|
I thought "Muslim" referred to a religion, not a race. The largest
population of Muslims is in Asia, not the Middle East, so who is the OP being racist against? You could stretch the definition of "racist" to religion, I know, but it is a real stretch in this case, IMO. ------------------ You are quite right. I think the OP really meant to say Muslim extremists with identifiably middle eastern features. |
If memory serves correctly, Timothy McVeigh, who was responsible for an
awful lot of deaths, was neither Muslim or from the Middle East. Matthew "Doug Miller" wrote in message ... In article , "Stephen M" wrote: And you're one serious racist. What, exactly, is racist in stating the _plain_fact_ that all of the acts of terrorism cited were indeed committed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40? He meant biggot. What's wrong with it is the implied conclusion that all muslims are murderers and/or terrorists. There is no such conclusion implied. You're looking at this from the wrong direction. It is obviously incorrect to suppose that all Muslims are terrorists; however, it is equally obvious that nearly all terrorists are Muslims, primarily Muslims from the middle east. And thus, if you're trying to find terrorists, it clearly makes more sense to look for them among middle eastern Muslims than among Scandinavian Christians or southeast Asian Buddhists. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response. |
Abe, no offense and I am not trying to be grammar/spelling cop here, but
if you really meant 'died' vs 'dyed' it would mean that there wasn't a compassionate conservative nearby willing to pull you out of the wool and save your life? G Well, it was late. Sorry bout that. In my business dealings I have discovered that there are assholes amongst all races and colours and religions and ages and genders. In my business dealings I have discovered that there are wonderful people amongst all races and colours and religions and ages and genders. It's MY job to sort them out. Could not have said it better myself. |
I thought "Muslim" referred to a religion, not a race. The largest
population of Muslims is in Asia, not the Middle East, so who is the OP being racist against? You could stretch the definition of "racist" to religion, I know, but it is a real stretch in this case, IMO. Even though the OP used the word Muslim, I read his message as referring to middle eastern Arabs, not Muslim men in general. |
With what these Musslims do to innocent people as "actual" compared to
what the Nazis merely "thought" (and still think) of the Jews, if this so entirely for real and as dangerous as death to innocents, then I don't see why not. This is an emergency!!! Then dial 911. |
Koran Verse 8:12
Don't be deceived by the Muslim apologists in this group. The Koran speaks for itself. [8.12] "When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." |
wrote:
What you are missing is the concept of the ability of a test to discriminate in the objective, rather than the political sense. How many Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40 fly on airliners each year? Twenty, Thirty, Fourty million perhaps? If you use 'Muslim man between the age of 17 and 40' as a screening criterion you're literally playing a million to one shot. Besides, I don't think anyone's passport, visa or driver's license is going to say 'Muslim' on it. Aside from that, if it is known that security is concentrating on a particular 'type' then any potential perpetrator will simply avoid appearing like that type and so will then have a smaller chance of being caught. Most 'Muslim men between 17 and 40' could easily pass for Italians, Greeks, Spainards, Armenians, Cypriots, etc, or some other religious persuation. In some respects, this is like pre-employment drug screening. If the testing really has a deterrant effect, then the only positive tests will be false positives because no drug addicts will take the test. I don't think that racial profiling will go away. The problem as you point out is that it is a very long shot. The risk and damage to honest people in society should not be underestimated. There is a case in Canada where a 'Muslim Canadian citizen, 17 -40 yrs old', educated and living in Canada with a wife and kids was seized in NY after returning from Tunisia. He had to stop in NY because if you fly on a US carrier, you stop in the US on your way back to Canada. He had to clear US customs, and was detained. There were apparently some discussions between US and Canadian 'authorities' who branded him a dangerous terrorist and after holding him without communication for 2 weeks, had him deported to Syria (the country of his birth, he left when he was 17). In Syria he was put in prison and tortured repeatedly, confessing all kinds of nonsense. see http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/ Eventually the Syrians figured out that he didn't really know anything and sent him back to Canada. There was no evidence against this man, no trial, no legal rights at all, for a Canadian citizen who was kidnapped by our governments and sent to a 3rd state for the express purpose of being tortured. (isn't torture illegal?) He has never been charged with any offence, even after returning! If the 'authorities' thought he was so dangerous, why is he walking around Ottawa today? Canadian and US 'authorities' pointed fingers for awhile, then it died down. After all, it only happened to a Muslim. The authorities are covering their behinds, destroying documents and claiming 'national security'. What have we all lost. What if it happened to you? On my way back from Boston, I was