Thinking Right

By Reality Sandwich

August 14, 2006 08:06 AM | Link to this

If innocent Americans were walking through an airport and then were forced to see Jim Wooten being Strip/Cavity searched, then the terrorists win.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:11 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. Ann has a series of jokes – about ADD, etc - she uses during the Q&A. After she makes an argument for profiling at airports, like Jim’s, some doofus inevitably says, “Yeah, but what about Oklahoma City (or Atlanta Olympic Park, or similar?)” (Her point – where was the airplane in those evil acts?)

I don’t believe profiling is either evil or unnecessary, and I would not restrict its application to airports. Making 80 year old women remove their shoes at airports is comically unnecessary. Young Asian women are rarely involved in gang activities. I have no problem allowing our police to use their brains; indeed, I would rarely appear in criminal court if they used their brains instead of their “procedures.”

By Reality Sandwich

August 14, 2006 08:17 AM | Link to this

There are 4 million Arab Islamics in the US. Shouldn’t we aughta be makin’ friends now with them? Have you hugged a mullah today?

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this

But they don’t want to use their brains jbmlaw. They want to throw a net and hope they reel in a fish. Kind of like fishing with dynamite. Everyone wants to do it the easy way.

By Rod

August 14, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this

I’ve recently heard a saying that I think is appropriate:

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.

Meaning, as Jim says, screw the PC and take appropriate action. If you were boarding a plane scheduled to go cross-country or international, and there were five 20-30 year-old Muslim men in line in front of you and they were continually looking at each other but not talking and they went right past the checkpoint without serious searching: would you get on the plane or run like hell? I’d at least like them searched!

To not search them is downright stupid. You can have your PC and be dead. I’d rather be considered prejudiced - and alive.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 08:23 AM | Link to this

Racial profiling? Now you have done it Jim. Rednecks is going to have a field say with this one.

Some names stand out against your theory. Timothy McVey, Eric Rudolph and the unabomber. They like blowing up things too.

Talk about scared, you conservatives need to grow a spine.

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this

Jim - Are we talking racial profiling just for terrorist on airplanes, or can this “tactic” be used for all crimes? If we choose all crimes, then the demographic you described (slim, handsome, middle-age white guy conservatives) better watchout when kids turnup missing, or ladies disappear during evening bike rides.

By Reality Sandwich

August 14, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

That’s just it, Rod. The liberal’s point is that by profiling and sterotyping, we disenfranchise whole blocks of our population and start a Rube Goldberg series of events over the generations that can only lead to strife which puts us all in danger. The Black History in the US, when couple with the Indian History in the US proves this point beyond a shadow of a doubt. (ask custer)

911 proved that terrorism is not obvious. It’s just men stepping on a plane. Suppose those 911 muslims were stopped and searched. I dont think box cutters were a felony then, and they probably would have passed through. What gave control of the airplane to the 911 terrorists was their threat of having a bomb. Anyone can say that without any weapon whatsoever.

It’s much more complicated than just strip searches of towel heads. ANd if we think that we are safe because we allow profiling, then we will be sadly awakened, and profiling will probably make us blind to an actual attack as it happens in an airport because it wont match the profiling scenario we made ourselves feel better with. (hows that for awkward phrasing)

By Donovan Coley

August 14, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this

Jim is absolutely correct. The Isrealis are absolutely correct. Islam has a bad effect on its followers. It fills one’s head with bad wiring. However, not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim. It is foolish to waste time on being pc and not focusing on the obvious problem.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this

As a grandma who is ALWAYS singled out in airports, I have to wonder what the profiling concern is all about. I don’t fit ANY stereotypical terorist profile, but every time I fly I have to take off my shoes, and inevitably, I have to stand there with my arms out waiting for someone to wave their magic metal detector only to discover that, oh my goodness, I’m wearing a bra with metal underwire.

That said, no, all democrats are NOT against profiling. I do, however, think that we have to be careful that just because some people fit the profile a little better than others, that we do not forget that ANYONE can be a terrorist, and hey, guess what, not JUST Muslims! Everyone on a plane will be just as dead if there is a non-muslim terrorist on board as they would be had he/she been muslim.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this

And, of course, the true conservative solution is to remove government from the calculus to the greatest extent possible. Privatize the airports, allow the airlines to police their passenger lists by whatever method they deem desirable (of course, we would have to cripple the ACLU there, but there is probably a downside to that somewhere.)

Allow the private market to set the terms for travel. Travel would be more efficient, less intrusive, and safer, all at a lower cost.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this

I disagree with Dana, for historic reasons. No non-Muslim plane hijackers since 1980.

By Van

August 14, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Profiling is used all the time in police work.

“The suspect is a middle aged (black, hisppanic, white, asian or native american, take your pick)male, 5 feet 9 inches about 200 pounds.

All profiling does is reduce those that do not fit. 80 year old grannys would not fit the profile of a 5 foot 9 inch male, she would not be picked up as one of the usual suspects.

However, if we start looking for men that look arab or persian and appear a little nervious, that might be someone to screen a little closer.

El Al, the Israeli national air line seems to be doing something right, we might want their folks to train some of our screeners.

And yes, I believe profiling, done by someone with a room temperature IQ and some training might help.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this

And what is this with “not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Mulim”? Did I miss something in the definition of terrorist? I agree, the vast majority of them are, but apparently you haven’t been to Ireland lately, have you?

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this

Getalife @ 8:23 is fundamentally correct about one thing - conservatives need to grow a spine and do what is right here, and ignore the leftists.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this

Dana is correct that there are evil people in Ireland, and mostly funded by US Democrats. We ought to prosecute every US donor who funds IRA activities.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this

LOL… not that I should care but I’m a long way from being an 80 year old granny. And while you are correct, we haven’t had a non Muslim hijacker on an American flight since the 80’s, I still have some concern about missing a potential threat because we were all looking at the obvious! What better way to get a weapon on board than to distract with someone who fits the profile and bring it on by someone who “looks” like the rest of us? I am NOT against paying attention, nor am I completely against profiling. I don’t give a hoot who gets offended, even if it is me - I am far more concerned with th safety of all. I simply feel there is more to it than simply profiling.

By RaisinBran

August 14, 2006 08:47 AM | Link to this

Let’s face it everyone, it’s time to start profiling anyone who is from anywhere in the Middle East or of Middle Eastern decent.

As someone stated in another editorial in todays paper, it’s not grandma’s and children hijacking planes and blowing them up, it’s radical Muslim extremists.

Who hijacked planes on 9/11 and killed almost 3000 people? Who recently plotted to blow up trans-Atlantic flights leaving Great Britain? Who beheads innocent Americans in Iraq? Who has blown themselve up on London subways? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out does it?

Until George Bush, the TSA and our representatives in the Senate and Congress pull their collective heads out of the sand and start singling out the “CORRECT” people for increased scrutiny, we are going to continue being subject to loss of our freedoms.

The US Government is so obsessed with not wanting to offend “anyone” for fear of bad press and admonishment from groups like the ACLU and people like Jessie Jackson, they have lost sight on their goal to keep America safe from terrorism.

Put your feet down Americans! Tell your elected officials that enough is enough and it’s time to get back on track. If you don’t the time is going to come where you’re going to be flying in your skivvies.

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

Van - *Profiling is used all the time in police work.

“The suspect is a middle aged (black, hisppanic, white, asian or native american, take your pick)male, 5 feet 9 inches about 200 pounds.*

That’s not exactly profiling. That is actually called a suspect description, when a crime has already been comitted and someone knows what the suspect looks like. That’s a lot different than saying if someone’s going to blow up a plane, it’s a middle eastern.

By sct

August 14, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this

It will be great to finally get the FBI and CIA to infiltrate our churches and mosque’s. Lets uncover and nab all the terrorists.

If your church is part of a terror investgation and no one has done anything wrong you have nothing to fear. If your church is being wire tapped, you have nothing to fear. Right?

Yes lets profile. The domestic terrorists and evil Muslim actions must stop. Its time to start a federal anti-terror operation in all of our houses of worship.

By the way, this tactic could also be used against the very serious problem a certain church has with pedophilia.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this

What happened to these cowards they call conservatives?

Were you this scared during the cold war?

Why do you happily give away your freedoms so many great American have given their lives for to an administration that can’t be trusted.

Grow a spine cowards!

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this

Dear Dana, maybe there is a profiling idea you would approve? Today’s WSJ has an item at the bottom of page B-1, a machine that is something like a modern lie detector. Maybe not admissible in a court of law, but perhaps useful to minimize the number and amount of time we detain people?

By getalife

August 14, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

Once again, conservatives want to fight terrorism with emotions and not their brain.

Think about it, if you start racial profiling on all Muslims, how do you think they will react?

More terrorism stupid.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this

Although I describe myself as a person of faith, I don’t have a serious dispute with SCT’s observation that churches should not be exempt from any police activities. Our gay friends might object to the profiling that would be effective in policing pedophilia in churches. (Such a concern has the Boy Scouts in trouble with the Left already - I suppose that is another gift from the ACLU.)

I beginning to see a pattern to our problems in police work here.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

Well, this is probably going to be pretty heated today! Thanks, Jim, this is a great topic! Perhaps we could attempt to remain civil while we all disagree.

My father was career military. I have, at diferent times in my life been the child of, the sister of, and the wife of a soldier in combat. I am a moderate liberal. I would hate to think that my father gave up as much of himself as he did over the 25+ years that he was active duty, only to see us hand over the rights and priveledges he, and so many, fought for. This isn’t a simple issue. If profiling were really going to make a huge difference, I’d be standing up and yelling for it right now. And I DO think that it has a place, but only to a point. Congress has NO business listening to my calls or monitoring my computer transmissions. I DO have a right to some privacy, and I don’t intend to hand it over without a fight. The BRITS found out about the recent plot, not us. Yes, we trade information. And I admit, since I don’t know how they discovered it I won’t pretend I do. But they sure as heck didn’t get that info wiretapping AMERICAN phones! and now I am the off topic poster of the day.

By jbmlaw

August 14, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

Easy, Getalife - less caffeine in your coffee. More profiling means less terrorism; you mean to say the evil people would have to increase their number of efforts to have the same efficacy. They might decide there is a better way. Not sure your argument has any validity.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this

Rod: I heard a line that was very similar, “Not all idiots are leftist…but all leftists ARE idiots!!!”

That’s JUST what I heard. But in getalife’s case there could be a lot of facts behind that. Ya know what I mean???

By Dana

August 14, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw - I didn’t say that we shouldn’t profile! I said we shouldn’t rely to heavily on it! I would LOVE to believe that terrorists are all stupid, however, sooner or later they are going to figure out that we can tell the difference between a person of Middle Eastern descent and a Western European.

By Van

August 14, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Why split hairs, instead of “profiling” we can place the description of all suspect terrorists!

If I was a jewish male and I witnessed young skin heads defacing my temple, who would I be on the look out for?

If middle eastern looking males killed thousands, who would I be looking for?

Wake up! The Irish are not attacking Israel, the French are not wanting to blow up planes. Germans are not buying 1000 cell phones for very questional purposes regarding the Mackinac Bridge.

Radical Islam is at war with the rest of the world.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

As a law-abiding citizen with an abundance of COMMON SENSE, I detest the PCBS!! Unless you’re a complete idiot, why not do whatever is necessary to stop these terrorists or any other enemies of this country and its people? People in other parts of the world AND criminals and potential terrorists right here in the good ole U.S. have to laugh their A*******ES off at all this PCBS that makes it easier to cover their trails and hide their crimes. Absolutely unbelievable! I know that these PC folks are nonconformists that hate laws and rules. That’s why they are so concerned about their “brothers and sisters” in prisons and are against just about every law that helps law enforcement in this country. Some folks might call them traitors, but NOT ME!!! I’m too nice of a guy!

By Dana

August 14, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

UGBK; Who are you talking about? Who (so far in here today) is as rabidly PC as you are raving about?

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Dana: My “raving” was not intentionally aimed at you , UNLESS you fit the “profile” (sorry ‘bout that). YOU KNOW who I’m talking about. Don’t act so naive!

By J Tom

August 14, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

Mr. Wooten has said what I have said from the beginning: if white, English-speaking, American men are blowing up planes, please profile them even though it includes me. Searches at the airport are legal (as opposed to other intrusions mentioned earlier), so always search the most likely groups, and add in few random individuals just to add an uncertainty factor. That should be doh-forehead-slapping obvious.

Clearly, not all terroists are Muslim (although at the moment most are) and not all Muslims are terrorists, but you get the most bang for the buck playing the statistics.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

My point isn’t that no one thinks that way, my point is that I don’t think anyone IN HERE, at least yet, is quite as obtuse as you seem to think. I LIKE being able to hear differing points of view - it’s why I read this blog. Occasionally I even read something intelligent from both sides of the fence. I tend to believe that those of us closer to the fence make more sense, but then, we all think we know it all, don’t we?

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Van - That’s not splitting hairs - unless you are very simple minded. If you were a jewish male and you saw skinheads defacing your temple, hopefully you would get a description of the skinheads who were guilty - not trying to gather ALL skinheads.

But here’s a question for you, but what does a radical islamisct look like?

By Ditto

August 14, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Give it a break Dana. Gotta’s whole act here is Rush Limbaugh jr.. Please don’t take that away from him, its all he has.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this

You may want to read up on the enemy to see what we are up against.

The President of Iran was on 60 minutes last night and he has started a blog.

Yes, most Muslims hate us due to the wars but very few are extremists who will carry out an attack here. They are very smart and very dedicated. We have to fight them with our brains not emotions.

The British plot was tipped off by one Muslim to the British authorities. The US pushed for an early arrest when the British wanted to wait to get more info. Then the GOP is using it as a political scare tactic and people are buying once again. They use your emotions to try to get relected after so many failures.

By Bill Clinton

August 14, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

Ole Ugotta’s gotta go back to work for a while. Before I go I just wanted to say to Dana that I was speaking in general about ALL the PC folks, not necessarily about any person (other than getalife) on the blog that had posted this morning. If it doesn’t pertain to you, then SIMPLY IGNORE IT!!! That’s what I would do!

Ditto: Obviously you must be one of the PC folks that disagree with me. Damn, I hate that! And I thought you liked me! I refer you to my 9:09 pearls of wisdom. If the shoe fits…!!!

By getalife

August 14, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this

Uggota,

The fries are up. Get back to work.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this

I’m going getalife. Have a good day my little leftist buddy!

By getalife

August 14, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

You too.

By Van

August 14, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Ask the screeners at El Al. They are the experts in looking for radical islamists.

By deegee

August 14, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this

Behavioral profiling is a tool that is now being used in the effort to detect terrorists and other law breakers. While it may not be as easy as shooting fish in a barrel, i.e., searching all people of Middle Eastern, Arab and Pakistani descent, it is a more effective way of detecting people like Richard Reid. Security personnel are trained to spot nervous, evasive behavior such as that exhibited by the infamous terrorist bound for Los Angeles with a bomb. That individual was detained by a border patrol agent working the Canadian border because she observed certain behavioral clues. The Israelis have used behavioral profiling for years to thwart suicide bombers. The use of behavioral profiling at border crossings and airports has led to the detention of drug smugglers, fugitives, etc. Nobody is saying that we don’t want to fight crime and terrorism, we just want to be smart about it.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

RACIAL PROFILING IS SMART AND COOL!!

It instantly inflames the moronic pandering politically correct lefties and it addresses the REALITY that all terrorists are mohammedams, but not all mohammedans are terrorists. Whilst there are other terrorists in the world, the fact is that they rarely if ever actually attack the USA. Its fanatical mohammedan terrorists, of all colours, that need stomping on.

Dana’s obtuse point about papist fenian terrorists and proddie thugs is now an obtuse one. After the Tony Blurrrr govt’s virtual surrender to fenian demands the irish have all but stopped planting bombs, and only the local protection rackets and drug dealing etc are ongoing in Ulster and parts of Eire.

Obviously searching only mohammedans, of all ages, given the terrorists use of kids and women for anti-Israelis terrorism etc is overwhelmingly the clever thing to do, but occasional searches of other folks, especially liberals, to inflame them whenever possible should be done. Law abiding Republicans have nothing to fear and are invariably happy to co-operate with law enforcement. But others, like hispanic types need to be searched for drugs and weapons (see stats of illegal hispanic criminals for motivation), as do afriKans and caribbeans from certain destinations. And of course bedraggled liberals with funny smelling backpacks should always be targeted for drugs and seditious literature - e.g. the NYT Times, Newsweek, The AJC, The Nation, LA Times etc. Al Quaida defence lawyer materials might well sometimes offer useful terror related intelligence.

Bottom line … targeting America’s enemies is the smart kind of racial profiling to do!!

By Van

August 14, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

Regarding the young skinheads, I would also be on the look out for any near the temple. A watchful eye is not “infringing” on anyone.

Keeping a watchful eye on semitic and persian types is not harming anyone. If this means an extra look at the airport, so what. Given the past 30+ years, they have earned the extra look.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this

As hard as it is to believe, I feel like playing devils advocate today.

I think the profiling issue, and the leftist way of viewing it, can be likened to the conservatives view of the 2nd amendment right to bear arms and the work of the NRA. Its a “give an inch-take a mile” philosophy. We cant trample on the constitutional right to privacy just as we cant trample on the 2nd amendment right to bear arms. Both sides see any intrusion or blurring of the definition as the first step toward eradication. Neither side trusts the other to use common sense or discretion regarding these issues. And the truth is, both sides have given the other every reason not to trust the other on these issues.

My take is simple. Profiling is a great topic for blogs, and Jim will no doubt have a full on war in here today. But the truth is, its a non-issue. Profiling is already happening everywhere. It happens in every police cruiser on the street in the course of daily duty. It happens at the FBI and NSA in the course of thier duties. It is happening at airports and bus stations and train terminals. Do you know how many plain clothes officers there are in a given airport today, following, listening, watching those they find “suspicious”. They arent following grandma’s I assure you. And what about the air marshalls? Do you think they are looking at the passenger registry and choosing a seat near Jim Smith or one near Saleed Abdul? It happens in every shopping mall or dept. store as store security is everywhere watching, following in person and on camera. And if that isnt enough, you can download for free, google earth, which gives you a close-up satellite image so clear that I can see my childhood home and even make out the old storage shed in the back yard and the cars in the driveway. And its FREE. Imagine what the government has at its disposal, watching, following.

I have no problem with profiling whatsoever. And if you do, you may as well get over it, because it will only get more intense as the next terror plot unfolds, and then the next, and the next, and the next. Its a new way of life folks, like it or not.

By Watta Load

August 14, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

Not all Christians are abortion clinic bombers, but all all abortion clinic bombers are Christian….and usually clean cut white guys…

By Susan

August 14, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Now, I realize that the members of this blog lead limited lives and have profiled out anyone who is African American or from the Middle East from their social circles.

If you truly and honestly think profiling is going to help in the fight against terrorism, may I offer you some ocean-front land in Arkansas?

For over thirty years, anyone travelling anywhere who is from the Middle East has been subject to extreme and intrusive searches. Ever since the 70’s, that has routinely been the case. My uncle would tell me stories of knowing that no matter where he was flying, he knew for certain he would be the only one pulled aside to have his luggage and person thoroughly searched.

It happens to everyone who is carrying a passport for a Middle Eastern country. So clearly, it has not worked, and as an earlier poster noted, the guys who flew on 9/11 had box cutters, and no one up until that point in time had ever used one in the commission of a crime.

For the very few who were never caught, 100% of that population has been insulted and unduly detained.

For years any black male has been subjected to what they call, “DWB”, driving while black. You cannot imagine how upsetting it is to be a succesful black male and be pulled over, far more times than any other member of society, because some dumb cop is ‘suspicious’.

I saw a black man almost go to jail on Friday because he disputed a ticket with an officer. He was ticketed for allegedly running a stop sign. He wrote, “I stopped” on the ticket, made the officer mad, got handcuffed, and he had the good sense to ask for a supervisor. He thankfully did not go to jail. A white person can act out during a traffic stop and suffer no consequence whatsoever. You know you’ve done it, I’ve done it and not one of us ever went to jail for having a nasty attitude.

So, does the profiling of black men driving posh cars have any effect on actual crime? Please cite any statistics you have to support such a ridiculous assertion.

And you probably have conveniently ignored this news flash:

**”NBC: Hair-gel terrorists posed no risk last week

An anonymous “senior British official knowledgeable about the [hair-gel bombers]” told NBC that there was no threat to airplanes last week, that the terrorists had been under surveillance for over a year, and that UK government didn’t plan on arresting these guys until they’d surveilled them a while longer, but moved when they did because of US pressure:

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports…

The official shed light on other aspects of the case, saying that while the investigation into the bombing plot began “months ago,” some suspects were known to the security services even before the London subway bombings last year.”**

So, enough with the weak jabs at the ACLU and those you consider PC—profiling has been used for over 30 years and it has not worked. You’re going to have to come up with something intelligent, something that is quicker and more agile, to fight terrorism.

Oh, and by the way, how can YOU tell the difference between an Israeli and a Jordanian? An Israeli and a Lebanese? An Israeli and a Syrian? Given a line up of suspects, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference, would you?

As for me, I look at any member of the IDF and I know they are a terrorist. Every single stinking one of them. But that’s just how I profile.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Watta …

and the numbers and frequency of such bombings is happily less than neglible!! If it was a real, ongoing problem as with mohammedan terrorism then the leftsist media would be finger pointing about it all day long!!

So your dumb point is a poor one - as usual!! A red herring from a pinko - if you like!!

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Van - The problem is some people views are too simplistic and just plain wrong. My guess is you are a white male - which means that in your eyes, every race but yours is wrong and suspect.

The truth of the matter is, 98% percent of the TSA personnel barely graduated high school. Most, if not all, couldn’t tell you the difference between an Iranian, Iraqi, Egyptian or Pakistani. Chances are, you can’t either! But in your clouded view of the world, they are brown and look middle eastern so they are suspect. “if it’s brown, it’s down!”

I hardly trust my safety to you or the clowns checking sneakers at the terminal gates.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Susan, Can you please post a link to that “NBC” article or commentary? Id like to read that. I havent heard that take anywhere else.

Thanks.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

NAZI SUSAN IS BACK!!!!

not quite a classic Rednekkk’s hissy fit - but getting there!

The AJC’s very own Eva Braun … you gotta love it … smirk

AND LOOK LOVE -THE ISRAELIS ARE WINNING!!!!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1070-2311756,00.html

By Susan

August 14, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this

[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/]

By Susan

August 14, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/)

By Susan

August 14, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

Realist, I cannot post a link that links to save my soul. If you would, please, simply cut and paste into a new browser window.

Thank you!

Here are the first few paragraphs:

“By Aram Roston, Lisa Myers, and the NBC News Investigative Unit NBC News Updated: 5:13 p.m. PT Aug 12, 2006 LONDON - NBC News has learned that U.S. and British authorities had a significant disagreement over when to move in on the suspects in the alleged plot to bring down trans-Atlantic airliners bound for the United States.

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.”

By Susan

August 14, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this

TFTT, if one op-ed piece in a newspaper constitutes a victory, then I’ll start plastering the op-ed pages of every American paper with articles proclaiming the victory of Hezbollah!

But battling op-ed pieces is silly and not where the truth lies. I think we will have to see what happens over the next days and weeks to learn if, for one, the cease-fire holds and two, what long-term effect this conflict engenders.

This is a rather weak effort on your part.

Your assignment for today is to try harder.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

Nazi Susan …

one ‘allegedly’ extra week after several months is hardly that big a deal - you leftist mohammedan Bush haters grasp at pathetic straws to discredit anything you can!!

there are always political pressures and agendas during and after investigation, especially something this big/international. NBC is as anti-Bush as they get. You cannot trust a company that employs the likes of an ultra partisan David Gregory as a supposedly serious news hack as a White House correspondent!!

By Realist

August 14, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

from same article Susan posted:

“There was unprecedented cooperation and coordination between the U.S., the U.K. and Pakistani officials throughout the case,” said Frances Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, “and we worked together to protect our citizens from harm while ensuring that we gathered as much info as possible to bring the plotters to justice. There was no disagreement between U.S. and U.K. officials.”

