[bin Laden] 'It's only a question of time'

/me bows.

 

Yeah, come on now Lumpy.

Are you trying to say there might've been economic damaged incurred when, for generations on end, people were forced to work their entire lives without pay, while their "masters" recieved all profits? That, conceivably, rampant housing discrimination and block-busting might've affected home equity values--the single greatest source of wealth for most Americans--differentially across races? That perhaps, not having the right to vote, and being locked out of all but menial job and hihger education might be partially responsible for unusually low socio-economic group performance? That the Supreme Court has ruled that there is a compelling interest in diverse classrooms to reflect the diverse workplace and global market, per the numerous amicus curae briefings of major corporations like GM, 3M, etc. And it's not like race isn't one of many factors (and, mathematically, not the dominant one) considered that help get a more complete picture of the particular candidate.

And it's certainly not as justifiable as being flagrantly racist, and calling for internment of non-whites, and racial profiling. So you just stop with all your logical "crpa" Lumpy, and let the man make his point.

 

Just a note on something from the previous page; the President can go ahead without a warrent and have a wiretap performed with just cause. Within 72 hours after the wiretap they must submit to have a warrent issued, which it will be. Bush did not get warrents after these wiretaps were performed, that is why it was considered illegal.

Racial profiling was given a bad name by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse jackson. If a police officer gets a call from dispatch that a (insert race here) male just robbed a store or shot someone and was seen driving away in whatever make of car, then the officer is going to look for a certain make of car being driven by that race of person. Same goes for prevention.
Through whatever intel they recieve, let's say a gang of robbers may be targeting a bank. If they have been identified with a certain skin tone then anyone waiting at the target is going to be looking for just that. This can be abused of course, but then again anything can be.

 

Amen. If I'm getting on a plane and I see a group of Arab men between the ages of 19-35 in line next to me muttering prayers to Allah, I'm definitely going to keep my eye on them.

Boxcutters don't scare me--I've had a pair of scissors rammed through my foot.

 

The bigger question would be what degree and which parties involved. If the CIA bungled a lead on an attack in Paris, would the US be responsible?

Remember, France did nuke Springfield.

 

I just have to post this:

This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself?nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.


- President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Inaugural Address, March 4 1933

 

Coming from a man seldom shown to be a cripple by the media, Lee.

 

I don't know whether to be surprised or not at how completely you miss the issue. Questioning/wathcing someone because they match the physical description of a specific person wanted for a specific crime, is not defined as racial profiling. Nor, more particularly, is what we're talking about in this thread. No one in the thread yet has complained that you shouldn't double-check if you think you see Osama Bin Laden walking down the street.

What's being advocated in this thread, and what is objected to and racist is classic racial profiling. For instance, a black man is seen walking in a nice area of town. The police stop, question, and generally harass him, because his presence counts as "suspicious behavior." Note, the man wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary. But the police are operating under the racist assumption that a black man can't have the kind of money/class/taste that would attract someone to such an affluent area. So, they conclude, he must be trying to rob someone, or at least planning to. That would be racial profiling. Or, to use an exmaple more applicable to the thread, try this. A man of middle eastern descent dressed in a gallibia mentions Allah in public. Now, there is no look out for any terror suspect, and no descriptions of anyone wanted that remotely match this gentleman. And mentioning Allah isn't really that out of the ordinary, considering the frequency with which Christians reference God. But according to racial profiling, the very fact of his being a Middle Eastern Muslim means he should be heavily harassed, preferrably arrested, and treated as if he were guilty. Because after all, as I suppose the logic goes, Muslims don't really belong in the US anyway--the only reason they'd come is to commit terrorist acts.

That is the disgusting and repugnant face of racial profiling. It is an entirely racist endeavor with gaping holes in logic even if we accept its appallingly false premises.

 

What Jabba said. <3

 

As I said, it can be abused.

Let's try an essay:

The Myth of Racial Profiling

No one is saying that arresting or harrassing someone based on skin tone is right.

 

Now why do you think that is? Because of insensible leaders or blind citizens? Or both?

Or perhaps being a great civilization means that you're targeted a lot more by terrorist groups that despise the power of control that a great civilization possesses. Any threat against a civilization would quickly drive fear and anger in the citizens and leaders, right? No matter how much they might decline to admit it. Such fear, anger and uncertainty are what drive a civilization to the ground, I think. Perhaps the terrorists have a bigger effect on us that goes beyond just blowing things up.

 

Or did I just blow you away with that post?

