Majority of Republicans favors racial profiling at airports, while Dems, indys oppose

1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
a. Olga Corbitt
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzeneger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. During the 1980′s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
4. In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year-old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davy Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a U.S. Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill’s women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

Nope, I really don’t see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?
:clap2::lol:
 
Hell yea!

If your name is Mohammad....you must be a terrorist

Airports should have an express lane for white people
 
I was listening to the local radio host here in my town. Obviously a conservative because its the only radio that can survive but I digress.

She was talking about how we should profile and not be concerned with the terrorist feelings. Like I give two shits about their feelings, its alienating people of arab decent that have no ties to terrorism at all.

Al-queda isn't stupid, they recruit whites and blacks too. So who are we suppose to racially profile? All can be suspected.

Has the TSA maybe gone too far? Sure. But just profiling Muslims or Arabs isn't going to make us safer, they already know they are going to be under more scritiny. We can do it better without racial profiling.

Behavoral profiling, better intelligence, and other things like that are better than racial profiling.

That's just it. It is not Racial profiling. Islam and the Radical Elements of it. Are NOT A RACE.
 
I was listening to the local radio host here in my town. Obviously a conservative because its the only radio that can survive but I digress.

She was talking about how we should profile and not be concerned with the terrorist feelings. Like I give two shits about their feelings, its alienating people of arab decent that have no ties to terrorism at all.

Al-queda isn't stupid, they recruit whites and blacks too. So who are we suppose to racially profile? All can be suspected.

Has the TSA maybe gone too far? Sure. But just profiling Muslims or Arabs isn't going to make us safer, they already know they are going to be under more scritiny. We can do it better without racial profiling.

Behavoral profiling, better intelligence, and other things like that are better than racial profiling.

That's just it. It is not Racial profiling. Islam and the Radical Elements of it. Are NOT A RACE.

And the Statists here that are against profiling show themselves for what they are for their PC sake.
 
Fifty three percent of Republicans think race "should be included in a passenger's security profile," while 45 percent think it shouldn't.

* Only 39 percent of independents think race should be included, while 59 percent think it shouldn't.

* Only 31 percent of Dems think race should be included, while 68 percent think it shouldn't.


Does that help?

lol

I'll tell you what would help me..... if idiots would understand that a poll conducted on a media outlet's website is NOT scientifically valid. If this was a Fox News poll, you'd be howling at anyone who took it seriously... and you would be correct. Have some fucking backbone and recognize your own partisan idiocy.

"News" poll is not the same as an internet poll.

I don't trust any polling that much, but most media polls are just as valid as Gallup or Rassmussen - they're dedicated phone polling, not internet polling.

So, if Fox had commissioned this poll and the results did not suit your political agenda, you'd be fine with it? No, you would not. You would be questioning the source and funding as a lead to the result. And rightly so. The only difference is that this one happens to suit you so you don't question it. I, on the other hand, would say the same thing no matter who commissioned it. The media have their own agenda - political or otherwise.... therefore, I'm not gonna trust the information obtained.
 
I'll tell you what would help me..... if idiots would understand that a poll conducted on a media outlet's website is NOT scientifically valid. If this was a Fox News poll, you'd be howling at anyone who took it seriously... and you would be correct. Have some fucking backbone and recognize your own partisan idiocy.

"News" poll is not the same as an internet poll.

I don't trust any polling that much, but most media polls are just as valid as Gallup or Rassmussen - they're dedicated phone polling, not internet polling.

So, if Fox had commissioned this poll and the results did not suit your political agenda, you'd be fine with it? No, you would not. You would be questioning the source and funding as a lead to the result. And rightly so. The only difference is that this one happens to suit you so you don't question it. I, on the other hand, would say the same thing no matter who commissioned it. The media have their own agenda - political or otherwise.... therefore, I'm not gonna trust the information obtained.

You must be confusing me with someone else.

These poll results don't "suit" my political "agenda" - I don't have an "agenda" on these boards - nor would I say anything different if it was a FOX poll.

As I said before, I don't trust any polling. But there's no reason to "trust" Gallup or Rassmussen, and not "trust" media polling.
 
"News" poll is not the same as an internet poll.

I don't trust any polling that much, but most media polls are just as valid as Gallup or Rassmussen - they're dedicated phone polling, not internet polling.

So, if Fox had commissioned this poll and the results did not suit your political agenda, you'd be fine with it? No, you would not. You would be questioning the source and funding as a lead to the result. And rightly so. The only difference is that this one happens to suit you so you don't question it. I, on the other hand, would say the same thing no matter who commissioned it. The media have their own agenda - political or otherwise.... therefore, I'm not gonna trust the information obtained.

You must be confusing me with someone else.

These poll results don't "suit" my political "agenda" - I don't have an "agenda" on these boards - nor would I say anything different if it was a FOX poll.

As I said before, I don't trust any polling. But there's no reason to "trust" Gallup or Rassmussen, and not "trust" media polling.

I treat Gallup and Rass with some suspicion too, however, when a poll is funded by a news media organization, I think it is far more open to being weighted. That's because I know how the media operate.... they pay for it, they want the result to be what they want it to be.
 
Hell yea!

If your name is Mohammad....you must be a terrorist

Airports should have an express lane for white people
No one has said that, except for leftists who pay more attention to their bigotry against conservatives than they do to reality.

Oh no...we are talking profiling based on religion, color and name on the ticket


White people never blow things up...why should they be checked?
 
