General Hawley's Words

June 7, 2002

A lot of the claims the good general debunks were made here, in one form or another. All of them have been shot down, generally by Mike and I (where IS Mike, anyway?), but the general offers a very succinct and appropriate rebuttal. Enjoy.

Said like ONLY a Marine could say it ! Speech by former ACC Commander General Hawley:

Since the attack, I have seen, heard, and read thoughts of such surpassing stupidity that they must be addressed. You've heard them too. Here they are:

1) "We're not good, they're not evil, everything is relative."

Listen carefully: We're good, they're evil, nothing is relative. Say it with me now and free yourselves. You see, folks, saying, "We're good," doesn't mean, "We're perfect." Okay? The only perfect being is the bearded guy on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

The plain fact is that our country, with all our mistakes and blunders, has always been and always will be the greatest beacon of freedom, charity, opportunity, and affection in history. If you need proof, open all the borders on Earth and see what happens. In about half a day, the entire world would be a ghost town, and the United States would look like one giant line to see "The Producers."

2) "Violence only leads to more violence."

This one is so stupid you usually have to be the president of an Ivy League university to say it. Here's the truth, which you know in your heads and hearts already: Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp, panicky, half-measures lead to more violence. However, complete, fully-thought-through, professional, well-executed violence never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the other guys are all dead. That's right, dead. Not "on trial," not "reeducated," not "nurtured back into the bosom of love." Dead. D-E-well, you get the idea.

3) "The CIA and the rest of our intelligence community has failed us."

For 25 years we have chained our spies like dogs to a stake in the ground, and now that the house has been robbed, we yell at them for not protecting us. Starting in the late seventies, under Carter appointee Stansfield Turner, the giant brains who get these giant ideas decided that the best way to gather international intelligence was to use spy

satellites. "After all," they reasoned, "you can see a license plate from 200 miles away."

This is very helpful if you've been attacked by a license plate. Unfortunately, we were attacked by humans. Finding humans is not possible with satellites. You have to use other humans. When we bought all our satellites, we fired all our humans, and here's the really stupid part. It takes years, decades to infiltrate new humans into the worst places of the world. You can't just have a guy who looks like Gary Busey in a Spring Break '93 sweatshirt plop himself down in a coffee shop in Kabul and say "Hi ya, boys. Gee, I sure would like to meet that bin Laden fella." Well, you can, but all you'd be doing is giving the bad guys a story they'll be telling for years.

4) "These people are poor and helpless, and that's why they're angry at us."

Uh-huh, and Jeffrey Dahmer's frozen head collection was just a desperate cry for help. The terrorists and their backers are richer than Elton John and, ironically, a good deal less annoying. The poor helpless people, you see, are the villagers they tortured and murdered to stay in power. Mohamed Atta, one of the evil scumbags who steered those planes into the killing grounds (I'm sorry, one of the "alleged hijackers," according to CNN. They stopped using the word "terrorist," you know), is the son of a Cairo surgeon. But you knew this, too.

5) "Any profiling is racial profiling."

Who's killing us here, the Norwegians? Just days after the attack, the New York Times had an article saying dozens of extended members of the gazillionaire bin Laden family living in America were afraid of reprisals and left in a huff, never to return to studying at Harvard and using too much Drakkar. I'm crushed. I think we're all crushed. Please come back. With a cherry on top?

Why don't they just change their names, anyway? It's happened in the past. Think about it. How many Adolfs do you run into these days?

Shortly after that, I remember watching TV with my jaw on the floor as a government official actually said, "That little old grandmother from Sioux City could be carrying something." Okay, how about this: No, she couldn't. It would never be the grandmother from Sioux City. Is it even possible? What are the odds? Winning a hundred Powerball lotteries in a row? A thousand? A million?

And now a Secret Service guy has been tossed off a plane, and we're all supposed to cry about it because he's an Arab? Didn't it have the tiniest bit to do with the fact that he filled out his forms incorrectly three times? And then left an Arab history book on his seat as he strolled off the plane? And came back? Armed? Let's please all stop singing "We Are the World" for a minute and think practically.

I don't want to be sitting on the floor in the back of a plane four seconds away from hitting Mt. Rushmore and turn, grinning, to the guy next to me to say, "Well, at least we didn't offend them."

So here's what I resolve for the New Year:

Never to forget our murdered brothers and sisters.

Never to let the relativists get away with their immoral thinking.

After all, no matter what your daughter's political science professor says,we didn't start this.

Have you seen that bumper sticker that says, "No More Hiroshimas"? I wish I had one that says, "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."

Semper Fi!

June 7, 2002

I agree with all the comments in the post. We don't have to be even handed with evil people! This is the reason we're getting no where in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian question! The Palestinian leadership is corrupt and evil. Israel is our friends. We have no reason to be even handed and worry about coming off as "anti-Arab" or "Islamophobic." Fuck the Islamic world, they're the ones trying to kill us.

Oh, by the way, that missionary was killed yesterday in the Phillipines, the one that had been hostage for over a year. He was murdered by the Abu Sayaf. But yet we should still feel sorry for these fucking Muslims.

June 7, 2002

All we are doing is expanding racism another generation. Thats it. OK, screw the little grandmother anology that everyone keeps trying to use...at the end of the day, they are saying that anyone non arab could not do anything on the plane and only arabs should be checked. How anyone doesn't see this as ridiculous is the dumbest thing that I have ever heard. How is it not disturbing that Arab Americans are having to leave school for fear of safty, how is it not disturbing that all of a sudden, the Muslim religion is considered eveil because of extremist. If we used the same rational in America, every white Christian would a white supremist. Every person that isn't happy with some part of government would be a anarchist, every black person would have to hate white people for holding us down...you can not judge a entire people due to the extremist. We don't scruinize whites, blacks(as much), Latinos (as much) Asian and others the same way.

Everyone will comeback with the "But whites didn't run planes into buildings" and blah blah blah. That has happened how many times since the advent of planes. Didn't this white kid run a plane into a building in Florida to committ suicide?? There is a reason that 9-11 was so shocking, it hadn't happened before. It is now known that there were many obvious signs that could have prevented it. If you know that someone has terrorist ties, stop em. But to stop every arab american who have every right that you do, which it seems alot of you are supporting, is ridiculous and opens up a much more dangerous atmosphere.

I think it all comes around to the fact that white america will never be the subject of racial profiling therefore its Ok. The whole argument isn't over the up security, its about putting white people through it too, because the CAN'T have anything bad planned. If you want to up security, fine, up it for everyone. But singling out one group of people is just perpectuating a stereotype that all arabs are terrorist and that is a dangerous message to be sending. Are you truely ready to be stereotyped in the same manner? Because no matter what you believe in , there are some extremist that fit in your catagory...are you ready to be considered a extremist in the same matter.

And I still believe that if a law was up for it to be ok to read all email, intercept all phone calls, and such on Arabs only, Americans and all you guys would be for it, but since the law included all america, it was considered horrible, and taking away freedoms. Treating someone as outcast is viewed as acceptable because someone of thier race was nuts; it baffles me how easily America is ready to accept it.

June 7, 2002

I think it all comes around to the fact that white america will never be the subject of racial profiling therefore its Ok.

I think Carlos Mencia - who's a non-white, hispanic comedian - said it best on the subject of racial profiling: "It shouldn't be called racial profiling. It should be called, 'people who look like you do this a lot.' "

Hey, cry racism all you want, there is SOME value to profiling.

June 7, 2002

I agree with Ripper comments, come on with this grandmother anology bullshit, I mean so you guys think its not right to check little old white ladies, but I bet its O.K. to check little old Arab ladies? All I keep hearing is check all young Arab/muslim men because they terrorist, so should that mean we'll turn a blind eye to who aren't Arab/Muslim? If yes, thats straight bullshit. Don't be running at the mouth talking about fuck all muslims because the terrorists are a small extremist group of muslims compared to millions muslims who don't condon those actions, damn people act this is a witch hunt. Don't give that white people are not flying planes into buildings b.s. when that white kid flew that plane into a building or John Walker eventhough he wasn't a major player but he showed that there could possibly be former Americans that support terrorist and the anthrax scare. I would be for racial profiling if everybody was checked if they're under suspecion instead of being a certain race.

June 7, 2002

Yeah, there is some value in it. But does it outweigh the negatives??? Say that the FBI had handled the info the exact same way they did over the 9-11 thing. Would racial profiling at the airport have saved these people. In all likelihood, no. I am pretty sure the terrorist didn't walk through the airport with the knives in their pockets, they obviously had planed on it, and hid them accordingly (scary visual place.......okay and gone). Criminals prepare for beating the authorities. All that could be accomplished was annoying the living hell out of all the Arab americans that just wanted to get on the plane.

There are black drug dealers...true...but does that make it ok to treat all blacks as drug dealers?? There are plenty of whites that are criminal, killers and psychos, but white america doesn't have to worry about being catagorized with that. These people are viewed as freaks in the white race while in minorities criminals are stereotypically (and incorrectly) considered to be the norm and the the majority of us that are not, for some reason, are considered exceptions to the rule.

Millions of Arab Americans + small percentage radical psychos= lets treat all Arab Americans like criminals

Insert any minority in that equation and that is how racial profiling is working. The fact that I can't walk around wearing anything short of a shirt and tie without worrying about being considered a drug dealer(apparently there are alot "black males fitting my description just seen fleeing a drug scene" that coincedentally happened right before I walked along...and the officer never has to call back to another officer to get the whole description...aparently the fact that I can answer where I am going and where I'm coming from, where I work and I have a ID such is proof that I couldn't have been the guy) simply because I am young and black. Luckly Atlanta has some racial profiling laws in place which makes it a much more fun place to be now.

If white people don't have to deal with it, they never see what the big deal is. The "small incovience" isn't so small when you are the victim of it.

June 7, 2002

You liberals really amaze me. For the millionth time the people responsible for the attacks are muslims. Not white, not black, not asain, but Muslim Males. Who will commit other terrorist attacks, muslim males. Who in hell should security at the airport check, an old black lady. Who should the FBI investigate, a Mosque or a Mormon church. When talking about terrorism than the answer is obvious.

I don't know why you can't seem to accept that a certain group is almost 100% likely to be behind terrorist attacks on the United States. What's scary is if we did things your way than Moussai might have been on that 4th plane. In your liberal eyes what the agent in Minneapolis did was racial profiling because they had no proof he had ties to Al Qaeda.

June 8, 2002

You liberals really amaze me. For the millionth time the people responsible for the attacks are muslims. Not white, not black, not asain, but Muslim Males. Who will commit other terrorist attacks, muslim males. Who in hell should security at the airport check, an old black lady. Who should the FBI investigate, a Mosque or a Mormon church. When talking about terrorism than the answer is obvious.

I don't know why you can't seem to accept that a certain group is almost 100% likely to be behind terrorist attacks on the United States. What's scary is if we did things your way than Moussai might have been on that 4th plane. In your liberal eyes what the agent in Minneapolis did was racial profiling because they had no proof he had ties to Al Qaeda.

Islam or Muslim are religions and isn't a race, so therefore any race can practice Islam/Muslim (like John Walker). As for your 100% muslims is way off like I said before its a small group of extremists. What about those anthrax scares who made those? Well if our security was trained properly they would know what to look for, instead of singling out a certain entire group.

June 8, 2002

"All we are doing is expanding racism another generation."

Racism still exists, and will always exist, regardless of any racial profiling of Arab males that may occur.

"If we used the same rational in America, every white Christian would a white supremist."

As soon as white Christians crash passenger planes into buildings for the express purpose of killing blacks, you can make that analogy. Until then, it's ridiculous.

"That has happened how many times since the advent of planes."

Um... once too many for $200, Alex.

"Didn't this white kid run a plane into a building in Florida to committ suicide??"

One stupid white kid with a Cessna and a death wish does not equal a terrorist operation with four fully-fueled jets packed with innocent civilians. I don't see how you can possibly be naive enough to even begin to make this comparison.

"I think it all comes around to the fact that white america will never be the subject of racial profiling therefore its Ok."

Wrong. I've been subjected to it. In certain neighborhoods in Baltimore, white males from the suburbs are frequently pulled over and questioned by the police on the suspicion they might be drug buyers. Why? Because most drug buys in that part of town involve white males from the suburbs. That's obviously not while I was there, but I didn't mind getting pulled over. As long as it's nothing unreasonable, I don't see what the big deal is. There are a lot of bad examples of racial profiling, but the practice itself isn't necessarily wrong, racist, or evil.

"But singling out one group of people is just perpectuating a stereotype that all arabs are terrorist and that is a dangerous message to be sending."

Not all Arab men are terrorists who have attacked us recently. But ALL terrorists who have attacked us recently ARE Arab men. There is NO reason we shouldn't scrutinize them more closely than anyone else. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and we need to keep our country and our citizens safe.

June 8, 2002

"I agree with Ripper comments..."

I'm going to have a heart attack and die from not surprised...

"I bet its O.K. to check little old Arab ladies?"

I bet you haven't been reading too closely.

"Don't give that white people are not flying planes into buildings b.s. when that white kid flew that plane into a building... "

You can't possibly be this thick. One white kid on a suicide mission crashes his Cessna - a fucking CESSNA, for fuck's sake - into a building, and you want to compare it with the deliberate murder of 3000+ innocents. If you really believe those two incidents are comparable, then you're hopelessly fucked in the head.

"I would be for racial profiling if everybody was checked if they're under suspecion instead of being a certain race."

When all terrorists who attack us are Arab males, then I think paying extra attention to Arab males is a safe and reasonable measure. Find me a Swede who was an important member of Al'Qaeda. Or a Mexican. Or a Dane. How about anyone other than a Moslem. Don't throw out John Walker, since he was far from important in the organization; he just got a lot of media attention for being an American.

Our enemies have shown their faces, but if you want to keep looking at everyone instead of just them, then you're making a serious mistake.

Christ, I'm tired of trying to explain this. How fucking difficult is it?

June 8, 2002

Didn't a white supremicist park a car under an office building and blow it up killing many peope?

Under your criteria we now know who the enemy is and all white males should be stopped in their cars when they are parking in office buildings.

Doesn't it say somewhere that no racist comments will be tolerated on this board, but everywhere I look I see references to "fucking moslems".

Al Qaeda is a very small terrorist organisation with a small membership, yet you all harp om as if every muslim in the world supports them. They don't, simple as that, they probably have the same amount of support as the real IRA do in Northern Ireland. Percentage wise, and probably less among Arab Americans than the Real IRA do among Irish Americans.

If you want to condemn the millions of people who follow one religion because of the actions of a few extremists then good luck to you.

It's not difficult at all, if you're happy to see lots of innocent people suffer or be killed.

June 9, 2002

Didn't a white supremicist park a car under an office building and blow it up killing many peope?

Under your criteria we now know who the enemy is and all white males should be stopped in their cars when they are parking in office buildings.

