Terrorists Could Be Your Next Door Neighbor...

[melon]

How about this: One of the parents of a young child is a terrorist. They know that their name is on the watch list so they have another lesser known extremist put an explosive vest on the child. If airport security went by a more 'sensitive' approach, they'd let the baby pass without any questioning why the child's name is on the watch list. Hmm, could it be that the child's parent is a terrorist and they might use their own child as a method to get around the security of the airport? Noo, of course not. That'd be crazy. And we all know that terrorists are rational and moral.

While we're at it, a Muslim woman could shove plastique up her cunt and ignite it.

Oh the things we can come up with if we let our imaginations run wild.

Melon

 

[martha]

cunt

Good points can easily be lost when one uses tasteless and disrespectful language for no good reason.

 

[melon]

Well, I apologize. My point was to be a bit crass, but only because we spend so much time dehumanizing Muslims to make them sound like animals. After all, "sensitivity" is so "librul."

That was my point, which can be made by a word that even I think to be crass.

So I hope you can understand why I used it.

Melon

 

[financeguy]

How about this: One of the parents of a young child is a terrorist. They know that their name is on the watch list so they have another lesser known extremist put an explosive vest on the child. If airport security went by a more 'sensitive' approach, they'd let the baby pass without any questioning why the child's name is on the watch list. Hmm, could it be that the child's parent is a terrorist and they might use their own child as a method to get around the security of the airport? Noo, of course not. That'd be crazy. And we all know that terrorists are rational and moral.

Are you really a Dead Kennedys' fan as it says in your profile?

'Cos your politics don't seem at all like Jello Biafra's.

 

[BVS]

How about this: One of the parents of a young child is a terrorist. They know that their name is on the watch list so they have another lesser known extremist put an explosive vest on the child. If airport security went by a more 'sensitive' approach, they'd let the baby pass without any questioning why the child's name is on the watch list. Hmm, could it be that the child's parent is a terrorist and they might use their own child as a method to get around the security of the airport? Noo, of course not. That'd be crazy. And we all know that terrorists are rational and moral.

Still has nothing to do with this scenario. These names are apparently on the list due to "intelligence" gathered. No one with any common sense would say oh but this toddler is known terrorist for he's on my list.

You're scenario yes can happen, along with a million others, they could find someway to get the explosives on you without your knowledge, but it has nothing to do with this scenario.

 

[financeguy]

"Welcome to 1984
Are you ready for the third world war?!?
You too will meet the secret police
They'll draft you and they'll jail your niece

You'll go quitely to boot camp
They'll shoot you dead, make you a man
Don't you worry, it's for a cause
Feeding global corporations' claws"

(Especially for SonoftheTelepunk, the DK's fan )

 

[Sonoftelepunk]

Well, I apologize. My point was to be a bit crass, but only because we spend so much time dehumanizing Muslims to make them sound like animals. After all, "sensitivity" is so "librul."

That was my point, which can be made by a word that even I think to be crass.

So I hope you can understand why I used it.

Melon

Did I say anything about ALL muslims being terrorists as you clearly imply? No, I didn't. Though I do think that they should have precidence over others for being suspected. Why? Because the most threatening global terror groups and terrorists are Muslims. Read the Qu'ran and you'll find that there are specific instructions that it is every Muslim's duty to kill the "enemies of Islam". With things such as this, it's no wonder that the major terrorist attacks in the past 40 years have been carried out by Islamic terrorists. Now, I'm not denying that other terrorists exist besides ones that practice Islam. But there is an overwhelming undeniable fact that Islam has produced the most terrorists in recent history than any other religion.

 

[financeguy]

Did I say anything about ALL muslims being terrorists as you clearly imply? No, I didn't. Though I do think that they should have precidence over others for being suspected. Why? Because the most threatening global terror groups and terrorists are Muslims. Read the Qu'ran and you'll find that there are specific instructions that it is every Muslim's duty to kill the "enemies of Islam". With things such as this, it's no wonder that the major terrorist attacks in the past 40 years have been carried out by Islamic terrorists. Now, I'm not denying that other terrorists exist besides ones that practice Islam. But there is an overwhelming undeniable fact that Islam has produced the most terrorists in recent history than any other religion.

