Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (177949)	12/26/2011 11:34:13 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543925

I actually think profiling makes a lot of sense. Why give grannies rectal probes when we aren't really threatened by them? Not that I think we should be as limited in our profiling as the xenophobic muslim fearing weenies think we should be- but we kind of know what most terrorists look like. They are relatively young- no matter what color or religion they are, and I'm sure we could stop goosing grannies, or squeezing out their hemorrhoid creams because granny might have some anal explosive in there. I disagree. The shoe bomber was a Caucasian British subject. Besides, the TSA folks are smart enough to treat the granny the way you would like her to be treated and I will be surprised if her scan was done differently. I have been through security where I have been scanned very lightly while my business colleague, A Caucasian, was subjected to intensive scan because of his garb and looks, bearded, wears Texas style boots, has a thin key chain from his belt and a broad belt. So there is a inherent level of profiling but it is not based on religion, race etc. The rest of the points raised by you in this post is the same as what I believe in also.