Profiling

[TRNDRVR]

:flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:

***This is the contents of an email forwarded to me that I found to be an interesting read. I make no claim to its contents, including the slight religious connotation at the bottom. Read, and flame away, but not at me. Thanks!***
:flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:


Please pause a moment, reflect back and take the following multiple choice test.

The events are real. So are the answers highlighted in red.


Do you remember?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by?

a. Superman?
b. Jay Leno?
c. H arry Potter?
d. a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40?


2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred
by?

a. Olga Corbett?
b. Sitting Bull?
c. Arnold Schwarzenegger?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 ?


3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by?

a. Lost Norwegians?
b. Elvis?
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon
by?

a. John XXXXXXXXX?
b. The King of Sweden ?
c. The Boy Scouts?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by?

a. A pizza delivery boy?
b. Pee Wee Herman?
c. Geraldo Rivera?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old
American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair
by?

a. The Smurfs?
b. Davey Jones?
c. The Little Mermaid?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?


7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver
trying to rescue passengers was murdered by?

a. Captain Kidd?
b. Charles Lindberg?
c. Mother Teresa?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by?

a. Scooby Doo?
b. The Tooth Fairy and The Sundance Kid?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by?

a. Richard Simmons?
b. Grandma Moses?
c. Michael Jordan?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by?

a. Mr. Rogers?
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women
problems?
c. The World Wrestling Federation?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles
to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one
crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by
the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by?

a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd?
b. The Supreme Court of Florida ?
c. Mr. Bean?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against?

a. Enron?
b. The Lutheran Church ?
c. The NFL?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by?

a. Bonnie and Clyde ?
b. Captain Kangaroo?
c. Billy Graham?
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?



Nope, 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 winning and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest they be guilty of profiling.

Let's send this to as many people as we can so that the Gloria Aldreds and other dunder-headed attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, get the message.

As the writer of the award winning story "Forrest Gump" so aptly put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Come on people wake up!!! Keep this going. Pass it on to everyone in your address book. Our Country and our troops need our support.

Live simply.
Love generously.
Care deeply.
Speak kindly.
Leave the rest to God.

[jeepinxj01]

I got the exact same e-mail today, for the 50th time. :viking:

[TRNDRVR]

I got the exact same e-mail today, for the 50th time. :viking:Yeah well, like I said, I make no claim as to its contents.

[jeepinxj01]

Yeah well, like I said, I make no claim as to its contents.


Still interesting either way.

[flexjay87]

seems like a bad episode of "Mr. Obvious" you mean it's a religious thing, huh, i never made the connection. of course for non believers, there's nothing to worry about.

[johnlv6]

That does show a bit of a trend. They are the peace loving religion though. If it were white males between the age of 17 and 40 you can bet they'd be profiling like a mother fawker.

[muduck18]

They are the peace loving religion though.

Have you ever read any parts of the Koran?
I don't know that they are as peaceful as you think...

[BSD]

OK, lets try my version...

1. Abraham Lincoln was assasinated by
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christian between the ages of 17-40

2. The atomic bomb was dropped by..
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

3. Jim Crow laws in the South were created and enforced by ...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

4. The destruction of Native American societies was led by...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

Looks like we better be on the lookout for white male Christians between the ages of 17 and 40.

I will let you connect the dots.

BSD

[flexjay87]

nice try BSd, comparison does not hold water.

[McDonnie91]

you can make a list of horrible crimes for any ethnicty but in todays world many of the terrorist acts have been carryed out by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 isnt it common sense to watch those more prone to "cause problems" and this isnt to say that all muslim men are terrorists its that the majority of terrorist attacks in recent history have been carried out by this group and we need to use the avilible security as wisely as possible even if it adds up to profiling this isnt also saying they are the only people capable of terrorism heck anybody theoreticly is capable of terrorism its those who are prone to it need to be watched more closely

[Ramsey]

Muslims are evil, kill em all. Save the girls ages 13-20 though.

[JeepFreak91]

2. The atomic bomb was dropped by..TO END A WAR
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

BSD
there you go edited it for ya

[DrMoab]

Fundamental Muslim Extremists are evil, kill em all. Save the girls ages 13-20 though.
Fixed it for ya. I would hate being a Muslim in this country right now. They are getting profiled everyday no matter what the Government says.

That being said....Too bad. If it keeps terrorists from pulling off more bombings it's ok with me.

[Menzenski]

nice try BSd, comparison does not hold water.
Sure it does. Just about any group of people you can think of has committed enough violence to create a quiz like the one TRNDRVR posted.

[Ramsey]

Having an arab background you might would think I wouldn't, but I can't help but do it. Really I just feel sorry for those that fit the category. I know one guy at my gym, he's a muslim in his mid 20s, full beard wears a black stocking on his head, looks just like someone you would see on the news. Nice guy though, I hate it but it is hard not to profile.

Jeepfreak91, reasons dont justify it. Hell the extremist muslims have reasons but it doesnt make it right.

[DrMoab]

This is XJ4Moab.

He is half German...Half Latino.

Funny how a little photoshop to the head can make him look evil...Don't ya think?
http://images1.snapfish.com/34795%3C2%3B%3B%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3243%3E%3B99%3E233% 3EWSNRCG%3D32334%3A794%3B883nu0mrj

On a side note...
sure glad I found a reason to post this pic again.:D

[Ramsey]

This is XJ4Moab.

He is half German...Half Latino.

Funny how a little photoshop to the head can make him look evil...Don't ya think?
http://images1.snapfish.com/34795%3C2%3B%3B%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3243%3E%3B99%3E233% 3EWSNRCG%3D32334%3A794%3B883nu0mrj

On a side note...
sure glad I found a reason to post this pic again.:D

KILL IT!!

[5-90]

you can make a list of horrible crimes for any ethnicty but in todays world many of the terrorist acts have been carryed out by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 isnt it common sense to watch those more prone to "cause problems" and this isnt to say that all muslim men are terrorists its that the majority of terrorist attacks in recent history have been carried out by this group and we need to use the avilible security as wisely as possible even if it adds up to profiling this isnt also saying they are the only people capable of terrorism heck anybody theoreticly is capable of terrorism its those who are prone to it need to be watched more closely

Breathe...

Not to try to invalidate your point, but it took me a minute to sort it out. You know, there are decaffeinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing...

I'm not trying to grade you on grammar, spelling, and punctuation (especially punctuation!) but go over your post (quoted for your convenience) and read mine - and see which is easier to read. You will probably come across a little better if you articulate yourself a little better - this aint' college-level English, but you'll have an easier time making your point if you make your point easier to read, you know.

Pretty much every ethnicity and most religions can be demonised (I'll leave out Zen, Taoists, and Buddhists - I haven't heard of them massacring anyone...) but the predominant religions of the day - Christianity and Muslim - have killed more people in the name of their God than any other cause (the Christians just did it a thousand years ago. What was that called? Oh yes - the "Crusades." Just because it's over doesn't make it right, tho...)

5-90

[8Mud]

Just a passing thought, but the only real way that Muslim fundamental terrorism is going to be beaten, is if the Muslim community gets tired of there antics, gets feed up with being dirtied by association, gets angry about being targeted as a group because of fundamentalist excesses and purges there own community. Profiling could be benefitial.
Same thing can be said for certain hispanic gangs, black gangs and even caucasion brotherhoods.
Seriously though, 911 really pissed me off and made me want to hurt somebody. I look at the pictures of Lebanon and see almost identical piles of ruble and similiar numbers of dead and injuried (mostly innocent). And can understand the Muslim world being pissed off. Lebanon could be called there 911. Who did what to whom, at some point, gets kind of irrelavent. And the destruction continues.
It's likely going to get worse before it gets better, Australia announced an increase in there Armed forces, Canada is in the process, so is Germany. The liberal Democracies are getting worried. When New Zeland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Switzerland start building up there armed forces, I'll really strart to worry.

[Brad M.]

This is XJ4Moab.

He is half German...Half Latino.

Funny how a little photoshop to the head can make him look evil...Don't ya think?
http://images1.snapfish.com/34795%3C2%3B%3B%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3243%3E%3B99%3E233% 3EWSNRCG%3D32334%3A794%3B883nu0mrj

On a side note...
sure glad I found a reason to post this pic again.:D

Ah yes... the IC's little resident terrorist :)

[GSequoia]

Osama bin Quadratec is on the loose.

[johnlv6]

Have you ever read any parts of the Koran?
I don't know that they are as peaceful as you think...

That was sarcasm in case you missed it :D. I've deployed five times in support of operations to combat their peaceful nature.

[BSD]

My point was to demonstrate how subjective and meaningless such quizzes / statements are. The fact is that probably every ethnic / religous group (O.K. we might have to leave the Mennonites out :-) ) have been guilty of some attrocity. Simplistic ethnic and religous categorizations are easier to use rather than note more complex cultural, politcal and economic tensions. A person who thinks the current instability can be narrowed down to simpy a religous equation is a bit naive. To say that such tensions and problems would not exist without a particular faith is often a simplistic approach to problems.
BSD

[RichP]

OK, lets try my version...

1. Abraham Lincoln was assasinated by
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christian between the ages of 17-40

2. The atomic bomb was dropped by..
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

3. Jim Crow laws in the South were created and enforced by ...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

4. The destruction of Native American societies was led by...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

Looks like we better be on the lookout for white male Christians between the ages of 17 and 40.

I will let you connect the dots.

BSD

Actually thats more of a warning about political parties and governments more then about race...

[98XJSport]

OK, lets try my version...

1. Abraham Lincoln was assasinated by
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christian between the ages of 17-40

2. The atomic bomb was dropped by..
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

3. Jim Crow laws in the South were created and enforced by ...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

4. The destruction of Native American societies was led by...
A. Muslim female
B. African-American Male
C. Hispanic male
D. White Male Christians between the ages of 17-40

Looks like we better be on the lookout for white male Christians between the ages of 17 and 40.

I will let you connect the dots.

BSD

It's also time period relevant. That stuff happened back then. This is now. Your version is as sensible as being aware and profiling the vikings, or the mongols, or the spanish conquistadores. All have done bad things, but not in the last few weeks, or the last few years even.

[anderld47]

This is XJ4Moab.

He is half German...Half Latino.

Funny how a little photoshop to the head can make him look evil...Don't ya think?
http://images1.snapfish.com/34795%3C2%3B%3B%7Ffp338%3Enu%3D3243%3E%3B99%3E233% 3EWSNRCG%3D32334%3A794%3B883nu0mrj

On a side note...
sure glad I found a reason to post this pic again.:D

Hey, was that your camel I saw parked outside the airport?

[Roxtar]

Sure it does. Just about any group of people you can think of has committed enough violence to create a quiz like the one TRNDRVR posted.You missed the point.
It isn't just random violent acts.
He named almost every major terrorist attack on America.
All done by one group.
We ARE looking for possible terrorists, right?
It doesn't make sense to concentrate your aim at the group most likely to do it?
Profiling used to be called good intelligent police work before the days of political correctness.

[RichP]

You missed the point.
It isn't just random violent acts.
He named almost every major terrorist attack on America.
All done by one group.
We ARE looking for possible terrorists, right?
It doesn't make sense to concentrate your aim at the group most likely to do it?
Profiling used to be called good intelligent police work before the days of political correctness.

But then if you read the report by that kidnapped reporter in iraq she said 'They shave their beards, do all their work of building bombs in their homes, throw their families in the car and go plant the bomb then drive home.'...

[98XJSport]

'They shave their beards, do all their work of building bombs in their homes, throw their families in the car and go plant the bomb then drive home.'...

Who says people don't do anything as a family anymore?

[BSD]

It's also time period relevant. That stuff happened back then. This is now. Your version is as sensible as being aware and profiling the vikings, or the mongols, or the spanish conquistadores. All have done bad things, but not in the last few weeks, or the last few years even.


Yes, my quiz is very foolish. That is my point. It would not take much effort to make a contemporary one. However, that would not make it any less foolish or any more valid.
BSD

[flexjay87]

make no mistake(like Bush did, or wouldn't admit) this terrorist problem has everything to do with religion. Iran, who is is godfather of the terrorists currently, are run by the Shiite sect of Islam, basically the lunatic brigade of the region. we need to reach out to the Sunni's and help them get back some kind of sanity to their religion, which of course means probably killing the opposition, and of course the worst part is that civilians will lose out in the short term. but hey, we are losing some people too. but what war haven't we had some casualty's ? you should go into a war to win, not have an exit strategy up front, hell those are for when your ass is gettin kicked. good thing liberals don't coach football teams, soon as the other team got one score, or someone got hurt, they would employ the exit strategy and quit!!

[5-90]

make no mistake(like Bush did, or wouldn't admit) this terrorist problem has everything to do with religion. Iran, who is is godfather of the terrorists currently, are run by the Shiite sect of Islam, basically the lunatic brigade of the region. we need to reach out to the Sunni's and help them get back some kind of sanity to their religion, which of course means probably killing the opposition, and of course the worst part is that civilians will lose out in the short term. but hey, we are losing some people too. but what war haven't we had some casualty's ? you should go into a war to win, not have an exit strategy up front, hell those are for when your ass is gettin kicked. good thing liberals don't coach football teams, soon as the other team got one score, or someone got hurt, they would employ the exit strategy and quit!!

I think the idea of the "Exit Plan" here was to be able to re-create a stable form of government (of whatever sort,) and for us to not have to occupy the region for the next forty or fifty years. Didn't we have an exit plan when we occupied most of Europe sixty years ago? And, we're not there trying to maintain "law and order" now - our military presence is as a part of NATO, and is not meant to supplant or supplement any local government. We are also there with the consent of the "host nations" - that's why Subic Bay was abandoned after Pinatubo went up (actually, I think the Filipinos wanted us there - but they wanted too much out of us. Same thing - we left.)

Also, I find likening any sort of armed conflict to football is specious at best. While injuries are common in football (not common enough, for what they get paid, I think...) the idea of prosecuting an armed conflict is to kill people - and to kill enough to change the way of thinking that got the war started in the first place. We're just making a mistake in thinking that we can attrit the other side into giving up, while the other side is prosecuting this as an unlimited war of annihilation - and it's motivated by religion. Until we work on the same principle, we are destined to lose, just because we're not prosecuting the war "hard enough."

I honestly don't have any trouble with trying to secure the world against terrorism, but until we grasp that basic point (terrorists aren't afraid to die - they kill themselves in their acts!) and prosecute this as an unlimited war of annihilation for survival, there's no way we can win. That's what we've been doing wrong, and that's what we're continuing to do wrong...

Don't even get me started on football - I don't see a lot of point to it. There are larger matters to concern us...

5-90

[IXNAYXJ]

...but until we grasp that basic point (terrorists aren't afraid to die - they kill themselves in their acts!) and prosecute this as an unlimited war of annihilation for survival, there's no way we can win.

5-90x2.

The Iraq vs. Vietnam comparison is generally flawed and inaccurate, but it works in regards to what you're talking about. And that worries me.

-----Matt-----

[5-90]

x2.

The Iraq vs. Vietnam comparison is generally flawed and inaccurate, but it works in regards to what you're talking about. And that worries me.

-----Matt-----

The trouble there is that you are also correct - in Vietnam, we were fighting a war of attrition (with "set-piece" rules, no less!) against a politically-motivated enemy with rather less regard for human life than we have, fighting a war of annihilation.

I believe the phrase we're looking for here is plus ca change, plus ca meme chose. (I don't know how to do accented characers, and I never did learn to speak Frog properly anyhow...) "The more things change, the more they stay the same." We saw the beginnings of the "new face of warfare" on the Korean peninsula, and we got a damn good look in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand.

The only change that modern warfare has made has been an increase in intensity, and it's a toss-up whether a given conflict will be politically motivated or religiously motivated.

And, speaking of motivation, I have issue with the various service Departments (Department of the Army - DoA, Department of the Navy - DoN, Department of the Air Force - DoAF) pushing for "retention and recruitment" numbers. How motivated are these people we're keeping, anyhow?

Given a choice, I'll take TEN highly-trained and highly-motivated individuals over ONE THOUSAND that would be best described as "mediochre" - whatever the task. There's an old logger's legend out here about a Swede that was hired to recover a steam locomotive from a valley. When asked what he needed, his answer was, "I need ten of your best me. Or two Swedes." This has given the phrase "two-Swede job" as meaning something that is impossible on the face of it, but can still be done. THAT is the sort of thing we should look for in the Armed Forces - what means numbers if the files aren't motivated and trained? They're already doing jobs that could be filled by civilians, but they're done by EM and officers. We've got too much "tail" and not enough "teeth" - we should be "all teeth and no tail."

That's another reason why we're going to lose, unless some SERIOUS policy changes take place.

5-90

[flexjay87]

point taken, but too many deep thinkers are making this purposely complicated, so they can banter back and forth and not face the simple truth, which is of course, they( the teerorists) want to KILL us. they have a simple plan, so should we. also did we have an exit plan for ww2 until we won the war? of couse we stuck around for 10 years after, rebuilding the place, and we still have a presence in the whole area to some degree. as far as specious in the same sentence as war and football, you'll have to walk me through that one.( i say that respectfully.)

[dirtymuddog]

profiling..it might not be right but neither is affermitave action. soooo looks like the score is tied

[5-90]

point taken, but too many deep thinkers are making this purposely complicated, so they can banter back and forth and not face the simple truth, which is of course, they( the teerorists) want to KILL us. they have a simple plan, so should we. also did we have an exit plan for ww2 until we won the war? of couse we stuck around for 10 years after, rebuilding the place, and we still have a presence in the whole area to some degree. as far as specious in the same sentence as war and football, you'll have to walk me through that one.( i say that respectfully.)

No problem - last things first.

Football is not about eliminating the enemy - war is. Therefore, apples to oranges applies here. You're not trying to disable or kill the opposing team's players (part of the reason I think they get paid entirely too much...) but just outmaneuver them. In war (or "armed conflict" - in the absence of a declaration of war,) I think Patton summed up the guiding principle nicely. "No-one ever won a war by dying for his country. Wars are won by making the other poor bastard die for his country!" That principle isn't in football - therefore, the comparison is void. Boxing might be better compared to armed conflict - but I've not given it much thought. "Boxing" really isn't "fighting" - in boxing, you're trying to convince the other guy that continuing the fight isn't in his best interests. In fighting, you're trying to kill someone else before he kills you. Sounds pretty simple - sports don't routinely involve a component of lethality (given what they're paid, I think they damn well should... Landmines in the infield, perhaps?)

You are correct that we did NOT have an exit plan until we won WWII - we prosecuted the conflict first, the commenced with rebuilding and the "Exit Plan." Having an exit plan for Iraq right now is foolish - I'll guaran-damn-tee you we haven't won there yet. Or in Libya. Or in the Rub Al Khali. Or even in remote parts of Egypt, and most of Syria and Lebanon. Terrorism is a war of elimination/annihilation - until the other side is completely destroyed, we haven't won. This doesn't mean wasting the entire country - just taking out the belligerents, and making other people understand that the same fate awaits them if they take up arms in their place. WWII was not a "political" war - it was started as a war of conquest, and could be fought by techniques of attrition. Wars in Asia (Korean peninsula and Southeast Asia, again...) marked the beginnings of the "war of annihilation" - and we haven't learned a damned thing.

Also, we have the problem that politicians just don't realise that once the war starts, there's nothing for them to do anymore - and they damn well should not rpt NOT get involved! War is what happens when statecraft and politics has failed - so let the solders get on with the soldiering, and keep the pollies out of the way. If politicans want to get involved, I'm sure we can find utilities and a rifle for them - then they can get involved. At the front. Where it's possible for them to be killed. I've long though that people who can declare war should be fighting in war - then, we'd see a lot less wars.

As far as our "military presence in Europe" - I thought I'd addressed that. We're there largely as part of the NATO agreement, and our installations are throughout Europe with the blessings of their various host countries. I belive most - if not all - of the European countries in which we have a military presense are NATO member nations. Most of the rest of the countries (like the Azores, the Phillipines, and most of African installations) are nations with which we have treaties. Make sense?

5-90

(Sorry if I seem a little short - but my landlord has just handed me an immense pisser-offer, and my mother-in-law is really getting on my pecs to-day... I need a drink.)

[5-90]

profiling..it might not be right but neither is affermitave action. soooo looks like the score is tied

"Affirmative Action" - by whatever name - is simply legalised reverse discrimination. Tangentially, it goes back to a point I've been trying to make for more years than I care to count - "There will be racism as long as some people insist upon being ni**ers." Continue to set yourself apart somehow, and you'll get set apart. I don't mean to have everyone submerge themselves totally in the culture where they are - but don't go into a backlash and fight it, either...

Discrimination is technically illegal - but Affirmative Action is legal. Tell me, which is less discriminatory, generally speaking?

5-90

[flexjay87]

ok, i just got back online. my wife kicked me out due to working on high school fund raising for the athletic dept. (my daughter is a senior athlete this year) anyhow last things first. don't worry about being short, it's part of bein human, and i suspect if you really want to go past short it will be obvious, and when i do it can be obvious as well. although not always interperted correctly. anyhow, i do understand the nato thing, but i beg to differ on the analogy of war and sports, because the only real difference is the literal killing part. the planning, attitude, execution, and will to win by whatever" rules "are engaged, should be the end goal. i have noticed that that there are similar mindsets in people who engage in different types of "warfare", which is, i'm going to kick your butt, and may the best man win. may seem a little simplistic, but go ahead and boil down the best recipe in the world, and you'll probably find plain old water as the "simple" but main ingrediant. would you agree that football players may not play the game for the love of it anymore, compared to the money, but i would say, our soldiers "play" for the love of their country, definatley not the money, since it is volunteer, and could easily be a dead end job. (pun intended) ok i'm getting kicked off again, see ya...

[5-90]

I'm inclined to argue - because that's the sort of day I've been having...

Sports vice war is still an invalid comparison - there are too many rules governing conduct (rather more than on the battlefield,) and patriotism/survival/protection is not RPT NOT the ultimate goal.

Besides, until some feetsball player gets a salary cap at what, say, a five-year captain gets paid, I will maintain that they are overpaid prima donnas who aren't worth what we're paying them. A "professional athlete" is someone who either lacks the wit or the skill to make it working, or someone who is more fixated upon making money than actually trying to do something productive (oddly enough, I tend to have rather more respect for tradesmen than for marketing/advertising people, modern "journalists, or lawyers - under that latter criterion.) The fact that some player of some damn game can make more in one year than a competent journey-level tradesman can make in ten or more defies common sense - a competent tradesman is intrinsically worth more.

This analogy is not restricted to football - I just pick on it because it's the most visible. Pretty much any "athlete" (which most of them are not - an athlete is a physical generalist, while most gamesmen become specialists...) is not worth a pound of salt in the worldview - simply because they don't actually produce anything of benefit to people. Full Stop. (And don't even try to get me started on the "X Games" or "Extreme Sports" - until you're going into an area where people want to kill you directly, I don't see the "extreme" angle. Those yoyos are just adrenaline junkies looking for a fix.)

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

5-90

ok, i just got back online. my wife kicked me out due to working on high school fund raising for the athletic dept. (my daughter is a senior athlete this year) anyhow last things first. don't worry about being short, it's part of bein human, and i suspect if you really want to go past short it will be obvious, and when i do it can be obvious as well. although not always interperted correctly. anyhow, i do understand the nato thing, but i beg to differ on the analogy of war and sports, because the only real difference is the literal killing part. the planning, attitude, execution, and will to win by whatever" rules "are engaged, should be the end goal. i have noticed that that there are similar mindsets in people who engage in different types of "warfare", which is, i'm going to kick your butt, and may the best man win. may seem a little simplistic, but go ahead and boil down the best recipe in the world, and you'll probably find plain old water as the "simple" but main ingrediant. would you agree that football players may not play the game for the love of it anymore, compared to the money, but i would say, our soldiers "play" for the love of their country, definatley not the money, since it is volunteer, and could easily be a dead end job. (pun intended) ok i'm getting kicked off again, see ya...

[rocklandxjer]

Im sorry i really must say, every time i see one of your [5-90] posts i immediately know that it is going to be some sort of, almost poetic, rhetoric.
You should really be a scholar or something.

any way lol

i agree wholeheartedly that Affirmative action is just as racist and discriminative as say, whites against blacks. I am by no means a "racist", keep that in mind as you read on, for i do not wish to come across as that. I believe that it is those who seek to stand out against racism that, redundantly, press those who are racist or discriminative to continue to dislike or distrust them. i believe that many peoples radical ways of accusing someone of being a racist, ironically, causes that feeling to grow, even where it may not have been present before.

The way to stopping racism is not by reversing it and making it easier on those being prejudiced against, it is by assymilating them into a common society. I have several African american friends, though around my area there aren't that many, in a town close to mine, African Americans are of a prominant majority. And many of whom i see or meet, always seem to have the same demeanor about them- distrustful, angry, as though i am automatically racist or prejudice. i agree with you 5-90, unless i am mistaken about your meaning, people must stop being N*****s and start being people, we must not be Whitey or Honkies, we must also be people.
Everyone now-a-days has become hyphonated. Latin-american, African-american, etc...

why are there special interest groups for Blacks, hispanics, mexicans, asians, indians, muslims, brazilians, and every other ethnic, cultural or religious group in this nation and world fighting for their individual rights,
are we not all equal under the constitution, shouldn't everyone recieve the same opportunities as everyone else.

i understand that is a terribly theoretical assumption, but it could be true, if everyone who felt as though it is some other ethnicities fault that they are poor, realized that if they tried hard enough, they too could become what they want to be-instead of wallowing about what they are.

ehhh, its really late and im probably not making much sense, just read some of these posts and felt like i should contribute.

a little humor to finish however.
while doing a little research about colleges, No, not there yet, next year (RPI-rennselaer polytech, in Troy-by the way i still wish to know of some of you around that area...anyway)
i came across an article that told of a couple of schools which, due to some variation of affirmative action, weighted the scale of the applicants' sat scores due to ethnicity. blacks got somewhere around 250 points, spanish decent- 200, canadian 1000 (joke of course ha ha sorry)
then whites got i think 10-15 or something, and then Asians... whom recieved a weight of -50 points lol they were actually penalized for being of asian decent

yet it was not the african americans whom rallied against this obvious discrimination, it was the asians and the whites, those who were not benifited from the weighting, those who were deemed smarter were under the fire of prejudice, and those whom should have felt insulted, gretted the extra points as a-maybe- payback...

o well

Travis

phew thank God that rant is over...

[dzolcali]

Based on the first original post about "muslim extremist" sure it makes sense to profile etc.. etc.. police do it as well. It's not however right to do it, regardless of common sense. It's unconstitutional to treat people un-equal based on their skin color, or features. Not to mention the fact that most average americans including those who work in the airplane industry don't know apples from oranges or Muslims from Islams to whatever other middle eastern person there may be. heres a scenario, irish people are killing people everywhere, so they start to profile irish at airports...well most of us could pass for irish since they are normal like most white people are....so the airport starts profiling whites as a whole instead of just irish because distuingishing that is so difficult to the common person. nvm.

[5-90]

Im sorry i really must say, every time i see one of your [5-90] posts i immediately know that it is going to be some sort of, almost poetic, rhetoric.
You should really be a scholar or something.

any way lol

i agree wholeheartedly that Affirmative action is just as racist and discriminative as say, whites against blacks. I am by no means a "racist", keep that in mind as you read on, for i do not wish to come across as that. I believe that it is those who seek to stand out against racism that, redundantly, press those who are racist or discriminative to continue to dislike or distrust them. i believe that many peoples radical ways of accusing someone of being a racist, ironically, causes that feeling to grow, even where it may not have been present before.

The way to stopping racism is not by reversing it and making it easier on those being prejudiced against, it is by assymilating them into a common society. I have several African american friends, though around my area there aren't that many, in a town close to mine, African Americans are of a prominant majority. And many of whom i see or meet, always seem to have the same demeanor about them- distrustful, angry, as though i am automatically racist or prejudice. i agree with you 5-90, unless i am mistaken about your meaning, people must stop being N*****s and start being people, we must not be Whitey or Honkies, we must also be people.
Everyone now-a-days has become hyphonated. Latin-american, African-american, etc...

why are there special interest groups for Blacks, hispanics, mexicans, asians, indians, muslims, brazilians, and every other ethnic, cultural or religious group in this nation and world fighting for their individual rights,
are we not all equal under the constitution, shouldn't everyone recieve the same opportunities as everyone else.

i understand that is a terribly theoretical assumption, but it could be true, if everyone who felt as though it is some other ethnicities fault that they are poor, realized that if they tried hard enough, they too could become what they want to be-instead of wallowing about what they are.

ehhh, its really late and im probably not making much sense, just read some of these posts and felt like i should contribute.

a little humor to finish however.
while doing a little research about colleges, No, not there yet, next year (RPI-rennselaer polytech, in Troy-by the way i still wish to know of some of you around that area...anyway)
i came across an article that told of a couple of schools which, due to some variation of affirmative action, weighted the scale of the applicants' sat scores due to ethnicity. blacks got somewhere around 250 points, spanish decent- 200, canadian 1000 (joke of course ha ha sorry)
then whites got i think 10-15 or something, and then Asians... whom recieved a weight of -50 points lol they were actually penalized for being of asian decent

yet it was not the african americans whom rallied against this obvious discrimination, it was the asians and the whites, those who were not benifited from the weighting, those who were deemed smarter were under the fire of prejudice, and those whom should have felt insulted, gretted the extra points as a-maybe- payback...

o well

Travis

phew thank God that rant is over...


Poetic? I've not been called that. Rhetoric? Maybe - but it's not the Party Line that I'm talking about, it's a batch of opinions borne of rather varied experience.

So, where would you give me the category of "rhetoric?" Was it my dislike of "professional sports" that did it this time? Just wondering...

5-90

[tommyr]

Like it or not, admit it or not, profiling works. It is playing the odds. If 10 people get robbed by someone of x nationality and 1 person gets robbed by someone of y personality, are you going to be afraid of x nationality people or y personality people? Look at the makeup of prison populations. Why dont they represent the population as a whole?

[Roxtar]

Like it or not, admit it or not, profiling works. It is playing the odds. If 10 people get robbed by someone of x nationality and 1 person gets robbed by someone of y personality, are you going to be afraid of x nationality people or y personality people? Look at the makeup of prison populations. Why dont they represent the population as a whole?Thank you.

[Gil BullyKatz]

I'm all for muslim profiling...

It diverts attention from lazy wetback demonizing

:yelclap:

[sprngfldxj]

Great Post!!
I would have to say that we need to be careful how we qualify what a "Christian" is.
As far as the days we live in, we cannot afford not to profile those who have continued to fit the same profile in acts that have lead to the death of many. The same was true in WWII....unfortunately. The same is true even now with Illegals coming from the south. Some have come with very legitimate reasons and have grafted into our society as citizens. There are others that have come for reasons that are detrimental to what we beleive and stand for....Freedom!
I tell young people all the time, if you choose to dress in a way or act in a way that resembles the dress or actions of someone who does wrong or causes crimes, dont be mad at the policeman or authority figure who chooses to stop you and ask you questions. He or She may be apprehensive towards you for the way you look, because they may have just dealt with a crime including one that looked like you look just hours before. The police or any other authority cant afford to make mistakes in todays society, if even for their safety!!!
Just becuase you dress like a hooker, doesnt mean you are one!, BUT...If you choose to dress like one and are not, dont get angry when you get included into the group through profiling because they cant tell the difference by the way you dress or the way you act?
That is why the Heart of the person should be the one thing we need to reveal to others before our actions speak for us or our dress.
If you look it, Smell like it, or Act like it, Than BE IT!! Show it by your Actions and your Heart! If not, then stop trying to be like it
Just my 2

[8Mud]

Great Post!!
I would have to say that we need to be careful how we qualify what a "Christian" is.
As far as the days we live in, we cannot afford not to profile those who have continued to fit the same profile in acts that have lead to the death of many. The same was true in WWII....unfortunately. The same is true even now with Illegals coming from the south. Some have come with very legitimate reasons and have grafted into our society as citizens. There are others that have come for reasons that are detrimental to what we beleive and stand for....Freedom!
I tell young people all the time, if you choose to dress in a way or act in a way that resembles the dress or actions of someone who does wrong or causes crimes, dont be mad at the policeman or authority figure who chooses to stop you and ask you questions. He or She may be apprehensive towards you for the way you look, because they may have just dealt with a crime including one that looked like you look just hours before. The police or any other authority cant afford to make mistakes in todays society, if even for their safety!!!
Just becuase you dress like a hooker, doesnt mean you are one!, BUT...If you choose to dress like one and are not, dont get angry when you get included into the group through profiling because they cant tell the difference by the way you dress or the way you act?
That is why the Heart of the person should be the one thing we need to reveal to others before our actions speak for us or our dress.
If you look it, Smell like it, or Act like it, Than BE IT!! Show it by your Actions and your Heart! If not, then stop trying to be like it
Just my 2


What I got out of your post (mostly) is that freedom is having to look, groom and act just like everybody else. If you stand out it's your own fault you are being profiled. Freedom=conformity

If your a non conformist, either by choice or genetics, you are likely going to be scrutinized often. Most anybody under enough scrutiny is going to be caught at something sometime. Nobody is perfect. So the non conformists are likely to have a record of some sort. Which will likely cause them problems sometime, either with background checks and/or additional scrutiny.
In my mind, the whole process is a short step away from producing criminals and not eliminating criminals. It narrows your options.
If a person is singled out on a regular basis, sooner or later they are going to get an attitude. Even if they eventually conform and try to blend in, the attitude will likely remain.
On the point of legislating equality, this phrase stricks me as an oxymoron. The legislation actually emphasizes the differences and attempts to address the perceived eniquities. What does this have to do with equality? The whole process seems to have the opposite of the desired affect and actually seems to be more unequal. A piss poor solution to a problem as old as humans.
How about defining Christianity as the followers of a major prophet named Jesus (maybe the messia) sometime after Abraham, Budda, Moses and before Mohammed or maybe even Smith. If we ever manage to eliminate, the doctrine of the one and only true faith, much of the problem would disappear. And/or eliminate philosophical, political and racial dogma, it's likely the left over conflicts would disappear. I guess the whole thing could be summed up in the word *tolerance*.

Tolerance=equality seems pretty close to a balanced equation.

Freedom=conformity, seems oppresive.

In the mean time, survival philosophy tells me to climb up any likely suspects rear end with a microscope, until we work out the fine points of living together.

[sprngfldxj]

Actually, I was trying to make a point for self expression that upholds freedom through integrity for the law and for anothers' edification.
Being able to be yourself, yet providing for proof through your actions!