Another terrorist on the prowl?

[Lynn7]

From Drudge report originally Washington Post:

washingtonpost.com
Student Arrested After Pilot Uniform Found

The Associated Press
Friday, September 16, 2005; 11:39 PM



MEMPHIS, Tenn. -- A university student from Egypt was ordered held without bond after prosecutors said they found a pilot's uniform, chart of Memphis International Airport and a DVD titled "How an Airline Captain Should Look and Act" in his apartment.

The FBI is investigating whether Mahmoud Maawad, 29, had any connection to terrorists. He is awaiting trial on charges of wire fraud and fraudulent use of a Social Security number.

Maawad, who is in the United States illegally, told the judge during a hearing Thursday that he is studying science and economics at the University of Memphis.

"My school is everything. I stay in this country for seven years; I stay for the school," he said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Parker said Thursday that the airport-related items were found during a Sept. 9 search.

"The specific facts and circumstances are scary," Parker said.

U.S. Magistrate Judge S. Thomas Anderson ruled that Maawad be held without bond.

"It is hard for the court to understand why he has a large concentration of those (aviation) items, and nothing else to indicate Mr. Maawad plans to stay in the community," Anderson said.

Maawad had ordered $3,000 in aviation materials, including DVDs titled "Ups and Downs of Takeoffs and Landings," "Airplane Talk," "Mental Math for Pilots" and "Mastering GPS Flying," FBI agent Thad Gulczynski testified.

The company reported Maawad to authorities when he didn't pay for $2,500 of merchandise it had delivered, Gulczynski said.

__________________________________________________ _____


I think it's terrible our country is still letting foreign students in this country to study wothout monitoring them. My first instinct is to say that I don't think foreign students are entitiled to the same privacy rights as American citizens- any thoughts on this?

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I think it's terrible our country is still letting foreign students in this country to study wothout monitoring them. My first instinct is to say that I don't think foreign students are entitiled to the same privacy rights as American citizens- any thoughts on this?

Wow, that was rather xenophobic.

As for the kid, I wanna hear more info about thi before I make up my mind, but even if he isn't a terrorist he is a dumbass for having all that stuff in a semi-public area.

[Tuukka]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005JLS9.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I think it's terrible our country is still letting foreign students in this country to study wothout monitoring them. My first instinct is to say that I don't think foreign students are entitiled to the same privacy rights as American citizens- any thoughts on this?

Right now it seems likely that I'm going to L.A to work on a TV production next year. I'll be there 3-4 months.

It'll be interesting that according you I should have CIA or FBI following me around, and you think I don't have any right for privacy because I'm a foreigner.

Sounds like a totalitarian country to me. Countries like Soviet Union, North-Korea, Iraq, etc, have practises like that. Free countries don't.

[Criminal Rock]

There’s a difference between controlling (following as you put it) and monitoring.

We can’t just pick and choose which foreigners we want to monitor, it isn’t fair… and considering that most, if not all the terrorists are middle-easterners, only monitoring THEM would bring the US more beef for racial profiling (though I know you didn’t even mention it, I‘m just saying). And not monitoring noncitizens is a dumb idea considering all the threats we receive are from foreign countries, or people from them, bsides the fact that immigrants blew up several of our buildings.

We cant allow anything to happen within our country, and if that means that a non-native resident have to periodically check in to some authority, so be it.

[TheDeadWalk]

This is the type of potential terrorism that should be looked into. Suspcicious persons and groups already inside the United States, and special organized persons or groups outside of the United States.

There's a huge difference between destructive masterminds in the name of Islam, and Hamid who's running down the streets of Iraq with his grandfather's rifle.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Why do people want America to not protect itself from terrorism?

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by Tai Mai Jew
There’s a difference between controlling (following as you put it) and monitoring.

We can’t just pick and choose which foreigners we want to monitor, it isn’t fair… and considering that most, if not all the terrorists are middle-easterners, only monitoring THEM would bring the US more beef for racial profiling (though I know you didn’t even mention it, I‘m just saying). And not monitoring noncitizens is a dumb idea considering all the threats we receive are from foreign countries, or people from them, bsides the fact that immigrants blew up several of our buildings.

We cant allow anything to happen within our country, and if that means that a non-native resident have to periodically check in to some authority, so be it.

I don't have a problem being checked by authority every once in a while. In fact you have to go through that process anyway if you want to work in USA. USA is a much more protective country against foreign workers than any other western country I know - It's a real pain in the ass to get a working permission, even if you have everything 100% ready and your employer is waiting for you to come.

But it seemed to me that Lynn7's idea of monitoring foreigners and ripping them off of their privacy wasn't exactly the same idea as you seem to have.

Frankly, if I don't have a right to privacy when I visit USA, then it feels like visiting a totalitarian country. The whole idea that I'm ripped off of my basic civil rights when I enter the turf of USA sounds completely insane. I hope such thing never happens.

BTW, how many terrorist-esque attacks in USA over the last decade have been done by USA citizens, and how many of them have been done by foreigners? I don't know the answer, but I think it's an interesting question.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Why do people want America to not protect itself from terrorism?

I think people do, it's just that opinions on what is defined as protecting varies accordingly.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Yeah, but opinions that are basically saying "We don't want you to protect yourselves" are great.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Yeah, but opinions that are basically saying "We don't want you to protect yourselves" are great.

Did someone say that? I didn't notice.

But I think american people shold protect themselves more. And especially they should protect their freedom, and they should stand up against any authorities who try to control people more. Especially when this control concerns american people themselves. Bush administration favors authoritative, sometimes even rather totalitarian ideals.

But it doesn't seem to bother american people much that their freedom is taken away from them. It should.

[someguy]

Originally posted by Tuukka
Right now it seems likely that I'm going to L.A to work on a TV production next year. I'll be there 3-4 months.

It'll be interesting that according you I should have CIA or FBI following me around, and you think I don't have any right for privacy because I'm a foreigner.

Sounds like a totalitarian country to me. Countries like Soviet Union, North-Korea, Iraq, etc, have practises like that. Free countries don't.

Oh Tuukka, you're too silly. You won't be monitored or controlled. You're not brown skinned! Oh you :p

I really don't like the idea of monitoring people from foreign countries coming over, but it IS understandable. You have terrorist groups going on about how they're going to go after America, so you have to keep your eyes peeled.

(the first part of my post is NOT serious just in case people get all :eek: from it)

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I think it's terrible our country is still letting foreign students in this country to study wothout monitoring them. My first instinct is to say that I don't think foreign students are entitiled to the same privacy rights as American citizens- any thoughts on this?

I'm a foreign student. I'll omit the rest of my thoughts, but needless to say, they aren't 'nice'.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by Tuukka
The whole idea that I'm ripped off of my basic civil rights when I enter the turf of USA sounds completely insane. I hope such thing never happens.



But I guess that is the question- do foreign vistors have the same rights as American citizens?Arent there some things foreigners do not have the right to do when they are visiting another country? Don't you have to check in from time to time for VISA issues etc?
My husband has had many relatives come over from other coutries and as I have mentioned before, he is of Arabic descent. I think it is OK if they are monitored and they are all really nice people. They are doing nothing wrong but if they were the authorities should know about it. If one of them came over and started ordering airline uniforms I would have a problem with that.

In the past, a lot of foreign students were coming here to go to school and they never showed up to the colleges and the colleges never reported this to any authorities. Shouldn't that at least be required? Maybe not to go so far as putting bugs in people's apartments. but to make sure that they are doing what they said they are going to do.

[The Postmaster General]

If we are so worried about protecting ourselves, why don't we monitor white males aged 25 - 50 since they are responsible for the majority of serial killings here.

There's a difference between protecting our country and infringing on rights.

Now, it's foreign students who are under scrutiny, but what's next? Maybe me, maybe you -- when it's us, our opinions will change, because we'll say we've done nothing wrong, and shouldn't be watched.

The government used to watch over the people, now they watch the people - Yeah, that's not too cool a concept.

Maybe if you download porn, the FBI can come in and seize your computers, and detain you, because they know that people who rape look at porn --- Hey, that's not the only way, or a good way to prevent a crime.

Yeah, you'll get off and you'll get your computer back after you're clearend, and you had nothing to hide -- but i bet you'll still wish they hadn't been monitoring your private life.

Maybe they could go and arrest everyone at Lynn's church - detain them and search their stuff - You know, Christian Extremist Groups have done some terrorists acts -- Oh, we better check these people -- we better monitor them and make sure no 'flags' are going up because that's the only way we can protect America.

Yeah, as if any of that's going to happen. In the mean time, no one can relate to Joe Muslem, so let's just use him as our poster boy to make people feel we are really making things safer.

[EVILxxx]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
If we are so worried about protecting ourselves, why don't we monitor white males aged 25 - 50 since they are responsible for the majority of serial killings here.

There's a difference between protecting our country and infringing on rights.

Now, it's foreign students who are under scrutiny, but what's next? Maybe me, maybe you -- when it's us, our opinions will change, because we'll say we've done nothing wrong, and shouldn't be watched.

The government used to watch over the people, now they watch the people - Yeah, that's not too cool a concept.

Maybe if you download porn, the FBI can come in and seize your computers, and detain you, because they know that people who rape look at porn --- Hey, that's not the only way, or a good way to prevent a crime.

Yeah, you'll get off and you'll get your computer back after you're clearend, and you had nothing to hide -- but i bet you'll still wish they hadn't been monitoring your private life.

Maybe they could go and arrest everyone at Lynn's church - detain them and search their stuff - You know, Christian Extremist Groups have done some terrorists acts -- Oh, we better check these people -- we better monitor them and make sure no 'flags' are going up because that's the only way we can protect America.

Yeah, as if any of that's going to happen. In the mean time, no one can relate to Joe Muslem, so let's just use him as our poster boy to make people feel we are really making things safer.

I hear this arguement alot and I don't buy it. If the police put a watch for a killer in a neighborhood who has blonde hair, green eyes, light skin and freckles they aren't going to be stoping any Asians or Blacks on the street for questioning now are they.

When police are checking peoples bags on the subway who and what are they looking for. They are looking for terrorist with bombs. How do we optimize our chance for successfully locating a terrorist with a bomb(assuming that is what we want to do, not just look like we are searching)? We stop Arabic looking young men and politly say "excuse me sir, may I check your bag". All this P.C. 'we can't offend people bullshit' is going to result in another successful attack.

Your excuse that "As soon as we do that the government is going to raid our homes and arrest us for suspicion of terrorst activities, and they'll throw away the key" Is nonsense.
But I guess until we start thinking about our saftey and not about whether or not people are offended we are still going to make 82 year old white women take off their shoes at the airport.

[Tuukka]

It should be noted that you shouldn't monitor only foreign workers and students. You should monitors tourists as well. If they spend 3-4 week on their holiday in USA, that allows them enough time to take part in a terrorist attack. Granted, tourists probably won't like being monitored and probably spend their holiday in some other country next year.

The issue is this: Where do you draw the line?

I don't really have a problem with low-level monitoring.

But if the USA goverment really wants to make sure that I'm not a terrorist, it's not enough that I report monthly to them. They actually have to check where I live, and that I spend my days where I claim I spend them. They have to check what things I buy, to make sure I'm not building a home-made bomb, and that I'm not planning to play an airline pilot. They have to check what people I meet during my time in USA, to make sure I don't have any suspicious contacts.

It's not just monitoring, it's controlling.

In order to actually achieve proper information about foreigners, there has to be a complex, systematic way of doing it.

Kinda like STASI was in East-Germany, or KGB in Soviet Union. Those organisations were effective in tracking down any suspicious foreign activity, because they had very in-depth methods of "monitoring" all foreigners. Including tourists.

Now, maybe this kind of monitoring is not what people in here mean. Maybe you just think that foreigners should tell the authorities why they are in USA, and how they are gonna spend their time. Maybe you think foreigners should report to authorities maybe 1-2 times a month to let the authorities know what is going on.

This is all fine, and it's in fact more or less the current practice.

But this practice isn't really going to find any potential terrorists. It's easy to fool authorities with that little monitoring. And if you are going to monitor foreigners more, then you are on your way to become STASI or KGB.

BTW, like Bubba said, why monitor only foreigners? Why not monitor also all possible "terrorist" groups who are american? Extreme right-wing christian cults for example have a history of violence. They should be monitored as well. As should people who strongly oppose federal state (Remember Oklahoma?). And several other groups belong to this category as well.

[Tuukka]

I guess I should add one more point to my rant:

You shouldn't take these things too lightly.

Whenever people, whether they are americans or foreigners, are being ripped of their freedom and basic civil rights, you should SERIOUSLY think about it. You shouldn't just go "Yeah! It'll help us to find the terrorists!". But you should REALLY think whether it's something that needs to be done.

Because once you hit that road, there might be no turning back. It might only get worse and worse. Someday it might be you who is ripped off from this freedom, and his rights.

In fact the USA goverment can already imprison you, and keep you in custody forever, without a trial. If they just happen to suspect that you are a terrorist.They don't even need hard evidence to back it up.

Whenever your goverment tries to take away your freedom and your rights, then be very, very suspicious. In the end the establishment that is supposed to protect you might end up being your worst enemy.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by EVILxxx
I hear this arguement alot and I don't buy it. If the police put a watch for a killer in a neighborhood who has blonde hair, green eyes, light skin and freckles they aren't going to be stoping any Asians or Blacks on the street for questioning now are they.

I don't understand your point in that. I'm not saying it's a cause and effect thing. I'm just really not sure what you are suggesting here. Sorry. I don't think any person should be detained for the way they look - unless of course they look like they look like they are engaged in suspicious activity.

It's not a matter of being PC to me - I don't get that. I hear it a lot on these boards "Oh, your just being PC!" I don't care if anyone is offended. That's never been my concern, so being PC is thrown out the window.

What is my concern is infringing on rights of very basic rights. I don't like having my privacy violated - pretty simple, eh?

In my opinion, there should be another way of monitoring - I have no problem with the government monitoring activities -- it's when they monitor people for just being people that bothers me.

And what I'm talking about goes a bit further than "an old lady taking her shoes off at the airport." --- It was my understanding that we are talking about being detained for questioning, and being under survailence.


Your excuse that "As soon as we do that the government is going to raid our homes and arrest us for suspicion of terrorst activities, and they'll throw away the key" Is nonsense.

Yes, that is nonsense, but that was also nothing close to what I said.

If they can apply this protocol to terrorists, they can also apply it to other crimes?

Don't you get that hypothetical?

We aren't talking about only terrorism here. Did you already forget that the same laws that we made to stop terrorism have resulted in the arrest of TOMMY CHONG? Fucking Tommy Chong, man.

http://jerks.puxley.ca/archives/tommy_chong_ColumbiaTriStar.jpg

Stopping terrorism is great, but arresting an old actor who sells bongs over the internet -- come on man, no one thought that's why we were doing this. And I ask where they will draw the lines. Some of the most protective laws in our nation have resulted in some of the biggest injustices against our freedoms. Japanese containment camps in the 40s -- That was also to protect people.

Like I said, they could arrest people for looking at porn just as easily as arresting arabs who look like terrorists? Why not? And would it make any difference to know that your rights of privacy are being infringed on because people think if you are against it that you are supporting rapists? That's just silly.



But I guess until we start thinking about our saftey and not about whether or not people are offended we are still going to make 82 year old white women take off their shoes at the airport.

God, I really hope you aren't one of those people who were arguing against gun control because you didn't want anyone to infringe on your right to bare arms. If you were, this is just a hyporcritical statement, and yes - gun control has everything to do with this topic, because I am talking about rights --- On of the differences between America and every other country. We are innocent until proven guilty --- You are pushing for "Guity by way of race until proven innocent." - There's not much other way I can see it.

And I'm somewhat bothered that you would ever think I was worried about offending someone. Especially some fucking Arab who if he isn't a terrorist, probably knows a terrorist, or is related to a terrorist. If we could haul them all up for questioning, America would be a safer place.

Now obviously I don't think that way, nor do you, but I think others do - That's of no consequence to me, because this is AMERICA and they have a right to think that. And that kind of thing is important to me - be it a white guy spouting nonsense, or a muslem just going about his buisiness.

Like I said - you don't have to profile random people -- That's not the only way to stop terrorists.

