Napolitano: No "Logic" In Profiling Muslim Men Under The Age Of 35

[AntZ]

Napolitano: No "Logic" In Profiling Muslim Men Under The Age Of 35

June 9, 2011


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5IRdiMwYnY



"You're not using good logic there. You've got to use actual intelligence that you received. And, so, you might -- all you've given me is a kind of status. You have not given me a technique for tactic or behavior. Something that would suggest somebody is not Muslim, but Islamic, that has actually moved into the category of violent extremists," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said at a forum on U.S. security and preventing terrorist attacks.

"We have ways to make some of those cuts. And they involve the intel that comes in, the analysis that goes on. For example, we often times, for travelers entering the United States, we won't not do what is called a secondary inspection just because they are a 35-year- old male who appears to be Muslim, whatever that means. But we know from intelligence that if they have a certain travel pattern over a certain period of time, that should cause us to ask some more significant questions than if we don't."


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/06/09/napolitano_no_logic_in_profiling_muslim_men_under_ the_age_of_35.html

______________________________________________


So it's prudent that we keep giving child molesting pat-downs to 4 year old children and 80 year old grandmas, but not Ahmed with the nervous sweat and crazy eyes.

Another example of why Obama is not a good president, he chose this fool. After a dozen occasions where she has shown not only a lack of common sense, but a complete lack of intelligence, he still has no problem with her. :rolleyes:

[Acid Trip]

Just another Democrat talking out of their ass. Same shit different day.

[Deepsepia]

So it's prudent that we keep giving child molesting pat-downs to 4 year old children and 80 year old grandmas, but not Ahmed with the nervous sweat and crazy eyes.

You can be quite sure that "Ahmed with the nervous sweat" gets a thorough inspection.

In fact, its not well known, but 14 or 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were pulled aside for further screening-- in other words, even before 9/11 attacks, we were already subjecting Muslim males to a much higher level of scrutiny, more or less just because they're young and had arab names.

And behavioral characteristics, such as nervousness are explicitly used in the screening process-- in high risk areas, there are often plainclothes folks monitoring passengers, and if you're sketchy enough, you'll get pulled in for further screening.

[Hal-9000]

Why can't they just make a standardized rule...everyone goes through the scanner and is subjected to a pat down ?
Yes it will take longer but it certainly will remove people getting affronted by their 4 yr old getting the treatment and not the nervous Achmeds.

Safe airline travel is the goal for everyone and I'm willing to go through the hoops so that I can sleep on my flights...

[Deepsepia]

Why can't they just make a standardized rule...everyone goes through the scanner and is subjected to a pat down ?
Yes it will take longer but it certainly will remove people getting affronted by their 4 yr old getting the treatment and not the nervous Achmeds..

That's pretty much what we have already. Everyone gets examined, and then some folks get examined much more closely.

I went through the backscatter scanner recently, which was faster and felt less intrusive than a patdown.

[Muddy]

Why can't they just make a standardized rule...everyone goes through the scanner and is subjected to a pat down ?
Yes it will take longer but it certainly will remove people getting affronted by their 4 yr old getting the treatment and not the nervous Achmeds.

Safe airline travel is the goal for everyone and I'm willing to go through the hoops so that I can sleep on my flights...


Because people like FBD scream cry about their rights..

[Acid Trip]

Because people like FBD scream cry about their rights..

Yeah we don't need any fucking rights! The government shall provide! :rolleyes:

[Hal-9000]

then those people that bitch about their rights..can be held responsible when a terrorist does get past the checkpoint


if a person needs to cup my junk to ensure my balls are not C4, people like Achmed will have a tougher time getting his little goodies past security

[Muddy]

Yeah we don't need any fucking rights! The government shall provide! :rolleyes:

Yeah, exactly.. :rolleyes: back at ya'..

[Deepsepia]

Yeah we don't need any fucking rights! The government shall provide! :rolleyes:

raise your hands, everyone who wants to fly "no search airways"

I don't like the security either, but I prefer it to the alternatives.

Its pretty clear that bad guys, bad guys who are familiar with our systems, are trying to get on board aircraft.

The one occasion when they found weakness in our systems was disastrous for us.

We know that in Iraq and Afghanistan, they've used women as suicide bombers because "they don't fit the profile". We know that they've recruited Anglo converts to Islam into al Qaeda.

We know that one al Qaeda terrorist stuffed his brother's rectum with explosives in order to slip through security.

This a bad, dangerous, and extremely inventive enemy.

We know that civil aviation is a high priority for them . . . I really don't see any way around treating it with extreme care. As 9/11 demonstrated, a fueled airliner is basically a very big bomb.