Other Resources My Cup of Joe » TSA has gone too far Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 4
 
 
2010-12-01 10:27 AM
in reply to: #3231877

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 8:59 AM
NXS - 2010-12-01 5:51 AM

This is an example of what you get when you don't want to profile for terrorists.  Last time I checked black grandmothers with their grandchildren don't blow up airplanes, or 40 y/o bleached blonde females or nuns, etc.  As long as the PC game of treating everyone the same is played instead of profiling for terrorists, we will have scenes like this. 

I agree with everything that you’ve said, but treating everyone the same way isn’t just “PC”, it’s the cornerstone of our society. It may be true statistically that a particular kind of person is more likely to steal from a store or default on a mortgage, but that doesn’t give retailers or mortgage lenders the right to decide to refuse service to that class of people, or to expose those people to greater scrutiny or more obstacles. Again, I don’t disagree with you, and I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s an oversimplification to say that the reason we don’t profile is out of some misguided sense of political correctness.


In a sense it is misguided, we know who is out to get us and what people fit into that catagory, but we frisk old ladies, kids, families going to Disney, none who fit the profile of a terrorist, all because we don't want to offend a certain group or groups of people.  Heck this administration doesn't even want to use Islam or terrorist in the same sentence for fear it will be offensive.  Its a show, this nation is reactive to situations, not proactive.  We are looking for the bomb on everyone (a needle in the haystack) instead of looking for terrorists, of which we have a pretty good idea who would fit into that group.  What we are doing now wastes time, energy and resources but makes us feel like we are doing something to make us safe.  





2010-12-01 10:28 AM
in reply to: #3232030

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 9:59 AM

If you don't think the government already profiles in non-public ways you are sorely wrong.  Do you think the FBI keeps tabs on more Mosques or more Baptist churches?


“Keeping tabs” is one thing. Adversely impacting a particular group because of protected characteristics is another.

I’m all for keeping tabs on people and having watch-lists and no-fly lists if there’s compelling evidence to justify it, but you can’t just pat down the Middle-Eastern-looking people and let the white people go through unmolested. I understand the futility of having to screen people who have almost a 0% chance of being a terrorist, but the right for everyone to be treated as equals is one of the fundamental principles that this country stands on.

I don’t really understand how you can be so outraged about the so-called violation of our personal freedoms related to pat-downs and body-scan machines but defend (if that’s what you’re doing) disparate treatment of American citizens based solely on their color or national origin. That, to me, is a far more egregious affront to our way of life than the backscatter machines.
2010-12-01 10:35 AM
in reply to: #3232105

User image

Champion
5615
5000500100
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
NXS - 2010-12-01 11:27 AM

In a sense it is misguided, we know who is out to get us and what people fit into that catagory, but we frisk old ladies, kids, families going to Disney, none who fit the profile of a terrorist, all because we don't want to offend a certain group or groups of people.  Heck this administration doesn't even want to use Islam or terrorist in the same sentence for fear it will be offensive.  Its a show, this nation is reactive to situations, not proactive.  We are looking for the bomb on everyone (a needle in the haystack) instead of looking for terrorists, of which we have a pretty good idea who would fit into that group.  What we are doing now wastes time, energy and resources but makes us feel like we are doing something to make us safe.  



Do these people fit that "group"?


2010-12-01 10:39 AM
in reply to: #3232105

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
NXS - 2010-12-01 10:27 AM

jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 8:59 AM
NXS - 2010-12-01 5:51 AM

This is an example of what you get when you don't want to profile for terrorists.  As long as the PC game of treating everyone the same is played instead of profiling for terrorists, we will have scenes like this. 

Again, I don’t disagree with you, and I don’t know what the answer is, but it’s an oversimplification to say that the reason we don’t profile is out of some misguided sense of political correctness.


In a sense it is misguided, we know who is out to get us and what people fit into that catagory, but we frisk old ladies, kids, families going to Disney, none who fit the profile of a terrorist, all because we don't want to offend a certain group or groups of people.  Heck this administration doesn't even want to use Islam or terrorist in the same sentence for fear it will be offensive.  Its a show, this nation is reactive to situations, not proactive.  We are looking for the bomb on everyone (a needle in the haystack) instead of looking for terrorists, of which we have a pretty good idea who would fit into that group.  What we are doing now wastes time, energy and resources but makes us feel like we are doing something to make us safe.  





