Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Stay on the subject MM...
The thread is about profiling not republicans killing doctors...
I know its contreversial and politically correct to say this, but I think profiling muslims, and middle eastern looking people is acceptible, if blond hair blue eyed germans were doing this, or white jews, then we should profiling according to what it is, the truth, and stop being afraid of offending people.
We cant cower in fear, of pressure groups, who in my opinion are not on the side of america.
Do we really want to put, patting ourselves on the back for how morally superior we are (for not offending people) for being a polite civil society at war, while our enemy slits out throat, and we serve them tea?
Well... That depends on where you draw the line when it comes to what a terrorist is. Ireland had MAJOR issues with terrorism and none of them where Muslim. Oklahoma City wasn't done by Muslim. The Olympic bomber wasn't Muslim. I can go on and on.
percentage wise, the worlds terrorism is being done by muslims, in the vast majority.
I agree with you there but I can't say all. It's not the truth.
agreed, but atleast 75 percent, based on reports ive read. And i do believe with all due respect to you, my new friend, that our greatest thread global comes from islamo nazi terrorists.
I agree too. It's definitely the biggest threat, but not the only. We have plenty of home grown crazy too.
We have our home grown crazies as well - but not an organized terrorist group like they have
so true.
Not all Muslims are terrorists - but all the terrorists have been Muslims
What about the IRA and its various splinter groups? And what about the fund-raising groups in the US - primarily in the North-East I think - that supported them?
Yes, even the most violent of those splinter groups of the IRA, like ETA in Spain, gave/give notice prior to bombing to get as many 'out of the way' as possible. That's one difference, though they too were/are terrorists also as far as tactics go.
True enough on the difference. But I was just trying to point out that terrorists come from many places (and I don't just mean "places" in the geographical sense).
RSR made a point that "all the terrorist have been Muslims". To be a valid claim it needs to be more specific. If the claim was, "all the terrorists involved in the various 9/11 atrocities were Muslims", then that's a valid claim in truth terms. But if RSR meant that all terrorists are/were Muslims then it's not valid.
Profiling will never be correct 100% of the time, not even 50% or 5% of time, nor probably even 2% of time. However, it should be done at borders and other points of entry. Truth is, the chances of identifying a extremists most definately would go up using male, 20-40 years of age, Muslim. That would NOT mean strip searching or even pulling all that fall within that range out for questioning, etc. It does mean that those that fit those parameters would be eyeballed closely for stress, etc. 