in the airport. I'd switched to an earlier flight because my meetings ended early. For some reason at the counter, the person made a mistake typing in my information and thought I was someone named (something like) Joe Whiteboy/Srinivanthan (yes, my boarding pass actually had the slash and the Srinivanthan is accurate) They kept my passport, and ordered me to take my luggage on a cart to the side and wait. My luggage was to be CT scanned, all of it, and special security officials waited with me. After a moment, I looked at my boarding pass, saw the error and pointed it out to them. They checked, saw their error, gave me a new boarding pass, my passport, took my bags for loading and said "have a nice day". No CT scan, no checking, nothing. Thank God my name is Joe Whiteboy and not Srinivanthan, or perhaps I'd be in Sri Lanka being tortured. We are in a war, a ground war, and a war of ideas. We should be vigilant to ensure that buildings and airplanes don't blow up. That may require some infringement on rights, but where are the checks and balances to make sure that innocent people are not harmed? Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? LOL. Many non-white citizens in our countries no longer have that right. For every one of those horrible acts listed by the OP, I could list imperialist aggression by us, acts that cost 10 times as many innocent lives. ( The Isrealis which are really just us on vacation in Palestine; most Isrealis were European/American/Canadian 2 generations ago.) Until we start to look at the problem with some balance it will never be solved. Unfortunately all the OP does is present easy to handle 'facts' without challenging people to think about why this is happening. Until we start to look at the problem objectively it will never be solved. Joe Whiteboy |
AAvK wrote:
Yeah...heh heh...if you only knew what the Q'uran involves in it's doctrine for "real muslim religion"... those terrorists are doing what it says, as learning from the Q'uran. Much of that doctrine adds up to the conclusions they come to do in anti-human actions as justified in Islam, based on what that book says. If one is a Christian or a Jew or an idol worshiper or a Buddhist then they are "the enemy" and deserve to die. Just because the Q'uran says so... that is a part of it. I invite you to read the Qu'ran, and study it's meaning. You might be surprised, and you would surely be better informed. |
Intersting example considering Muslim extremists do not allow women voting rights or basically any rights beyond what cattle have in the year 2005. Women vote in Iran don't they? They go to school and become Doctors don't they? Check your facts. I'm not claiming that the Islamic world is perfect, but please try to be accurate. |
In article , Rob Mitchell wrote:
I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. I believe that we should continue to use the word "terrorist" precisely because it does connote bad as opposed to good. Or do you mean to suggest that the mass murder of two thousand eight hundred some civilians one Tuesday morning in September was a morally neutral act? I don't agree. I believe that was an *evil* act, and our choice of words in referring to its perpetrators should reflect that. Try the word enemy. How about the word "murderer"? We have enemies. Yes, we do. Among them are radical Islamic terrorists. [moral relativism and blame-America nonsense snipped] -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response. |
In article , Rob Mitchell
wrote: I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. "Someone who does not know the difference between good and evil is worth nothing." -- Miecyslaw Kasprzyk, Polish rescuer of Jews during the Holocaust, New York Times, Jan. 30, 2005 |
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 20:33:55 -0500, Rob Mitchell wrote:
I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. Try the word enemy. We have enemies. In any war the two sides are enemies. To the British, the IRA are terrorists who kill innocent people. To some Irish people, they are just fighting to get rid of the oppressors and are justified. Take your pick. Same with Tamils, or Isrealis, same in the Sudan or Nigeria or... Ask yourself why the enemy is attacking you and ask if we have harmed them in any way, and we might be able to figure out how to stop the conflict, or we might decide we need to fight harder. BTW, the 'stop lists' contain more than just Muslims, as I found out. I don't think we should ask why they are what they are or why they do what they do, I think that rather than calling them "terrorists", we should call them "Murderous assholes" and we should strive with all haste to eradicate them, where ever they can be found. They are a cancer on the human condition. Sorry if this isn't "PC" enough. - Doug -- To escape criticism--do nothing, say nothing, be nothing." (Elbert Hubbard) |
In article , Rob Mitchell wrote:
Intersting example considering Muslim extremists do not allow women voting rights or basically any rights beyond what cattle have in the year 2005. Women vote in Iran don't they? They go to school and become Doctors don't they? Check your facts. I'm not claiming that the Islamic world is perfect, but please try to be accurate. They certainly *used* to, under the Shah. I don't think they do any more.... -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response. |