Doesn't it say somewhere that no racist comments will be tolerated on this board, but everywhere I look I see references to "fucking moslems".

Al Qaeda is a very small terrorist organisation with a small membership, yet you all harp om as if every muslim in the world supports them. They don't, simple as that, they probably have the same amount of support as the real IRA do in Northern Ireland. Percentage wise, and probably less among Arab Americans than the Real IRA do among Irish Americans.

If you want to condemn the millions of people who follow one religion because of the actions of a few extremists then good luck to you.

It's not difficult at all, if you're happy to see lots of innocent people suffer or be killed.

But if you notice, the FBI/ATF/etc keep a VERY close eye on the militia's. You also need to remember that the people who ARE white supremicists usually proclaim that very loudly so you really don't need to stop them and question them. Arab terrorists though don't go around America saying "I hate all you Christian heathens!" if so it would be much easier to track them.

June 9, 2002

A lot of the claims the good general debunks were made here, in one form or another. All of them have been shot down, generally by Mike and I (where IS Mike, anyway?), but the general offers a very succinct and appropriate rebuttal. Enjoy.>>>

As for where Mike is, I'm currently quite happy with the love of my life and have far less virtriol and anger with which to spew forth with effectiveness. I'm also really tired as I've started working for a soul-sucking insurance agency and have basically been in a groove of going to the shows and the like with the woman when I'm not at work. Energy is at a premium, folks.

Not that anybody cares, but hey, nobody cares what I say anyway.

<<<Said like ONLY a Marine could say it ! Speech by former ACC Commander General Hawley:

Since the attack, I have seen, heard, and read thoughts of such surpassing stupidity that they must be addressed. You've heard them too. Here they are:

1) "We're not good, they're not evil, everything is relative."

Listen carefully: We're good, they're evil, nothing is relative. Say it with me now and free yourselves. You see, folks, saying, "We're good," doesn't mean, "We're perfect." Okay? The only perfect being is the bearded guy on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

The plain fact is that our country, with all our mistakes and blunders, has always been and always will be the greatest beacon of freedom, charity, opportunity, and affection in history. If you need proof, open all the borders on Earth and see what happens. In about half a day, the entire world would be a ghost town, and the United States would look like one giant line to see "The Producers.">>>

Heck, just ask who does more to FEED the populations of these terrorist-laden countries: The U.S OR their own governments?

<<<2) "Violence only leads to more violence."

This one is so stupid you usually have to be the president of an Ivy League university to say it. Here's the truth, which you know in your heads and hearts already: Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp, panicky, half-measures lead to more violence. However, complete, fully-thought-through, professional, well-executed violence never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the other guys are all dead. That's right, dead. Not "on trial," not "reeducated," not "nurtured back into the bosom of love." Dead. D-E-well, you get the idea.>>>

Indeed. Did we worry about "begetting more violence" when we pounded the living crap out of Germany? No, we worried about where else we could hit to make them surrender a little more quickly.

<<<3) "The CIA and the rest of our intelligence community has failed us."

For 25 years we have chained our spies like dogs to a stake in the ground, and now that the house has been robbed, we yell at them for not protecting us. Starting in the late seventies, under Carter appointee Stansfield Turner, the giant brains who get these giant ideas decided that the best way to gather international intelligence was to use spy

satellites. "After all," they reasoned, "you can see a license plate from 200 miles away."

This is very helpful if you've been attacked by a license plate. Unfortunately, we were attacked by humans. Finding humans is not possible with satellites. You have to use other humans. When we bought all our satellites, we fired all our humans, and here's the really stupid part. It takes years, decades to infiltrate new humans into the worst places of the world. You can't just have a guy who looks like Gary Busey in a Spring Break '93 sweatshirt plop himself down in a coffee shop in Kabul and say "Hi ya, boys. Gee, I sure would like to meet that bin Laden fella." Well, you can, but all you'd be doing is giving the bad guys a story they'll be telling for years.>>>

One other thing:

Let's say Bush knew full well that an attack was being planned on NYC.

What the heck could he have POSSIBLY done?

Evacuated New York City? I don't see THAT happening.

Tell people to be careful of kamikaze hijackers? Nobody even thought that that was a possibility at the time.

<<<4) "These people are poor and helpless, and that's why they're angry at us."

Uh-huh, and Jeffrey Dahmer's frozen head collection was just a desperate cry for help. The terrorists and their backers are richer than Elton John and, ironically, a good deal less annoying. The poor helpless people, you see, are the villagers they tortured and murdered to stay in power. Mohamed Atta, one of the evil scumbags who steered those planes into the killing grounds (I'm sorry, one of the "alleged hijackers," according to CNN. They stopped using the word "terrorist," you know), is the son of a Cairo surgeon. But you knew this, too.>>>

The population of these countries hate us (and, rest assured, they DO hate us by and large) because their governments are inept and, thus, they use us as a scapegoat for the problems of their countries, rather than looking at where the problems REALLY lie: with the monkeys in power.

<<<5) "Any profiling is racial profiling."

Who's killing us here, the Norwegians? Just days after the attack, the New York Times had an article saying dozens of extended members of the gazillionaire bin Laden family living in America were afraid of reprisals and left in a huff, never to return to studying at Harvard and using too much Drakkar. I'm crushed. I think we're all crushed. Please come back. With a cherry on top?>>>

I am amazed that the world thinks so highly of us that they are shocked that Americans MIGHT have negative reactions towards the FAMILY of the guy who MASTERMINDED the whole attack.

They must think we're Gods or something.

Which just further shows how much envy plays into the anti-U.S sentiment in the world.

<<<Why don't they just change their names, anyway? It's happened in the past. Think about it. How many Adolfs do you run into these days?

Shortly after that, I remember watching TV with my jaw on the floor as a government official actually said, "That little old grandmother from Sioux City could be carrying something." Okay, how about this: No, she couldn't. It would never be the grandmother from Sioux City. Is it even possible? What are the odds? Winning a hundred Powerball lotteries in a row? A thousand? A million?

And now a Secret Service guy has been tossed off a plane, and we're all supposed to cry about it because he's an Arab? Didn't it have the tiniest bit to do with the fact that he filled out his forms incorrectly three times? And then left an Arab history book on his seat as he strolled off the plane? And came back? Armed? Let's please all stop singing "We Are the World" for a minute and think practically.>>>

Haven't heard that story. I remember a black agent that was stopped in December and pitched a royal fit about it---which begs the obvious question of why a guy who was so easily veered into over-emotionality was even in the Secret Service to begin with.

They tend to prefer guys who can avoid looking like an idiot when something goes badly for him.

<<<I don't want to be sitting on the floor in the back of a plane four seconds away from hitting Mt. Rushmore and turn, grinning, to the guy next to me to say, "Well, at least we didn't offend them."

So here's what I resolve for the New Year:

Never to forget our murdered brothers and sisters.>>>

Absolutely. Americans have an amazing desire to forgive ANYBODY---a trait NO other country holds. We need to suppress it here.

<<<Never to let the relativists get away with their immoral thinking.

After all, no matter what your daughter's political science professor says,we didn't start this.>>>

Oh, indeed. Saying we started this is like saying the woman was responsible for her rape due to her clothing.

<<<Have you seen that bumper sticker that says, "No More Hiroshimas"? I wish I had one that says, "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."

Semper Fi! >>>

Hear, hear.

-=Mike

...Should be back to a more regular schedule soon enough.

June 9, 2002

<<<Didn't a white supremicist park a car under an office building and blow it up killing many peope?

