I don't care how many times they detain and search Al Gore. They're still not going to find explosives (except for his brain), deadly weapons, etc. even though he is a flaming liberal. Why is it so hard to face the truth?

Posted by DADvocate at April 28, 2006 09:14 AM

GM,

Some will say this is too simplistic. Some will accuse you of lacking "compassion." However, reality is reality.

To All Hands,

While some may (or even, should) labor long and hard to "fix" the giant number of problems that are carried on the backs - and in the minds - of the people of the world, some others must confront facts and reality as it exsists today.

Remember my earlier comments? If the bad guys kick the door of your house in in the middle of the night and are armed, do you:

1. Give them sandwiches and milk?

2. Give them a hug and tell them that God loves them?

3. Organize your family to assist them in carrying out your worldly goods to their truck?

4. Have all your family huddle together in a corner so that you'll be easier targets?

5. Open fire with your shotgun?

See, this test wasn't so hard. Was it?

I know that violence is awful. I know of the deep irony of: to prevent violence, you must be prepared to be violent...and even more violent than potential enemies. That is the way the world IS in 2006, despite what we might wish.

Please...work on poverty, education, health care, opportunity, dignity, respect, and more. Meanwhile, guard thy hearth, or thee will become yet another victim of evil men and women....AND...a victim of wishful thinking and/or unknowing stupidity.

Posted by tad at April 28, 2006 10:11 AM

Not fair GM. This test is biased and stacked against minorities who may not have lived here, at least at the time that these events took place. You cannot fault them for being from a poor country and having no access to real news, when those things happened. You must revise your test to better reflect the diversity of students across this great land.

Sincerely,

Ted Kennedy

;)

Posted by LASunsett at April 28, 2006 02:58 PM

Dear Ted,

Fugiddaboudit 'cause I got your diversity right here!

Posted by GM Roper at April 28, 2006 06:20 PM

Good point's, Tad.
If one isn't passionate enough to fight for his family, I question whether there is any love there.
There are some things worth fightin' for, which is why I can never be a pacifist, or against a war that fights evil.

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at April 29, 2006 04:41 PM

What an utterly disgusting post GM, you should really be ashamed of yourself. Roper I'm a muslim, i came here from South Africa, where we were exploited by a white racist state under apartheid (not by muslims). A racist regime which imprisoned my father for membership in the ANC and a regime that our own government in the USA played contructive engagement with. But, i forgot crimes commitedf by our own stae, our allies, caucasians, heck wnyone but muslims (who you plainly hate) dont make your idiotic list. I am an American citizen, i have been for a long time. I'm an active participant in my own communitty yet you want me profiled simply because of i was born with a Muslim name. You want my mother, my father people i know and love treated differetnly than you because you have the priveledge of bweing white whicle i dont. As for your silly list its pretty manipulative isnt it? Hypocriticial too. I shall begin by saying immediately that it is a radically wrong, Orientalist and indeed racist proposition to accept that, unlike Europeans and Americans, Arabs have no sense of individuality, no regard for individual life, no values that express love, intimacy and understanding which are supposed to be the property exclusively of cultures that had a Renaissance, a Reformation and an Enlightenment. That they are inherantly violent as you seem to think. what amoral drivel. shame

Posted by Ahmed at April 29, 2006 05:02 PM

Ahmed, yours is a typical kneejerk reaction. I don't give a hoot what your name is, what you look like or where you came from. I understand fully that there are bad people where you came from and that apartheid was an onerous and evil regime. But, if you were in a store and it was robbed by a white male caucasian approximately 25 years old and drove away in a red ford pickup, would you want the police to look for a white male in a red pickup or stop a grandmother in a blue pick up. If you said anything but the former, you are a racist pig for wanting the police to profile.

You just don't get it. I have no problems in stoping and searching anyone who meets the profile of a terrorist. That will be increasingly difficult as the islamofascists are currently, by report, recruiting in Bosnia and similar environs for "White Muslims" who can get through checkpoints easier. Tell me that profiling has not had at least some effect.