Rob Mitchell wrote: I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. Try the word enemy. We have enemies. I never accepted the term because they want others to be terrified. I call them paramilitary organizations and argue that they should be held to the same standards as regular military--especially the doctrine of command respnsibility. .... BTW, the 'stop lists' contain more than just Muslims, as I found out. Senator Ted Kennedy has been detained at airports several times evidently becuase T. Kennedy is one of hte names on the stop list. -- FF |
I don't think we should ask why they are what they are or why they do
what they do, I think that rather than calling them "terrorists", we should call them "Murderous assholes" and we should strive with all haste to eradicate them, where ever they can be found. They are a cancer on the human condition. Sorry if this isn't "PC" enough. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. You simply cannot eradicate terrorism without first eliminating the root causes. |
|
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 01:53:06 +0100, "no spam"
wrote: Koran Verse 8:12 Don't be deceived by the Muslim apologists in this group. The Koran speaks for itself. [8.12] "When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." you can take any written word, especially the bible, and find something in it to prove whatever point you have at the moment... The bottom line for me is that there are lugnuts in every race and religion... and to say that any one religion is good or bad or has good or bad people in it is a personal opinion, not a fact.. The other choice, of course, is to kill 'em all and let (insert name of who/what ever you might or might not worship) sort 'em out.. mac Please remove splinters before emailing |
|
|
Doug Miller wrote:
They certainly *used* to, under the Shah. I don't think they do any more.... -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) I'm not an expert, but I believe women were granted the right to vote and hold office in Iran in 1963 (under the Shah). For a more recent status see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6856181/ Women can vote and hold public office. However recently there has been a setback in that women won't be allowed to run for the Presidency in June. Initially it appeared that they would. That's too bad because perhaps Iran could have had a female president before the US has one. Things change slowly in all male dominated societies. .. Rob |
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:22:29 GMT, Nate Perkins
wrote: (Doug Miller) wrote in . com: In article , take out 'takeout' to reply wrote: But on the original question: What do you think the impact would be if every Arab or Muslim were pulled out of line at the airport and given a special search? One obvious result is that we'd catch more terrorists.... Do you really think all of the terrorists are going to be going through JFK customs wearing their red and white ghutras and carrying their Korans? No, but I certainly don't think that they are 90 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs; or for that matter, 70 or 80 year old able-bodied gray-haired women, or even 40 something, middle-aged, balding white guys. TSA stops and frisks more of them than 18 to 40 year-old middle-eastern appearing men. That make sense to you? Does that seem like a good use of resources? You think that after checking off 100 caucasians, getting to frisk one middle-eastern person helps prevent the potential of another terrorist hijacking? +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety Army General Richard Cody +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |
Mark & Juanita wrote in
: On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:22:29 GMT, Nate Perkins wrote: (Doug Miller) wrote in .com: In article , take out 'takeout' to reply wrote: But on the original question: What do you think the impact would be if every Arab or Muslim were pulled out of line at the airport and given a special search? One obvious result is that we'd catch more terrorists.... Do you really think all of the terrorists are going to be going through JFK customs wearing their red and white ghutras and carrying their Korans? No, but I certainly don't think that they are 90 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs; or for that matter, 70 or 80 year old able-bodied gray-haired women, or even 40 something, middle-aged, balding white guys. TSA stops and frisks more of them than 18 to 40 year-old middle-eastern appearing men. That make sense to you? Does that seem like a good use of resources? You think that after checking off 100 caucasians, getting to frisk one middle-eastern person helps prevent the potential of another terrorist hijacking? What's your point? Sorry, I have no interest in debating whether the fools running TSA or Homeland Security are profiling elderly handicapped grandmothers. I simply asked why some folks think that terrorists are going to announce their ethnic background and/or criminal intent. Perhaps we should err on the safe side, and just stop all males that have olive-colored skin? |
Whatever happened to the good guys wearing white hats and the bad guys
wearing black hats? And the good guys entered from the left and the bad guys entered from the right. It was so easy to tell them apart. What has this world come to?! No one ever follows the rules anymore. Glenna |
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 01:53:06 +0100, "no spam"
