Racial Profiling: Let’s stop the damn whining and get after the terrorists.

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Here’s your hypothetical situation. Let’s say that you have a community where all of the people .. and I mean ALL --- 100% ---come from one of two different ethnic backgrounds. You have 50 percent Middle Eastern Muslims and 50% Pennsylvania Quakers living in this town. Nobody else. You’re the county sheriff. You’ve just received word that someone from this particular town is about to head for a big city where he will attempt to board an airliner with explosives and try to blow it up. Time is very limited. You only have time to question half the residents of the community. You can either question all of the Muslims, all of the Quakers, or randomly pick among the entire community. Whatchagonnado? You know that ALL acts of airline terrorism were committed by Muslims. You also know that Quakers have taken a vow of non-violence and live a completely passive lifestyle. Who are you going to question? If you tell me that you are going to try to question members from both groups because you don’t want to racially or ethnically profile the Muslims, than I will tell you that you are a damned fool who has lost touch with all reality.

Law enforcement has limited resources. These resources have to be used in the most efficient manner possible. That means sometimes you have to chose between two individuals to be searched or questioned and that choice should be made on probabilities, not political correctness.

Let’s stop the damn whining and get after the terrorists.

 

[SINthysist]

Don't kid yourself, Quakers dislike government. May even be passively helping to bring it down as in, uhhhh, I didn't know nuttin'...

 

[daughter]

Timothy McVeigh

wasn't from the Middle East nor was he Muslim.

Of course you should harass and interrogate every person that looks like a 'Mohamad'. So what if he's third generation, American. He 'looks' like a terrorist.

Have you started constructing the internment camps yet? The largest Muslim community is in Dearborn. What? You haven't rounded them all up yet?

When you're done, incarcerate the rest of the African-American male population. Minus the athletes and performers to entertain you, the rest are gangbangers. Everybody knows black men can't legitimately drive a Lexus. DWB just is working fast enough. You know how paranoid they are. Next, they'll be dropping bombs.

Law enforcement has more than limited resources, if they're using your logic.

Let's see, non-Muslims trained Bin Laden. Non-Muslims are the largest armnament salesmen. And non-Muslims have been known to commit atrocities daily. I forgot, they're also the majority. And with limited resources, you have to target groups. Start with crazed non-white minorities.

Peace,

daughter

 

[modest mouse]

I'll stay within your construct and say that I will question the men between the ages of 16 and 60. That should be a significantly lower percentage than 50% so I will fill my remaining interrogations with the single young women, perhaps the guilty parties have been loose lipped in an attempt to impress with their perceived power.

 

[SINthysist]

Dick Morris

Has a wonderful piece in the Post detailing the efforts that they went through to try and get Clinton to do something about Al Qaeda, but he would not. Because racial profiling was politically incorrect...

Dick would know, he was there...

That's the Washington Post Editorial Page for those of you who are curious as to what really caused 9-11.

 

[alltherage]

Re: Dick Morris

Has a wonderful piece in the Post detailing the efforts that they went through to try and get Clinton to do something about Al Qaeda, but he would not. Because racial profiling was politically incorrect...

Dick would know, he was there...

That's the Washington Post Editorial Page for those of you who are curious as to what really caused 9-11.

Polically incorrect my ass. It is unconstitutional. If racial profiling where in effect when the Oklahoma City bombing took place would it have stopped those nice white boys who did the bombing? Would it have any impact on neo-nazi violence in this country, or with racism. It would enhance racist thought. The fact is that by the standards that are being set by this administration our civil liberties are being strangled. Racial profiling will do little to keep us safe, add turmoil to our race relations, and alienate a large group within our society.

That having been said there are things we can reasonably do. Such as, following up on visa's and making certain that students are studying, and professors are teaching, and vacationers leave when the visa expires. We should do a better job of screening who we give visa's too. We should become more active in the area of human intelligence gathering, and by god we should be consistent in foriegh policy. Some of our best friends are more repressive than our enemies and yet we support them out of an economic need, or out of convenience. Racial profiling is another smoke screen and relatively meaningless in the long term.

 

[WriterDom]

Re: Dick Morris

Has a wonderful piece in the Post detailing the efforts that they went through to try and get Clinton to do something about Al Qaeda, but he would not. Because racial profiling was politically incorrect...

Dick would know, he was there...

That's the Washington Post Editorial Page for those of you who are curious as to what really caused 9-11.

Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.

 

[SINthysist]

Uh, rage

Al Qaeda attacked us again and again and again with each attack growing larger in scope and bolder in concept. Read the article and the one previous to that and many of Clinton's top people were urging him to profile, to freeze assets, to go after the terrorist. But they were stopped by thier leftist inclinations as voiced by Steffy Stefanapolous (sp?).

But the real truth of the matter is that Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.

 

[lovetoread]

Re: Re: Dick Morris

Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.
Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators. Clinton's failings were the fault of "right-wing" conspirators.

Yes it was. Glad to see you finally admit it.

 

[WriterDom]

Dick Morris was a GOP spy just like Monica. He's on the Fox network almost every night spreading his lies. Do you need more proof than that?

 

[daughter]

notice your points are being ignored

alltherage? Ummmm. Did we round up all the militia groups? Nope. In fact, you can buy guns and host meetings in the good ol' US. It's your American right. Timothy McVeigh was an aberation. What are you bitchin' about anyway?

Solid point, alltherage.

Peace,

daughter

 

[Weird Harold]

Polically incorrect my ass. It is unconstitutional. If racial profiling where in effect when the Oklahoma City bombing took place would it have stopped those nice white boys who did the bombing? Would it have any impact on neo-nazi violence in this country, or with racism.

The biggest problem with "Racial Profiling" is that it limits the thought processes of the investigators.

However, in the context of a search for members of a specific organization, it is inevitable.

If I'm looking for members of Hamas or the Islamic Jihad, I'd pretty much be wasting my time looking in synagogues.

If I'm looking for members of the Aryan Nation, I can pretty much rule out synagogues, mosques, and the local hispanic and black neighborhoods. If I'm looking for KKK memebers, I can add Catholic churches to places where I'd probably be wasting my time.

Currently, the focus of the investigation into terrorism is focused on a group that is primarily composed of radical muslims -- not all of them are middle eastern, just most of them. That focus hasn't stopped the investigation and arrest of a white extremist sending anthrax hoaxes to planned parenthood and abortion clinics.

When does defining common characteristics of the suspects become racial or ethnic profiling?

Is it racial profiling to suspect every young man in my neighborhood wearing blue handkerchieves of being a member of the Crips if they're all young blacks? Or is that just acknowledging that the local branch of the Crips has very few non-black members?

Is it paranoid to wonder if a young black man I meet in my neighborhood is a member of the Crips even if he isn't wearing gang colors on his way to school (where wearing gang-colors is banned)?

Verifying the whereabouts of people in this country on a student (or other limited) visa shouldn't stop with those who most closely match the racial and ethnic characteristics of the Sept 11 highjackers who used student visas to enter the country. It does seem logical to me to at least start with those who might be the highjacker's peers -- even if it means describing those to be interviewed in terms of their race and religion.

If race, religion, and other ethnic factors are removed from the descriptions of suspects, then investigators are hampered in narrowing the search to actual perpetrators.

 

[Texan]

Bravo WH

Extremely well stated and on target. I have disagreed with you from time to time, (but always with respect) however, this time, you cut through the bullshit and PC with clarity and uncommon sense.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Very wise and well-reasoned post, WH (even considering the ordinary high-quality of your posts )

Daughter, your implication that racial profiling is a sufficient first-step to internment camps is alarmist and logically unsound. There are common-sensical profiling steps that can and should be taken for the common protection of all.