Another U.S. official, however, acknowledges there was disagreement over timing. Analysts say that in recent years, American security officials have become edgier than the British in such cases because of missed opportunities leading up to 9/11.

Aside from the timing issue, there was excellent cooperation between the British and the Americans, officials told NBC.

So then,

We have an unknown British “official” making claims that we pushed to move in faster. I dont see the problem here. The faster the better. Dems let Osama slip away and sat on thier hands after the first WTC plot, why should the US sit back and let these guys get wind of the investigation and disappear in the night. Also, it was our coutnry that was targeted, of course we were eager to move in.

And lastly, where are the liberals from last week who were charging that the current admin was asleep at the wheel, and thank God for the British for uncovering this plot? Where are you now that the facts are out and suggest that we were very involved and actually pushed for the arrests?

Oh thats right, you guys dont like facts do you.

By deegee

August 14, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

I am happy that the British terror suspects are in custody but now what? How long will British law allow them to be detained? What sort of evidence does the government have to convict them of anything? My understanding is that the British investigators wanted to wait until one finished his planned dry run before stepping in. Perhaps that would have made it easier for prosecuters to get a conviction. Let’s just hope that if these guys are guilty that the authorities can keep them off the street.

By Joe

August 14, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

We all mentally profile, some people just deny doing it. When I hear of a serial killer I generally think white male. Corporate fraud, again white male. When I think of a terrorist, the picture of an Arab male comes to mind. When I hear home invasion or car jacking, I see the face of a black male. When I get an Amber Alert I think of a 5 foot Hispanic guy in a red Ford 250 truck. It’s just a way of life, but some on here that are so PC they won’t admit to doing it.

By holdingAJC"accountable"

August 14, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

Sound like a case where dispassionate conservatism is needed. Treat with respect, apologize, acknowledge the inconvenience, recognize that the majority who fit the profile aren’t guilty…but search!

Like grandma would say, “The words ‘thank you’ and ‘please’ will take you around the world” (or something like that).

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this

Nazi Susan …

its not just an op-ed piece love… if you actually bothered to read and inwardly digest the inexorable logic and factual content you will see the blindingly OBVIOUS!! The Israelis have quietly done Hizbollocks a great deal of harm politically and militarily. With not that great a cost to themselves. But Hizbollocks, like other cowardly arab terrorists always do are lying/spinning it their way and the lying/distorting arab media - which will never portray an Israeli victory are feeding the myth!!

In 1967 love Nasser went on Egyptian TV and asserted the Egyptian Air Force was pounding Tel Aviv and destroying the IAF - even while folks in Cairo could hear IAF jets bombing local targets - the “truth” was it (the Egyptian AF) was still smouldering on the tarmac from the first day’s IAF raids!!

keep drinking your (presumably halal) mohammedan kool aid - its hilarious!!

By Dana

August 14, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this

Can’t you find a better argument? This is a tired tirade from a pair of bitter, unimaginative individuals. I’d be more descriptive, but since name calling is one of the things that I think detracts from the blog, I will refrain

By beltway sniper

August 14, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

Thanks, Joe. Keep up the good work.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

poor old Dana witlessly makes a completely inaccurate point about fenians/proddies and then gets all upity when its pointed out!!

You’re just the kind of obtuse uninformed blogger I love to niggle with facts!!

By JK

August 14, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Nine out of ten crimes, torts, misdemeanors, violations, cons, swindles, and lies perpetrated against me, my person, and my property were committed by caucasion, “Christian” males, and more than half were “conservatives”. But yet I still manage to give most of you the benefit of the doubt. (Imagine that!) Am I wrong? Hmmm…. Mr. Wooten has a point. Maybe I should re-think my associations based on race and religion! THANKS JIM for showing me the light!

By Dusty

August 14, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this

Well, may I picture the maturation of an airline totally free of any profiling, inspections or interest in anyone’s luggage or appearance. Let’s call it the Patrick Henry Airline specializing in LIBERTY flights.

The Liberty crew would be so politically correct that they would be both blind and deaf, with radar controlled flying. Customers would stop only long enough to buy a ticket at the gate, then carry their luggage, laptops, boxes of cell phones, bottles of liquid and anything else right into the plane. There would be no security checks and no air marshalls. The only requirement would be a million dollar life insurance policy signed off to the airline.

What joy in freedom!! No profiling!!! What happy passengers!! Airline helpers would even pass out cigarettes and unlimited alcoholic beverages to enhance the trip.

I am sure that some of you will be investing in this new airline. That’s right. Put your money where you mouth is. And here’s your ticket. Hop on!

By Dana

August 14, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Why thank you TFTT! I cannot imagine a better compliment from you!

My comment wasn’t at all inaccurate, but you are more than welcome to your opinion. My comment was a bit off point, but then, I HAVE a point. Right now, yes, it seems the terrorists are all Muslim. And yes, I’ll agree that the IRA isn’t so much an issue here. I only wanted to point out that if we all blindly point fingers in one direction we will pay the price when someone who DOESN’T fit the profile kills a thousand or so Americans. But feel free to obscure the issue by finger pointing instead of having an original idea.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

pathetic JK … dealing with mohammedan terrorism is the actual debate here, not your liberal prejudices!! If you’re talking about builders and tradesmen that is sadly the way of the world for all folks of all colours!!

By Watta Load

August 14, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

Time to shut up,

kiss my a$$…you head up the a$$ limey…

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

The IRA isn’t much of an issue anywhere now love, including in Ulster where they were indeed a murderous carbuncle - your facts are several years behind the times. THat’s the point!! Next time try actually using a relevant analogy or ‘foil’!!

many thanks for calling me “tired, bitter and unimaginative” - that was very funny!!

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

WATTA BIGOT!!

WATTALOADOFLEFTISTBOLLOCKS cant actually debate so it just posts biogted racial abuse!!!

well done bubbaturd!!

By Let's All Get Naked

August 14, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

I’m an American conservative so I’ll make the sacrifice for the safety of all passengers. Strip search me at the airport. It’ll be a fair & balanced approach. Nobody could scream racial profiling.

It would be a minor inconvenience, but something that fellow flyers may not want to witness because I’ve been off my diet of late.

Warning! Warning! Warning!

By JK

August 14, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

Builders and tradesmen? Hahaha! NEVER! Only a moron pays before getting three estimates and having the finished work inspected. No Troof, it wasn’t my “liberal prejudices” that led me down the path to violation; it was trusting people like Van, Realist, and Ugotta. (BTW, I was never dim-witted enough to trust the likes of you.)

By Watta Load

August 14, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

Limey’s not a race dumba$$…

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

Dana,

The BRITS found out about the recent plot, not us. Yes, we trade information. And I admit, since I don’t know how they discovered it I won’t pretend I do. But they sure as heck didn’t get that info wiretapping AMERICAN phones! and now I am the off topic poster of the day.

Dana, you have been severely misinformed. Yes the Brits took down these guys and acted as the lead in their arrests. However, the NSA was very much involved and they were the ones that tipped off the Brits.

By Rod

August 14, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

Dana, your point about not focusing in on the Muslims is weak. True, we need to consider all people as potential terrorists, but the focus must currently be on the Muslims.

Look at it this way. You’re in a room full of violent criminals. However, one in particular is currently bashing in your head. Where is your primary concern? The others are all potential threats, but your focus should be on the one beating you up for now. Later, you can further expand your focus (if you survive).

By Mmmmm

August 14, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

I’ll volunteer for the strip search! Especially if they use the rubber gloves to check all my open cavities!!

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

WATTA BIG0T … it has racial overtones turdface in that its deliberately singling out an ethnic type in a perjorative way.

if I called you a snivelling maggot brained moron that would simply be a fact based description - but if I called you a yankee/ american snivelling maggot brained moron then it would still be fact based but have a racial dimension.

By Rod

August 14, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

Susan - please explain exactly how you saw that black man write “I stopped” on the ticket. Obviously, you’re just lying through your a$$ to get some attention.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

Stewart, as I understand it, a MUSLIM tipped off the BRITS with the plot. And I never said we (the NSA or any other American Intelligence Group) weren’t involved! Nor am I implying they don’t know what they are doing!

Rod, OK - you have a point. However, if I concentrate only on the one currently attacking me and the other stabs me to death, am I any less dead? Your analogy doesn’t work here.

And I remind you all, I agreed up front that profiling is necessary, I simply don’t think that is the only needed measure!

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

moron JK … it seems you are just a bitter haggish woman who is nastily lashing out at men - men you have never met, or are you actually an ex of one of the chaps on here?!

I’m glad you dont trust me at all - I hate it when smug liberals do that - I MAKE IT A MATTER OF PRIDE TO ALWAYS LET THEM DOWN!!

By Andy Just Once

August 14, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

By getalife August 14, 2006 09:43 AM You may want to read up on the enemy to see what we are up against. The President of Iran was on 60 minutes last night and he has started a blog. Yes, most Muslims hate us due to the wars but

You talking about the “wars” we started after they took our Iranian embassy hostage?

Or after they took out the World Trade Center?

How ridiculous.

As for the topic of Today, I’d being willing to bet that if you “racially profiled” getalife you would find that he’s a Muslim male.

Either that or he’s insane.

By JK

August 14, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

Hahaha! Sure, Dude. Whatever you say. No love for the “bitter” broad, huh? HAHA! You don’t think bleeding-heart, Clinton-loving, compassionate chicks get good lovin’ on the weekends? You go stand in line at the airport; I’ve got better things to do. HAHAHA! Too funny.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this

By Rod

August 14, 2006 08:19 AM

If you were boarding a plane scheduled to go cross-country or international, and there were five 20-30 year-old Muslim men in line in front of you and they were continually looking at each other but not talking and they went right past the checkpoint without serious searching: would you get on the plane or run like hell? I’d at least like them searched!

Uh, Rod. What kind of Muslim detector does one rely on for this?

By getalife

August 14, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

Ah, the wingnut moonbat Andy makes an appearence. This troll has been wrong on every post he has ever posted.

I was talking about Iraq and Lebanon.

Still have those voices in your head screaming, “the libs are the enemy”? And you call me insane?

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Dana, I also heard that a Muslim was also involved in tipping them off as well. I was more referencing your comment regarding the tapping of phone lines. My understanding is that they are only looking at calls that originate overseas from suspected terrorists as well as creating a database that monitors who is calling who. Previously I would have issues with this practice, but today it makes total sense.

By Susan

August 14, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

“By Rod

August 14, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

Susan - please explain exactly how you saw that black man write “I stopped” on the ticket. Obviously, you’re just lying through your a$$ to get some attention.”

I was on a ride along in Zone 2 with an officer who was called to the scene to possibly transport someone to jail. Shortly after we arrived, the supervisor arrived as well and after discussion, the man had his cuffs removed and went on with his day. We saw the ticket when we got there.

You are welcome to call the officer I was with on Tuesday. Today is his day off. Do you want to call him to confirm the incident? I have his cell phone number.

By Realist (Man of Science)

August 14, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this

Joe, When I get an Amber Alert I think of a 5 foot Hispanic guy in a red Ford 250 truck

I think of caucasian male with mustache here also! Anbody else?

By Markus

August 14, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

Well, it’s not too difficult to see where the jacka… I mean the liberals stand on profiling and terrorism.

Liberals say we can’t profile people of Arabic descent because we might offend them or inconvenience them. Well that’s just tuff tiddie. Cry me a Nile, limpnoodled liberals. We are at WAR with radical islamofascism. We are not at WAR with white male child molesters. We are not at WAR with anti-government extremists. We are not at WAR with the Arian/neonazi movement. We are not at WAR with little old ladies and white male businessmen who get searched to make it appear we are NOT racially profiling Arabs (“token” whites, if you will). We are not at WAR with inner city hip-hop thugs who carjack people. You spaghetti-spined liberals need to get over your “terrorism is a crime, not a war” inferiority complex. That said, recent indications are that al Qaeda has already begun to counter international Arab profiling and is starting to recruit Asians (Phillipinos), Africans (Somalis), and even Eastern-Europe Anglos (Chechnyans). However, they are few and far between compared to the Arab masses in al Qaeda.

