2 NYC Officials Call for Racial Profiling

[savafan]

http://ap.washingtontimes.com/dynami...S&SECTION=HOME

By SARA KUGLER
Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Middle Easterners should be targeted for searches on city subways, two elected officials said, contending that police have been wasting time with random checks in efforts to prevent terrorism in the transit system.

The city began examining passengers' bags on subways and buses after the second bomb attack in London two weeks ago. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg have said several times that officers will not engage in racial profiling.

But over the weekend, state Assemblyman Dov Hikind said police should be focusing on those who fit the "terrorist profile."

"They all look a certain way," said Hikind, a Democrat from Brooklyn. "It's all very nice to be politically correct here, but we're talking about terrorism."

On Tuesday, Republican City Councilman James Oddo said the Sept. 11 World Trade Center attack by Middle Eastern men in hijacked airplanes prompted him to publicly declare his support for Hikind's statements.

"The reality is that there is a group of people who want to kill us and destroy our way of life," he said. "Young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror, and we should keep those facts prominently in our minds and eyes as we attempt to secure our populace."

Oddo commended Hikind for "rushing headlong against the strong undertow of political correctness."

Hikind said he planned to introduce legislation allowing police to racially profile, and Oddo said he intended to introduce a resolution in the City Council supporting the measure.

The director of the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Wissam Nasr, said their push for racial profiling is offensive and ignorant.

"Terror comes in all shapes and sizes, and certainly there's no legislation or system that's going to identify terrorists on the spot," Nasr said.

The New York Police Department said in a statement that racial profiling is "illegal, of doubtful effectiveness and against department policy."

The Republican mayor reiterated Tuesday that it is against the law and doesn't work. "I'm against it for fairness reasons, and we're not going to do it," he said.

[Johnny Footstool]

"They all look a certain way," said Hikind, a Democrat from Brooklyn.

Welcome to 1942.

[GAC]

Originally Posted by savafan

But over the weekend, state Assemblyman Dov Hikind said police should be focusing on those who fit the "terrorist profile."

"They all look a certain way," said Hikind, a Democrat from Brooklyn. "It's all very nice to be politically correct here, but we're talking about terrorism."

"The reality is that there is a group of people who want to kill us and destroy our way of life," he said. "Young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror, and we should keep those facts prominently in our minds and eyes as we attempt to secure our populace."

Nuff said. But lets keep pulling those 80 yr old grandma's and Girl Scouts out of line carrying handbags. Gotta be politically correct.

Do you think the terrorists profile? Oh, that's right...we have to be better then them, and set a better example for the world.

[GAC]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Welcome to 1942.

So you're saying the terrorists who have been committing suicide attacks, bombings, and the taking of innocent lives don't look a certain way or fit a profile?

[savafan]

I'm going to admit, I get nervous anymore whenever I see a woman wearing the Muslim head covering or veil, or groups of men of Middle Eastern descent speaking to each other in a foreign language. I've seen it a lot in and around Dayton, at the grocery store, library, etc. I sometimes feel bad about it later, but I can't help but feel uncomfortable at those moments anymore.

[Johnny Footstool]

Gotta be politically correct.

Honestly, it has nothing to do with being politically correct. It has everything to do with Constitutional rights.

Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/c...nt04/01.html#5

The text of the web site is lengthy, so I won't post it here.

I'm not a lawyer, but as the web site explains, the amendment protects *people,* not property. It also states that "It is surely anomalous to say that the individual and his private property are fully protected by the Fourth Amendment only when the individual is suspected of criminal behavior."

So you're saying the terrorists who have been committing suicide attacks, bombings, and the taking of innocent lives don't look a certain way or fit a profile?

In 1942, the US government started rounding up Japanese people and putting them into camps because they "fit a profile." I'm not too proud of that.

I know a lot of people who look "a certain way" and fit a profile who had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. I don't think they deserve to get hassled any more than the rest of us.

[Redsfaithful]

Originally Posted by GAC

So you're saying the terrorists who have been committing suicide attacks, bombings, and the taking of innocent lives don't look a certain way or fit a profile?

Tim McVeigh?

[registerthis]

I will say this (and this may land me somewhere - GASP - right of center)...

In London, there is currently a directive out for police to be extra-cautious and increasingly suspicious of Muslim men riding about the city's public transportation system. Why? Because four weeks ago attacks by Muslim men killed over 50 people, two weeks ago fouled-up attacks by Muslim would have no doubt killed many more, and police and intelligence officials in the UK have strong evidence pointing to other cells in the country populated by - yep - Muslim men who are planning additional attacks.

Now, people are hesitant to support anything containing the word "profiling", because it has significant negative, racist connotations. We think of black men who have been pulled over for 'driving while black", we think of Hispanics who are denied jobs because of their ethnicity...some of us even think of Japanese internment camps. All examples of racism at its worst, a perverted form of profiling.

The truth is, though, people profile every single day. You see a white male with slicked-back hair in an Armani suit yapping on his cell phone and you think "arrogant jerk". You see the bearded man in the old sweater with a plastic bag and you think "homeless bum." Granted, none of these things require any follow-up action on you part. But stereotyping and compartmentalizing people is something done by everyone, every single day, whether we wish to admit to it or not.

I can tell you with honesty that if I was riding the Londond Underground, and witnessed a Muslim-looking man get on wearing a backpack or winter coat, I would be suspicious. Rightly or not, I would be. What the london police have done is simply verbalized a policy that most likely would have been undertaken anyway--Muslim men will be under more intense scrutiny.