Under your criteria we now know who the enemy is and all white males should be stopped in their cars when they are parking in office buildings.>>>

No--but do you think that known white supremacists AREN'T watched closely?

Give me a break.

When you add in that of the 20 hijackers, I believe 19 were Arab; bombings in th Middle East have LONG been done by Arabs...

Is it such a HUGE imposition for them to submit to maybe one minute of hassle?

Again, it's not like we have tons of INNOCENT Arabs in prison presently.

<<<Doesn't it say somewhere that no racist comments will be tolerated on this board, but everywhere I look I see references to "fucking moslems". >>>

Not a racist term. Moslem/Muslim is not a race.

<<<Al Qaeda is a very small terrorist organisation with a small membership, yet you all harp om as if every muslim in the world supports them.>>>

Not EVERY Muslim supports them.

HOWEVER, to deny that a FRIGHTENINGLY large percentage of them DO support them is to ignore reality in favor of a fantasy world.

<<<They don't, simple as that, they probably have the same amount of support as the real IRA do in Northern Ireland. Percentage wise, and probably less among Arab Americans than the Real IRA do among Irish Americans.>>>

Do a lot of Arab Americans support Al Qaeda? No, probably not.

But A LOT of them DO support OTHER terrorist organizations. Al Qaeda isn't a huge network---but it's not a RARE one, either.

<<<If you want to condemn the millions of people who follow one religion because of the actions of a few extremists then good luck to you.>>>

Hmm, so you'd trust your young boy to a Catholic priest after this scandal broke without ANY doubts?

That is naivete.

<<<It's not difficult at all, if you're happy to see lots of innocent people suffer or be killed. >>>

Already saw it.

In September.

Maybe you remember it.

-=Mike

June 9, 2002

All we are doing is expanding racism another generation. Thats it.>>>

So, if we DON'T profile, they won't want us to cease to exist anymore?

But---we didn't profile them BEFORE 9/11 and they STILL attacked us?

You mean, they might hate us REGARDLESS?

Then why should we CARE if they don't like it?

<<<OK, screw the little grandmother anology that everyone keeps trying to use...at the end of the day, they are saying that anyone non arab could not do anything on the plane and only arabs should be checked.>>>

No, they're saying that young Arab males are the highest-risk category. It'd be like having a serial killer on the loose and not focusing on white males---even though white males tend to be serial killers more than any other group.

One bad apple spoils the bunch.

<<<How anyone doesn't see this as ridiculous is the dumbest thing that I have ever heard. How is it not disturbing that Arab Americans are having to leave school for fear of safty, how is it not disturbing that all of a sudden, the Muslim religion is considered eveil because of extremist.>>>

There have been serious concerns about the ideology of the Muslim religion for years now. Why do people think the Muslim religion is evil?

Because it is so hesitant to criticize its own members who do wrong.

The Muslim religion is just as evil NOW as the Christian faith was during the Crusades.

<<<If we used the same rational in America, every white Christian would a white supremist.>>>

Nice try---but not even close.

<<<Every person that isn't happy with some part of government would be a anarchist, every black person would have to hate white people for holding us down...you can not judge a entire people due to the extremist. We don't scruinize whites, blacks(as much), Latinos (as much) Asian and others the same way. >>>

For what it's worth, those other groups don't so actively and fervently express a desire for the death of all non-believers.

<<<Everyone will comeback with the "But whites didn't run planes into buildings" and blah blah blah. That has happened how many times since the advent of planes.>>>

Hey, nuclear bombs have only been dropped twice. We MUST be over-reacting over what is happening between India and Pakistan presently. No way THEY would drop a bomb, right?

<<<Didn't this white kid run a plane into a building in Florida to committ suicide?? >>>

Yup.

<<<There is a reason that 9-11 was so shocking, it hadn't happened before.>>>

I'm curious to see where this defense will go.

<<<It is now known that there were many obvious signs that could have prevented it.>>>

BUT---that would have required *gasp* profiling.

Can't do that.

<<<If you know that someone has terrorist ties, stop em.>>>

BUT, since we can't focus on any group, we have to jus pray we stumble upon a terrorist here and there amidst this country of nearly 300,000,000 people.

And that the majority of terrorists that are causing the world problem are Muslim is probably a coincidence.

<<<But to stop every arab american who have every right that you do, which it seems alot of you are supporting, is ridiculous and opens up a much more dangerous atmosphere. >>>

Because, God knows, frisking Arab Americans has led to so many massive attacks that killed thousands of people, right?

<<>>

You can believe that if you wish. You'd be wrong, of course.

<<The whole argument isn't over the up security, its about putting white people through it too, because the CAN'T have anything bad planned.>>>

Oh, so it's not that profiling is UNFAIR---it's that whites don't suffer it, too?

Heck, neither do blacks. Let's hit them, too.

Women? Round 'em up.

The elderly? Yup.

Of course, none of these groups are considered to be even moderate threats---but we'd hate to offend terrorists, wouldn't we?

<<<you want to up security, fine, up it for everyone.>>>

Which, of course, means that you don't up security at all.

<<<But singling out one group of people is just perpectuating a stereotype that all arabs are terrorist and that is a dangerous message to be sending.>>>

No, it's stating that terrorists tend to be young Arab males. You can call it a stereotype if you wish---it tends to be accurate.

<<<Are you truely ready to be stereotyped in the same manner?>>>

Yup.

<<<Because no matter what you believe in , there are some extremist that fit in your catagory...are you ready to be considered a extremist in the same matter.>>>

Sure.

<<<And I still believe that if a law was up for it to be ok to read all email, intercept all phone calls, and such on Arabs only, Americans and all you guys would be for it, but since the law included all america, it was considered horrible, and taking away freedoms.>>>

Gee, at least you don't stereotype US, right?

<<<Treating someone as outcast is viewed as acceptable because someone of thier race was nuts; it baffles me how easily America is ready to accept it. >>>

It baffles me that you almost seem to believe what you're writing here.

Baffles---and scares me a little.

-=Mike

..."What? MOST terrorists are Arabs? MUST be a coincidence."

June 9, 2002

<<>>

I am shocked---SHOCKED I tell you.

<<<, come on with this grandmother anology bullshit, I mean so you guys think its not right to check little old white ladies, but I bet its O.K. to check little old Arab ladies?>>>

Wow, way to jump to a conclusion on this one.

Terrorists TEND to be young Arab men. We'd be IDIOTS to not focus on them as security risks.

<<<All I keep hearing is check all young Arab/muslim men because they terrorist, so should that mean we'll turn a blind eye to who aren't Arab/Muslim?>>>

Yes, that is EXACTLY what is happening. I mean, I went to the airport recently and was amazed that they didn't even ask me a question OR check my luggage.

Sarcasm now off.

<<<If yes, thats straight bullshit. Don't be running at the mouth talking about fuck all muslims because the terrorists are a small extremist group of muslims compared to millions muslims who don't condon those actions>>>

And MILLIONS of Muslims SUPPORT those actions. Let's not pretend that there is not a considerable body of Muslim thought that supports what the monkeys did.

<<<, damn people act this is a witch hunt. Don't give that white people are not flying planes into buildings b.s. when that white kid flew that plane into a building or John Walker eventhough he wasn't a major player but he showed that there could possibly be former Americans that support terrorist and the anthrax scare.>>>

Of course, the white kid killed a few thousand fewer people and was shooting for suicide---not the deaths of thousands of innocents.

I know, I'm just nitpicking now.

<<>>

Let's say a cross is burned on the lawn of a black family.

Would you be upset if in the investigation, the police focused on whites as suspects? Should the police ALSO focus on black people as possible culprits?

Or do you realize how f'n asinine that would be?

-=Mike

June 9, 2002

Yeah, there is some value in it. But does it outweigh the negatives???>>>

Saving thousands of lives v hurting some peoples' feelings?

Wow, that IS a tough decision!

<<<Say that the FBI had handled the info the exact same way they did over the 9-11 thing. Would racial profiling at the airport have saved these people.>>>

"Sir, we have a bunch of young Muslim men at flight schools who don't care to learn to land. They bought some plane tickets---one-way, of course---with cash. Should we possibly worry about them?"

"Of course not, Smith! Grandmothers can kill people just as effectively"

<<<In all likelihood, no. I am pretty sure the terrorist didn't walk through the airport with the knives in their pockets>>>

Nor would it have been illegal for them to do it.

<<<, they obviously had planed on it, and hid them accordingly (scary visual place.......okay and gone). Criminals prepare for beating the authorities. All that could be accomplished was annoying the living hell out of all the Arab americans that just wanted to get on the plane. >>>

Shall I break out the violin now?

Let's put no possible annoyance above the possibility of saving lives.

<<<There are black drug dealers...true...but does that make it ok to treat all blacks as drug dealers??>>>

No. But to pretend that blacks DON'T deal drugs would be quite stupid.

<<<There are plenty of whites that are criminal, killers and psychos, but white america doesn't have to worry about being catagorized with that.>>>

Funny, white supremacist groups are watched like a hawk. When a serial killer is on the loose, white males tend to be the focus of the investigation.

No, whites have NO clue what it's like.

Time to give you a hint: We KNOW what it's like---we just don't bitch about it incessantly.

<<<These people are viewed as freaks in the white race while in minorities criminals are stereotypically (and incorrectly) considered to be the norm and the the majority of us that are not, for some reason, are considered exceptions to the rule.>>>

You act like whites alone do this? Do I need to remind you that Jesse Jackson (as detestable a "human" as exists) has said that it bothers him that when he hears footsteps behind him and then sees that the person is white, he feels relieved?

<<<Millions of Arab Americans + small percentage radical psychos= lets treat all Arab Americans like criminals>>>

More like---terrorists tend to be Arabs. If we're going to get terrorists, focusing on the people who tend to MAKE UP THE GROUP might not be a bad strategy.

<<<Insert any minority in that equation and that is how racial profiling is working. The fact that I can't walk around wearing anything short of a shirt and tie without worrying about being considered a drug dealer(apparently there are alot "black males fitting my description just seen fleeing a drug scene" that coincedentally happened right before I walked along...and the officer never has to call back to another officer to get the whole description...aparently the fact that I can answer where I am going and where I'm coming from, where I work and I have a ID such is proof that I couldn't have been the guy) simply because I am young and black.>>>

Hey, sounds rough. You know what? When white kids dress like hoodlums---they get watched closely too.

<<<Luckly Atlanta has some racial profiling laws in place which makes it a much more fun place to be now. >>>

Well, until you get robbed or mugged.

Then it might suck.

-=Mike

If white people don't have to deal with it, they never see what the big deal is. The "small incovience" isn't so small when you are the victim of it.

June 9, 2002

Islam is a religion as is Judaism. calling someone a "fucking muslim" is uncalled for and when you do it you aren't thinking of Cat Stevens or Muhammed Ali, you're thinking of Arabs so don't pretend you aren't. If people were on this board calling people "fucking Jew" or "fucking Catholic" then it wouldn't be tolerated simple as that.

Great. known white supremicists are kept under surveliance. So I suspect are known supporters of Islamic militant groups. Doesn't change the argument that under your thinking all white people should be kept under surveliance just in case they have a white hood in their wardrobe and they celebrate Hitlers birthday. Unless you don't really care about Nazi's and only have it in for Muslims.

I grew up a Catholic and would be quite happy to trust my kids with my old Preist. I wouldn't leave them with one I don't know, but then again I wouldn't leave them with anyone I didn't know.

Yeah I remember what happened on September the 11th. I also remember when Deal was attacked, Harrods was car bombed, Liverpool was bombed, the City of London was bombed, Enniskillen was bombed and other atrocities. But even after all of these happenings in which innocent people died, I was never stopped in the street because of my Irish heritage, or killed in a sweep of Kilburn in the hope of getting the people who did it and if you think that Northern Ireland would be as close to peace as it is if that had happened then you're wrong.

June 9, 2002

"relativists"

"relativists?"

Ah so the War on Terror apolgists have a new insult, well I guess its an improvement on anti semite or "British intellectual" but its doubly stupid. Look Tom as far as I can tell there are two types of people who arguing against this war. The first is the usual crowd saying that all war is evil and that all bombing is evil as it puts civilans are evil. That is NOT moral relativism, that is moral absoultism (bad spelling), that is saying it is equally bad whether Al'Queada does it or the USAF does it. Tom YOU'RE the moral relativist, it is you who would allow Israel to ethnically cleanse Israel while stopping Serbia do the same thing, why? Because you like Israel you didn't like Slobo. It is you who rightly mourns Sept 11th but appulads the bombing of Kabul Airbase and Power Station, why? Because you think your cause is right, THAT is moral relativism not saying all war is bad, which while understandably is stupid and naive.

The second by the way is saying this war is counter productive and will lead to greater problems which is true.

William

June 10, 2002

"Didn't a white supremicist park a car under an office building and blow it up killing many peope?"

Sure did.

"Under your criteria we now know who the enemy is and all white males should be stopped in their cars when they are parking in office buildings."

Then you must not understand my criteria. One incident does not an epidemic make. But on September 11th alone, there were four separate incidents of Arab male terrorists hijacking airplanes for the express purpose of killing as many Americans as possible. Add in the rest of bin Laden's actions against America, and the Muslim tendency to "solve" disputes with a bomb, and I think we have a large and very reasonable cause for concern.

"Doesn't it say somewhere that no racist comments will be tolerated on this board, but everywhere I look I see references to 'fucking moslems'."

We must not be looking in the same places, then, because I can't recall seeing those two words used together like that. If you have, could you point out where?

"Al Qaeda is a very small terrorist organisation with a small membership, yet you all harp om as if every muslim in the world supports them."

A lot of them do. How many Muslim leaders came out and denounced the 9/11 attacks? And how many lent those attacks their implicit support by saying and doing nothing?

"If you want to condemn the millions of people who follow one religion because of the actions of a few extremists then good luck to you."

Who's being condemned. Christ, I'm not advocating dragging everyone who looks Arab out of lines, beating them about the head, rifling thru their belongings, and performing full cavity searches. I don't think anyone is advocating something so ridiculous. What I and others are saying is that terrorists tend to be Arab males, so scrutinizing that group more is a good safety precaution. I don't really care if it inconveniences them, and I don't really care how many do-gooders bitch about it. Our country and our people need to be kept safe, and if that means a few people have to spend an extra couple minutes in line at the airport, tough shit.

"It's not difficult at all, if you're happy to see lots of innocent people suffer or be killed."

I'm not sure how scritinizing Arab males leads to mucho death, but I'm sure you'll enlighten us with an explanation. I saw a lot of innocent people killed and made to suffer about nine months ago, and I don't ever want to see it again. And if we can take reasonable means to try and prevent, then that's what we need to do.

June 10, 2002

"Ah so the War on Terror apolgists have a new insult, well I guess its an improvement on anti semite or "British intellectual" but its doubly stupid."

And "apologists" is a lot better? We call you moral relativists because that's what you are. "Yes, the 9/11 attacks were terrible, but..." "Yes, Al'Qaeda need to be stopped, but..." "America is just as evil as the rest of the world." Those are the three basic things I've heard from the moral relativist crowd. There are no buts about the atrocities carried out on 9/11, and there can never be any buts about it. I don't give a shit that Afghanistan is poor, or in ruin, or that Muslims are generally a happy lot who only occasionally blow a lot of shit up, spew anti-West rhetoric as if it were in the fucking Koran, and enjoy slaughtering innocent people. What happened was evil, those responsible for it need to be brought to justice, and we need to make sure it doesn't happen again. If you can't see those points, then I'm not sure I can explain anything else to you.

"That is NOT moral relativism, that is moral absoultism..."

That presumes there is such a thing as a moral absolute.

"Tom YOU'RE the moral relativist, it is you who would allow Israel to ethnically cleanse Israel while stopping Serbia do the same thing, why?"

I think you meant "ethnically cleanse Palestine" there. I don't recall ever commenting on Serbia, so I have no idea where you're getting this claim. As for Israel, I don't really care what they do with the Palestinians, but I did suggest evicting them into countries that actually want them, and shooting those who remain after two weeks. I have little patience for terrorists, and I care not at all what bad thigns befall them.

"Because you like Israel you didn't like Slobo."

I didn't? Perhaps you could show where I said that. I've said it before: I'm not a big fan of Israel. I think they should be supported because they are the lone democracy in that region, and a useful ally because of that. I don't fly the freaking flag, or anything.

"It is you who rightly mourns Sept 11th but appulads the bombing of Kabul Airbase and Power Station, why?"

Um... because the terrorists deserved it? Wanting the guilty to get their comeuppance isn't moral relativism, Will, it's a sense of justice.

"Because you think your cause is right, THAT is moral relativism..."

Let's see... terrorists are evil. Evil needs to be stopped. Ergo, terrorists need to be stopped. America and its allies have committed to stopping terrorism. Sounds like a good cause to me. I really don't see how you're getting moral relativism out of this, since I didn't use a "Yes, but," nor did I condemn someone else for issuing the same response we've been issuing.

June 10, 2002

Islam is a religion as is Judaism. calling someone a "fucking muslim" is uncalled for and when you do it you aren't thinking of Cat Stevens or Muhammed Ali, you're thinking of Arabs so don't pretend you aren't.>>>

Not necessarily. I could be referring to that grand genetic mistake Farrakhan and his ilk. "F'n Moslem" is an anti-religion slur, not a racist slur.

<<<If people were on this board calling people "fucking Jew" or "fucking Catholic" then it wouldn't be tolerated simple as that. >>>

Well, when Jews and Catholics kill thousands in this country, you MIGHT have a god point here.

<<<Great. known white supremicists are kept under surveliance. So I suspect are known supporters of Islamic militant groups. Doesn't change the argument that under your thinking all white people should be kept under surveliance just in case they have a white hood in their wardrobe and they celebrate Hitlers birthday.>>>

That's was never my argument. Shoud young men of Arab ancestry be focused upon as security risks?

Absolutely.

We KNOW that many of these groups have sent them here. Not a debatable question there. We KNOW that many of them fervently harbor anti-U.S sentiment (while living here---one of the greater ironies out there).

So, yes investigate them. If we have a spate of white hate groups targeting buildings with planes, white males would have to tolerate the horrible burden of having security check you every so often before you board a plane.

<<<Unless you don't really care about Nazi's and only have it in for Muslims.>>>

Well, since Nazis are, at best, a barely existent fringe group with virtually no support anywhere while Muslim terrorists don't tend to lack funding---they're not quite the same thing.

But, if you wish to portray this as me being pro-Nazi, feel free.

<<>>

Let's say it was a priest you never knew. He came from a parrish recently and you have no clue why he left the old parrish.

You'd blindly trust your child to him?

Well, I'd hope for your child's sake that your blind faith would never be regretted on your part.

<<>>

A lot of people DO, though. They're priests, right? If you can't trust a priest, who can you trust, right?

<<<Yeah I remember what happened on September the 11th. I also remember when Deal was attacked, Harrods was car bombed, Liverpool was bombed, the City of London was bombed, Enniskillen was bombed and other atrocities. But even after all of these happenings in which innocent people died, I was never stopped in the street because of my Irish heritage, or killed in a sweep of Kilburn in the hope of getting the people who did it and if you think that Northern Ireland would be as close to peace as it is if that had happened then you're wrong.>>>

Amazingly enough, America is more peaceful than Ireland in spite of thee horrible measures.

There is something to be said for the American way of dealing with the situation here. If Ireland and Britain were willing to not take all precautions to stop terrorism for decades, it is their poor judgment.

-=Mike

..See? Just not much vitriol here.

June 10, 2002

fucking Muslims.

Second post down by Invader3k. There you go Tom.

Mike I explicity stated in my post that I wouldn't leave my kids with someone I didn't know so please read before replying.

Nazis are on the rise everywhere. If you don't know that then read more papers. Of course in previous posts when you've been presented with facts you've said that the UN, charities and the liberal press all make things up while you know the real truth. Bit of blind faith there and not on my part.

The only problem I have with racila profiling is it is always abused. I know a black guy who worked very hard to get himself a BMW and sold it after two months because every time he went out in it he got stopped by the police. I know of many incidents where young and old black males were stopped and basically bullied because "they resembled a suspect" on one night a six foot 22 year old Rastafarian and a forty five year old white collar worker with close cropped hair were stopped because they resembled the same person.

Because a member of a religion commits a totally evil and vile act that kills thousands of people I don't find it acceptable to prefix any follower of that the religion with the word "fucking"

June 10, 2002

"The only problem I have with racila profiling is it is always abused."

I doubt that it's "always" abused. The potential is there to abuse it, but anything can be abused in the right (or wrong) hands. The idea behind racial profiling is a sound one, but several bad implementations of it have given the practice a negative connotation. I maintain that profiling Arab males as a security risk is both necessary and prudent.

"Because a member of a religion commits a totally evil and vile act that kills thousands of people I don't find it acceptable to prefix any follower of that the religion with the word 'fucking'."

Fucking liberals.

I think Invader was just venting in his post. To me, any group that perpetrates the killing of thousands of innocents richly deserves a "fucking" before their name. Maybe if the Muslim community would have actually condemned the 9/11 attacks, people would be less likely to think they all had a hand in it. Tacit support is still support.

June 10, 2002

<<<Nazis are on the rise everywhere.>>>

Man, that IS a good one. Nazis are the same fringe group that people laugh at as they've ALWAYS been. Even the German neo-Nazis that seemed so on the rise a few years back were a miniscule fringe group with virtually no popular support.

Going from 12 members to 15 members CAN be described as a shocking 25% increase in membersip---or it can be described as them still being tiny and irrelevant.

Meanwhile, Arab terrorism IS on the rise.

<<<If you don't know that then read more papers.>>>

Give me a SINGLE story about the rise of Nazis. Yes, there are Nazi parties in many countries. And they are completely irrelevant everywhere. If the press is gong to attempt to argue that Nazism is gaining popularity, then my beliefs about the press and their lack of believabilty have been proven.

If you wish to spend your time in fear of Nazis, then you have a major problem.

<<<Of course in previous posts when you've been presented with facts you've said that the UN, charities and the liberal press all make things up while you know the real truth. Bit of blind faith there and not on my part.>>>

Such as? The Jenin "massacre"? The press DID make it up. I was 100% right there.

The cruelty of Israelis? Exaggerations.

That Pim Fortuyn was a xenophobic right-winger? COMPLETELY fabricated.

If you completely believe the press (or even MODERATELY believe the U.N or most charities), you are naive.

<<<The only problem I have with racila profiling is it is always abused.>>>

ALWAYS abused?

Do you know how much racial profiling police do? Do you know how rare it is for it to be "abused"?

<<>>

Was he speeding?

Was he driving erratically?

Was he dressed like a thug?

I've found that most "innocent" victims aren't all that innocent.

<<<I know of many incidents where young and old black males were stopped and basically bullied because "they resembled a suspect" on one night a six foot 22 year old Rastafarian and a forty five year old white collar worker with close cropped hair were stopped because they resembled the same person.>>>

The police generally have little more than "black man, about this height, about this weight" to work with.

If those men weren't ARRESTED, then it's just whining, plain and simple.

<<<Because a member of a religion commits a totally evil and vile act that kills thousands of people I don't find it acceptable to prefix any follower of that the religion with the word "fucking" >>>

If they won't condemn it, "fucking" is the least bad thing I could say about them.

-=Mike

June 11, 2002

Ok,You can't say racial profiling doesn't get abused because it does, Mike your damn right I'm going to BITCH AND WHINE ABOUT IT when I see or hear shit that isn't right. I know plenty of stories on "Racial Profiling" that are abused, Just last week 5 White cops were aquitted for shooting at a UNARMED black couple and this when they were OFF DUTY in Chicago shit like that pisses me off, I bet if they were black and the couple was white it would be a different story. Or what about the Dialo case, He was a immigrant he didn't know the law and the police thought he was someone they were chasing but he wasn't and then they got trigger happy when he pulled out his wallet, they thought he was pulling out a gun when Dialo thought he was getting rob. How about the Rodney King beating the cops gave him, true he was speeding but did the cops have to beat his ass that badly? So do black people have legit complaint when the cops abuse their authority on us? HELL YEAH WE DO!!!! IF it happend to you, you would BITCH AND WHINE about it too. Muzanisa is right if a young black person who has a little money to afford a BMW legally, the cops think either you stole it or the car was involed in a crime of some sort. Mike, I was kinda curious how would you describe a thug?

June 11, 2002

Just last week 5 White cops were aquitted for shooting at a UNARMED black couple and this when they were OFF DUTY in Chicago

That's not racial profiling. That's shooting at an unarmed black couple when they are off-duty. Of course hindsight is 20/20 and the couple was probably doing something suspicious. It's real easy to say they were unarmed after the fact. What if the guy was reaching into his shirt acting threatening towards the police? Are they supposed to wait until he shoots and kills one of them to take action? It's funny your use of white, as if black cops can't racially profile black citizens.

He was a immigrant he didn't know the law and the police thought he was someone they were chasing but he wasn't and then they got trigger happy when he pulled out his wallet, they thought he was pulling out a gun when Dialo thought he was getting rob.

Ignorance of the law excuses no one. It's a tragedy that he died. But put the blame on the criminal the police were chasing. Dialo was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

How about the Rodney King beating the cops gave him, true he was speeding but did the cops have to beat his ass that badly?

Again, that wasn't racial profiling. That was a few corrupt cops abusing power and getting away with it. And if you're going to complain about the riots remember it wasn't just black men revolting. There were poor Mexicans and whites rioting as well.

Muzanisa is right if a young black person who has a little money to afford a BMW legally, the cops think either you stole it or the car was involed in a crime of some sort.

I like your use of the phrase "afford a BMW legally." As if there is another way to "afford" one, i.e. stealing it. And in how many cases does this occur. If you were a police officer in you saw a poor black guy riding around the inner-city in a BMW, wouldn't you be suspicious. What's the harm in pulling the guy over to make sure everything is legit... it's not a violation of rights, it's an inconvenience.

June 11, 2002

I (correctly) define Moral realtivism as defining an action by WHO committed it and/or WHY they commited it, either what inspired them or what they are trying to achieve.

Now there is no differance (accept on scale of course) between the USA bombing Serbia TV Station or a Tailban Army Barracks and the attacks on World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.

Now you could say what Al'Queada did is different as their terrorists but that is defining Sept 11th by those who did it and besides if you accept the idea of "state terrorism" then you can't exclude the possiblity that America is commiting terrorism.

Now you could say that Al'Queada were purposely attacking civilans, might be true but again your defining the action of the attack by what those carrying it out want to achieve, hence Moral Realitivism.

Now on Serbia/ War on terror apolgist comments I'll apolgise for them I was in a rush, etc.

However you do support what can only be defined as Ethnic Cleasning in Israel/ Palenstine (Ethnic Cleasning being defined as forcing people to move from an area becuase of their ethnic group) and America did bombed a TV Station and other civilain installitions in both Serbia and Afghanistan because they "contrubuted to the war effort".

Now I am not saying these actions are right/wrong, nor I'm a saying the the American action and the other's actions are the same but to make any judgement on the differance requires you to either fall back on the American's moral quality or what their trying to achieve.

Now I'm not saying these are wrong I agree with you that there is no such thing as a moral absoulte, and yes it is stupid and bizarre (to put it lightly) to treat America and Al'Queada the same.

Now onto those who go "Sept 11th was terrible but..." now unless they actively say that the causes or subjects they give vindcate what Al'Queada did then are not moral realtivists, indeed they are moral absoultists as they are saying "Yes we agree with some of the issues Al'Queada have but we still think Sept 11th was terrible".

Now on the idea there can be no "buts" when it comes to the War on Terror, I'll agree with you to a point. There can be no buts on the principle of the "War on Terror" i.e that Al'Queada must be smashed, Islamiso-Facism defeated, ectera.

However they can and are disagreements on how best to carry out the war. The fact is the Afghanistan war meant and did nothing in the grand scheme things and to be honest the more I learn about the more dubious I am about the reasons behind it.

The fact is (as reported by respected former Times editor Simon Jenkins) that the Saudi/Pakistan negoations were at a knife edge and we (and I use that on purpose) might have got Osama Bin Ladien and the Tailban leaders yet still America started bombing, why? The only three I can think about is a reluctance to put him on trial (the case that Al'Queada did Sept 11th has never been proved to legalistic proof), a desire to reaffirm Americans belief in the Armed/Intelligence Services and lastly that Bush wanted to done a miltary fatigue and play the hero for political reasons.

Now I'm more inclined for reason one, although Bush's use of Sept 11th in his campagin literature is disturbing and also I think we all forget how weak a President Bush looked in the immedate aftermath of Sept 11th.

Now of course there's always a danger of believing journalists (or officals/politicans for that matter) who may have an agenda but the actual results of the Afghanistan campagin raise doubt on whether that was the way to go. For example due to the bombing Al'Queada has escaped into Pakistan and has been stiring up trouble between India and Pakistan. Now I agree with whoever said that we might be overreacting over the threat of nuclear war but it is true that in 1998/9 some Pakistania generals (including Musharrf) were planning to launch a nuclear strike on India and were only stopped when Clinton warned the Prime Minster.

On a more domestic level the bombing of Afghanistan has caused Muslims tip offs to drop off as can be proved by a rise in MI6 tip offs from Muslims post Sept 11th, a drop off after the bombing started, a pick up when the bombing "ended" and a further fall back to pre Sept 11th levels due to Camp X-Ray.

The fact is this is a "new" war that should not be fought with large armies. It should be though with anti-terrorist branches from across the world cooperating to stop terrorist plots and also by addressing the concerns of the ordinary populus. This is what the British and Irish (when they finally came on board) did and although with the Stormont Protcool we grasp defeat from the jaws of victory it does work.