All I hear from liberals besides “what about the McVeighs” is we need to be “smarter” in our approach to terrorism. Well no st. Talking about being “smarter” is one thing. Actually coming up with a WAY to be “smarter” is something else. Hey liberals, instead of blowing feel-good let’s-not-insult-anyone smoke up our @sses why don’t you clowns give us some *S-P-E-C-I-F-I-C examples of how we need to be “smarter.” Oh wait I know I know, the *government needs to be more involved! It’s not like the democrats didn’t already bring on the TSA no thanks to Tom Daschle’s most BRILLIANT plan of “you can’t professionalize until you federalize.” So now we have ex-burger flippers who are now “professional” government union employees in charge of airport security. A big raspberry goes to Bush for being nice to the jacka.. I mean the democratic party post-9/11 and “reaching across the isle” and allowing them a hand in matters and approving it without question.

The bottom line is to hell with liberalism and their “offend no group” horsecrap. This is a time of WAR. But hey, we Atlantans sure doesn’t have to worry about security at airports. We have Atlanta airport cops who like to racially profile rich white ladies in SUVs and body slam them at curbside pick-up/drop-off. Hey, leave it to Atlanta to give THAT zone a new meaning. I feel so much safer…

By Realist

August 14, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

Well, obviously Susans 8 hour ride-a-long qualifies her to hypothesize that ALL black men are detained and mistreated while white men get off without such treatment. I mean after that much vast experience, she must be qualified to come to such a conclusion.

Typical liberal hogwash Susan.

And btw, I dont think that officer (or his supervisors) would be pleased to know that a ride-a-long civilian was blabbing about on an ajc blog regarding the events she witnessed.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

Stewert,

but today it makes total sense.

It has always made sense within the law and proper oversight.

Hell, Cheney called American voters terrorists and as far as we know, they are being treated like terrorists. They could be arrested without being charged or talk to a lawyer. They could be tortured or sent overseas to be tortured. They could listen to all communications and bank records. They could have all their names listed as terrorists and published on TV.

By Van

August 14, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

You maybe right, I might have a problem telling an Israeli from a Jordanian from a Persian. That is why we need better trained screeners, not the people looking at the xray machines, personnel screeners.

We need people trained to look at people, like El Al does.

By Susan

August 14, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

Realist, I’m not concerned about it. It’s the truth, it’s what happened.

As far as profiling black males, the DWB comment I made earlier, that is based on working for a black boss for over 4 years.

I am relating his experience and the experience of his friends and family members. So it was not based solely on an 8 hour ride along.

Why should we not talk about things that actually happen? I had a good talk with the officer poised to arrest and think he is a good guy, I am extremely impressed by the officer whom I rode along with, and thirdly, I think the supervisor did a great job in handling the situation. And the man who left with a ticket in lieu of going to jail, I know he feels better.

Look, when you sign the waiver to ride along, you do not agree to never discuss or dissemintate any information about what happened.

Freedom of speech has not yet been quelled, Realist, no matter how much you would like for that to be so.

I’ve got more pressing concerns. My final comment for the day: Jim Wooten may contact me via email for any follow up regarding the source of my experience or information.

Rod, if you can convince Jim Wooten to contact me to verify, go right ahead. I would really prefer a more stable, professional person tie up the officer’s time. I cannot trust you to act in an appropriate manner, given your language and general tone. The officer has more important things to do, but again, if Jim Wooten would like to contact me, he knows my email address.

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this

Getalife,

I am not here to defend Dick Cheyney. Even I was offended and disappointed, but with that said he is not the first politician to use hyperbole and fear tactics. I remember back in the day when I was a Democratic supporter that we would go door to door to the elderly telling them that the Republicans were trying to take their medical benefits away from them. I agree it should be within the law. But my premise is that the current law does not go far enough.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

Nobody really cares enough to follow up on your story Susan. You really arent that important. Its only an ajc blog, remember? Nothing written here has any meaningful impact. Now you can go about your day with less burden.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

Well Stewart,

You should be outraged that the Vice President of this great country spews garbage like that. He is terrorizing the voting Americans.

We should be demanding his immediate resignation and not let him get away with the bs.

By Dusty

August 14, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

I can’t help but wonder. Susan was riding in a police vehicle that was to transport someone to jail? In what capacity? Is she security? Reporter? Ambulance-chasing lawyer types? ACLU? Prisoner? Girl friend?

Sorry, but I never heard of anyone JUST riding in a police car unless they were on the back seat behind the security screen.

Now she is reporting even what she read on the arrest ticket. Makes you wonder what kind of regulations police departments have.

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Getalife,

You must be consistent. I will not hold Dick Cheyney any more responsible than I would hold any other politician. Do you want to get into the things that Cynthia McKinney, Jack Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, etc have said in regards to the President and to Republicans in general? You hold people responsible in such away as the good people of GA did with McKinney.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Susan,

Please do not give out any personal information. It attracts the low lifes like Dusty to attack your character.

I know, it is pathetic but that is the type of people you are dealing with here.

By Markus

August 14, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Susan’s disgusting excremental post of the day:

“As for me, I look at any member of the IDF and I know they are a terrorist. Every single stinking one of them. But that’s just how I profile.”

Yeah that’s about what I’d expect from a terrorist-loving anti-American liberal pig. Israel has been defending itself from islamofascist scum, and of course Israel is the terrorist organization accordidng to the absolutely repulsive liberal vermin.

Sometimes the stench of liberalism on this board is too much to take.

By JK

August 14, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this

Since when is Cheney ever held accountable for anything? He can jeapordize national security out of spite, loot the national treasury for his buds, and even shoot his friend somebody in the face on a Saturday evening and delay his convo with the po-po until he sobers up. (YOU try that! HAHA!) On judgement day, perhaps, but not until.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

My goodness Stewey,

I was talking about the American voters.

Wow, you are truly blind to reality.

Have fun in la, la land.

By J Tom

August 14, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

Any policy, procedure or law can be abused. That doesn’t mean you throw it out, it means you have to police those who implement them.

When there is a valid reason for profiling, profiling should be allowed. As far as not being able to tell an Arab from whatever, so what? If you’ve got the manpower to search all people who seem to fit the profile, what’s the problem? The object isn’t to avoid offending people, it’s to stop terrorism.

If we let multiple, young men of apparent Arab descent board a plane without giving them a little extra scrutiny, we’re stupid - possibly stupid and dead.

By WAR EAGLE

August 14, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

It never fails-why is it when the country’s future is at stake, the minorities freak out!Muslims are blowing up planes-therefore, we need to profile them until another group starts up. The best way is for everyone to have their passports out and profile the countries/people that fit the profile. Yes Black people, this is for YOUR protection as well. Would you rather we did not search the Nigerian bomber and have him blow up the plane with you on it or would you rather we catch the bomber so that you can get to your family reunion? We need to get a law that prohibits the ACLU from interfering in Government business when there is a war or crisis going on.I hear all the minorities yelling about McVeigh-fine-he did not blow up a plane. Maybe they should profile white guys who buy 1000 pounds of chemicals-fine. We need to get rid of these radical christians any way. As for the black guy in the car-sorry man-but look who is getting arrested on the 10 and 11 oclock news most nights-Hispanics and blacks. So yes, we do need profiling to keep the lines moving and to deter the islamofacists from coming to America.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

JK,

Well, according to Stewey he is not as bad as the Dems.

Lets hope he does not vote and be considered as a terrorist.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

By Markus

August 14, 2006 11:45 AM

It’s not like the democrats didn’t already bring on the TSA no thanks to Tom Daschle’s most BRILLIANT plan of “you can’t professionalize until you federalize.” So now we have ex-burger flippers who are now “professional” government union employees in charge of airport security. A big raspberry goes to Bush for being nice to the jacka.. I mean the democratic party post-9/11 and “reaching across the isle” and allowing them a hand in matters and approving it without question.

Markus I seem to remember that the only reason TSA took over much of the airport security was because the private contractors that initially had the job were miserable failures.

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Is it because I also read the Wall Street Journal that I am aware two of the people arrested in this plot were of Anglo Saxon descent? Let me throw a couple of names at everyone - John Walker Lindh (member of Taliban in Afghanistan from CA), Richard Reid (the shoebomber from UK), and I threw out the WSJ but I remember one of the current suspect’s name was Christopher Stewart-Whyte or something like that - Um, Jim, you want to rephrase your diatribe? I’m all for profiling, but I think you and many others are missing the bigger threat, and by the way, all of these potential suicide bombers were UK citizens… Let’s see those countries whose citizens have attacked American civilians, Hmmm… Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, the UK - hmmmm… I still don’t see Iraq anywhere on that list, do you? Tony Blair, get your house in order.

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Getalife

I’m sorry I must have misread We should be demanding his immediate resignation and not let him get away with the bs.

You make a valid point every now and then, but then you come off as a complete idiot in others. I guess that can be said for all of us.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Stewert,

It is called reality and I call them like I see them.

If Hillary was doing this crap or any other Dem. I would be saying the same thing.

I am not blinded by hatred of the other party. I point out the obvious.

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this

By JK

August 14, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this

Since when is Cheney ever held accountable for anything? He can jeapordize national security out of spite,name one instance. If shooting off your mouth is jeapordizing national security then all of us would be in big trouble loot the national treasury for his buds* I am sure you are referencing Haliburton..do a little researh pal. They have lost money on their operations in Iraq, and even shoot his friend somebody in the face on a Saturday evening and delay his convo with the po-po until he sobers up *happens all the time pal. (YOU try that! HAHA!) On judgement day, perhaps, but not until.

By Markus

August 14, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

Israel agrees to a ceasefire, and what do the islamofascist hezbollah scum do? Call it a victory over Israel. I said that WEEKS ago that every time Israel either withdraws or agrees to a ceasefire, the islamofascists cosider it a sign from Allah that victory is near. Unbelievable. Too bad Israel blinked. They’ll be back.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1154525868614&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this

Getalife,

So it is your opinion that the Democrats do not exaggerate and purposely mislead it’s constituents by attacking members (both congress and members) of the other party. I think you know better.

By Markus

August 14, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

Off topic, but the week’s greatest liberal smackdown story: a freakshow from the Left Coast threatened to harrass a college professor (Mike Adams) for his speeches on how harrassment codes limit free speech on college campuses. It’s all about the insanity of liberalism and what kooks they all are. This is priceless.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2006/08/14/thetamingofthejew

By Mid-South Philosopher

August 14, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

Good afternoon, Jim,

I am running late today, and as usual the blog has taken many different turns.

As to dealing with the terrorists, I concur that the preponderance of the current crop appear to be Islamist fanatics. Profiling (right or wrong)is one strategy.

But, we so desperately need to do more!

It may be an urban legend and I admit that I am no expert on Islam, but I have been told that for a Muslim to die in the presents of swine makes them unclean and not able to enter Paradise with their contengent of virgins and such. I don’t know if any of that is true, and I certainly don’t advocate hauling a herd of pigs on every airline flight, but inasmuch as the Islamist fanatics appear to have a deep and abiding religious “faith” in the righteousness of their terroristic acts, it seems to me the most effective way to combat them is to discover and use their superstitions against them. Surely, there are scholars of Near and Middle Eastern culture that can devise some Islamic based weapons to use as a defence against the Islamists.

Voodoo, I have been told, works most of the time because the victim believes it will work. Faith healing, I have been told, works many times, again, because the patient believes.

Where are the weaknesses of the Islamist? What do they believe in that can be used to quell them?

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

whiteboy …

I have known (i.e. frequently debated) a number of white male mohammedan converts in London. All of them were virulently anti-Jewish and anti-west, even though they were UK whites + one aussie. One from the Brixton mosque, the others from Finsbury Park and Aldgate mosque. Converts are often more fanatical than those born into it. I also know a woman in W Yorks who married a Bradford paki and got divorced, he abused her, she is actually a complete socialist moron but even she has a blind spot and wont condemn the religion. Its a very powerful form of brainwashing is being a mohammedan convert . Yeah I know its just anecdotal - but every one counts!!

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

Susan’s eight hour ride along was just a FOX cable COPS marathon!!

