Justice Department Considers Racial Profiling For Terror Prevention

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Justice Department Considers Racial Profiling For Terror Prevention stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07- 3-08 08:28 AM   |   Updated: 07-11-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Raceflag

The Justice Department is considering letting the FBI investigate Americans without any evidence of wrongdoing, relying instead on a terrorist profile that could single out Muslims, Arabs or other racial and ethnic groups.

Law enforcement officials say the proposed policy would help them do exactly what Congress demanded after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: root out terrorists before they strike.

Although President Bush has disavowed targeting suspects based on their race or ethnicity, the new rules would allow the FBI to consider those factors among a number of traits that could trigger a national security investigation.

Currently, FBI agents need specific reasons _ like evidence or allegations that a law probably has been violated _ to investigate U.S. citizens and legal residents. The new policy, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press, would let agents open preliminary terrorism investigations after mining public records and intelligence to build a profile of traits that, taken together, were deemed suspicious.

Among the factors that could make someone subject of an investigation is travel to regions of the world known for terrorist activity, access to weapons or military training, along with the person's race or ethnicity.

More than a half-dozen senior FBI, Justice Department and other U.S. intelligence officials familiar with the new policy agreed to discuss it only on condition of anonymity, either because they were not allowed to speak publicly or because the change is not yet final.

The change, which is expected later this summer, is part of an update of Justice Department policies known as the attorney general guidelines. They are being overhauled amid the FBI's transition from a traditional crime-fighting agency to one whose top mission is to protect America from terrorist attacks.

"We don't know what we don't know. And the object is to cut down on that," said one FBI official who defended the plans.

Story continues below
advertisement

Another official, while also defending the proposed guidelines, raised concerns about criticism during the presidential election year over what he called "the P word" _ profiling.

If adopted, the guidelines would be put in place in the final months of a presidential administration that has been dogged by criticism that its counterterror programs trample privacy rights and civil liberties.

Critics say the presumption of innocence is lost in the proposal. The FBI will be allowed to begin investigations simply "by assuming that everyone's a suspect, and then you weed out the innocent," said Caroline Fredrickson of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey acknowledged the overhaul was under way in early June, saying the guidelines sought to ensure regulations for FBI terror investigations don't conflict with ones governing criminal probes. He would not give any details.

"It's necessary to put in place regulations that will allow the FBI to transform itself ... into an intelligence gathering organization in addition to just a crime solving organization," Mukasey told reporters.

The changes would allow FBI agents to ask open-ended questions about activities of Muslim- or Arab-Americans, or investigate them if their jobs and backgrounds match trends that analysts deem suspect.

FBI agents would not be allowed to eavesdrop on phone calls or dig deeply into personal data _ such as the content of phone or e-mail records or bank statements _ until a full investigation was opened.

The guidelines focus on the FBI's domestic operations and run about 40 pages long, several officials said. They do not specifically spell out what traits the FBI should use in building profiles.

One senior Justice Department official said agents have been allowed since 2003 to build "threat assessments" of Americans based on public records and information from informants. Such assessments could be used to open a preliminary investigation, the official said.

However, another official said the 2003 authorities are limited, tightly monitored by FBI headquarters in Washington and, overall, confusing to agents about how or when they can be used.

Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the guidelines governing when to open a national security investigation are part of a "harmonizing" process that will not give the FBI any more authority than it already has. He declined further comment, but he and two other senior Justice officials, would not deny the changes as they were described to AP by others familiar with the guidelines.

"Any review and change to the guidelines will reflect our traditional concerns for civil liberties and First Amendment liberties and our traditional investigative emphasis on using the least intrusive means feasible," Roehrkasse said Wednesday.

Although the guidelines do not require congressional approval, House members recently sought to limit such profiling by rejecting an $11 million request for the FBI's security assessment center. Lawmakers wrote it that was unclear how the FBI could compile suspect profiles "in such a way as to avoid needless intrusions into the privacy of innocent citizens" and without wasting time and money chasing down false leads.

The denial of funding could limit the FBI's use of profiles, or "predictive models and patterns of behavior" as the government prefers to describe the data-mining results, but would not change the guidelines authorizing them. The guidelines would remain in effect until a new attorney general decided to change them.

Courts across the country have overturned criminal convictions when defendants showed they were targeted based on race. Racial profiling generally is considered a civil rights violation, and former Attorney General John Ashcroft condemned it in March 2001 as an "unconstitutional deprivation of equal protection under our Constitution."

President Bush also has condemned racial profiling as "wrong in America" and in a December 2001 interview had harsh words for an airline that refused to let one of his Secret Service agents board a commercial flight. The agent was Arab-American. "If he was treated that way because of his ethnicity, that will make me madder than heck," Bush said.