 

Moved from the YJCC to The Senate.

Continue discussion .... now.

 

[bin Laden] 'It's only a question of time'

To which I say---do your worst, you filthy pretentious bastard.


Cause Osama, you don't understand--we Americans are pretty damn pissed off over damn near everything.

Alito is likely to be the next Supreme Court judge-- half of the country is pissed off.
Creationism/ID is taken out of the public school forum---the other half of America is pissed off.
Democrats are pissed at Republicans, Republicans are pissed at Democrats.

I can guarantee you this one, Mr. Bin Laden---we are so damn pissed off that if any of your little Jihadists try anything on our dirt, you are going to have the same thing on your hands that you had in Pennsylvania on 9/11. We--the ordinary pissed off citizenry--will rise to your challenge and beat you, just as we have before.
because you know what---we don't need a stinking department to tell us when we are safe----we create our own safety.

So prepare to meet Allah--cause he'll be sending you on a one-way ticket to hell.

 

So prepare to meet Allah--cause he'll be sending you on a one-way ticket to hell.

"So I don't know where he [bin Laden] is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you."- President Dubya

 

Lee, doesn't that kind of "Air Force One/ID4" "end of movie" speech sound prentious to you when you're typing it?

In any event, bin Laden's not dangerous. He was only ever as dangerous as those willing to die in his name, in pursuit of his ideals, and last I checked that network was smashed.

E_S

 

Amen. If I'm getting on a plane and I see a group of Arab men between the ages of 19-35 in line next to me muttering prayers to Allah, I'm definitely going to keep my eye on them.

[Obi-Wan]Then the terrorists have already won.[/Obi-Wan] By your logic, all black people should fear white Christians as potential Klan members. How does that help anything?


I can guarantee you this one, Mr. Bin Laden---we are so damn pissed off that if any of your little Jihadists try anything on our dirt, you are going to have the same thing on your hands that you had in Pennsylvania on 9/11.

You mean we're going to go after him, eventually give up on catching him, but then use the national anger at the attacks to try and justify an unnecessary war with a country that had nothing to do with what bin Laden did the year-and-a-half before?


E_S, I hope you're right, I really do.

 

He just can't help but say the wrong things. I mean, it really seems like he's trying to say everything wrong.

Laden is a coward, but he's a credible coward. We know he's done this before and I hope it's the wiretaps that break down any sort of attack because nothing else seems to working when trying to catch bin Laden and his gang.

 

I said I'm going to keep my eye on them. Not like I'm going to pull out an automatic and wipe them out. In this day and age, one has to be aware of their surroundings.

Like after Columbine, I started actually paying attention to my high school--memorizing every hallway, knowing where every door went to, so that if something should happen, I'd feel I'd have some advantage to fight back and get as many people out as possible.

No. I mean that the Government won't respond--the citizenry will. I'm willing to bet that if anyone in the post-9/11 US pulled a boxcutter on a plane, there would probably be an angry mob wanting to take him out.


Besides, what other country would we invade. Canada?

 

Bin Laden is irrelevant. Unless we as a country and society make him relevant. Unless we allow him to do so, he cannot affect our lives in anything more than a temporary, isolated and minor way.

But of course we're allowing him to do just that.

 

His tapes are minor and even his threats could be considered minor since he likes to pass those out like free candy. But the events that happen from him are not minor. The amount of damage he can cause is not minor.

I'm not here to pass blame on Bush, or Congress or anyone else ... but come on. You don't care about him all that much? What kind of message does that send if another traumatic attack were to happen? Are we back to square one after only 4 1/2 years? Are we back to ignoring terrorist threats? Do we think we're safer now because a big attack has already happened?

 

KW, I have a question...

Is al Qaeda irrelevant too?

Or just bin Laden? If just the head, then I'd probably agree with you.

 

Racial profiling, the NSA wiretapping without warrants, the PATRIOT ACT, these are all items that make me stop and think every time I hear someone agree with them because only "terrorists" need fear these measures.

On the slippery slip of giving the federal government more and more powers the definition of a "terrorist" could be drastically different 20 years from now. Anyone who dissents or questions decisions could be a terrorist.

Hysteria is not a method of combating terrorism. Unraveling the safeguards of the breadth of the executive branch's power because of a "clear and present" danger is not wise method, either.

<[-]> Saber

 

So basically you think that no matter how severe the situation is, no branch of government should consider themselves above the law, right? Even when they consider that it's helping the country?

I use the term "helping" very loosely as you might have gathered.