4 ms·

Understand the difference. Well I don't see a difference. Better that a minority live in the ghetto so that the rest don't have to? Each time you clarify al

by Amadou 13y ago

Understand the difference. Well I don't see a difference. Better that a minority live in the ghetto so that the rest don't have to? Each time you clarify all I see is my original conclusion being confirmed. Perhaps it is you who don't understand the consequences of the policies you are promoting.

fetbaffe 13y ago
Who said anything about a ghetto? You are just assuming too much and making things up because you are full with prejudice against others and other ideas. First you associated terrorist with muslims (which I never said), that shows in it self that you are profiling, even if you don't admit it. And now you seem to think that profiling will lead to a nazi like world. What? No! What Marxist has brainwashed you with this nonsense? Reality is not an all or nothing world, but you however seems to accept the fact of 1) total mass surveillance of everyone 2) which will create a police state 3) in a police state you will get true prejudice (like racism) and no equality before the law 4)that terrorism has won. It is you who must defend that fact that you need to search old solitaire playing ladies as much as young extreme radicals.
- Amadou 13y ago
  Who said anything about a ghetto? It is an analogy. I am starting to get the impression that you are a literalist. That's not a helpful tool in this discussion because all you do is outright deny rather than explain how what you've written does not fit the analogies and comparisons. You could start with explaining how these two statements are meaningfully different: "better to mistreat a small group of people rather than a large group of people." "mistreating millions is far worse than mistreating a few thousands." Explain the difference, don't just declare they are different. First you associated terrorist with muslims (which I never said), I stand by my characterization of your use of "politically incorrect" - the only people who use that term with respect to profiling are talking about profiling of minorities. Your follow-up reference to "appearance" and defense of the israeli system's racial profiling of arabs only confirm my initial evaluation. you who must defend that fact that you need to search old solitaire playing ladies as much as young extreme radicals. Jihad Jane is 50 years old. Your error is in believing that "profiling" works - that you can know who is an "extreme radical" with any level of certainty. As soon as you create a shortcut through security procedures, that shortcut becomes a vulnerability.
  - fetbaffe 13y ago
    You come with literal accusation. How would like me take them? It is you who use the word better. Not me. And they are different because better implies that you accept it or think it's good. I don't. The only thing I accept is reality. Are you some sort of mind reader? "The only people", nonsense. You made up your mind on the first reply and you are sticking to it, even thou things are much more complicated than that. Once again, it was you who thought of muslims, not me. This is why profiling is politically incorrect because the accusers themselves are stuck in their prejudice. So I say terrorist, you say Muslim and then you accuse me of racism. This is how moronic the Marxist has become. And once again you assume that profiling is racial profiling because some have been racially profiled i in Israel. But I hope you understand that a few examples does not make that true for all profiling. Nice that you use Jihad Jane as an example without knowing the facts. Jihad Jane was not an old solitaire playing lady. She converted to Islam and became radicalized. She got caught by her writings by people running the Jawa report blog, blog dedicated to profile islamist terrorists. So profiling worked! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleen_LaRose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleen_LaRose From your answer I take that you would spend time searching the old solitaire playing ladies.
    - Amadou 13y ago
      The only thing I accept is reality. No, you declare your belief as reality and then hide behind that unsupported declaration. Nice that you use Jihad Jane as an example without knowing the facts. Jihad Jane was not an old solitaire playing lady. She converted to Islam and became radicalized. She got caught by her writings by people running the Jawa report blog, blog dedicated to profile islamist terrorists. So profiling worked! It's funny you should mention the "Jawa Report" as supporting your "reality" those guys are some of the most bigotted people on the net. Even the name of the website is bigotted - who do you think the "jawas" are? That they occasionally get something right is like saying that because a stopped watch is right twice a day, no one needs a working watch. You keep saying you aren't bigotted but every time you cite something as a defense it turns out to be just another example of bigotry. How many times will you quack before you realize you are a duck? From your answer I take that you would spend time searching the old solitaire playing ladies. If I believed in all the hysteria of terrorism, which you have defined as "reality" then yes, I would. If being an old lady playing solitaire is enough to get someone past security with less scrutiny, then terrorists would be stupid not to start playing solitaire, we already know they've got old ladies.

