View Single Post
  #36   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
*e#c *e#c is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,267
Default OT More reasons not to profile.

On Jan 11, 9:00*am, John H wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 07:34:11 -0600, thunder
wrote:



On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:18:46 -0500, John H wrote:


On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:14:22 -0600, thunder
wrote:


On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:43:13 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:


Sirhan Sirhan was Palestinian. *Certainly would get caught in a good
profiling. *Arabic/Middle east, young male from Palestinian. *Question
is why did he get into the US even back then? *Was he about 24 at the
time?


Geeze, let's try a little simple math for the simpletons around here.
There are somewhere between one and a half to two billion Muslims on
this planet. *How may of them do you think are young males? *Maybe a
couple of hundred million? *Some f'n profile.


Look, if you want to develop a true terrorist profile, fine. *But if
anyone things that young male Muslims is an adequate profile, they are a
moron, and a racist.


No one proposed young, male Muslims as an adequate profile. Only a
blathering fool would seriously suggest such a thing. However, a good
case can be made for their use as a starting point.


Huh? *From the blathering fool himself:


"No, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you? *So,
to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent
on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to
profile certain people.. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old
women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret
agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old
Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor
Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest
they be guilty of profiling."


The word in question was 'adequate' - your word. Your quote, above,
does make a good point, don't you think? That 'blathering fool' makes
some good sense.



BTW, Harry would get you for categorizing them as a 'race', ergo the
suggestion could not be 'racist'.


Uh, you were talking about Muslims. *See number two:


racist
* * *adj 1: based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks"
* * *2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
* * * * [syn: {racist}, {antiblack}, {anti-Semite(a)}]
* * *n 1: a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior
* * * * * to others [syn: {racist}, {racialist}


I don't need the convincing, Harry does.

But, you did get a lot of name-calling into your posts.


If the shoe fits...


I wear a size 13 or 14, depending on the make. Although, I don't see
the pertinence.
--

America needs Obamacare like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.

John H


I wear a size 13 or 14, depending on the make. Although, I don't
see
the pertinence.

Big enough to constantly stick in your big mouth.......