History Test

Got this in an email, and was amused. Don't know how I feel about profiling, but this email did make a good point at the end...


Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following Multiple Choice test. The events are actual cuts from past history. They actually happened!

Do you remember?

1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:

a. Olga Corbitt
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzeneger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:

a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

3. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:

a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

4. In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:

a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American
Passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:

a. The Smurfs
b. Davy Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a U.S. Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:

a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:

a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:

a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:

a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill' s women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:

a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:

a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:

a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

Nope, .........I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?

So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, Secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning former Governors, and leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 & 40 alone because of profiling.

"Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40"

The key word "extremeist" makes what your talking about NOT profiling. What people against profiling mean is targeting ALL "Muslim males between the ages of 17 and 40" is racism.

Would you only have us inspect all Arab Americans that look and have names like Casey Casem?

Would it surprise you to learn upwards of 99% of all serial killars are "White males between the ages of 17 and 40" and all DOMESTIC terrorists are "White CHRISTIAN male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?"

Again key word "EXTREMISTS". You don't profile behavior based on race my friend. Or if you do, the extremeists just start dressing like "little old ladies".

Its funny how many of those who decry the ridiculousness of detaining a young white British girl for a stupid comment about a bomb are the same ones who raise a stink about profiling. Logic dictates the application of resources in areas where the greatest returns will be seen. Muslims are not the enemy, but the enemy are Muslims.

Originally posted by RANT
Would it surprise you to learn upwards of 99% of all serial killars are "White males between the ages of 17 and 40" and all DOMESTIC terrorists are "White CHRISTIAN male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?"

Actually, no. And most of the serial killers come from my neck of the woods, the midwest. (Maybe I'm a serial killer, I'm white, 25, and the country I come from is called the midwest(to quote Dylan) ).

As for the profiling, as I said before, I don't know how I feel about it. I definatly don't think that only muslims should be targeted. However, the biggest external terror threat to this country, currently, is the middle east. But I don't know, because I also believe racism is wrong. I'm sure there are more tells of when someone is "up to no good", as well. The way people act, mannerisms, eye movements when questioned...but with the masses of people going through airports, it's hard to observe every one.

So in short, I don't know what the solution is...

Are they "extremists" because they resort to violence to achieve their aims???

Don't the Russians resort to violence in Chechnya???
Dont the Isrealis resort to Violence in Palestine???
Dont the Americans resort to violence in Nicaragua???
Dont the Indians resort to violence in Pakistan???
Dont the british resort to violence in Ireland???
Dont the American colonies resort to violence against England???
Dont the Cherokee Indians resort to violence against Union Army???
Dont the South Africans resort to violence against the dutch???
Dont the Germans resort to violence against the Jews

Are we learning that "Extremism" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "morality" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "truth" is a matter of perspective?
How do we brake the "mind-forged-manacles"???



Authority is an illusion in the mind of Govenors - Lao Tse

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Are they "extremists" because they resort to violence to achieve their aims???

Don't the Russians resort to violence in Chechnya???
Dont the Isrealis resort to Violence in Palestine???
Dont the Americans resort to violence in Nicaragua???
Dont the Indians resort to violence in Pakistan???
Dont the british resort to violence in Ireland???
Dont the American colonies resort to violence against England???
Dont the Cherokee Indians resort to violence against Union Army???
Dont the South Africans resort to violence against the dutch???
Dont the Germans resort to violence against the Jews

Are we learning that "Extremism" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "morality" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "truth" is a matter of perspective?
How do we brake the "mind-forged-manacles"???



Authority is an illusion in the mind of Govenors - Lao Tse

Some guy being famous for saying something doesn't make him right. Hitler said alot of things

Theya re called extremists because they are using their religion to justify what they are doing. They take one line of their holy book, and expand it into justification to kill everyone who isn't them. They are an 'extreme' faction of their religion, as opposed to the majority.

PETA throwing paint on fur coats and burning down McDonald's are extremists, as compared to most vegetarians and animal-rights activists.

None of the people you stated above were extremists, because they had the support of most of their group. If every Muslim declared jihad on America, they woudl no longer be extreme Muslims, just regular Muslims. The 5% that was peaceful would be the extremists.

[Edited on 23-1-2004 by Esoterica]

Originally posted by Esoterica

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Are they "extremists" because they resort to violence to achieve their aims???

Don't the Russians resort to violence in Chechnya???
Dont the Isrealis resort to Violence in Palestine???
Dont the Americans resort to violence in Nicaragua???
Dont the Indians resort to violence in Pakistan???
Dont the british resort to violence in Ireland???
Dont the American colonies resort to violence against England???
Dont the Cherokee Indians resort to violence against Union Army???
Dont the South Africans resort to violence against the dutch???
Dont the Germans resort to violence against the Jews

Are we learning that "Extremism" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "morality" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "truth" is a matter of perspective?
How do we brake the "mind-forged-manacles"???