As a Muslim (and I have no idea what your race is, Muslim being a religion and not a race) you should be fervently against anyone that denegrates your religion and that most specifically includes the terrorists who commit henious acts in your religions name. Get real Ahmed, grow up and quit your leftish knee jerk responses.

Posted by GM Roper at April 29, 2006 05:54 PM

So now who's the "true believer" anyway? Instead of responding to the substance of my argument you simply argue that its "kneejeck". Go figure. As for what you know about South Africa, there was a fairly large solidarity movement rigth here in the United states, led by many unions, civil rigths folks and others who worked hard to isolate the racist regime and end US "contrcutive enagement". Somehow I doubt you were involved in that effort although i may be wrong. Listen Gm I'm a muslim male between the age of 17-40 exactly the kind oif person you want profiled. Sorry but I'm going to fight like heel agianst measures deseigned to rob me of my civil liberties i'd hope you'd join me in that effort. As for people who "denigrade my religion" what condenscending crap. I hardly need lectures from someone who calls for my profiling, overlooks the crimes of his own state and runs a joint veture websute with one of the most reactionary knee jerk types i've ever come across.

Posted by Ahmed at April 29, 2006 06:38 PM

Here's a good piece on profiling from my dear friend

http://www.pmuna.org/archives/2005/08/pmu_speaks_out.php

Posted by Ahmed at April 29, 2006 06:51 PM

"I don't give a hoot what your name is, what you look like or where you came from."

Cut the crap, Roper. Isn't the whole point out your post that Muslim males between 17 and 40 should be profiled. It sounds like you do care about my name and origin after all

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 12:45 AM

Ahmed, when my mother was 79 years old and was flying home after seeing my sister, she was pulled to the side at the airport and completely checked out by security in the war against terrorism. It was "her turn" in their random check. If the next person was a 26 year old Muslim male, he would have received a pass because they were only checking every 20th person (or some number.) We go so overboard on political correctness that we throw all common sense out the window.

This is reminiscent of police questioning only black males of a certain age range in the S.F. bay area after a brutal sex crime (as I remember), but then civil rights whores complained about the profiling, resulting in police having to queston males of ALL races even though it had been proven that the perpetrator was black. Just how stupid was that? Just how stupid is it to check 79 year old grandmothers when they have never been the problem?

Political correctness, at some point, has to give way to common sense and security. Profiling has its place in the real world and is a necessary tool needed to protect our citizens--regardless of hurt feelings. I'm sorry that you take personal offense, but correct profiling is a small price for you, and everyone, to pay to reduce the chances of more bombings of innocent people.

And, it wasn't us who made this step necessary, but it is the fault of a Muslim terrorist network comprised of Muslim males who support killing every American. Blame them and try to change them before you blame Americans for wanting protection.

Posted by Woody at April 30, 2006 05:27 AM

Ahmed,

So you suffered at the hands of the old regime in SA. I regret that. But, read carefully what GM and Woody have written. Read it slowly and carefully. Put aside your anger and think of others others anger and fear.

Think about this: You and your family are in your home. It is night. Three armed WHITE, BLONDE haired guys wearing crosses around their necks break down the door to your home. They have guns and are ready to use them. They demand cash and all the valuables they can carry. You give them what they demand. They race out. You call the police.

NOW, the police arrive very quickly and you must tell them who robbed you and terrorized your family. What are you going to say? Three individuals? You don't want to say males because that would be sexist. Do you refer to their ages? No, that would be singling out people by age. Would you mention that they all were wearing crosses? No. There plenty of Christians that are good and decent people. Would you mention that they were white and had blonde hair? Heavens no. Lots of white, blonde folks that are decent.

This is really about common sense. NOT about racism or intolerence for certain groups. GM is a very good friend and probably THE most tolerant person I actually know.

