(More) Proof Airport Security is Bogus - Page 2

Seriously, someone should make a Muslim-friendly airline. It would make millions.

It would not work like that - in reality, American Muslims are the least radical in the world and the most progressive.

They are the last group to actually be radical so one could not realistically target Muslims on religion. You would have to do it on race - ie Yemenis or Afghanis or whatever the choice is at any given time.

And that would not be legal.

I seriously think that this sort of enterprise would be the answer to the current 'image problems' of Islam and it is a problem in itself why no Muslims do it but that is a deeper issue.

In Berlin for example, mosques are responding to the economic crisis by growing organic food and selling it on the premises quite cheaply.

There is nothing 'Islamic' about it as such but it integrates into the community and it is known that it is Muslims who are doing it so the non-Muslim customers (hopefully) go there and realize they aren't going to get their heads chopped off.

This is really the answer to the issue actually - though I am digressing, apologies - just open these kind of businesses. Not just for Muslims but BY Muslims and do it better or, at least, just as well.

That's just the US. Worldwide it could work. Especially if it were a better product.

It also assumes and pays into the underlying assumption that ALL Muslims are terrorists. Otherwise why profile them?

How many Muslims would have to be radical to make it worthwhile? 20%? 40?

How many actually ARE radical to the extent they would carry out a bombing on an aircraft?

I would suggest it is more or less the same figure, percentage wise as - say - Christians or other established terror groups.

Put another way: if the percentage of Muslims who would plan to carry out a terror attack is less than 1% then is profiling necessary?

Hands figure was 6 Million Muslims in US. 1% is 60,000.

Are there even that many suicide jihadis in the entire world? I think not.

How many in the US? I would say in the low hundreds at a very, very, very high and generous estimate.

So call it 0.1% - 6000? Nah. 0.01%? 600? Unlikely.

But for 0.01% or lower then profiling is necessary?

It doesn't make sense - not does the rest of the measures actually - not unless you assume ALL Muslims are potential terrorists....oh...wait....

They could show Dawkins on continual loop on the in-flight movie and have instructions on the safety cards:

"If the plane goes down - NO PRAYING - NO RECANTING - NO LAST MINUTE CONVERSIONS"

You could combine with the racist profiling too.....many atheists, like Sam Harris, are Islamophobes/borderline racists so there could be some good crossover.

I just worry in case someone like Harris straps on a bomb-belt, takes over the cockpit and heads for Mecca shouting "God is not Great!"

They might not let me on the plane!

I kind of did - I was taking it easy though. Trying to be more pacifique

That was what I meant above by saying it wouldn't work and you would have to target specific nations or Muslims of a certain ethnicity.

What I think would work would be to have more Muslims on the staff of immigration and just get them to talk to any Muslim they find suspicious. You could even have a higher level of academically trained Muslims to talk to people if necessary.

It says your religion in your passport...just get a Muslim on staff to say "Salam Alaykum' when they go through and talk to them. if they're cool it's a normal thing to do, if they're up to no good they'll set off subtle alarms that Muslims are perhaps more attuned to than people with no experience of Islam perhaps.

You don't even have to do it that way - you could have an Imam or someone at the embassy interviewing Muslims when they apply for visas. If they are not radicals they'd love it....and if they were they'd be found out.

I don't know how it is as I haven't been to the States for a while but maybe they do it, I don't know.

I do know that one way to marginalize the fanatics is to deprive them of the ability to play the 'us and them' angle which is a major force for radicalizing so it couldn't hurt.

That way would avoid the profiling anyway.

In some cases I believe they are.

If they can cause Symptom A and sell Product B to 'cure' it of course they would. They are corrupt. You seem to think they have consciences or something.

So yes...I do believe this personally. I think more often though they just don't care whether something harms or not. They just want the money.


In some way - not as obvious as above - I actually think some departments ARE sitting around thinking of ways to harm their customers.

They don't call it that and - let's be charitable - perhaps they don't even realize it but the fact is that every car looks the same. All the colours are limited.

Think about that for a minute.

When I was a kind you could have yellow, blue, red, whatever. Now you get some shade of silver and fuck you if you don't like it. And they all look the same.

Yet people buy them and don't notice.....why?

Because these car companies have huge departments dedicated to brainwashing people it's all right and dumbing down what little discrimination or free will they have left.

That my friend is HARM.


Certainly not. Far, far from it.

Long ago customer expectation rose and rose and rose.

The Companies had to rise their game in response - in fact raise and raise and raise.

And some did.

But then came a new breed: The Greedy Fucking Bastards.

And The Greedy Fucking Bastards didn't want to raise their game - to be fair they weren't capable of it but the real reason was that if they could sell low class SHIT then they would make more profit. Massively more - because the product was cookie-cutter or, in some cases - worthless.

But there was a problem: Mr Consumer had raised his game. He was intelligent and discriminating. He would spot a shit product a mile off.

Something had to be done.

So they forgot about the products and concentrated on making Mr Consumer stupid.

In fact some even ended up believing that these companies were fulfilling and meeting the desires of consumers.


Benefits.

Right.

You got me there.