True, it’s one of the more inconvenient elements of living in a free and egalitarian society. Dictatorships and police states don’t worry themselves about such trivialities. But you don’t just throw the baby out with the bathwater and adopt the most convenient solution, even if it happens to violate everything we stand for as a country.
2010-12-01 10:43 AM
in reply to: #3232126

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
CubeFarmGopher - 2010-12-01 11:35 AM
NXS - 2010-12-01 11:27 AM

In a sense it is misguided, we know who is out to get us and what people fit into that catagory, but we frisk old ladies, kids, families going to Disney, none who fit the profile of a terrorist, all because we don't want to offend a certain group or groups of people.  Heck this administration doesn't even want to use Islam or terrorist in the same sentence for fear it will be offensive.  Its a show, this nation is reactive to situations, not proactive.  We are looking for the bomb on everyone (a needle in the haystack) instead of looking for terrorists, of which we have a pretty good idea who would fit into that group.  What we are doing now wastes time, energy and resources but makes us feel like we are doing something to make us safe.  



Do these people fit that "group"?



Would you care to tell me exactly what on going terror organization Mc Veigh or Rudolph belonged to?  That is akin to saying Columbine was a terroist act, or that the DC sniper case was terrorism.  Terrorism is about sustained action over time not isolated incidences by mentally derranged individuals.
2010-12-01 10:47 AM
in reply to: #3232030

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
nevermind



Edited by ratherbesnowboarding 2010-12-01 10:50 AM


2010-12-01 10:49 AM
in reply to: #3232109

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 11:28 AM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 9:59 AM If you don't think the government already profiles in non-public ways you are sorely wrong.  Do you think the FBI keeps tabs on more Mosques or more Baptist churches?
“Keeping tabs” is one thing. Adversely impacting a particular group because of protected characteristics is another. I’m all for keeping tabs on people and having watch-lists and no-fly lists if there’s compelling evidence to justify it, but you can’t just pat down the Middle-Eastern-looking people and let the white people go through unmolested. I understand the futility of having to screen people who have almost a 0% chance of being a terrorist, but the right for everyone to be treated as equals is one of the fundamental principles that this country stands on. I don’t really understand how you can be so outraged about the so-called violation of our personal freedoms related to pat-downs and body-scan machines but defend (if that’s what you’re doing) disparate treatment of American citizens based solely on their color or national origin. That, to me, is a far more egregious affront to our way of life than the backscatter machines.


No one has ever said that race or religion should be the qualifier for profiling. They should be two of the MANY factors for profiling.  I honestly do not see how applying logic to a situation can be a breech of rights.

If we took your obviously exaggerated example above then yes.  There is an issue with that.  However if your true goal is to provide "security" then you will do a better job by ignoring the noise (the 4 year kids traveling with his grandmother) and focus on the signal (the nervous looking arab gentlemen).

Add to this some random checks for everyone and I think you have much better system.
2010-12-01 10:52 AM
in reply to: #3232145

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.

Edited by TriRSquared 2010-12-01 10:54 AM
2010-12-01 10:57 AM
in reply to: #3232150

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:49 AM

jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 11:28 AM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 9:59 AM If you don't think the government already profiles in non-public ways you are sorely wrong.  Do you think the FBI keeps tabs on more Mosques or more Baptist churches?
“Keeping tabs” is one thing. Adversely impacting a particular group because of protected characteristics is another. I’m all for keeping tabs on people and having watch-lists and no-fly lists if there’s compelling evidence to justify it, but you can’t just pat down the Middle-Eastern-looking people and let the white people go through unmolested. I understand the futility of having to screen people who have almost a 0% chance of being a terrorist, but the right for everyone to be treated as equals is one of the fundamental principles that this country stands on. I don’t really understand how you can be so outraged about the so-called violation of our personal freedoms related to pat-downs and body-scan machines but defend (if that’s what you’re doing) disparate treatment of American citizens based solely on their color or national origin. That, to me, is a far more egregious affront to our way of life than the backscatter machines.


No one has ever said that race or religion should be the qualifier for profiling. They should be two of the MANY factors for profiling.  I honestly do not see how applying logic to a situation can be a breech of rights.

