 7:58:25 AM PDT by Wurlitzer (The difference between democrats and terrorists is the terrorists don't claim to support the troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson