| Author |
Message |
    
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1452
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 4:36 pm: | 
|
I really don't know why I am checking this thread but-
Israeli authorities have successfully created and used a very sophisticated
behavioral profile system, which I refer to in my last post. We need to do so as well.
I guess I would ask some of the folks who replied here to answer this one in light of what happened today on the airplane diverted to Logan :
Would you feel comfortable getting on an airplane which would follow your own specific policy on profiling? I prefer to hear from people who actually have to fly frequently and have not changed their travel routines.
A good week to you all. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2365
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 4:47 pm: |
|
I'm a frequent flyer, and I feel safe on airplanes. Certainly as safe as I feel on the subway, train, in Penn Station, or near any NYC landmark. The fact is, the chances of being killed or maimed by a terrorist are so low, even in our open society, that I don't walk around thinking about it. It's more likely a NYC cab will jump a curb and run you down. Do you walk around all day afraid of cabs? I doubt it. Once "the terra-ists" are in your head, they've won. Be smart, be aware of your surroundings, but don't be afraid. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3745
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 5:29 pm: |
|
I agree with Dr. W. I travel frequently, including periodic international travel (mostly to Europe). It's not something I really think about. I occasionally forget to wear slip on shoes or loose sneakers, so I'm annoyed at having to untie my shoes at security.
But I usually buy my water at the airport - I don't take it through security. And I am more concerned about the pilot having enough rest than worrying what my fellow passengers look like. I've been pulled out of line on more than a couple of occasions. On two of those occasions, I actually made it through security faster than the people I was standing behind. I'm not bothered by security enough to change my travel habits. it's simply a fact of life.
To be honest, security doesn't really feel much more onerous that it was pre-9/11. Tighter? Sure, but no more of a hassle (other than the shoe thing).
BTW, I think the only thing different about how the plane that was diverted to Logan was handled is that F-16s that escorted it. Pre-9/11, I would guess the plane would still have landed at the nearest US airport. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1459
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 8:17 pm: |
|
I agree with Dr. as well. I say why fight them at all. They will only continue to kill random people in New York and Washingtion. Just like the cab analogy. I'll keep score at home. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2367
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 8:25 pm: |
|
if you're saying don't fight, you're not in agreement with me. here on planet Earth, not being afraid and fighting aren't mutually exclusive. often they in fact go together. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3747
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 9:40 pm: |
|
Southerner, don't you have an email scam to post somewhere? I hear you love them.  |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 112
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:05 pm: |
|
ABC News today:
When two airplanes went down within minutes of each other in Russia in 2004, officials immediately suspected a terrorist connection. It was later learned that the two suicide bombers were Chechen women.
I believe that Chechens are considered "white" and am sure that at least some of the women in question (called "Black widows" in the Russian press) have grandchildren.
(As if the proposition that the set of Muslims does not intersect the set of white grandmothers needed refuting.) |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3750
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:02 am: |
|
Some of the two?
The diagram was to make a point, not to be completely accurate.
As I have contended all along, and will, I suppose, have to point out each time I post, I do not believe that profiling based on religion or race is effective. |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 115
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:00 pm: |
|
R,
Some of the Chechen women acting as terrorists. From the entire text of the article. Sorry for being obtuse. |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 898
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:11 pm: |
|
The Chechens are Muslims.
Men and Women, and grandmothers.
jd |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 53
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 2:19 am: |
|
"Any nation that would give up a little liberty, for a little security deserves neither, and will loose both."
-Ben Franklin
You guys are ridiculous. You can do anything, ANYTHING, to single out suspected terrorist, but if they really want to kill you... they will. Maybe it's better to make people not want to kill you instead. Profiling will only lead to more angry people who want to kill you.
Infact, you guys are part of this disturbing anti-American American subculture that's arising. It's this culture that seems to forget that our country isn't supposed to be safe, it's supposed to be a land of liberty. We could start taking away people's liberty, and MAYBE we'd feel safer, but I doubt we actually would be.
What's the Conneticut motto? 'Live Free or Die'? Seems alot of people forget what that really means. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12433
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 5:09 am: |
|
I caught one of the talking head TV shows yesterday when I got home from work. There was a debate between profiling and not profiling. The guy advocating the profiling had a goatee, was dark haired and looked like a "terrorist". I wonder what his reaction would have been if he had been pulled out at the airport for a full screening by the TSA.  |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3772
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 7:47 am: |
|
Live Free or Die is New Hampshire's motto. I alwaqys found it ironic, back when prison inmates made license plates. Imagine being a prisoner stamping out "Live Free or Die" license plates.
Which "you guys" are you talking about? People have expressed opinions on both sides of this issue throughout this thread. Your post seems to imply everyone has the same wrong opinion. |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 57
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 7:23 pm: |
|
Everyone does has a wrong opinion. Just not the same one.
Seriously though, I meant anyone who believed profiling was a good idea. Sorry for the confusion, I find I express my opinions better if I do them in an angry, knee-jerk fashion. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1938
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 9:47 am: |
|
Illuminated had a great post and it bears repeating
Quote:...You can do anything, ANYTHING, to single out suspected terrorist, but if they really want to kill you... they will. Maybe it's better to make people not want to kill you instead. Profiling will only lead to more angry people who want to kill you.
Infact, you guys are part of this disturbing anti-American American subculture that's arising. It's this culture that seems to forget that our country isn't supposed to be safe, it's supposed to be a land of liberty. We could start taking away people's liberty, and MAYBE we'd feel safer, but I doubt we actually would be.
Substitute you guys for who it pertains to. |
Spinal Tap
Citizen
Username: Spinaltap11
Post Number: 178
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
In the case of Timothy McVeigh, the FBI actually came up with an accurate profile.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/mcveigh/snag_2.html |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5578
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 11:37 am: |
|
I'm not sure how a missing license plate amounts to a profile. The gun, on the other hand, well if your side had it's way, McVeigh's gun wouldn't have been grounds for anything. The best the officer could have done was write him a summons, maybe impound the car.
So keep voting for those NRA candidates, so that the next McVeigh can escape. |
Spinal Tap
Citizen
Username: Spinaltap11
Post Number: 179
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 12:27 pm: |
|
You obviously didn't read the whole story so allow me to post the relevant section:
In Virginia, at the FBI's behavioral science unit, profiling was underway. Whereas most investigators were convinced the bombing was the work of foreign terrorists, Clinton R. Van Zandt had other ideas. A psychological profiler who had worked as chief FBI negotiator at Waco, Texas - site of The Branch Davidian siege, Van Zandt noted the date of the attack - April 19, 1993 - was exactly two years to the day when the deaths at Waco had occurred.
He believed the perpetrator would be white, male and in his twenties. Furthermore, he theorized the suspect would be a military man and possibly a member of a fringe militia group. His assessment would be proven correct as the investigation progressed. Terrorism expert Louis R Mizell Jr. noticed that the date coincided with that of Patriot's Day - anniversary of the Revolutionary War Battle of Concord, revered by the militia movement. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5579
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Well then ... after the fact profiles are good, because you have an actual attack to work with. Based on the characteristics of the attack -- the date, the target -- these are all sound conclusions and led quickly to an arrest. The FBI is great at this.
How does this relate to profiling to prevent an attack, when you don't have a target or a date? |
Spinal Tap
Citizen
Username: Spinaltap11
Post Number: 180
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 1:29 pm: |
|
I don’t know. I’m just saying that profiling in a useful tool when used properly. And isn’t after the fact profiling what we are doing? We have had acts of war perpetrated against us by an organization. The members of this organization are virtually all young Middle Eastern males. Shouldn’t we focus our efforts there? Serial killers are another good example. Virtually all serial killers are white males and this is where law enforcement tends to focus their efforts in that type of case. If the FBI were investigating a crew in the Colombo crime family, wouldn’t their efforts gravitate towards Italians? If they are investigating the Yakuza do they look at Mexicans?
Imagine you are a police officer working security. You are doing random checks so you must stop the next person (say the 20th) An elderly Hispanic woman walking with a walker is coming towards you. Right behind her are two Middle Eastern looking males speaking Arabic. What do you do? This is actually not to far from what happened at LAX after the shooting there. The LAPD was required to search the people exiting every, I think 50th, vehicle at curbside and were under close scrutiny. Many officers complained that they wound up having to search people who were clearly not involved in anything while watching young Middle Eastern males walk past unmolested.
On the one hand it seems that given limited resources, we should focus those resources on those who are mathematically more likely to be involved in nefarious activities. However, if our enemies lean that we are not searching elderly disabled women or women with children, how long will it take them to find a person who fits into this category that can get past security?