There is also the sinking feel that many non-conservatives feel that Sept 11th is being use as a pretext to settle old scores with Saddam (UK intelligence says he had nothing to do with it), Iran (hated the Taiban, wanted to invade in 1999), North Korea (Communist, do the math) and Cuba (oh COME ON!) oh and completing the ultra-zionist ideal of a greater Israel including the West Bank.

Now I wish I could quote her but I'm in the libairy, but Margrat Thatcher in her memoirs The Downing Street Years (good book by the way) said that although she supported Israel the country and the idea that you could not deny that the Palenstinans lived in appauling conditions.

Gerald Kaufam (a Jew) has said that although he loves Israel and that believes in the zionist idea that the Palenstians have the right to self-determination and that Sharon's policy has managed to make a man who offers nothing to the Palestinain people a hero again.

Both of these are right, like all fascists/ terrorists Arafat can see the problems and how to exploit them but he can't solve them. The Palenstinans had saw through him but thanks to Sharon he is now a hero.

What people like Mike have got to realise is that Sharon is not Israel, he is not the zionist cause and certaintly isn't the jewish race. He is a bully, he is a war criminal, he is a man who will play the miltary card for his own selfish political gain (as said by right wing Daily Mail correspondent Ann Leslie).

The fact is this not the worst terrorist onslaught Israel has had to face, it had to face alot worst in the 60s,70s and 80s yet in never responded like this outside of Lebanon,where you guessed Sharon was in charge.

I love Israel, I love the Jewish, I as a European and a Brition I'm deeply sorry for the centuries of persuction climaxing in the Holocaust we put them through, but just like the molstered child who becomes the molster, the Israelis are becoming the persuctors. Israel needs a solution most notably beacuse it needs to get rid of its Arab minority that lives in Israel at the moment as it has a higher birth rate and will eventually overtake the Jewish population. If a Palenstinan state was state up then maybe they would go and build that nation up and save Israel as a jewish state.

Also despite the American grants Israel's econmey is screwed as can be seen by the new austerity budget that Sharon is trying to get through. And also far from a country untited behind Sharon over 70% of the Jewish public support the idea of a Palenstinan state.

It is things like this that should not be closed for debate, a debate on how to conduct a war is good. For example Britain has changed Prime Minster at least three times during wars when we were doing badly. They are Pitt the elder during a war (can't remember which one) against the French, from Asquith to Loyld Geogre in World War One and of course from Chamberlian to Churchill during WW2 and all three through a change in policy and their leadership help win the war for Britian and save us. To disagree with the conservatives on the Afghanistan and Israel/Palestine and to refuse to allow them to hijack the 4,000 dead at the WTC and Pentagon to settle old grudges is not appeasement, it is not being an apolgist for terrorism and it is not explaining away Sept 11th, it is right and it is nessarcy because if allow those who failed to stop Sept 11th in the first place (the Egyptian President warned for christ's sake) to set the agenda then we will be dragged into a war that is a lie and will leave many more innocents dead.

We will be screwed basically.

William

June 12, 2002

Ok,You can't say racial profiling doesn't get abused because it does>>>

Nobody said it NEVER gets abused. We said it isn't ALWAYS abused and is, in fact, an excellent tool in detective work.

But, if misstating comments makes you happy, have a ball.

<<<, Mike your damn right I'm going to BITCH AND WHINE ABOUT IT when I see or hear shit that isn't right. I know plenty of stories on "Racial Profiling" that are abused, Just last week 5 White cops were aquitted for shooting at a UNARMED black couple and this when they were OFF DUTY in Chicago shit like that pisses me off>>>

World of difference between racial profiling and ATTEMPTED MURDER. What the off-duty cops did was ATTEMPT TO MURDER somebody.

<<<, I bet if they were black and the couple was white it would be a different story.>>>

Possibly---but possibly not.

The press has things they want to report and things they don't want to report.

Remember how much we heard about the horrible killing of James Byrd in Texas?

Did you know that an almost identical crime happened there last year? Well, the victim was white and the perpetrators were black, but otherwise, the exact same crime happened.

You didn't? Can't say I'm shocked as the press ignored it.

<<<Or what about the Dialo case, He was a immigrant he didn't know the law and the police thought he was someone they were chasing but he wasn't and then they got trigger happy when he pulled out his wallet, they thought he was pulling out a gun when Dialo thought he was getting rob.>>>

And a racially mixed jury acquitted the cops because the cops LEGITIMATELY felt that he was pulling a gun. They were wrong---but how many times do thugs pull gns on cops and fire? If a policeman wants to live to get home and see his family, he needs to be REALLY wary.

An incorrect (albeit legitimate in theory) assumption by officers is not a condemnation of racial profiing.

<<<How about the Rodney King beating the cops gave him, true he was speeding but did the cops have to beat his ass that badly?>>>

He didn't exactly follow orders when they told him to stay on the ground. Not saying what the cops did was justified (it was over the line), but don't paint King as this innocent guy here.

<<<So do black people have legit complaint when the cops abuse their authority on us? HELL YEAH WE DO!!!! IF it happend to you, you would BITCH AND WHINE about it too.>>>

But then I wouldn't ALSO bitch that fellow members of my particular group get thrown in jail more often while ALSO bitching that the police don't care about black-on-black crime.

<<<Muzanisa is right if a young black person who has a little money to afford a BMW legally, the cops think either you stole it or the car was involed in a crime of some sort. Mike, I was kinda curious how would you describe a thug?>>>

There is a style of dress that indicates this guy might be a thug.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're blind.

-=Mike

June 12, 2002

"Ok,You can't say racial profiling doesn't get abused because it does..."

I never said it couldn't be abused. Anything can be abused. What I said is that it isn't *always* abused, despite what some of you would like to claim.

"Just last week 5 White cops were aquitted for shooting at a UNARMED black couple and this when they were OFF DUTY in Chicago"

That's not racial profiling. It's blatant racism and attempted murder. There's a huge difference between racial profiling, which is a useful tool in police work, and racism, which is a loathsome worldview. People being pulled over for "driving while Black" are victims of racism, not racial profiling, since the principle behind them getting pulled over is that a Black person can't get a nice car without stealing it. That's racism, plain and simple.

"Or what about the Dialo case..."

If you're a policeman and you think someone is pulling a gun on you, are you going to do nothing until you're really sure it's a gun? If so, you're not going to live very long. It's very hard for civilians to criticize the police in a lot of cases, since we don't do their jobs and our day-to-day decisions rarely mean life or death for ourselves and others.

"How about the Rodney King beating the cops gave him, true he was speeding but did the cops have to beat his ass that badly?"

Rodney King was far from the angel the media made him out to be. I think the beating they gave him was certainly excessive, but he's the one who led them on a chase, had a criminal history, and refused to cooperate. As Chris Rock said, don't run from the cops, "cuz if they have to chase you, they're bringing an ass-kicking with them."

"So do black people have legit complaint when the cops abuse their authority on us?"

Anyone has a legitimate complaint in those cases. However, how often do you think we hear the whole story, especially from the supposed victims of these abuses of power?

General Hawley's Words

Recommended Posts

Guest DrTom

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Invader3k

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Ripper

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Vyce

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest ant_7000

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Ripper

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Vern Gagne

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest ant_7000

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest DrTom

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest DrTom

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest muzanisa

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest TheMikeSC

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest TheMikeSC

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest TheMikeSC

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest TheMikeSC

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest TheMikeSC

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest muzanisa

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest DrTom

Share this post