The people behind 9/11 weren't exactly Joe Muslem -- these were guys with records, known ties -- They were living happily in our country, unwatched and allowed to make these enormous plans with out an eyebrow being raised. So, it makes no sense to me what race had to do with ANYTHING --- All they had to of done is just keep an eye on the people they knew to be terrorists, and it would have been a world of difference. How we went from that, to checking to make sure every Muslem isn't a terrorist is just plain beyond me.

And hell, I'm not even mentioning how many terrorists, including AL QUIDA MEMBERS are American citizens or white people. You all think you are doing some big service to this country in making it safer only by stopping to brown terrorists. HOGWASH!

Another thing to consider -- what if a terrorist goes free because a lawyer proves their rights were violated. That's not very productive....


This BubbaStrangelove message was a whopping 5,156 characters out of the maximum allowed 20,000. Characters contained in this disclaimer were not counted.

[Lynn7]

I think that if someone is here from anotehr country to do a certain thing (like go to school here) then we should make sure they are doing what they say. I guess taht would be low level monitoring. Of ocurse someone could come as a tourist and do their damage and there is nothing we can do about that but they will have less time to arrange anything too complicated like gathering bomb supplies etc. And we all know American citizens can turn agaisn their own country too and there isn't too much we can do about that exceot watch out for strange purchases or activities.

But, we know there are terrorists who are planning to enter this country to kill us by the thousands or millions and to the extent we can slow them down we should do that. To the extent we can catch them, we should do that. Just last week I heard ont he news that some rats or mice who were infected with the plague went missing. I never heard what happened with that- hopefully they are just in anotheer lab room but if they were stolen to do us all in then all of our high minded fairness will be for nothing.

Terrorists have also threatened our water and food sources- you saw the chaos of Katrina- imagine that happening in a bigger area like the state of New York or the whole of New England or of California.What chaos and destruction there would be.

PS, if a Christian church was sending away for airline uniforms and stuff like this guy was doing, I would want them to be checked out- I don't think churches should be exempt from the laws that apply to others.

[The Heart Collector]

If you apply all these fascist watch rules, the terrorists won't have to do anything.

[The Postmaster General]

Yeah, but Lynn -

For instance, they have laws monitoring the purchase of medicines like Sudafed, and the sort -- this is to keep an eye out for those who might be manufacturing methamphetamines.

We can't allow the government to just start hauling in people for questioning because they look like the type who might do it --- If we did that, we'd haul in every skinny and toothless white guy who purchases firearms in rural America, because they might be making meth.

That's not cool, nor does it have anything to do with what America is about.

Go down a list of the worst crimes against humanity and freedom - all throughout history - it all involved profiling of some sort.

[EVILxxx]

Bubbastrangelove:
I don't understand your point in that. I'm not saying it's a cause and effect thing. I'm just really not sure what you are suggesting here. Sorry. I don't think any person should be detained for the way they look - unless of course they look like they look like they are engaged in suspicious activity.

Apology accepted. I said nothing of detainment.


What is my concern is infringing on rights of very basic rights. I don't like having my privacy violated - pretty simple, eh?

No one is talking about your privacy. When you are boarding a plane or train you have no privacy rights really. The attendant has the right to know what is in your bag and what is on your person.

In my opinion, there should be another way of monitoring - I have no problem with the government monitoring activities -- it's when they monitor people for just being people that bothers me.

How about Muslim illegal aliens studying piloting?



Stopping terrorism is great, but arresting an old actor who sells bongs over the internet -- come on man, no one thought that's why we were doing this. And I ask where they will draw the lines. Some of the most protective laws in our nation have resulted in some of the biggest injustices against our freedoms. Japanese containment camps in the 40s -- That was also to protect people.

The question of "where do we draw the line?" is a great one. A line needs to be drawn. It isn't as tough a question as some people make it out to be. The line between proper protection and over reaction is not a thin one.

The people behind 9/11 weren't exactly Joe Muslem -- these were guys with records, known ties -- They were living happily in our country, unwatched and allowed to make these enormous plans with out an eyebrow being raised. So, it makes no sense to me what race had to do with ANYTHING --- All they had to of done is just keep an eye on the people they knew to be terrorists, and it would have been a world of difference. How we went from that, to checking to make sure every Muslem isn't a terrorist is just plain beyond me.