STOP. What does "tolerant" mean? It, has been confused with the word "tolerate". Do we, should we, must we, tolerate all sorts of really awful behavior in the name of political correctness? Frankly, you might approach your co-religionists and chat with them about just why others have a much more suspicious view of them than they did even a decade ago.

Posted by tad at April 30, 2006 09:22 AM

Fighting terrorism by using racism is not only repugnant to our values but it also won't work. As the article i forwarded outlined, demogogues like Woody, who call for profiling against muslims assume that you can tell who is and isnt a muslim. Leaving aside the question of morality for a moment it strikes me as absurd that woody and gm think you can tell who is arab and who is muslim simply by sight. this just isnt the case. As Hussein points half of the Arabs in the United States are Christians, and Arabs can resemble almost any group of southern Europeans, Latin Americans, Central and South Asians, or Africans. Muslims cant be visibly recognized since they constitute a fifth of humanity and come from everyone on earth. There is a large african american muslim population who make uo almost a third of the urban muslim population but ideologues like Roper and Woody wouldnt know this. In London we witnessed the tragic shooting of Jean Charles, a brazilian brother who police mistook for being pakistani. I guess my point is that comprehensiveness and radomness are probably the most thorough and moral way to deal with the problem unless woody and gm are proposing that US muslims should be forced to carry Identity cards. If that's the case then lets hear it fellas. Personally I think people like Woody and Gm who call for profiling based on ethicity and race, or a kind of second class citizenship are repeating the same hostorical mistakes as those who argued that japanese americasn should be interned, en mass, during world war 2. lest we forget

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 12:20 PM

Ahmed, get off of your high horse and drop your intentional distortions of our views. If we accepted the internment of the Americans of Japanese descent in WWII, then we would drag your sorry rear end to Guantanamo today.

Profiling is an accepted and proven way of sorting out potentially problem people. Police everywhere do it with success, and security teams armed with automatic weapons at foreign airports do it far more than us.

Profiling also covers white American males in many countries, but you don't hear me making a stink out of that. Why, they even do it in your beloved former home.

If I were a security screener and saw a shifty-eyed, twenty-something, Arab male skulking around the airport: you can bet that I would be suspicous. I don't have to know that he is a Muslim terrorist. I just have to know that he looks suspicious and fits the profile of other terrorists to justify wanting to observe or question him rather than questioning grandmothers. Or, do you think that grandmothers should be randomly stopped and strip searched to make it "fair" to you?

Ask yourself, "If it were my job to insure the safety of the traveling public, would I not monitor or question anyone who looked suspicious?" If you say that you wouldn't, then you're dumber or more ideologically driven than I thought--and, you would be a terrible secruity guard.

(Should we be suspicious of you?)

Posted by Woody at April 30, 2006 03:05 PM

But my entire point, which you've clealy missed, is that what you're suggesting is not only amoral but also impractical. Now you're saying Arab but first it was Muslim. Now you're adding qualifiers like 'shifty eyed" and "sulking" Listen I dont fit under either of those categories but i was stopped, harrassed, detained for over an hour when trying to fly out of new york to see my cousins gradaution in LA. What's sad and pathetic is that you're defending a pattern of behaviour, targetting of a group based on ethnicity or religion, which clearly runds contrary to the constitutional and the professed ideals of this country. As for profiling being acceptable and proven, give me a break buddy. Instead its a clearly imoral and long discredited enforcement technique which has been used to abuse african american and latino populations. it has few defenders although perhaps youre one such person who would make "driving while black" a crime. People of your idelological stripe, I remind you, were the same sorry asses who defended "contructive engagement" in south african which most people now adknowledge probably stalled political progress in south africa by at least 10 years, giving the apartheid regime free reign. But that's a bit off topic, i guess

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 03:41 PM

Ahmed,

Here's an idea. Back up all the way and start over.

Assume you are assigned the task of providing security for, let's just limit it to, commerical airliners.

How would you do it? Search and question each and every person? Would you excuse very small babies? How about very old women?

Would you excuse anyone? If you did, then the rest of us would say you are pre-judging us.