One measure I think should be implemented is more questioning. At check in, at security, at the gate. How are you? How long did it take you to get through the line? Where are you going? Oh – Miami, business or pleasure? Been there before? Where are you staying? Is that a nice hotel? A persons actions while answering simple questions can be very revealing and warrant further scrutiny. Unusual eye contact, sweating, fidgeting, fumbling, stressed speech, etc.
|
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 2116
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 5:23 pm: |
|
John Allen Muhammad and John Lee Malvo |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 359
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 7:34 pm: |
|
If members of the Ku Klux Klan were hijacking airliners, would CAIR and the NY Times Op-Ed page object to the profiling of white males, with or without a complete set of teeth?
Cheers |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 1457
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 8:31 pm: |
|
And with thoughts such as these shall we lose the current, but ignored, world war? |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 58
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 11:49 pm: |
|
We've already lost if we're turning to profiling. It'll just make people angry, who weren't previously angry. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 1704
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 12:50 am: |
|
I would offer it is time to cross reference the terror watch list with the no fly list. Of course it should have been done on 9-12-01.
Spinal-- couple of good ideas you got.. "One measure I think should be implemented is more questioning"... you are spot on... |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12438
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 8:29 am: |
|
To be honest I don't have a problem with ethnicity being included as part of a profile used at airports in connection with other factors. In other words, a nervous appearing semetic person would be screened, while a nervous looking 80 year old might not be.
However, ignoring little old ladies with walkers might be a mistake. The little old lady might be Jose Padillo's mother and the walker might be chuck full of semex or c-4. Yeah, I wrote this in a humerous note. However, whatever you think of them, terrorists will morph to avoid security threats and that is my problem with race and religion only based profiles.
|
Project 37
Citizen
Username: Project37
Post Number: 276
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 10:25 am: |
|
Dr. Ahmed Farooq, a Muslim, was escorted off an airplane in Denver on Tuesday. According to Farooq, reciting his evening prayers was interpreted by one passenger as an activity that was suspicious.
"The whole situation is just really frustrating," Farooq said. "It makes you uneasy, because you realize you have to essentially watch every single thing you say and do, and it's worse for people who are of colour, who are identifiable as a minority."
Farooq said the allegation came from a passenger who appeared drunk and had previously threatened him during the trip.
More at link:
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/08/18/doctor-winnipeg.html |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 59
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 10:32 am: |
|
Bob K,
Of course YOU don't have a problem with profiling. You're not in the targetted demographic. That's like saying, "I don't have a problem with black men being pulled over on the turnpike, because most crack is smuggled into NJ by black men." |
John
Citizen
Username: Jdm
Post Number: 118
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 11:10 am: |
|
I don’t know. I’m just saying that profiling in a useful tool when used properly.
Which I don't think anyone has disputed. It's "racial profiling" that's in question here, and we (myself included) really shouldn't be saying simply "profiling."
And isn’t after the fact profiling what we are doing? We have had acts of war perpetrated against us by an organization. The members of this organization are virtually all young Middle Eastern males. Shouldn’t we focus our efforts there? Serial killers are another good example. Virtually all serial killers are white males and this is where law enforcement tends to focus their efforts in that type of case. If the FBI were investigating a crew in the Colombo crime family, wouldn’t their efforts gravitate towards Italians? If they are investigating the Yakuza do they look at Mexicans?
You're confusing things there. It's one thing to investigate after the fact, another to do prevention.
Imagine you are a police officer working security. You are doing random checks so you must stop the next person (say the 20th) An elderly Hispanic woman walking with a walker is coming towards you. Right behind her are two Middle Eastern looking males speaking Arabic. What do you do? This is actually not to far from what happened at LAX after the shooting there. The LAPD was required to search the people exiting every, I think 50th, vehicle at curbside and were under close scrutiny. Many officers complained that they wound up having to search people who were clearly not involved in anything while watching young Middle Eastern males walk past unmolested.
And they missed the point entirely. Random searches are better because there's no way to avoid them. If the police start skipping little old ladies, then little old ladies will get recruited to carry bombs. (See the Chechen anecdote I cited above and your own comments below.)
On the one hand it seems that given limited resources, we should focus those resources on those who are mathematically more likely to be involved in nefarious activities. However, if our enemies learn that we are not searching elderly disabled women or women with children, how long will it take them to find a person who fits into this category that can get past security? |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12442
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 11:15 am: |
|
Actually Illuminated, I did hit a profile and got the full body search in late 2001. "Spread 'em". I didn't like it to be honest, but that is life and I knew why I was profiled, I had a one way ticket.
