Friday, January 22, 2010

GOP Bigot Wants Profiling

Per the GOP norm, hate trumps effectiveness.

GOPRacism Since the Fort Hood shootings and the failed Christmas Day terror attack, some on the right have called for more racial and ethnic “profiling” and “discrimination,” saying that the Obama administration is more interested in “protecting the rights of terrorists” than “protecting the lives of Americans.” Today during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing looking into the Fort Hood rampage, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) became perhaps the most powerful proponent of outright ethnic profiling, saying it’s “by and large true” that “all terrorists are Muslims or Middle Easterners”:

INHOFE: I’m, for one — I know it’s not politically correct to say it — I believe in racial and ethnic profiling. I think if you’re looking at people getting on an airplane and you have X amount of resources to get into it, you get at the targets, and not my wife. And I just think it’s something that should be looked into. The statement that’s made, it’s probably 90 percent true with some exceptions like the Murrah federal office building in my state, Oklahoma. Those people, they were not Muslims, they were not Middle Easterners. But when you hear that not all Middle Easterners or Muslims between the age of 20 and 35 are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims or Middle Easterners between the age of 20 and 35, that’s by and large true.

Watch it:

 

In addition to being an affront to civil rights, ethic profiling is ineffective. Inhofe says he is worried about limited resources, but ethnic profiling actually wastes law enforcement resources by chasing false targets. Moreover, many terrorists — including “shoe bomber” Richard Reid, al Qaeda recruit Adam Pearlman, and “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski — don’t fit Inhofe’s profile… [emphasis original]

Inserted from <Think Progress>

As frustrated as we get with Democrats, they do not begin to approach the sheer lunacy of the GOP!

7 comments:

the walking man said...

What the results of profiling is directly related to the radicalization of the segments of the society being profiled.

Living within the most highly segregated area of the USofA has taught me this.

TomCat said...

Mark, I could not have said it better.

Jolly Roger said...

We seem to be leaning towards the same artwork, I see :)

Lisa G. said...

I'm fine with this as long as we include the Christian Taliban and all right-wing nutters in there too. Oh, and all Republican congressmen and women.

otis said...

Racism from the Republicans? What is this a conspiracy theory blog?

Really? Is this even news anymore? I mean Rush (The "voice" of the Rethuglican Party) mentioned how much he would love to own blacks in the form of a NFL team.

This isn't the first time that this has been proposed, either. I mean it has been veiled in the past, thinly (Like sheer lingerie from an adult movie thinly), but at least veiled.

Whatever. They will throw the National Security card until no one wants to see the Old Maid card anymore. It's not like OK is going to vote this douche out of office.

Oso said...

Imhofe defines terrorism by race.If it's an individual act of political violence against civilians done by Brown people-that's terrorism.

If it's state political violence against civilians done by the US/Israel/Europe with Planes tanks cruise missiles depleted uranium it's-what?

exporting democracy,maybe. Or,winning hearts and minds?Letting God sort 'em out?

Maybe he should say that not all assholes are Republican politicians but all Republican politicians are assholes ?

TomCat said...

JR, we often mirror each other without intending it. :-)

Lisa, police must now search all vehicles for tea bags. ;-)

They seem to like him in OK, Otis. I've driven across that state a couple times. I didn't like it.

Oso, I believe that the first use of 'terrorism' in the English language was by a British general referring to American tactics during the Revolutionary War.