Blasts Hit London Bus And Underground

[martha]

Now back to the argument already in progress:

So many of you are so willing to put your civil rights up on a shelf because "it might save a life."

You realize you'll never get them back, don't you? EVER.

I'm not willing to subject myself (or my darker-skinned brothers) to unConstitutional searches because some dipshit wants to blow me up. These searches don't turn up anything anyway. They offer the illusion of security while slowly our rights are eaten away and we roll over and take it.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Agreed, martha.

Also agree about the medical staff. Those people are definitely amazing, dealing with all that stress and that many people and going into dangerous situations and everything. People like them don't get nearly enough praise for what they do. to the medical personnel, as well as any other public officials who came in to help out.

Angela

 

[verte76]

I agree, Martha. Why should anyone who's dark-skinned and of Asiatic heritage necessarily get checked? After all, Al-Qaeda has adherents with all sorts of European heritage, and they are getting through without getting checked. The "shoe-bomber" was a Brit, for heaven's sakes.

 

[enggirl]

Good point Martha and verte:
People have been bitching for years about old ladies and little kids getting searched at airports...um, would they not be the best "mules" for someone who wants to do something sinister? It does not make sense to search people who "look Muslim" ONLY. People can be nasty and evil and will use the system to their advantage.

 

[VertigoGal]

I didn't know being searched at the airport was a breach of our constitutional rights. I thought it's always been within the airport security's power to search passengers before they board a flying tank of fuel.

For the last time, I don't think all Arabs are terrorists, or all Muslims are fanatics, or anything like that. But it seems like some people want to tiptoe around the fact that Al Queda *is* a fanatical Muslim organisation who are the highest security threat to our country right now (at least as far as terrorism). Searching Middle Eastern passengers at a higher rate seems only logical to me. Even if it only creates the illusion of increased security to discourage terrorists from trying it again in the future.

My science teacher's last name is Youssef, and even though she's white pink and rosy (her ex was Egyptian), she was briefly searched last time she flew. It wasn't that big of a deal.

 

[martha]

Searching Middle Eastern passengers at a higher rate seems only logical to me.

Because it doesn't affect you.

When you start losing your rights due to the way you look, you'll change your tune.

And it will happen. Wait a few more years.

 

[martha]

I didn't know being searched at the airport was a breach of our constitutional rights. I thought it's always been within the airport security's power to search passengers before they board a flying tank of fuel.

We're talking targeted searches of individuals of specific ethnicities. When they seacrh every single person, or engage in truly random searches, they we can say it's a fair system.

Until then, it's racial profiling and it's bullshit.

 

[U2democrat]

As some of y'all know, i just got back from europe. My german teacher has a darker complexion (though he has NO middle east decent) and every single time we went through security he was pulled out and patted down. it became very frustrating because he was obviously being profiled.

 

[Klink]

I was also at King's Cross after the 1st Twickenham show. Erie stuff. I hope everyone is ok.

Jon

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

As some of y'all know, i just got back from europe. My german teacher has a darker complexion (though he has NO middle east decent) and every single time we went through security he was pulled out and patted down. it became very frustrating because he was obviously being profiled.

. Glad you made it back here okay. I was wondering about you.

Angela

 

[speedracer]

Good point Martha and verte:
People have been bitching for years about old ladies and little kids getting searched at airports...um, would they not be the best "mules" for someone who wants to do something sinister? It does not make sense to search people who "look Muslim" ONLY. People can be nasty and evil and will use the system to their advantage.

Of course they would. They're not dummies. No doubt they coach their members on how to answer if they're questioned by airport security, so you shouldn't completely rely on screening interviews either.

(Warning: quick game theory lesson ahead.)

Searching only people who appear Middle Eastern is dumb, because it's obviously offensive and because it's an easy tactic to beat -- the terrorists would work really hard to get white people or old ladies to carry their bombs. But on the other hand, al-Qaeda isn't exactly awash in white recruits, and it's not a trivial matter to convince an old lady to carry a suspicious package for you. So they can't send all their bombs with white people/old ladies/little kids/whatever.

What happens is that this little game of cat-and-mouse reaches what's called a mixed-state Nash equilibrium. Airport security can't completely rule out the possibility that a little kid, old lady, white person or whoever else might be a terrorist, so anybody is a candidate to be searched. But they'd search middle-aged Middle Eastern-looking people more frequently than other groups.

Yes, it's discriminatory, but if you think hard enough, you'll realize that a lot of things in life that you're comfortable with are discriminatory.