Apparently you have not heard of "Able Danger" (I posted a thread on it that only Lynn responded to). We had concrete intelligence that Mohammed Atta was planning some kind of atack but DOD beaurocrats prevented the FBI from doing anything because they had green cards.

And hell, I'm not even mentioning how many terrorists, including AL QUIDA MEMBERS are American citizens or white people. You all think you are doing some big service to this country in making it safer only by stopping to brown terrorists. HOGWASH!

White Alqueda members. Well since they make up maybe .001% of Alqueda, and since white people make up over 75% of America I think we can do educated deductions, don't you?

[The Postmaster General]

Apology accepted. I said nothing of detainment.

Yes, you did. If you are stopped in an airport, that meets, far and wide, the legal definition of detainment.

It doesn't matter if you weren't anyway, because that's not even what the initial article talking about. They went in this guy's apartment -- but apparently they had reasonable cause - It had nothing to do with how he looked. The guy had a fake social security card.

The question here is if they should monitor people solely based of a profile, even when they've committed no crime. My answer is no -- I think the police forces need to focus manpower on the crimes taht are out in the open. There are enough of those. Terrorism isn't a big a problem in the U.S. as murder, rape, parents not paying child support, fraud, drunk driving, battery, theft, and a long long list of things that occur more often than terrorism.

No one is talking about your privacy. When you are boarding a plane or train you have no privacy rights really. The attendant has the right to know what is in your bag and what is on your person.

I'm not talking about just bording planes. I'm talking about having your e-mails monitored, phones tapped, and every other thing that is now perfectly legal through homeland security.

Obviously when you're in a public place, you are in a public place.

What exactly do you think they mean when they say "monitoring foreign students?"

Red Robin, this is Blue Sparrow - The Arab squirrel just left his house with packed bags, plane tickets, and a T-Shirt that said 'Florida'! He must be going to the airport! Let's move! Let's move!

They aren't just monitoring people in airports, you know.

:confused:

How about Muslim illegal aliens studying piloting?

As per your "ABLE DANGER" statement below -

Why not just the ones who we have concrete intelligence against?

I mean, the biggest terrorist attack on American soil - and we knew one of the ringleaders was a terrorist living here????

We go from that, to stopping everyone who is of the same race as him?

If you ask me, the government has you tricked into thinking they didn't fuck up by monitoring this guy closer -- and now you are ignoring that to focus on going to an extreme to stop future attacks.

The question of "where do we draw the line?" is a great one. A line needs to be drawn. It isn't as tough a question as some people make it out to be. The line between proper protection and over reaction is not a thin one.

Again - to me, no line needs to be drawn. We have good evidence on someone, we move in. No big deal.

What is being suggested is skirting privacy rights to collect evidence. That's contrary to our legal system

That would be like a cop seeing two kids with long hair and MEGADETH T-shirts walking into a home, then following them inside because they look like the sort that would have some weed. Do you think that is a good thing?

The sad part is that most of the laws we've made to stop terrorism has caught more non-terrorists than terrorists.


Apparently you have not heard of "Able Danger" (I posted a thread on it that only Lynn responded to). We had concrete intelligence that Mohammed Atta was planning some kind of atack but DOD beaurocrats prevented the FBI from doing anything because they had green cards.



Apparently you misunderstood what I stated, because this statement is incongruent to what I actually said, and actually agrees with me.

If we have information about someone - we should look into it. That's what I think we need to do. And that is what I meant by the people behind 9/11 weren't exactly "joe muslem"

To me, it's absurd to go from not even checking on known terrorists to checking everyone who fits a profile. We went from freezing cold to very hot if you ask me.

[This BubbaStrangelove post was 3919 characters out of the maximum allowed 20,000. Characters contained in this disclaimer and in quotes made by other schmoes were not counted for sanity purposes.]

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Yeah, but Lynn -

For instance, they have laws monitoring the purchase of medicines like Sudafed, and the sort -- this is to keep an eye out for those who might be manufacturing methamphetamines.

We can't allow the government to just start hauling in people for questioning because they look like the type who might do it --- If we did that, we'd haul in every skinny and toothless white guy who purchases firearms in rural America, because they might be making meth.

That's not cool, nor does it have anything to do with what America is about.