wrote: Koran Verse 8:12 Don't be deceived by the Muslim apologists in this group. The Koran speaks for itself. [8.12] "When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." Now, go read it in context. For example the next verse: [8:13] This is because they acted adversely to Allah and His Apostle; and whoever acts adversely to Allah and His Apostle-- then surely Allah is severe in requiting (evil). It's clear from the entire Sura that the 'unbelievers' referred to are not merely non-Muslims, they are enemies who are actively at war with the Muslims. When they desire peace, the same Sura commands that it be given to them. [8.61] And if they incline to peace, then incline to it and trust in Allah; surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing. In other words, Muslims are to make peace with their enemies even if they have doubts about their enemies' sincerity. In a similar vein they are enjoined to honor any truce they might make with their enemies. Unfortunately almost no non-Muslim Americans bother to read the Koran, even in translation, except the people who go through picking and choosing the verses they want to emphasize how evil Muslims are. (Never mind the Hadith, which most of them have never even heard of!) (Oh yeah, don't be confused by the reference to 'terror'. That's a translation issue. The term isn't related to 'terrorism.') Don't get me wrong. Islamic culture is very different from Western culture. There are profound differences and a lot of things on either side that the other side finds unacceptable. Islam and Christianity likewise have major differences. But caricaturing and demonizing the religion and its beliefs doesn't help anyone -- except maybe Al Queda. --RC "Sometimes history doesn't repeat itself. It just yells 'can't you remember anything I've told you?' and lets fly with a club. -- John W. Cambell Jr. |
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 20:33:55 -0500, Rob Mitchell
wrote: Matthew wrote: There is no such conclusion implied. You're looking at this from the wrong direction. It is obviously incorrect to suppose that all Muslims are terrorists; however, it is equally obvious that nearly all terrorists are Muslims, primarily Muslims from the middle east. And thus, if you're trying to find terrorists, it clearly makes more sense to look for them among middle eastern Muslims than among Scandinavian Christians or southeast Asian Buddhists. I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. I disagree. Terrorist is a rather exact term for what these people are. Try the word enemy. We have enemies. In any war the two sides are enemies. We have many enemies in the Muslim world who are not terrorists. Hell we have plenty of non-terrorist enemies in France, Germany and here in the United States. Fine. Let them rant and rave as much as they want. As long as they are not actively trying to harm us they're entitled to their opinions and the most we should do is try to persuade them. The fact that someone is our enemy alone doesn't justify hunting them down and killing them. snip BTW, the 'stop lists' contain more than just Muslims, as I found out. Because not all our active enemies are Muslims. I hope that comes as a surprise to no one. --RC "Sometimes history doesn't repeat itself. It just yells 'can't you remember anything I've told you?' and lets fly with a club. -- John W. Cambell Jr. |
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:08:25 -0800, "mp" wrote:
I don't think we should ask why they are what they are or why they do what they do, I think that rather than calling them "terrorists", we should call them "Murderous assholes" and we should strive with all haste to eradicate them, where ever they can be found. They are a cancer on the human condition. Sorry if this isn't "PC" enough. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Yeah, and they write songs about them, too. The Germans used to have a great one about some young freedom fighter named Horst and his weasel. Moral relativism is the great disease of modern thought. (Okay, that's an overstatement. Some of its more vociferous practicioners show no signs of any thought whatsoever.) --RC snip "Sometimes history doesn't repeat itself. It just yells 'can't you remember anything I've told you?' and lets fly with a club. -- John W. Cambell Jr. |
|
|
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 13:39:11 -0800, "AAvK" wrote:
One obvious result is that we'd catch more terrorists.... With what these Musslims do to innocent people as "actual" compared to what the Nazis merely "thought" (and still think) of the Jews, if this so entirely for real and as dangerous as death to innocents, then I don't see why not. This is an emergency!!! And there is a real temptation to do truly stupid things in emergencies. Ask the Japanese who were in the US during WWII. We have to strike a balance here. --RC "Sometimes history doesn't repeat itself. It just yells 'can't you remember anything I've told you?' and lets fly with a club. -- John W. Cambell Jr. |
|
|
"Rob Mitchell" wrote in message . .. I think we should stop using the word terrorist because it conotes good vs. bad. Try the word enemy. We have enemies. In any war the two sides are enemies. To the British, the IRA are terrorists who kill innocent people. To some Irish people, they are just fighting to get rid of the oppressors and are justified. Take your pick. Same with Tamils, or Isrealis, same in the Sudan or Nigeria or... Ask yourself why the enemy is attacking you and ask if we have harmed them in any way, and we might be able to figure out how to stop the conflict, or we might decide we need to fight harder. BTW, the 'stop lists' contain more than just Muslims, as I found out. No, call the terrorist a terrorist. If s/he were a member of an organized open conflict, different matter. What instills terror is the victims cannot anticipate the action. The terrorist strives to remain anonymous, otherwise there is no terror. Though it's obvious you are an apologist for terror(ists)ism, there is no justification for it, save in the belief of the terrorist. |
