Page 4 of 4
Posted: February 28, 2003, 10:05 pm
by Kargyle
Well enough others have posted since my last post that I don't feel I need to defend my stance that the comments in question are/were indeed of a racist nature, debateable as you may think that is. Regardless of that, there is yet another term we can place on those statements, that being bigot. It is a bit broader, and will cover the comments nicely I think. So whether you find the comments in question to be "racist" they are bigoted.
Also, I think you'll find that the vast majority of the world would agree that those statements do indeed fit the criterions of being racist.
Posted: February 28, 2003, 10:27 pm
by kyoukan
Fallanthas wrote:That's profiling.
No, it's not. It's also absurd and has ZERO to do with the conversation.
You seem to gain some odd form of what I can only assume is sexual gratification by making up totally fucking bizzare situations and trying to draw comparisons to actual relevent topics.
Posted: February 28, 2003, 11:03 pm
by Arborealus
Aabidano wrote:These pieces of string (actually minute yet infinitely long pieces of baling twine) tie together billions upon billions of tiny little lobsters. Some of these lobsters whizz round and round a nucleus of tightly packed miniscule mudskippers, attached as they are with 9-dimensional string, and this combination of tiny lobster revolving around a nucleus of tightly packed mudskippers is known as an "atom"
Lobsters which have no mudskipper nucleus restraining them whizz around the cosmos at the speed of light, and depending on their orientation can have various effects when they reach an object. They sometimes appear to be a bit wavy, but they also sometimes appear to behave as particles (this is the quantum mechanics bit). When you look at one of the little lobsters, it gets self-conscious and its waveform collapses. This is quite unpleasant for the lobsters, so it is difficult to observe them. When one of the lobsters gets its string caught up with the string of another lobster, they get entwined, and changes to one of them will instantaneously affect the other of the pair. This is known as "quantum entanglement."
Different lobsters are known as photons, quarks, muons, protons, electrons and so on- all depending on the temperament of the individual lobster. There are various small lobsters that are predicted by theory but which have yet to be observed. These lobsters are very shy, and scientists have to revert to smashing them toether in a "particle accelerator" in order to get them to come out. This is not nice for the lobsters at all, and should be stopped.
String Theory has very complicated maths behind it, as the string is wrapped over on itself in a multi-dimensional way, but the lobsters do not seem unduly worried by this. The lobsters originally condensed out of pure energy shortly after the Big Bang and have been expanding ever since (not literally the lobsters- they stay the same size but get further away from each other). When they condense, they can form anything from stars and galactic super-clusters to you and me. Clever lobsters. The mudskippers do not seem to do anything much except to form an anchor for the string.
This is a far more sophisticated theory than Relativity, which falls down because it fails to predict the actions of the lobsters, whatever their mood, and makes no mention of string.
I hope that this clarifies the issue for you.
(taken from rathergood.com)
My understanding is that the existence of all of the hypothesized lobsters have now been verified empirically (or as empirically as possible given the high energy nature of lobsters)...I think the Top Lobster was the last and I recall seeing summary data from CERN in the last year or so indicating that they had verified its existence in their Lobsertron or as laymen know it their Lobster Smasher.
Posted: February 28, 2003, 11:17 pm
by Fallanthas
If you didn't understand the example then you don't understand either criminal or security profiling.
Who commits the majority of crimes? Young males.
Statistically, who is the least likely to commit a violent crime? Elderly females.
There you go, in your favorite day-glo crayon on the wall.
Contribute or go the fuck away. You are getting boring.
Posted: March 1, 2003, 12:01 am
by kyoukan
YES BUT THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING BEARING IN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CRIMINAL AND RACIAL PROFILING.
YOU CAN'T BE THIS FUCKING DENSE.
YOU CAN'T BE.
JESUS CHRIST YOU JUST CAN'T BE.
Posted: March 1, 2003, 12:12 am
by Zamtuk
My power has been out for the past 26 hours, is this a good thread?
Posted: March 1, 2003, 1:01 am
by Fallanthas
Calm yourself wench.
Race is a consideration in profiling a lot of the time. In this situation, we know that a large part of the threat is coming from a very speific geographical locale.
What's fucking dense is that you have to have this explained to you.