If we took your obviously exaggerated example above then yes.  There is an issue with that.  However if your true goal is to provide "security" then you will do a better job by ignoring the noise (the 4 year kids traveling with his grandmother) and focus on the signal (the nervous looking arab gentlemen).

Add to this some random checks for everyone and I think you have much better system.


Except that those kids may be a cover. Because kids have been used as suicide bombers. So you can't exclude that grandmother and her cute little darlings, just because she's a grandmother. Otherwise, you are still using profiling based on pre-defined characteristics, you're just filtering things out, rather than using them to include.

Body language is key. Changing up the security checks is a good way to throw off those who have actually practiced how to get through security without giving off signals (which is, fortunately, something most terrorists do not do).
2010-12-01 10:59 AM
in reply to: #3232159

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM

ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


All of it? Because this page seems to show that a number of hijackings have been conducted by various groups, some with no religious affiliation.
2010-12-01 11:02 AM
in reply to: #3232159

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



2010-12-01 11:02 AM
in reply to: #3232150

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 10:49 AM

jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 11:28 AM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 9:59 AM If you don't think the government already profiles in non-public ways you are sorely wrong.  Do you think the FBI keeps tabs on more Mosques or more Baptist churches?
“Keeping tabs” is one thing. Adversely impacting a particular group because of protected characteristics is another. I’m all for keeping tabs on people and having watch-lists and no-fly lists if there’s compelling evidence to justify it, but you can’t just pat down the Middle-Eastern-looking people and let the white people go through unmolested. I understand the futility of having to screen people who have almost a 0% chance of being a terrorist, but the right for everyone to be treated as equals is one of the fundamental principles that this country stands on. I don’t really understand how you can be so outraged about the so-called violation of our personal freedoms related to pat-downs and body-scan machines but defend (if that’s what you’re doing) disparate treatment of American citizens based solely on their color or national origin. That, to me, is a far more egregious affront to our way of life than the backscatter machines.


No one has ever said that race or religion should be the qualifier for profiling. They should be two of the MANY factors for profiling.  I honestly do not see how applying logic to a situation can be a breech of rights.

If we took your obviously exaggerated example above then yes.  There is an issue with that.  However if your true goal is to provide "security" then you will do a better job by ignoring the noise (the 4 year kids traveling with his grandmother) and focus on the signal (the nervous looking arab gentlemen).

Add to this some random checks for everyone and I think you have much better system.


Well, if you’re profiling based on “many” characteristics, then, at a certain point, it ceases to be profiling, doesn’t it? Other than race and color, and considering that religion and national origin aren’t something you can identify by sight, what are the “many” characteristics that you suggest be evaluated? Nervousness? From all accounts, the 9/11 bombers were anything but nervous.
2010-12-01 11:06 AM
in reply to: #3232190

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



I agree, and if the IRA (or RAF or KKK) were to ever start targeting the US transportation system then I'd include their race and religious preference in my bag of "profiling tricks" if I were in that position.

Edited by TriRSquared 2010-12-01 11:06 AM
2010-12-01 11:09 AM
in reply to: #3232192

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM Well, if you’re profiling based on “many” characteristics, then, at a certain point, it ceases to be profiling, doesn’t it? Other than race and color, and considering that religion and national origin aren’t something you can identify by sight, what are the “many” characteristics that you suggest be evaluated? Nervousness? From all accounts, the 9/11 bombers were anything but nervous.


Neither you nor I are experts at profiling.  Who is to say that the 9/11 terrorists were not acting strangely? 

Profiling is inexact and involves a lot of factors (many of which I'm sure I do not understand).  However I know that The Israelis factor in the frequency of flying, passport status, traveling companions, language, accent, age, weight and lots of other factors.
2010-12-01 11:12 AM
in reply to: #3232190

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?
2010-12-01 11:20 AM
in reply to: #3232212

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:12 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?


Um, yes.  According to the definition.

But according to your definition since DC is no longer afraid than the IRA should no longer be considered a terrorist group since Ireland isnt afraid of them anymore?  No I dont dilute the meaning, I am understanding the definition.  Did the DC sniper instill Terror? yes he did, therefore he is a terrorist. 