 

[sallycinnamon78]

I agree, Martha. Why should anyone who's dark-skinned and of Asiatic heritage necessarily get checked? After all, Al-Qaeda has adherents with all sorts of European heritage, and they are getting through without getting checked. The "shoe-bomber" was a Brit, for heaven's sakes.

Well said.

I didn't respond to this yesterday because, after being awake for 2 days on the trot and watching the news all day, I wasn't exactly at my most articulate.

I'm an Englishwoman, born and bred, apart from 3 years spent living in the USA. My family is originally Asian. Although my skintone is quite light for an Indian - not that that matters at all - it's easy to see that I am of Asian descent.

I flew from London to Amsterdam on September 15th 2001, with my friend Emma. Emma has very pale skin. When we went through the security checks to board the plane, I was wondering whether my skintone would have any effect on the way I was treated. Emma and I went through totally seperately. They didn't give me a second glance - in fact, it was Emma they stopped and searched... they made her take off her bracelet. Why? It had a rubber spike on it. I had no problems anywhere on our travels on that occasion, which, knowing how idiotic people can be, gave me something of a nice surprise.

A year later I travelled by train to my mum's in Switzerland. When we had crossed the border between Belgium and France, 3 security guard customs men (with guns, I might add), came round. They asked for my passport completely at random. So I showed them, and of course they saw I was a British citizen. Didn't stop them interrogating me for 10 minutes

They went through my suitcase. They frisked me. I knew damn well that they had no right to do so, there was no female guard there, but I was so shocked that I didn't argue. They also went through my hand luggage, and read all my personal letters from my fiance. I snatched my bag off them when they were about to leave me alone at long last.

One of the bastards leered at me and said "is there a problem?" My response was "where I come from, we don't treat visitors like dogs". They didn't have anything to say to that and left.

All because of the way I look. Nobody else on those carriages got 'searched'.

I'm quite happy to go through a ton of security checks, but I think this should apply to everyone. Profiling that doesn't account for criminals of various backgrounds, being based purely upon ethnicity, isn't going to stop the crime. That's what's known as common sense. If you're gonna single someone out because of their appearance and your prejudice, then I have a major problem with you.

 

[sallycinnamon78]

Intelligent responses only, please:

If you want an intelligent answer, it helps to ask an intelligent question in the first place.

As some of y'all know, i just got back from europe. My german teacher has a darker complexion (though he has NO middle east decent) and every single time we went through security he was pulled out and patted down. it became very frustrating because he was obviously being profiled.

Another point - how do you tell where someone is originally from? The colour of someone's skin frequently tells you nothing about their nationality, and it is quite often hard to distinguish people of one country, or 'race', from others. This is an important point.

One of my friends is of partial Arab descent. His sister is much paler. You wouldn't know they're related. So, based on what the two look like, he has been searched at airports, while she's been left to go through with no comment at all. Theoretically, is she any less likely than he is to be a terrorist?!

One of my uncles is much darker skinned than I am, while his wife is Russian, very pale, with blue eyes, while . My eldest cousin is blonde and pale, while her five sisters are of a variety of hues, in skintone, hair colour and eye colour. The same applies to my nieces. If you saw most of us, you'd have no idea whatsoever where we came from.

In the UK, people assume that I am of mixed race, Indian, or Pakistani. In the States, people assume I am Puerto Rican or Mexican. Until January 16th 1991, that is, when I started getting called 'Saddam Hussein's daughter', of course.

We're talking targeted searches of individuals of specific ethnicities. When they seacrh every single person, or engage in truly random searches, they we can say it's a fair system.

Until then, it's racial profiling and it's bullshit.

Precisely.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I'm quite happy to go through a ton of security checks, but I think this should apply to everyone. Profiling that doesn't account for criminals of various backgrounds, being based purely upon ethnicity, isn't going to stop the crime. That's what's known as common sense.

Bingo . After all, Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist, too. Why weren't/aren't we investigating people that are similar to him in looks?

That's crappy what happened to you. Reading your personal letters? Wow.

Angela

 

[martha]

Yes, it's discriminatory, but if you think hard enough, you'll realize that a lot of things in life that you're comfortable with are discriminatory.

1. Please speak for yourself.

2. I make a point of examining my motives and thoughts to try to rid myself of "comfort" with discrimination. It appears that you might not.

 

[martha]

After all, Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist, too. Why weren't/aren't we investigating people that are similar to him in looks?