Authority is an illusion in the mind of Govenors - Lao Tse

Some guy being famous for saying something doesn't make him right. Hitler said alot of things

Theya re called extremists because they are using their religion to justify what they are doing. They take one line of their holy book, and expand it into justification to kill everyone who isn't them. They are an 'extreme' faction of their religion, as opposed to the majority.

PETA throwing paint on fur coats and burning down McDonald's are extremists, as compared to most vegetarians and animal-rights activists.

None of the people you stated above were extremists, because they had the support of most of their group. If every Muslim declared jihad on America, they woudl no longer be extreme Muslims, just regular Muslims. The 5% that was peaceful would be the extremists.

[Edited on 23-1-2004 by Esoterica]

Sigh...what is it with people in Michigan these days?
Ok...So lets start this from the top...firstly, I never said Lao Tse was right. You did. In fact if you bothered to read the previous paragraph you would have seen where I said that "truth" was a matter of perspective. doesn't mean I'm right, you're right or Lao Tse was right. Its INFORMATION to make you think.
Secondly, to follow your line of logic, "extremism" is a matter of numbers...or percentages. 1000 muslims blowing things up is extremism but 10,000 is enemy action...or a political movement. Is that 5% or 6%. Does the percentage change according to the population size?
Thridly, you claim that a religious aspect has to be involved for the label extremist to be applied. Ok. Lets start with this quote from your favorite guy Hitler, "Nazism is more than a political movement, more than a new religion." Sounds downright spiritual to me. Of course when the Nazi's took power they were a minority too.
How about the Cherokee Indians and the Union soldiers? Think the indians apply a level of religiousness to their lives and actions??
How about the Isreali's...think religion conviction has anything to do with the continued violence in that country. Are they extremeist?
Or how about the "religious"war betweeen the Indian Hindus and Islamic Pakistanians? Where do you divide the line of extremism there?
And who decides where the line is divided? You? Me? George Bush who was elected by 15% of the people in this country...is he and his admin extremist and if they are, how can we trust any pronouncement they make? Who can claim that authority and where do they get it? Who gives it to them?
Is one man's extremism anothers right of survival? What did the British nobleman think of the terrorist American colonials? What does the Chechnyan Businessman think of the extremist Russian infantryman?
Think things are getting complicated? Think it might have anything to do with the country they're born into? If so, does that mean we are forced to adopt the rules and valuies of the country just becuase of the physical location of our birth? Maybe we do what we're told because of the church we grew up in. Does that church have all the answers? CAn they see all ends? What about the families we're born into? Are we forced to adopt their prejudices and patriotism?
What if there really is NO enemy? Can you handle the metaphysical implications of that statement? Not that its right..but what if it has built with in it the key to unlocking more of the reality tunnel we currently live in. What if most of eastern philosophy and western cabalism were really designed to help us face our own perspective limits and allow us a chance to redifine our neurological process's so we could be MORE than our genetic makeup and chance early childhood provide.

Are there really any thinkers here?!

It seems folk support racial profiling until it's their race being profiled. If you wanna make the argument for this as soon as another McVeigh comes along be ready to hand over your rights to the right givers.

What's interesting though, no one said every white men was a threat to national security. No one claimed that they could possibly blow other things up. It wasn't assumed that every white man 17-40 was a potential threat. They didn't run around the country locking up every white man that came along.

This type of thinking is more of a threat than random Muslims just trying to take a trip to see their family or do some business. This type of thinking gives birth to the lies about WMD and mushroom clouds over Baltimore. The fathers of the patroit act rely on prejudice to slowly erode our rights. And some of you fork them over freely. Truly sad, scared, pathetic citizens we have become.

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by Saphronia]

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Dont the Germans resort to violence against the Jews

Is it a lack of knowledge or lack of grammar? "Didn't".

By the way violence and discrimination against Jews is international. The 3rd Reich just did it to the max. extend, unfortuneately.

I am of mixed feelings on this.

Although I despise the thought of some one being singled out by race or nationalty just how many terrioists are 80 year old spanish women again? If white guys made up almost the total membership of a terrioist group that hijacked planes I would expect a little more scruntiny by the air port security.

BUT

I have a good friend that is muslim and him and his wife both have recieved death threats and abuse sense 9-11
and crap like that MUST NOT be tolarated.

There has to be a middle ground that both works and is fair to all.

Originally posted by Saphronia
It seems folk support racial profiling until it's their race being profiled. If you wanna make the argument for this as soon as another McVeigh comes along be ready to hand over your rights to the right givers.