First, profiling young middle-eastern men need not prevent all terrorism to be worthwhile. Pointing out that it would not have prevented Tim McVeigh's bombing is beside the point. There's a huge proverbial pachyderm sitting in the middle of the living room here that lots of people seem to be intentionally avoiding - that there is a significant threat from Islamic fundamentalists who have both the will and the means to kill Americans.

As such it is frank irresponsibility on the part of security personnel and law enforcement to give equal scrutiny to 25 year-old middle-eastern men and 63 year-old Lutheran grandmothers from Minnesota.

This need not be seen as racially, ethnically, or religiously divisive either. For all its evils, one thing 9/11 did not do was discriminate. The terrorists set out to destroy buildings and kill Americans - all Americans. They didn't let the fact that there were Muslims in the WTC deter them. Everyone suffered equally on that day.

Protecting our nation against terrorism then is a protection that crosses all racial, ethnic, and religious lines. There could be almost nothing more egalatarian than preventing the deaths of thousands of more Americans of all backgrounds.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Texan, nice to see you back around these here parts.

 

[Texan]

sssshhhhh

Texan, nice to see you back around these here parts.

I'm trying to keep a low profile...... this place can be like a vacuum...... it sucks you in.......... Well sometimes it just sucks....

I've just given up the need to defend my "beliefs and opinions" against the "slings and arrows" of others. I finaly discovered that contained inside the word ignorant... is the word ignor(e).
That guy with the "Woodduck" AV is good practice for me.

Oliver..... I have always enjoyed your posts... yours is one of the names I look for when deciding which threads to read.

 

[morninggirl5]

Re: sssshhhhh

I'm trying to keep a low profile...... this place can be like a vacuum...... it sucks you in.......... Well sometimes it just sucks....

I've just given up the need to defend my "beliefs and opinions" against the "slings and arrows" of others. I finaly discovered that contained inside the word ignorant... is the word ignor(e).
That guy with the "Woodduck" AV is good practice for me.

Oliver..... I have always enjoyed your posts... yours is one of the names I look for when deciding which threads to read.

Very nice to see you again, Texan.


Ignorant= Ignore + ant


I like that, but sometimes you need to squish the darn things to get rid of them.

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: notice your points are being ignored

alltherage? Ummmm. Did we round up all the militia groups?

No, militia groups were not "rounded up" but they were thoroughly investigated. A task made much easier by prior attention being focused on them and the ease of WASP FBI agents infiltrating such groups.

I understand that racial profiling is a sensitive issue with you, but not every description that includes race, religion or ethnicity can be made without those distinguishing marks.

Everyone should understand that I am NOT in favor of racial stereotypes being used to profile suspects! I simply recognise that if an elephant tramples your house, interogating all of the waterbuffalo and ostriches first isn't going to yield much information.

 

[Ezzy]

I think I would invite the whole town...

To attend a meeting in the town hall. Knowing that only about 50% would be bothered to attend anyway.

At the time the meeting was to be held, I would with my deputies go around the rest of the town and arrest and interrogate all those who had not attended.

This would not stop the terrorists, but would just be for my own satisfaction to find out why they did not want to attend the meeting I had called, any who did not offer good enough excuses would spend the next 48 hours being reminded that they had better vote for me next year when my re-election is due or else.

Of cause the other thought would be to put roadblocks around the town and use helicopters to make sure the perimeter is not breached. Check anyone at the bus station or the train station and arrest anyone attempting to exit these ways too.

Then arrest and question all people who try and leave town, as it is only those who leave that we have to worry about in your hypothetical situation.

I would also have a quick word with the friendly judge and get a warrant to review all travel arrangements that had been made by the local travel agents. This would include a search of airline rolls for anyone from my town’s names, via computer.

This should leave plenty of the 100% of my town alone and only question those who appeared to be at risk of being the terrorists.




EZ

 

[Guest]

I tend to think of a conservative argument against affirmative action when I discuss my beliefs regarding racial profiling. In theory it's a legitimate idea, in practice it's a clusterfuck.

Looking simply at Todd's hypothetical, this type of activity presents numerous 4th Amendment problems. What happened to probable cause? What happened to "reasonable search and seizure"? All of these elements are missing many times in the practice of racial profiling.