If we had racially profiled the right person, then this wouldn't have happened:

murrahafter.jpg
 
So, if Fox had commissioned this poll and the results did not suit your political agenda, you'd be fine with it? No, you would not. You would be questioning the source and funding as a lead to the result. And rightly so. The only difference is that this one happens to suit you so you don't question it. I, on the other hand, would say the same thing no matter who commissioned it. The media have their own agenda - political or otherwise.... therefore, I'm not gonna trust the information obtained.

You must be confusing me with someone else.

These poll results don't "suit" my political "agenda" - I don't have an "agenda" on these boards - nor would I say anything different if it was a FOX poll.

As I said before, I don't trust any polling. But there's no reason to "trust" Gallup or Rassmussen, and not "trust" media polling.

I treat Gallup and Rass with some suspicion too, however, when a poll is funded by a news media organization, I think it is far more open to being weighted. That's because I know how the media operate.... they pay for it, they want the result to be what they want it to be.
Media polling is usually not even performed by the organization itself - it's almost always farmed out to a polling company, and the network just sticks their name on it.

I work in election politics, so I read a lot of polling. The polling I trust the most is local polling - in most states, a University or two will releasing election polling (Siena college, Quinnipiac University), and they're usually mostly accurate. National polling is nearly useless, the only polling I trust is poll aggregators, like fivethirtyeight.com, or RCP.
 
If we had racially profiled the right person, then this wouldn't have happened:

murrahafter.jpg

If Ruby Ridge didn't happen McVeigh wouldn't have gone crazy. When the FBI sends a "death squad" to the mountains and shoots a mom holding a baby, crazy shit happens.

Racial profiling or "terrorism" had zero to do with the Murrah Building bombing. It has zero to do why we go thru screening at airports.
Islamic terrorists are why we go thru screenings, an IMHO we need to do cavity searches for muslims that fit the profile.
 
Last edited:
Hell yea!

If your name is Mohammad....you must be a terrorist

Airports should have an express lane for white people
No one has said that, except for leftists who pay more attention to their bigotry against conservatives than they do to reality.

Oh no...we are talking profiling based on religion, color and name on the ticket


White people never blow things up...why should they be checked?
As I keep telling dean, I feel no obligation to defend against your bigotry against conservatives.

Don't spew shit and then just say "Everybody KNOWS it!" Back it up, or retract.
 
You must be confusing me with someone else.

These poll results don't "suit" my political "agenda" - I don't have an "agenda" on these boards - nor would I say anything different if it was a FOX poll.

As I said before, I don't trust any polling. But there's no reason to "trust" Gallup or Rassmussen, and not "trust" media polling.

I treat Gallup and Rass with some suspicion too, however, when a poll is funded by a news media organization, I think it is far more open to being weighted. That's because I know how the media operate.... they pay for it, they want the result to be what they want it to be.
Media polling is usually not even performed by the organization itself - it's almost always farmed out to a polling company, and the network just sticks their name on it.

I work in election politics, so I read a lot of polling. The polling I trust the most is local polling - in most states, a University or two will releasing election polling (Siena college, Quinnipiac University), and they're usually mostly accurate. National polling is nearly useless, the only polling I trust is poll aggregators, like fivethirtyeight.com, or RCP.

Of course it is - they pay for the service - so any results are open to being skewed. I say the same thing on any polls.... What concerns me is the inability of so many people (on both sides of the political spectrum) to blindly accept what suits them while decrying anything that does not.
 
I treat Gallup and Rass with some suspicion too, however, when a poll is funded by a news media organization, I think it is far more open to being weighted. That's because I know how the media operate.... they pay for it, they want the result to be what they want it to be.
Media polling is usually not even performed by the organization itself - it's almost always farmed out to a polling company, and the network just sticks their name on it.

I work in election politics, so I read a lot of polling. The polling I trust the most is local polling - in most states, a University or two will releasing election polling (Siena college, Quinnipiac University), and they're usually mostly accurate. National polling is nearly useless, the only polling I trust is poll aggregators, like fivethirtyeight.com, or RCP.

Of course it is - they pay for the service - so any results are open to being skewed. I say the same thing on any polls.... What concerns me is the inability of so many people (on both sides of the political spectrum) to blindly accept what suits them while decrying anything that does not.

And on this, we agree 100%.
 
Here is a list of terror attacks against the US. Oddly it doesn't include the Akbar slaughter of his commanders at the start of the Gulf war. I'd be very wary of any muslims, especially after the Ft Hood massacre.

Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans — Infoplease.com

You got ANY proof that the Murrah Building bombing was an act of "terror" and not a warped act of vengeance? Got any links to terror organizations? Got any terror funding mechanisms?
 
Here is a list of terror attacks against the US. Oddly it doesn't include the Akbar slaughter of his commanders at the start of the Gulf war. I'd be very wary of any muslims, especially after the Ft Hood massacre.

Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans — Infoplease.com

You got ANY proof that the Murrah Building bombing was an act of "terror" and not a warped act of vengeance? Got any links to terror organizations? Got any terror funding mechanisms?

You're skewing the definition of "terrorism" to fit what you want. "Terrorism" doesn't mean "funded by terror mechanisms" or "by terror organizations".

ter·ror·ism   
[ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
 
Here is a list of terror attacks against the US. Oddly it doesn't include the Akbar slaughter of his commanders at the start of the Gulf war. I'd be very wary of any muslims, especially after the Ft Hood massacre.

Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans — Infoplease.com

You got ANY proof that the Murrah Building bombing was an act of "terror" and not a warped act of vengeance? Got any links to terror organizations? Got any terror funding mechanisms?

You're skewing the definition of "terrorism" to fit what you want. "Terrorism" doesn't mean "funded by terror mechanisms" or "by terror organizations".

ter·ror·ism   
[ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
Given those definitions, what happened at Waco was state terrorism.
 

Forum List

Back
Top