Do you think its good thing to bother people in the name of security at air port?

[Roman77]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

The post above I quote is just one of many who share this misconception. I don't mean to single it out but just use it as a typical example. You guys don't get it. It is not RACE or ethnicity that needs to be screened. It is adherence to an ideology. In this case the ideology of Islamic Supremacism. Of course you cannot screen for that visually since being a Muslim (one who follows Islam) is not a race. Remember, most Muslims are not even Arabs. SE Asia, including Indonesia are the largest concentration of Muslims today.
To screen for an ideology you have to ask questions, you have to profile, you have to check group affiliations. Of these things, only the question asking can really be done at the security line at the airport. The other checks have to be done ahead of time and result in the people in question being put on the no-fly list. If they aren’t flagged ahead of time then question-asking by trained interrogators at the airport if the last chance to stop them before they get on the plane.
Those that attacked us on 9/11 did so because they were acting on an ideology. It is quite legitimate to scrupulously investigate and question others who profess to follow the same ideology. To do otherwise would be to endanger people in the name of political correctness.

Oh I get it just fine. And for the record, the individual I was responding to specifically called for increased scrutiny on people of middle eastern lineage. So are we saying that all who 'look' middle-eastern follow this idealogy? Racism is the act of assigning specific traits, beliefs, behavior to a particular ethnic group, look it up if you feel so inclined. Also look up the word stereotype, because that's another thing happening here. As you said, you wouldn't know what idealogy they followed unless you singled them out,right?

And I'll repeat, the moment you start targeting specific groups is the day an 'innocent' slips right under your nose. It happens, I've seen it happen. Not all terrorists are middle eastern or follow the same idealogy as the 911 culprits. I already cited an example of an individual who committed one of the most heinous acts of Terrorism in U.S history. Who would guessed it would be a good ole American boy? And he had his own agenda for doing what he did. Funny enough you didn't respond to that part of my post, just handpicked the parts to collaborate your own argument. The missing part regarding Timothy Mcveigh follows the same line of logic and reasoning as the poster that I responded to before. Just out of interest, since you think its all about Islamic Supremacy( against the West I assume), why does America seem to be singled out in particular? There's a country just north of the border that's every bit as westernized as the U.S, yet they never are targeted for this same 'idealogy'. Any ideas why?

As someone earlier mentioned, it's easy to point the finger elsewhere to call for increased 'whatever' on those who aren't like yourself.

[rogerbacon]

Originally Posted by Greg1977

Not all terrorists are middle eastern or follow the same idealogy as the 911 culprits. I already cited an example of an individual who committed one of the most heinous acts of Terrorism in U.S history. Who would guessed it would be a good ole American boy? And he had his own agenda for doing what he did.

No, not all terrorists follow an ideology of Islamic Supremacism (agaisnt all non-Muslims and not just Western countries). You named good old boy Tim McVeigh, the boogyman everyone likes to pull out to remind everyone that the jihadists aren't responsible for 100% of the attacks against us. It's true that you can find a few scattered individuals that commit acts of terror that have nothing to do with Islamic beliefs. A guy flew his small plane in to a government building a few months ago over finantual problems (the building contained an IRS office).
The difference between these individuals and the other 99.999% of terrorists is that they are rouge individuals acting on individual motives. They don't have hundreds of millions of believers following a 1400 year old ideology that they believe comes from Allah and is beyond question. And before you mention McVeigh again, remember that he was not a Christian. He was an Agnostic who said, "Science is my religion".

Just out of interest, since you think its all about Islamic Supremacy( against the West I assume), why does America seem to be singled out in particular? There's a country just north of the border that's every bit as westernized as the U.S, yet they never are targeted for this same 'idealogy'. Any ideas why?

America has not been singled out by any means. The jihad wages globally against all of Dar al-harb (In Islam the world is divided into dar al-harb [the land of war] and dar al-Islam [the land of the folloers of Islam]). There have been 15,217 seperate fatal attacks since 9/11 carried out in the name of Islam. Go to Islam: Making a True Difference in the World - One Body at a Time and you can download an Excel sheet listing all of the attacks. Here is the link to all attacks in 2009 (Give it a while to load 'cause its big). TheReligionofPeace.com - List of Islamic Terror Attacks for 2009 In March alone 15 seperate countries had deadly attacks and its not just where the "wars" are either. The Philippeans and Thailand suffer attacks all the time. Thailand had 23 attacks last month. Yeah, Canada made the list once.

[Roman77]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

No, not all terrorists follow an ideology of Islamic Supremacism (agaisnt all non-Muslims and not just Western countries). You named good old boy Tim McVeigh, the boogyman everyone likes to pull out to remind everyone that the jihadists aren't responsible for 100% of the attacks against us. It's true that you can find a few scattered individuals that commit acts of terror that have nothing to do with Islamic beliefs. A guy flew his small plane in to a government building a few months ago over finantual problems (the building contained an IRS office).
The difference between these individuals and the other 99.999% of terrorists is that they are rouge individuals acting on individual motives. They don't have hundreds of millions of believers following a 1400 year old ideology that they believe comes from Allah and is beyond question. And before you mention McVeigh again, remember that he was not a Christian. He was an Agnostic who said, "Science is my religion".

And through all that exposition, the point is that if 911 was committed by a group of rogue individuals with a certain belief system, that shouldn't grant license to target specific groups of people who you feel, based on their ethnicity, will follow that same line of behaviour. Because let's keep it real, you'll be picking out people based on 'appearance', and nothing else, in order to target them for interrogation, because it will be assumed that those who 'look' like that, 'likely' follow the same belief system as those responsible for 911.That is assigning traits and beliefs to a group of people, commonly referred to as racism. You certainly wouldn't know one's agenda merely by looking at them standing in the security line.

I'll mention Mcveigh again. He was a rogue individual, with a certain belief system that compelled him to do what he did. There's not much difference, other than WHAT he believes, between him and the 911 terrorists. Both used their idealism as means to inflict pain and death on innocent people. What they believe and don't believe, isn't really the point.

Now, as with the other poster, you have your opinion and I have mine. I'm not interested in debating this issue any further. It can only go circular, and I'm not going back and forth ad nauseum across the internet. Have a good one...