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

I really have no fundamental issues with profiling as long as the shoe fits. But what is the profile? Since there is no requirement to proclaim your religion when you buy a ticket, what is the BASIC criteria. Is it certain nations? Is it black skin, white skin, your attire, a really good suntan. What? Who gets searched?

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

time for the truth - thanks for the acknowledgement. The more I read Jim Wooten and many of the bloggers on here, the more I’m convinced that the conservative hawks are still stuck in Cold War mode. Us vs. them, free vs. communist, good vs. evil, God vs. Satan - Go pick up From Beruit to Jerusalem by Thom Friedman about what went down in Lebanon in the 80’s, or The Eagle and the Lion by James Bill about what went down in Iran from 1919-1988. Conservatives, this isn’t the Falcons vs. the Buccaneers and it never has been. It’s like all the NFL teams against each other and lots of the players within the teams fighting each other. To not acknowledge this (I’m talking to you Bush Administration), to not understand and appreciate this, hamstrings our efforts to protect our nation and our world.

PS - Jim Wooten, see any warning signs in these disaffected Muslim extremists in the UK and other Euro nations??? I mean they came to those countries to work and provide cheap labor, but the governments and many “conservatives” passed legislation and rancored cynicism toward them, isolating them and allowing their radicals to charge them up for jihad… Hmmm… what’s the spanish word for jihad???? Yeah, they didn’t think it would happen either.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

Amelia, EVERYONE gets searched, thats the issue. Ask yourself, what group opposes being searched or “profiled” and gets thier long-haired hippie liberal attorney and runs to federal court to try to obstruct our nations best efforts at catching the terrorist before they carry out an act?

The ACLU, NAACP, SCLC, etc, thats who.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

No funky white boy,

We are stuck in survival mode.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

If EVERYONE gets searched it’s not profiling now is it?

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this

Amelia is obviously not very bright or just not very well informed … mohammedans actually are only suppsoed to take mohammedan names that “praise allah” … whilst perhaps not each and every one of them has a name that gives it away - overwhelmingly they do. Easy enough to spot on forms/passports/tickets etc.

http://islam.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=islam&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.idleb.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Flinks%2Fdetail_page.cgi%3FID%3D219292

white boy - the integration thang works both ways, mohammedans deliberately refuse to accept integration in the UK EU - this was the case long before late 1960’s arab PLO terrorism morphed into mohammedan fascist terrorism.

ita all about the mohammedan notion of the house of faith and the house of war.

By Stewart

August 14, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Play the funky music whiteboy,

Your football analogy is not bad, however it would be a mistake to ignore the states sponsoring these groups. Also, I am sure the Bush administration is aware and a little bit more informed than all of us for that matter..There are several different ways to attempt to combat this problem. There is the Clinton Way (i.e. as a police action) there is the Bush way(as in Iraq). To date neither has been successful. It is too early to know if either of these strategies is the correct one. More than like it will be a combination of both and end up being totally different than what has been attempted so far.

By deegee

August 14, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

Realist, get real. What happened in the airport on Thursday morning when people were asked to throw out liquids and check their baggage? Now you want everyone that boards a plane to get searched? Are you a frequent flyer?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this

Again Amelia, who do you hear yelling about the “profiling”. I dont really call it profiling, I call it deductive reasoning.

Police could search 1000 white women and one black man, and if the black man happens to be in possesion of weed, then he was only arrested and targeted because he was black.

By Joe

August 14, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

When I think t**t-rot I think of Susan. Is this profiling?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

Sorry, I have to make it plainer for the coffee clutchers this morning.

When I say everyone gets searched, i dont mean numerically every single person in line, I mean everyone, meaning a representative from each race, religion, color, ethnicity, etc.

Sorry to have confused you. Yes I fly regularly, and get searched regulary.

By Emily

August 14, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

In response to getalife, we are in a war against terrorism…not Eric, Timothy or the unabomber. Each of those people are individuals. The Islamic facists are a wide spread group that want each an every one of us dead. Since 9/11 how many people have threatened the US than Male Muslims? But i guess thats whats wrong with you liberals anyway, Maybe its going to take some of them killing someone close to you to wake up.

By time for the truth

August 14, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

emily - do NOT use logic and facts on getatinybrain - its not fair - its being logocentric!!

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

So I guess by the reasoning of some of you, law enforcement officials can create a new sop for crime. That sop can contain a spreadsheet that allows them to create a suspect pool by the type of crime:

• Terrorism - Any middle eastern male
• Car-jacking - Black males from 18-28
• Rape - White males
• Pedophilia - Catholic priest, then while males
• Embezzlement - Middle-aged, white male
• Marijuana & Crack - Black male, or white college kids
• Meth - White males and females, 18-50
• Armed Robbery - Any combination of the above
• Kidnapping - White males and females
• Serial-killings - White males

So, in an effort to prevent these crimes, the “usual” suspects should be searched and questioned regularly. This includes any reasonable monitoring and/or surveillance necessary to prevent these crimes.

** Data may be included to this matrix and information becomes more readily available.

By deegee

August 14, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

European nationalism is very strong and uninviting to outsiders. For example, Germans still consider 2nd and 3rd generation Turks as foreigners. Whiteboy makes a good point. We don’t need to take a lesson from the Europeans where it comes to assimilation of foreign-born labor.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

No VOR, The SOP for most LE that Im aware of is and always has been:

Eye Witness Accounts Victim Statements Forensic Evidence Confessions/Suspect Statements

Some things are still done the old fashioned way. But liberals want to tell us, “Believe us, not your own lying eyes.”

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

Emily - great “party” line they want each and every one of us dead. No,the bin Laden faction wants US troops out of their holy land of Saudi Arabia, they want Israel gone as a nation and the land returned to the Palestinians and they want a return to the power of Saladin. the Iranians want a return to their Persian Glory, Hezbollah wants to be the Shiite arm to cause upheaval, then usher in their Syrian and Iranian brothers to run Lebanon,.. and Realist, survival mode? Do you fear for your life from the Taliban when driving on 285? What are you referring to?
Stewart Point taken, just take the team owners (Al Davis could be Ahminejad.. I think he’d like that) and add them to the analogy I gave!

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

Realist, if people believed their own eyes there wouldn’t be so many Bush apologists at this point in time.

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

Realist - Tell that to Van. I’m pretty familiar with how LE works, which is why I think it’s obsurd to profile only middle easterns at airports - especially when there is no way of what religious beliefs they hold, or what their nationality is.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

I will answer two birds with one stone.

No, I do not feel threatened while I drive on 285, or when i go to the mall. Nor will I feel threatened when I attend football games this fall. And as Im not a BUSH apologist, I appreciate and respect the Bush administration for my peace of mind. Come 09, if the likes of Gore or Hillary are in office, I may start hoarding guns and canned goods in my basement.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

I agree VOR. Thats why we need to profile ME men and blacks too. Some of the terrorist Ive seen could pass for your run of the mill plain old African American.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this

Emily,

Islamic facists?

Lets see, you are part of the 36% who buy into blindly anything they tell you.

First it was OBL and his gang. Then it was Saddam and his country. Then it was the terrorists. Now it is the Islamic facists. Wow, my head is spinnining with all that flip flopping?

Who is the enemy again? Guess what sweeheart, it is not the liberals.

By Realist (Man of Science)

August 14, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this

There it is the Realist we all have come to love sooo much.

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

Realist - Well I would take offense to that as well, considering I am a black male who has served my country honorably in time of war. As a matter of fact, there are quite a few people of middle eastern descent who have fought for THIS country - honorably. But hey, we all look the same right?

By CBF

August 14, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

Profiling is nothing new. In the late ‘60’s and early ‘70’s if you were a long-haired male in rural Georgia (as I was) you were fair game for police harrassment, occasional beatings, planting of evidence, unjustifiable car searches, etc. And the judges would wink and pretend not to hear if these things were brought out in court. Thank God the police departments of today are more professional. I still have long hair and the police have been nothing but courteous in any contact I’ve had with them in recent years. Let’s do whatever it takes to combat terrorism but let’s not get carried away with profiling!

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

Realist - Analogy time, you personally have angered both of them, who are you more afraid of, George Dubya or Hillary Clinton? I’m making an assumption here that you have witnessed before the absolute unrelenting carnage that a woman like Hillary can affect on someone who has made her angry. Don’t fear the protection/retribution she would meet out to our enemies (she would be a nightmare for them, how would they face their own people after a woman led nation kicked their behinds?) But fearing the economic policies and taxation adjustments, that is with merit.

By Morris Dees

August 14, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this

Realist has been to one too many aryan brotherhood and KKK sites.

By Emily

August 14, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this

Getalife - Reading your comments makes me realize the real reason you chose that name… So your saying that if we racially profile that it will just create more terrorism? So then you must agree that the more we enforce laws in this country and the more we hold people accountable for their actions, the more crime criminals commit? Let me turn the tables…If in the past 5 years there was a group of or rise in Old while females btw the ages of 60-80 smuggling cocaine on airplanes and that if we started paying a little more attention than usual to that group it scare them enough to think they couldnt get away with it? I just think that extreme misinformed liberals as yourself are just mad that a democratic president doesnt have the balls to stand up for what more than half of America believes in.

By Voice of Reason

August 14, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this

Emily - Using your “amazing” logic, GW has no balls to stand up for what more than half of America believes either. Is this the session on Double Standards 101?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this

Thats what I fear funky. With Hillary it would have to be retribution. Because initially she would do what her dem cohorts would call for her to do, and that is pull out of the ME. It would take another attack on the US, one on her watch (God Forbid), for her and the rest of the dems to step up to congress and address the problem on thier own terms (and do so in similar fashion as the current administration no doubt) but call it something else. The NEW NEW War and Terror.

By deegee

August 14, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this

Thank you, Realist for making yourself clear and making the distinction between everyone and everyone. Do you recommend that travelers fill out a race/religion/skin tone/national origin survey when they purchase their ticket so that the airlines will be able to pick the appropriate number of representatives beforehand? If so, then we are on the honor system. If not, would you recommend that the ticket agents perform this function at check in after extensive training in racial and cultural recognition?

By rarringt

August 14, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this

Morning all,

Nice topic, Jim. And I appreciated your first post of the morning, Realist.

I guess my two cents would be to realize that while McVeigh was not on a plane, Richard Reid was. The attacks in Japan, Malaysia, and the Phillipines were planned and carried out by Asians. And we all know about the D.C. sniper and his lil’ helper.

The point of all this is terrorism is committed by all sorts of folks, without regard to appearance or background. The issue of the day is ME terrorism, but there are plenty of other folks who’d like some attention as well.

My solution? Defensive flying. It’s a lot like defensive driving, where you presume you’re the only one on the road who isn’t incompetent. With defensive flying, assume everyone has an agenda other than safe transport from point A to point B. Search everyone. All the time. I’d rather everyone add 30 minutes to their trip and check their lotion and face cream, than to let one terrorist on board because he looked more like Ben Affleck than Bin Laden.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

Emily just what is it that W is protecting that more than one half of America believes. Can you verify the more than one half?

By getalife

August 14, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

Emily,

Misinformed? I read all day every day. Do you?

I do like how you group terrorism with crime. Do you think pulling over black drivers due to their color stopped crime or increased it?

By rarringt

August 14, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

Guess it has been a long day, should’ve said “Good afternoon.”

By Emily

August 14, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

Amelia,

Freedom.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

What kind of freedom Emily? Be more specific please.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this

No, as I said in my earlier post this morning, debating profiling is a moot point because it is and has been going on for years and years. Like it or not, its happening. There are at any given moment hundereds of plain clothes state, federal and airport authorities watching and listening amongst the travelers. Its not up to me and you to check a box on a ticket, its up to those men and womens own DISCRETION. Cry about it all you want. Run and file a suit in federal court. If you think profiling was bad before, its about to get MUCH worse. And now you can get profiled AND have your big fat obnoxious Louis Vitton carry on taken away and checked. I love it. The phone lines at the ACLU are going to be burning up.