Because skinny white guys with bad haircuts and frowny looks on their faces tend to vote Republican. Ya don't want to piss off your support base.

(I think, however, that if those same skinny white guys were indeed subjected to that kind of treatment, a lot more of the people on this board would be outraged, outraged I tell you, at the profiling going on.)

 

[speedracer]

1. Please speak for yourself.

Driving age? Drinking age? Eligibility for elected office?

2. I make a point of examining my motives and thoughts to try to rid myself of "comfort" with discrimination. It appears that you might not.

Naturally, this begs the question of why all forms of discrimination are bad.

 

[speedracer]

(I think, however, that if those same skinny white guys were indeed subjected to that kind of treatment, a lot more of the people on this board would be outraged, outraged I tell you, at the profiling going on.)

Straw man. Nobody here is advocating that people be searched in anything other than a professional, orderly manner.

I don't understand why people seem to think that the only possible alternative to a completely random search is a witch-hunt where every single brown-skinned person who passes through airport security is screamed at, spit upon and physically abused.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

I havent' been on earlier cos been poorly in my sick bed. I am horrified by what's happened in London, as happened in Madrid, in New York and on a daily basis, Iraq and Israel.

Of all those places, the only one I've been to is London, where I stayed in the Tavistock Hotel for a couple of weeks and regularly took the Russell Square and Euston tubes.

I really hope this isnt an excuse for more xenophobic behaviour towards Muslims or "middle eastern looking" people, just because of what a small group of extremists have done. I agree with everything Sally, Martha and Angela have already said. My parents are Italian but I'm quite fair, so I pass for Anglo-Aussie in Australia and the rubbish I've heard some people say to me towards other "ethnic" people is horrifying. It's nice to see their faces when I tell them I'm Italian.

Making our society more extremist to deal with other extremists is not the way to go. The extremists are attacking our moderate way of living, our freedoms, the way that I as a female may choose how to live, what religion to believe or not, who to marry or not, how to dress, what to say, what to THINK. If we react in a negative way, they win.

 

[speedracer]

Bingo . After all, Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist, too. Why weren't/aren't we investigating people that are similar to him in looks?

We do and should, but consider that there were nineteen guys involved in the 9/11 attacks, all of Middle Eastern descent. Plus a bunch of other guys involved in the 1993 WTC bombing. Plus a bunch of other plane hijackings in recent history.

 

[martha]

Driving age? Drinking age? Eligibility for elected office?

We could play games like these all night. I'm tired and this thread isn't the place for it.

BUT, driving at 16 brings legal responsibility (majority age of 18) and physical maturity (younger kids; pedals, etc) into consideration.

Drinking age? Why do teenagers need to drink? Physical maturity comes into it here as well; their bodies are still growing; they lack the reasoning skills to make the choices, etc.

I have some problems with the 35 year age limit for president, but as I get farther on the other side of 35, I can see some of the wisdom in the law.

Now, you can use thees laws and my responses to justify your prejuduce all you want, but only you will buy it.

 

[martha]

Straw man. Nobody here is advocating that people be searched in anything other than a professional, orderly manner.

I don't understand why people seem to think that the only possible alternative to a completely random search is a witch-hunt where every single brown-skinned person who passes through airport security is screamed at, spit upon and physically abused.

No, I think that if white men were subjected to the searches that others have had to endure, they would shit themselves and make sure it was outlawed.

 

[martha]

We do and should, but consider that there were nineteen guys involved in the 9/11 attacks, all of Middle Eastern descent. Plus a bunch of other guys involved in the 1993 WTC bombing. Plus a bunch of other plane hijackings in recent history.

So you support race-based profiling?

 

[speedracer]

We could play games like these all night. I'm tired and this thread isn't the place for it.

BUT, driving at 16 brings legal responsibility (majority age of 18) and physical maturity (younger kids; pedals, etc) into consideration.

Drinking age? Why do teenagers need to drink? Physical maturity comes into it here as well; their bodies are still growing; they lack the reasoning skills to make the choices, etc.

I have some problems with the 35 year age limit for president, but as I get farther on the other side of 35, I can see some of the wisdom in the law.

Now, you can use thees laws and my responses to justify your prejuduce all you want, but only you will buy it.

Okay, how 'bout when a murder occurs and police are told to be on the lookout for a black man with a 5 o'clock shadow?

