Author Topic: A Troubling Poll (Read 5628 times)

Pyro · « **Reply #30 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:17:00 PM »

I bet that far more of the poll respondents, much less the authors(USA Today and CNN), don't even know what an Arab is and isn't.

"And Americans are split when asked if Arabs and Arab-Americans should carry some form of special identification."

Armbands seemed to be effective for this 60 years ago...

The poll was pretty stupid and pointed in its choices of questions and answers. Small wonder that it was USA Today and CNN that teamed up for it.

Wingnut_0 · « **Reply #31 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:18:00 PM »

I served 10 years in public service, both in the military and in civilian law enforcement. And under no circumstance will I support any incursion upon the Constitution.

In many different cases across America over the last 3 years racial profiling done for the "sake" of drug enforcement have been shot down as unconstitutional.

I paraphrase a quote from earlier, should all young white males also be singled out because of Timothy McVeigh?

The IRA also harbors terrorist amongst its ranks, should all red headed "irish looking" people also be under more scrutiny?

"Bending" laws, creating new one's or setting policy that singles out U.S. CITIZENS because of their beliefs,or racial background IS unconstitutional. And any person, or entity that sanctions such things is a bigger enemy to democracy than a terrorist for THEY are the ones that have the ability to change things politically.

Talk of this kind is not about security. It's about a bigger threat against what this country stands for. After seeing the sickening backlash against people that "look" middle eastern in the past several days if we start "Bending" where is the line drawn? Hell half the people targeted by violence in the last few days haven't even been MUSLIM! They only "Looked" the part.

If there are extra security measures it should apply to all not one of a certain ethnic background.

I Pledge Alligance to my flag, and the Republic for which it stands, One Nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #32 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:19:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM:
"Bill of Rights, Amendment IV - Right of search and seizure regulated.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

You have the right idea, Sandman, but the wrong Amendment. The one that really applies here is the 14th Amendment. Section 1 of that Amendment states:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The last part is the important one; it basically means that laws must be applied equally to all citizens regardless of race or ethnicity. It's very likely that singling out Arab-Americans violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

OTOH, this Amendment makes it clear that equal protection applies to citizens only. So it may be possible (unless some Supreme Court cases I'm not aware of expanded the scope of the equal protection clause) that non-citizens can be singled out as security risks.

-- Todd/DMF

easymo · « **Reply #33 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:23:00 PM »

I am a mick. The first time I got shot at, the man in the bunker next to me was black. I had never seen him before in my life. But he was wearing an American uniform. When the shooting started I was so happy he was there, I could have kissed the son of a squeak.

Its time to grow up guys. Bigotry is a waste of resources, and a distraction we don't need right now.

Nifty · « **Reply #34 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:47:00 PM »

wonder how many of you would support this "profiling" if you were of Arabic descent...

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #35 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:49:00 PM »

I don't know nifty. You don't by chance know if the 4 airliners crashed last tuesday stop to let anyone of Arab decent off do you?

AKDejaVu

Eagler · « **Reply #36 on:** September 17, 2001, 03:53:00 PM »

security and scutiny of all - whatever color/sex you are.

more face recognition cameras and software - if this was at the borders/airports, tues terrorists would never of got into the country..

I'll suffer the inconvience for the safety and security of my family

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #37 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:26:00 PM »

The apparent desire for some to appease to everyone through more diplomatic ways (read: political correctness) might work when you want to be hired for a job, run for president or be the cool guy.

Unfortunately, if you expect your country to remain free and for the sake of the freedom of others in this country- then racial profiling does indeed play a big part in this.

Whether you like it or not, not one member of any other race except of Middle Eastern decent stepped aboard those planes on Tuesday with the intent of crashing them into largly populated buildings.

Apply more strict policing methods when someone who is of Middle Eastern decent and is a non-natural born citizen wants to board a plane seems to be the only answer.

Unless I'm mistaken, how else do you stop hijackers that can easily blend in with someone of the same ethnic background?

This isn't about Timothy McVeigh, this isn't about the IRA, this is about what happened 6 days ago. This is about a cult of insane and self-righteous terrorist groups that happen to reign from the Middle East.

I see it as safety, you see it as bigotry.

When your safety is compromised because my so-called bigotry in which I wanted to more carefully screen non-natural born US citizens of Middle Eastern decent is not allowed in this country, look at yourself to blame for your death.
-SW

leonid · « **Reply #38 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:27:00 PM »

Either we all get searched, or nobody does. It's what America's about, equality and freedom.

Kratzer · « **Reply #39 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:34:00 PM »

Awww, what a load.

Being an American has nothing to do with ethnicity. That isn't PC, that's patriotism. Using race as the basis for police scrutiny is giving into fearful ignorance. Don't be scared to truly be an American.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #40 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:43:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kratzer:
Using race as the basis for police scrutiny is giving into fearful ignorance.

Oh my! You mean there were actually Africans, Russians, Italians and Japanese that hijacked those planes too?

Whether you believe me or not, you think that a special eye won't be dovoted to keepin' a watch on people that are of Middle Eastern decent?

I mean, I guess you believe that african americans aren't paid more attention to when it comes to drugs....
-SW

Karnak · « **Reply #41 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:48:00 PM »

Its funny watching conservatives run to give up some freedoms in the name of safty when they are so fond of the Ben Franklin quote in the context of gun control.

Paraphrase:

"Those who would trade freedom for a little security or safety deserve neither."

I can't tell you how many times I've seen conservatives use this statement in gun control debates, but it seems as soon as it is somebody else's freedoms on the line they are more than willing to give those up.

Based on this behavior I think it is pretty clear where they'd stand if they were Arab-Americans.

mrfish · « **Reply #42 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:51:00 PM »

what's with the shakey-jawed huffy teared patriotic soundbites and racial overtones?

it isn't racism it is profile matching!

every terrorist involved in the tues bombing has been arab: fact.

if there are 20 non-arabs and 1 arab in a boarding line, and you want to try to narrow your search to the most likely target,the arab is statistically far more efficient of a search target than the others, even though the probability of him/her being a terrorist is still extreeeeemely small. any probability is too much to ignore in the quest to protect human lives.

should we waive that guy/lady through without a search and then spend resources searching people with 0 matching characteristics?

there's no reason to accuse them or be rude or violent and kick people's doors in, but targeting arabs for searches in a boarding line scenario as a priority ahead of but not excluding others is very reasonable if you can divorce yourself from the emotion of it and just think about the magnitude of the act of narrowing down a nation of millions to find agressors.

[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #43 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:53:00 PM »

LOL Karnak!

And I wonder how many people would be fine with this if it hit EVERYONE. I for one would be. Many others would say they were too. But would that affect your decision to fly? Do you think it should do so on an even smaller scale?

Now... this is going to sound a little out of place here... what was used to take those planes down again? I'm somewhat amazed you found a way to throw gun control in there. Fricking pathetic.

AKDejaVu

Toad · « **Reply #44 on:** September 17, 2001, 04:54:00 PM »

What you are going to get is the maximum amount of "safety" that doesn't impede the operation to the point that the airlines cannot be profitable. They will pay the absolute minimum price they can get away with to achieve this. That's how the industry works.

If you think otherwise, you're dreaming.