I'm not saying that racial profiling is not one way to limit the pool of suspects. That is simply common sense. If you know you are looking for an white male who committed a crime, you are barking up the wrong tree if you arrest a Hispanic man for questioning. That's simple. I concede that readily. However, if you just start randomly pulling over people without true probable cause simply because of their race you violate numerous principles of criminal law upon which our country is based.

In most court cases regarding racial profiling there have been numerous studies and reports that have indicted a great many police jurisdictions around America. It is just a fact of life that police units have been discriminatory in the past. There is a definite perception in high crime areas where minorities are the majority of the population that the police practices are unconstitutionally discriminatory. The practice is not much better than the perception. That's just a fact, it has nothing to do with political belief. It's a sad state of events in America, but it is real.

Noting the tendency for law enforcement to be a bit discriminatory, racial profiling opens up the doors for many activities that would not be normally justified. I actually think that many changes taken place in 2002 can limit the ability for racial profiling, in practice, to be such an incredibly negative thing. In order to have a society that allows limited racial profiling, we must have a check of sorts on our law officers to make sure they are not taking too many liberties regarding their ability to profile. As of 2002 reports have stated that many police cars across the United States will be required to have a camera that tapes what occurs outside a vehicle when a "stop" is made. This will ensure that the conduct taken by the officers is legitimate and not excessive. While I think we need to find a much better system than racial profiling, these current bandaids on the problem will at least help the perception that in practice racial profiling goes far beyond a way to reduce the suspect pool.

I abhor racial profiling. I think it has caused many unconstitutional stops, searches and seizures. The police have gone far beyond their rights with the type of invasive searches that have taken place under the idea of racial profiling. I do not believe that race, religion and other ethnic factors should be totaaly removed from documents about suspects; however, there needs to be more there than simply a race match in order to make a police search or investigation legitimate. We must add the element of probable cause. Without that, racial profiling is as unconstitutional as segregated buses.

I don't think that daughter's ties of racial profiling to internment camps in the current climate and in response to Todd's post is that inadequate. For as Todd's post declares, race is the ONLY factor in determining who is questioned in the hypothetical at hand. That is equivalent to a rounding up of a ethnic population for purposes of police investigation and possibly invasive search procedures.

 

[lavender]

 

[daughter]

not looking through rose-colored glasses

Thanks, Lavender.

WH, I appreciate what you're saying. Yes, I am sensitive and when highly emotional I swing toward extremes. However, I am not some irrational, paranoid minority(I know you were not implying this either).

When you live in a society where you don't know when your skin color is going to be a factor, you are slightly edgier than your neighbor Bonnie. Somedays, being black stirs no consequences. Other days, I'm stopped, questioned, harassed for no other reason. I'm not sensitive without reason.

My dissent is with the emphasis of targetting a group for no other reason than race/ethnicity as Lavender pointed out.

We know the profile for serial killers is a white guy in his forties. However, when looking for the perpetrator, FBI doesn't do a blanket sweep through your neighborhood looking for him.

Want to start with a group because of probabilities, I can live with that. When you send a form letter to 600 Americans requesting they show up for questioning solely on the basis of their skin, that's bullshit.

We're in this mess partly because of what we haven't done. Our foreign policy and INS operations are a joke. Now that national security is breeched, we are going to look at visas and immigration policy?

And is there any reason why any American shouldn't question how the matter is handled? Does being patriotic mean I have to agree with every action? Hell, no. Am I going to interfer with justice no. Am I going to scream when I think something is unjust? Damn skippy.

When you get a geniuen taste of what it means to be under constant scrutiny, tell me how you feel. If it were your brother, uncle, father, or child, how would you react then?

Will easy to say the tactics are sound when there's no threat that the noose will ever be put around your neck.