If you screen everyone, to make it "fair", the airline industry would damn near collapse.

So, what would you do?

You made a very good observation earlier about how some people might appear to others to be of some nationality or genetic group when in actuality they are not.

Hey, if I was running security, I would be primarily looking at ALL males as my first choice. ANYONE, acting in a manner that would indicate they fit a psychological profile in terms of their actions and deportment would trigger my suspicions.

This is a common sense issue. I am 65. I served my country as a Marine for 32 years. I have short hair and do not fit the psychological profiles, but I do not take offense at being grilled. Take off your shoes. All that stuff. I mostly do grit my teeth a bit and some of the actions seem silly and/or useless.

However, we live in the world we live in. We must deal with the realities as they exsist.

Again, it is a common sense issue.

BTW, all the old awful behaviors against blacks, hispanics, Japanese-Americans....are true. Further, the Irish, and Polish were discriminated against in the late 1800s in America. The Germans were discriminated against. I'm betting that damn near everyone at one time or another is discriminated against. We struggle to make things fair and just. I submit we've made great progress.

What proof to I have? People keep coming to America. Why? Sure, some (many) come to make a better living. However, I submit that America, for all its' flaws is a great country and we really do attempt to become better.

Walk to a wall map of the world. Which other countries would you prefer to live in? Why?

Finally, the primary purpose of government is to protect its' citizenry. This is a tough and complex job. Sometimes it is done in a heavy-handed manner. I regret that, but you are still alive to complain. If they hadn't been so heavy handed, you and many others of all faiths and ethnic backgrounds might well have already perished.

God Bless America and ALL Americans of Good Will.

Posted by tad at April 30, 2006 04:08 PM

"This is a tough and complex job. Sometimes it is done in a heavy-handed manner. I regret that, but you are still alive to complain. If they hadn't been so heavy handed, you and many others of all faiths and ethnic backgrounds might well have already perished."

What you're defending goes aginst the best traditions of this country. Furthermore the above setiment was used during the second war to justify the internment of japanese. I dont really know anyone--well, except daniel pipes and michelle malkin--who defends these practices now. And tad discrimination in this country has been foiught and won through struggle, through movements, marches, people have been killed, harassed, jailed to achieve the level of equlaity we have and we still got a long way to go. Its not simply that america became better. In my opinion you either believe in justice and equality for EVERYONE or the idea has no merit. Youre suggesting that I should i should have to be harassed at airports because of my name whilke others shouldn't. I cant defend this and if you were true to the best traditions of this country, neither would you

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 04:36 PM

Ahmed,

I have gone through all sorts of security screening as an American. Further, having been to more than 35 countries, I have noted that their methods of civil rights are so draconian or senseless as to make one wonder why they call themselves a country. America is loaded with justice compared to most other countries.

However, we have to protect one another.

History Lesson: Abe Lincoln, long revered as one of our best presidents, suspended all sorts of civil rights that were in the Constitution. He wasn't attempting to establish a dictatorship. He was attempting to preserve the Union. And he did.

America IS a work in progress. However, you must remember that Americans (truly a polyglot of peoples from All 'round the world) are human. When threatened, they may very well lash out...even in violation of the beliefs and creeds they claim they stand for.

Each of us...bears a burden from the attacks on 11 September 1991. Are they "fair"? Are they evenly distributed? Of course not.

The next time you are treated unfairly by being delayed at an airport. Please recall those Soldiers and Marines, Sailors and Airmen who have given their lives. Please remember those who have been terribly wounded and will not, over time, ever truly be whole again.

I believe that the War on Terror will go on for some time, however, it will - with God's grace - pass. And then, your personal anguish at being unfairly treated by your fellow American citizens, will pass too, or so I pray.

Meanwhile, in a civil and unthreatening manner, continue to fight for your rights under the Constitution. They are worth fighting for.