Hmmm, did I imagine that bit in the Bible where Jesus said that he came 'to bring a sword'?

And Melon did not imply that you said all Muslims are terrorists.

I know you're new here and stuff, but you really need to read peoples' responses a bit more carefully.

 

[Sonoftelepunk]

"Welcome to 1984
Are you ready for the third world war?!?
You too will meet the secret police
They'll draft you and they'll jail your niece

You'll go quitely to boot camp
They'll shoot you dead, make you a man
Don't you worry, it's for a cause
Feeding global corporations' claws"

(Especially for SonoftheTelepunk, the DK's fan )

You know, If you want to criticize me, it would be prudent to have correct lyrics.

 

[financeguy]

You know, If you want to criticize me, it would be prudent to have correct lyrics.

You shouldn't take posts so personally. What I would say is, if you are prepared to engage in robust debate, it is a give and take process.

 

[Sonoftelepunk]

You shouldn't take posts so personally. What I would say is, if you are prepared to engage in robust debate, it is a give and take process.

Yes, and I had been given plenty and I was taking just then.

 

[martha]

Well, I apologize. My point was to be a bit crass, but only because we spend so much time dehumanizing Muslims to make them sound like animals. After all, "sensitivity" is so "librul."

That was my point, which can be made by a word that even I think to be crass.

So I hope you can understand why I used it.

Melon

I understand.

(That word grates on me like no other.)

 

[Zoomerang96]

a_wanderer's comments always make coming to this forum worthwhile. hysterical!

 

[zoney!]

No child is left behind when it comes to TSA!

No baby would get through a TSA line with a "explosive jacket" - that is actually one of the things they are trained for (parents using children as decoys). It is sad...but that is how the terrorists think (and our very own sonoftelepunk).

Sonoftelepunk - you have now been added to the No-Fly-List.

actually, the list is updated just about daily. names are removed and added.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Interesting that the idea of using the restricted resources as effectively as possible is considered hysterical. I suppose that the other options are do nothing or do everything ~ if every single person was submitted for full checks before boarding planes then there would be no cause for alarm; no profiling at all could take place.

Bombs can be detected with effective security technology, when you are trying to defend against hijackings they are probably going to be men aged 15 - 50, religion is a factor but it is not an effective means for profiling because anybody intent on doing such damage maintains a lower profile of adherence. Just look at the manner in which the 9/11 hijackers indulged in life before the attacks, it can minimise suspicion.

There should be a degree of profiling, which I said should probably age and sex; the September 11 hijackers, Trade Center Bombers, London Bombers, Richard Reid the Shoe Bomber etc. were all Muslim males aged 15 - 50, but if you exclusively profile on religion it is too tight and there are weaknesses. Sex and age are two broad factors that cut the potential pool by more than 50%.

 

[nbcrusader]

I can't believe this. Babies? Yeah, they're a real threat.

Ever change a diaper?


Sometimes they do contain bombs - dirty ones - hazmat city

 

[deep]

don't ever change em
when they are standing on the kitchen table

unless you want to learn the true meaning of "whiz kid".

 

[martha]

I've got it! No men at all allowed on airplanes!

Think of it: bathrooms would be cleaner and smell better, fewer drunk men getting nasty with the flight crew, the female flight attendants wouldn't get harrassed, and since all the pilots prosecuted for drunk flying have been men so far, the pilot would be sober! And, no bombers!! Since they're all men so far, and profiling "works" keeping the guys off the plane is a win-win for everyone.

Well, almost. But hey, if it keeps one bomber from blowing up a plane, it's all worth it, and I'm more than willing to make the sacrifice.