Today, we have credible information leading us to believe that a terror network consisting largely of Middle Eastern Islamic radicals may be plotting spectacular attacks against us. It'd be dumb to throw this information away. Sure, this information isn't as robust as seeing a guy running from a murder scene. But it's not too likely that you're going to see a bomber walking around in an airport with wires protruding from his jacket.

 

[speedracer]

No, I think that if white men were subjected to the searches that others have had to endure, they would shit themselves and make sure it was outlawed.

Rail against these sorts of abusive searches all you want -- I'm not going to argue. But please don't conflate it with the separate issue of figuring out who to check.

 

[speedracer]

So you support race-based profiling?

Please read my last post on page 27 (not just the last throwaway sentence that you quoted earlier) and you'll know exactly what I support. Sorry if I'm coming across as a bit testy, but I really think I've communicated my ideas as clearly as possible and I think people are talking right past them.

 

[norsehorse23]

sally, i don't really know you, but that was a really creepy story you had. if we want to complain about abusing civil liberties, i am a high school teacher here in the us... my kids complain about every little rule saying it's violating their rights. whether it be driving age, drinking age, smoking age, voting age, getting reprimanded for bad behavior (i get a kick out of that one), whether or not someone who is 18 can play in the nba.... you know what, what is the big deal? there are consequences when a small minority does something wrong... why do you think we have laws? if everyone committed murder, would it be illegal? that's a bit of a theoretical question, but if these 'security checks', and even if they are a farse as some of you say, help to curb terrorism, regardless of how many people actually participate in it, what is the big deal? i am not the most liberal person in the world, but i think that all this liberal/conservative bickering is really stupid. let's face reality: terrorism exists, and it has to end, regardless of your political beliefs or whether or not some laws step on our toes a little. those of us from western countries have the opportunity to stop governments from squashing our rights, it's called voting, but apparently not everyone sees the point in voting, millions of people complain, but very few of them do something to help their cause.

 

[sallycinnamon78]

Straw man. Nobody here is advocating that people be searched in anything other than a professional, orderly manner.

I don't understand why people seem to think that the only possible alternative to a completely random search is a witch-hunt where every single brown-skinned person who passes through airport security is screamed at, spit upon and physically abused.

I don't understand why people seem to think that terrorism will be combatted by searches based purely on PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL, and therefore highly subjective, ASSUMPTIONS OF whatsomeone's race is. That's neither logical nor sensible.

But they'd search middle-aged Middle Eastern-looking people more frequently than other groups.

You didn't answer my question about how you would decide whether or not these people were Middle Eastern, anyway. Where do you draw the line?

I don't have much time for 'political correctness - a term that was initially taken from a court ruling and turned into a a joke, anyway - but I do have a huge problem with anyone who believes that they can solve the problem of terrorism by widening the gulf between 'different cultures'.

What part of 'fair treatment' do you not understand, precisely?

It's one thing to be a raving advocate of the far left - or right for that matter - basing an argument purely on lofty ideals. I'm not doing that. What I AM saying, is that deliberately advocating a biased, ineffective, unworkable, and fundamentally racist policy, which is based purely on the individual perspective of security personnel, is moronic. I don't believe it is stupid to stand up against THAT - quite the opposite.

 

[norsehorse23]

how do we end terrorism? tolerance? the US and other nations staying away from islamic holy sites (which i actually understand), completely ignoring the middle east, universal communism where everyone is equal.. no rich or poor, kill every person associated with terrorism.. that's impossible. i think it starts with the gap between rich and poor.... i think that money and power have more to do with it than policy or religion. a level playing field in terms of trade and globalization would be ideal, but is it practical? i live in a really wealthy nation, one that was built by people's hard work (aside from some people born with silver spoons in hand). through hard work and education i think that anyone could achieve at least some sense of equality.

 

[speedracer]

I don't understand why people seem to think that terrorism will be combatted by searches based purely on ethnicity. That's neither logical nor sensible.

El Al seems to do a pretty good job of it. They have really skilled agents. But from what I understand they subject Israelis who speak perfect Hebrew much less rigorously than everyone else.

What part of the principles of fairness and equality do you not understand, precisely?

Enough to know that they're not identical.

You didn't answer my question about how you would decide whether or not these people were Middle Eastern, anyway.

I suspect that to gain your approval I'd have to forward this question to someone who actually works for El Al. Verbal accent, skin color, facial characteristics and information in identity documents carry a lot of information though.

Where do you draw the line?

I don't know. As with many things, there are grey areas. It's impossible to make these identifications with 100% certainty, but 100% certainty is not needed for the searches to be effective.