Another thought: Follow the example of the Japanese-Americans. Join the military. If too old, have your sons and daughters join. The Japanese-Americans, despite the fact that many of their parents and greater families were interned, joined and became THE most decorated unit in the U.S. Army: The 442nd Regimental Combat Team.

Posted by tad at April 30, 2006 05:19 PM

Tad, i was going to respond to your post in more detail but I think I'll just let it pass. I take it you're a nice guy, with a somewhat annoying folksy preacher like style with whom i have some sharp political, moral and historical differences with. Lets just leave it at that since I think I made my point and cleaned woody and gm's clock in the process

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 05:56 PM

"cleaned woody and gm's clock"??????????

Did I miss something or is he referring to a different woody and gm?

Posted by Woody at April 30, 2006 06:55 PM

No Im referring to the Woody who failed misreably when he tried to bully his way through an argument by saying "should we be suspicious of you?" Im glad you said that because it sort of proved my point about how racial profiling and the criminlisation of certain kinds of people creates an atmospheres of fear fundementally at odds with democratic debate. Thus i disagreed with you vigorously, I have a muslim souding name so immediatley I'm considered suspicious. pathetic woody

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 07:19 PM

How pathetic, Ahmed. THAT's what you consider cleaning my clock?! You don't recognize a tongue-in-cheek remark because you are soooo typical of those on the left who consider everything a crusade (typically against America) and can't imagine for a moment that someone isn't taking you seriously and would make a flippant remark to illustrate their lack of concern for your "cause."

Yeah, I'm going to ask someone if he's a terrorist and expect an honest answer, because terrorists only murder--not lie. I mean, there are some things that cross the line for even them. The Koran forbids them from lying. The jury is still out on whether or not it calls for mass murders of innocent people of other beliefs. Oh, wait. Could this mean that Islamic terrorists profile their victims? Murder anyone who appears to be an American (that's infidel to you.)

The U.S. doesn't have prisons for people simply suspected of being terrorists, but if they had a prison for people who are clueless and eaten up with leftist propoganda, then you would be an early entrant.

Oh, and forgive me if I look my car doors going though a suspicious black neighborhood at night. I know that it's profiling, but it makes me feel safer. Of course, you wouldn't use locks on your car or house because they might offend someone. Yeah, right.

Posted by Woody at April 30, 2006 08:44 PM

Woody, whether you or I lock our doors at night really has nothing to do with whether we as a country should insitute impractical and immoral policies which single out US citizens for profiling based on something they have no control over, namely their backround or ethnicity. I've made a strong argument, you've dodged it, and instead relied on straight out xenophobia and ignorance. Sorry but that dog wont hunt around these parts. Try it somewhere else. Let me know how it works for you

Posted by Ahmed at April 30, 2006 08:58 PM

Ahmed, you haven't made a strong argument. You expressed personal offense based upon how you feel being screened, which isn't pertinent, and you expressed no understanding that "the best traditions of this country" as you see them are not necessarily the same as our laws and our security policies during war.

As long as terrorists continue to be young Islamic males plotting against the U.S., then this country has a duty to its citizens to monitor and screen those people whose profiles fit that--not grandmothers. Fortunately, that screening is working. As an example, take a look at this recent success:

Cox News Service, Friday, April 21, 2006
ATLANTA — A 21-year-old Georgia Tech student taken into federal custody last month has been charged with giving "material support" to a terrorist organization, according to a federal indictment unsealed Thursday. The student, Syed Haris Ahmed.... http://www.oxfordpress.com/news/content/shared/news/stories/GA_ARRESTS_0421_COX.html

Wait! That's not you is it?! Maybe we need to start screening everyone named Ahmed. It worked in this case.

The government didn't monitor the calls of grandmothers to catch him. Instead, they followed the trail of young Islamic males and arrested them. "That dog hunts" and that approach "worked." We need more of it--not burying our heads in the sand as you propose.