by Amadou 13y ago

fetbaffe 13y ago

Who said anything about a ghetto? You are just assuming too much and making things up because you are full with prejudice against others and other ideas. First you associated terrorist with muslims (which I never said), that shows in it self that you are profiling, even if you don't admit it. And now you seem to think that profiling will lead to a nazi like world. What? No! What Marxist has brainwashed you with this nonsense? Reality is not an all or nothing world, but you however seems to accept the fact of 1) total mass surveillance of everyone 2) which will create a police state 3) in a police state you will get true prejudice (like racism) and no equality before the law 4)that terrorism has won. It is you who must defend that fact that you need to search old solitaire playing ladies as much as young extreme radicals.

Amadou 13y ago
Who said anything about a ghetto? It is an analogy. I am starting to get the impression that you are a literalist. That's not a helpful tool in this discussion because all you do is outright deny rather than explain how what you've written does not fit the analogies and comparisons. You could start with explaining how these two statements are meaningfully different: "better to mistreat a small group of people rather than a large group of people." "mistreating millions is far worse than mistreating a few thousands." Explain the difference, don't just declare they are different. First you associated terrorist with muslims (which I never said), I stand by my characterization of your use of "politically incorrect" - the only people who use that term with respect to profiling are talking about profiling of minorities. Your follow-up reference to "appearance" and defense of the israeli system's racial profiling of arabs only confirm my initial evaluation. you who must defend that fact that you need to search old solitaire playing ladies as much as young extreme radicals. Jihad Jane is 50 years old. Your error is in believing that "profiling" works - that you can know who is an "extreme radical" with any level of certainty. As soon as you create a shortcut through security procedures, that shortcut becomes a vulnerability.
- fetbaffe 13y ago
  You come with literal accusation. How would like me take them? It is you who use the word better. Not me. And they are different because better implies that you accept it or think it's good. I don't. The only thing I accept is reality. Are you some sort of mind reader? "The only people", nonsense. You made up your mind on the first reply and you are sticking to it, even thou things are much more complicated than that. Once again, it was you who thought of muslims, not me. This is why profiling is politically incorrect because the accusers themselves are stuck in their prejudice. So I say terrorist, you say Muslim and then you accuse me of racism. This is how moronic the Marxist has become. And once again you assume that profiling is racial profiling because some have been racially profiled i in Israel. But I hope you understand that a few examples does not make that true for all profiling. Nice that you use Jihad Jane as an example without knowing the facts. Jihad Jane was not an old solitaire playing lady. She converted to Islam and became radicalized. She got caught by her writings by people running the Jawa report blog, blog dedicated to profile islamist terrorists. So profiling worked! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleen_LaRose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleen_LaRose From your answer I take that you would spend time searching the old solitaire playing ladies.
  - Amadou 13y ago
    The only thing I accept is reality. No, you declare your belief as reality and then hide behind that unsupported declaration. Nice that you use Jihad Jane as an example without knowing the facts. Jihad Jane was not an old solitaire playing lady. She converted to Islam and became radicalized. She got caught by her writings by people running the Jawa report blog, blog dedicated to profile islamist terrorists. So profiling worked! It's funny you should mention the "Jawa Report" as supporting your "reality" those guys are some of the most bigotted people on the net. Even the name of the website is bigotted - who do you think the "jawas" are? That they occasionally get something right is like saying that because a stopped watch is right twice a day, no one needs a working watch. You keep saying you aren't bigotted but every time you cite something as a defense it turns out to be just another example of bigotry. How many times will you quack before you realize you are a duck? From your answer I take that you would spend time searching the old solitaire playing ladies. If I believed in all the hysteria of terrorism, which you have defined as "reality" then yes, I would. If being an old lady playing solitaire is enough to get someone past security with less scrutiny, then terrorists would be stupid not to start playing solitaire, we already know they've got old ladies.