Immediately after 9/11, hundreds of Muslims and Arabs were detained, deported and monitored as the government urgently sought information that could prevent another attack. Despite efforts to repair and nurture relationships with those groups, Muslim- and Arab-Americans still complain of being singled out by federal security practices.

Martin Redish, a constitutional and civil rights scholar at Northwestern University School of Law, said courts are likely to give the FBI a lot of leeway in deciding how to open national security investigations.

"But it's a very fine line to be drawn when the basis of the investigation is dominated by the ethnic background of the subject," Redish said. "And when the investigation results in harassment, you have a serious constitutional concern."

Citing Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh _ two white Americans _ the ACLU's Fredrickson said: "Profiling has sent us in the wrong direction. ... I thought we learned our lesson in that regard."


The Justice Department is considering letting the FBI investigate Americans without any evidence of wrongdoing, relying instead on a terrorist profile that could single out Muslims, Arabs or other rac...
The Justice Department is considering letting the FBI investigate Americans without any evidence of wrongdoing, relying instead on a terrorist profile that could single out Muslims, Arabs or other rac...
Filed by Katharine Zaleski  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
1211
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (15 pages total)
photo

On the day when there is any statistical correlation between people like my 85-year-old Irish-Catholic mother of 6 inflicting terrorist s**t on America, maybe I'll back off on the idea of racial profiling. Until then, and as long as it's swarthy Muslim dudes and dude-ettes who are strapping IEDs to their paunches, I don't and won't see anything terribly wrong with racial profiling.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:33 AM on 07/04/2008

just as there is no correlation (i'll take your word for it) between your mother and the 9-11 attackers, there is no correlation between american arabs/muslims and the 9-11 attackers

your attitude is being colored by something, but it's not the truth . . . perhaps you've watched too many episodes of "24"?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:42 AM on 07/04/2008

Are you saying that if someone invaded your country and tried to force you to live a certain way, if they went into your home and ransacked it, if their bullets found their way into your loved ones, you wouldn't be out there planting IEDs? Don't you have any self respect?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 AM on 07/04/2008

Since people of all races have perpetrated crimes against Americans that could be categorized a being "terrorism" (dating back to the days when Europeans were commonly committing acts of terrorism against the Native Americans), then how about if our government simply subjects all of our citizens to the same type of insulting and invasive profiling? We could amend the Constitution to make it all legal.

How about it, MarkInIrvine? How would you like to be regularly stopped by the cops and searched for absolutely no reason (other than "DWIA" [Driving While Irish American])? My money says that not only would you not like it, you would not tolerate it. Save your "I don't and won't see anything terribly wrong with racial profiling" garbage for others like you who don't have to worry about being victimized by this criminal behavior.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 AM on 07/04/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

To MarkInIrvi­ne.... Lift your eyes and see where your future takes you. It would be impossible to take ordinary Americans and turn them into terrorists EXCEPT if you bring the green zone home. The only way to turn ordinary Americans against their government is to think you can seperate citizens from each other. Bad pain, my friend.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 PM on 07/04/2008
- BlackJAC I'm a Fan of BlackJAC 62 fans permalink

Three words: "Irish Republican Army." They were flat-out terrorists who had dealings with Moammar Khadaffi.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:58 PM on 07/07/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

Well someone has to say it. Who commits the vast majority of murders? Rapes? Assaults? Armed robberies? Felonies of all kinds? Oh and hijacking of course.

Right. Men. Pack all your possessions, it's off to the camps for you guys.

You can laugh, but against any other type of variable, religion, ethnicity, race, birthplace etc. etc, the positive correlation of male gender w crime leaves all these other classifications in the dust. Just to show how ludicrous the whole idea of profiling is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:16 AM on 07/04/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

Yep. Testosterone poisoning is the number one cause of most of what's wrong. Read the other day that most fatal dog bites are inflicted by unneutered male dogs too. (I know that last sentence contains a literary redundency, but most people don't know a "dog" is a male in the dog world too.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 AM on 07/04/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

Really? I figured the neutered ones would be more pissed off. Go figure.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:30 AM on 07/04/2008

You words don't show how ludicrous profiling is, rather it supports the reason we profile.