I think there are a lot of problems with profiling based on race or religion, as I have said before. You risk radicalizing people such as Dr. Farooq as posted above, in addition to missing the fact the the threat will morp. However, right now the majority of people who want to blow up airplanes, subways and God only knows what else fit a specific profile. If their ethnicity is part of the profile, fine.
|
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 916
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 1:04 pm: |
|
You risk saving lives, too.
I was profiled at San Diego Int'l Airport in May, because I changed flights an hour before departure.
So what?
I was profiled here, EWK, and in Tallahassee, in January, because my tickets were paid for by a third party.
So what?
Looking for terrorists is "terrorist profiling" and if you do present a positive factor for enhanced review, so what?
jd |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 61
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 1:05 pm: |
|
Bob K:
That's rather short-sighted thinking, don't you think? |
Project 37
Citizen
Username: Project37
Post Number: 277
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 1:46 pm: |
|
I'm not sure if the pro-ethnic profiling contingent here has fully considered the trickle-down ramifications of approving such a measure.
The government tells its citizens, "Be on the lookout for anything or anyone suspicious."
This empowers the everyday person to take an active role in participating in the "War on Terror". This person is then fed with the information that the terrorist fits "a certain ethnic appearance."
People are now nervous and hypervigilant. An "us versus them" situation is created *within* the country. What happens next?
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/15/fla.terror.students/
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/19/gen.hate.crimes/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4713753.stm
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2006/08/18/2003323687
http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/3597131.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/23/AR2005072300438. html
http://www.aclunc.org/911/backlash/chowdhury.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/331264p-283131c.html
http://www.rediff.com/us/2002/jul/17us1.htm
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/08/18/doctor-winnipeg.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1894124.cms
http://www.voice-online.co.uk/content.php?show=9888
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_222190512.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/skyterror.asp
Now you have innocent citizens turning against each other, distracted from the real threat at hand. How does that strengthen or protect the country, when you officially enforce the frightening idea that you can't trust your neighbor? |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 192
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 1:48 pm: |
|
"because most crack is smuggled into NJ by black men"
Radish, how do you know that? Show me some stats, maybe a link.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12446
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 1:56 pm: |
|
Illuminated, that is why I tend to come down on both sides of this issue. The best I can come up with is some form of mixed profile based more on ethnicity than religion. As I posted before General Abizaid of Central Command can be taken for a Middle Eastern dictator or an IDF general as an example.
There has to be a compromise somewhere that will protect us and not set Americans on Americans.
|
Project 37
Citizen
Username: Project37
Post Number: 278
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Monday, August 21, 2006 - 8:31 pm: |
|
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=4014 19&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5 |
Illuminated Radish
Citizen
Username: Umoja
Post Number: 63
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 11:04 am: |
|
Ae35,
Read what I said 'That's like saying, "I don't have a problem with black men being pulled over on the turnpike, because most crack is smuggled into NJ by black men."'
It was illustrative of my point. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear that it was an analogy that wasn't necessarily true. Honestly though, I don't think any crack is smuggled into NJ. Crack is relatively easy to make with access to cocaine.
Bob K,
Trading away freedom for security is never a compromise, in my mind. That's always a loss, the question is, how big of a loss do you want?
Maybe not making people hate us would stop terrorism? Otherwise we need to buck up, and accept that bad stuff will happen. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12457
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
Radish, it is a tough line and as I have said I really don't know where that line is. Obviously, we have been attacked by certain groups. These people have vowed to attack us again. As you point out, they probably will.
We trade off a lot of freedoms for safety. Speed limits on highways are a good example, as are drunk driving laws.
The thought of not trying to protect our borders and transportation system is, to be quite honest very frightening.
Do you travel by air often? How much risk are you willing to assume? |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 12458
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
Radish, it is a tough line and as I have said I really don't know where that line is. Obviously, we have been attacked by certain groups. These people have vowed to attack us again. As you point out, they probably will.
We trade off a lot of freedoms for safety. Speed limits on highways are a good example, as are drunk driving laws.
The thought of not trying to protect our borders and transportation system is, to be quite honest very frightening.
Do you travel by air often? How much risk are you willing to assume? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5603
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 22, 2006 - 12:26 pm: |
|
This focus on carry-on items is getting ridiculous already. If we're going to be concerned with what goes onto a plane, let's be concerned with air freight and checked bags. Building a bomb in a washroom is such a ridiculously complicated piece of work compared to stuffing conventional explosives with timers into a bunch of random air freight containers. If these eleven guys indicted yesterday had instead each taken some C3 with an altimeter fuse and shipped them to random U.S. and European addresses by common carrier, how many of them would we have caught? |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page