2010-12-01 11:22 AM
in reply to: #3232208

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 12:09 PM
jmk-brooklyn - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM Well, if you’re profiling based on “many” characteristics, then, at a certain point, it ceases to be profiling, doesn’t it? Other than race and color, and considering that religion and national origin aren’t something you can identify by sight, what are the “many” characteristics that you suggest be evaluated? Nervousness? From all accounts, the 9/11 bombers were anything but nervous.


Neither you nor I are experts at profiling.  Who is to say that the 9/11 terrorists were not acting strangely? 

Profiling is inexact and involves a lot of factors (many of which I'm sure I do not understand).  However I know that The Israelis factor in the frequency of flying, passport status, traveling companions, language, accent, age, weight and lots of other factors.


James Woods said they were acting strangely when they shared a flight a week earlier and filed a report.

snopes 
2010-12-01 11:27 AM
in reply to: #3232242

User image

Champion
7347
5000200010010010025
SRQ, FL
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:20 PM
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:12 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?


Um, yes.  According to the definition.

But according to your definition since DC is no longer afraid than the IRA should no longer be considered a terrorist group since Ireland isnt afraid of them anymore?  No I dont dilute the meaning, I am understanding the definition.  Did the DC sniper instill Terror? yes he did, therefore he is a terrorist. 


Might want to check on that.  The IRA is alive and well.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bedd06fc-c807-11df-ae3a-00144feab49a.html#axzz16skF1cLM
2010-12-01 11:31 AM
in reply to: #3232242

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:20 PM
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:12 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?


Um, yes.  According to the definition.

But according to your definition since DC is no longer afraid than the IRA should no longer be considered a terrorist group since Ireland isnt afraid of them anymore?  No I dont dilute the meaning, I am understanding the definition.  Did the DC sniper instill Terror? yes he did, therefore he is a terrorist. 


DC was 2 men who did what they did to garner pleasure out of killing once caught the killing stopped.  The IRA was an organization who used killing to advance a political agenda.  By your definition all criminal acts can be considered terrorism and there for all criminals terrorists.  Therefore we should all be randomly searched as we exit our homes everyday to check for terrorists.
2010-12-01 11:33 AM
in reply to: #3232261

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 12:27 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:20 PM
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:12 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?


Um, yes.  According to the definition.

But according to your definition since DC is no longer afraid than the IRA should no longer be considered a terrorist group since Ireland isnt afraid of them anymore?  No I dont dilute the meaning, I am understanding the definition.  Did the DC sniper instill Terror? yes he did, therefore he is a terrorist. 


Might want to check on that.  The IRA is alive and well.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bedd06fc-c807-11df-ae3a-00144feab49a.html#axzz16skF1cLM


Link is a little weird - but the last 'IRA' bomb was in 2001 - The 'REAL IRA' (a splinter group) is the new group that had the bomb in February 
2010-12-01 11:40 AM
in reply to: #3232273

User image

Master
1517
1000500
Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:31 PM

DC was 2 men who did what they did to garner pleasure out of killing once caught the killing stopped.  The IRA was an organization who used killing to advance a political agenda.  By your definition all criminal acts can be considered terrorism and there for all criminals terrorists.  Therefore we should all be randomly searched as we exit our homes everyday to check for terrorists.


Wasnt that the purpose of the Patriot Act?  Being able to search my home and tap my phone if the powers that be thought I may be up to something.

But no, not all criminal acts are acts of terror - those that instill terror on a populous are.  And just because they do it for pleasure and not political does not make their reign of terror any less significant or exempt them from the terrorist label.    


2010-12-01 11:43 AM
in reply to: #3232273

User image

Champion
5615
5000500100
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:31 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:20 PM
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:12 PM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:02 PM
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:52 AM
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 11:47 AM

(snip: photos of a bunch of white guys who did bad things)



Indeed they do come in all shapes and sizes and races and religions.  Which is why you cannot focus entirely on race or religion.  However to leave it out is to fail to look at all the data.  I fail to see how these two theories are mutually exclusive.

ETA: The other difference is that these were all individuals.  All of the airline terrorism has been by people who belong to an organization that has a common religious background.