Posted: March 1, 2003, 12:55 pm
by Pilsburry
Sirensa wrote:Pilsburry wrote:
Why is profiling good? Because when my grandma got searched to board the airplane on the way down to Atlanta, and some middle eastern guy didn't.....that was just utterly stupid.
Why is this stupid? For all I know your grandmother used to be a militant Nazi supporter. She could have a history of served jail time for violent crimes and an expert on bombs. She could be a child molester. She is just as capable of committing a crime on an airplane as anyone else. How do I know that she is "safe" simply by her color?
Racial profiling doesn't do a bit of good and anyone who thinks it does is stupid. You cannot profile a person's actions based on their color. The people who try only come off as unintelligent and uninformed. I really would rather not leave my safety to the unintelligent and uninformed.
If you are going to profile, profile on things that matter, such as political or religious affiliations.
You can't profile on religion or political affiliation, you have to profile on physical attributes otherwise you can't identify the group....
Nazi's dont' bomb planes these days...
Child molesters can't be thwarted at security counters by checking for bombs or weapons.
So why was your post stupid? It's hard to explain.
P.S. My grandmother was married to a man who stormed the beach on normandy, he received 5 purple hearts among other medals in world war II. She isn't a nazi.
Posted: March 1, 2003, 1:06 pm
by Pilsburry
"I really love it when people say shit like this. Because people are not born in the US they don't deserve the same rights we enjoy? The Bill of Rights should apply to everyone throughout the world, and FYI it does apply to everyone who is physically inside the US whether they are an American or not."
If they can read/write/speak our native tongue and pay taxes sure. If they can't they can go home. If the he Bill of rights is enforced by the gov't which is paid for with taxes they didn't contribute to and written in a language they can't read? They don't deserve to be protected.
And yes I would ship off all the illiterate fucks also even in they are white, unless they had an excuse like they are in a coma, blind, or retarded. Or tax evaders....you know what, I'd ship them to Iraq.
Posted: March 1, 2003, 2:47 pm
by Xyun
Posted: March 1, 2003, 8:39 pm
by miir
Nazi's dont' bomb planes these days...
Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists don't hijack planes either....
Make up your fucking mind.
Were saying RACIAL profiling is OK. Were not talking about religious profiling you fucktards
Why is profiling good? Because when my grandma got searched to board the airplane on the way down to Atlanta, and some middle eastern guy didn't.....that was just utterly stupid.
Middle eastern people aren't the group of people that is hijacking planes.
Radical, militant muslims are the people that are terrorists hijacking planes. Radical, militant muslims can be white, black, middle eastern, asian, european.
If you use racial profiling to deter terrorism and profile only those of middle eastern descent, your doing a piss-poor job. Any suspicious person, regardless of descent should be searched throughly.
Maybe the airport where Richard Reid boarded his plane was racial profiling only middle eastern individuals. Imagine the outrage if he had managed to detonate that bomb...
To me, that's proof that using racial profiling to deter terrorism is ineffective.
Posted: March 3, 2003, 1:44 pm
by Hoarmurath
It seems to me that the only reason that there's even a perceived "need" for profiling is the government's lack of willingness to commit the resources to allow searches of each and every person boarding a plane. I personally don't like the idea of more government, but I do think that every single bag (carry-on or checked-in) and every single person should be searched prior to a commercial aircraft leaving the ground. Period. Anything less than that is a half-ass attempt on our part. I'm all for personal freedoms, but I still have the freedom to drive or take the bus versus flying in a plane. Too bad we rely on air travel so much, but that shouldn't be the government's problem.
(Maybe I'll get flamed now...there's a first time for everything.)
Posted: March 3, 2003, 1:52 pm
by Midnyte_Ragebringer
Pilsburry wrote:"I really love it when people say shit like this. Because people are not born in the US they don't deserve the same rights we enjoy? The Bill of Rights should apply to everyone throughout the world, and FYI it does apply to everyone who is physically inside the US whether they are an American or not."
If they can read/write/speak our native tongue and pay taxes sure. If they can't they can go home. If the he Bill of rights is enforced by the gov't which is paid for with taxes they didn't contribute to and written in a language they can't read? They don't deserve to be protected.
And yes I would ship off all the illiterate fucks also even in they are white, unless they had an excuse like they are in a coma, blind, or retarded. Or tax evaders....you know what, I'd ship them to Iraq.
Amen brother! So, when are you having a $1000 a dish, fund-raising breakfast?