The police rightly use gender profiling all the time. It is an effective tool in crime solving and crime prevention.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 AM on 07/04/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

If the Feds used gender profiling, there would be 2 lines at the airport, one for men and one for women. Because all the 9/11 guys were, well, guys. Which by the logic of profiling means all future terrorists will be men, right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:35 AM on 07/04/2008

1st of all, there is a huge difference between investigating criminal behaviour and investigating citizens purely on the basis of their identity, and 2nd, when police use profiles to solve crimes, they also use other factors, such as criminal history, to narrow the field . . . they don't, for instance, interrogate every white, middle-aged male when a serial killer is on the loose

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 07/04/2008

Msmaggie, you are on the path to discovery, but you have only found your way to the first stepping stone.

Say there is an infestation of meth dealing in your jurisdiction. You begin your investigation by checking the prior arrest records for patterns.

first you determine that all but a few arrestees for meth dealing are men.

Next you find that all but a few of these men have been white.

Next you narrow it down to unshaven long-haired white men who were riding bikes.

You check further and find that these bikes were big Harley Davidsons.

So to conduct an efficient investigation it makes sense to pay particular attention to unshaven long-haired bikers on Harleys,i.­e. 'profiling' them.

It is a total waste of time to pay any attention to yuppies riding mopeds or pencil necked geeks adorned in gaily-colored spandex riding bicycles.

Would that it were so simple since the bikers would hire a lawyer with their meth money who would sue your police department for 'dithcwiminating' against his clients and harassing them in violation of their Con-stee-t­oo-shun-al rights.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 PM on 07/04/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

Want to see the future? Want to see what will happen when a ordinary Americans are given this proposed seminar in terrorism in the land of the free? Read the graphic comic "V for Vendeta"..­..or see the less strong movie.
Yep, they mean to make it personal.
Happy 4th of July, citizens!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 07/04/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

Or ir taste is a bit more....uh­....differ­ent: Pick up "The Candy Bombers", very stirring account of the Berlin Air Lift and how good comes from good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 AM on 07/04/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

Ah, don't be a snob. I've read_The Candy Bombers Too_ . You might pick up _V_ and be surprised by it's political sophistication. It was made by a Brit when Maggie Thatcher was rounding 'em up. Hey it's got a British accent...j­ust like Masterpiece Theater. All good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:58 AM on 07/04/2008

Do you remember the Fifth of November? I do. I also agree with you.

We are witnessing the formation and transformation of the institutions that will enslave this country. And all they do, they do because they can. They already have the sanction of the victim, to use Ayn Rand's term.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 AM on 07/04/2008

Can someone explain to me how the constitution give us the right to not be investigated by the government?

How is one harmed by having the government investigate whether or not he is a terrorist as long as none of his rights are violated (i.e. having his home searched without consent, being denied an attorney, being forced to testify against himself ect...)?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 PM on 07/03/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

Habeus corpus, Bill of Rights. Loosely translated means "produce the body"Basically means you (the Govt) can't target/investigate me for no good reason, you need a crime to reasonally connect me with. Also more generally "equal justice under the law", due process. Equal meaning if I'm Irish and you're Pakistani, we are to be treated equally under the law unless there is a specfic cause to investigate you--specific meaning particular to you as an individual.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 07/04/2008

Habeus corpus has to do with your right to go before a judge, i.e. the government can't lock you up without charging you. It has nothing to do with investigation.

Due process relates to treatment after being charged.

When one is being investigated, he/she hasn't been charged with anything.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:16 AM on 07/04/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

Well....as Gramps put it, "This used to be a pretty damn good country. Every one used to have the right to go to hell in their own way". The essence of the Constitution is the right to be left the hell alone.
I look for the middle way which makes me a socialist, but i respect old Gramps position.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 07/04/2008
- goodog I'm a Fan of goodog 138 fans permalink
photo

Apparently 75% of American's confuse the Ten Commandments with the Bill of Rights, so I'm not surprised someone has never heard of probable cause.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Probable cause, not the color of my skin, my political party, sex life, and certainly not just because I spend as little as $5000. Even as little as $3000, at your teller's discression, can trigger a federal investigation. That's wack.

What's more, many citizens engage in taboo activities that can easily be outlawed depending on who wins any particular election. That's why I don't want the government snooping in my stuff or recording what I do, buy, and like, because history shows so-called intelligence gets used against people, later, when a new regime is in power.

That's fine for mundane muggles, but some of us have lives.

Don't fool yourselves. The article starts, saying the FBI 's only thinking about it, before it gets around to saying oh, by the way, we've been doing it since 2003.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 AM on 07/04/2008
- realtalk I'm a Fan of realtalk 13 fans permalink

Well I hope the include white people in the profiling as well because, as it was reported in a news article on ABC NEWS on June 20, 2008, TITLED: Intelligence Officials: Dozens of EUROPEANS have Trained In Terror Camps in Pakistan.
Officials Fear This Maybe the beggining of a news breed of Al -Qaeda Affiliated Terrorism.