What's interesting though, no one said every white men was a threat to national security. No one claimed that they could possibly blow other things up. It wasn't assumed that every white man 17-40 was a potential threat. They didn't run around the country locking up every white man that came along.

This type of thinking is more of a threat than random Muslims just trying to take a trip to see their family or do some business. This type of thinking gives birth to the lies about WMD and mushroom clouds over Baltimore. The fathers of the patroit act rely on prejudice to slowly erode our rights. And some of you fork them over freely. Truly sad, scared, pathetic citizens we have become.

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by Saphronia]

I believe that everytime there is an act of terrorism committed against Americans whether it be Domestic or International Someone calls in a profiler.
Everytime there is a rash of serial killings they call in a profiler.

What ever the race of the Profiled individual most likely to commit the heinous act may be...... that is what they may be!

It's White male serial killers and Muslim males between the ages of 17 & 40 who blow up planes. Those are the usual suspectsas dictated by past experience. It would be assanine to not focus on those groups in an attempt to solve or prevent those crimes against society.

For the record I am a white male between the ages of 17 and 40 and not a terrorist, yet I was detained at an Airport in Orlando and searched....I had no problem with it, though it was inconvenient...I had nothing to hide! And I was glad that security was doing SOMETHING at the airport..It is amazing that I didn't hollar HARRASSMENT...Wait ..I can't because I'm a white male between the ages of 17 & 40.

Maybe I was just the 'token" white guy.


[Edited on 1-24-2004 by krankinkx]

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Are they "extremists" because they resort to violence to achieve their aims???

Don't the Russians resort to violence in Chechnya???
Dont the Isrealis resort to Violence in Palestine???
Dont the Americans resort to violence in Nicaragua???
Dont the Indians resort to violence in Pakistan???
Dont the british resort to violence in Ireland???
Dont the American colonies resort to violence against England???
Dont the Cherokee Indians resort to violence against Union Army???
Dont the South Africans resort to violence against the dutch???
Dont the Germans resort to violence against the Jews

Are we learning that "Extremism" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "morality" is a matter of perspective? Are we learning that "truth" is a matter of perspective?
How do we brake the "mind-forged-manacles"???



Authority is an illusion in the mind of Govenors - Lao Tse

the british-ierland thing is just like the palistinain-isreal thing

No, selective use of events to paint a perception of "My Christ on a Cross beats your Mohammed under a Tree any day".
Religion is the opiate of the masses - once you realize that you shouldn't base your life on a book of fairy tales & didactic stories, listing quotes from the formation of the cult as your modus operandi to life, then you'll be enlightened enough to see that life for those profiled is not equal to the minor hold ups you endure at an airport; death is involved.
As for that death count over the years resulted by Muslim extremeists cited above?
Compare that to the one hour death count engineered by a Christian Fundamentalist in Iraq, "Shock & Awe" killed thousands of elderly, women & children non-combatant.
Mangle the definition of terror to your hearts content & praise Jesus that you have such a moral Christian being an active terrorist on a global scale in order to supposedly delflect terror domestically.
I just don't think that either of you will stand as favorably on that judgement day you're expecting.

Those who write history (aka "the victors") get to write the history books as they see the story unfold from thier perspective of the events.

Esentially we humans are violent beasties and crave some kind of conflict at all times as a way to apease the need for bloodlust, our most ancient and deepest rooted desire, followed closely by eating and sex (but not always in that order).

So now, the enemy dujour are the Muslim extremists, before that it was the Commies, before that the Nazi's, before that (for we colonial Americans, anyway) it was the Brits and Royals.

All countries and all people have the need to have a vile enemy to focus all of that negative energy onto, if not for these enemy dujour, the world would be rampant with serial killers and mass murderers... kinda like Compton on steroids.

Although many of us have a grander ideal of what mankind could be if we were to stop killing one another long enough to realize our real potential as a SINGLE race inhabiting this big blue marble we call Earth, I'm also enough of a realist to realize that none of that will happen in my lifetime or that of my children or grandchildren.

Hopefully someday our ancestors will live together in peace, that is if we don't blow up our big blue marble before this vision can be realized.

PEACE

That didn't look like a history test to me. It actually personally offended me. I am a Muslim and I am 16 turning 17 in October, does that make me a terrorist??? I believe that this so called " history test", is propaganda to push the profiling cause of the Muslim man/woman even further/worse. I would like to hear your excuse in defending this "test".

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by TheCatalyst]

Originally posted by TheCatalyst
That didn't look like a history test to me. It actually personally offended me. I am a Muslim and I am 16 turning 17 in October, does that make me a terrorist??? I believe that this so called " history test", is propaganda to push the profiling cause of the Muslim man/woman even further/worse. I would like to hear your excuse in defending this "test".

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by TheCatalyst]

im not anti muslim or anything but you and other muslims need to tell other muslims to stop living up to the negative sterotype.

