NYC Officials Call for Racial Profiling

Good article by Charles Krauthammer.

The type of searches they are doing are nothing more than exercises in knee-jerk reactionism coated with an excess of political correctness.

the thing is if nyc cops can't tell a wallet from a handgun how can we expect them to tell an arab from a mexican.

Good it is needed.

The people who are against racial profiling like to throw up Teddy K. and Timmah M. Great 2 in 50 have been non-Arabs.

People need to pull their heads out of their ass and realize racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

Oh, and if you reach into your pockets when the police tell you not to move, you should expect to be filled with lead.

what if I have a trench coat on when its 90 degrees out?

Originally posted by Davo:

Oh, and if you reach into your pockets when the police tell you not to move, you should expect to be filled with lead.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
what if I have a trench coat on when its 90 degrees out?

If you're going to wear a trench coat in 90-degree weather, make sure it's on the same day there are attempted bombings in your city's subway by people dressed in heavy clothes. Also, tell your family to complain and make an international incident out of it because you were a [censored] idiot and ran when the cops told you to stop.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:

People need to pull their heads out of their ass and realize racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

the nypd doesn't agree with you.

Originally posted by BP:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:

People need to pull their heads out of their ass and realize racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

the nypd doesn't agree with you.

Yea, but what do they know, they can't tell a wallet from a handgun

Originally posted by Davo:
Also, tell your family to complain and make an international incident out of it because you were a [censored] idiot and ran when the cops told you to stop.

while you stayed in the country illegally after your visa expired.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

Did I miss something here?

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Good it is needed.

The people who are against racial profiling like to throw up Teddy K. and Timmah M. Great 2 in 50 have been non-Arabs.

People need to pull their heads out of their ass and realize racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

This is simply, as Davo said, knee-jerk reactionism (if that's even a term) It's racism and anyone who has the belief that the Muslim community as a whole intends to harm the US doesn't know the Muslim community. It just seems there always must be a group to blame groups for, it makes people think if we get them all we will be safe. This is no way to live, it is oppressive and unfair; and as I often say Un-American.

I'm all for it, and I'm a lightly toasted Hindu (meaning I'm equally likely to get harassed!). . . .frankly, the Muslims have harassed my people (haha, even though I was born here) back in India long enough with their bombings, etc. I say harass the hell out of them, so what if it's UnAmerican, at least we'll all be safe and alive. . .and yes I understand 90% of them aren't crazy and fanatical, but profiling all of them will at least freak out the remaining 10% from doing the wayward crap they do. . . maybe, who knows, probably piss one of them off and they'll strap a bomb and go running into a crowd for Allah

I can honestly say, like Carlos Mencia said, TAG, YOU'RE IT!!! Sucks to be Muslim right now. . .

its hard for anyone who is tan not to get profiled

like carlos mencia said, if your in

Cali/tex= your mexican
Florida= cuban
New york= Puerto rican
Airport/railway= terrorist

by the way, suneil=not indian.....hes reborn mexican..WBR

I love saying it because so many do not understand this country, those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither. Do not ever say "so what if it is Un-American", that is one of the worst things an Ameican can say. The rest of your statement if just laden with fear.

well said.

Well if every bomber so far has been a young middle eastern muslim man I would expect them to search AT LEAST EVERY young middle eastern muslim man! Why is that so hard?

Just like if every bombing was by a white american male with brown hair and brown eyes like myself, I would expect them to all be searched as well. Seems pretty simple. And you know what? I wouldn't mind them searching me one single bit, knowing that they are keeping me and my family safe. Bloomberg is a moron.

Quote:

Oh, and if you reach into your pockets when the police tell you not to move, you should expect to be filled with lead.

... and if five hoodlums start running at me shouting not to move, I should assume those are undercover police officers and cooperate. Otherwise I might end up like that Brazilian guy did in the London underground.

T.

Originally posted by tiv:
... and if five hoodlums start running at me shouting not to move, I should assume those are undercover police officers and cooperate. Otherwise I might end up like that Brazilian guy did in the London underground.

Yeah, I mean what nerve they have to shoot a suspected terrorist who left from a suspected terrorist hideout in the middle of the summer while wearing a trenchcoat and then goes into a subway where bombings has just recently happened and then runs from the police INTO the subway when he is told to stop. THE NERVE OF THOSE DARNED POLICE OFFICERS!

Officially, I'd say you are right, added with the fear of a huge law suit from a future 'harrassed innocent' muslim. Unofficially, I bet you agree. Until another attack, we'll never know who was right....

Originally posted by BP:

the nypd doesn't agree with you.

I agree, the Muslim community as a whole may not want to harm the US (or Westerners for a more wider base), however, the facts can not be denied. HOw many more attacks here on our own soil and others soil by Muslims do we need before common sense starts to kick in???

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:

This is simply, as Davo said, knee-jerk reactionism (if that's even a term) It's racism and anyone who has the belief that the Muslim community as a whole intends to harm the US doesn't know the Muslim community. It just seems there always must be a group to blame groups for, it makes people think if we get them all we will be safe. This is no way to live, it is oppressive and unfair; and as I often say Un-American.

What freedom do you have if you are laden with fear every day when you get up in the morning and head towards your mass transit? What freedom do you have, if you have to change your ways every due to fear or some kind of attack? What liberty/freedom do you have after you have been killed by an attack that could have been prevented by some screening or God forbid racial profiling.

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:
I love saying it because so many do not understand this country, those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither. Do not ever say "so what if it is Un-American", that is one of the worst things an Ameican can say. The rest of your statement if just laden with fear.

Bottom line is until the world wide Muslim population starts to police it's own their sect of the world will be viewed as barbaric and violent. To say the US is oppressive, violent, inhumane, whatever moronic word you want to use is idiotic.

I can't beleive that some people are so scared that they would throw everything that this country is about in the trash. A little fear goes a long way I guess.

I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Scared? No. However, when proper things are not put into place that can easily prevent another 9/11 type event, then that is just moronic. Do not put the blame on the people who want to do something to prevents, put the blame where it is needed. Either do it right, or do not do it at all. Random searches without profiling are just plain stupid. When was the list time you saw a 65 year old Jewish man blow himself up?

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
I can't beleive that some people are so scared that they would throw everything that this country is about in the trash. A little fear goes a long way I guess.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by tiv:
... and if five hoodlums start running at me shouting not to move, I should assume those are undercover police officers and cooperate. Otherwise I might end up like that Brazilian guy did in the London underground.

Yeah, I mean what nerve they have to shoot a suspected terrorist who left from a suspected terrorist hideout in the middle of the summer while wearing a trenchcoat and then goes into a subway where bombings has just recently happened and then runs from the police INTO the subway when he is told to stop. THE NERVE OF THOSE DARNED POLICE OFFICERS!

Would you please tell me in what way could he have figured out that those people were actually police officers ?
He ran AWAY from the people he believed were attacking him.
I do not consider yelling "Police" to be a credible form of identification in such situations (if we assume his English was good enough to understand...)

And if you're saying it's OK to shoot a SUSPECTED criminal in the head right away, well, that's just one thing we do not agree on.

T.

100% for racial profiling. Why? Because it works. If you claim differently, I'm certain your local community college offers a 100 level class in statistics. Most likely, you'll have to have passed algebra as a pre-req.

Of course some of you will suggest I take an ethics/humanities/American Government class.
If you think life is supposed to be fair, get over it. It isn't, nor will it be. The same goes for the good ol' USofA. Constitutional rights? Hey, we have Amendments for that.

PS. I don't mind a bit having to take my shoes off to board a plane. When a cop yells at you, in any language, stop.

[yoda voice]Learn more one does by listening than by talking.[/yoda voice]

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Not sure if I understand the stats? How do these numbers have anything to do with racial profiling?

Seems to me that you are saying that if we allow profiling that somehow we must stop these other activities since they kill too? Well, if you are saying that we should ban these activities because people die you still make no sense. Profiling doesn't ban anyone from living in this country, it mearly states that we understand reality and the world we live in where an infinatly higher number of Arabs than whites are killing people in terrorist attacks. The last white terrorist attack was OKC, when was the last arab terrorist attack? Every damn day in some places of the world, in most others, London, WTC come to mind. Oh wait, there were no white men involved in those attacks, only arabs.

Good. They needed to do this a long time ago. I could care less if I get searched, and if some suspicious looking arab dude wants to board my plane, I hope he gets searched too.

If he isn't a terrorist at least he knows that people are trying to keep him safe too.

You said the lives of 3000 should allow us to infringe on the rights of 10's of thousands of darker complected Americans. I'm just trying to make a list for the next knee twitch.

My big point is where does it stop? Hitler's deal looked like a pretty good thing at first but after awhile you were ether on board or dead. The Soviet Union...that didn't go so well either now did it. One of the first things to go in both cases were the peoples personal freedoms.
It's easier to hold on to what you have than fight to get back what you've lost.

this thread sickens me..

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
You said the lives of 3000 should allow us to infringe on the rights of 10's of thousands of darker complected Americans. I'm just trying to make a list for the next knee twitch.

My big point is where does it stop? Hitler's deal looked like a pretty good thing at first but after awhile you were ether on board or dead. The Soviet Union...that didn't go so well either now did it. One of the first things to go in both cases were the peoples personal freedoms.
It's easier to hold on to what you have than fight to get back what you've lost.

Being stopped and searched doesn't equate to a loss of freedom. Well, maybe for a minute or two, but if it makes us safer then we should be doing it.

Use your own quote, I TOO have the right to LIFE, liberty and the persuit of happiness. I don't want that ended because some arab wants to blow up the bus/bridge/building I am on or in and we didn't stop them because we felt bad for hurting his feelings by searching him more closly.

It's not only the lives of 3000, but yes, the lives of those 3000 could have been saved at the risk of a f*cking inconveinance to a few people. How easily we forget just 4 years ago... Those people could have stood a hell of a better chance had we gone with the terrorist profile of arab men. But we didn't, and we paid the price.

Nice job comparing the safety of innocent people to the greed of Hitler and the USSR. Too bad they are nowhere near the same. Hitler blamed money problems and the like on the Jews, none of which were true. We are blaming terrorist attacks on arabs, which is true, they are committing the terrorist attacks. When white men start strapping TNT and taking train rides, I will call for them to be searched. But until then, people of arab descent are doing the terrorist acts.

But of course, you will always have the bleeding heart liberal that will feel bad for the terrorist and not the victims. And then they will claim to be for people's rights, not caring about the rights of the victims of course because they are dead, and the dead can't talk.

agreed, from a security stand point profiling does work. don't bother debating it.
-and just what are we profiling you ask? muslims. they are by far most likely to to try attack the west in a terrorist manor today.
-what do most (but not all, we know that) muslims look like? mostly dark skinned although not dark enough to be considered black. most of them are middle eastern in origin although they may not live there or have been born there.
-do they generally resemble any other groups? hispanics a little, assuming you don't know what a hispanic/latino/chicano person looks like.
-does this mean that we should ignore anyone who doesn't fit this mold? no
-should we ignore muslims in the interest of not offending people. no
-should we stop all muslims because they fit this mold. no

well gee gosh and golly darn. a little bit of simple reasoning and there we have it. an accurate basic profile of who is most likely to be an fundamental islamic terrorist.

personal real world example:
about a year ago i was stopped, searched via the "pat down", grilled by four sapd cops with another in the whirly bird floating above and (with my permission) my car was searched at 1:30 in the morning because i didn't look like i belonged in that part of town at that hour. the exact statement was, "you don't look like you belong here." admittedly i was fussing with my headlights while driving through the residential area surrounding my apartment so i was attracting attention to myself and deserved the attention i received. after about twenty minutes of proving we were positioned just below my apartment i was released with the only real consequence being my large size number 4 from carls jr was then cold. moral, in the interest of protecting the community at large i was detained and released shortly thereafter. for their trouble i thanked the officers for trying to protect the community at large even though i was inconvienenced. so yes, even when i am negatively effected i support profiling.

When did it become a *right* to fly? We all have the *right* to free speech but I don't remember anything in the Bill of Rights addressing the *right* to fly. Last I checked flying, like driving, was a privledge to enjoyed by law-abiding citizens. Therefore I can't see how my *rights* are being violated if someone pulls me aside to make sure I"m not going to blow up the plane. If there are any *rights* being violated it is those of the thousands of innocent civilians being killed by terrorists taking advantage of our system.

It is disgusting that some people make this out to be a racial issue. Who here *hasn't* been searched?---Big friggin deal, right? In fact if you're upset about getting searched then I"ve got wonder... and Goonz, YOU are starting to sicken me. Your posts on terror-related subjects reek with sympathy towards the terrorist cause.

The thing I find lacking in the anti-profiling people is a lack of an arguement that profiling does not work. They only 'argument' if you want to call it was is that it 'takes your rights away'. Which I find very weak. You are the same people who complain that Gitmo is so inhumane (yet, those prisoners have it way better than alot of US citizens). The same people who claim the war in iraq is 'for' oil.

Sitting back and doing nothing is not going to solve a problem. However, you are the ones who will [censored] about the government not doing anything when the next attack happens. I'm tired of Muslims claiming 'discrimination' because of hte worlds events. Wake up and smell the focking coffee. You aren't doing anything with your own, so it's said, that the ones are, are turned into the 'bad ones'.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

My big point is where does it stop? Hitler's deal looked like a pretty good thing at first but after awhile you were ether on board or dead. The Soviet Union...that didn't go so well either now did it. One of the first things to go in both cases were the peoples personal freedoms.

talk about knee jerk reactionism. so figuring arabs mostly comprise islamic terrorists, a group dead set on killing as many westerners as possible=acting like hitler!? hmm, now that is a stretch.

Profiling is definitely needed and makes sense. The only thing I see wrong in this thread is that people keep calling it racial profiling. In actuality it's TERRORIST profiling. It just happens to be a fact that alost ALL the terrorism in the world over the last decade, with few exceptions, happens to have been perpetrated by Islamic radical fundamentalist extremists. It makes perfect sense to devote more of our security resources to the group of people who attacked us on 9/11 and who attacked Spain and London, I could go on, but you get the point. If any of our peace loving Islamic bretheren (the majority, I'm sure) don't like this, then instead of yelling at us, they should spend their energy yelling at the extremists who are comitting and financing the terrorist acts. Don't see that happening, do you? If it was tall white folks of Danish descent (like me), I'd EXPECT to be stopped every time I took mass transit or flew. I, personally, thank the folks for helping me feel safe every time I'm searched.

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:
this thread sickens me..

You should be sickened by the people who have hijacked the Muslim faith with their extremist views and their murderous terrorism, not by this thread!

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:

... We are blaming terrorist attacks on arabs, which is true, they are committing the terrorist attacks. When white men start strapping TNT and taking train rides, I will call for them to be searched. But until then, people of arab descent are doing the terrorist acts.

The people behind 9/11 were arabs => arabs are terrorists and should be held under suspicion
Tim McVeigh was a registered Republican => registered Republicans should be held under suspicion and searched regularly

Just for the lovers of statistics: Tim McVeigh himself makes up a larger percentage of registered Republicans than that of the 9/11 attackers of the believers of Islam.
(And most - if not all - of the London bombers were not Arabs).

T.

Originally posted by tiv:

The people behind 9/11 were arabs => arabs are terrorists and should be held under suspicion
Tim McVeigh was a registered Republican => registered Republicans should be held under suspicion and searched regularly

Just for the lovers of statistics: Tim McVeigh himself makes up a larger percentage of registered Republicans than that of the 9/11 attackers of the believers of Islam.
(And most - if not all - of the London bombers were not Arabs).

The stupidity of the comparisons in this thread is amazing. Do a count on the number of terrorist attacks committed by whites vs arabs and tell me. And tell me, which of these people who were involved in london are not arab? 1: Yasin Hassan Omar, Muktar Said Ibrahim, Ramzi Mohammed, Osman Hussain. They also had ties to Al-Qaeda; how many non muslim and white people you know in Al-Qaeda?

No you missed the point again!
When people lose their right to (whatever measure of) freedom they have come to know they have also lost their ability to affect any kind of change in their government.(Psst, like Germany and Russia)

Quote:

Nice job comparing the safety of innocent people to the greed of Hitler and the USSR.

Hitler = 6,000,000 Jews killed.
Stalin = A conservative estimate of 10,000,000 of his own people killed.
All these people were guilt? No, all these people were killed by rampant fear. A fear that they would destroy their society. A fear fostered by people like yourself saying "Giving up this one little thing is no big deal it will protect us". It didn't turn out that way did it?

The bill of rights does not discriminate and neither should we.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Originally posted by tiv:

Tim McVeigh was a registered Republican => registered Republicans should be held under suspicion and searched regularly

Tim McVeigh was ONE person that did this. There are 1,000s of young middle eastern men killing innocent people. Thats why we should be profiling.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by tiv:

Tim McVeigh was a registered Republican => registered Republicans should be held under suspicion and searched regularly

Tim McVeigh was ONE person that did this. There are 1,000s of young middle eastern men killing innocent people. Thats why we should be profiling.

typical sterotyping right there...

It not steriotyping its the truth!

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

typical sterotyping right there...

Not stereotyping; TRUTH!!! Why don't people get this!?!?! I havent seen one non arab strap TNT to themselves and blow up a bus/subway/WTC/Iraq Checkpoints. My God are some people THAT nieve or too politically correct to see this?

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Hitler = 6,000,000 Jews killed.
Stalin = A conservative estimate of 10,000,000 of his own people killed.
All these people were guilt? No, all these people were killed by rampant fear. A fear that they would destroy their society. A fear fostered by people like yourself saying "Giving up this one little thing is no big deal it will protect us". It didn't turn out that way did it?

Oh, so now we went from fisking them to killing them. Your example is far too extreme and way out of touch with reality. We are not trying to imprison or kill them, but TO FRISK OR SEARCH THEM. You want to talk about losing liberty here, but do you feel the same way about gun control? If not you, many opponants of gun control are the same ones that cry about our loss of freedom from profiling. Hell the FBI profiles ALL THE TIME, how do you think many criminals are caught everyday? PROFILING. Hell, there is a whole profession based on profiling.

And tell me, how many 60 year old white women have hijacked an airplane recently; how about ever? But for some reason the TSA feels that they should be searching 60 year old women, but not the man in his 20's and of arab descent right in front of her. That is just PC stupidity run amok.

Quote:

The bill of rights does not discriminate and neither should we.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That ammendment doesn't apply to Terry frisks or patdowns, which is what some want the NYPD to do, frisk based on profiles. Get real here, we are not imprisoning, hurting, killing based on race. There is a reality today that arab men in their late teens to late 20s are killing any non muslims they can.

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

typical sterotyping right there...

Not stereotyping; TRUTH!!! Why don't people get this!?!?! I havent seen one non arab strap TNT to themselves and blow up a bus/subway/WTC/Iraq Checkpoints. My God are some people THAT nieve or too politically correct to see this?

what is this thread trying to prove?
that every man with a middle eastern background, or in other words who is BROWN needs to be searched and profiled against?? wow so I guess I need to be searched every whereI go or in airports (like I usually do) just so you all can feel safe about yourselves..

wish you guys could be in my shoes just to see how [censored] embarassing it is to be profiled for this type of [censored], NONE of you guys will ever know

its easy for you all just to talk about it but to experience this is another whole story, its degrading..

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by tiv:

Tim McVeigh was a registered Republican => registered Republicans should be held under suspicion and searched regularly

Tim McVeigh was ONE person that did this. There are 1,000s of young middle eastern men killing innocent people. Thats why we should be profiling.

True. However, but how is regular white people, or hispanic or black people killing thousands of innocent people any different than a few "arabs" killing a few thousands of also innocent people? Is it that they just didnt decide to spread their murders out over a period of time instead of a day or two like terrorists? Is it me or do you just not hear too much of rapist/murderers/convict arabs (besides actual terrorists) in this country, especially when every criminal on tv is white/black/hispanic most of the time. These groups probably kill a few thousands themselves eh?

Racial profiling does work, but even if it catches every terrorist (if any) in this country its not worth thousands (tens of or hundreds of) of similarly complected people getting harrased for being themselves. Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

-ivan (hispanic btw)

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

wish you guys could be in my shoes just to see how [censored] embarassing it is to be profiled for this type of [censored], NONE of you guys will ever know its easy for you all just to talk about it but to experience this is another whole story, its degrading..

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

Analogy:

If someone called me a cracker would i care...no. If someone called me a wetback would i care...yes.

Innocent White person being searched on terrorism suspicion...no embarrasement (sp). Innocent "arab" person being searched on terrorism suspicion...you get it?

I think that unless your pretty thick headed (not good) its very plain to see why you wouldnt care and why goonz would.

-ivan c.

iirc kokopellian has posted a few times that he actually gets (really) harrassed and is even on some watch list.

i am mistreated virtually every time i have to go into an area we call little saigon. when i go there with a female friend of mine i am especially mistreated for reasons that do not matter here.

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Sorry but I care more about protecting my family then protecting your emotions.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Sorry but I care more about protecting my family then protecting your emotions.

wow

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Sorry but I care more about protecting my family then protecting your emotions.

Sounds like your more interested in protecting you family from arabs (which im sure statistically are less likely to commit killing sprees, rape, murder, pillage and plunder than other groups). I guess at least your intentions are good.

-ivan

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Hitler = 6,000,000 Jews killed.
Stalin = A conservative estimate of 10,000,000 of his own people killed.
All these people were guilt? No, all these people were killed by rampant fear. A fear that they would destroy their society. A fear fostered by people like yourself saying "Giving up this one little thing is no big deal it will protect us". It didn't turn out that way did it?

Oh, so now we went from fisking them to killing them. Your example is far too extreme and way out of touch with reality. We are not trying to imprison or kill them, but TO FRISK OR SEARCH THEM. You want to talk about losing liberty here, but do you feel the same way about gun control? If not you, many opponants of gun control are the same ones that cry about our loss of freedom from profiling. Hell the FBI profiles ALL THE TIME, how do you think many criminals are caught everyday? PROFILING. Hell, there is a whole profession based on profiling.

And tell me, how many 60 year old white women have hijacked an airplane recently; how about ever? But for some reason the TSA feels that they should be searching 60 year old women, but not the man in his 20's and of arab descent right in front of her. That is just PC stupidity run amok.

Quote:

The bill of rights does not discriminate and neither should we.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That amendment doesn't apply to Terry frisks or patdowns, which is what some want the NYPD to do, frisk based on profiles. Get real here, we are not imprisoning, hurting, killing based on race. There is a reality today that arab men in their late teens to late 20s are killing any non muslims they can.

Try and follow along OK? First off if you're going to quote me...use the whole quote. Of course if you didn't read the whole thing then I understand you lack of comprehension.

What happens when a society surrenders it's rights and freedoms? Example of what it can lead to can be found throughout history. Germany and Russia are extreme examples but those that don't remember history are condemned to relive it.

As far as the amendment not applying I think you missed this line.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Stabler, I never said it didn't work I said it goes against the bill of rights, what this country was founded on and is therefore wrong! But since you know me so well you knew that.

Sorry I can't fit into that pigeon hole you made up for me!

Originally posted by eyevancsu:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Sorry but I care more about protecting my family then protecting your emotions.

Sounds like your more interested in protecting you family from arabs (which im sure statistically are less likely to commit killing sprees, rape, murder, pillage and plunder than other groups). I guess at least your intentions are good.

-ivan

HAHAHAHA! That's fabulous!

Nice one Ivan!

Originally posted by eyevancsu:

Sounds like your more interested in protecting you family from arabs (which im sure statistically are less likely to commit killing sprees, rape, murder, pillage and plunder than other groups). I guess at least your intentions are good.

-ivan

Who said Arabs? Arabs are Christian. I am talking about Muslims. And so far every suiside bomber has been a young middle eastern muslim male so why on earth shouldnt we be stopping every young middle eastern muslim male? Because it is embarassing to them? Give me a break! It just makes sence. You can't tell who is arab or muslim, I say stop them all. I dont care about their feelings or even mine. As long as we are all safe. It's not like we are hauling them off to camps like we did with the Japanese. All we are doing is searching them before they get on any mas transit. Sheesh!

Why not just search everybody? That is the only way we could come close to truly being safe...

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Why not just search everybody? That is the only way we could come close to truly being safe...

Ahh yes, searching an 80 year old black woman would make total sense because all of these suiside bombers are young middle eastern muslim males!

The point is that the 80 year old lady is just as capable as blowing up a plane and 99.9% of the time just as innocent as the muslim guy getting on the plane. All racial profiling does is give you a fake sense of security.

Great quote, and unfortnately this type of writing is up to intereptation. I interupt it this way. Am I secure in my own country if the possibility of another 9/11 or terrorist attack? The answer is simply no. Is it unreasonable in today's society for people (note people) who meet a certain criteria to be searched? Again, No.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I agree, however, manpower, money, and time are the simple answers. People do not want inconvienced.

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Why not just search everybody? That is the only way we could come close to truly being safe...

I think therein lies the problem Goonz. I am samrt enough to know that not every Arabic male is not a terrorist. And it is an unfortnate that someone such as yourself who most likely is a true loving Muslim has been caught up in something like this within this country. However, it highlights a problem I believe exists in the Muslim / Arabic community. We (the United States or the pro-profiling crowd) get 'blamed' for such things, when indeed, your community needs to rise up and squash, or at least help, in qualming the radical Islam that gives all of you other good Muslims a bad name.

I for one, am fully aware that the radicals are far out numbered by the good, and believe I understand better than most, the culture from which you live and have been raised in. I did live in a moderate Muslim country for almost 8 months...

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

what is this thread trying to prove?
that every man with a middle eastern background, or in other words who is BROWN needs to be searched and profiled against?? wow so I guess I need to be searched every whereI go or in airports (like I usually do) just so you all can feel safe about yourselves..

wish you guys could be in my shoes just to see how [censored] embarassing it is to be profiled for this type of [censored], NONE of you guys will ever know its easy for you all just to talk about it but to experience this is another whole story, its degrading..

True, she is just as capable, but who is more likely?

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
The point is that the 80 year old lady is just as capable as blowing up a plane and 99.9% of the time just as innocent as the muslim guy getting on the plane. All racial profiling does is give you a fake sense of security.

Capable but not likely. Every bomber has been a young middle eastern male and until that changed we should search at least every young middle eastern male. Makes sense to a lot of people.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
The point is that the 80 year old lady is just as capable as blowing up a plane and 99.9% of the time just as innocent as the muslim guy getting on the plane. All racial profiling does is give you a fake sense of security.

Capable but not likely. Every bomber has been a young middle eastern male and until that changed we should search at least every young middle eastern male. Makes sense to a lot of people.

It makes sense to search suspicious people (aka those who fit the "terrorist" stereotype), but it makes absolutely no sense to let everyone else walk through becuase they don't "look the part"

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Read this:
Yell at the groups (young middle eastern muslim men) who are committing these violent murderous terrorist acts worldwide and not we who are just trying to protect ourselves from them.......you get that, right???

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:

Sounds like your more interested in protecting you family from arabs (which im sure statistically are less likely to commit killing sprees, rape, murder, pillage and plunder than other groups). I guess at least your intentions are good.

-ivan

Who said Arabs? Arabs are Christian. I am talking about Muslims. And so far every suiside bomber has been a young middle eastern muslim male so why on earth shouldnt we be stopping every young middle eastern muslim male? Because it is embarassing to them? Give me a break! It just makes sence. You can't tell who is arab or muslim, I say stop them all. I dont care about their feelings or even mine. As long as we are all safe. It's not like we are hauling them off to camps like we did with the Japanese. All we are doing is searching them before they get on any mas transit. Sheesh!

Sorry about my politicla uncorrectness, i should have typed out arabs/muslims/indian/pakistani/iraqi/iranian/ egyptian/jordanian/saudis, when i think of more ill type them out too.

Like i said, its very easy for a person like you or me for that matter to say "seach all darkskinded people that arent black or hispanic" because we arent the ones being targeted. And i dont think its just the embarrasement, but humiliation , unwarranted at that, that you want to put these people through, like i said, if the shoe was on the other foot your words might be a tad different.

-ivan

Originally posted by gearhead:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Read this:
Yell at the groups (young middle eastern muslim men) who are committing these violent murderous terrorist acts worldwide and not we who are just trying to protect ourselves from them.......you get that, right???

Like i stated earlier, you and the other pro-profilists (not all) are protecting yourselves from the middle easteners, and not even protecting at that, just placing the blame on the popular scapegoat nowadays. What group isnt committing murderous acts that we dont know about, and many more of them? You get that one

?

Why should i yell at any one group for the wrongdoings of a few, i dont yell at the whites for what a few have done and i dont yell at the blacks for what a few have done. Get that ?

If you really want to be safe in this country, protect yourselves from the whites/blacks/hispanics which are more likely to commit violent crimes than middle easteners, all you all have been doing doing is pulling a hitler and blaming the scapegoat.

-ivan

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Why not just search everybody? That is the only way we could come close to truly being safe...

We'll never be 100% "truly safe" because technology will never be able to pick up 100% of potential threats. So we need to do manual searches.

With that in mind, why is it worse for a person of Middle Eastern descent to be searched at an airport than it is for me? I've been singled out frequently based on my unusual itineraries and also the fact that I'm a relatively young single guy. But I'm white. One of my business colleagues is of ME descent, and he says it happened to him frequently for a year or so. Then apparently the airlines/TSA eventually marked him as a non-threat/frequent traveler, so he was searched less frequently. So we're basically talking about searches happening not exclusively, but merely more frequently to people of ME descent.

Public transportation is a different animal. People have never been expected to "arrive early" at public transportation centers like they have at airports. It'd be great if there was explosive-detection technology that would scan people without detaining them, but that's not the case. So we need to do manual scans. Setting up an infrastructure to do that on a large scale at every transportation center is impossible. So we do it randomly, target likely individuals, and hope for the best. Likely individuals, like it or not, are young single guys of ME descent. I'm sure those of us not of ME descent will get stopped too, but probably at a lower percentage.

Personally I won't take offense if I get stopped, and if I was of ME descent, I wouldn't take offense, and would instead think about ways to change the factors that have created suicide bombers. For example, if young white guys had an extensive history of suicide bombing, I'd personally be devoting a lot of my free time to organizations which speak out against violence of that type, which address the causes of such violence, or even which attempt to change the policies suicide bombers find unacceptable.

Sometimes fate places us in a position where we have to put in more effort than the other guy.

Originally posted by Viss1:

Personally I won't take offense if I get stopped, and if I was of ME descent, I wouldn't take offense, and would instead think about ways to change the factors that have created suicide bombers.

Most of the time, hypotheticals are usually not entirely true and are very easy to say. I could easily say that if a group of white mass murderers came into my college i would quickly run up to them, take their weapons away, shoot them all in the legs and tie them up with the handy rope i happened to be carrying in my back pocket, when in all reality, i (and most of you) would be standing next to the scared females and shaking just as bad.

-ivan

I don't understand the embarassment part of this BS argument. I just smile when I'm searched, because I KNOW they are doing it for the safety of EVERYONE.

I'm sorry that the acts of people that are of your religion and who may look like you - bring extra attention to you, but how on earth is a security guard supposed to know "oh that Goonz, he's a goofy kid who owns an SVT - let him through!". Fact is they don't so if you get searched, don't hate the guys searching - hate the trerrorists that brought this on you.

It's not like they are gonna depants you - ram a rod up your ass and parade you around the airport in front of everyone - so I don't see what's so emnbarassing, unless you tend to wear socks with holes in them or something.

Ivan, who do you think is more likely to carry out the next terrorist attack on America? A young middle eastern muslim man or a fat black 80 year old woman?

I'm brown of Eastern Indian decent. Sure I'll be pulled over and searched at any mass transit system. However, I neither find it embarassing nor prejudice. The fact still remains that there is a physical attribute to my skin tone that attributes to terrorists. Those that has done and will do harm to this country. I love this country and I'd do anything for our families to be safer. If this requires setting aside a few minutes for a security screen, by all means DO IT. Does it fixate a false sense of security in this country, HELL NO! The reality is that this group resembles brown pigmentation, facial hair, etc.. Had it been cacuasian and blonde hair, I think those affected should be search just in relation. YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE THE SECURITY OF YOUR LOVED ONES OVER SUCH RIDICULOUS EMOTIONS OF UNFAIRNESS; this kind of crap leaves this country extremely vulnerable!

I can't believe this subject would be debatable. How can you rationally debate the secruity of your family for a few minutes of a security check? Goonz? Your argument is blind-sighted. As a person who takes advantage of this country and reaps the fruits of your labor; I've seen your folks driving Lexus in some of your past posts, you can't be so blind to the situation. This measure makes it safe for you and I to walk out and about, to work hard, make money and live the American Dream (Don't mean to target you Goonz, but I feel pretty strongly aganist your opinion, as another fellow brown, young American).

Sure, one can debate that a security check of all groups should be placed, but this is not plausible with the lack of man-power and technology. So one would have to create a system where those who physically appear to be a terrorist be searched. Hell, I feel less safe right now with this racial profiling BS. I'd rather have people who look like me be searched; I'd feel a lot safer.

Ok--so I promised myself I wouldn't post here until the MCATs were over, but this one got me fired up!

Originally posted by ancientsanskrit:
I'm brown of Eastern Indian decent. Sure I'll be pulled over and searched at any mass transit system. However, I neither find it embarassing nor prejudice. The fact still remains that there is a physical attribute to my skin tone that attributes to terrorists. Those that has done and will do harm to this country. I love this country and I'd do anything for our families to be safer. If this requires setting aside a few minutes for a security screen, by all means DO IT. Does it fixate a false sense of security in this country, HELL NO! The reality is that this group resembles brown pigmentation, facial hair, etc.. Had it been cacuasian and blonde hair, I think those affected should be search just in relation. YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE THE SECURITY OF YOUR LOVED ONES OVER SUCH RIDICULOUS EMOTIONS OF UNFAIRNESS; this kind of crap leaves this country extremely vulnerable!

I can't believe this subject would be debatable. How can you rationally debate the secruity of your family for a few minutes of a security check? Goonz? Your argument is blind-sighted. As a person who takes advantage of this country and reaps the fruits of your labor; I've seen your folks driving Lexus in some of your past posts, you can't be so blind to the situation. This measure makes it safe for you and I to walk out and about, to work hard, make money and live the American Dream (Don't mean to target you Goonz, but I feel pretty strongly aganist your opinion, as another fellow brown, young American).

Sure, one can debate that a security check of all groups should be placed, but this is not plausible with the lack of man-power and technology. So one would have to create a system where those who physically appear to be a terrorist be searched. Hell, I feel less safe right now with this racial profiling BS. I'd rather have people who look like me be searched; I'd feel a lot safer.

Ok--so I promised myself I wouldn't post here until the MCATs were over, but this one got me fired up!

Great post Neil!

it could be neither. i doubt john walker lindh was taken in by the taliban and terror affiliates by chance...

personally i'm undecided on the idea of profiling for 3 reasons:

1) it may inflame muslims who were unlikely to be sympathizers before to relate to the extremist pov and give them a larger underground base of support/recruitment here.

2) not sure how effectivene it would be in the US in a post 9/11 environment. everyone keeps a close eye on people of ME/arab appearance. they are under a very close microscope by the general population as well as security forces. suspected terror cells/groups can still be investigated through the patriot act.

3) slippery slope and likelihood of profiling to be abused.

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Most of the time, hypotheticals are usually not entirely true and are very easy to say.

I agree entirely, which is why I included "Sometimes fate places us in a position where we have to put in more effort than the other guy" at the end of my post. Do you disagree that it would be a good idea for American Muslims to become involved in organizations of the type I mentioned?

Now if only we could get your message through to others.

Originally posted by ancientsanskrit:
I'm brown of Eastern Indian decent. Sure I'll be pulled over and searched at any mass transit system. However, I neither find it embarassing nor prejudice. The fact still remains that there is a physical attribute to my skin tone that attributes to terrorists. Those that has done and will do harm to this country. I love this country and I'd do anything for our families to be safer. If this requires setting aside a few minutes for a security screen, by all means DO IT. Does it fixate a false sense of security in this country, HELL NO! The reality is that this group resembles brown pigmentation, facial hair, etc.. Had it been cacuasian and blonde hair, I think those affected should be search just in relation. YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE THE SECURITY OF YOUR LOVED ONES OVER SUCH RIDICULOUS EMOTIONS OF UNFAIRNESS; this kind of crap leaves this country extremely vulnerable!

I can't believe this subject would be debatable. How can you rationally debate the secruity of your family for a few minutes of a security check? Goonz? Your argument is blind-sighted. As a person who takes advantage of this country and reaps the fruits of your labor; I've seen your folks driving Lexus in some of your past posts, you can't be so blind to the situation. This measure makes it safe for you and I to walk out and about, to work hard, make money and live the American Dream (Don't mean to target you Goonz, but I feel pretty strongly aganist your opinion, as another fellow brown, young American).

Sure, one can debate that a security check of all groups should be placed, but this is not plausible with the lack of man-power and technology. So one would have to create a system where those who physically appear to be a terrorist be searched. Hell, I feel less safe right now with this racial profiling BS. I'd rather have people who look like me be searched; I'd feel a lot safer.

Ok--so I promised myself I wouldn't post here until the MCATs were over, but this one got me fired up!

Originally posted by BP:
it could be neither. i doubt john walker lindh was taken in by the taliban and terror affiliates by chance...

And I dont recall him being a suiside bomber either. In any case, he's an exception to the rule and given the way the guy looked when he was picked up, he looked just like them anyway.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by ancientsanskrit:
I'm brown of Eastern Indian decent. Sure I'll be pulled over and searched at any mass transit system. However, I neither find it embarassing nor prejudice. The fact still remains that there is a physical attribute to my skin tone that attributes to terrorists. Those that has done and will do harm to this country. I love this country and I'd do anything for our families to be safer. If this requires setting aside a few minutes for a security screen, by all means DO IT. Does it fixate a false sense of security in this country, HELL NO! The reality is that this group resembles brown pigmentation, facial hair, etc.. Had it been cacuasian and blonde hair, I think those affected should be search just in relation. YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE THE SECURITY OF YOUR LOVED ONES OVER SUCH RIDICULOUS EMOTIONS OF UNFAIRNESS; this kind of crap leaves this country extremely vulnerable!

I can't believe this subject would be debatable. How can you rationally debate the secruity of your family for a few minutes of a security check? Goonz? Your argument is blind-sighted. As a person who takes advantage of this country and reaps the fruits of your labor; I've seen your folks driving Lexus in some of your past posts, you can't be so blind to the situation. This measure makes it safe for you and I to walk out and about, to work hard, make money and live the American Dream (Don't mean to target you Goonz, but I feel pretty strongly aganist your opinion, as another fellow brown, young American).

Sure, one can debate that a security check of all groups should be placed, but this is not plausible with the lack of man-power and technology. So one would have to create a system where those who physically appear to be a terrorist be searched. Hell, I feel less safe right now with this racial profiling BS. I'd rather have people who look like me be searched; I'd feel a lot safer.

Ok--so I promised myself I wouldn't post here until the MCATs were over, but this one got me fired up!

Great post Neil!

DITTO!

I think there's probably 4-5 people in this thread that AREN'T for profiling in mas-tran stations. I wonder if they'd change their minds if they were placed on an airplane with nothing but young Muslim males that WEREN'T checked before they boarded.

And when a string of white Americans go suicide bombing the ME, I'd hope they'd take the same precautionary measures over there that we do here.

Mark

OT:

This has been a great example of a thread that has potential for BS and flaming. Thanks to all for keeping it passionate yet civil.

Please resume dialogue!

Mark

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Except for the gunfire stats (which could be a wnole nother argument in itself) -

- How many of those deaths were murders motivated by religious fanaticism?

none, thank you. accidental deaths have nothing to do with this argument.

Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
I think there's probably 4-5 people in this thread that AREN'T for profiling in mas-tran stations. I wonder if they'd change their minds if they were placed on an airplane with nothing but young Muslim males that WEREN'T checked before they boarded.

And when a string of white Americans go suicide bombing the ME, I'd hope they'd take the same precautionary measures over there that we do here.

Mark

I would gladly.

Being Arab, dark skinned, or whatever is never a reason to search someone. That is not enough to search anyone, that is like pulling a young black person over who is driving a BMW because a young black man may not be as likely to be able to afford said car. (I am not saying this is true, but some believed things like this) My skin color is never enough reason to be searched beyond the extent that everyone else is. That is the problem that people are not getting here.

Dude this is not even comparable. Give me a f'en break. How is racially profiling a black man in a BMW even compare to looking for terrorists who's mission is to bring down a f'en plane and kill as many people as possible - tell me how?

You argument is a joke. Sorry but this is just ridiculous.Jesus Christ people THINK. I bet half of you moron's balled your eyes out and swore revenge on the terrorists that caused 9-11, but now, years later "we aren't allowed to pester the people" that fit the same damned description.

And in any case how many cops do you think even look at balck guys driving luxury cars nowadays? I bet they don't get more than a second glance. It's not like it's 1960 - hell in Detroit every other brother is driving an X-calade wid dubs.

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:
Being Arab, dark skinned, or whatever is never a reason to search someone.

Again, like I said before. It is when every single terrorist bomber has been dark skinned and middle eastern.

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:

Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
I think there's probably 4-5 people in this thread that AREN'T for profiling in mas-tran stations. I wonder if they'd change their minds if they were placed on an airplane with nothing but young Muslim males that WEREN'T checked before they boarded.

And when a string of white Americans go suicide bombing the ME, I'd hope they'd take the same precautionary measures over there that we do here.

Mark

I would gladly.

You go right ahead and do that. Let me know how it turns out for you, unless CNN reports it first.

Mark

Stazi, it's funny isn't it that the anti-profiles come up with these borderline moronic arguments, yet they never say that profiling will not work. The only thing they jump up and down about is that it's not 'fair'.....if profiling didn't work so many would not be for it then.

Originally posted by Stazi:
Dude this is not even comparable. Give me a f'en break. How is racially profiling a black man in a BMW even compare to looking for terrorists who's mission is to bring down a f'en plane and kill as many people as possible - tell me how?

You argument is a joke. Sorry but this is just ridiculous.Jesus Christ people THINK. I bet half of you moron's balled your eyes out and swore revenge on the terrorists that caused 9-11, but now, years later "we aren't allowed to pester the people" that fit the same damned description.

And in any case how many cops do you think even look at balck guys driving luxury cars nowadays? I bet they don't get more than a second glance. It's not like it's 1960 - hell in Detroit every other brother is driving an X-calade wid dubs.

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:
That is not enough to search anyone, that is like pulling a young black person over who is driving a BMW because a young black man may not be as likely to be able to afford said car.

Not quite the same thing. Say you have a bowl of grapes. If every single sour grape was wrinkled and a different color than the good ones, would you randomly check all grapes for the sour ones? Doesn't make much sense, does it? Sure, it's very possible that a perfect-looking grape could be sour, but your experience tells you it's very unlikely.

EDIT: Forgot a part of my analogy: Yes, you may find a wrinkled, off-color grape that tastes perfectly fine. But it makes much more sense to test that one than it does the good-looking ones.

The type of 'racial profiling' being suggested for searches is not the same racial profiling you're suggesting above, and the conditions are different.

Originally posted by akrump47:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Except for the gunfire stats (which could be a wnole nother argument in itself) -

- How many of those deaths were murders motivated by religious fanaticism?

none, thank you. accidental deaths have nothing to do with this argument.

The point of these numbers is to show that we are in far more danger from ourselves than we are from terrorists at this point.
More US citizens are killed by guns in our own country in one year then have ever been killed by terrorists on US soil. Can we profile them? Nope! Far to large and politically powerful group. Whisper anything about gun control and you generate a sh1tstorm of cries about rights being violated.
Now I don't have a problem with peoples right to bear arms, I have a problem with hypocrisy.

Common sense is no longer common.

Seems like the IQ of this board is dropping into the double digits lately.

Too many people jumping on the liberal band-wagon for the sheer sake of arguing - WITHOUT thinking about WTF they are talking about.

Tell me one person here that isn't more scared to fly now ever since 9-11? Yes, even though there is more screening, AFAIC there isn't ENOUGH!

Totally f'en stupid - especially when a couple of weeks ago the pricks were bombing London - HELLO OPEN YOUR GOD DAMNED EYES! They didn't go away after you shut them and counted to 10. Seriously people lets think about it. Do you want to live....start with that question, then the normal progression from there is: I need to keep myself safe....

The problem here is that the American public forgets about these atrocities in one week. If the London bombing happened in NYC/LA every answer would be the exact opposite.

"Bomb these F'er's!!!!! I don't care what has to happen"

Just like after 9/11.

Now everyone is back to being PC pu$$ies.

Originally posted by Wien_Sean:

I would gladly.

Being Arab, dark skinned, or whatever is never a reason to search someone. That is not enough to search anyone, that is like pulling a young black person over who is driving a BMW because a young black man may not be as likely to be able to afford said car. (I am not saying this is true, but some believed things like this) My skin color is never enough reason to be searched beyond the extent that everyone else is. That is the problem that people are not getting here.

And I'm going to refrain from unleashing a sh!t storm on this line of thought.

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

typical sterotyping right there...