Posted by Woody at April 30, 2006 09:59 PM

No I expressed a philosophical, moral and practical objection to the erosion of civil liberites and the criminalisation of muslims and arabs more broadly. I dont at all oppose vigorous police action aimed at protecting citizens, there's a difference. The grandmother thing is a red herring you keep throwing arond as a way of avoiding my argument. Woody, I'll be honest here I think you mask your hatre filled agenda behind humourous remarks like "is that you Ahmed" but its a thin veil there buddy

Posted by Ahmed at May 1, 2006 01:16 AM

Ahmed, if you make statements about me that I and anyone who knows me are totally false, then it's hard give respect to anything else that you say. You're either a bad amateur psychologist or you intended to lie about me. Among my friends who would support me are Arab clients that I help who live in Syria, Kuwait, and Bahrain. (We rarely discuss politics, and they know that I treat them with honor and respect.)

However, since you are concerned about "philosophical, moral, and practical" issues: then, let me hear your position on Islamic terrorists--that put us in the position of having to tighten civil liberties of everyone--not just you and your pals. How moral is it to murder thousands of innocent people in the name of your religion?

Before ISLAMIC TERRORISTS hatched and carried out plots in their mission to destroy America, I never had to go through an hour of screening and take my shoes off at airports, but they made that inconvenience necessary. That inconvenience also covers grandmothers, who are not a threat and who are part of my point.

Islamic peoples have two problems: One problem is those who want to kill everyone who are not like them. The other problem is those who will not take a stand to condemn and stop their brothers who murder.

You've had your chance at us. Now, let me hear you condemn terrorists from your side. It has been very, very quiet from the Muslim world. Are you included in those who refuse to condemn terrorism? If not, then let's hear what you have previously said and done to condemn terrorists in your religion. Until you do, quit griping about necessary security measures that we have to take--including profiling.

Do I hear a silence?

Posted by Woody at May 1, 2006 06:15 AM

Your question exposes you for as a bigoted, narrow minded, mendacious jerk. I have no need to "plea my innocence" to you and i find the question damn offensice since it wouldnt be asked if my name was "Jack" instead of Ahmed, even if i had the same reservations about racial profiling. Go spew your hate filled agenda somewhere else

Posted by Ahmed at May 1, 2006 08:25 AM

Ahmed said,
i came here from South Africa, where we were exploited by a white racist state under apartheid…

Ahmed, it almost sounds like you have some personal baggage you brought with you from South Africa regarding “Whites?� Why are you stuck on all Americans being white? You have no idea if I’m white, black, brown…or do you? Your comment was racist in itself.

Ahmed said,
As for your silly list its pretty manipulative isnt it? Hypocriticial too.

Ahmed, this is the problem we face today in the United States. The first amendment allows people to open there mouth and vent they’re opinions. GM posted facts, facts that you disagree with. Unfortunately you don’t like the facts. So you’ve adopted the new American game “Spin� Keep spinning them around and around Ahmed, they still come out as facts!

Ahmed said,
Arabs have no sense of individuality, no regard for individual life, no values that express love

Ahmed, this is where I believe you took a giant leap off of common sense, into personal experiences. My only comment to your partial sentence I copied above, is this…

I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since those terrorist attacks in GM’s (list) post, we have experienced a slow surge
in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from those attacks had
barely settled when the "politically correct! " crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. We are now the USA Law Suit capitol of correctness.

"The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another. The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds of distrust; the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader.�
The survival of the American republic, depends upon "the preservation of a national spirit and a national character.� "To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens, the moment they foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.� (Alexander Hamilton)

Posted by Kern at May 1, 2006 11:19 AM

Ahmed, you wouldn't say those things to me if my name were Mokhtar. I guess that exposes you for your hatred of anything not Muslim. (I guess this works both ways.)

But, if I were of your faith, I would condemn all terrorism sponsored by religious heads of my faith and carrried out by people claiming that they murder in the name of your god. You purposely avoided such rejection of terrorism, and that says an awfully lot about you.

You expect us Americans to condemn security measures necessitated by actions of your own people, but you won't write one word--not one stinkin' word--against your people who murder. Do you not care, do you support terrorism, does your faith really call for murdering all non-believers of your religion,...just what is it besides the phony claim of being offended that keeps you (and others) from condemning murder and terrorism?

Until you state otherwise, I have to assume that you agree with the mudering of innocent Americans and support terrorism. That's a lot more scary than my harmless words (protected by the Bill of Rights.) The offered possibilities of your beliefs accompanied by the implied threat of actions by you, is worthy of an honest, non-emotional answer from you. I suspect that you wouldn't be proud to share your views with Homeland Security.

And, to your comment, "Go spew your hate filled agenda somewhere else." First, it isn't hate filled agenda when I state that I agree that we need to take simple, common-sense actions to help in the fight of the war on terror. Second, I checked, and G.M. has not banned or blocked me from commenting. Maybe what I'm saying has more merit than what you believe and it is you, not me, who is out of place.

What I support will not result in murders--only inconveniece. What you imply that you support is very serious and criminal.

You're not going to ban me, are you, G.M.?

Posted by Woody at May 1, 2006 12:35 PM

Woody you're going to have to engage in your hate arab delusions with someone else because i honeslty cant be bothered. Now i see you're not only assuming what i think (including that i condone mass murder, totally digusting buddy) but youre denationalising me, someome who is, and has been a US citizen for over twenty years. You're a disguting creep who obviously has no shame. I guess where i diverge with you is that i find all human life inherantly valuable and i believe that killing innocent people is disgusting no matter who is the perpetrator. I mourned for the victims of the september 11 th attack , i mourned for the brothers i lost to the anti apartheid struggle, i mourn for the victimes of oppression. You're a disgusting bigot who I'm done talking to

Posted by Ahmed at May 1, 2006 03:50 PM

Thanks, Ahmed. You mourned for victims and are disgusted with killing innocent people, but in all your ranting you never once condemned terrorist attacks by the people of your faith--which is all that I asked. I suspect that you have never condemned them or approached your spiritual leaders about this issue. Am I right?

You lose your temper and stomp away rather than address the fact that the issues over which you criticize the U.S. came about because of Islamic terrorists--but you don't want to criticize them.

Your actions here are so typical of the left. Make absurd attacks against the U.S., label responders to you as racist and demagogues, proclaim yourself the "winner," and say that you don't have to defend your side because you're "offended."

I'll tell you what is offensive. It's thousands of dead people murdered by Islamic terrorists, and what else is offensive is that believers of Islam do not come down en masse against them--not even your own one voice.

Go away mad. It's so much easier than facing reality and admitting your very own focus of hate and prejudice.

Is it really so hard to condemn terrorism?

Posted by Woody at May 1, 2006 04:06 PM

Woody you've proved yourself not only to be a bigoted, blind moron but apparently youre also illeterate. Unwilling to engage me in a debate on racial profiling, you then demand i condemn terrrism and woefully state that I approve of mass murder. What an amoral creep you are. You do this without knowing a single thing about me. Racism at the very bottom indeed. In terns of some of the real issues of race, ethnicity and justice in post 9 11 american I'd recommend you read cockburns latest piece "the war on terror on the lodi front"
http://www.counterpunch.org/

Posted by Ahmed at May 1, 2006 06:09 PM

"Thanks, Ahmed. You mourned for victims and are disgusted with killing innocent people, but in all your ranting you never once condemned terrorist attacks by the people of your faith--which is all that I asked. I suspect that you have never condemned them or approached your spiritual leaders about this issue. Am I right?"

By the way here you innocently parrot the extreme Islamist line that there is no difference between Islam as a religion and Islam as politics. For a a wonderfully cogent discussion on these matters you should realy check out this article. Beware though, its filled with history a subject you've shown an immense aversion to
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060515/mamdani

Posted by Ahmed at May 1, 2006 10:31 PM

Touchy, aren't you?