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

Originally posted by TheCatalyst
That didn't look like a history test to me. It actually personally offended me. I am a Muslim and I am 16 turning 17 in October, does that make me a terrorist??? I believe that this so called " history test", is propaganda to push the profiling cause of the Muslim man/woman even further/worse. I would like to hear your excuse in defending this "test".

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by TheCatalyst]

im not anti muslim or anything but you and other muslims need to tell other muslims to stop living up to the negative sterotype.

What do you mean "living up to the negative stereotype"?????? I think you are racist, you just are afraid to admit it.

Originally posted by TheCatalyst

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

Originally posted by TheCatalyst
That didn't look like a history test to me. It actually personally offended me. I am a Muslim and I am 16 turning 17 in October, does that make me a terrorist??? I believe that this so called " history test", is propaganda to push the profiling cause of the Muslim man/woman even further/worse. I would like to hear your excuse in defending this "test".

[Edited on 24-1-2004 by TheCatalyst]

im not anti muslim or anything but you and other muslims need to tell other muslims to stop living up to the negative sterotype.

What do you mean "living up to the negative stereotype"?????? I think you are racist, you just are afraid to admit it.

the negative sterotype being suicide bombers. and i am not racist. i like muslims. i had an instructur at space camp, he was a muslim and he was one of the best teachers i had. you know nothing about me. read my other post espically dealinig with colonel.

Sigh...what is it with people in Michigan these days?
Ok...So lets start this from the top...firstly, I never said Lao Tse was right. You did.

Quoting somebody usually assumes you agree with them. But oh well.

Secondly, to follow your line of logic, "extremism" is a matter of numbers...or percentages. 1000 muslims blowing things up is extremism but 10,000 is enemy action...or a political movement. Is that 5% or 6%. Does the percentage change according to the population size?

Well, of course it's based on perspective. but 51% of a group doing one thing makes it no longer extreme for that group. Everything is a matter of your opinion when it's all boiled down.

Thridly, you claim that a religious aspect has to be

involved for the label extremist to be applied. Ok. Lets start with this quote from your favorite guy Hitler, "Nazism is more than a political movement, more than a new religion." Sounds downright spiritual to me. Of course when the Nazi's took power they were a minority too.
How about the Cherokee Indians and the Union soldiers? Think the indians apply a level of religiousness to their lives and actions??
How about the Isreali's...think religion conviction has anything to do with the continued violence in that country. Are they extremeist?
Or how about the "religious"war betweeen the Indian Hindus and Islamic Pakistanians? Where do you divide the line of extremism there?

I didn't. I simply used religion because it has plenty of examples.

And who decides where the line is divided? You? Me? George Bush who was elected by 15% of the people in this country...

What the # have you been amoking? 15%? Maybe not the majority, but a hell of alot mroe than 15%

is he and his admin extremist and if they are, how can we trust any pronouncement they make? Who can claim that authority and where do they get it? Who gives it to them?

This is a little rambling, but from I can tell, my answer is that they would be extremist depending on how their actiosn rank with otehr democratic nations and other American administrations.

Is one man's extremism anothers right of survival?

Extremism != bad. It only equals being in the far minority taking, well, extreme action.

What did the British nobleman think of the terrorist American colonials? What does the Chechnyan Businessman think of the extremist Russian infantryman?

They were the enemy.

Think things are getting complicated?

No.

Think it might have anything to do with the country they're born into? If so, does that mean we are forced to adopt the rules and valuies of the country just becuase of the physical location of our birth? Maybe we do what we're told because of the church we grew up in. Does that church have all the answers? CAn they see all ends? What about the families we're born into? Are we forced to adopt their prejudices and patriotism?
What if there really is NO enemy? Can you handle the metaphysical implications of that statement? Not that its right..but what if it has built with in it the key to unlocking more of the reality tunnel we currently live in. What if most of eastern philosophy and western cabalism were really designed to help us face our own perspective limits and allow us a chance to redifine our neurological process's so we could be MORE than our genetic makeup and chance early childhood provide.

That was a total tangent and has nothing to do with the discussion a t hand.

Are there really any thinkers here?!

*Raises hand*

Apparently, I'm not a thinker unless I think as you do.

Would it surprise you to learn upwards of 99% of all serial killars are "White males between the ages of 17 and 40" and all DOMESTIC terrorists are "White CHRISTIAN male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?"

Yes, but they aren't the ones flying planes into buildings, or marching down the street chanting "Death to America" while burning effigies of the president or the flag either....

A poster above said it best...Muslims are not our enemies, but our enemies are Muslim. I've always been an advocate of profiling. Statistics are statistics for a reason.... There is NO need for harsh treatment, or undue suspiscion, but it makes sense to target the likely demographic of those committing certain crimes...