By JK

August 14, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Emily, please pardon me for jumping in here, but whenever you speak of FREEDOM as either a given or an imperative, I have to ask, “Freedom for WHOM?” “Freedom to do what?” and “How do YOU support it?” We hear a lot about “freedom” but then we also hear a lot about who “should” have rights to do what, and who should be stopped. Just curious. Thanks.

By Emily

August 14, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this

Getalife, Islamic-A religion marked by the profession of submission to God and of Muhammad as the prophet of God. Allah- God, in Islam. Terrorism- The political use of violence or indimitation. Fascism-Opressive, dictatorial control.

According to you the above definitions do not define who want us dead because we are christians or do not believe in the muslim religion? What should they be called? Islamic Fascist terrorist seems to fit the description in my eyes.

So now that I have the opportunity to ask, whether I hear a lie back or not, If John Kerry would have won, would the democrats still be just as mad with all the stuff going on thats happened in Bush’s two terms?

By deegee

August 14, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this

I know profiling has been going on for years and years. I learned on TV back in the 70’s the best way to get through customs. It’s more about behavioral profiling than racial profiling as it should be.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

Good afternoon rarringt.

Thank you for your comment. You know its a rough day on the blog when Im trying to be the moderate voice. :)

Though in the last hour or so a few have pulled me kicking and screaming back toward to the far right fringe.

I agree with your post completely, and I think its the only logical solution. Travel times will double, but if it means our safety, so be it. Search everyone.

By Emily

August 14, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

JK, Freedom now and in the future for Americans to continue to worship and do what they want as long as you dont break the laws that are written. If the other side wins, all that will be taken away from us and we will live just like they do. How do I support it? I vote for politicans that agree with that way of thinking…

By Howard

August 14, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

Great column Jim…you still are the only one at the AJC who has his head out of the sand and realizes what type of enemy we are up against. What gets me is the very liberals who are always screaming for protections for these evil people fail to realize if these people were in charge of this country for 24 hours, the very first ones they would come after would be the liberals and everything they stand for and the warped beliefs that they espouse. We are now reliving history…ala 1930s when everyone praised Hitler et. al., appeased him, refused to see the truth…and then voila…World War II. It’s coming folks…give it about five more years.

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

Emily, I’m glad you are on the blog, it does show that you are interested in these topics. Would Dems be just as mad if Kerry had won and things were the same, absolutely. Also, Republicans would be calling for his head over the runaway federal budget (read the contract with America again, good grief Reps, this is part of your ideology.) Emily, Sean Hannity might be cute, but he hasn’t had an original thought since he left Atlanta radio (he was great here), stop regurgitating the “buzz words” (facist.. please do your google definition check on that one while you are at it, as the guy in Princess Bride said “I do not think that word means what you think it means”, freedom, etc.) Reality - wow, in the face of all the mounting evidence and attacks on American’s and American interests abroad starting in 1983 with the Marine barracks bombings, that George W. sure did a great job preventing 9/11 didn’t he? I also notice you didn’t answer the question I posed vis a vis Bush and Hillary. Torture??? Anyone think a woman wouldn’t authorize it’s use before a man would???

By Realist (Man of Science)

August 14, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

Jim,

You have got to appoint Rarringt to your Secretary of State. Like Colin Powell, he is far from a Neo-Con, and far from a ultra-lib. If he can turn Realist (a known racist idiot on this blog) to a flip flopper (“I’m a moderate voice”, he could easily help in your Conservative Party administration.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

By Emily So now that I have the opportunity to ask, whether I hear a lie back or not, If John Kerry would have won, would the democrats still be just as mad with all the stuff going on thats happened in Bush’s two terms?

Emily if Kerry screwed things up as badly as W has, I for one would be just as mad. I don’t care if it’s dem or repub. Screwed up is screwed up.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this

Hel Emily,

You just described our President.

Traitor.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this

Im not sure Jim gives much credence to someone who cant even stand behind thier own identity here day to day.

By Amelia

August 14, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

Does that freedom include freedom from a right wing theocracy, Emily?

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

Great news! Good ole Ugotta’s baaaaaaack, and I have THE solution…the answer to all our “terrorist on airplanes” problem so that “some” people in this country are never offended!

First we divide the airlines into LIBERAL airlines and CONSERVATIVE airlines.

Second, the conservatives will ALL be profiled and searched before boarding their flights to make sure NO terrorists or explosives are on board.

Third, all boarding the liberal airlines WILL NOT be profiled or searched. NO ONE will ever be asked any “embarassing” questions. You will be WELCOME to bring your carry-ons, backpacks, and anything your lil’ole hearts desire. All liberal airlines employees will be wearing their company issued liberal rose-colored glasses as they greet you and pass out drinks.

Have a wonderful trip and enjoy your flight!

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

Emily,

Just say you want to kill them because you are scared of the big, bad Muslims and be done with.

Cut the crap.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this

Im liking this ugotta. I just ran it by my marketing folks, and they already have a great ad slogan for the liberal airline.

“Come Fry with Us”

(now we need to run this by legal and make sure we arent in some way offended Asians)

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

Uggotta,

Make sure you profile those evil wingnuts.

They are a blood hungry bunch especially when they are scared.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

Emily, I hope you are as young as you sound. And I’ll second both Amelia and Funky Music on the “Heck yes we’d be pissed if Kerry had come in and screwed up like this!” I learned a long time ago to vote for a candidate, not a party. I choose who gets my vote based on what I know about that person. I have never voted a straight ticket and doubt I ever would. For the record, I did not vote for Kerry. I did not vote for Bush, (in the last election) I couldn’t bring myself to vote for either of them. I’d give a great deal to have a presidential candidate I felt I could actually believe in.

Back to profiling now folks…. I still say it’s only useful when not abused and in conjunction with other measures. To rely on it to the point some in here tout is ridiculous at best.

By JK

August 14, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

Emily, thank you for your thoughtful, yet general answer. I was thinking in more specific terms, such as changes in recent years to how the Bill of Rights is interpreted and enforced, and the rulings of “judicial activists” (kindly forgive the buzzword) who decide that big industries don’t need regulation, but individuals in the privacy of their homes do.

Some of us believe in freedom for individuals (if my behavior isn’t stepping on anyone else’s property or rights, then stay out of it) and regulation for corporations and other entities that DO, IN FACT affect the environment and the economies and lives in the communities in which they operate. The other school of thought is that businessmen can do whatever the heck they want (provided their lawyers can stuff it through a lawyer-written legal loophole somewhere) regardless of who it hurts, but my neighbor can’t marry his boyfriend, (though that affects no one else) and my other neighbor with cancer can’t grow his own [indigenous plant] medication in his own back yard (as that would cut into pharmaceutical profits.)

Hence, my confusion over the blanket use of the word “freedom.” If the terrorists do, as stated by our swaggering leader, hate us for our freedom, then they must be liking us more and more every day!

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Hey Realist: How about, “Fly Liberal Airlines and meet Allah and your dozen virgins at l/2 price, cause our ticketes are ONE-WAY!!!”

By Zoo Keeper

August 14, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this

Sorry folks. Ugotta escaped from the gorilla habitat. Maybe a few bananas will get him back in his cage.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

Ha! UBK, that was actually funny! in a very sad way…

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

Realist: The l/2 price liberal flights are ALL-INCLUSIVE so not to offend ANYONE.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

Totally stupid but what did you expect from this clown.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this

You can witness the 36% here in all its glory.

“Stuck on stupid”.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

Dana: I’m glad you liked it! BUT I’m sad if you thought it was sad! I was just trying to broker some sort of agreement between liberals and conservatives on how airport and airlines safety should be handled and I THOUGHT I had come up with a pretty good plan, one that EVERYONE could agree on. So cheer up, I’m just tryin’ to help…that’s just the kind of guy I am!

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

I like it ugotta, I like it. Getting it through legal will be hell but we can try. I suppose its too much to ask to have Pork Skins as the in flight snack?

And for you JK. You have now outted yourself as a card carrying gay rights supporting hemp activist who is out to beat the “man” and big corp america. Lay off the weed pal, and maybe all these conspiracy theories you are contriving in your head will go away. That and the voices.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

I have a strange sense of humour.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

Zoo Keeper: I didn’t escape! I’ve just gone totally bananas and going APE over all the good lookin’ ladies on here!!!

By Emily

August 14, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this

Getalife, I have to be PC with saying I’s rather give them all really late post pardon abortions than saying Kill them all.

By JK

August 14, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

Hahaha! What was that, like FIVE MINUTES to profile me as a lesbo, man-hating druggie! HAHAHA! Gee, Realist, if you could see me in the flesh, you’d profile me as a man-hungry busty bimbo who REALLY REALLY wants you right here on the desk! HAHAHA! You’d be SO confused! HAHAHAHA!

You profile me, so please forgive me for profiling you: Bama boy kappa alpha rapist misogyinist racist.

By Bill Clinton

August 14, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Did you say something about doin’ it on the desk JK???????????? Wanna see the Presidential Seal?

By getalife

August 14, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this

Emily,

Thank you for being honest.

I can spot a blood hungry wingnut moonbat so called Christian within seconds after they puke up the posts.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

Call me as you see me JK. I will never ever try to infringe on your right to do so. See I believe in free speach, and not only when its what I want to hear or agree with. Unlike you dems, who believe in all these personal liberties, but only when they align with your own ideology.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

I also believe in free speech too. lol

By Emily

August 14, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this

Your crazy, getalife. Thanks for giving me the highlight of my day. I never thought arguing knowing no one is ever going to win could be so much fun. Have a great day Libs and good luck saving the world better than anyone else could.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this

Thanks for your service today Emily.

You are a great American!!

By Dana

August 14, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this

Why thank you Emily!!! Somehow I think we will, at that!

By JK

August 14, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this

Ah, good Mr. Realist. You ARE capable of sticking to the issue. Still, I have to ask the origin of your statement. What democrat told you that we believe in personal liberties ONLY when they align with a particular ideology? I’d like to know who this Democrat is, and have a pointed discussion with him or her. I’ve never said such a thing EVER, as I believe in individual liberties. I just think it’s ironic that I get verbally attacked (in America) for stating that.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this

You are welcome Emily.

I will be here all week unless the big bad Muslims get me.

By getalife

August 14, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

Blogs are great for getting it off your chest.

Forget the PC bs, let it fly like this:

By Bill

“As usual ignorance on this blog prevails. Within people who’ve never seen anything, learned anything, done anything. Prior to and at the moment of Pearl Harbor, the Republican Party was strictly isolationist. Quite content to watch the newsreels of Hitler on the move. Bitterly fighting against U.S. lend-lease for Britain even as it was being bombed. Ignorant bastards, you seem to be proud of having wasted your lives drowning in stupidity and no sense of history.”

Or this one:

By Lil

“Neocons are ALWAYS filled with fear, pal. Whether it’s info in a newspaper or someone on this blog dshoving truth, experience, reality down their throats. They can only respond with their version of an insult. Which they are unable to do in that they themselves are an insult to society and humanily. They are not funny. Not clever. Not humerous. Not creative. Just cowardly chunks of excrement, taking up space and soiling everything they touch. Samo samo.”

Great stuff.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

JK: Just a thought but: Do you agree with the RIGHT to Life? How about the RIGHT to Pray ANYWHERE we choose? Apparently you’re a liberal. Do you also agree with the RIGHT for individuals to bear arms??? Do you agree that we have the RIGHT of free speech? To say whatever we think WITHOUT the “PC police” trying to make it wrong? I’m just curious.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this

You see my beautifully bosomed bimbo, regarding individual liberties, I subscribe to the idea that in this vastly complex, evolved society we live in, the simpleton or average citizen, such as you and me, are not fully capable of understanding the end result, when considering cause-effect action-reaction of our actions. In that regard, I think there are numerous negative impacts to be felt by legalizing drugs or gay marriage. So while Im all for rights of individuals, I simply dont think most individuals are evolved enough or informed enough to fully understand the consequences of some of thier own actions or wants. Just because you think it isnt hurting anyone, doesnt mean it isnt.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

getalife: Where in the Hell did you dig that crap up? You’ve got to quit slumming. Just when I thought you had a little big of sense, you PROVE my point about liberal all over again!!!

Your sometimes friend, UgottaB

By getalife

August 14, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this

Ugottta,

If I had any sense, I would smoke it.

