jay_a2j wrote: If those that attacked us on 911 were actually Arab, common sense says PROFILE to make sure more Arabs don't attack us. (and whip dee doo if we hurt anyone's feelings)
Charles Manson was a white American male, so I guess that means we need to consider every white, American male a potential serial killer, and should search/investigate them as such immediately?
jay_a2j wrote: It doesn't make sense to profile (even though law enforcement uses it to catch serial killers)
This is where you err. Profiling is not wrong, is, in fact very helpful. Its profilng based on race, religion and other very broad categories that is wasteful. The profiling that needs to happen is based on "behaviors", to some extent associations and such. Focusing on behaviors gives a better chance of catching not just the last terrorist (that is, the people who match the ones we already got), but gives us a chance to catch the
next terrorist, from whatever direction that person comes.
jay_a2j wrote:. but it does make sense to assume EVERYONE is a terrorist EXCEPT those who "fit the profile" because we might inadvertently hurt someone's feelings. Yes, it's the dawn of of new age. You have to love liberalism. If not for it's blatant lack of common sense, then for its sheer fairness to all the terrorists out there who are never pulled aside because they "look Arab" and therefore are given a pass out of the politically correct, unbelievably stupid US security measures.
This is definitely not about liberals. This is about sense versus politics. Politicians like simple answers, so they can step up and claim they DID SOMETHING. If it fails, they just say "oops, well, I did
try.." This issue is too important to play that game. We need real and true intelligence on the bad guys, profiling that looks at things that really matter, which whether you are in the US or Israel doesn't mean race or broad ethnicity.
We need money spent on intelligence in advance, not pretend that even full body scanners will somehow catch the bad guys.
The best comment I heard, but I cannot remember who said it, was that "we" [the TSA/US anti-terrorism efforts] are constantly fighting the last battle. Some guys use boxcutters, so tweezers are out. Someone makes a liquid bomb, so shampoo is outlawed. A shoe bomber comes, so we take off our shoes. An underwear bomber means we now have full body scans.
We need a more pro-active approach. We need to fight the next problem, not just repeats of the last one.