I notice that this did not get wide spread covergae in the mains stream media, and it is disgraceful that they would NOT let the public know of this new threat so that we are better able to protect ourselves, by being aware, and, cautious.

READ THE ARTICLE ON ABCNEWS WEBSITE:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5213783&page=1

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:45 PM on 07/03/2008

Nowhere in the article you linked to did it describe these Europeans as "white." It merely described them as "western."

You are correct in your concern. To look only at the nationality or religion of an individual is to ignore many other important factors in determining an effective profile.

Fortunately, the FBI (as pointed out in the story) is considering race and religion as only a part of a greater profile.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 07/03/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 270 fans permalink
photo

And... this proposed seminar in "Who's the terrorist" would be the only way to radicalize a population of ordinary white folks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:13 AM on 07/04/2008
- Kalima I'm a Fan of Kalima 74 fans permalink
photo

Racial profiling of people who have no record of wrong doing, is appalling. What is next,
internment camps while their information is being processed?
Your country is vast, there are plenty of spaces to build a few more Gitmos. It sounds like
you are going back to an awful time in history where neighbours were expected to turn
in neighbours for the good of their country. The prospects are indeed frightening, apart
from the fact that they are unethical too, but then again this has never stopped your
government before.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:31 PM on 07/03/2008

Katima sounds like a European elitist. As I remember they are the reason a few million people died last century because of their wisdom, and arrogance.

Americans bailed out the Katima's of the world. Katiima should be grateful, instead of this condemnsation of my country he/she should relax, take a moment and chill. Be thankful American soldiers died for your freedoms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 PM on 07/03/2008
- syllepsis I'm a Fan of syllepsis 24 fans permalink

American soldiers seem to be dying a lot these days, but freedom is not what they are dying for.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:12 AM on 07/04/2008

When was the last time a dead soldier helped your freedom? If you believe that, then why don't you join the military and become a freedom fighting soldier yourself.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 AM on 07/04/2008

Kalima, where do you live that you can criticize us for trying to protect ourselves from evil people? The U.S. has been the biggest contributor to peace in history, protecting or freeing hundreds of millions from German, Japanese, Socialist, and Communist oppression, and now engaged in freeing millions more from Islamic oppression, if they can hold it. The people about whom this article speaks are using our laws to subvert our country, and yes, not all of them are dark-skinned Arabs. However, the majority, for now, are Muslim and Middle Eastern. Research into their lives, and possible intervention, may save lives, untold lives. Unless you live in some utopia that has discovered the secret to wealth and stability while keeping the barbarians from the gates, please reserve your criticism for those countries that oppress their peoples, as do the majority of Middle Eastern countries and African countries.
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 AM on 07/04/2008

That is so well put. The United States has no equal in being a force for freedom in the history of civilization.

It is unfortunate that some see only our shortcomings and imperfections as the sum total of our great nation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 AM on 07/04/2008

want to protect our country? don't start by spying on arab americans, who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, and unlike european americans, have not bombed federal buildings and abortion clinics, sent mail bombs, etc

as productive, law-abiding citizens, the majority of arab and muslim amerians are highly educated and have incomes well above the national average . . . the vast majority, moreover, are christian (75+%), while among muslims, more than 20% marry people outside their faith . . . they have extremely high rates of voter registration, and for what it is worth, the overwhelming majority favor stricter gun controls

when law enforcement resources are spent spying on these americans because of their ethnicity and/or religion, they are being diverted from the real threats . . . kind of like diverting our military resources from afghanistan and the hunt for bin laden in order to invade iraq

indeed, the only place where profiling arab/muslim americans makes sense is on the set of "24" . . . but that is not the the real world, it is fiction, and based upon the same bigotry and ignorance as this proposed policy

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:43 AM on 07/04/2008

"The U.S. has been the biggest contributor to peace in history, protecting or freeing hundreds of millions from German, Japanese, Socialist, and Communist oppression, and now engaged in freeing millions more from Islamic oppression, if they can hold it."

That makes me LOL.

Is that what you think the marines do? I ask this question of course because of your "semper fi" at the end. Well, I'm on my second tour in Iraq as I type this, and if you've been here, you should know full well that we are not helping these people. Trading a dictator for an occupation is hardly a step in the right direction. Freedom is a conscious choice, one that, sadly, most people here don't seem ready to make yet.