Not stereotyping; TRUTH!!! Why don't people get this!?!?! I havent seen one non arab strap TNT to themselves and blow up a bus/subway/WTC/Iraq Checkpoints. My God are some people THAT nieve or too politically correct to see this?

what is this thread trying to prove?
that every man with a middle eastern background, or in other words who is BROWN needs to be searched and profiled against?? wow so I guess I need to be searched every whereI go or in airports (like I usually do) just so you all can feel safe about yourselves..

wish you guys could be in my shoes just to see how [censored] embarassing it is to be profiled for this type of [censored], NONE of you guys will ever know its easy for you all just to talk about it but to experience this is another whole story, its degrading..

Get over it! I have several brown friends, Muslin and Hindu.
If I get tan enough in the summer I could get searched. I think this is a small price to pay for safety. Does everyone forget what we did to the japanese during WWII? I think this is chicken sh!t by comparison.

Originally posted by todras:
The problem here is that the American public forgets about these atrocities in one week. If the London bombing happened in NYC/LA every answer would be the exact opposite.

"Bomb these F'er's!!!!! I don't care what has to happen"

Just like after 9/11. Now everyone is back to being PC pu$$ies.

I don't know about that... the people I knew who said "turn the ME into a glass parking lot" after 9/11 have pretty much stayed true to that mentality. Personally I didn't have that type of knee-jerk reaction after 9/11, but I don't consider profiling a bad idea.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by akrump47:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Except for the gunfire stats (which could be a wnole nother argument in itself) -

- How many of those deaths were murders motivated by religious fanaticism?

none, thank you. accidental deaths have nothing to do with this argument.

The point of these numbers is to show that we are in far more danger from ourselves than we are from terrorists at this point.
More US citizens are killed by guns in our own country in one year then have ever been killed by terrorists on US soil. Can we profile them? Nope! Far to large and politically powerful group. Whisper anything about gun control and you generate a sh1tstorm of cries about rights being violated.
Now I don't have a problem with peoples right to bear arms, I have a problem with hypocrisy.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Yes, lets not worry about people who have declared war against us. I'm sure they will just go away.

There is a huge difference in risk associated with life and comparing those to terrorist activities. Twist the numbers to fall into your unintellible thought process which makes no sense. I don't think you have a problem with hypocrisy, you seem to have a problem with common sense.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by akrump47:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Except for the gunfire stats (which could be a wnole nother argument in itself) -

- How many of those deaths were murders motivated by religious fanaticism?

none, thank you. accidental deaths have nothing to do with this argument.

The point of these numbers is to show that we are in far more danger from ourselves than we are from terrorists at this point.
More US citizens are killed by guns in our own country in one year then have ever been killed by terrorists on US soil. Can we profile them? Nope! Far to large and politically powerful group. Whisper anything about gun control and you generate a sh1tstorm of cries about rights being violated.
Now I don't have a problem with peoples right to bear arms, I have a problem with hypocrisy.

Sorry you don't get it. Fear can be blinding.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
Fear can be blinding.

So is liberalism.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
Fear can be blinding.

So is liberalism.

I think its called ignorance

RT and his SE - you nimrod.

It's one thing to be scared of something imaginary like the Boogie-Man, and another thing to be scared of something real, like terrorists, which, in case your Goldfish brain has already forgotten - bombed London 2 weeks ago.

PLEASE STFU already.

Originally posted by SVTatGT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
Fear can be blinding.

So is liberalism.

I think its called ignorance

Oh no here come the name callers!

Is the Constitution a Liberal or Conservative document? Does it not apply to everyone or is the protection offered by it only for those you deem deserving? Who's the next group of bad guys you'll bend the rules to catch? When does it stop?

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by akrump47:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I think the 3000+ that died in 9/11 would wish the airport screeners profiled that day....

Nationally

In 2004, 42,626 people died in car accidents.
Cars: still legal.

In 2000, 3281 people drown in non-boating related accidents.
Swimming: still legal.

In 2003, 3145 people died in house fires. Cooking is the primary cause of residential fires.
Cooking: still legal.

In 1998, 30,708 people died from gun fire.
Guns: still legal.

In 2002, 2,443,387 died total from various cause in this country.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: still legal...for now.

Except for the gunfire stats (which could be a wnole nother argument in itself) -

- How many of those deaths were murders motivated by religious fanaticism?

none, thank you. accidental deaths have nothing to do with this argument.

The point of these numbers is to show that we are in far more danger from ourselves than we are from terrorists at this point.
More US citizens are killed by guns in our own country in one year then have ever been killed by terrorists on US soil. Can we profile them? Nope! Far to large and politically powerful group. Whisper anything about gun control and you generate a sh1tstorm of cries about rights being violated.
Now I don't have a problem with peoples right to bear arms, I have a problem with hypocrisy.

I already said I wouldnt touch gun homicide as thats a whole different argument ...

But if people are running their cars into trees and blowing up their houses because they can't cook safely - I'm sorry but that's THEIR self inflicted problem.

Religious radicals coming in and MURDERING people by the thousands is quite a bit different!!

Accidents and stupididty does not = first degree mass murder

Last time I checked, Muslims come in other wrappers than just Arab form. Come to think about it, the failed bombings were done by non-arab men.

Also, who bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City?

Terrorist do not simply come from the Middle East or Islamic faith, and setting our defense to combat ONLY people with a Middle Eastern background is foolish. North African's are also known to have actually carried out bombings against the US, just for example.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Last time I checked, Muslims come in other wrappers than just Arab form. Come to think about it, the failed bombings were done by non-arab men.

Again, like I said, every bomber so far has been a young middle eastern muslim man.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Also, who bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City?

Are you saying the OKC bombing and what is happening today is somehow linked? Becasue last time I checked, Tim Mcveigh was not blowing up our people in the name of Allah. Thats the war we are fighting today, not something 10 years ago.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Terrorist do not simply come from the Middle East or Islamic faith, and setting our defense to combat ONLY people with a Middle Eastern background is foolish.

That funny because so far, every suiside bomber has been from the middle east and of the islamic faith.

KEEP IT CIVIL; or take it to PM's.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
Last time I checked, Muslims come in other wrappers than just Arab form. Come to think about it, the failed bombings were done by non-arab men.

1. Again, like I said, every bomber so far has been a young middle eastern muslim man.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Also, who bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City?

2. Are you saying the OKC bombing and what is happening today is somehow linked? Becasue last time I checked, Tim Mcveigh was not blowing up our people in the name of Allah. Thats the war we are fighting today, not something 10 years ago.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Terrorist do not simply come from the Middle East or Islamic faith, and setting our defense to combat ONLY people with a Middle Eastern background is foolish.

3. That funny because so far, every suiside bomber has been from the middle east and of the islamic faith.

1. Like I said, not every bomber is Arab. What about Jermaine Maurice Lindsay? He's from Jamaica. What about the bombers in the US embassy bombings? The only thing they have in common is they follow a radical sect of Islam. You need to read up a bit more on the subject since you are incorrect in your broad statment.

2. No, what I'm saying is that wacko religious people come in other flavors than just Muslim, and they are just as dangerous to Americans as a whole. The OKC bombing is as apt of an example as one could find.

3. You're wrong. *Suicide* bombers came in African form in Africa against the US twice, which were conducted by OBL's followers. The crazy sect of Islam does not need it's followers to be Arab, just about any US soldier that was in the Somolia conflict will be able to tell you that.

I do not disagree that the vast majority of extreme Islamic followers are Arab young men. What I am saying is that we shouldn't focus upon ONLY Arab young men, or we will let many attackers slip by. We need better Homeland Security/Boarder Patrol and we need better transit security in every format. There are more than just Islamic Extremists out there to cause harm.

Originally posted by Swazo:
2. No, what I'm saying is that wacko religious people come in other flavors than just Muslim, and they are just as dangerous to Americans as a whole. The OKC bombing is as apt of an example as one could find.

Uh oh, here comes the 'Islamic terrorists are no worse than Christians' BS.

The OKC bombing? McVeigh did that in the name his religion? And I'm not sure there are global networks of McVeighs whose goals are the destruction of the United States.

You did not prove that Christians are as dangerous as OBL in the other thread, and you will not do it in this thread. Every time you make these wacko assertions your credibility drops a few more points into the negative. You should quit barking up that tree, it will continue to get you nothing.

I agree with you somewhat on your definition. True, not all, os the Islamic terrorists are Arabic. Some are/were African, etc. However, the vast majority are of Arabic descent and have connections to other cells.

And, just an FYI, the Somalia conflict had nothing to do with terrorism.

Originally posted by Swazo:

1. Like I said, not every bomber is Arab. What about Jermaine Maurice Lindsay? He's from Jamaica. What about the bombers in the US embassy bombings? The only thing they have in common is they follow a radical sect of Islam. You need to read up a bit more on the subject since you are incorrect in your broad statment.

2. No, what I'm saying is that wacko religious people come in other flavors than just Muslim, and they are just as dangerous to Americans as a whole. The OKC bombing is as apt of an example as one could find.

3. You're wrong. *Suicide* bombers came in African form in Africa against the US twice, which were conducted by OBL's followers. The crazy sect of Islam does not need it's followers to be Arab, just about any US soldier that was in the Somolia conflict will be able to tell you that.

I do not disagree that the vast majority of extreme Islamic followers are Arab young men. What I am saying is that we shouldn't focus upon ONLY Arab young men, or we will let many attackers slip by. We need better Homeland Security/Boarder Patrol and we need better transit security in every format. There are more than just Islamic Extremists out there to cause harm.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
I agree with you somewhat on your definition. True, not all, os the Islamic terrorists are Arabic. Some are/were African, etc. However, the vast majority are of Arabic descent and have connections to other cells.

And, just an FYI, the Somalia conflict had nothing to do with terrorism.

Originally posted by Swazo:

1. Like I said, not every bomber is Arab. What about Jermaine Maurice Lindsay? He's from Jamaica. What about the bombers in the US embassy bombings? The only thing they have in common is they follow a radical sect of Islam. You need to read up a bit more on the subject since you are incorrect in your broad statment.

2. No, what I'm saying is that wacko religious people come in other flavors than just Muslim, and they are just as dangerous to Americans as a whole. The OKC bombing is as apt of an example as one could find.

3. You're wrong. *Suicide* bombers came in African form in Africa against the US twice, which were conducted by OBL's followers. The crazy sect of Islam does not need it's followers to be Arab, just about any US soldier that was in the Somolia conflict will be able to tell you that.

I do not disagree that the vast majority of extreme Islamic followers are Arab young men. What I am saying is that we shouldn't focus upon ONLY Arab young men, or we will let many attackers slip by. We need better Homeland Security/Boarder Patrol and we need better transit security in every format. There are more than just Islamic Extremists out there to cause harm.

I never said that Somolia had anything to do with terrorism. I meant that there were TONS of non-Arab Islamics that were guided by OBL and/or people from his ranks. Just pointing out direct combatants will come from OBL that AREN'T Arab, and the US has come across them.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
2. No, what I'm saying is that wacko religious people come in other flavors than just Muslim, and they are just as dangerous to Americans as a whole. The OKC bombing is as apt of an example as one could find.

Uh oh, here comes the 'Islamic terrorists are no worse than Christians' BS.

The OKC bombing? McVeigh did that in the name his religion? And I'm not sure there are global networks of McVeighs whose goals are the destruction of the United States.

You did not prove that Christians are as dangerous as OBL in the other thread, and you will not do it in this thread. Every time you make these wacko assertions your credibility drops a few more points into the negative. You should quit barking up that tree, it will continue to get you nothing.

That's because I never said that they are as dangerous as OBL, you twisted what I had said. I said that when someones beliefs are so important to them that they will force them upon others at any cost, they are just like OBL. Big difference there davo.

McVeigh & Co. did what they did for many reasons. One prime reason was in response to when the Feds took out the wacko Waco, TX christian cult (Another example of radical nutcase christians, btw). It's not that I'm saying all Christians are evil, that's hardly the case. I am saying that since someone is Christian doesn't mean they won't commit evil or wrong doing. McVeigh is an example of what a christian extremist can do, and those awful abortion clinic bombers/attackers are another.

The bottom line is that evil doing isn't a part of Islam, just like it isn't a part of being Christian or any other religon. Nutcase religious people have always been able to find nutcase religious sheep to follow. Blame who's at fault, OBL and his followers or any other like minded people. But don't make the ignorant mistake of blaming all of one vast religion that has many different forms. As you can see, there are nuts on both sides of the fence. It's like blaming a Baptists for something the Catholics did.

Maybe we should make two airports then for everyone.

One with random, non-profiling searches of passengers, and one with heavy profiling and searches of arabic/muslim passengers.

Now, tell me, which one would you want to fly out of?

for you people that dont think you need to profile them all. you trying sitting on a road block checking cars( women, kids they all kill and you have know idea who is the threat) yea it sucks but it has to be done. If you say not to check them then thats fine just dont get mad when a bomb goes off and you family is killed because they did not check that 13yr old and 30yr old lady. Every one in the military knows. check this out. this all sucks, i was crossing the border from mexico tj inthe san deigo. I was held there for 30 mins. because i didnt have a passport. i have never had that happen. I go back and fourth every 3mth, but this time was diff. i gave him me id and even my army id, he throw it back at me and sad it ment [censored]. that pissed me off. Sad that i could be a terrorist and i am white and mexican. ha so this all suck but is needed.

Again, UBL's connection to the Somalia conflict is vague at best, and IIRC has never been proven.

Originally posted by Swazo:

I never said that Somolia had anything to do with terrorism. I meant that there were TONS of non-Arab Islamics that were guided by OBL and/or people from his ranks. Just pointing out direct combatants will come from OBL that AREN'T Arab, and the US has come across them.

I don't think any of us are denying that there are nutcase Christians out there. However, the radical sect of Islam has proven over and over again to be much more of a threat to all of us 'infidels'

Originally posted by Swazo:
I am saying that since someone is Christian doesn't mean they won't commit evil or wrong doing.

How about we step up airport security? I fly on a weekly basis in my line of work, and I see how "effective" Homeland Security is. I get to have my shoes checked basicly EVERYTIME I fly because it's on short notice, if not the day of. Anytime I have a flight in atleast a week in advance, I sail through to my gate. Boy, I feel safer

Isreal has the right idea with airport security. If we had openly armed security onboard, at the airport, ect... that'd help a lot. It would have stopped the box cutter toting scum from commiting the 9/11 attacks too.

I'm not saying we shouldn't check people. I'm saying that to only think that an arab will harm you is ignorant.

Dude, stop looking at this through the slot of a mail-box. I don't think they are saying they want to ONLY check arabs/muslims, but they want to check more OF them and still do the randoms on everyone else.

Originally posted by Stazi:
Maybe we should make two airports then for everyone.

One with random, non-profiling searches of passengers, and one with heavy profiling and searches of arabic/muslim passengers.

Now, tell me, which one would you want to fly out of?

Maybe we should get you a bubble!

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by Stazi:
Maybe we should make two airports then for everyone.

One with random, non-profiling searches of passengers, and one with heavy profiling and searches of arabic/muslim passengers.

Now, tell me, which one would you want to fly out of?

Maybe we should get you a bubble!

Maybe we should pitch in and buy you a brain! Here...Ipicked some snot out of my nose - I won't need it any more, you can pile that up with everyone else and make yourself a brain so you can stop posting nonsense and pull your head out of your ass!

I think we need to get you out of yours so you can see what the real world is like.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by Stazi:
Maybe we should make two airports then for everyone.

One with random, non-profiling searches of passengers, and one with heavy profiling and searches of arabic/muslim passengers.

Now, tell me, which one would you want to fly out of?

Maybe we should get you a bubble!

Originally posted by Stazi:
Dude, stop looking at this through the slot of a mail-box. I don't think they are saying they want to ONLY check arabs/muslims, but they want to check more OF them and still do the randoms on everyone else.

Which is fine with me by all means. More security is needed, I'm glad they are actually putting more thought into it.

I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

How many christians have hijacked planes the run them into buildings?

How many christains have declared a holy war on the US?

How many christains released a video today saying that they were going to attack the US and Great Britain and make 9/11 look small?

Hey that doesn't mean we arent' capabile of it.

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
How many christians have hijacked planes the run them into buildings?

How many christains have declared a holy war on the US?

How many christains released a video today saying that they were going to attack the US and Great Britain and make 9/11 look small?

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Again, UBL's connection to the Somalia conflict is vague at best, and IIRC has never been proven.

Originally posted by Swazo:

I never said that Somolia had anything to do with terrorism. I meant that there were TONS of non-Arab Islamics that were guided by OBL and/or people from his ranks. Just pointing out direct combatants will come from OBL that AREN'T Arab, and the US has come across them.

I don't think any of us are denying that there are nutcase Christians out there. However, the radical sect of Islam has proven over and over again to be much more of a threat to all of us 'infidels'
Originally posted by Swazo:
I am saying that since someone is Christian doesn't mean they won't commit evil or wrong doing.

I've read about key figures directly from OBL in Somolia, I'll have to find my reference.

No doubt about it, OBL's sect of Islam and others much like from Egypt or Saudi Arabia, are the biggest threat to us right now. I simply can't wait for OBL's head on a pike.

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Hey that doesn't mean we arent' capabile of it.

Originally posted by SVTatGT:
How many christians have hijacked planes the run them into buildings?

How many christains have declared a holy war on the US?

How many christains released a video today saying that they were going to attack the US and Great Britain and make 9/11 look small?

Ok, this is my point

What we should do:
Search everybody, that is the only way we are going to come anywhere close to "security"

But we can't, so if your gunna pick on somebody pick on the group who has a recent history of causing problems

My point is that focusing on one group more than others is leaving holes in the screen. There are more than just Arabs that have attacked the US under the name of OBL. To ignore that is leaving us open for others to attack us.

Originally posted by Swazo:
My point is that focusing on one group more than others is leaving holes in the screen. There are more than just Arabs that have attacked the US under the name of OBL. To ignore that is leaving us open for others to attack us.

Unless you are going to search everybody, you have to play the game of percentages. Its an unfortunate fact, but its the most effective way.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

Hmmm, a radical sect of a religion is attacking the US. Yes, yes I did have to bring up religious key issues to debate with.

Funny, Christians have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people through out history for not converting to Christianity. But with time, that has gone away. But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

Originally posted by Swazo:

Hmmm, a radical sect of a religion is attacking the US. Yes, yes I did have to bring up religious key issues to debate with.

Funny, Christians have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people through out history for not converting to Christianity. But with time, that has gone away. But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And again, like I said. The Bible never says anywhere that we are to kill those who do not believe or will not convert. The Koran does says that if someone will not convert to Islam, they should be killed because they are an infadel. And that is why Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

Originally posted by Swazo:
But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And when they do, I will be all for profilling them at air ports. WTF is the point to this argument.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

Originally posted by Stazi:
Maybe we should make two airports then for everyone.

One with random, non-profiling searches of passengers, and one with heavy profiling and searches of arabic/muslim passengers.

Now, tell me, which one would you want to fly out of?

Maybe we should get you a bubble!

Maybe we should pitch in and buy you a brain! Here...Ipicked some snot out of my nose - I won't need it any more, you can pile that up with everyone else and make yourself a brain so you can stop posting nonsense and pull your head out of your ass!

Wow nice comeback, a little short on clever and funny but good for you!

I've been particapating in this discussion when the only thing you've been doing is calling people names and trying to puff up you sagging E tough guy persona on people who don't see things your way! Guess what? Differing opinions run rampant in the US. It's one of the things that make our system work better than any other political system on the planet! If you can't deal with that in a big boy way maybe you should go back to your Uni-bomber shack in the outback!

I'm not sure how much you fly, but I do basically on a weekly basis. I get searched 95% of the time, and I'm 6'4" and whiter than rice thanks to my Scottish/Irish roots. I've learned that if I were to book in at least one week in advance, I could avoid that search all together. I'm not a crook or a terrorist, but I know how to avoid cetrian aspects of security. Imagine what someone who is trying to commit a terror attack could do. When they announce that they are going to focus on Arab's much more, you don't think they'll simply use non-Arab followers they have to attack us?

I say that the currant system should be junked and they should take some notes from European airports where you have people with machine guns walking around and keeping people in check as they search for wrong doers with bomb sniffing dogs and the like, also teamed with heavy security. They seem to make flights on-time and travel efficiently, and I haven't heard of anyone being able to get a box cutter on board to hi-jack their flights.

Originally posted by Swazo:
That's because I never said that they are as dangerous as OBL, you twisted what I had said. I said that when someones beliefs are so important to them that they will force them upon others at any cost, they are just like OBL.

You did not say that. You said fanatic Christians are as dangerous as Osama bin Laden. When you say 'force beliefs upon', are you talking about handing out Bibles on the street corner, or killing people who don't believe? I agreed that comparisons between Christians of 800 years ago and Muslims of today could be made, but you insisted the comparison is valid today.

Originally posted by Swazo:
McVeigh is an example of what a christian extremist can do, and those awful abortion clinic bombers/attackers are another.

But he didn't do it because he was a Christian extremist. He killed people at the Murrah building because he was pissed at the government for forcing themselves upon the Branch Davidians, not because he thought the people inside were bad Christians.

Originally posted by Swazo:
The bottom line is that evil doing isn't a part of Islam,

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is.

So which is it, evil-doing is no part of Islam, or 'only a small sect of [Islam] is to blame for terrorism?

Originally posted by Swazo:
Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

How many times have you said not to generalize Muslims to terrorism, yet you show no hesitation in labeling Christians as terrorists?

Originally posted by SVTatGT:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And when they do, I will be all for profilling them at air ports. WTF is the point to this argument.

To point out how crazy OBL is and his followers are. How they do not represent Islam, that they are a sect and shouldn't taint the rest of Isalm with their 15th centry beliefs.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by SVTatGT:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And when they do, I will be all for profilling them at air ports. WTF is the point to this argument.

To point out how crazy OBL is and his followers are. How they do not represent Islam, that they are a sect and shouldn't taint the rest of Isalm with their 15th centry beliefs.

Everybody allready knows this, and this thread is about airports...

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Hmmm, a radical sect of a religion is attacking the US. Yes, yes I did have to bring up religious key issues to debate with.

Funny, Christians have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people through out history for not converting to Christianity. But with time, that has gone away. But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And again, like I said. The Bible never says anywhere that we are to kill those who do not believe or will not convert. The Koran does says that if someone will not convert to Islam, they should be killed because they are an infadel. And that is why Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

The bible has been rewritten time and time again, before it ever made it onto paper. How many times have people used bible quotes to justify keeping black people from being actual people and so many other reasons to hate and kill? The bible was written by man and so was the Koran. What's your point? When you find something written by God, let me know

People who look to either and come away with an understanding of why someone should die or why they should be hated, is a POS. Those turds need to be flushed like any other out there.

Originally posted by Swazo:
To point out how crazy OBL is and his followers are. How they do not represent Islam, that they are a sect and shouldn't taint the rest of Isalm with their 15th centry beliefs.

But they DO represent Islam because all Muslims read the Koran which teaches them to all do what these extremists do. Why do you keep ignoring this point?

Originally posted by SVTatGT:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by SVTatGT:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And when they do, I will be all for profilling them at air ports. WTF is the point to this argument.

To point out how crazy OBL is and his followers are. How they do not represent Islam, that they are a sect and shouldn't taint the rest of Isalm with their 15th centry beliefs.

Everybody allready knows this, and this thread is about airports...

....and who's trying to attack them

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
That's because I never said that they are as dangerous as OBL, you twisted what I had said. I said that when someones beliefs are so important to them that they will force them upon others at any cost, they are just like OBL.

1. You did not say that. You said fanatic Christians are as dangerous as Osama bin Laden. When you say 'force beliefs upon', are you talking about handing out Bibles on the street corner, or killing people who don't believe? I agreed that comparisons between Christians of 800 years ago and Muslims of today could be made, but you insisted the comparison is valid today.

Originally posted by Swazo:
McVeigh is an example of what a christian extremist can do, and those awful abortion clinic bombers/attackers are another.

2. But he didn't do it because he was a Christian extremist. He killed people at the Murrah building because he was pissed at the government for forcing themselves upon the Branch Davidians, not because he thought the people inside were bad Christians.

Originally posted by Swazo:
The bottom line is that evil doing isn't a part of Islam,

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is.

3. So which is it, evil-doing is no part of Islam, or 'only a small sect of [Islam] is to blame for terrorism?

Originally posted by Swazo:
Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

4. How many times have you said not to generalize Muslims to terrorism, yet you show no hesitation in labeling Christians as terrorists?

1. Did you already forget about abortion clinic attackers/ bombers and even the Aryan Nation? They have their christian beliefs that they force upon the US with force. They use the word of God to kill and to hate, just like OBL chooses to. They may not be AS crazy (or educated for that matter) so they don't take it to his level. I'm not trying to water down OBL or what he has done. People should be able to identify who's really attacking them and it's his sect, not Islam.

2. Yeah, you're right davo. I bet he would've done the same exact thing if it was a Muslim sect being stomped out by the Feds. He just hated the Federal government and that's the ONLY reason he AND others did what they did

3. I'm saying that you cannot blame Islam for what a sect does, just like you cannot blame Christianity for what a small number of them do (Abortion clinic attacks, OKC, or an actual church like the Aryan Nation). I wanted to show that no religion will do things like this, rational people simply are above things like this.
It's the radicals that don't follow along with the rest of the sheep and want to obtain more power within their group by spouting Hitler like BS.

Originally posted by Swazo:
3. I'm saying that you cannot blame Islam for what a sect does,

OMG Yes you can because that is what the Koran teaches them to do. Quit ignoring me. You are wrong!

Scroll up a bit

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Hmmm, a radical sect of a religion is attacking the US. Yes, yes I did have to bring up religious key issues to debate with.

Funny, Christians have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people through out history for not converting to Christianity. But with time, that has gone away. But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

And again, like I said. The Bible never says anywhere that we are to kill those who do not believe or will not convert. The Koran does says that if someone will not convert to Islam, they should be killed because they are an infadel. And that is why Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

The bible has been rewritten time and time again, before it ever made it onto paper. How many times have people used bible quotes to justify keeping black people from being actual people and so many other reasons to hate and kill? The bible was written by man and so was the Koran. What's your point? When you find something written by God, let me know

People who look to either and come away with an understanding of why someone should die or why they should be hated, is a POS. Those turds need to be flushed like any other out there.

It's crap like this that makes me a NON-religious person!

Mark

Originally posted by Swazo:

1. Did you already forget about abortion clinic attackers/ bombers and even the Aryan Nation? They have their christian beliefs that they force upon the US with force.

I find it to be quite the paradox that you claim people are having Christianity forced upon them when you yourself are far from a Christian (and you aren't the only one).

Originally posted by Swazo:
They may not be AS crazy (or educated for that matter) so they don't take it to his level. I'm not trying to water down OBL or what he has done.

FINALLY.

Originally posted by Swazo:
2. Yeah, you're right davo. I bet he would've done the same exact thing if it was a Muslim sect being stomped out by the Feds. He just hated the Federal government and that's the ONLY reason he AND others did what they did

I'd be willing to examine any proof you have that he murdered 168 people in the name of Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Swazo:
3. I'm saying that you cannot blame Islam for what a sect does, just like you cannot blame Christianity for what a small number of them do (Abortion clinic attacks, OKC, or an actual church like the Aryan Nation). I wanted to show that no religion will do things like this, rational people simply are above things like this.

Are you calling religious people irrational? Nice of you to take the self-righteous sectarian ground here, it's very pretty and convenient.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Did you already forget about abortion clinic attackers/ bombers and even the Aryan Nation? They have their christian beliefs that they force upon the US with force.

1. I find it to be quite the paradox that you claim people are having Christianity forced upon them when you yourself are far from a Christian (and you aren't the only one).

Originally posted by Swazo:
They may not be AS crazy (or educated for that matter) so they don't take it to his level. I'm not trying to water down OBL or what he has done.

2. FINALLY.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Yeah, you're right davo. I bet he would've done the same exact thing if it was a Muslim sect being stomped out by the Feds. He just hated the Federal government and that's the ONLY reason he AND others did what they did

3. I'd be willing to examine any proof you have that he murdered 168 people in the name of Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm saying that you cannot blame Islam for what a sect does, just like you cannot blame Christianity for what a small number of them do (Abortion clinic attacks, OKC, or an actual church like the Aryan Nation). I wanted to show that no religion will do things like this, rational people simply are above things like this.

4. Are you calling religious people irrational? Nice of you to take the self-righteous sectarian ground here, it's very pretty and convenient.

1. I can see the fault with Christians as much as I can see the fault with Muslims. I don't over look wrong doing by them, how is that a bad thing? There hasn't been threads about what good things religions have done, so you are simply ASSuming things again.

2. Finally what? I never tried to sugar coat what he has done. I have been showing that it's him and his sect, not Islam. I have been showing what so called "christians" do in the name of God, but that shouldn't label Christians as terrrorist either. You imply that Christians are the "good guys" and Muslims are the "bad guys", but things are not so black and white.

3. Never said that was his only resoning, only a partial reason.

4. Nope. Just showing that religion in the wrong hands lead to bad things, despite which one you choose to follow. I said no religion would commit evil, but that doesn't stop quacks from within to do so along with their own sheep to follow them. It's more about the person who's leading whatever flock in an alternate belief system that's based on their original religion. Ask an Afgan how much they liked the Taliban telling them how they should practice their religion. Or ask them how they liked how arrogant many of the Islamic freedom fighters from other Arab countries were and how they'd handle them when they stepped out of line in when in Afghanistan. Islam is diverse with different versions that believe in different ways, just like the Christian faith.

Originally posted by Swazo:
1. I can see the fault with Christians as much as I can see the fault with Muslims. I don't over look wrong doing by them, how is that a bad thing? There hasn't been threads about what good things religions have done, so you are simply ASSuming things again.

Maybe I should have asked a question. How can you claim Christianity is being forced upon everyone if you yourself (and millions of other people) are not Christians?

Originally posted by Swazo:
2. Finally what? I never tried to sugar coat what he has done. I have been showing that it's him and his sect, not Islam. I have been showing what so called "christians" do in the name of God, but that shouldn't label Christians as terrrorist either. You imply that Christians are the "good guys" and Muslims are the "bad guys", but things are not so black and white.

Oh, but you did draw an equivalence between Muslim terrorists and Christians. You're appearing to be backing off that statement now, which is a little refreshing.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
1. I can see the fault with Christians as much as I can see the fault with Muslims. I don't over look wrong doing by them, how is that a bad thing? There hasn't been threads about what good things religions have done, so you are simply ASSuming things again.

Maybe I should have asked a question. How can you claim Christianity is being forced upon everyone if you yourself (and millions of other people) are not Christians?

Originally posted by Swazo:
2. Finally what? I never tried to sugar coat what he has done. I have been showing that it's him and his sect, not Islam. I have been showing what so called "christians" do in the name of God, but that shouldn't label Christians as terrrorist either. You imply that Christians are the "good guys" and Muslims are the "bad guys", but things are not so black and white.

Oh, but you did draw an equivalence between Muslim terrorists and Christians. You're appearing to be backing off that statement now, which is a little refreshing.

I live in Salt Lake City, do you think that I haven't had Christianity shoved in my face every day of my life? I've had to deal with separation of church and state a lot, not being Mormon in Utah. In our state history, many of our laws were basicly from the Book Of Mormon. They made THEIR laws, OUR laws.
That's the lesser of what I'm talking about, the wacko Aryan Nation or any other extreme side is what I compared to people like OBL.

Even under OBL's watch of Afghanistan during the Taliban's rule, non-muslims could live there. They were just treated like the Jews were initially in Nazi Germany, and they had to wear badges showing their religion and to mark their home or business. So why do you assume that even OBL would ban other religions.

If you have other questions about what I think, ask in a PM. This has totally hi-jacked this thread.

Originally posted by Swazo:
The bible has been rewritten time and time again, before it ever made it onto paper. How many times have people used bible quotes to justify keeping black people from being actual people and so many other reasons to hate and kill? The bible was written by man and so was the Koran. What's your point? When you find something written by God, let me know

People who look to either and come away with an understanding of why someone should die or why they should be hated, is a POS. Those turds need to be flushed like any other out there.

Have you ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls? If not I suggest you do some research before you go spewing out more of this garbage to others. They prove the Bible is just as acurate today as it was when it was first written. The Bible was written by man, inspired by God. The Koran was written by a man, inspired by men.

Originally posted by Swazo:
I live in Salt Lake City, do you think that I haven't had Christianity shoved in my face every day of my life? I've had to deal with separation of church and state a lot, not being Mormon in Utah. In our state history, many of our laws were basicly from the Book Of Mormon. They made THEIR laws, OUR laws.

You mean in a representative government the laws actually represent what the people want? What a concept! Besides, anything that Utah does that I would even remotely consider 'forcing religion' down your throat would be unconstitutional.

Back on topic:

I think it is a mistake to only search more Arab's.

Arabs, Africans, Asians are all working together with OBL. OBL is speical in the fact that he is the glue that keeps many different groups together, like the Kashmiris and Egypt's Islamic Jihad as one example.

Our enemies have more than just one face. I wouldn't be suprised if there will be caucasian people amoung their ranks, if not already amoung them.

So, IMO we should trust no one and have our various transit security reflect that. But that won't happen, so I guess all we have to combat things is to generally stereotype people from what they appear to be.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I live in Salt Lake City, do you think that I haven't had Christianity shoved in my face every day of my life? I've had to deal with separation of church and state a lot, not being Mormon in Utah. In our state history, many of our laws were basicly from the Book Of Mormon. They made THEIR laws, OUR laws.

You mean in a representative government the laws actually represent what the people want? What a concept! Besides, anything that Utah does that I would even remotely consider 'forcing religion' down your throat would be unconstitutional.

Well, the state's government was unbalanced for a long time. It's slowly starting to reflect the actual population, and it is quickly doing so in SLC. SLC's last 2 Mayors have made that happen

That doesn't change what has happend, but we're learning from our past history to make the correct changes today.

Feel free to PM me since this is off-topic.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
The bible has been rewritten time and time again, before it ever made it onto paper. How many times have people used bible quotes to justify keeping black people from being actual people and so many other reasons to hate and kill? The bible was written by man and so was the Koran. What's your point? When you find something written by God, let me know

People who look to either and come away with an understanding of why someone should die or why they should be hated, is a POS. Those turds need to be flushed like any other out there.

Have you ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls? If not I suggest you do some research before you go spewing out more of this garbage to others. They prove the Bible is just as acurate today as it was when it was first written. The Bible was written by man, inspired by God. The Koran was written by a man, inspired by men.

What about the New Testiment? The rest of your post is totally your opinion and reeks a "holier than thou" attitude shared by most unchristian-like christians I've met. Your way isn't the way

Feel free to PM me since this is off-topic.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
3. I'm saying that you cannot blame Islam for what a sect does,

OMG Yes you can because that is what the Koran teaches them to do. Quit ignoring me. You are wrong!

Your post reminds me to what an Indian coworker of mine once said (shortly after arriving from India):
"I hate all Cristians for what they do. They come into my country as missionaries and give food/money to people if they declare themselves as Christians. Missionaries get people to lie about their religion because their Bible teaches them to do so."
When I told him that I am a Christian, he asked how could I identify myself with "those people" he saw in India.

Your "opinion" about Muslims is about as well-founded as his is about Christians. Except for he based his opinion on what he personally saw.

You seem to know pretty well what the Koran says. Did you read it ? He did not read the Bible just had an "educated opinion" about it based on talking to others and watching the (certainly biased) media in his country.

Just like him, you seem to have a pretty good sense to select the true representatives of a community of hunderds of millions of people...

Originally posted by Swazo:
What about the New Testiment? The rest of your post is totally your opinion and reeks a "holier than thou" attitude shared by most unchristian-like christians I've met. Your way isn't the way

What about the New Testament? Nothing. Why would they change the New Testament and not the Old Testament. And your responce is typical of those who don't like what they hear. I am not saying that I am "holier than thou" Thats jsut a weak defense tactic used by people like yourself who don't have anything else to use to defend their position so they call someone a mean christian. Give me a break.

Originally posted by tiv:
You seem to know pretty well what the Koran says. Did you read it ? He did not read the Bible just had an "educated opinion" about it based on talking to others and watching the (certainly biased) media in his country.

Just like him, you seem to have a pretty good sense to select the true representatives of a community of hunderds of millions of people...

Yes in fact I have read the sections of the Koran pertaining to the terrorism acts. It specifically says that if a person does not believe or will not convert they should be killed. You should read it too, then maybe you would understand rather then play he said she said.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
What about the New Testiment? The rest of your post is totally your opinion and reeks a "holier than thou" attitude shared by most unchristian-like christians I've met. Your way isn't the way

What about the New Testament? Nothing. Why would they change the New Testament and not the Old Testament. And your responce is typical of those who don't like what they hear. I am not saying that I am "holier than thou" Thats jsut a weak defense tactic used by people like yourself who don't have anything else to use to defend their position so they call someone a mean christian. Give me a break.

That is what I was referring to in my post, so you bringing up the Dead Sea Scrolls is a joke. That was in writing before the Christian religion began. The New Testament floated around in word of mouth form for centuries! The oldest piece found is from 125 A.D. and is only a tiny, incomplete Gospel of John. The oldest semi-complete versions are from the 4th century (still FULL of errors and gaps), but most of the gaps have been filled in the last 100 years. Thousands of manuscripts exist, but they know they were simple copies of a few error filled originals. There is not a full version of the New Testament to date, only an interpretation of what they've found to date.

They wouldn't try to change the old testament because the Jews would know when to fly the BS flag

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Stazi, it's funny isn't it that the anti-profiles come up with these borderline moronic arguments, yet they never say that profiling will not work. The only thing they jump up and down about is that it's not 'fair'.....if profiling didn't work so many would not be for it then.

Originally posted by Stazi:
Dude this is not even comparable. Give me a f'en break. How is racially profiling a black man in a BMW even compare to looking for terrorists who's mission is to bring down a f'en plane and kill as many people as possible - tell me how?

You argument is a joke. Sorry but this is just ridiculous.Jesus Christ people THINK. I bet half of you moron's balled your eyes out and swore revenge on the terrorists that caused 9-11, but now, years later "we aren't allowed to pester the people" that fit the same damned description.

And in any case how many cops do you think even look at balck guys driving luxury cars nowadays? I bet they don't get more than a second glance. It's not like it's 1960 - hell in Detroit every other brother is driving an X-calade wid dubs.

Sorry if someone already replied to this, but...you might try to do a little reading because one of my first posts said it does work. Moronic arguements? Did you not read the post a few down that mentioned 3 reasons along with the others we have brought up? Ive heard of selective hearing, but reading...?

-ivan

Im not one bit afraid of flying, even after the london attacks. It makes no sense to me to be scared. Common sense dictates that you have a better chance of dying (and not accidentaly) anywhere as opposed as flying. Ive got tons of friends that are indian/arab/dark skinned although some may look like terrorists, id have no problem flying in a plane full of them, i guess that unless you're exposed to the common fear, you wont get over it.

-ivan c.

Originally posted by Stazi:
Common sense is no longer common.

Seems like the IQ of this board is dropping into the double digits lately.

Too many people jumping on the liberal band-wagon for the sheer sake of arguing - WITHOUT thinking about WTF they are talking about.

Tell me one person here that isn't more scared to fly now ever since 9-11? Yes, even though there is more screening, AFAIC there isn't ENOUGH!

Totally f'en stupid - especially when a couple of weeks ago the pricks were bombing London - HELLO OPEN YOUR GOD DAMNED EYES! They didn't go away after you shut them and counted to 10. Seriously people lets think about it. Do you want to live....start with that question, then the normal progression from there is: I need to keep myself safe....

Yes, lets not worry about people who have declared war against us. I'm sure they will just go away.

There is a huge difference in risk associated with life and comparing those to terrorist activities. Twist the numbers to fall into your unintellible thought process which makes no sense. I don't think you have a problem with hypocrisy, you seem to have a problem with common sense.

Right now, i have about a .000001% chance of being killed by terrorists, as most of you do too. Im not twisting any numbers into some "unintellible" thought process, i call it reality. If you cant follow the thought process that shows you're not in that much danger while flying on a plane or being in mass transit compared to just crossing the street, then i cant help.

-ivan

Originally posted by eyevancsu:

Originally posted by gearhead:

Originally posted by Goonz SVT:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Wow I get searched all the time and I dont feel embarassed. Give me a break.

read this:

Originally posted by eyevancsu:
Its very easy for non-arab or non-targeted group people to advocate racial profiling and claim that it makes society better, but how many of you face almost constant (and not just once or twice) and unfair profiling for your skin tone? Its very easy when the shoe is on the other foot, isnt it.

Read this:
Yell at the groups (young middle eastern muslim men) who are committing these violent murderous terrorist acts worldwide and not we who are just trying to protect ourselves from them.......you get that, right???

If you really want to be safe in this country, protect yourselves from the whites/blacks/hispanics which are more likely to commit violent crimes than middle easteners, all you all have been doing doing is pulling a hitler and blaming the scapegoat.
-ivan

Nice bit of racial profiling there

....actually, all I've been doing is blaming the people who commit the terrorism....

Originally posted by Swazo:
That is what I was referring to in my post, so you bringing up the Dead Sea Scrolls is a joke. That was in writing before the Christian religion began. The New Testament floated around in word of mouth form for centuries! The oldest piece found is from 125 A.D. and is only a tiny, incomplete Gospel of John. The oldest semi-complete versions are from the 4th century (still FULL of errors and gaps), but most of the gaps have been filled in the last 100 years. Thousands of manuscripts exist, but they know they were simple copies of a few error filled originals. There is not a full version of the New Testament to date, only an interpretation of what they've found to date.

They wouldn't try to change the old testament because the Jews would know when to fly the BS flag

Well at least you made it clear you believe the Bible is a sham. Now, could you please explain how Islam does not support killing infadels and the Bible does!

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

Point is, they didn't......Islamic/Muslim extremists are.....

Nice bit of racial profiling there

....actually, all I've been doing is blaming the people who commit the terrorism....

I figured i covered all groups besides middle easteners with my comments, which others did i leave out?

-ivan c.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

I've been particapating in this discussion when the only thing you've been doing is calling people names and trying to puff up you sagging E tough guy persona on people who don't see things your way! Guess what? Differing opinions run rampant in the US. It's one of the things that make our system work better than any other political system on the planet! If you can't deal with that in a big boy way maybe you should go back to your Uni-bomber shack in the outback!

Hey nutjob - try again. Last time I checked the uni-bomber was a Yank.

It's on thing to have a political opinion and another to be a blatant moron who refuses to look at things realistically.

Your attempt to belittle Australia, is laughable. If you weren't such a tree-humping moron wearing blinders, you'd realise that some of the most innovative things ever invented came out of Austalia, including the pace-maker,the black-box flight recorder, the modern automotive differential, the bionic ear, the utility vehicle, and the Xerox photocopier....just to name a few things.

It's sad when someone who tries to act soooo smart and wise, like yourself - actually doesn't know his asss from a hole in the ground and reverts to a feable attempt to insult me.

All you contribute to this discussion in inflamatory comments, with total disregard for the facts. because you're so far up the ass of John Kerry and the Liberal band-wagon/agenda, that you're nothing more than a irritating suppository.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by RT and his SE:

I've been particapating in this discussion when the only thing you've been doing is calling people names and trying to puff up you sagging E tough guy persona on people who don't see things your way! Guess what? Differing opinions run rampant in the US. It's one of the things that make our system work better than any other political system on the planet! If you can't deal with that in a big boy way maybe you should go back to your Uni-bomber shack in the outback!

Hey nutjob - try again. Last time I checked the uni-bomber was a Yank.

It's on thing to have a political opinion and another to be a blatant moron who refuses to look at things realistically.

Your attempt to belittle Australia, is laughable. If you weren't such a tree-humping moron wearing blinders, you'd realise that some of the most innovative things ever invented came out of Austalia, including the pace-maker,the black-box flight recorder, the modern automotive differential, the bionic ear, the utility vehicle, and the Xerox photocopier....just to name a few things.

It's sad when someone who tries to act soooo smart and wise, like yourself - actually doesn't know his asss from a hole in the ground and reverts to a feable attempt to insult me.

All you contribute to this discussion in inflamatory comments, with total disregard for the facts. because you're so far up the ass of John Kerry and the Liberal band-wagon/agenda, that you're nothing more than a irritating suppository.

Aussies ROCK!!!

Originally posted by gearhead:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

But if Christians were dumb enough to revert to 15th centry beliefs like OBL did, I think they'd be able to do just as much damage "in the name of God".

Point is, they didn't......Islamic/Muslim extremists are.....

Exactly, an extreme take on their religon. The VAST majority have not followed, only a small fraction of them have. We're dealing with a sect, not all of Islam.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Exactly, an extreme take on their religon. The VAST majority have not followed, only a small fraction of them have. We're dealing with a sect, not all of Islam.

I thought anything off topic was supposed to be taken to PMs? Oh, that's right, that's probably only because you were asked questions that you couldn't answer and make sense at the same time.

It would make a lot of sense if you'd view Christianity in the same way you view Islam as indicated in your post above.

Originally posted by Swazo:
Exactly, an extreme take on their religon. The VAST majority have not followed, only a small fraction of them have. We're dealing with a sect, not all of Islam.

Seeing as noone is able to easily identify the extremists from the pacifists, there is only one real feaisble way of looking for these people, by looking closely at all of those people who have a HIGHER probability of being involved in those groups. Those that are innocent, should understand they they too deserve the right to live without the fear of being killed in the name of some perverse ideal, and if that requires a small degree of inconvenience, then so be it.

At least they will no that they will have a much greater chance of travelling safely compared to playing Russioan-roulette with their lives, if we put feelings in front of safety.

It's a shame that a few crazies, bring down the rath on the rest of "their people" - but it would be careless not to try to do whatever we can to prevent another 9-11

I tried to take it to PM's and I tried to get this back on topic, but for some reason you and corbett are more interested in what I think for some reason.

Sorry Stazi there was no insult hurled at your beloved Australia in my post. Your selective reading has you missing out on the point...AGAIN!

Quote:

It's on thing to have a political opinion and another to be a blatant moron who refuses to look at things realistically.

Here's one of the many things you refuse to consider. The bill of rights applies to everyone not just the people you find don't scary. We've been doing it that way for over 200 years. Seem to have worked pretty well to this point and I for one am not going to let the protection that it guarantees die because you're frightened. Maybe it's time to hike-up your skirt and head back to the home land?
People like you who would give up their rights for anything let alone something like this that will offer little to no protection are sad indeed.

I can't wait for your next reply because I'm sure it will be chuck full of information pertaining to this thread and not just a personal attack on me!

Actually, you responded to something neither he nor I said, and it was something you had already said a few times in this thread. So I'm not sure what Corbett or I have to do with this, other than that you wanted us to continue the conversation in PM because points were made against you that made you look quite foolish.

I'm not too interested in what you say or think. But when you say or think something that doesn't make any sense, then I am interested in a further explanation. Not being able to give a further explanation (which happened twice in this thread) is when my point is made and when your statements are invalidated.

Originally posted by Swazo:
We're dealing with a sect, not all of Islam.

Wrong again. Go read the Koran and then come back to this thread. All of Islam is specifially taught by the Koran that if someone does not convert they are an infadel and should be killed.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

So are you saying that God of the bible doesn't say to kill anyone for their beliefs? I beg to differ.

Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
(People used to sacrafice animals to please God, and it better be the right God or else. Believers don't have to do this anymore, I guess God's laws aren't written in stone.)

Lev. 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.
(Kinda sounds like the death sentences islamic clerics put on journalists and authors today doesn't it?)

Deut. 6:14-15 Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you; (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.

How many people have been killed because of these words in the bible? Less than those killed by muslims? More?
My guess would be more.

Originally posted by RT and his SE:
Sorry Stazi there was no insult hurled at your beloved Australia in my post. Your selective reading has you missing out on the point...AGAIN!

Quote:

It's on thing to have a political opinion and another to be a blatant moron who refuses to look at things realistically.

Here's one of the many things you refuse to consider. The bill of rights applies to everyone not just the people you find don't scary. We've been doing it that way for over 200 years. Seem to have worked pretty well to this point and I for one am not going to let the protection that it guarantees die because you're frightened. Maybe it's time to hike-up your skirt and head back to the home land?
People like you who would give up their rights for anything let alone something like this that will offer little to no protection are sad indeed.

I can't wait for your next reply because I'm sure it will be chuck full of information pertaining to this thread and not just a personal attack on me!

Dude you are ridiculous - you told me to go back to my uni-bomber shack - thus inferring that Australians are all crazy recluses who live in the desert in makeshift accomodations. You're such a two-faced idiot. You OBVIOUSLY know JACK-diddly-squat about Australia, it's people, out constitution (which AMAZINGLY IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE US's - you nimrod!). And I guess your accuasation of my "skirt wearing" is another misconstrued point coming from you, huh? Yeah, you attack me in every post and everyone else can see that also. You're a f'en hypocrite if I ever saw one!

No one is trying to take away anyones rights. No one is saying take every arab and throw him/her in Gitmo and forget about them. If you knew you had a poisonous snake in your house, would you not try to find it and remove it to eliminate the chances of you being bitten and dieing, or would you just go to sleep and hope you don't get bitten in your sleep? It's the same damn thing.

Do they not check EVERYONES bags at the airport, do they not asks for EVERYONES passport when travelling overseas, do they not screen passengers randomly already? All they want to do is check those who may be more inclined to inflict malicious acts on others, more closely - how is that a theft of someone's rights? If they are not discovered to be carrying illegal posessions or behaving in a terrorist fashion, they will be allowed to pass through and resume their activities. All it is is 5 minutes of someones time. How hard is that for you to understand?

Sure - the antiquated precautuions of the past worked fine up until 9-11 and then a MAJOR flaw was found - we were caught with out pants down and over 3000 people died, and more recently the pricks killed people in London.

But you're basicaly sayin "F" that, it was a one off, and you REFUSE to look at what's going on outside of your fairy-tale world in your momma's basement.

People like you need a rude awakening to realise what's going on in the world.

You're a disgrace to those that were innocently killed on 9-11. You disgust me.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
That is what I was referring to in my post, so you bringing up the Dead Sea Scrolls is a joke. That was in writing before the Christian religion began. The New Testament floated around in word of mouth form for centuries! The oldest piece found is from 125 A.D. and is only a tiny, incomplete Gospel of John. The oldest semi-complete versions are from the 4th century (still FULL of errors and gaps), but most of the gaps have been filled in the last 100 years. Thousands of manuscripts exist, but they know they were simple copies of a few error filled originals. There is not a full version of the New Testament to date, only an interpretation of what they've found to date.

They wouldn't try to change the old testament because the Jews would know when to fly the BS flag

Well at least you made it clear you believe the Bible is a sham. Now, could you please explain how Islam does not support killing infadels and the Bible does!

I don't think the Bible is a sham, I think that it is incomplete and that should be known as you learn from it.

If you think it's a sham from those facts, that's one thing. But I never said I think it's a sham. I pointed out how man has been unable to come up with a complete version, that's all.

If you've never seen/read of the Bible being used as an insrument of evil, then you haven't studied history much.

With the Bible or the Koran, it's all based on who's acting upon what they've learned. Both can be used for good or evil, it depends on the person.

Chill it a bit or PM it. Everyone.

Originally posted by spgoode:

So are you saying that God of the bible doesn't say to kill anyone for their beliefs? I beg to differ.

Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
(People used to sacrafice animals to please God, and it better be the right God or else. Believers don't have to do this anymore, I guess God's laws aren't written in stone.)

WOW! This just proves you do not have any clue what the Bible is about. It's called a new covenant. We don't sacrifice animals anymore because we are in a new covenant with Christ. That is why Jesus came to die for us. He was the ultimate sacrifice and now we only need to believe in Him to go to Heaven, we don't have to sacrifice animals anymore. This alone shows how little you actually know on the subject. I'm not going to disprove any more of you ignorant posts about the Bible. I would only suggest you do a little research with an open mind before you take things out of context like you have with these verses. The Bible does not tell us to kill those who do not believe. The Koran does. It's pretty simple.

Originally posted by Davo:
Actually, you responded to something neither he nor I said, and it was something you had already said a few times in this thread. So I'm not sure what Corbett or I have to do with this, other than that you wanted us to continue the conversation in PM because points were made against you that made you look quite foolish.

I'm not too interested in what you say or think. But when you say or think something that doesn't make any sense, then I am interested in a further explanation. Not being able to give a further explanation (which happened twice in this thread) is when my point is made and when your statements are invalidated.

PM sent

Originally posted by spgoode:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
I'm just tired of what seems to be a christian dominate attitude that all of Islam is to blame for terrorism, when only a small sect of it is. Christian's cannot make terrorsim an Islamic thing, when they too have partook.

You had to make this a religious debate didnt you? The difference is that the Bible does not say to kill anyone who will not convert. The Koran says the exact opposite. That is was Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

So are you saying that God of the bible doesn't say to kill anyone for their beliefs? I beg to differ.

Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
(People used to sacrafice animals to please God, and it better be the right God or else. Believers don't have to do this anymore, I guess God's laws aren't written in stone.)

Lev. 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.
(Kinda sounds like the death sentences islamic clerics put on journalists and authors today doesn't it?)

Deut. 6:14-15 Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you; (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.

How many people have been killed because of these words in the bible? Less than those killed by muslims? More?
My guess would be more.

yes,but NOTHING in your quotes says ANYTHING about god's followers killing nonbelievers....it says that GOD will destroy them....it is NOT telling god's people to do it for him...big difference...

Originally posted by Swazo:

I don't think the Bible is a sham, I think that it is incomplete and that should be known as you learn from it.

If you think it's a sham from those facts, that's one thing. But I never said I think it's a sham. I pointed out how man has been unable to come up with a complete version, that's all.

If you've never seen/read of the Bible being used as an insrument of evil, then you haven't studied history much.

With the Bible or the Koran, it's all based on who's acting upon what they've learned. Both can be used for good or evil, it depends on the person.

Sorry but the Bible is complete, and it even says not to add any more books to it. Just because people take things out of context and twist it to fit what they want it to say does not mean that the Bible was what told them to do it. However, the Koran specifically says to kill the infadel.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:

I don't think the Bible is a sham, I think that it is incomplete and that should be known as you learn from it.

If you think it's a sham from those facts, that's one thing. But I never said I think it's a sham. I pointed out how man has been unable to come up with a complete version, that's all.

If you've never seen/read of the Bible being used as an insrument of evil, then you haven't studied history much.

With the Bible or the Koran, it's all based on who's acting upon what they've learned. Both can be used for good or evil, it depends on the person.

Sorry but the Bible is complete, and it even says not to add any more books to it. Just because people take things out of context and twist it to fit what they want it to say does not mean that the Bible was what told them to do it. However, the Koran specifically says to kill the infadel.

Nope, the New Testament is not complete. It's funny how that works when either people forget to write it down for a few hundred years or it "gets lost".

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by spgoode:

So are you saying that God of the bible doesn't say to kill anyone for their beliefs? I beg to differ.

Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
(People used to sacrafice animals to please God, and it better be the right God or else. Believers don't have to do this anymore, I guess God's laws aren't written in stone.)

WOW! This just proves you do not have any clue what the Bible is about. It's called a new covenant. We don't sacrifice animals anymore because we are in a new covenant with Christ. That is why Jesus came to die for us. He was the ultimate sacrifice and now we only need to believe in Him to go to Heaven, we don't have to sacrifice animals anymore.

The verses I quoted are very staightforward, show me how they are out of context with all the other killing and debauchery in the Bible.
And I already know why you don't have to sacrafice animals anymore or follow strict dietary laws or do any other of the other things that Jesus said you didn't have to do. I find it funny that God didn't get it right the first time and had to send his son to tidy things up a bit, that's all.

Originally posted by Corbett:
I would only suggest you do a little research with an open mind before you take things out of context like you have with these verses. The Koran does not tell us to kill those who do not believe. The Bible does. It's pretty simple.

I switched your words around to show how a muslim would state this. Not that I am defending islam, I think it's nuttier that christianity.

It's good to see that this has turned into a religon debate.

Originally posted by spgoode:
I find it funny that God didn't get it right the first time and had to send his son to tidy things up a bit, that's all.

Wow, if thats how you look at the Bible and God I am not even going to debate with you. You've already made up your mind that God is a moron. And BTW, we were the ones that didn't get it right, not God. He gave us a second chance.

Originally posted by spgoode:
I switched your words around to show how a muslim would state this. Not that I am defending islam, I think it's nuttier that christianity.

Switch it around all you want but thats not what the Bible says, no matter how far out of context you take certain scriptures.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by spgoode:
I find it funny that God didn't get it right the first time and had to send his son to tidy things up a bit, that's all.

And BTW, we were the ones that didn't get it right, not God. He gave us a second chance.

I was talking about God changing his own laws, not anything that man did.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
It's good to see that this has turned into a religon debate.

IMO it was only a matter of time, considering that the Islamofanatics are religiously motivated, and this country's laws and system of rights was founded on christian principles.

It is not possible to have 100% "free" rights and 100% protection from outside harm by gov't methods, simulaneously. Having protection requires SOME compromise of people's "right" not to be searched, or be suspect based on their skin color or background, etc. If we could be MUCH safer by sacrificing some small "right" not to be searched or what not, why would it be a bad thing?

POV

â�?��?with few exceptions, happens to have been perpetrated by Islamic radical fundamentalist extremists.â�?�

The IRA ?
_________

â�?��?True. However, but how is regular white people, or hispanic or black people killing thousands of innocent people any different than a few "arabs" killing a few thousands of also innocent people?â�?�

Africaâ�?��?�s history is tattered with genocide.

â�?��?Ahh yes, searching an 80 year old black woman would make total sense because all of these suisideâ�?�

Granny often carries bags of stuff

So, since the inception of the religous talk in this thread I've gathered this..

Christians are bad and evil and the root cause of the problem
Islam / Muslim are good and misunderstood.

Muslims just need to hire a good public relations firm and this whole terrorism scam will go away.

They have the ACLU on their side.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Christians are bad and evil and the root cause of the problem
Islam / Muslim are good and misunderstood.

Close. Christians in general are forcing their beliefs and views upon us, and are as dangerous as Islamoterrorists, but don't stereotype Arabs because of a few radicals.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
They have the ACLU on their side.

The ACLU could use a good pr firm too

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
So, since the inception of the religous talk in this thread I've gathered this..

Christians are bad and evil and the root cause of the problem
Islam / Muslim are good and misunderstood.

What I got from this thread is that all the major religions were concieved at a time when the average life had very little value. Today some backward cultures use this ancient "wisdom" to justify violence, since their value of life has not changed. Modern cultures place much more value on life and instead often use this ancient "wisdom" for financial or polital power.
Like it or not christianity and islam share the old testament which has much outdated thinking in it. The saviors of these religions advanced their own interpretations of the bible and updated God's law to fit.

Except Christianity has evolved with the times and since updated their religous book....

Originally posted by spgoode:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
So, since the inception of the religous talk in this thread I've gathered this..

Christians are bad and evil and the root cause of the problem
Islam / Muslim are good and misunderstood.

What I got from this thread is that all the major religions were concieved at a time when the average life had very little value. Today some backward cultures use this ancient "wisdom" to justify violence, since their value of life has not changed. Modern cultures place much more value on life and instead often use this ancient "wisdom" for financial or polital power.
Like it or not christianity and islam share the old testament which has much outdated thinking in it. The saviors of these religions advanced their own interpretations of the bible and updated God's law to fit.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Again, UBL's connection to the Somalia conflict is vague at best, and IIRC has never been proven.

Originally posted by Swazo:

I never said that Somolia had anything to do with terrorism. I meant that there were TONS of non-Arab Islamics that were guided by OBL and/or people from his ranks. Just pointing out direct combatants will come from OBL that AREN'T Arab, and the US has come across them.

I don't think any of us are denying that there are nutcase Christians out there. However, the radical sect of Islam has proven over and over again to be much more of a threat to all of us 'infidels'
Originally posted by Swazo:
I am saying that since someone is Christian doesn't mean they won't commit evil or wrong doing.

I've read about key figures directly from OBL in Somolia, I'll have to find my reference.

No doubt about it, OBL's sect of Islam and others much like from Egypt or Saudi Arabia, are the biggest threat to us right now. I simply can't wait for OBL's head on a pike.

OK, I found the link to OBL from the British Government. In 1993 OBL sent Muhammed Atef to give military training and assistance to Somalis. On October 3rd and 4th of that year, during the very same battle that many of my fellow Army Rangers were killed in (The movie "Black Hawk Down" was of this battle), the Somalis under Aidid's command used RPG's to bring down 2 Black Hawks by hitting the tail rotors. Those were not skills possesed by the Somalis, and is a definitive example of the training they recieved by Arab's that fought against the Soviets, who were trained by our own military.

Also in the Manhattan trial, Mohamed Odeh was given up as someone who trained troops that were opposed to Aidid.

OBL himself consistantly spoke of his jihad in Somalia against the "American invaders".

That's what I figured the link to be. I never thought it was actually 'proven' though. As just about every one with some kind of 'power' in that region has ties to UBL/OBL whatever you want to call him. Do you have links to those articles I'd be interested to read them?

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Again, UBL's connection to the Somalia conflict is vague at best, and IIRC has never been proven.

Originally posted by Swazo:

I never said that Somolia had anything to do with terrorism. I meant that there were TONS of non-Arab Islamics that were guided by OBL and/or people from his ranks. Just pointing out direct combatants will come from OBL that AREN'T Arab, and the US has come across them.

I don't think any of us are denying that there are nutcase Christians out there. However, the radical sect of Islam has proven over and over again to be much more of a threat to all of us 'infidels'
Originally posted by Swazo:
I am saying that since someone is Christian doesn't mean they won't commit evil or wrong doing.

I've read about key figures directly from OBL in Somolia, I'll have to find my reference.

No doubt about it, OBL's sect of Islam and others much like from Egypt or Saudi Arabia, are the biggest threat to us right now. I simply can't wait for OBL's head on a pike.

OK, I found the link to OBL from the British Government. In 1993 OBL sent Muhammed Atef to give military training and assistance to Somalis. On October 3rd and 4th of that year, during the very same battle that many of my fellow Army Rangers were killed in (The movie "Black Hawk Down" was of this battle), the Somalis under Aidid's command used RPG's to bring down 2 Black Hawks by hitting the tail rotors. Those were not skills possesed by the Somalis, and is a definitive example of the training they recieved by Arab's that fought against the Soviets, who were trained by our own military.

Also in the Manhattan trial, Mohamed Odeh was given up as someone who trained troops that were opposed to Aidid.

OBL himself consistantly spoke of his jihad in Somalia against the "American invaders".

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Christians are bad and evil and the root cause of the problem
Islam / Muslim are good and misunderstood.

Close. Christians in general are forcing their beliefs and views upon us, and are as dangerous as Islamoterrorists, but don't stereotype Arabs because of a few radicals.

No. People are playing off all of Islam as evil because of OBL. If that's true, then actions of all evil-doing Christians (Aryan Nation, abortion clinic bombings/attacks or any other evil acts) should reflect upon the average Christian.

That's not fair to either Christians or Muslims IMO. We're able to see the difference between a skin head from the Aryan Nation and the average Christian, and know they don't represent each other. I think it's sad that most aren't able to see the difference between Osama Bin Laden and the average Muslim.

I'm not against protecting possible terrorist. But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

It's mainly from "Holy War, INC" by Peter L. Bergen. Also, I got more info on an online search from their names and locations.

Originally posted by Swazo:
But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

Typical.

And just to clarify, you do not have to know your enemies in order to kill them. All I have to know is that they're trying to kill me, and that will make me want to kill them. But your desire to know them is typical of your side. It wouldn't be a bad thing, but you let the desire to know our enemies hamper our means of destroying them.

I would agree with both statements. However, I think its the uneducated people on both situations that are grouping everyone (sects within religons) together.

The issue is due to this country being a majority of whites, with blacks / hispanics 2nd and 3rd, it's somewhat 'easy' to narrow it down to the Muslim terrorists, because they fit a typically appearance profile.....

Originally posted by Swazo:

No. People are playing off all of Islam as evil because of OBL. If that's true, then actions of all evil-doing Christians (Aryan Nation, abortion clinic bombings/attacks or any other evil acts) should reflect upon the average Christian.

Originally posted by contour_phoenix_when:
POV

â�?��?with few exceptions, happens to have been perpetrated by Islamic radical fundamentalist extremists.â�?�

The IRA ?

I was waiting for this one. That is a division along religous as well as political grounds.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

Typical. And just to clarify, you do not have to know your enemies in order to kill them. All I have to know is that they're trying to kill me, and that will make me want to kill them. But your desire to know them is typical of your side. It wouldn't be a bad thing, but you let the desire to know our enemies hamper our means of destroying them.

When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk

The more knowledge you have about who you're dealing with, the better off you are. That doesn't mean sit on our hands and wait for them to attack us again

Originally posted by Swazo:
When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk

LMAO

When you become a Christian, then you can talk about Christians.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk

LMAO

When you become a Christian, then you can talk about Christians.

To know of Christianity, you don't have to be Christian. You can simply open your eyes in America, read about them, and allow them to try to convert you.

But you sure do need to read more than a Tom Clancy book and play a few video games to know of war

I agree with both, as if you take Davo's comments in the simplest form he is right, you do not have to know your enemy in order to kill him. However, if you want to DEFEAT your enemy as I'm figuring Swazo is inferring, then you must know the root cause and what makes them fight. A key problem in the Vietnam war, and a problem the military has not adapted to quickly enough in the GWOT. However, today, we do know how to defeat this enemy and what makes them fight....

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

Typical. And just to clarify, you do not have to know your enemies in order to kill them. All I have to know is that they're trying to kill me, and that will make me want to kill them. But your desire to know them is typical of your side. It wouldn't be a bad thing, but you let the desire to know our enemies hamper our means of destroying them.

When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk The more knowledge you have about who you're dealing with, the better off you are. That doesn't mean sit on our hands and wait for them to attack us again

Originally posted by Swazo:
To know of Christianity, you don't have to be Christian. You can simply open your eyes in America, read about them, and allow them to try to convert you.

But you sure do need to read more than a Tom Clancy book and play a few video games to know of war

So to know my enemy, I have to be in the military? You make no sense. Last I checked, we were all a part of this war on terror, not just the ones who suit up for it. Much love to our military, but they're not the only ones who can comment on the war on terror.

...but that wasn't the first time I've heard someone say that.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Good it is needed.

The people who are against racial profiling like to throw up Teddy K. and Timmah M. Great 2 in 50 have been non-Arabs.

People need to pull their heads out of their (censored) and realize racial profiling is a needed tool our law enforcement needs.

yes!

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
I agree with both, as if you take Davo's comments in the simplest form he is right, you do not have to know your enemy in order to kill him. However, if you want to DEFEAT your enemy as I'm figuring Swazo is inferring, then you must know the root cause and what makes them fight.

Exactly. If we don't bother to understand the root causes of why people become terrorists, we'll just be sending troops to get killed in various ME countries indefinitely.

By "we have to understand the enemy" no one means "we need to sit down with a cup of tea and hold their hand while they tell us about the time their pet hamster died." It's scary that anyone would infer otherwise.

Originally posted by Viss1:
Exactly. If we don't bother to understand the root causes of why people become terrorists, we'll just be sending troops to get killed in various ME countries indefinitely.

Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

Originally posted by Corbett:
Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

If that was the only factor, why aren't 100% of Muslims terrorists?

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:
Exactly. If we don't bother to understand the root causes of why people become terrorists, we'll just be sending troops to get killed in various ME countries indefinitely.

Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

Luckily our leaders aren't ignorant enough to label every Muslim the enemy of the state like you do.

When a book tells someone to kill thousands of people, do you blame the book or do you blame the person?

So does the fact that the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family are very close make you second guess our President's choices?

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

If that was the only factor, why aren't 100% of Muslims terrorists?

Because they are ignorant of what the Koran says.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Luckily our leaders aren't ignorant enough to label every Muslim the enemy of the state like you do.

When a book tells someone to kill thousands of people, do you blame the book or do you blame the person?

So does the fact that the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family are very close make you second guess our President's choices?

Oh so now I am ignorant. Look, you want to understand your enemies then go read the Koran. Just because most of the Islamic community have not committed suiside bombings does not mean they are not part of a religion that tells them to kill those who wont convert.

The Koran is not just a book to them, it is what they follow and it specifically says to do what these terrorists are doing. So weather or not they choose to do it is up to them but their religion teaches them to do so.

The fact that you think there is some conspiracy in the Bush camp shoes just how much of a conspiracy theory anti-Bush liberal you really are.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

If that was the only factor, why aren't 100% of Muslims terrorists?

Because they are ignorant of what the Koran says.

So in your opinion, the only reason most Muslims are not terrorists is because they haven't bothered to understand the Koran.

This also implies that the House of Saud is not well-versed in the Koran either. Good thing we're tight with them - maybe we can prevent them from getting a copy of the Koran!

Originally posted by Viss1:
So in your opinion, the only reason most Muslims are not terrorists is because they haven't bothered to understand the Koran.

This also implies that the House of Saud is not well-versed in the Koran either. Good thing we're tight with them - maybe we can prevent them from getting a copy of the Koran!

No I said they are ignorant of what it says. IE, may have read it but do not choose to believe certain parts.

Actually you are incorrect. The are many more factors in to why a Muslim becomes a terrorist than the Koran itself.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Luckily our leaders aren't ignorant enough to label every Muslim the enemy of the state like you do.

When a book tells someone to kill thousands of people, do you blame the book or do you blame the person?

So does the fact that the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family are very close make you second guess our President's choices?

Oh so now I am ignorant. Look, you want to understand your enemies then go read the Koran. Just because most of the Islamic community have not committed suiside bombings does not mean they are not part of a religion that tells them to kill those who wont convert.

The Koran is not just a book to them, it is what they follow and it specifically says to do what these terrorists are doing. So weather or not they choose to do it is up to them but their religion teaches them to do so.

The fact that you think there is some conspiracy in the Bush camp shoes just how much of a conspiracy theory anti-Bush liberal you really are.

Thats fine, still prove my theory that Islam is a terrorist religion.

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I said they are ignorant of what it says. IE, may have read it but do not choose to believe certain parts.

Do you agree, then, that there are factors other than the Koran itself that cause Muslims to become terrorists?

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I said they are ignorant of what it says. IE, may have read it but do not choose to believe certain parts.

Do you agree, then, that there are factors other than the Koran itself that cause Muslims to become terrorists?

Hated towards America. Sure! But that does not change the fact that Islam is a religion that condones terrorism.

Do you agree that the Koran teaches to kill those who will not convert to Islam?

I'm not saying there is anything going on with the President Bush SR or W and the Saudi Royal Family. Why do you ASSume that I'm a liberal when I am not?

The US has a 0 tolerance for Terror sponsoring nations, so you must be upset that Bush doesn't have Saudi Arabia on his hit list because of their status in the Islamic world.

Corbett, you and OBL have made the same exact mistake about Islam. There are 2 jihad's to a Muslim, the Great jihad and the Little jihad. The Great being the inner struggle to overcome one's evil inclinations, and the Little being war against the enemies of Islam. You've got the priorities mixed up. Islam is related etymologically to the word salaam, which means peace.

So yes, you are ignorant of what Islam is all about and I'm glad our leaders are not.

The burden is upon you to prove that Islam as a whole is a 'terrorist organization' as your ignorantly put it. If that was true, then we'd have millions upon millions of people against the West. Ignorance such as what you are conveying is what makes things such as 'racil profiling' such a heated debate. When you have uneducated people arguing for it and can not intelligently argue for it it makes the others look just as ignorant as your views are. Christianity has the same voliatility in it to be as 'violent' as the Radical Muslims are but there are many factors behind the overall people involved with Christianity that do not allow it to be to the degree that Islam has associated with it, one being education. I will agree that Muslims as a community do need to do a better job at policing their own and condemning the terrorists within Islam which is slowly making more progress.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Thats fine, still prove my theory that Islam is a terrorist religion.

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

Typical. And just to clarify, you do not have to know your enemies in order to kill them. All I have to know is that they're trying to kill me, and that will make me want to kill them. But your desire to know them is typical of your side. It wouldn't be a bad thing, but you let the desire to know our enemies hamper our means of destroying them.

When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk The more knowledge you have about who you're dealing with, the better off you are. That doesn't mean sit on our hands and wait for them to attack us again

Well maybe we should invite them over for tea and crumpets then

- in the mean time while we are trying to "get to know them", they're planting mombs all over the place to send us to Allah to be punished.

We don't have time to JUST investigate - we need to be PRO-active against them. Not wait till they blow sh!t up and then go....aah yes, I thought those guys were terrorists, and print out a 500 page analysis after-the-fact. Seems like the Libs just want to fight fires, and rather not go looking for the firestarters. Pretty damn stupid if you ask me.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I said they are ignorant of what it says. IE, may have read it but do not choose to believe certain parts.

Do you agree, then, that there are factors other than the Koran itself that cause Muslims to become terrorists?

Hated towards America. Sure! But that does not change the fact that Islam is a religion that condones terrorism.

Do you agree that the Koran teaches to kill those who will not convert to Islam?

Tim, you are losing all respect in my eyes. The Koran is not anymore violent then the Bible is. The difference is that Islamic terrorists are looked on as being "animals" while Christians are viewed as being "holy and right".

Racial profilling will only work, when it is proven that all terrorist are arab or of middle eastern descent. The fact of the matter is that Islam is global religion and radical extremists can be any color. Hell, one of the terrorist in the first London bus bombings was a black Jamacian!

Racial profiling as a whole has been proven to be totally ineffective. The whole purpose is to further promote stereotypes and racist ideas.

Originally posted by Stazi:
Seems like the Libs just want to fight fires, and rather not go looking for the firestarters. Pretty damn stupid if you ask me.

No. They want to understand why the fire exists. They want to know why it must burn everything it touches. What did we do to make the fire want to destroy everything in its path? We should make peace with the fire so it won't want to hurt us.

Originally posted by Corbett:
...Islam is a terrorist religion.

wow. what an extremist pov. if you're serious about what you've said, then you've completely discredited yourself and your pov.

not only is it completely unsubstantiated, but it isn't supported any fact. not even president bush or anyone in his administration would agree with you. as a matter of fact no one with any kind of knowledge about islam or religion in general would back up your statement.

to label a whole religion as "a terrorist religion" because of a few idiots is so unbelievably ignorant it's hard to believe you seriously meant that. this is one of the main concerns with profiling in any form, people would turn to making these types of blanket assumptions.

Originally posted by BP:

Originally posted by Corbett:
...Islam is a terrorist religion.

wow. what an extremist pov. if you're serious about what you've said, then you've completely discredited yourself and your pov.

not only is it completely unsubstantiated, but it isn't supported any fact. not even president bush or anyone in his administration would agree with you. as a matter of fact no one with any kind of knowledge about islam or religion in general would back up your statement.

to label a whole religion as "a terrorist religion" because of a few idiots is so unbelievably ignorant it's hard to believe you seriously meant that. this is one of the main concerns with profiling in any form, people would turn to making these types of blanket assumptions.

Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

But let me guess...you're a free thinker.

Oh, and please list some things the Bush Administration has done that you think amounts to brainwash.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

But let me guess...you're a free thinker.

Oh, and please list some things the Bush Administration has done that you think amounts to brainwash.

Actually, yes. Sorry buddy, I don't let the likes of Sean Hannity, Pat Robinson, Jerry Faldwell, Micheal Savage and the rest of the right to cloud my mind.

The President has not come out openly to say it himself but the people who claim to follow him does. Please see above.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

Ahh so now because I am a Christian I am uneducated and brainwashed. Thanks Antonio.

BWHAHAHA, sorry Antonio, but that was damn funny, thanks for the comedic relief! But your last two statements were on the same wavelength as Corbetts about all of islam being a terrorist organization.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

But let me guess...you're a free thinker.

Oh, and please list some things the Bush Administration has done that you think amounts to brainwash.

Actually, yes. Sorry buddy, I don't let the likes of Sean Hannity, Pat Robinson, Jerry Faldwell, Micheal Savage and the rest of the right to cloud my mind.

The President has not come out openly to say it himself but the people who claim to follow him does. Please see above.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Actually, yes. Sorry buddy, I don't let the likes of Sean Hannity, Pat Robinson, Jerry Faldwell, Micheal Savage and the rest of the right to cloud my mind.

Of course.

But instead it's Michael Moore, George Soros, Ted Kennedy, and Al Franken.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
The President has not come out openly to say it himself but the people who claim to follow him does. Please see above.

Huh???

Let me get this straight: the Bush Administration is brainwashing people but they don't say anything to do it? They are amazing.

Originally posted by BP:

Originally posted by Corbett:
...Islam is a terrorist religion.

wow. what an extremist pov. if you're serious about what you've said, then you've completely discredited yourself and your pov.

not only is it completely unsubstantiated, but it isn't supported any fact. not even president bush or anyone in his administration would agree with you. as a matter of fact no one with any kind of knowledge about islam or religion in general would back up your statement.

to label a whole religion as "a terrorist religion" because of a few idiots is so unbelievably ignorant it's hard to believe you seriously meant that. this is one of the main concerns with profiling in any form, people would turn to making these types of blanket assumptions.

Way to take it out of context. You completely mixed up my words. I suggest you go read the Koran to see what it says before you start calling people who HAVE read it ignorant.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

Don't worry BP. The Bush administration and his group of right wing Christian exteremists have sucessfully fooled another uneducated person.

I can't really blame Corbett. He is just repeating what he has been brainwashed to say.

Ahh so now because I am a Christian I am uneducated and brainwashed. Thanks Antonio.

No, your just an idiot for what you said.

Davo, your right I should not have added the Bush Adminstration. I will just say, Right wing Christian extremist.

Ryan, just listen to the people I listed talk about Islam. They honestly believe that relgion is about hate.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
No, your just an idiot for what you said.

Well which one is it? Am I brainwashed and uneducated? Or am I an idiot? Or both?

Originally posted by Swazo:
Corbett, you and OBL have made the same exact mistake about Islam. There are 2 jihad's to a Muslim, the Great jihad and the Little jihad. The Great being the inner struggle to overcome one's evil inclinations, and the Little being war against the enemies of Islam. You've got the priorities mixed up. Islam is related etymologically to the word salaam, which means peace.

Just because you have an internet connection and a few hours to find a website that backs up what you think about Islam does not mean you know what you are talking about.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I said they are ignorant of what it says. IE, may have read it but do not choose to believe certain parts.

Do you agree, then, that there are factors other than the Koran itself that cause Muslims to become terrorists?

Hated towards America.

Correct, they hate America. Do you think there might be reasons for that other than "the Koran tells them to?"

Quote:

Do you agree that the Koran teaches to kill those who will not convert to Islam?

Haven't read it. I do know that you interpret it that way, and I respect your knowedge of the world's religions. But knowing that most Christians don't take the "teachings" of Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc. literally, I'm assuming the non-violent Muslims must consider their book similarly to the way non-violent Christians consider ours.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
No, your just an idiot for what you said.

Well which one is it? Am I brainwashed and uneducated? Or am I an idiot? Or both?

Judging from your comment, all of the above.

I have had the great honor and privlage to work with many Muslims. I have learned alot about Islam and come to respect the religion. I have also come to see that it is not all "evil" like some would want you to believe.

Antonio, I do listen to those figures regularly, and they do not think Islam as a whole (ok minus Anne which you didn't list) believe what you said about Islam. They know what the root causes are. The problem is that the Left & the Right don't want to listen to each other and continue to be divided, but I digress, that's for a whole different discussion.

My entirely unwarranted (and possibly unwanted) .02 cents:

Racial profiling will work to a limited degree, but only for a while and ultimately, IMHO at too great a cost in terms of public opinion of the government and law enforcement. There needs to be a balance; as it stands today, law enforcement does have their hands tied in areas of investigation due to Constitutional rights that ARE NOT negociable, but they damn-sure need more leeway in their methods of surveillance. Finally, much more sophisticated tools are needed over racial profiling to where race is but one of many variables that are considered. Travel, buying habits, race, religious persuasion, birth origin, scholastic pursuits, reading habits, internet habits, etc., etc. Of course, it takes an Act of God to obtain warrants to the level needed to dig that far today, but there does need to be a greater degree of tracking along those lines...

Racial profiling would possibly nab a few nutcases up front, but I fully believe that it won't do anything to stop the really worrisome events that keep the Intel communities up at night. Al-Qaedas leadership remains intact and regardless of one's thoughts towards their goals, they have some fairly smart SOB's running the show that have managed to elude the largest manhunt in the history of the human race. Yes, it's been Arabs that have been the poster-children of terrorists, but locking a great many eyes on all Arab gentlemen would QUICKLY steer Al-Qaeda to other methods and other races to carry out their desires.

Finally, racial profiling plays right into what Al-Qaeda wishes most; a larger and spreading rift between Western cultures and Islamic ones, thereby polarizing more and more moderates of both sides.

It needs to be done, but in such a way that it's only one small component of the entire profile.

2) Islam is no more a violent religion than Christianity is. History bears this fact out. I have read the Koran and while it does condone violence in places, so does the Bible (OT). Extremists aren't usually known for taking a balanced view of things, so expecting them to NOT latch on to particular passages and thoughts to the exclusion of hundreds of pages to the contrary isn't surprising at all.

Originally posted by Viss1:
Correct, they hate America. Do you think there might be reasons for that other than "the Koran tells them to?"

I thought I just answered that? Yes, however, that does not change the fact that the Koran tells them to kill those who will not convert.

Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Antonio, I do listen to those figures regularly, and they do not think Islam as a whole (ok minus Anne which you didn't list) believe what you said about Islam. They know what the root causes are. The problem is that the Left & the Right don't want to listen to each other and continue to be divided, but I digress, that's for a whole different discussion.

Ryan, I have heard each and everyone listed make a reference to Islam being a religion of hate. Oh, and thanks for reminding me about Anne Coulter.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Judging from your comment, all of the above.

I have had the great honor and privlage to work with many Muslims. I have learned alot about Islam and come to respect the religion. I have also come to see that it is not all "evil" like some would want you to believe.

Hang around them all you want, thats great. I'm not saying all Muslims are evil, however, what I am saying is that the Koran teaches them to kill those who will not convert. There is no ignorance in what I said about that. I have studied it and you have not, so you would be the ignorant one on the subject, no matter how many muslim people you work with.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Judging from your comment, all of the above.

I have had the great honor and privlage to work with many Muslims. I have learned alot about Islam and come to respect the religion. I have also come to see that it is not all "evil" like some would want you to believe.

Hang around them all you want, thats great. I'm not saying all Muslims are evil, however, what I am saying is that the Koran teaches them to kill those who will not convert. There is no ignorance in what I said about that. I have studied it and you have not, so you would be the ignorant one on the subject, no matter how many muslim people you work with.

How is that no different then Christian missionaries converting the "savages" of the New World? You either joined or died. The fact of the matter is BOTH religions were used as effective and bloody tools of conversion.

The difference is that an reference in the Koran is being used agianst people of Islamic faith. Shall we dig deep into the bible and find references about those who do not accept the word of God shall suffer a horrible death? I know it is in there.

Look behind the words, Corbett. This reference is being used to foster stereotypes and racist ideas to promote hate, so that this "war on terror" can still be successful.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:
Correct, they hate America. Do you think there might be reasons for that other than "the Koran tells them to?"

I thought I just answered that? Yes, however, that does not change the fact that the Koran tells them to kill those who will not convert.

Great, and the Bible tels us to kill someone who sleeps with his neighbor's wife. And if my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

How is that no different the Christian Muslims converting the "savages" of the New World? You either joined or died. The fact of the matter is BOTH religions were used a effective and bloody tools of conversion.

Christian Muslims? Thats a new one! They must be the kind that believe you can get into heaven by believing other than Jesus died on the cross, which then of course, would not make them Christians in the first place.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

The difference is that an reference in the Koran is being used agianst people of Islamic faith. Shall we dig deep into the bible and find references about those who do not accept the word of God shall suffer a horrible death? I know it is in there.

I would love to see that. In fact, I would love for you to open your Bible for once, so yes, I am asking YOU to show me where God said to kill anyone who will not convert to Christianity.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

The fact of the matter is that this reference is being used to foster stereotypes and racist ideas to promote hate, so that this "war on terror" can still be successful.

I dont hate Muslims at all! I dont hate anyone. However, how I feel about them does not change the fact that their Koran says to kill people like you and me both!

Originally posted by Viss1:

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Viss1:
Correct, they hate America. Do you think there might be reasons for that other than "the Koran tells them to?"

I thought I just answered that? Yes, however, that does not change the fact that the Koran tells them to kill those who will not convert.

Great, and the Bible tels us to kill someone who sleeps with his neighbor's wife. And if my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle.

So that must cancel out what the Koran says then, eh? I'd love to see that one too, however, I'm sure you took it out of context or it is something under the Old Covenant. If you really want to start a conversation about it, we can, though I dont think we will make much progress.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

How is that no different the Christian Muslims converting the "savages" of the New World? You either joined or died. The fact of the matter is BOTH religions were used a effective and bloody tools of conversion.

Christian Muslims? Thats a new one! They must be the kind that believe you can get into heaven by believing other than Jesus died on the cross, which then of course, would not make them Christians in the first place.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

The difference is that an reference in the Koran is being used agianst people of Islamic faith. Shall we dig deep into the bible and find references about those who do not accept the word of God shall suffer a horrible death? I know it is in there.

I would love to see that. In fact, I would love for you to open your Bible for once, so yes, I am asking YOU to show me where God said to kill anyone who will not convert to Christianity.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

The fact of the matter is that this reference is being used to foster stereotypes and racist ideas to promote hate, so that this "war on terror" can still be successful.

I dont hate Muslims at all! I dont hate anyone. However, how I feel about them does not change the fact that their Koran says to kill people like you and me both!

That was a mental error. Ask and you shall receieve here you go. The "conversion" process to become Christian.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by Swazo:

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Swazo:
But I am for knowing who is attacking us and why, and stopping them before they can do any more harm. To kill your enemy, you have to know them first.

Typical. And just to clarify, you do not have to know your enemies in order to kill them. All I have to know is that they're trying to kill me, and that will make me want to kill them. But your desire to know them is typical of your side. It wouldn't be a bad thing, but you let the desire to know our enemies hamper our means of destroying them.

When you've been in the military davo, then you can talk The more knowledge you have about who you're dealing with, the better off you are. That doesn't mean sit on our hands and wait for them to attack us again

Well maybe we should invite them over for tea and crumpets then - in the mean time while we are trying to "get to know them", they're planting mombs all over the place to send us to Allah to be punished.

We don't have time to JUST investigate - we need to be PRO-active against them. Not wait till they blow sh!t up and then go....aah yes, I thought those guys were terrorists, and print out a 500 page analysis after-the-fact. Seems like the Libs just want to fight fires, and rather not go looking for the firestarters. Pretty damn stupid if you ask me.

Who said to JUST investigate? If you actually read what I've said, you'd see that's not the case

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
Corbett, you and OBL have made the same exact mistake about Islam. There are 2 jihad's to a Muslim, the Great jihad and the Little jihad. The Great being the inner struggle to overcome one's evil inclinations, and the Little being war against the enemies of Islam. You've got the priorities mixed up. Islam is related etymologically to the word salaam, which means peace.

Just because you have an internet connection and a few hours to find a website that backs up what you think about Islam does not mean you know what you are talking about.

ASSume away

It's called picking up a book, reading it and retaining the info.

Facts always ruin a "good story"

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Here you go. The "conversion" process to become Christian.

Is that the best you can do? Giving me a website of an anti-christian pro-muslim group?

Originally posted by Swazo:

ASSume away It's called picking up a book, reading it and retaining the info.

The ASSume thing was funny the first 30498275092452 times you used it. Reguardless of where you got that information, it doesnt do anything but prove that Jihad is in the Koran and is exactly as I stated. Little or Big Jihad does not matter, call it wahtever you want but it is still a Jihad, something all of the Muslim community is taught by the Koran.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Here you go. The "conversion" process to become Christian.

Is that the best you can do? Giving me a website of an anti-christian pro-muslim group?

That was the best I can find at this moment. I am currently searching the Bible for any references. Oh, and by the way, that website I gave is all FACTUAL evidence.

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition? That's a microcosm of Christianity.

Originally posted by Davo:

Originally posted by Stazi:
Seems like the Libs just want to fight fires, and rather not go looking for the firestarters. Pretty damn stupid if you ask me.

No. They want to understand why the fire exists. They want to know why it must burn everything it touches. What did we do to make the fire want to destroy everything in its path? We should make peace with the fire so it won't want to hurt us.

Actually being in the military might give you an insight into how it functions. You're putting words into my mouth because of your limited view of how the military does function. Intel is important to take action, and I support knowing how best to wipe out any threat. You imply I mean to take a step back and and lolly gag while we're attacked, which I don't.

It's limited views like yours that puts people who actually do "suit up" as you put it, as occupiers and any other roles poor intel leads to.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

That was the best I can find at this moment. I am currently searching the Bible for any references. Oh, and by the way, that website is gave is all FACTUAL evidence.

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition? That's Christianity for you.

Honestly Antonio, I feel sorry for you if that is how you look at Christianity. There is so much you obviously don't understand about it. I don't hate you because you are not a Christian, nor do I hate anyone who is a non-Christian. Just wanted to make that clear.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

That was the best I can find at this moment. I am currently searching the Bible for any references. Oh, and by the way, that website is gave is all FACTUAL evidence.

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition? That's Christianity for you.

Honestly Antonio, I feel sorry for you if that is how you look at Christianity. There is so much you obviously don't understand about it. I don't hate you because you are not a Christian, nor do I hate anyone who is a non-Christian. Just wanted to make that clear.

No, it is just that so-called Christians have killed an unknown countless number of people in the name of God. Quite honestly all religions make me sick. Let me rephrase that, the people who use religion as a precursor to kill, make me sick.

No, Corbett. I feel sorry for you, my friend. I hope I can still call you a friend.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

No, it is just that so-called Christians have killed an unknown countless number of people in the name of God. Let me rephrase that, the people who use religion as a precursor to kill, make me sick.

Hey I'll agree 100% with that!

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

No, Corbett. I feel sorry for you, my friend. I hope I can still call you a friend.

Hey you can call me friend any time man. I just dont call my friends uneducated brainwashed ignorant idiots.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:

ASSume away It's called picking up a book, reading it and retaining the info.

The ASSume thing was funny the first 30498275092452 times you used it. Reguardless of where you got that information, it doesnt do anything but prove that Jihad is in the Koran and is exactly as I stated. Little or Big Jihad does not matter, call it wahtever you want but it is still a Jihad, something all of the Muslim community is taught by the Koran.

You do know a jihad is an effort or struggle..... right? I know that word sounds scary to you, but atleast know what it means.

You don't like me using ASSume, then stop making flat out assumptions

Originally posted by Swazo:

You do know a jihad is an effort or struggle..... right? I know that word sounds scary to you, but atleast know what it means.

You don't like me using ASSume, then stop making flat out assumptions

Call it whatever you want. There is an Islamic effort to kill all non-believers. Ther is an Islamic struggle to kill all non-believers.

I'm not making assumptions, I am stating what the Koran says.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

No, it is just that so-called Christians have killed an unknown countless number of people in the name of God. Let me rephrase that, the people who use religion as a precursor to kill, make me sick.

Hey I'll agree 100% with that!

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:

No, Corbett. I feel sorry for you, my friend. I hope I can still call you a friend.

Hey you can call me friend any time man. I just dont call my friends uneducated brainwashed idiots.

Friends don't get into heated arguments?

Originally posted by Corbett:
So that must cancel out what the Koran says then, eh?

What the Koran says about killing infidels is obviously important to this subject. The extent to which various religions act out the literal teachings of their holy books is the subject I'm addressing.

Since you now appear to agree that there are causes of terrorism other than simply "the Koran says so," I'm satisifed.

Originally posted by Antonio Wright:
Friends don't get into heated arguments?

Heated arguments, yes. Calling eachother something they are not, no. At least not me.

Originally posted by Viss1:
Since you now appear to agree that there are causes of terrorism other than simply "the Koran says so," I'm satisifed.

Well, yes and no. They hate America because they hate Christians or anyone that will not convert.

Who said you're assuming what the Koran says? I didn't

I know that the Koran specifically says that no non-muslims can reside within the holy Arab Peninsula. Are we so arrogant that we should thumb our collective noses at their religion and stay there for almost 2 decades and get upset when they actually do something about it? Even France or the UK knew better than to place any military or mess with local politics there when splitting up the Ottoman Empire after WWI.

Is this what you're speaking of? If not, please enlighten me as to what you keep talking about. For someone who's studied the Koran as you have, it shouldn't be a problem to show your reference

I'm talking about Jihad, as in, to kill those who will not convert to Islam, which the Koran says to do. You and me included.

But, that's not what a jihad is. A jihad is a struggle or effort.

It only warrants a holy war against infedel armies when Islam has a threat and the previous reasons in my last post. The strongest/best (I may be a little biased here

) military of mostly Christians, residing within the exact place their holy book says for us not to is a direct slap in their face.

Luckily most Muslims are rational minded people, and don't see it as an occupation force or the like. But there are always the religious extremist that will rattle their saber, especially when you give them a reason to.

So then my understanding from what you said is that you do not believe the Koran says that is someone will not convert to Islam that the Muslim should kill that person?

Do you believe the Koran says that?

It's taken out of context, if it does say that. I have never heard of it, so please show me it if you can.

A jihad, in a holy war sense, should be defensive in nature to protect Islam. Also, the Koran specificly protects civillian "people of the book" (Jews and Christians) during war. OBL ignores many of the teachings of the Koran, and his radical stance shows.

OBL claims the US and it's allies have killed millions of Arab civillians and to know their pain, we have to taste the bitter fruit as they have. Not too far fetched, but it's sad his "holy war" is based on revenge.

Originally posted by Swazo:
It's taken out of context, if it does say that. I have never heard of it, so please show me it if you can.

If you have never read that how would yo know if it is taken out of context?

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by Swazo:
It's taken out of context, if it does say that. I have never heard of it, so please show me it if you can.

If you have never read that how would yo know if it is taken out of context?

You keep talking about it, yet I haven't seen you show any link or proof of it. Is that a problem for you?

For someone who's studied the Koran, this shouldn't be an issue to find it.

Torment to Non-believers:
4.56: (As for) those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the chastisement; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Islam Acceptable:
3.85: And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers

No friends from outsiders
3.118: O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand.

Friends with Jews, Christians
5.51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

No friends with non believers
4.144: O you who believe! do not take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; do you desire that you should give to Allah a manifest proof against yourselves?

No friends with non believers
3.28: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribution from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual coming.

No friends with parents/siblings if not believers
9.23: O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and whoever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

Fight non-believers
9.123: O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Kill non-believers
4.89 : They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

Anti Jewish verses
5.82: Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly.

Smite the neck and cut fingertips of unbelievers
8.12: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

Smite the neck of unbelievers
47.4: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

Severe Punishment for atheists
10.4: To Him is your return, of all (of you); the promise of Allah (made) in truth; surely He begins the creation in the first instance, then He reproduces it, that He may with justice recompense those who believe and do good; and (as for) those who disbelieve, they shall have a drink of hot water and painful punishment because they disbelieved.

5.10: And (as for) those who disbelieve and reject our communications, these are the companions of the name.

5.86: And (as for) those who disbelieve and reject Our communications, these are the companions of the flame.

Severe Punishment for non-believers
22.19: These are two adversaries who dispute about their Lord; then (as to) those who disbelieve, for them are cut out garments of fire, boiling water shall be poured over their heads.

22.20: With it shall be melted what is in their bellies and (their) skins as well.

22.21: And for them are whips of iron.

22.22: Whenever they will desire to go forth from it, from grief, they shall be turned back into it, and taste the chastisement of burning.

Severe Punishment for non-believers
72.23 : (It is) only a delivering (of communications) from Allah and His messages; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Apostle surely he shall have the fire of hell to abide therein for a long time.

98.6 : Surely those who disbelieve from among the followers of the Book and the polytheists shall be in the fire of hell, abiding therein; they are the worst of men.

Threat of punishment for not going to war
9.38 : O you who believe! What (excuse) have you that when it is said to you: Go forth in Allah's way, you should incline heavily to earth; are you contented with this world's life instead of the hereafter? But the provision of this world's life compared with the hereafter is but little.

9.39 : If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things.

48.16 : Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until they submit; then if you obey, Allah will grant you a good reward; and if you turn back as you turned back before, He will punish you with a painful punishment.

OK, you've posted quotes of the Koran. To say they are taken out of context isn't something I can say for sure, as I have not read the Koran from cover to cover. Can you say for sure that they are not taken out of context?

But, I have friends that are Muslim and that goes against what most of those quotes say.

It's easy to take strange quotes like the landover baptist web site does of the Bible, and make Christians out to be odd or disgusting. I have a feeling that this is what's happening with the Koran.

Well you wont have to read the Koran from cover to cover to read the context they are in, just read the sections they are in. Why would I take it out of context? I have no reason to.

My whole point is that there are a lot of peaceful muslims out there. However, they either choose to ignore what their Koran says or they just flat out do not know what it says.

I'll agree with that, but only to a point. Only because I think it's more along the line that most Muslims are rational people. I'm sure they take the teachings of the Koran with a grain of salt at times.

OBL and the like have an agenda, and modern Islamic beliefs don't support it. They have to revert to 15th century Islamic beliefs from Islam's height, to even justify his agenda by those terms... and even then he still ignores many aspects of the Koran to do what he does.

Thanks for posting those quotes, I now have some reading to do this week

Hey just wanted to say I have not read the Koran cover to cover either and I do not claim to know everything about it. However, I have studied the subject of punishment for non believers in the Koran. I just wanted to make it clear I dont think I am some "better than you" person because of what I have studied on. Thanks.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by BP:

Originally posted by Corbett:
...Islam is a terrorist religion.

wow. what an extremist pov. if you're serious about what you've said, then you've completely discredited yourself and your pov.

not only is it completely unsubstantiated, but it isn't supported any fact. not even president bush or anyone in his administration would agree with you. as a matter of fact no one with any kind of knowledge about islam or religion in general would back up your statement.

to label a whole religion as "a terrorist religion" because of a few idiots is so unbelievably ignorant it's hard to believe you seriously meant that. this is one of the main concerns with profiling in any form, people would turn to making these types of blanket assumptions.

Way to take it out of context. You completely mixed up my words. I suggest you go read the Koran to see what it says before you start calling people who HAVE read it ignorant.

i mixed up your words? lol, it must burn having to re-read what you've said and realizing you're completely wrong. don't wussy out now, man up and accept that this is your stance. the way i hear it this is the reason you think profiling is warranted, because muslims follow a religion/islam which has advocated violence in some part of their doctrine. how novel.

not to mention there are examples of extremist in every religion.

the large majority of 'muslims' (arabs,indians,persians,asians, etc) i've worked with and know on a personal level have always been positive and dependable people. even though they may not agree with some of the decisions our gov has made, they are not sympathetic to or supporting of extremist/terrorist actions in any shape, form, or fashion. they are actually very upset that a few islamic scam artist are causing people like corbett to play the birds of a feather rule. well i can say that in my experience they've had the same commitment to peace as a the most 'christian like' christians. i know what the koran says and have read the passage you so annoyingly refer to, but i'm basing my opinion on real world experience and interaction rather than a narrow and shortsighted interpretation of one passage out of thousands.

you need to stop viewing everything as captain literal and accept that the koran is up to interpretation just as any other book. again just for clarification, for you to even remotely infer that islam is a terrorist religion is completely wrong and yes...ignorant.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by JaTo:
My entirely unwarranted (and possibly unwanted) .02 cents:

Racial profiling will work to a limited degree, but only for a while and ultimately, IMHO at too great a cost in terms of public opinion of the government and law enforcement. There needs to be a balance; as it stands today, law enforcement does have their hands tied in areas of investigation due to Constitutional rights that ARE NOT negociable, but they damn-sure need more leeway in their methods of surveillance. Finally, much more sophisticated tools are needed over racial profiling to where race is but one of many variables that are considered. Travel, buying habits, race, religious persuasion, birth origin, scholastic pursuits, reading habits, internet habits, etc., etc. Of course, it takes an Act of God to obtain warrants to the level needed to dig that far today, but there does need to be a greater degree of tracking along those lines...

Originally posted by BP:
...not sure how effectivene it would be in the US in a post 9/11 environment. everyone keeps a close eye on people of ME/arab appearance. they are under a very close microscope by the general population as well as security forces. suspected terror cells/groups can still be investigated through the patriot act.

jato, i would say we've already reached that balance you speak of. implementing official policy that supports profiling isn't necessary imo since we're already doing it. and to your other points, the changes we've made in intelligence gathering since 9/11 as well as extending the patriot act (i think) are proving to be effective in keeping track of and pro-actively pursuing suspects. imo we need to invest more into securing our vital infrastructure where security and disaster recovery plan is very weak. realistically there's only so much you can do outside of martial law to closely monitor some of these organizations.

Originally posted by JaTo:
Racial profiling would possibly nab a few nutcases up front, but I fully believe that it won't do anything to stop the really worrisome events that keep the Intel communities up at night. Al-Qaedas leadership remains intact and regardless of one's thoughts towards their goals, they have some fairly smart SOB's running the show that have managed to elude the largest manhunt in the history of the human race. Yes, it's been Arabs that have been the poster-children of terrorists, but locking a great many eyes on all Arab gentlemen would QUICKLY steer Al-Qaeda to other methods and other races to carry out their desires.

Originally posted by BP:
...i doubt john walker lindh was taken in by the taliban and terror affiliates by chance...

another reason it won't work.

Originally posted by JaTo:
Finally, racial profiling plays right into what Al-Qaeda wishes most; a larger and spreading rift between Western cultures and Islamic ones, thereby polarizing more and more moderates of both sides.

exactly. so why does this seem to be a non-issue for those advocating systematic profiling.

Originally posted by BP:
i mixed up your words? lol, it must burn having to re-read what you've said and realizing you're completely wrong. don't wussy out now, man up and accept that this is your stance. the way i hear it this is the reason you think profiling is warranted, because muslims follow a religion/islam which has advocated violence in some part of their doctrine. how novel. not to mention there are examples of extremist in every religion.

Ahh you are right, I did say taht. I was looking at my last post before you posted. You were referring to the post before that. Anyhow, I do stand by my words that Islam is a terrorist religion because its teachings are specific in that the Koran says to kill those who will not convert in more than one place in the Koran.

Originally posted by BP:

the large majority of 'muslims' (arabs,indians,persians,asians, etc) i've worked with and know on a personal level have always been positive and dependable people. in my experience they've had the same commitment to peace as a the most 'christian like' christians. i know what the koran says and have read the passage you so annoyingly refer to, but i'm basing my opinion on real world experience and interaction rather than a narrow and shortsighted interpretation of one passage out of thousands.

Thats great, I know a lot of nice muslims too. However, that does not change the fact that the Koran says they should kill people like you and me. Wether they choose to follow that or not is besides the point, their religion tells them to kill us. This is not a shortsighted view of it either. As I posted earlier, it is found thoughout the Koran, not just in one verse.

Originally posted by BP:

you need to stop being try to view everything as captain literal and accept that the koran is up to interpretation just as any other spiritual book. basically your argument that islam is a terrorist religion is simply wrong.

Are you suggesting the Koran is speaking not literally but figuratively about killing us? Sorry, but I completely disagree that the Bible is up for interpretation (ie - whatever you want it to say it can say) just like these muslims do who you work with think the Koran does not tell them to kill myself and my family, as well as yours, when it is plainly written in multiple areas of the Koran.

I am not limiting my points to just one line in the Koran, but throughout the entire Koran. And that is why the Koran does in fact condone the acts that OBL, Al-Queda and all others killing our people in the name of Allah, no matter what your buddies tell you or how nice of a person they are.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Are you suggesting the Koran is speaking not literally but figuratively about killing us? Sorry, but I completely disagree that the Bible is up for interpretation (ie - whatever you want it to say it can say) just like these muslims do who you work with think the Koran does not tell them to kill myself and my family, as well as yours, when it is plainly written in multiple areas of the Koran.

how can you be so thick headed!? you must be completely selective in your knowledge of christianity and the usage and interpretation of passages in the bible if you're unware of wrong doings committed 'in the name of chrisianity'. there are extremist christian groups today that twist and misinterpret teachings of the bible to support their sick and irrational take on things.

Originally posted by BP:
how can you be so thick headed!? you must be completely selective in your knowledge of christianity and the usage and interpretation of passages in the bible if you're unware of wrong doings committed 'in the name of chrisianity'. there are extremist christian groups today that twist and misinterpret teachings of the bible to support their sick and irrational take on things.

Thank you for proving my point. You are correct that people have taken the Bible out of context and twisted it to say what they want it to say and then claim they are doing it in the name of Christianity. However, what OBL and Al-Quaeda are doing is not taken out of context or twisted whatsoever. Throughout the Koran it teaches to kill those who do not believe. Nothing out of context or twisting of words about it. It is very clear as I posted before.

So again I am asking you. Are you suggesting the Koran is speaking not literally but figuratively about killing us throughout these writings?

the koran also says 'do not commit aggression for God does not love aggressors'. for a very short answer to your question, when the koran talks about killing infidels it is meant in the context of self defense, NOT terrorism. but you (like other extremist) want to interpret certain passages as you see fit. the stench of irony should be strong in your nostrils by now...

what about the passover? how about moses and the red sea? the plagues of egypt? all in the name of christianity. does that mean we should go out and kill all people suppresing gods people? NO!!!!

i'm not going to get into religion bashing because it's counter-productive and off topic. the point is even though the koran says what it says, the bible also has teachings which can be interpreted in the same manner and taken to extremes. accept it and move on.

Originally posted by BP:
the koran also says 'do not commit aggression for God does not love aggressors'. for a very short answer to your question, when the koran talks about killing infidels it is meant in the context of self defense, NOT terrorism. but you (like other extremist) want to interpret certain passages as you see fit. the stench of irony should be strong in your nostrils by now...

WRONG! It is not meant in self defense, I suggest you go read the Koran rather then talking to your buddies at work.

Originally posted by BP:

what about the passover? how about moses and the red sea? the plagues of egypt? all in the name of christianity. does that mean we should go out and kill all people suppresing gods people? NO!!!!

It's quite obvious you do not understand the concept of Old Covenant/New Covenant like the Bible teaches. All those things were under the Old Covenant and God does not do those things any more because of Jesus. I suggest you go read the Bible as well.

Originally posted by BP:
i'm not going to get into religion bashing because it's counter-productive and off topic. the point is even though the koran says what it says, the bible also has teachings which can be interpreted in the same manner and taken to extremes. accept it and move on.

And anyone who thinks God and the Bible says to go kill anyone in His name does not understand the Bible. Unlike the Koran, which tells its followers that anyone who is NOT a Muslim is a threat and should be killed. It's quite clear if you would just read it instead of talking to your buddies at work.

Originally posted by Corbett:

It's quite obvious you do not understand the concept of Old Covenant/New Covenant like the Bible teaches. All those things were under the Old Covenant and God does not do those things any more because of Jesus. I suggest you go read the Bible as well.

this is the same as you taking a few passages out of the koran and branding all followers of islam as terrorist. in the same way as the bible, if you take all of the koran's teachings together it does not support your claim that it is a terrorist religion!

in addition i've discussed this with muslims and people with doctorates in islamic studies and i trust their opinion more than yours. you are wrong to take what you want and disregard the rest. that is how extremist view it. even further, you are not a muslim and you are wrong to say your interpretation of one or a couple passages taken by themselves are representative of all the teachings taken together!! if you are not a believer or scholar of the religion how can you speak for people who are?

Originally posted by BP:

this is the same as you taking a few passages out of the koran and branding all followers of islam as terrorist. in the same way as the bible, if you take all of the koran's teachings together it does not support your claim that it is a terrorist religion!

in addition i've discussed this with muslims and people with doctorates in islamic studies and i trust their opinion more than yours. you are wrong to take what you want and disregard the rest. that is how extremist view it. even further, you are not a muslim and you are wrong to say your interpretation of one or a couple passages taken by themselves are representative of all the teachings taken together!! if you are not a believer or scholar of the religion how can you speak for people who are?

Its not a few though, did you not see how many I posted earlier? And that is only part of what is taught. Of course your schollar friends arent going to admit it, they want Islam to be known as a peaceful religion even though it teaches differently.

I'm not speaking for any scholars of Islamic religion, you are! Though most of the people who follow Islam are peaceful, that does not mean their Koran doesnt have a fundamental element of killing non believers if they will not convert. It does not just say in self defense, but also those who will not convert in many places as posted earlier. I suggest YOU go read it for yourself rather then talking to all the PHDs (Post Hole Diggers) that you know.

One more thing. I find it very interesting that you put your full trust in what the Koran says from a few Islmaic Schollars. From what I've read in your previous posts on this board, I doubt you would give the same level of trust and benefit of the doubt to a Biblical schollar. Interesting.

Originally posted by Corbett:

I'm not speaking for any scholars of Islamic religion, you are! Though most of the people who follow Islam are peaceful, that does not mean their Koran doesnt have a fundamental element of killing non believers if they will not convert. It does not just say in self defense, but also those who will not convert in many places as posted earlier. I suggest YOU go read it for yourself rather then talking to all the PHDs (Post Hole Diggers) that you know.

so you're saying you (a non-muslim, and obviously uneducated about islam) know better than they do? ok. lol.

Originally posted by Corbett:
One more thing. I find it very interesting that you put your full trust in what the Koran says from a few Islmaic Schollars.

over your uneducated, closed-minded, biased, and shortsighted opinion yes i do.

Originally posted by Corbett:
From what I've read in your previous posts on this board, I doubt you would give the same level of trust and benefit of the doubt to a Biblical schollar. Interesting.

you have no leg to stand on with that statement. i've never made baseless claims against a whole religion people based on extremism like you are. nor have i ever bad mouthed or mis-interpreted christianity or its principles.

luckily for us and the rest of the world your views are not representative of the christian majority or any majority for that matter. what does that mean? you're on the outer fringe of the group of people you claim to be part of, bka an extremist.

it's ok though. you've stated your view and you're pretty much alone with it. doesn't change the fact that profiling will not work for the reasons we've already discussed.

Originally posted by BP:

so you're saying you (a non-muslim, and obviously uneducated about islam) know better than they do? ok. lol.

When did I say that? Nice try. Uneducated? If you are comparing me to you on the subject, then hardly! Your facts are based on what people have told you. Mine are based on what I have read from their Koran.

Originally posted by BP:

over your uneducated, closed-minded, biased, and shortsighted opinion yes i do.

More educated on the subject then you I'm sure. Though I tend to find answers for myself, rather then rely on what someone else says, IE - actually reading the Koran.

Originally posted by BP:
you have no leg to stand on with that statement. i've never made baseless claims against a whole religion people based on extremism like you are. nor have i ever bad mouthed or mis-interpreted christianity or its principles.

Thats because you are not educated on either. You rely on what your co-workers and scholars, not your own knowledge of the subject.

Originally posted by BP:
luckily for us and the rest of the world your views are not representative of the christian majority or any majority for that matter. what does that mean? you're on the outer fringe of the group of people you claim to be part of, bka an extremist.

Hah, better check those facts again. I can name many major religious organizations that believe the same thing about Islam. I'm no more an extremist then you are with your PC views on religion.

Originally posted by BP:

it's ok though. you've stated your view and you're pretty much alone with it. doesn't change the fact that profiling will not work for the reasons we've already discussed.

Again, just because this thread is made up mostly of liberals who are uneducated on the subject besides what they hear from other people (yourself included), does not mean I stand alone. In fact, as previously stated, a large protion of the Christian community share the same beliefs.

And profiling does work because a young middle eastern man is much much more likely to blow up a subway then an 80 year old black woman.

Originally posted by Corbett:

Again, just because this thread is made up mostly of liberals who are uneducated on the subject besides what they hear from other people (yourself included), does not mean I stand alone. In fact, as previously stated, a large protion of the Christian community share the same beliefs.

prove it. i can bet the majority of people christian or not, don't agree with you that islam is a terroristic religion. i also bet many are saying speak for yourself. heck even some of the more respected members of the conservative posse don't agree with you. so stop acting like you speak for the majority of people because you don't.

and again, i've read the koran and since i'm not a muslim i can admit that i need people who understand its teachings better than i do to explain it to me and answer my questions. however you're too self-righteous or too much of a know it all to admit the same.

Originally posted by BP:
prove it. i can bet the majority of people christian or not, don't agree with you that islam is a terroristic religion. i also bet many are saying speak for yourself. heck even some of the more respected members of the conservative posse don't agree with you. so stop acting like you speak for the majority of people because you don't.

Me prove it? You prove it. Who are the most respected members that disagree? Please do tell.

Originally posted by BP:

and again, i've read the koran and since i'm not a muslim i can admit that i need people who understand its teachings better than i do to explain it to me and answer my questions. however you're too self-righteous or too much of a know it all to admit the same.

I'm not a know it all, just compared to you I guess. Your liberal views will not let you believe that these people want us dead. You say you've read the Koran yet you won't admit it flat out says specifically if a non believer will not convert they should be killed.

Thanks for posting those Koran quotes. Made me think a little.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Torment to Non-believers:
4.56: (As for) those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the chastisement; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Does this recommend torture at random, or in response to a specific condition?

Quote:

Islam Acceptable:
3.85: And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers

No talk of murder here

Quote:

No friends from outsiders
3.118: O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand.