Go down a list of the worst crimes against humanity and freedom - all throughout history - it all involved profiling of some sort.

Well, I do agree with what you said but I also agree with what Evilxxx said- I htink there is not really so fine a line. AFter all, my local police force cna't keep up on everyone- it is doubtful we can eveer get too big brotherish but in the mean time it is a fight for survival.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well, I do agree with what you said but I also agree with what Evilxxx said- I htink there is not really so fine a line.

Actually, I said there's no line at all.

It's pretty simple.

You have Joe Muslem and Joe On A Terrorist List - If we'd paid more attention to the latter of those two folks: 9/11 wouldn't have happened.

However, now the attention has shifted from Joe On A Terrorist List over to Joe Muselm, and I don't think that's cool for Joe Muslem because he hasn't done anything to arouse suspicion, except resember Joe Terrorist List if you cross your eyes and let them go a bit fuzzy.


AFter all, my local police force cna't keep up on everyone- it is doubtful we can eveer get too big brotherish but in the mean time it is a fight for survival.

Local police force doens't have to do much. Remember evill's thing about ABLE DANGER.

Joe Terrorist's name comes up on a list, it gets sent to local police, the look at it, then go and see what Joe Terrorist is up to. That's pretty simple.

Your way, the police are going, "Hey, that looks like one. Lets ask him questions!" and most of the time it's a waste of time, and that another person ends up not trusting the cops.

That's my whole point about everything --- We ignored people on a terrorist list, and we've gone from that to racial profiling. It's not survival it's stupid - Like cutting off your ear to spite your face, or however that goes.


And one thing I forgot to comment on earlier, to Evil:
White Alqueda members. Well since they make up maybe .001% of Alqueda, and since white people make up over 75% of America I think we can do educated deductions, don't you?

Do you have the stats on how many Arab-looking people are Alqueda members -- I bet that number would be pretty low as well.

[MacReady]

I know Bubba has slaughtered EVILxxx points, I will say the idea that racial profiling is comparable to police profiling is ridiculous. It would be accurate if we were to make everyone that looked like the suspect (brunette, hazelnut eyes...) in the country have to go throught extra monitoring and interrogation whenever they wanted to go out or travel abroad.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by MacReady
I will say the idea that racial profiling is comparable to police profiling is ridiculous. It would be accurate if we were to make everyone that looked like the suspect (brunette, hazelnut eyes...) in the country have to go throught extra monitoring and interrogation whenever they wanted to go out or travel abroad.


Can you expand a bit? I'm lost.

I don't think anyone was comparing 'police profiling' and 'racial profiling' because they aren't really.... I don't know man. Police profiling and racial profiling are like two interlapping circles that can occur together, or they can't. The police can profile people based on things other than race, or they can profile people based on race.

POLICE PROFILING - That's a noun and a verb, as in "the police profile someone"

RACIAL PROFILING - That's an adjective and a verb, I think, as in "the police are racialy profiling people"

All police create profiles of criminals. It's only racial profiling if they start a profile based on race.

And I also don't know what your point is about people leaving the country. That's the first I've heard anyone mention anything about that.

Maybe I'm not lost. I don't know, man. What are you talking about? Let's start there, and be friends.

[MacReady]

Oh you know. I mean that people have a kinda profile of the suspect out so when people who look like him the police notice him. I tried to point out that it wouldn't be fair to copare this to racial profiling, which is more of turning an entire ethnic group into suspects.

On a similar note about Lynn saying we should strip foreigners of thier civil rights: what about the countries with lower theft rates than America? What does this have to do with anything? Look at it this way: if you go to a place with a lower theft rate than yours, should they have an argument that's it's okay for you to be monitored since you are more likely to steal than the natives?

[The Postmaster General]

Yeah. People like to simplify things so much when they talk abut this -- ie. "Oh you don't want to stop terrorism." or "You don't want to defend the country."

I'll simplify it myself.

Going back to a simpler time, let's try to imagine how it would go down in Mayberry on the Andy Griffith Show:


THE WAY I WANT TO STOP TERRORISM:

BARNEY
"Andy, Sherrif Bullard called from over in Cooter's Creak. He said that a stranger was headed over our way, and we should keep an eye on him because they caught him trying to steal pies."

