4 ms·

The reason is very clear and simple: because he is a Muslim and terrorist attacks by Muslims are very common nowadays. The real question is how far are we willi

The reason is very clear and simple: because he is a Muslim and terrorist attacks by Muslims are very common nowadays. The real question is how far are we willing to go to prevent terror attacks. Are we willing to let innocent people get harassed on a regular basis?

Cyph0n 9y ago
You don't seem to be surprised by the content of the article. May I ask what your stance is on the issue of further marginalizing Muslims living in America? I am a Tunisian-American Muslim by the way.
- gamechangr 9y ago
  It like saying you have to eat only at Mcdonald's and its unhealthy for you. Everyone would like to complain about that, unless there is no food and you're starving...then McDonald's seems like a more reasonable solution.
  - Cyph0n 9y ago
    The biggest problem I see with this kind of argument is that once you enable the explicit and outright marginalization of a particular group, it becomes essentially impossible to ensure that it stays limited to said group. See: "First they came...". There are two other problems with this mindset. The first is that objectively quantifying the benefit vs. downside of marginalizing a particular group doesn't happen. Instead, feelings and opinions seep in -- a fear of the "other", if you will. The second is that, by marginalizing a group, you more often that not end up making your problem worse. The "other way" is to try to understand the root causes behind such attacks, and work with the communities that are closest; in this case, Muslim communities around America. It's quite known by now that American Muslims are very willing to cooperate with authorities when the need arises.
    - gamechangr 9y ago
      It's not that confusing. We don't see radical Buddhist bombing things?
      - Cyph0n 9y ago
        You are missing the point entirely. It's not about the "why", but rather the precedent it sets. > We DON"T have Radical Christians, Radical Hindus, Radicial Buddhist trying to blow up civilians. Ehh there are in fact radical Christians who kill innocents in the US. Radical Hindus and Buddhists also exist, but in other countries. > It does mean however that more specific attention should be paid to muslims, as they are most likely to contain the threat. So I assume you think it's OK to profile people of other religions and/or ethnicities (e.g., African Americans)?
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        gamechangr 9y ago
        " there are in FACT radical christians who kill innocents in the Us?" Where? That doesn't sound credible, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt. Don't get 1 nut job...show me what you mean?
        Cyph0n 9y ago
        > Don't get 1 nut job...show me what you mean? I would argue that all terrorists are nutjobs, so... Look up the history of attacks on abortion clinics.
        gamechangr 9y ago
        https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/29/us/30abortion-clinic-violence.html?mcubz=3 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/29/us/30abortion... It's not representative - only 9 people are mentioned. edit: I corrected the caps...thank you. I didn't know.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Are you surprised? Did you really think this has not been happening since 9/11? If yes, you are being naive.
- Fgapd 9y ago
  You appear to be a troll, looking through your twitter feed you have implicitly supported calls for isis members to be released. https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/895728982477418496 https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/89572898247741849...
  - Cyph0n 9y ago
    I'm flattered that you've been "investigating", but I'm not sure what that tweet has to do with your accusation.
throwaway613834 9y ago
Seems likely, sadly. Apparently (as I literally learned right now via a Google search), this is a thing: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2009/12/buildabomber.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/200...
bsder 9y ago
It would seem that terror attacks by fat white guys are actually more numerous on American soil nowadays.
eesmith 9y ago
If that were the case - and the government position is that they do not discriminate on religion - then how did he get his airport job, security badge, and global entry card in the first place? As written, your statement comes across as simple bigotry, and US laws make that sort of simple bigotry too hard to carry out on an institutional scale. (Complex and subtle bigotry is a different issue.) You wrote "prevent terror attacks". Some of the terror attacks in the US which are not caused by Muslims include the 2017 Charlottesville attack, the mosque bombing in Bloomington, MN, the stabbing of Timothy Caughman, the 2016 shooting of Dallas police officers, and the 2015 Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting. What should we do to prevent future terror attacks like these?
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  > If that were the case - and the government position is that they do not discriminate on religion - then how did he get his airport job, security badge, and global entry card in the first place? The government does not discriminate based on religion. That's why he got his security badge and job. This is not about discrimination at all. It's about anti-terrorist investigations and checks. It's a bit like you searching how to make bombs and then buying explosive chemicals in bulk will put you in a list. No discrimination has occurred. > As written, your statement comes across as simple bigotry, and US laws make that sort of simple bigotry too hard to carry out on an institutional scale. (Complex and subtle bigotry is a different issue.) That term is meaningless here. As I said, there is no religious persecution. It's just investigative agencies doing their job. I think they are being over-cautious in a lot of cases to the point of harassment of a significant number of innocent individuals. But I'd rule out any "bigotry" or discrimination. > You wrote "prevent terror attacks". Some of the terror attacks in the US which are not caused by Muslims Not relevant. The vast majority of international terrorist attacks are perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam. That's what I meant. Other terrorist attacks exist and must be protected against, but that is not what we're talking about here. We're talking about this particular method. > What should we do to prevent future terror attacks like these? There are many ways. Even though it's irrelevant here, I'll try to mention something. There are few patterns in a lot of mass shootings in the US. All of these can be used to initiate pre emptive investigations on a suspected individual, even though she hasn't done anything yet. Similar to the case mentioned in the article, this can also lead to harassment of a large number of innocents.