Friends with Jews, Christians
5.51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Friends with non believers
4.144: O you who believe! do not take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; do you desire that you should give to Allah a manifest proof against yourselves?

No friends with non believers
3.28: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribution from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual coming.

No friends with parents/siblings if not believers
9.23: O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and whoever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

Mistrust anyone whoâ�?��?�s not Muslim. No mention of murder.

Quote:

Fight non-believers
9.123: O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Now this one is interesting. It's one of the few that a terrorist could use to justify his actions. Note, though, that it doesn't say "start a fight" - it just says "fight." This site sheds a little more light on the context.

Quote:

Kill non-believers
4.89 : They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

This refers to people who became Muslim but then turned back.

Quote:

Anti Jewish verses
5.82: Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe (to be) the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe (to be) those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly.

Jews and Chrisitans suck... but no mention of murdering them.

Quote:

Smite the neck and cut fingertips of unbelievers
8.12: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

Sounds to me like the Lord is talking to the angels here.

Quote:

Smite the neck of unbelievers
47.4: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

This all applies only to a Muslim who is â�?��?in battle.â�?� Nothing about starting the battle. Could easily be used as justification by a potential terrorist in Iraq, though.

Quote:

Severe Punishment for atheists
10.4: To Him is your return, of all (of you); the promise of Allah (made) in truth; surely He begins the creation in the first instance, then He reproduces it, that He may with justice recompense those who believe and do good; and (as for) those who disbelieve, they shall have a drink of hot water and painful punishment because they disbelieved.

5.10: And (as for) those who disbelieve and reject our communications, these are the companions of the name.

5.86: And (as for) those who disbelieve and reject Our communications, these are the companions of the flame.

Great, but none of this instructs mortals to do any of this.

Quote:

Severe Punishment for non-believers
22.19: These are two adversaries who dispute about their Lord; then (as to) those who disbelieve, for them are cut out garments of fire, boiling water shall be poured over their heads.

22.20: With it shall be melted what is in their bellies and (their) skins as well.

22.21: And for them are whips of iron.

22.22: Whenever they will desire to go forth from it, from grief, they shall be turned back into it, and taste the chastisement of burning.

Again, are Muslims to just go around doing this to nonbelievers at random, or is it reserved for a response to a specific condition?

Quote:

Severe Punishment for non-believers
72.23 : (It is) only a delivering (of communications) from Allah and His messages; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Apostle surely he shall have the fire of hell to abide therein for a long time.

98.6 : Surely those who disbelieve from among the followers of the Book and the polytheists shall be in the fire of hell, abiding therein; they are the worst of men.

Whatever. The sinners will roast in hell. Sounds just like what my old Baptist neighbor used to tell me.

Quote:

Threat of punishment for not going to war
9.38 : O you who believe! What (excuse) have you that when it is said to you: Go forth in Allah's way, you should incline heavily to earth; are you contented with this world's life instead of the hereafter? But the provision of this world's life compared with the hereafter is but little.

9.39 : If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things.

How do we know â�?��?go forthâ�?� means â�?��?blow yourself up in a public place?â�?� Canâ�?��?�t it also just mean â�?��?spread the word of Allah?â�?�

Quote:

48.16 : Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until they submit; then if you obey, Allah will grant you a good reward; and if you turn back as you turned back before, He will punish you with a painful punishment.

The first part sounds like Nostradamus or something. But note it says "you will be invited to fight," not "you should start a fight." Another passage that they are using to justify their actions.

Note - The above is not "making excuses for terrorists." We're hopefully past those types of comments in this thread.

Sorry Viss but your interpretations of those verses is incorrect. For example, cutting off heads and fingertips of the enemy. Thats just one example of an incorrect interpretation. If you really want to interpret what it says I suggest you read the context in which these verses are in, not just the verse itself. I know you are not supporting terrorism, however, you are obviously trying to disprove my belief that Islam sponsors terrorism.

Originally posted by Corbett:
If you really want to interpret what it says I suggest you read the context in which these verses are in, not just the verse itself. I know you are not supporting terrorism, however, you are obviously trying to disprove my belief that Islam sponsors terrorism.

You are doing the EXACT thing that the Muslim community has been crying out against- twisting of the Koran's teachings. Yes, there are extremist Muslims, just as much as there are extremist Christians. The KKK comes to mind. The people that walk into Planned Parenthood and light the place up with gunfire come to mind.

It's all in the interpretation. The majority of Muslims do NOT, repeat, DO NOT believe in the verses you are quoting here as a tenet by which they should kill. There are many other verses (outnumbering, in fact) that state you should love your fellow man, that if they don't believe in Allah they go to hell, but, you should still love them.

I guarantee you that I could write my own passages, hand them to 50 different people, and get 3 different interpretations- 1.) That it was the greatest way to live ever created. 2.) That it meant you should kill a whole bunch of people. 3.) That it's full of crap and shouldn't be listened to.

I suppose you've NEVER asked yourself "What if I'm interpreting these things wrong?"

I'm not twisting anything around. I have no reason to. I suggest you read these verses in their context as well.

first i'd really like to see the information and support from these "major religious organizations that believe the same thing about Islam" as you do. please show me these organizations where they back up your claim that "islam is a terroristic religion." but i can tell you in advance won't find any, cause none of them share your extremist pov!

Originally posted by Corbett:

Originally posted by BP:
prove it. i can bet the majority of people christian or not, don't agree with you that islam is a terroristic religion. i also bet many are saying speak for yourself. heck even some of the more respected members of the conservative posse don't agree with you. so stop acting like you speak for the majority of people because you don't.

Me prove it? You prove it. Who are the most respected members that disagree? Please do tell.

Originally posted by BP:

and again, i've read the koran and since i'm not a muslim i can admit that i need people who understand its teachings better than i do to explain it to me and answer my questions. however you're too self-righteous or too much of a know it all to admit the same.

I'm not a know it all, just compared to you I guess. Your liberal views will not let you believe that these people want us dead. You say you've read the Koran yet you won't admit it flat out says specifically if a non believer will not convert they should be killed.

like i said before. luckily for us your views are not representative of the majority or any part there of. this is not a liberal/conservative issue. the center of both groups agree that islam is not a terrorist religion and don't support your claims that it is.

your insistence on saying "islam is a terrorist religion" and muslims as "these people want us dead" is stereotypical of a lop-sided extremist pov held by islamic terrorist. it is an un-american pov and not representative of the stance of the US government. accept it or not, you are holding an extremist pov and it's just as bad as the terrorist saying that westerners/christians want to dominate the world.

since you are biased against my "liberal views" below is a quote from a conservative who knows what they're talking about...

Originally posted by JaTo:
... Islam is no more a violent religion than Christianity is. History bears this fact out. I have read the Koran and while it does condone violence in places, so does the Bible (OT). Extremists aren't usually known for taking a balanced view of things, so expecting them to NOT latch on to particular passages and thoughts to the exclusion of hundreds of pages to the contrary isn't surprising at all.

notice what he says about extremists? re-read what you've said in this thread and think about it because it relates to extremist on both sides of the fence. your views are a perfect example of a conservative/christian extremist.

you can't really come back with anything substantive or educated to say on the above material because you are an extremist. you see things only as you want to and ignore comments from both sides of the fence which prove you're wrong about your views.

you can't accept that systematic profiling is not a viable long term solution because of those views and you've basically proven yourself to be uneducated, closed-minded, lopsided, and irrelevant in this discussion. you should move on to another thread or speak for yourself only instead of trying to act like you represent mainstream christian/conservative views. thanks for proving there are idiots on both sides. i'm done responding to you.

First off I never said I represented anyone but myself. You sugested I am one of only a few who believe the same way I do and you are sadly mistaken. You were the one who said you could prove the leaders of Christianity do not think Islam is a religion that teaches terrorism, so prove it. And for you of all people to call anyone an extremist is laughable, given your past political views and your views on religion. Hello pot, this is kettle.

I still find it very interesting that you are able to put so much trust in the Islamic people, yet shun anything realted to Christianity and its teachings, as you have proved in previous posts you have made on this forum.

Honestly BP, you are the one without a leg to stand on. You've proven that by coming down to the lowest level of an argument. Calling me names like uneducated, closed-minded, lopsided, extremist.Compared to you, I am much more educated on this subject then you will ever be, no matter how many friends you have that are Islamic. Nor am I close minded about it. If I am reading the Koran out of context I would be open to changing my opinion, but I will not be swayed by someone like yourself who has not formal training on the subject, yet has "friends" who can back him up.

The difference here is that the Bible does not teach to kill those who will not convert or do not believe, no matter how much you want it to. If these guys blow up abortion clinics, thats horrible, and the Bible does not say they should be doing these things. With the Koran on the other hand, no matter how many "good" passages it has in it, it does not change the fact that one of its teachings is the killing of those who will not convert.

And one more thing, you also called me unamerican and no better than these terrorists. Are you crazy? First off, it is my very right to have an opinion on this subject as an american so kiss my butt. And as far as being as extreme as a terrorist, you have to be kidding me. I would never go kill to force my beliefs upon someone, and my Bible does not tell me to do. Honestly BP, who is the close minded one when I cant even have an opinion without being "unamerican" and a "terrorist". Give me a break.

Tim,

I've been pouring through material on the history of Islam, the Crusades an their impact on the Muslim mindset, a comparitive piece on Judaism vs. Christianity vs. Islam, the Koran itself and a few other works for well over 3 years now. For what it's worth, I also did a few semester's worth of work on Egypt back in my college days plowing through it's history and politics from a religious standpoint. Finally, I'm lightly traveled in the Middle-East, as I've been in Morocco and UAE, but since I'm not the type to stick to the typical "tourist" routine, I've probably seen a thing two that are usually missed by Westerners. I know more than just a few Muslims and two of my good friends that I used to routinely play racquetball in KC with are Muslims.

I'm definitely no expert on Islam, but neither am I entirely alien to it, the various interpretations that people hold of it or it's history. Let's just say since 9/11, terrorism and it's various facets have been an obsession of mine in terms of reading.

Throughout everything I have read, heard and seen, none of it pushes me to believe that Islam in and of itself promotes wholesale terrorism and violence. Now, due to a number of other influencers such as poverty, systematic repression by totalitarian regimes, the ongoing Israel/Palestine issue and Western political policy since the British Empire days, have certain segments of Islam taken on a harsher edge and have created an atmosphere where violent religious extremism is more rampant within that religion over most other popular religions of today? ABSOLUTELY.

My opinion is that it's just not as cut and dried as you see it.

When boiled down to it's very essence, religion in it's various flavors is yet another tool for mankind to use. The wielder of it's message is no different that the wielder of any other tool; in sane, educated and careful hands, it can nurture and assist a society. In the wrong hands, it can do horrors beyond description.

To draw somewhat of a parallel: when someone uses a shotgun or a pistol to commit a crime, IMHO it is NOT the gun's fault, regardless of the particular type used. It's the fault of the person that used it.

The same goes for the religions we are talking about here since Islam BY ITSELF does not advocate violent extremism or the slaughter of innocents at it's core and the Koran IS NOT a work that pushes for a policy of "coversion or extermination" from cover to cover.

Those of an uneducated, easily-manipulated nature will ALWAYS be succeptable to the particulars of religious extremism; some more than others due to their upbringing and situation in life. Then you have highly-educated nutcases that have managed to fixate on certain particulars within religion to the exception of all else; they can easily marginalize or entirely dismiss reams of any contrary doctrine to the particular cause they have tied themselves to. Islam is not alone in this, though given that it's the most popular religion in the most poverty-stricken and uneducated regions on the planet, it becomes the "scapegoat" and demonized as it is the most easily identifiable and most readily available label for one to fasten to the populations in Africa and the Middle-East.

There's a LOT more to terrorism in it's current incarnation today than pegging Islam as being the core problem...

Jato, well I see where you are coming from and I have agreed previously that Islam is not the sole reason these terrorists are killing innocent people, but it is one of the reasons. My point however, was that even though the Koran does not teach to kill from cover to cover, it does specifically say to kill those who will not convert, and that is not out of context. That's the only point I have been focussing on in this thread.

this is just amazing. reading your posts are like watching a 20 car pile up in progress. anyone looking through this thread has to be completely flabbergasted at what you've said through out. i was actually at a loss for words for a sec. it's so outrageously extremist that i thought you were just being devil's advocate or funny at first. but the longer it went on the more i realized you really believe that hot pile of garbage you're spewing.

have you really thought about your pov or is it knee jerk reactionism? take a look at what you've posted.

Originally posted by Corbett:
The Koran does says that if someone will not convert to Islam, they should be killed because they are an infadel. And that is why Islam is responsible for this terrorism.

Originally posted by Corbett:
But they DO represent Islam because all Muslims read the Koran which teaches them to all do what these extremists do. Why do you keep ignoring this point?

Originally posted by Corbett:
They hate America because they hate Christians or anyone that will not convert.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Yes in fact I have read the sections of the Koran pertaining to the terrorism acts. It specifically says that if a person does not believe or will not convert they should be killed. You should read it too, then maybe you would understand rather then play he said she said.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Didn't I already say that these terrorists do what they do because their Koran tells them to?

Originally posted by Corbett:
...Islam is a terrorist religion.

Originally posted by Corbett:
In fact, as previously stated, a large protion of the Christian community share the same beliefs.

Originally posted by Corbett:
my belief that Islam sponsors terrorism.

Originally posted by Corbett:
You sugested I am one of only a few who believe the same way I do and you are sadly mistaken. You were the one who said you could prove the leaders of Christianity do not think Islam is a religion that teaches terrorism, so prove it.

and when presented with even more proof that what you've said above is wrong. you come back with..

Originally posted by Corbett:
My point however, was that even though the Koran does not teach to kill from cover to cover, it does specifically say to kill those who will not convert, and that is not out of context. That's the only point I have been focussing on in this thread.

smh @ 20 car pile ups.

Sounds pretty consistent to me. Thanks. WOuld you rather I start the namecalling like you have? Again, pot calling the kettle black.

DIE THREAD DIE!

Honestly now..

Originally posted by Corbett:
Sorry Viss but your interpretations of those verses is incorrect. For example, cutting off heads and fingertips of the enemy. Thats just one example of an incorrect interpretation. If you really want to interpret what it says I suggest you read the context in which these verses are in, not just the verse itself.

Every single one is incorrect? All I have to go by is what you posted. If you have time, could you provide a bit more about the context in which these quotes should be taken?

I don't really seea point, other than dragging this out further. You can look them up though.

Originally posted by Corbett:
I don't really see a point, other than dragging this out further. You can look them up though.

With all due respect, you posted the quotes. I just responded to them. I would think explaining how context makes all my comments incorrect would be the follow-up.

You don't understand what context has to do with these passages? My point was that you are taking the phrase to fit what you want it to say, without factoring in what context they are in and how it proves my point about each verse.

Originally posted by todras:

Originally posted by Corbett:
You don't understand what context has to do with these passages? My point was that you are taking the phrase to fit what you want it to say, without factoring in what context they are in and how it proves my point about each verse.

Not sure what you're going on about here. As far as "taking the phrase to fit what (I) want it to say," aren't you the one who posted the quotes? I just responded to them, and then you claimed my responses are incorrect. If every one of them is incorrect because of "context," it should be easy to explain why.

It's pretty simple. Though I posted each passage, each one was in its context, which is why it supports what I think about the Koran. However, for you to take the same passages and make an interpretation without knowing or considering the context from which they were taken (ie, war against the infadel) is breaking the first rule of study in any religion. Therefore, if you have not considered its context, which I have thus posting these passages, you can't correctly interpret them.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Therefore, if you have not considered its context, which I have thus posting these passages, you can't correctly interpret them.

Ok, you keep saying context.

What you mean is entirety.

If you were posting in context, you would have posted several verses before and after, GIVING it context.

Techincally, by only posting the passages, you have done the exact opposite- posted them completely and totally OUT of context.

No I am talking about context. The only reason to post their context would be if I were taking them out of context. So if I am that would be up to you guys. Nice try though.

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I am talking about context. The only reason to post their context would be if I were taking them out of context. So if I am that would be up to you guys. Nice try though.

I'd say it's up to you. You're the expert who is attempting to educate us by posting quotes from the Koran. You were quick to tell me why all my comments were wrong based on context, so it should be very easy for you to briefly explain why. You've essentially presented only part of your case at this point. It's not my job to finish your case for you.

I never claimed to be an expert and its not my job to spood feed you everything either. It's people like you who only read the specific verse and make an interpretation without considering its context that try to make passages say things which they do not. Which is why the person making the interpretation neeeds to consider the context, which you did not, therefore, your interpretation has zero merit.

Originally posted by Corbett:
No I am talking about context. The only reason to post their context would be if I were taking them out of context. So if I am that would be up to you guys. Nice try though.

You ARE taking them out of context. ANY time you quote something without the preceding and following text, you are taking them out of context. We have no means by which to judge the full meaning of those quotes without seeing what was in front of or after them. Do you not get that?

Give us the full paragraph worth of text you're pulling those quotes from, and THEN we'll have the context in which they were stated.

Originally posted by Corbett:
I never claimed to be an expert and its not my job to spood feed you everything either. It's people like you who only read the specific verse and make an interpretation without considering its context that try to make passages say things which they do not. Which is why the person making the interpretation neeeds to consider the context, which you did not, therefore, your interpretation has zero merit.

We'll keep going around in circles until you decide to finish making your case, so I'm out.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Torment to Non-believers:
4.56: (As for) those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the chastisement; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

......

48.16 : Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until they submit; then if you obey, Allah will grant you a good reward; and if you turn back as you turned back before, He will punish you with a painful punishment.

Where is your context here? What was the quote for 4.55 and 4.54. What about 4.57?

Same thing with 48.16... where's .15 or .17? THIS IS OUT OF CONTEXT.

I can grab quotes from all over the Bible and if they are out of context, will sound like we should kill a bunch of people, too.

Then go look it up and prove me wrong. Posting a single passage is not taking it out of context unless you are ignoring passages near it that say the opposite or do not support the scripture which you are talking about. Neither of which are the case here. Thanks.

No.

Proving or disproving the passage is not taking it out of context. No providing the information surrounding it IS.

That is the definition of taking it out of context.

Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

So you're saying the quotes you posted are in their proper context. This means none of the surrounding text will appreciably change their meaning.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Hang on... simple yes or no question time- did you supply ANY of the surrounding text?

Originally posted by bishop375:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Hang on... simple yes or no question time- did you supply ANY of the surrounding text?

Honestly guys - give gives a rats ass.

The initial topic has been forgotten and it's come down to this pissing matcxh about correct quotation procedures.

Lets try and get back on topic before this digresses further.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by bishop375:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Hang on... simple yes or no question time- did you supply ANY of the surrounding text?

Honestly guys - give gives a rats ass.

The initial topic has been forgotten and it's come down to this pissing matcxh about correct quotation procedures.

Lets try and get back on topic before this digresses further.

Let the mods decide that. Corbett has been handing out rope and I'm hangin' around for the show.

Originally posted by bishop375:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Hang on... simple yes or no question time- did you supply ANY of the surrounding text?

No need to.

Quote:

Remarks by President George Bush

"Some of the comments that have been uttered about Islam do not reflect the sentiments of my government or the sentiments of most Americans. Islam, as practiced by the vast majority of people, is a peaceful religion, a religion that respects others. Ours is a country based upon tolerance and we welcome people of all faiths in America."

----

"All Americans must recognize that the face of terror is not the true face of Islam. Islam is a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. It's a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It's a faith based upon love, not hate."

this is just further proof that the extremist views on islam expressed by some on CEG do not represent the views of the majority of americans, christians, or any other non-extremist group here in the US.

it's truly disturbing how some people (corbett in particular) choose to interpret a couple passages in the koran to mean that islam is a terroristic religion and therefore all muslims are prone to be terrorists as well. not even our president whom you follow so faithfully supports your views.

there's been some good info and positive contributions in this thread. too bad some people choose to ignore it.

moderators can lock this thread at their own convenience. i'm bowing out of this one.

Thanks for leaving! It's nice to se you support President Bush on SOMETHING. I forgot that as an American if I have a differing opinion then people on this thread that makes me unamerican and a terrorist.

I never said all Muslims are terrorists, however in my opinion and from my studies I have found that the Kroan in many places supports the killing of any who will not convert to Islam, which has been my whole point all along.

Perhaps my calling Islam a "terrorist religion" was a little hard and at that I will retract what I said. Obviously not ever Muslim is a terrorist. However, that does not change the fact that the Koran does in fact say in many places to kill the infadel (those who are not Muslim and will not convert). Weather or not a Muslim chooses to follow what the Koran says is up to them, however, the Koran is a religion based on law and one of its laws is in fact to kill those who will not convert. Does their choosing to not follow the law of their Koran make them a good person or a perhaps bad muslim?

it's not that your opinion differs, it's that it's unsupported by any fact or substance. plus you've said the majority of people and some organizations share you pov that islam is a terroristic religion but you haven't provided any proof to that claim.

not one person in this thread has backed up your pov that islam promotes terrorism.

but you're free to have your extremist opinion. i can agree to disagree with you.

Originally posted by Corbett:
Thanks for leaving! It's nice to se you support President Bush on SOMETHING. I forgot that as an American if I have a differing opinion then people on this thread that makes me unamerican and a terrorist.

Nice dodge.

Originally posted by BP:
it's not that your opinion differs, it's that it's unsupported by any fact or substance. plus you've said the majority of people and some organizations share you pov that islam is a terroristic religion but you haven't provided any proof to that claim.

not one person in this thread has backed up your pov that islam promotes terrorism.

but you're free to have your extremist opinion. i can agree to disagree with you.

So you think I am only one of a select few who believe the Koran does in fact teach to kill those who will not convert?

BTW please re-read my last post I edited it while you were posting.

Originally posted by Stazi:

Originally posted by bishop375:

Originally posted by Corbett:
Wrong again. Taking something out of context means if the surrounding passages are supporting a different outcome then the one you have established by the one passage. Thanks again. Nice try.

Hang on... simple yes or no question time- did you supply ANY of the surrounding text?

Honestly guys - give gives a rats ass.

The initial topic has been forgotten and it's come down to this pissing matcxh about correct quotation procedures.

Lets try and get back on topic before this digresses further.

Agreed.

Does racial profiling work? Yes. Is it a good idea? Yes. It sucks, but, in this day and age when a majority of the terrorists fit a certain profile, that's what you're going to look for.

If a large group of ANY race committed a crime in any area, why would/should the local law enforcement look for a group of another race?

Originally posted by bishop375:

Does racial profiling work? Yes. Is it a good idea? Yes. It sucks, but, in this day and age when a majority of the terrorists fit a certain profile, that's what you're going to look for.

If a large group of ANY race committed a crime in any area, why would/should the local law enforcement look for a group of another race?

I agree 100%

Originally posted by Corbett:
So you think I am only one of a select few who believe the Koran does in fact teach to kill those who will not convert?