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message ... No, but I certainly don't think that they are 90 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs; or for that matter, 70 or 80 year old able-bodied gray-haired women, or even 40 something, middle-aged, balding white guys. TSA stops and frisks more of them than 18 to 40 year-old middle-eastern appearing men. That make sense to you? Does that seem like a good use of resources? You think that after checking off 100 caucasians, getting to frisk one middle-eastern person helps prevent the potential of another terrorist hijacking? Red-headed, properly identified active-duty US Army male, accompanying female with military dependent ID, and twin boys 5 months old. Full searches at DTW and ORD. |
In article , "mp" wrote:
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Oh, really? You mean you don't make any distinction at all between those who fight against an occupying army, and those who deliberately murder civilians? The French Resistance in WW2, and the German SS troops who masscred French *civilians* in retaliation for Resistance attacks on German *soldiers* were morally interchangeable? You simply cannot eradicate terrorism without first eliminating the root causes. I agree. Let's start by eliminating radical Islam. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com) Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response. |
No, but I certainly don't think that they are 90 year old grandmothers
in wheelchairs; or for that matter, 70 or 80 year old able-bodied gray-haired women, or even 40 something, middle-aged, balding white guys. TSA stops and frisks more of them than 18 to 40 year-old middle-eastern appearing men. That make sense to you? Does that seem like a good use of resources? To a certain degree, Yes. No group should ever draw a bye (sp?). If you *never* search 8-year old girls (or insert grand mothers, or any other low-risk group) terrorists will recognize this hole in the system and start using 8-year-old girls as mules for weapons. Sure concentrate your resources on high-risk targets, but no group gets a complete pass. This good policy. Therefore complaining about the statistically mimimal grandmother who gets "secondary inspection" is a not a very well-thought out point of view. -Steve |
"Glenna Rose" wrote in message news:fc.003d094101e326683b9aca0033fcb9f4.1e3266d@p mug.org... Whatever happened to the good guys wearing white hats and the bad guys wearing black hats? And the good guys entered from the left and the bad guys entered from the right. It was so easy to tell them apart. What has this world come to?! No one ever follows the rules anymore. Glenna It was tough to grow up and find out that those rules never did apply. It was always so easy when everything was B&W; I never had to actually weigh and consider and decide on my own. Bob |
I've read all the posts/replys.....some are funny and some well meant.
One thing i "know" is that when armed conflict occurs .... non combatants suffer the most. Soldiers / terrorists / crusaders, accept the fate that might await them.....all others must wait in true fear & terror. Sometimes i fear more the people waving flags & "books" than the ones carrying a rifle. Few bullets are spent without reason.....but many have been injured with words from books & had the day clouded under the shadow of a flag. When i am searched at the airport to travel in my own country, i feel the enemy has already won a battle, though not the war. When i & my children pay out the taxes we do to support the free wheeling programs & expenses incurred by our government to "keep the peace" i feel the enemy has already won. When we had to take down a Nativity on the courthouse lawn last year....the enemy had won. Last year someone defaced a Mosque near my hometown, again an enemy won. When i hear the words RagHead, Honkey, ******, Greaser etc. i know an enemy has won. Who is the enemy ? many things to many people.......maybe the best we can do it to not become an enemy to ourselves or to others. Just an opinion, very off topic, but inportant to me....and if you don't like it then that is just too darn bad. Hope i didn't make an enemy ! |
mac davis wrote: On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:07:46 -0500, (tony stramella) wrote: This is not the proper forum for this. then don't read it... if you haven't figured it out yet, OT means Off Topic... Are you one of those assholes who thinks it's OK to park in the fire lane so long as you put your flashers on? -- FF |
Note crossposting and follow-ups.
wrote: On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:31:00 GMT, (Doug Miller) wrote: In article , take out 'takeout' to reply wrote: But on the original question: What do you think the impact would be if every Arab or Muslim were pulled out of line at the airport and given a special search? One obvious result is that we'd catch more terrorists.... Considering that the terrorists are somewhat smarter than cherrystone clams, I doubt it. Among other things, how do you tell the difference between Yussif al Ibrahim and Jose Gonzales just by looking at them? Precisely. If all Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40 are searched befor bording airplanes then any Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40 who plan to hijack the plane will simply grow a beard, wear a turban, and claim to be a Sihk, or some such other ethnic person not subject to mandatory searching. -- FF |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter