[QUOTE=Raoul Duke]Oh shut the **** up. I hate that bull**** excuse that if we show any fear or raised alarm that we are just "giving in to terrorism". These people are a threat to our freedom, security and general way of life. They are enemies that need to be stopped. If we just sit there and do nothing they are going to succeed. And I really don't think the terrorists would like it if the government introduced racial profiling because it would probably prevent alot of their attacks. So yeah, just shut your yappy little mouth...[/QUOTE]

If you want this to become a society where all Arabs are treated as terrorists until proven otherwise, is that really worth preserving? Is that really worth defending?

Because if racism becomes our 'way of life', then I'd sure as hell want to blow that up too.

But you see, there is no perfect solution. There will always be SOMEBODY that doesn't like the method. Whether it be the patriot act that has most everybody here squirming in their panties, or racial profiling of specific minorities, somebody is going to complain. The question to ask is which method is going to yield the best results, and go with it. The best anybody can do is roll their eyes and do what they have to do.

If you stop and question every single arab, then yes, it's wrong. But evaluating someone's threat level is not and while quite a few arabs will be deemed high enough threat level to stop and question, I don't believe most arabs will be subject to that, especially the native born ones. There is no reason to stop and evaluate everyone when it's obviously one group of people that are doing these things.

[QUOTE=Raoul Duke]Wow you have me completely dumbfounded with this one. I don't even know what to say...except that you have reached a new plateau of complete idiocy. Is your brain just decaying at a constant rate or what??[/QUOTE]

I think there is no reason to say that to him when he clearly just missed the point of the post... instead of tring to make him feel completly stupid, you correct him... dont be a dick.

Actually, now that I think about it, profiling Arabs probably wouldn't be the most effective method. If we concentrate on Arabs, that could make it easier for a terrorist group to get a non-Arab through. And while there are no where near as many non-Arab as Arab terrorists, there are still enough.

[QUOTE=Kieran Horn]That's still secularist. But a harsh secularism.[/QUOTE]
Much in the same way the Germany of the 1940s was a harsh Luthernist government? Though the government claims to be secularist, in reality this is simply a Western-Government friendly term that Mubarak likes to throw around so as to seperate himself from the other maniacal dictators of the region- except he's pretty much the same. Egypt has an institution that acts much in the same way the Catholic Church once did, and Mubarak's government has its hooks into it.

That's not my point. My point is that a more pertinent reason for an attack against the government would be it's suppressive tactics against any and all opposition, and not simply because it labels itself secularist, which it isn't. It happens to be killing Islamists, but it would have no problem killing Communists if they were a significant oppositon.

[QUOTE=Raoul Duke]:rolleyes: Obviously there are still going to be terrorist attacks, war on terror or not. It's not the kind of thing that can be stopped. Personally I believe we need to start introducing racial screening, because let's face it. White, black, hispanic, jews aren't the people bombing London's trains etc. It's arabic people. I believe they should screen based on this and search mainly arabic people. It may be "offensive" or politically incorrect but hey, drastic times call for drastic measures.[/QUOTE]

That is the most assinine comment I've heard on this board, and that's saying a lot.

It's not an ethnic group or a religious affiliation that is the determinant factor here, it's a vague political idea that gives the terrorists their motivations. The most accurate and effective method of screening therefore would be to try to question those with similar radical beliefs- but even then, having the belief does not mean one would act on it.

In the end, screening and profiling is a useless waste of time and simply a measure of psychological coddling for people as insecure as you, Raoul. Terrorists aren't idiots- they're not going to go someplace where they can be screened. Their immediate goal is to inflict maximum damage, and they'll find a thousand ways to do so without having to be harassed by the authorities.

And Kieran, native-born Arabs are also placed under suspicion. Anytime you give ethnicity-based discretionary powers to someone, it will be misused.

Are you always that ignorant? Or do you just act that way to pretend your e-penis is bigger than everyone elses?

e-penis?

The problem is that not all terrorists are radical Muslims, and further that not all radical Muslims are Arab or from Arab countries. "Just screen[ing] the Arabs" would not have caught "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, and it would not have caught the men who carried out the attacks in London.



Yeah. In fact, it's probably the main cause of all the major terrorist attacks against the U.S. since 9/11. Attacks like... well, I can't think of one right now, but you know what I mean, right?

[quote=Kieran Horn]If we concentrate on Arabs, that could make it easier for a terrorist group to get a non-Arab through.[/quote]

Exactly.

Just wanted to point this out, not every guy getting involved with these "Islamic terrorists" are of Middle-Eastern origin.
Willie Brigitte - Native of France and a convert to Islam.

Jack Thomas - Australian charged with having direct links to Al-Qaeda

It's not the guys who look Middle-Eastern we should be concerned about, it's the people who were born in your country and grew up in your neighborhood and converted to radical Islam you should be more worried about.