That comes from a group who drops by ml’s blog next door. Always cracks me up.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this

And further to your question JK, I havent yet met a dem who would own up to the fact that they are the biggest hypocrits on earth. I simply make that observation of my own experience.

I suspect JK and her ample bossom will be campaigning for the dems come next fall. I will say that I would prefer a knock on the door from her over the sweaty, long haired, patchouli oil smelling, clove smoking, VW driving type we normally see.

By JK

August 14, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

UB, hey Dude. (1) Right of indiv. to make own medical decisions, Yes. (currently restricted but not completely abolished) (2) YES. Right to pray anywhere, anytime. Have seen no evidence that anyone gets arrested for this here. (Liberal is your label for me. I didn’t ask for one.) (3) Right of Indiv. to bear arms. Yes. Restriction of sale & distribution of automatic weapons within reasonable limits, also Yes. Use of common sense in communities, yes yes yes! Legislators owned by gun manufacturers who give big donations? Conflict of interest, IMO, and they should STOP being such whores. (4) Free speech, BIG yeppers! (5) Never met any PC police who arrested people for speaking, only people who told me to shut up. Saying “shut up!” is free speech too. Shocking, I know, but people do tell me to shut up too. Debate is healhty, don’t you think?

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

Realist went from Conservative, to Oligarch (rule by the elite), to Liberal (we know better than you what’s good for everyone), to “moral theocracist”, back to conservative again, all in one paragraph. As someone who drifts pretty easily from school of thought to school of thought, I thought this was amazing. I’m thinking you may have MPD - Multiple Political Disorder.

By JK

August 14, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this

I havent yet met a dem who would own up to the fact that they are the biggest hypocrits on earth.

Have you ever met a Republican who would? Or a Libertarian? Or a Communist? Or a Christian? Or a Jew? Or an Athiest? Unless you can say who DOES admit to that, then it’s a non-point. I’m just sayin’.

By Dave

August 14, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this

Profiling is not a debatable subject. It needs to be done, but how can we get the idiot politicans we put into office to serve their constituents and get the right things done, is the question of the century?

As long as we have civil agencies funded by the Ford Foundation that advise our elected politicians, like the Trilateral Commission, with its current Chairman being Mr Volcker, what can we expect but Political Correct results.

I like a previous blogger say, “screw political correctness” and profile the hell out of our Arab citizens. I would rather the good ones hate me than a bad one kill me…………

By Dana

August 14, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

UBK, I suspect JK can speak for herself, but as a lib myself I am going to tell you what I think. Yes, I believe in the right to life. I also believe in the right to chose. those two things are NOT mutualy exclusive. I pray every day, in public, in private, alone or in groups at times. It’s a complete falsehood that all liberals are godless people, I’d say many more of us are than not. I do agree with the right to bear arms, though the thought of it scares me at times. I completely agree with the right to free speech. I would like to see people be a little more respectful and considerate with their free speech, but that is just me. The fact that you don’t agree with me or I with you isn’t enough to hate you, though I can’t say as I’d want to associate with you outside of this blog. I don’t understand how you come up with some of the things you say, but I agree you have the right to think and say them.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

Hey JK!!! You had me at “UB”, but then you waivered on me a little bit. You were for the freedoms I asked about BUT then you had exceptions. Do such restrictions also apply to YOUR rights? Yes, BUT??? BUT my biggest question was about the BIG BOSOM!!! BUT it’s not politically correct to ask about such, damn it!!!

By CBF

August 14, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this

Realist: “So while Im all for rights of individuals, I simply dont think most individuals are evolved enough or informed enough to fully understand the consequences…” Who do you think IS evolved or informed enough to make these decisions for us? Politicians who are bought and paid for? You perhaps? Want to meet me in the wrestling ring for some common sense school since “redneck” is too chicken to come on down?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

No funky whitey, I think the liberal idea is “we know better how to spend your money than you”

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

hey CBF, Im ya huckelberry. Thats just my game.

You are so barking up the wrong tree bud

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this

Dana, Dana, Dana! You also are waivering in your answers to my questions. You are BUT you aren’t. You’re pulling a “John Kerry” on me!!! You say you pray. Why is it not okay to pray before a city council meeting OR during a high school graduation OR before a high school football game? Why is that not okay? Liberals push for IMPRISONED Muslims to be given Korans and prayer cloths, etc. but won’t agree for Christians to pray at those events I mentioned. WHY??? Otherwise you did pretty well on my quiz EXCEPT I BET you would like me if you met me outside this blog. ‘Cause remember, that’s just the kind of guy I am!

By JK

August 14, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this

UB, yes I’m way too familiar with “profiling” and sterotyping. A brain AND a well-fed infant? Who knew?

Don’t want to take your gun away, Hon. Never asked anyone to come into your house and pry your fingers off. Never. Only request reasonable regulation of the industry so as to minimize the number of KIDS who get their hands on them, kill other kids, and rot in jail at taxpayer expense, that’s all. Not unreasonable, IMO. Maybe you think so.

By Realist

August 14, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this

Hey JK, thats “cold and dead fingers” ok. Get your southern racist jokes straight ok hon.

By J Tom

August 14, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

I’m back. This is the sort of thing that torques me, and I’ve seen no rebuttal, “Emily - great “party” line they want each and every one of us dead. No,the bin Laden faction wants US troops out of their holy land of Saudi Arabia, they want Israel gone as a nation and the land returned to the Palestinians and they want a return to the power of Saladin. the Iranians want a return to their Persian Glory, Hezbollah wants to be the Shiite arm to cause upheaval, then usher in their Syrian and Iranian brothers to run Lebanon.” This is a myopic and dangerous point of view. Radical muslims extend far beyond the ME, but you have to read below the fold to see what’s happening. Consider: An assassination attempt on a judge in Turkey because of a ruling against them. Riots in France because of the public school dress code. Film director Van Gogh assassinated in the Netherlands because he was anti-immigration. The threatened assassination of a movie director in the Netherlands for making a film criticizing Muslims for their intolerance of gays. Riots across Europe over political cartoons. The growth of radical Islam in South Africa (where they make up a whopping 2.3% of the population). Terrorism in the Balkans, Indonesia, India, Somalia,Trinidad and Tobago, and on and on worldwide. But some insist the problem is because of what happens in the ME and our policies. You could wipe out Israel, give them the entire ME, change our policies to whatever they want, and we would still have worldwide terrorism because we do not follow their religious edicts. Emily is right. They want all non-Muslims dead. Dead because they believe non-Muslims are offensive to their God. Dead because we won’t abide by their laws. That is why there can be no negotiation with them. It really is either them or us.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

hmm. Nope, not wavering at all. AND I never said it wasn’t ok to pray before any of those events! Let me ask you something (which I will whether you “let” me or not) do YOU believe and agree with each and every conservative platform there is? If so, I suppose I congratulate you for finding a party that represents you in all your glory. I tend to consider what an issue is and make up my mind regardless of the which party presented it. And, pray tell, what is wrong with allowing a Muslim to have a copy of the Koran and a prayer cloth? I would do whatever I needed to to get a bible to someone who needed one! I am well aware that there are some far left liberals who have about as much in common with me as I do with a martian. I am quite dismayed by extremists on BOTH sides.

By Brian Head

August 14, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

“those who do, have a track record”! Inverted logic! Don’t you get it? — there is surely a difference between (a) profiling a group of KNOWN terrorists, and (b) applying that profile to a broad sector of the population! It has NOTHING to do with being a liberal or whatever. Meanwhile, you are unjustly maligning those who think differently from you. Why? Because they think differently from you. Well, guess what? Both freedom of thought and freedom of expression are essential to democracy. Those who happen to think differently from you or me or anyone else also serve their country!!!!!!!!!! Brian brian@ilch.uminho.pt Brian brian@uminho.ilch.uminho.pt

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

JK: Why is that liberals want EDUCATION about sex and aids and condoms and drugs involving children? But you want REGULATION when it comes to guns? And sweetheart, it’s mostly young thugs and NOT “children” that are killed with firearms. If these little “darlings” had a lot more discipline and guidance in their lives they probably wouldn’t be dead now. The answer is EDUCATION, not REGULATION! Education for the parents and the children.

By CBF

August 14, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this

Realist: forget my fight-baiting. You didn’t answer my question. Who is evolved or informed enough to tell us how to live?

By getalife

August 14, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

Who is evolved or informed enough to tell us how to live?

W because he talks to God.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this

Dana: I’ve gotta go again but being the nice guy I am, I wanted to answer your questions. SO assuming from your last blog I guess it’s okay to pray at schools and government meetings. I take that as a YES! I DON’T SWEAR ALLEGIANCE TO ANY PARTY!!! Never have, never will! I vote as an independent for the candidate that I feel most represents my beliefs. And there’s nothing wrong with giving Muslims a Koran and prayer cloth AS LONG AS you don’t try to muzzle Christians from saying a short prayer OUT LOUD “because it might be OFFENSIVE to those of other beliefs”. I don’t feel that I am an Extremist, although I DO HAVE MY OPINIONS and I don’t apologize for them!!!

By Realist

August 14, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this

CBF,

Your mothers sure is hell not, to birth an ape like you.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

Gotta go. I’m a buuuuuusy man! Like they say down here in the glorious land of Dixie, “Ima…Ima…Ima gonna see y’all, ya yeah?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

yeah, you best forget it. smart, very smart.

As far as your question, certainly not me, thats for sure. I like to think the men and women we vote for and choose to run our country are more educated and informed to make decisions on our behalf than we are. If you dont beleive in this principal, I can see why our system causes you such great worry. Or, I suggest perhaps you run for office on your own merits of education and ideology. Who knows, maybe getalife or CBF truly are the next JFK.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

UBK,

What part of what you just said disagreed in any way with what I posted earlier? The “liberal” things you don’t like tend to come from the more extreme left. My God, we might actually agree on a few things, if you would STOP yelling and would manage to overcome your desire to be RIGHT about every thing!

By White Jesus

August 14, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this

Greetings all,

As far as your question, certainly not me, thats for sure. I like to think the men and women we vote for and choose to run our country are more educated and informed to make decisions on our behalf than we are.

Do you really think people believed W was more educated and informed than they were? Or, do you think he was just a regular C student guy, unlike that womanizing, uber-intellect, Clinton or the Robot geek Gore?

By Realist

August 14, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

post at 4:13 was getalife, not me

To you white jerome, Again, perhaps you should throw your name in the hat and lets hear your educational merits.

By Ugotta B. Kidding

August 14, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this

Dana: You’re MY WIFE, posing as Dana, right? Clever disguise BUT you gave it away with that last line! Sounded just like my wife. LOL

By JK

August 14, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

UB, apply your gun logic to the pointless war on drugs (that costs us billion$ and solves nothing), and I’m on my way to really trying to see your point. Honest! “Freedom from government regulation” for WHOM?

By White Jesus

August 14, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Realist,

I’m not qualified for president, I admit.

UT Austin, BS Civil Engineering Univ Arkansas,Masters Civil Engineering (Foundations/Hydrologic Sytems)

Go Hogs, and Hook em Horns! Anybody who know the history of these rivals understand I have a tough time explaining loyalty to both.

By Dana

August 14, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this

UBK, I’m thinking you need to listen to your wife, she is a wise woman!

By Play that funky music whiteboy

August 14, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this

JTom - reading history and current headlines, Muslims follow a creed “me against my brother, my brother and I against our cousin, my brother and I and my cousin against our neighbor, and so on.” There is no difference between what you are saying and what I was trying to convey - unless you are espousing the belief that all these things that you cite, which are true (except in the Balkans it was the Muslims who were getting exterminated and we rushed to their aide) are all coordinated as a master plot of a worldwide warlord - the supposed mastermind “Islamofascist” (thought you guys would love one of your words here). Who is it?? What Imam are you going to cite? What Warlord?? What nation?? Do you think they want to invade and take over America??? What is myopic is “it’s us or them” without there really being a “them”. Let me guess, you believe that Saddam, Osama, Ahidimenijad, Arafat (before death), Khameni, and other Imam’s were sitting around a table like the mafia families in the Godfather talking about 9/11 and planning everything that happened and has happened. That’s what the current administration would have you believe and why we invaded Iraq. “Dead because we won’t abide by their laws”, well JTom Iraq wouldn’t abide by “their laws” - and neither will a huge majority of the Muslim world.