Cyph0n 9y ago

You don't seem to be surprised by the content of the article. May I ask what your stance is on the issue of further marginalizing Muslims living in America? I am a Tunisian-American Muslim by the way.

gamechangr 9y ago
It like saying you have to eat only at Mcdonald's and its unhealthy for you. Everyone would like to complain about that, unless there is no food and you're starving...then McDonald's seems like a more reasonable solution.
- Cyph0n 9y ago
  The biggest problem I see with this kind of argument is that once you enable the explicit and outright marginalization of a particular group, it becomes essentially impossible to ensure that it stays limited to said group. See: "First they came...". There are two other problems with this mindset. The first is that objectively quantifying the benefit vs. downside of marginalizing a particular group doesn't happen. Instead, feelings and opinions seep in -- a fear of the "other", if you will. The second is that, by marginalizing a group, you more often that not end up making your problem worse. The "other way" is to try to understand the root causes behind such attacks, and work with the communities that are closest; in this case, Muslim communities around America. It's quite known by now that American Muslims are very willing to cooperate with authorities when the need arises.
  - gamechangr 9y ago
    It's not that confusing. We don't see radical Buddhist bombing things?
    - Cyph0n 9y ago
      You are missing the point entirely. It's not about the "why", but rather the precedent it sets. > We DON"T have Radical Christians, Radical Hindus, Radicial Buddhist trying to blow up civilians. Ehh there are in fact radical Christians who kill innocents in the US. Radical Hindus and Buddhists also exist, but in other countries. > It does mean however that more specific attention should be paid to muslims, as they are most likely to contain the threat. So I assume you think it's OK to profile people of other religions and/or ethnicities (e.g., African Americans)?
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - gamechangr 9y ago
        " there are in FACT radical christians who kill innocents in the Us?" Where? That doesn't sound credible, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt. Don't get 1 nut job...show me what you mean?
        Cyph0n 9y ago
        > Don't get 1 nut job...show me what you mean? I would argue that all terrorists are nutjobs, so... Look up the history of attacks on abortion clinics.
        gamechangr 9y ago
        https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/29/us/30abortion-clinic-violence.html?mcubz=3 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/29/us/30abortion... It's not representative - only 9 people are mentioned. edit: I corrected the caps...thank you. I didn't know.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dingo_bat 9y ago
Are you surprised? Did you really think this has not been happening since 9/11? If yes, you are being naive.
Fgapd 9y ago
You appear to be a troll, looking through your twitter feed you have implicitly supported calls for isis members to be released. https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/895728982477418496 https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/89572898247741849...
- Cyph0n 9y ago
  I'm flattered that you've been "investigating", but I'm not sure what that tweet has to do with your accusation.

throwaway613834 9y ago

Seems likely, sadly. Apparently (as I literally learned right now via a Google search), this is a thing: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2009/12/buildabomber.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/200...

bsder 9y ago

It would seem that terror attacks by fat white guys are actually more numerous on American soil nowadays.

eesmith 9y ago

If that were the case - and the government position is that they do not discriminate on religion - then how did he get his airport job, security badge, and global entry card in the first place? As written, your statement comes across as simple bigotry, and US laws make that sort of simple bigotry too hard to carry out on an institutional scale. (Complex and subtle bigotry is a different issue.) You wrote "prevent terror attacks". Some of the terror attacks in the US which are not caused by Muslims include the 2017 Charlottesville attack, the mosque bombing in Bloomington, MN, the stabbing of Timothy Caughman, the 2016 shooting of Dallas police officers, and the 2015 Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting. What should we do to prevent future terror attacks like these?

dingo_bat 9y ago
> If that were the case - and the government position is that they do not discriminate on religion - then how did he get his airport job, security badge, and global entry card in the first place? The government does not discriminate based on religion. That's why he got his security badge and job. This is not about discrimination at all. It's about anti-terrorist investigations and checks. It's a bit like you searching how to make bombs and then buying explosive chemicals in bulk will put you in a list. No discrimination has occurred. > As written, your statement comes across as simple bigotry, and US laws make that sort of simple bigotry too hard to carry out on an institutional scale. (Complex and subtle bigotry is a different issue.) That term is meaningless here. As I said, there is no religious persecution. It's just investigative agencies doing their job. I think they are being over-cautious in a lot of cases to the point of harassment of a significant number of innocent individuals. But I'd rule out any "bigotry" or discrimination. > You wrote "prevent terror attacks". Some of the terror attacks in the US which are not caused by Muslims Not relevant. The vast majority of international terrorist attacks are perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam. That's what I meant. Other terrorist attacks exist and must be protected against, but that is not what we're talking about here. We're talking about this particular method. > What should we do to prevent future terror attacks like these? There are many ways. Even though it's irrelevant here, I'll try to mention something. There are few patterns in a lot of mass shootings in the US. All of these can be used to initiate pre emptive investigations on a suspected individual, even though she hasn't done anything yet. Similar to the case mentioned in the article, this can also lead to harassment of a large number of innocents.