ANDY:
"Good job, Barney. I noticed that stranger coming into town too. We should keep an eye on him. I think I'll go see what he's up to, introduce myself - make sure he's up to no good."


THE WAY LYNN IS SUGGESTING

BARNEY
"Andy, somebody said they saw a Swede walk into town."

ANDY
"Oh boy. You know how them Swedes are always wanting to eat and stuff. I bet he came into town to steal pies."

BARNEY
"Should we haul him in, Andy?"

ANDY
"Yeah, we better. I don't want to look like someone who supports pie stealing. {OFF SCREEN) Otto, you better make room in that cell. We have foreigners in town."




Your call.

[Lynn7]

oh come on, LOL! I didn't say I wanted the police to go bothering tourists. I jsut think if they are engaging in suspicious activity they should be checked out and also that if a person comes to this country to go to college, he should be attending college and not going awol or cutting tons of classes. That should raise suspicions. If I got the chance to go study over seas I would not blow the opportunity- it is a privelege not a right.

[The Postmaster General]

Yeah, but can't you see it? Joe Muslem comes over to America, has never touched alchohol, maybe is still a virgin --- He learns to love American culture, but unfortunately he ends up at a college 'animal house' and ends up doing some things that are bad for him (but perfectly legal) So he starts oversleeping for classes because he's getting laid and partying too late.... Next thing you know, the FBI is at his door asking to go through his computer records.

In the meantime, all of the friends Joe Muslem made on campus see the feds talking to the Muslem kid who isn't a citizen. And we never are able to integrate the two cultures - this being, IMO, 100% of the reason why terrorism exists in the first place. They don't know us, and we don't know them.

That doesn't sound too cool to me, of course that is just one worst case scenario, I'm sure you may discredit it as purely a work of fiction, however I am applying rules of behaviors that are tried and true for many college students, regardless of race (you may apply this factuality to the doctrine of 'Original Sin')

You have a wonderful goal Lynn, and I know we both want the same end results. However, I stand strictly behind one of the merits of our legal system and that is all those cool words about how we have privacy and the freedom to cut classes if we want.

It's really not as difficult as we might think it is -- A kid from Anytown, Arab Speaking Country is seen with the wrong crowds ----

Wait, are you familiar with gang task forces that work in cities?

I think the way they deal with gangs should be the way they deal with terrorists. We can't spend our time and effort looking out for every black person aged 17 - 25, because they meet the profile of a gang member. Instead, the police learn about the gangs, get to know their habits, and by doing so, they begin to learn who they should be on the prowl for.

That's how terrorism has been mostly dealth with. The only reason for lapses in success are due far in wide by.. um.. 'user error'.

[Lynn7]

if that kid is partying and oversleeping then everyone would know it. It wouldn't be like where is this guy- he hasn't come to classes- oh, we have never seen him before- he has never come to classes and we have neveer seen him.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
if that kid is partying and oversleeping then everyone would know it. It wouldn't be like where is this guy- he hasn't come to classes- oh, we have never seen him before- he has never come to classes and we have neveer seen him.


Who is keeping tabs on the guy?

I thought that was your whole point - we should be keeping tabs on these people.

[Lynn7]

Well ,like the colleges should report if a foreign studnet never showed up and then there should be an investigation as to why.I know htere are only a few nuts but we need to follow up any unusual activity- that's all.

If someone is taking lots of pictures of a bridge etc it needs to be followed up on.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Lynn7
If someone is taking lots of pictures of a bridge etc it needs to be followed up on.

If they arrested tourists for taking photos of monuments, a shit load of people (including myself) would be in prison right now.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well ,like the colleges should report if a foreign studnet never showed up and then there should be an investigation as to why.


Again, we are going to warrant a federal investigation because a kid has been getting stoned and watching Sponge Bob Squarepants when he should be in Buisiness and Ethics class? That's just an extreme example. Maybe he's tired from working a late shift.

I just don't understand who you want to be in charge of doing all of this monitoring. Should we open up a Ministry of Information?

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by MacReady
If they arrested tourists for taking photos of monuments, a shit load of people (including myself) would be in prison right now.

This totally changes perspective on "THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY", doesn't it?