One Excelent Way To Fight Terrorism Here In America...

007

Charter Member
May 8, 2004
47,726
19,437
2,290
Podunk, WI
RACIAL PROFILING.

They may "blend in" as they say in Iraq, but they don't here. They stand out like a sore thumb. If that isn't a sure way to "identify" them, then I don't know what is.

Keep an eye on them. It's easy to tell who they are. Unless you're of the mind to let them blow up some more of our buildings.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Just waiting for you to get jumped on by the masses:cof:

Don't you know how politically incorrect that is?;)

Yup. That's why I love it. :D

It's TRUE though.
 
You can't identify a 'white Muslim' like that, but profiling where we can will help. BTW, there is a difference between profiling and harrassment, which is a line that cannot be crossed without punishment.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Surveillance of mosques?:D

AHA!

-But my point stands. I agree racial profiling makes sense in general.

-But you CANNOT determine a religion by race.

In addition, you need to be REACTIVE (unfortunately) or you take away rights.

If we let all Americans have unrestricted access to "Arms", we wouldn't have an issue anymore.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
AHA!

-But my point stands. I agree racial profiling makes sense in general.

-But you CANNOT determine a religion by race.

If we let all Americans have unrestricted access to "Arms", we wouldn't have an issue anymore.

No arguements here.

In addition, you need to be REACTIVE (unfortunately) or you take away rights.

Huh? You lost me there........
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Huh? You lost me there........

Americans want to go after terrorism by being PROACTIVE instead of being REACTIVE.

Unless you are REACTIVE, you take away peoples rights.
 
Originally posted by NewGuy
Americans want to go after terrorism by being PROACTIVE instead of being REACTIVE.

Unless you are REACTIVE, you take away peoples rights.

But by being REACTIVE might we not be too late? A potential slippery slope indeed.....
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
But by being REACTIVE might we not be too late? A potential slippery slope indeed.....
Slippery slope and a catch-22. It is hard to be reactive to a nuke once you are dead.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
But by being REACTIVE might we not be too late? A potential slippery slope indeed.....

Nope.

Again, with a fully functional Constitution, and unrestricted access to arms, the citizens will put down anything they see in advance of the actual crime having been comitted.

Example: Terrorist walks into a place with a backpack and drops it. -He runs away as someone looks in it to see what it was. A bomb is seen and citizen plugs running man.

Jury aquits. -Because of the jury of peers and their TRUE authority is excercised, citizens doing this sort of thing have no fear of the law.
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Slippery slope and a catch-22. It is hard to be reactive to a nuke once you are dead.

Which leaves 2 alternatives:

Do nothing, let the invasion continue and we all die.

Drop the politically correct crap and protect ourselves.
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Slippery slope and a catch-22. It is hard to be reactive to a nuke once you are dead.


:D

My above example applies there too.

-Assuming the nuke is not armed first.

Still, it is liberty or security.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Which leaves 2 alternatives:

Do nothing, let the invasion continue and we all die.

Drop the politically correct crap and protect ourselves.

YYYUUUUUUUP.
 
Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Which leaves 2 alternatives:

Do nothing, let the invasion continue and we all die.

Drop the politically correct crap and protect ourselves.
I vote for alternative 2. (sorry NewGuy ;) )
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
I vote for alternative 2. (sorry NewGuy ;) )

Oh, I am FOR the 2nd alternative, just not by the "Gov'ment" taking away my rights and suspending the Constitution to do it.

:D
 

Forum List

Back
Top