Peace,

daughter

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Texan: I've learned (the hard way) that if you want to argue here at lit, you have to have the right attitudes. First, I've learned that you can't expect to change anyone's mind. If you're here to gain converts to your cause you're going to be incredibly frustrated. Second, and just as important, it's a lot more enjoyable if you actually consider the other side's position. There have been numerous occasions where I've read posts and had marvelous little mini-epiphanies that have led me to rethink my notions. I've learned that a lot of my beliefs before weren't thought out in the least bit.

William James has a great quote that applies to a lot of us here at lit (myself often included). Don't remember the exact quote, but to paraphrase: "What passes for thinking for most people is simply rearranging ones prejudices."

90+% of the "debate" at lit is just that - rearranging prejudices. But there's so many arguments that if you just stay here long enough, you can actually learn some things in spite of yourself.

Lavs: you're right that there are some serious practical problems with profiling as it actually occurs. My main point was directed to applications of profiling for preventing terrorism. I don't think any particular characteristic of a person should be off limits to consideration when trying to determine who are the most likely people to commit acts of terrorism. Law enforcement already has people who are called "profilers" (nota bene the name of the job) who do nothing but try to identify criminals based on only generalizations.

I'm not sure what my point is, exactly. LOL.

Must... do... more... thinking.

 

[AnonEmouse]

America for all its vaunted freedoms...

Is not the Land of the free, (it may be the home of the brave).

For all the restrictions on people who want to enter the USA and become a productive part of the economy, they (the INS) have more restrictions than you would believe.

I am sure they spend so much time thinking up the restrictions, that the time they have available to enforce them is limited to almost non-existent.

Ask some of those like Xander who have crossed the water to be in the USA, if it was all plain sailing.

Ask the 4,000,000 plus Mexicans who are working on the black economy, if they would like to be able to work and have full rights (with regard to wages etc) and be resident in the USA legally or stay in their low paid, poverty line jobs and remain illegal?

Anon

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: not looking through rose-colored glasses

Want to start with a group because of probabilities, I can live with that. When you send a form letter to 600 Americans requesting they show up for questioning solely on the basis of their skin, that's bullshit.

????
My understanding was that the letters requesting an interview were sent based on immigration status and country of origin.

We're in this mess partly because of what we haven't done. Our foreign policy and INS operations are a joke. Now that national security is breeched, we are going to look at visas and immigration policy?

Are you implying that we should NOT look at visas and immigration policy now that the faiings of the system has been exposed? Granted, it would have been nice if someone with the power to do something about it had possessed the strength of character to go against their constituents and push for immigration reform and a more consistent foreign policy.

There are a lot of things being reonsidered because of Sept 11, 2001. Unfortunately, politicians are doing the reconsidering and that means emotional and poll based decisions being made. In turn, that means there's going to be a bunch of bad choices and half-hearted "quick fixes" proposed and tried.

And is there any reason why any American shouldn't question how the matter is handled? Does being patriotic mean I have to agree with every action? Hell, no. Am I going to interfer with justice no. Am I going to scream when I think something is unjust? Damn skippy.

Patriotism should mean doing what is best for your country to the best of your ability. I don't think that the word is being used according to it's dictionary definition by politicians and others. Scream your head off, and I'll sing harmony when I agree with your definition of unjust.

We know the profile for serial killers is a white guy in his forties. However, when looking for the perpetrator, FBI doesn't do a blanket sweep through your neighborhood looking for him.
...
When you get a geniuen taste of what it means to be under constant scrutiny, tell me how you feel. If it were your brother, uncle, father, or child, how would you react then?

It's not bloody likely anyone would search my neighborhood for a forty-something white man -- I live in a low income apartment complex on the border of gang territory. I'm in a decided minority in this neighborhood.

I have been in several circumstances where I was under constant scrutiny -- my current neighborhood is one such place. Granted, almost every case has been such that moving or changing jobs would change those circumstances -- I can escape those situations eventually. It does give me some glimmer of understanding about what it feels like to be a despised minority, though.

I reacted then as I react now -- I look for the underlying facts and try NOT to let my emotions rule my actions or words.