So what do we do? Treat them all differently. Each situation requires a different response and to view every Muslim group/radical/organization as the “same terrorist” will cause us to be more vulnerable.

By Dusty

August 14, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

Ugotta B. Kidding,

I guess you don’t read the morning posts. At 10:51 this morning I suggested there should be a Patrick Henry Airlines with LIBERTY flights.

The whole premise was to have no inspections and no regulations, etc. etc.

Great minds with but a single thought and all that. But thought you might like to know—-been there, done that. You might even like to read it, but I doubt it.

By rarringt

August 14, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this

WJ,

I don’t get it. How can you name a school’s team…after a pig?

I mean, I can see Longhorns, Bulldogs, Yellowjackets, and Rebels (my alma mater).

But a pig? Called a razorback?

By deegee

August 14, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this

The UBK posts are kind of like what we are seeing in the Middle East. You have a group of idealists who are mostly contained. In comes a radical idealogue with some incendiary language that appeals to the most radical element of their ideology. The momentum shifts and suddenly the quiet, sullen masses become energized. They are boldened by their unity and then everything goes to hell in a handbasket.

By GWJ

August 14, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

Well said Jim!!!

By Markus

August 14, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

Wow what a day. Jim really knows how to get the hatred out of the ffreakshow jackass left around here. Everything from cons are “scared because they want to fight terrorism” to “terrorists don’t want to kill us if we just pull out of the ME and give back Israeli land to Palestinians.” Of course we had the ever-present loonbat liberals pissing in the wind about Bush’s “hyped up scare tactics” for political reasons. Typical. Bush says nothing, you candyassed liberals say he’s not doing his job. Bush speaks out with warnings, you liberals get your pretty pinko panties in a collective wet wad. Pick a side and STICK TOO IT goons!

I’ve never seen so much liberal insanity in one spot outside of Mike Pukovich’s blog. One horse’s @ss even posted some con-bashing blog text here, as if any conservative give’s flying pig about what the loonbat left thinks over there (hey- loonbat left.. I like it!).

Hey liberal ladies, have you been keeping up with how Lieberman’s been doing in the polls up there in CT against that no-named nobody limo liberal? Oh wouldn’t that just throw you kook fringe leftists in a tizzy if Lieberman won as an Independent ala Jim Jeffords.

By rarringt

August 14, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

Hmm,

Seems like nobody’s biting, Markus.

Guess Beirut ain’t the only place where there’s a cease fire in effect….

By Markus

August 14, 2006 05:55 PM | Link to this

That “cease fire” won’t last. Hizbowella is already claiming a victory against the “Zionist regime.” They said the same thing when Israel voluntarily pulled out of Gaza earlier this year, and look what happened last month: they invaded Israeli territory, killed three IDF soldiers and kidnapped two others. This past skirmish was a puff of smoke compared to the inferno that’s coming.

By rarringt

August 14, 2006 06:14 PM | Link to this

Maybe. Maybe not. Hope springs eternal. Seems to me, if some of the folks in here can learn to get along, maybe others can.

I guess that may be a bit naive to your thinking, but for today, we’ve got peace and respect, despite our many differences.

‘night, all.

By Rice Crispies

August 14, 2006 10:41 PM | Link to this

Today’s blog about “staying the course” in Iraq: What does “stay the course mean”? What is the mission of US troops in Iraq?

Notice how the right wont define any terms. They only use jargon, slogans, and bumper stickers sound bites.

Nobody is in charge. Every argument for continuing the war employs circular logic. We are rushing headlong into chaos. The worst argument of all is “Dont let the dead die in vain, stay the course.”

Sadam had the sunni/shia civil war contained. He was really the perfect man for Iraq, and we knew it for decades, and we were lucky he was there.

We have been betrayed by elements of Bush’s administration. I demand Bush and Cheney’s resignation effective noon tomorrow.

We need to find out how far into our government these war-for-profit born-again Saudi sellouts have infiltrated, and then we need to weed them out.

Terms for Neocons to learn: Jingoism. Nationalism. Manifest Destiny. Hegemony. Nepotism. Strategic Mission. Foreign Policy. No-bid contracts. Bribery. Kickbacks.

Rice and Powell are disgraced liars. they lied to the world and now wont even admit it. WMDs? Rocket Tubes? It’s shameful.

Recently, they were pointing to old 80’s sarin gas artillery shells left over from the Iran/Iraq war as proof of WMDs. They were seriously expecting to win the “stay the course” argument with that.

It’s an insult to every single person on this planet that Bush/Cheney are allowed to hold their office one more day.

By J Tom

August 15, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this

I don’t know how this will be posted but it is in response to Play that funky music whiteboy’s post on 8/14: You have an interesting viewpoint, but history is not on your side. I keep forgetting I must be one of the ‘ancients’ posting here. Ask anyone who was alive in the ‘50s what the greatest threat to this country was, and the most common response would be ‘Communism’. Not USSR, not Red China, but communism, and no one thought Khrushchev, Mao and Tito were in the same room concocting war plans. Like radical Muslimism, communism is an ideology incompatible with the concepts of freedom and democracy. Every group of communist revolutionaries (CRs) was different, but the solution was basically the same: kill or jail them if the country was to survive. Attempts to ‘share’ governmental power didn’t work, but the threat of death did. Today, the ‘them’ who pose the greatest threat to freedom are radical Muslims (RMs). There are significant differences between CRs and RMs, such as how they attack their enemies: CRs, for the most part, concentrated on hitting military and governmental targets; RMs, civilians; CRs proudly wore distinctive clothing or uniforms; RMs hide behind women and children. In response to the threat, there is one important difference to remember: CRs didn’t want to die – if the died, they lost; RMs don’t care if they die – in there minds if they die, they still win. We defeated the CRs and much of communism by using a ‘mutually assured destruction’ (MAD) policy to forestall war long enough for the strongest economic system to prevail. That policy won’t work with a group that doesn’t care about life or death. Defeating CRs will be much tougher and require more force, and while time was our ally against communism, it may be our enemy against radical Muslimism. Communism was an economic theory that we could prove wrong over time. RMs want to maintain a despotic, religious-based set of beliefs in which economics plays no part. There is no objective way to ‘prove’ their tenets are wrong, like we did with communism. Additional time just gives them greater opportunity to recruit more psychopaths, the disenfranchised, anarchists, and other societal misfits.

By CBF

August 15, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this

Realist: I hate to break your heart but insulting a stranger’s mother is despicable enough to warrant no further communication with you. The rest of you can have at it with this cretin.

By Officer Mancuso

August 15, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

Handsome. (chuckle) Good one, Jim.

By RGB

August 15, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

KRUSCHEV’S PREDICTION IS GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER. WE WILL DESTROY OURSELVES FROM WITHIN. WE ARE TOO BUSY FALLING ALL OVER OURSELVES TRYING NOT TO “HURT ANYBODYS FEELING” THAT OUR ENEMIES ARE TAKING FULL ADVANTAGE OF US. GOD HELP US

By FalconsFan

August 15, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this

For lack of a more appropriate forum to post this information, I will see what responses and comments I get here.

My source is cnn.com/headlinenews/glennbeck/archives

Last evening (Aug. 14) I was channel surfing and the announcer (Glenn Beck) showned a picture of arab/muslim women holding up signs declaring their support for the Hezbolla fighters.

(This didn’t strike me as anything of interest until the announcer stated that this was a ralley held in Dearborn Michigan recently with over 10,000 supporters attending)

Now this caught my attention. I couldn’t BELIEVE I hadn’t heard about this on other news channel.

I must say that it frightens me (more then a little) to think of the censorship issue here from real issues and threats we have here in the U.S. and I will (even more so) stay diligent and steadfast on alternative news sources as this story (I believe)should have been reported and shown to be Headline News to more then a viewing audience of the Glenn Beck Show.

Here is the story:

BECK: I want you to take a look at this picture. Oh, OK, thats great. Thats probably something right out of Lebanon, right? Sorry. It`s from Dearborn, Michigan. Over 35 percent of the population is Arab-American. A few weeks ago, over 10,000 residents turned out in the streets for a pro- Hezbollah rally.

You probably never heard word about it. You know why? Because the media is so frickinworried about being politically correct or, worse, theyre afraid. Dearborn has been connected to untraceable cell phone stories the last couple of weeks. It`s also believed to be the place from where — remember when they were pointing the lasers into the cockpits of planes? Yes, Dearborn.

If you ask the leaders of Dearborn, theyre going to tell you that most of the residents are pro-American and antiterrorism. Great. But even if that is true — and I have no doubt that it is — how can they stop the bad seeds from developing? How do you stop young Muslims who grow up in this culture from trying to mimic the terrorist acts carried out by the very people theyre taught to look up to and support?

Those who rallied openly in support of Hezbollah have shown me and you their true colors. They are Arab first and American second. And someday soon, the war of Islam versus the West is going to force them to choose sides. And unfortunately, I believe that, for some of them, the choice has already been made. And we, my friend, are the enemy.

Barbara Newman is a terrorism expert, coauthor of “Lightning Out of Lebanon: Hezbollah and Terrorists on American Soil.”

Barbara, I feel like a nut job. Tell me I`m wrong.

BARBARA NEWMAN, FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES: Youre not wrong. We are softies. They are here. What you didnt say about Dearborn is the population is mostly Shiites, maybe from the same villages as the Hezbollah in Lebanon. When they say that Hezbollah is their army, their shield, they completely dis-identify with the United States of America.

And you said “if they had to choose,” they have chosen. They have chosen. There have been many incidents where the FBI has brought charges against them. It`s just never picked up in the media.

BECK: Barbara, why is that? I mean, I honestly — I found this story last week. And I stood in the news room and I said, “Who`s seen this footage?” And everybody said no. And I said this is criminal.

NEWMAN: Because our whole society is too politically correct. The prosecutors in Detroit were telling me of a case where they have a guy hard, shipping military equipment back to Hezbollah. And they brought him to court, and the judge required no bond, thinking that they were targeting a Muslim.

You know, the justice system is wrong. We just do not recognize the threat, and it has happened here savagely for years.

BECK: Barbara, tell me — I want to get through a couple of points. Tell me quickly if I`m right or wrong on a couple of things.

One, I believe that were just waiting for a few cards to be played and the Islamic extremist world is going to start uniting and playing cards. It doesnt matter if you`re in Al Qaeda or what. I mean, all of these opportunists are going to come and band together.

Tell me, am I wrong? The future we will see, war in the streets here in America. Europe you`ll see war in the streets because these cells are - - sleeper cells will be activated?

NEWMAN: Youre right. Ill tell you what a national security high official told me recently. He said that Muslim extremism was becoming a mass movement, not a fringe movement, a mass movement like communism.

BECK: So how do you defeat it? Let`s not talk about globally. Here in America, how do you stop this stuff?

NEWMAN: The Patriot Act, the NSA wiretapping, profiling. After all, who`s doing these things?

BECK: Well, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. Let`s look at the people they arrested in London last week. Some of them are white.

NEWMAN: They had converted.

BECK: Yes, so you`re saying profile Islam?

NEWMAN: Thats exactly right. And look for connections among friends, between and among. Thats why the NSA thing was so important. You have to see who these people are speaking to.

BECK: These guys, the wife said to the Associated Press, oh, gee, theyre just fundraising. Youre only targeting them because theyre Arabs. Tell me the cell phone thing. You buy into this? Weve got a thousand cell phones where we discarded all of the chargers and we`re selling them?

NEWMAN: No, because this has happened over and over and over again. The risk that it could not be something legitimate is something we cannot afford to take.

BECK: Yes. Barbara, thank you so much. We`ll have you on again.

Finally, I do understand the RIGHTs afforded to any group to assemble peacefully, after all, next to Freedom of Speech it’s one of the greatest privileges of living in the United States we have. My beef is with the networks NOT reporting this story. Wimps and shame on them.

With that said, I prayed longer last night then usual for safety and peace in a country I so love.

FF