I absolutely see your point, and all that have been made.  And I agree w/ the airline terrorism as well.  But please, the reason for my post is terrorism is not limited to Muslims, or even just groups.  Irish Catholics (IRA) at one time were considered terrorists, same w/ the RAF in Germany.  And Im sure some people would also consider the KKK a terrorist group as well.
And yes - I do consider the DC sniper a terrorist as well because he instilled terror in the DC area.



Then every single spree killer or serial killer is a terrorist.  I think you dilute the meaning too severly, is DC still afraid?


Um, yes.  According to the definition.

But according to your definition since DC is no longer afraid than the IRA should no longer be considered a terrorist group since Ireland isnt afraid of them anymore?  No I dont dilute the meaning, I am understanding the definition.  Did the DC sniper instill Terror? yes he did, therefore he is a terrorist. 


DC was 2 men who did what they did to garner pleasure out of killing once caught the killing stopped.  The IRA was an organization who used killing to advance a political agenda.  By your definition all criminal acts can be considered terrorism and there for all criminals terrorists.  Therefore we should all be randomly searched as we exit our homes everyday to check for terrorists.


The key distinction between the DC Sniper attacks and other individual killers who should be labeled as terrorists (even after the fact) is whether the motivation of the individual was the furtherance of an ideological agenda. 

An individual does not have to be an operating member of a terrorist organization in order for their act to be considered terrorism.  It's the Lone Wolf theory of terrorism.

The DC Sniper situation was a case of two men who were thrill killing with no agenda other than greed.

The Eric Rudolph situation was a case of an Army of God follower bombing clinics in order to kill people that he believed needed to die.

Any killer can be a terrorist based on the intent of the killing.
2010-12-01 11:47 AM
in reply to: #3232307

User image

Champion
18680
50005000500020001000500100252525
Lost in the Luminiferous Aether
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
ratherbesnowboarding - 2010-12-01 12:40 PM
trinnas - 2010-12-01 12:31 PM

DC was 2 men who did what they did to garner pleasure out of killing once caught the killing stopped.  The IRA was an organization who used killing to advance a political agenda.  By your definition all criminal acts can be considered terrorism and there for all criminals terrorists.  Therefore we should all be randomly searched as we exit our homes everyday to check for terrorists.


Wasnt that the purpose of the Patriot Act?  Being able to search my home and tap my phone if the powers that be thought I may be up to something.

But no, not all criminal acts are acts of terror - those that instill terror on a populous are.  And just because they do it for pleasure and not political does not make their reign of terror any less significant or exempt them from the terrorist label.    


Ah but with the TSA all you have to do is be doing a perfectly normal activity with no suspicious activity what so ever.

Yes actually it does make it much less significant.  It makes it a criminal act that will end when the criminal is caught.  Since all of the 9/11 terrorists are either dead or caught does that mean the threat has ended?  Is the underwear bomber in no way related?  Is the guy who goes on a shooting spree in texas related to the DC killings?  Fear is different than terror.
2010-12-01 11:47 AM
in reply to: #3232261

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
TriRSquared - 2010-12-01 11:27 AM

Might want to check on that.  The IRA is alive and well.
/


So, then we SHOULD be checking all Irish nationals? What about Americans of Irish descent?

Or…we shouldn’t be bothering with Irish people because the IRA (or the “Real IRA” or whoever) hasn’t attacked us yet?

So we should only concentrate on profiling people who belong to groups associated with terror groups that have already attacked us?

Ok, well, that seems reactive, sort of like making people take off their shoes or banning toner cartridges from overseas flights.

So, in other words, we should only be focusing on people of Middle-Eastern descent?

See? Right back where we started.

I realize that I’m being argumentative here, but the point is that there really isn’t a way to effectively profile without focusing primarily on race and national origin, which is something that is contrary to who we are as a society.

Edited by jmk-brooklyn 2010-12-01 11:48 AM
2010-12-01 11:49 AM
in reply to: #3229140

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: TSA has gone too far
I'm all for profiling for some things, if you're in the bad part of town its just a mode of survival.  People act and dress how they want to be perceived.  If someone wants to look like a convict,  they probably will act like one.

That being said its different with terrorism.  These guys don't want to be presented as such, and if an old lady will volunteer, they put her there.  They want to look like everyone else.
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » TSA has gone too far Rss Feed  
 
 
of 4