Posted by Woody at May 1, 2006 11:28 PM

Ahmed - I am an American muslim too. However, whay wont you even admit that many of our co-religionists are indeed committing crimes against humanity, killing innocents, and committing all manner of terrorism the world over? Why cant you even admit the truth? We muslims will never be respected, becasue folks like you, and the so-called leaders wont condemn terrorosm. What is wrong if the law enforcement authorities look into the terrorists and terrorism supporters? Or do you think that muslims are above the law, and ought to be allowed to behave as they choose, which in this case means to engage in terrorism. I bet you are like a lot of the older guys at our Mosque, who talka good game, hold US citizenship, but, secretly are all al-Qaeda, or Hizbollah, or Hamas supporters.
And, I bet, like such muslims, you must be a jwe-hating anti-semite too.
Shame on you Ahmed.
el-Hindi

Posted by el-Hindi at May 2, 2006 01:42 PM

El-Hindi cut ad honimen idiocy-which includes the false and insulting claim that I'm an anti semite or that i support mass murder-and take some time to actually read my stated opinions here. If you want to engage them then go ahead but that will take some elementary reading and comprehension skills which you seem to lack. In the spirit of El Hindi style debate can I ask you when you stopped beating your wife

peace

Posted by Ahmed at May 2, 2006 10:35 PM

Ahmed is probably long gone, but I'm piping in anyway:

"Listen I dont fit under either of those categories but i was stopped, harrassed, detained for over an hour when trying to fly out of new york to see my cousins gradaution in LA."

You seem bitter about that. And harrassed? Are you sure you weren't just number 20 in line? Because I was detained and searched on my last flight. I even had to take off part of my clothing to prove I wasn't wearing any explosives. All my luggage was searched and tested for explosives. Forty five minutes later, after my luggage was in such disarray I could hardly close the lid and I had been questioned extensively on why I was going to Mexico, I was sent on my way.

I am a white, red haired, freckled grandmother. Was I bitter? No. Inconvenienced? Why yes. Who wouldn't be? As a matter of fact, two spaces ahead of me was a young Arab male who went right on through. Was he a terrorist? Hell, I don't know. But he damn sure looked more the type to do what they pretended I might be doing. But see, he was not number 20 (or whatever the number was that day) so, I got searched instead.

And that's just the plain truth.

You complain about adding qualifiers like "shifty eyed" or "sulking". I see that you didn't consider them, only complained about it being brought up and using your own experience to belittle it.

If you want my opinion on this. The whole search thing, picking people at random, is bullshit. Did it stop Reid? pffft. The fact is, whenever a young Arab male does get pulled from line all we hear is bitching and moaning about profiling.

The fact is, they're not profiling. And if some people think that a certain amount of it should be allowable then I understand why. If you think GM is wrong, well, last time I checked we were all still free to be wrong. Live with it.

There's good reason why people feel this way. I think GM listed exactly those reasons. Yet you continue to call this disgusting and shameful without addressing the cause. Not once have you admitted why this sentiment prevails. Not once have you attempted to denounce those which brought about this sentiment, although you been given ample opportunity to do so. You speak of the horror of apartheid and the profiling that was used as part of its mechanism. How can you possibly compare profiling used to enhance security to profiling used to oppress a whole people and prop up a regime?

You have a chip on your shoulder and the longer you refuse to see it, the bigger it gets.

Posted by Oyster at May 3, 2006 10:16 AM

Ooops. I cussed again, GM. Sorry. Feel free to edit.

Posted by Oyster at May 3, 2006 10:31 AM

wow thats quite an argument we've got going on here. Iwas doind some research for a school assignment when i stumbled onto this site and i'd just like to say that everyone involved should pick up a book called "Myth, Propaganda and disaster in Nazi germany and contemporary america" By Stephen Sewell. Then stop and think objectively, not subjectively. Ignoe all your own beliefs and for once, consider others.

Posted by Caz at May 10, 2006 12:47 AM

Loved the history test. Frightening to think about how many may have actually failed it.

Posted by MWohl at May 11, 2006 01:56 PM