What these NY representatives are proposing sounds ugly - but is an unfortunate, yet natural, response to the culture of today. As I heard an NPR host exclaim one day, "These aren't Swedes who are blowing up subway trains."

None of this, mind you, means that there should be a lessened awareness by security officials for *anyone* who looks suspicious--be they Muslim, Black, Hispanic, Swedish, what have you. This also doesn't give authorities a green light to unfairly detain, abuse, mistreat or harass individuals simply because they appear to look like Muslim men. Nor does it mean that a Muslim extremist group couldn't recruit a non-Middle Eastern Muslim to carry out attacks.

But is it ridiculous to say that Muslim men will be viewed more skeptically and with increased suspicion than other members of our society, considering the recent events and recently-gathered intelligence? I don't think so. The response, in fact, seems quite natural to me.

[westofyou]

I know a guy who was walking down the street in Seattle and these security guards ran up behind him and grabbed him by the arm and dragged him into a Nordstroms down the block. Took him into a room and handcuffed him. Accused him of shoplifting from the store, insisting that he was seen and that the witness was on the way to finger him.

The guy walks in the room, looks at the guy and says, "That's not him. Not even close."

He sued them for false imprisonment and got a nice settlement for the idiots "racial profiling"

Oh BTW he was black.

[Unassisted]

I recently read on another message board, a proposal by someone who said they had the "simple solution to finding all of the terrorists in this country." That person proposed subjecting every Muslim in the country to a polygraph test and asking them during the test if they were "affiliated with a terrorist organization."

Seems to me like the NYC proposal is only a short slide down the slippery slope to this one.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by Unassisted

I recently read on another message board, a proposal by someone who said they had the "simple solution to finding all of the terrorists in this country." That person proposed subjecting every Muslim in the country to a polygraph test and asking them during the test if they were "affiliated with a terrorist organization."

Seems to me like the NYC proposal is only a short slide down the slippery slope to this one.

That's obviously taking it to extremes. I would never support something like that on a mass scale.

But "increased vigilance" of Muslim males? I don't have as much of a problem with that, provided it is clearly defined and strictly observed.

[Falls City Beer]

"The reality is that there is a group of people who want to kill us and destroy our way of life," he said. "Young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror, and we should keep those facts prominently in our minds and eyes as we attempt to secure our populace."

Yeah, this kind of talk reminds me of the bullcrap shoveled by Bush when he said the 9/11 Nineteen were driven by hatred of freedom when they committed their atrocious acts.

Please. More like pissed off because we support Israel and the state-sanctioned ghettoization of Palestinians. Not that that condones what the terrorists did, but don't LIE to me about WHY they did what they did. "Hating freedom?" What a joke. I guess they hate "air," too; and "water."

If you REALLY want to stare this thing in the face and dispense with political correctness, you'll understand WHY the Muslim world hates the U.S. before you act upon a plan to protect our country.

[Johnny Footstool]

But stereotyping and compartmentalizing people is something done by everyone, every single day, whether we wish to admit to it or not.

Citizens internally (or even externally) stereotyping one another is one thing. Government agencies stereotyping individuals is a whole different ballgame.

I can tell you with honesty that if I was riding the Londond Underground, and witnessed a Muslim-looking man get on wearing a backpack or winter coat, I would be suspicious. Rightly or not, I would be. What the london police have done is simply verbalized a policy that most likely would have been undertaken anyway--Muslim men will be under more intense scrutiny.

How about putting *everyone* under more intense scrutiny, not just Muslim men?

[Jaycint]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

How about putting *everyone* under more intense scrutiny, not just Muslim men?

Not to speak for Reg but I will put everyone else under more scrutiny once someone of a different religious or ethnic background than "Arab Muslim" blows up a bus full of people as an attack on the war on terror.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Citizens internally (or even externally) stereotyping one another is one thing. Government agencies stereotyping individuals is a whole different ballgame.

I don't necessarily think so. Part of a government's job is to protect its citizenry. If you're arguing that government and security officials should ignore the facts behind the recent London attacks, as well as the intelligence gathered which indicates that more Muslim men are plotting more attacks, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. It simply doesn't make sense to view the old woman in the wheelchair and the Muslim male with the backpack as equally likely to blow up a bus.

Governments don't view everyone as identical--affirmative action programs across the nation target minorities, albeit in a beneficial manner. Certain loans and government subsidies are available strictly to minority individuals--because the government has made a generalisation that Hispanics, for example, are generally in a more difficult position to succeed in business than caucasians. Does this mean that EVERY Hispanic is disadvantaged or incapable of succeeding without government assistance? Not at all. But the government has made the determination that, in general, they are.

Now, keep in mind that security measures reflect a response to an immediate, short term need. Increasing suspicion on Muslim men does nothing to dissuade the feelings of anger and resentment that many Muslims feel towards the west. Clearly a concerted effort must be made to reach out to those groups, to work with them directly, so as to eliminate the possibility of a terrorist arising from their community. To that end, the U.S. and U.K. could do significantly more to work with Muslim and Middle Eastern communities--both domestically and internationally. But, in the immediate future, an increase in scrutiny and suspicion as done in the U.K. is not out of hand, IMO.

How about putting *everyone* under more intense scrutiny, not just Muslim men?

I believe that's why I wrote this:

None of this, mind you, means that there should be a lessened awareness by security officials for *anyone* who looks suspicious--be they Muslim, Black, Hispanic, Swedish, what have you.