You cannot force people to be free.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 AM on 07/04/2008
- Kalima I'm a Fan of Kalima 74 fans permalink
photo

The people about who this article speaks are people who have done
nothing wrong to warrant the profiling except to have darker skin and
be Muslims. If that should included Arab/Americans, it is indeed
disgraceful. Where did I say you should not be protecting your citizens?
I should think that if you refer to people who were not born in your
country, then your system is upside down and people coming into
the U.S. should be checked in more detail before they are issued
their entry visas. As for where I live, I can't see what difference it
makes but I have lived in Tokyo for almost 30 years, was married
to a Japanese before I came here and still have to carry my "Alien
Registration Card" each time I leave my house.
"The biggest contributor to peace?"
What have you given to the people of Iraq?
They and other Arab countries don't need or want your help to free
them from oppression, your way of thinking is what is wrong.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 AM on 07/04/2008

Does this mean that the TSA idiots will stop feeling up my grandmother?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 PM on 07/03/2008

does she have an accent?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 PM on 07/03/2008

My 90 year old parents went throught Pittsburgh Airport, not to my knowledge a hub of terrorist activity.
Because of my father's pace maker he was throughly searched including the soles of his feet?
TSA needs to re-think searching senior citizens and come up with a common-sense approach to airport security. American citizens should be exempt from this appalling procedure!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 PM on 07/03/2008
- msmaggie I'm a Fan of msmaggie 10 fans permalink

Was bringing my granddaughter thru security at JFK en route to Europe. They confiscated her Sponge Bob toothpaste that was in her Hello Kitty backpack. Curses! Foiled again!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:53 PM on 07/03/2008

This is the wisdom of not 'profiling'. Harass everybody instead of just the potential troublemakers. Don't dare appear ''biased' or like you're 'dithcwiminating' (which has become the greatest sin known to mankind).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 PM on 07/04/2008
- BlackJAC I'm a Fan of BlackJAC 62 fans permalink

The elderly are often targeted by scam artists because they grew up in a far more innocent era where nobody thought twice about picking up hitchhikers, so she's an even bigger security risk. "That nice keffiyeh-wearing young man named 'Osama bin Laden' asked me to carry this funny-looking clock for him on the flight!"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 07/07/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

Over the past three decades, 100% of successful hijackings of US aircraft have been conducted by arabic men, aged 20 to 40 years old, traveling alone on foreign passports.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 07/03/2008

0% of american planes successfully hijacked by american arabs of any age or sex

0% of federal buildings bombed by american arabs of any age or sex

0% of 9-11 attacks perpetrated by american arabs of any age or sex

relevance of your statement to the issue of profiling american arabs: 0%

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

You have a much better response that mine. I focused on "why Arabs". You ficused on racial profiling of Arab Americans.

Thank you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

I made no comment regarding the profiling of "american arabs." Their record of hijacking US aircraft is the same as that of Catholic nuns, or Swedish exchange students, or Playboy bunnies.

My assertion concerned the possible profiling of arabic men, aged 20 to 40 years old, traveling alone on FOREIGN PASSPORTS. There is a pattern there if you wish to look.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 PM on 07/03/2008

The planes on 9/11 were hijacked by Arabs. How is the citizenship of the hijacker a point here? Arab, Arab, Arab and other Arabs did the crime. That is the point.

Relevance 100 per cent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 07/03/2008
- Deeg I'm a Fan of Deeg permalink

100% of presidents and presidential candidates have been assassinated by white men

100% of mail bombing sprees have been committed by white men

50% of Ryder truck bombings have been committed by white men

100% of anthrax attacks have been comitted by white men

Should we focus only on arab men trying to hijack planes?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 07/03/2008

heehee . . . for a second there, i thought i'd had a senior moment and posted twice!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

No. We should focus on all manner of things. But if we focus on airline hijackings, history suggests we focus on arabic men, aged 20 to 40 years old, traveling alone on foreign passports.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:08 PM on 07/03/2008

Are any of the bombings as recent as 9/11, where 3 massive bombs were delivered to the U.S. by Arab men? I, for one, am only too happy to profile!
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

During the past three decades all military attacks by non-Muslims on Arab countries have been by the U.S. or Israel.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:13 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

Too easy.

Quick rebuttal:

There were 34 countries in the 1991 Gulf War Coalition. Many of them were non-Muslim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_Gulf_War

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:06 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

During the past thirty years, U.S. has killed at least ten times as many Arab civilians that Arabs have killed American civilians.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

See reply above. Rinse and repeat.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:16 PM on 07/03/2008

If only 10% of Muslims are fanatics, we've hardly scratched the surface. We need to try much harder, don't you think?
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 07/03/2008

Your statement is without fact. And patently false. That is unless you believe in the made up statistics floating around.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

During the past thirty years, U.S. has been involved on more militray attacks on other countries than any other country in the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:18 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

Variation of stock progressive claim that "the US is the real terrorist nation."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:08 PM on 07/03/2008

Name the one's where we were either not requested, attacked, or our interests threatened, please.
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 PM on 07/03/2008

How did you figure that out? What smear merchant quoted that ? It is not factual and ridiculous. Every hear of the former soviet union? They have invaded Afghanistan, and a half dozen of their former allies alone.

Ever hear of the French foreign legion? Where they have been in the last 30 years?

You have no clue.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 07/03/2008

Next step - the same as what happened before: Japanese Internment Camps only they will be called Terrorist Internment Camps or some other twisted up version to make "crap" smell like "rose". And not only will they be locking up so-called terrorists in the name of YOUR safety they'll start locking up anyone who doesn't agree with it, then they'll start locking up people who have dissented.

This kind of thing tends to get out of control pretty fast, ask the Germans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

Much of what you say has already happened.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 07/03/2008

my guess is that they will be called "homeland threat containment facilities"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 07/03/2008

How about "concentration camps" it is more alliterative, or has someone thought of that one before?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:39 PM on 07/03/2008

Back when Ashcroft was AG, the loons were sqauwking that he was building 'concentration camps' in the desert. Maybe the government can save money for a change and use those. They must be there since the loons said they were. We all know the loons never imagine things and never lie.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 PM on 07/04/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

You guys have been saying that for years. And despite all that fear, ya got no camps, no mass arrests, no mass lockups, no stifling of "dissent", no censorship, no takeover of the media.

You guys are gonna ride that tired horse til it drops, aren't you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:54 PM on 07/03/2008

Because the constitutional amendments weren't in place yet Ramirez. They're starting to fall into place for them though. Stay tuned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 07/03/2008

just till we're locked up . . . it's worth it, though . . . the cost of not fighting tyranny, historically speaking, is pretty steep

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:15 PM on 07/03/2008
- Strain I'm a Fan of Strain 4 fans permalink

There was already been "talks" of setting up "holding facilities". Roughly 2 or 3 months ago. We're planning on closing Gitmo, and placing those men here on US soil in military facilities FOR NOW.

Don't trust this particular government to keep it's word. It hasn't in 8 years.

Read your history of WWII Europe, particularly Germany.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:03 PM on 07/03/2008

my guess is that they will be called "homeland threat containment facilities" . . . sounds innocuous enough

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 07/03/2008
- Strain I'm a Fan of Strain 4 fans permalink

I agree 100%.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:00 PM on 07/03/2008
- Chillinout I'm a Fan of Chillinout 125 fans permalink
photo

Here's a story for you.

One day a few years ago, I was in a major city and was hopelessly lost. The neighborhood I was in was rather decrepit and there were no places to ask for directions. After about an hour of driving around, trying to figure out where I was or where I was going I was pulled over by a couple of cops. I was pulled from the car at gunpoint, handcuffed and searched and then my car was searched as well.

What was my crime? I was a white person in a black neighborhood. And of course, I was told by the cops, the ONLY reason that I could possibly be there was to buy drugs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:33 PM on 07/03/2008

I am certain the police were embarrassed by this.

However, I am willing to bet that the vast majority of the time that happens, the white is there to buy drugs.

Off topic and just for the record, the whole idea of drugs being illegal and police wasting time to see if someone is buying drugs is about the dumbest thing we do in America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 07/03/2008
- Chillinout I'm a Fan of Chillinout 125 fans permalink
photo

I agree. The war on drugs in this country is the longest, most ridiculous, most expensive war we have ever fought. And it has done absolutely nothing to stop drug use.

And the police were more than embarrassed. The first one that pulled me over was suspended, and the police dept had to go through sensitivity training.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 07/03/2008
- Chillinout I'm a Fan of Chillinout 125 fans permalink
photo

And it wasn't so much that I was pulled over, I am sure a lot of the time that is why whites are there, it had more to do with the guilty until proven innocent, and the way the handled the whole situation.

And here is the kicker, the ACLU couldn't be bothered about this incident.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 07/03/2008

the american revolution and all that "give me liberty or give me death" jazz goes right over your head, doesn't it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

Look on the bright side. If the neighborhood was as bad as you say, there's a chance that the cops pulling you over may have saved your life.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

How would you like to be locked up in solitary confinement for the rest of your life? You would be perfectly safe.

You wouldn't have many of your rights or freedoms, but you would be safe.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:25 PM on 07/03/2008
- oregonrain I'm a Fan of oregonrain 13 fans permalink
photo

Who are you , who who , who who.... I really wanna know who , who, who are YOU! Geesh , this article makes me sick .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 07/03/2008

Every one should chill out a little bit here.

The fact that we haven't already been doing this shows we place way too much evidence on cultural sensitivities and political correctness.

When the FBI is looking for serial killers, (like the one we just had here in st. louis) they develop a profile based on a number of factors. One common conclusion (among many more specific ones) is usually that it is white male between about 25-45. That makes sense because most, but not all, serial killers are white men between 25-45.

By the same token, domestic terrorists have shown to be predominatley, but not exclusively, muslim men of middle eastern decent between the ages of about 18 and 45.

Yes, Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph don't fit the profile. (But Rudolph fits the profile to a tee of a man likely to blow up an abortion clinic.) However, 9-11, the first WTC attack in 93 and the DC sniper case all fit that profile. In other words, only about 1 in 30 victims of domestic terrorism were attacked by a person not a muslim male of middle eastern decent between about 18 and 45.

Believe me, our enemies mock us for out politically correct stance and refusal to use racial or religious profile in our threat detection techniques.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 07/03/2008
- HumeSkeptic I'm a Fan of HumeSkeptic 1613 fans permalink
photo

Racial profiling is illegal.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 PM on 07/03/2008

And? So what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Although the police practice racial profiling all of the time, it is very difficult to prove. The police pull dark-skinned people over on a regular basis, claiming that they were "weaving." How can you defend yourself against that? They then proceed to badger the driver incessantly, questioning him or her about "any drugs or firearms in the vehicle." They then politely ask for permission to search the vehicle. If they are denied permission, they summon the dog team. If a "hit" is detected, they then proceed to tear the vehicle apart. Meanwhile, the victims are at the mercy of the cops. They must patiently wait throughout the lengthy ordeal, losing time and suffering the embarassment of being searched by the roadside.

I know. Being Native American, I have "Latino-looking" features, which have resulted in my being stopped for NO reason. While working a job in Alabama, our work truck was stopped TWICE on the same day in two separate counties by two sets of dog teams -- both of which searched us. This episode cost our company much money, and everyone knew that I was the reason for it, which resulted in hard feelings toward me. This is truly ugly, criminal behavior perpetrated by our society, and innocent people are harmed by it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:17 PM on 07/03/2008

Wrong. If a bank robber holds up a bank and he is a white male in his 70s, 4 foot ten and 500 pounds, are you going to look at every black guy or white woman to prove a point? What idiot would do that?

Profiling gives you nothing more than a likely candidate(s)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 07/04/2008

we are talking about spying on AMERICANS, einstein . . . zero correlation between being an american arab and being a domestic terrorist . . . targeting american arabs and muslims is not profiling based upon facts, it's ignorance and racism . . . just like attacking iraq wan't about wmd's, catching bin laden, or making us safer, but about oil

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:31 PM on 07/03/2008

I believe the article mentioned not just americans but legal visitors.

Either way, doesn't matter a bit to me. The FBI already uses profiling in many cases to try to identify suspects.

This is just another tool, and one I believe will be effective.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:40 PM on 07/03/2008
- Deeg I'm a Fan of Deeg permalink

Right, they do create a profile, but what the FBI wants to do is more of a dragnet style policy. It may sound tame to you, but how often has this administration stayed within the bound of the rules? National Security letters, and the FISA courts come to mind.

Let me give you a more equitable analogy. It's more like pulling someone over because he/she is black. It's racial profiling and it, at best, violates the spirit of the 4th amendment, at worst it absolutely is unconstitutional.

As for:

"Believe me, our enemies mock us for out politically correct stance and refusal to use racial or religious profile in our threat detection techniques­."

By this thinking, our administration has engaged in rendition and torture, warrantless wiretapping and suspended Habeus Corpus. You'll have to excuse me if I don't buy it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:43 PM on 07/03/2008

Your analogy would fit if the soul reason they were being investigated was because they were muslim.

The article makes it clear that being muslim or of middle eastern decent is only one part of the profile they are looking for.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 07/03/2008

You forgot to add the pro-lifer terrorists. Several doing life in prison right now. Also profiled as white males between the ages of 25-45. Bombings and murder, as recent as 2007. Several on terror watch lists as we speak. They hate us for our freedom.

Never appease terrorists, right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:52 PM on 07/03/2008

I did mention Eric Rudolph, an abortion clinic bomber.

I abhor those who bomb abortion clinics, so please don't take the following statement out of context.

There are huge differences between those that bomb abortion clinics and Islamic terrorism. Do you really believe the two are equal threats to our safety and way of life?

It is estimated that 10% of Islam is radicalized. That means there are about 1.1 million Muslims who support efforts to kill innocent Americans. On scale, the two threats share no similarity.

There is no organization amongst anti-abortion terrorist. There are no safe havens for military style training camps. There are no state sponsers of anti-abortion terrorism. There is no widespread political support for anti-abortion terrorists. Anti-abortion terrorists do not control governments in any areas of the world.

Most importantly though, anti-abortion terrorist have an agenda only of ending abortion. Radical Islamic terrorism seeks to destroy our way of life, kill as many as they can indiscriminatly, inflict harm on our economy, convert us to Islam and force us to live under sharia law while exterminating as many Jews as possible.

In other words, the danger we face from anti-abortion terrorism is no where near the danger we face from radical Islam.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 PM on 07/03/2008
- WLA I'm a Fan of WLA 323 fans permalink
photo

Out o' here for the holiday. Bye bye huff. Keep the tr0lls at bay for the holy flag pin day weekend. Happy fourth (white 'merikans only, of course). Try not to get blowed-up real good with far-crackas.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 07/03/2008
- abouttime I'm a Fan of abouttime 23 fans permalink

At what point do the people, we the people, stop calling the U.S.cabal "our government'?
At what point do we acknowledge a coup has taken place in our name?
How do we take our government back?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 07/03/2008
- oregonrain I'm a Fan of oregonrain 13 fans permalink
photo

I like the way you think ! My thoughts exactly !

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 07/03/2008
- Chillinout I'm a Fan of Chillinout 125 fans permalink
photo

Thomas Jefferson said it best:

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. - Thomas Jefferson

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:14 PM on 07/03/2008
- CEDobson I'm a Fan of CEDobson 6 fans permalink
photo

Chillinout:

I love that one! Still gives me goosebumps.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:28 PM on 07/03/2008
- CEDobson I'm a Fan of CEDobson 6 fans permalink
photo

abouttime:

We take our government back by storming the WH.

Of course, we are all working so many hours to make ends meet that none of us has time to go and gas is so expensive that no one can afford to get there (part of the evil plot?)

Sounds good on paper though.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:00 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

Problem #2:

Progs don't own guns.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 PM on 07/03/2008

Move to another country. One that is more to your liking and has a similair type of government you approve of. north Korea, Cuba, or Venezuela come to mind.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 AM on 07/04/2008
- robbep I'm a Fan of robbep 23 fans permalink

whats the prblm, if you dont have anything to hide you wont have any issues. thgt i wld say that bfr some yahoo did. PS anyone know if Obama and the dems support this?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:12 PM on 07/03/2008
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 276 fans permalink
photo

They'll complain a little and make some noise, but in the end they will side with Bush.

In their hearts they know he's right.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:20 PM on 07/03/2008
- Deeg I'm a Fan of Deeg permalink

I think it has more to do with their spine than their hearts

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 07/03/2008
- TS I'm a Fan of TS 16 fans permalink

Seriously, is it that you've never read the Constitution or do you simply not understand what it says?

The fourth amendment could not be clearer. Further, the only conditions allowed for that in any way allow diminishing those guaranteed rights are also clearly laid out. They are invasion or insurrection. Neither of those conditions are anywhere near being met. It is a guarantee of freedom not absolute safety. What are you so very afraid of that you would choose to throw those rights away not just for yourself but for every citizen of this nation?

I though conservatives believed in a strict interpretation of the constitution. What's your problem?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 07/03/2008
- CEDobson I'm a Fan of CEDobson 6 fans permalink
photo

Some of the people detained at Gitmo thought that exact thing!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:27 PM on 07/03/2008
- WLA I'm a Fan of WLA 323 fans permalink
photo

Da! Your papers please!

No prb heer idjut.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:42 PM on 07/03/2008
- Nochnoi I'm a Fan of Nochnoi 130 fans permalink
photo

I am a necessary worker!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:09 PM on 07/03/2008

my problem with this policy, aside from the bigoted, unconstitutionality of it, is that when the fbi spies on innocent americans, they don't have time/resources to focus on the real bad guys . . . kind of the way bombing/occupying iraq has diverted resources from afghanistan and the hunt for osama bin laden (not an american arab, by the way) . . . i suppose that killing and/or oppressing innocent arabs is emotionally satisfying for some americans, but it hasn't made us safer

american arabs and muslims were NOT involved in 9-11 . . . most arab americans are highly educated professionals earning well above the national average, and the vast majority are christian (77%)

also, you may be cool with trampling upon the rights of arab/muslim americans, but once that abuse is accepted, the rights of bigoted, white christians aren't safe either

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:16 PM on 07/03/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (15 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect