Is this racial profiling?

[etech]

American Muslim Police and Rescuers Honored
By Jamshed Bokhari

WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 - Muslim American New York City police officers and a fire department officer from Virginia were honored in Washington Saturday for doing their part in rescue efforts at Ground Zero in New York following the September 11 attacks.

At a luncheon ceremony at the Hotel Washington across the street from the White House, New York City police officers Adil Almontaser, Rafet Awad, Faisal Khan and Ahmad Nasser received recognition and awards of excellence for what Ziad J. Asali, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), said was their ?heroism and common decency? in rescue efforts in the rubble of the attacks.

Fairfax County, Virginia, Fire Department member Ronald J. Kuley also received honors, but was unable to attend the ceremony.

Ralph Boyd, assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice?s Civil Rights Division, said it was proper to ?honor these American heroes,? reminding audience members that ?Muslims and Arab-Americans were also killed in the attacks,? and that ?Muslims and Arab-Americans and Pakistanis were involved in rescue efforts.?

Asali told the award winners, ?You can be proud of your own singular contribution.?

But while praising the officers, Asali pointed to hurdles that all Muslims had to overcome, including acts of racial profiling, mentioning the recent incident where a federal law enforcement official, a Secret Service agent, was pulled from an American Airlines flight for what the agent says was for no other reason than that he is Muslim and Arab.

Asali further added that the Secret Service agent?s case was important because, ?more than one Arab-American, Muslim American?protect the President.?

And Awad, speaking of the Muslim New York City police officers honored Saturday, said there were many more Muslims on the City?s force than just the four present at the ceremonies.
---------


It seems like a double standard to me. The ADC is only honoring the four Arab-American officers based solely on their ethnicity. The are condemning American Airlines for allegedly discriminating against the Secret Service agent based on his ethnicity.
Shouldn't it be one way or the other?

 

[Aelus]

They gave awards because 1) those police officers did their job, and 2) because they kept doing their job, despite the racism which was probably making their task much more difficult.

it's more of a publicity thingie to combat prejudice than truly awards for efforts imho.

just my 2c,

Aelus

 

[jjones]

gee, did they have a luncheon ceremony for Irish American police and firefighters too?

 

[etech]

Aelus

They were honoring these four out of the thousands based solely on their ethnicity. Whether it is to discriminate against or to honor, isn't that racial profiling?

edit
2) because they kept doing their job, despite the racism which was probably making their task much more difficult.

Do you have any proof to your statement that the Arab-American firefighters and policeman were discriminated against because of their race or is that just a blanket liberal assumption that they must have been discriminated against because of their race?

 

[Aelus]

I don't know where you were in september last year, but there were tons of reports about discrimination and violence. It would imho even be silly to assume they did not face discrimination, but that's not the point, the point is imho: those awards are given to polish up the image of arabian americans in the eyes of joe sixpack.

joe thinks those arabs are up to no good, and suddenly he hears about them on the tv, that there were actually arab police officers helping.

you're free to think they're a bunch of racist arabs who are up to no good, but i'm free to think they give those awards to polish up an image which was tainted by prejudice.

Aelus

 

[etech]

"you're free to think they're a bunch of racist arabs who are up to no good, "

And you are free to be an idiot and try to put words in my mouth that I did not say or imply.

"It would imho even be silly to assume they did not face discrimination,"

If you are a liberal that automatically assumes facts that are not proven it is of course logical to make assumptions of that sort.


I am only pointing out the double standard of a group that is discriminting for their group and also condeming people that are using the same process. To me it should be one way or another, you either discriminate or you don't. For the record, I'm on the 'don't' side.

 

[Aelus]

have you forgotten all those incidents? at least one person got murdered iirc, and one female reporter who decided to check out what live with a veil was, got harrassed several times on one day. So for a cop; who's probably on the street 8+ hours every day, i think it's safe to assume he encountered prejudice. It's an assumption, but imho, it's a pretty safe one.

anyway, as i said, it's a promotion campaign, to look for anything beyond that, is imho, fantasizing.

as i said, feel free to think otherwise, and whine some more about 'liberal" groups who defend racism.

oh, and if you're wondering on why they didn't include some other races, maybe you should send them a mail, saying they're not PC, and they're showing signs of racism

Aelus

 

[jjones]

<< those awards are given to polish up the image of arabian americans in the eyes of joe sixpack. >>


sorry, but joe sixpack was probably watching reruns of the Simpson's and didn't notice. all this was is another photo-op show by feelgood politicos who want to pat themselves on the back while showing their "sensitivity" to the US Muslim and Arab community.

there's daily prejudice against all ethnic groups. why don't they have these luncheons for every ethnic group of police and firefighters?

edit: carnt spel

 

[etech]

Aelus, Of course it is a promotion campaign, but it is based on race.

The question once again, Is it proper to discrimnate on race at all? How did they know these four officers were Arab-American unless they used "racial profiling" ?

 

[pulse8]

I don't think it's racial profiling, but it may not be right. I don't know the complete story from that article, though.

 

[PlatinumGold]

If you are a liberal that automatically assumes facts that are not proven it is of course logical to make assumptions of that sort.

since when has "assumption of facts not proven" been the exclusive territory of LIBERALS??

btw, my 2001 post.

NEF

 

[911paramedic]

The heros were of all races, colors, religions, and sexes that day. To sinlge out a specific few because of race is wrong. That is just my opinion, and I have lots more...

 

[Tominator]

This is typical activity of such groups.

They preach equality and of a 'color-blind society,' but their actions always lead in the opposite direction.

Today's definition of 'racial profiling' is the most stupid thing I've ever heard of! Regardless of the law, Cops use it daily to make decisions and just back up their actions with the correct 'numbers.'

As is with most Liberal actions, it is the apperance of doing something and not the result that counts.

...Sounds like a Muslim KKK to me.:disgust:

 

[StormRider]

I don't consider this racial profiling. In fact it serves a useful purpose. It reminds us that there are good Muslims around. If the only Muslims we see or hear about are the ones who celebrate in the streets after the Sept 11 tragedy, or the ones who spread hateful messages in their Mosques or who appear to sympathsize with al-Queda, then it's easy to think that all Muslims might be bad.

I'm struggling with this right now. At this point, I have a distrust of Muslims. Before Sept 11, I just grouped them with any other religion but now I see their extremist groups all over the world and I'm thinking "What the heck is going on?". I've never had any Muslim friends (that I know of) so most images I see of them are negative.

So, this type of event is good in that it reminds me that there are some Muslims who are just like the rest of us.

 

[jbod]

The problem with some people here in the US and abroad (mainly) is that whenever they see something on TV about racial discrimination, they think that the whole country is committing crimes against a certain race.

Here's a newsflash for you: if the US is such an illegitimate, backwards, don't know where Europe is located country, then why were there so few hate crime incidents after the September 11 attack? We could have gotten real medieval on some asses! But we didn't because we are a peace loving people. You see we moved away from the mindset of the past, the one that lynches people for no reason other than being black. We moved away from that.

Quit living in your bubble of an existence and do some research other than what you hear and see on TV news, especially the BBC. They are so full of themselves. They always condescend America from what I've seen. It's rather pathetic.

 

[Aelus]

<< Is it proper to discrimnate on race at all? How did they know these four officers were Arab- American unless they used "racial profiling" ? >>



ofcourse it's not, but when a group that fights against prejudice on arabs, wants to make a make a good press thingie to fight that prejudice, it seems more logical to use arab police officers than random officers. But that's just me...



<< As is with most Liberal actions, it is the apperance of doing something and not the result that counts. >>



i bet their hoped result was to lower prejudice, and it seems amongst the right wing, they'll only push it higher

Aelus

 

[Tominator]

<< and it seems amongst the right wing, they'll only push it higher >>



This thread was started with an instance the lends proof to my assumption. How about your proof?

Another tactic of Liberals is to demogogue groups by labeling them 'right-wing' without a shred of evidence.

 

[etech]

Aelus,

"ofcourse it's not, but when a group that fights against prejudice on arabs, wants to make a make a good press thingie to fight that prejudice, it seems more logical to use arab police officers than random officers. But that's just me..."

So are you saying that under certain circumstances and with good intentions that racial profiling is acceptable?

 

[Aelus]

<< This thread was started with an instance the lends proof to my assumption. How about your proof? >>



i'd like to know how you know their thing didn't reduce prejudice, you're assuming they haven't changed some people's view on arab americans.

I'm just saying they're trying to reduce prejudice, by showing there are arab americans who work to clean up the mess in NY. I didn't say they will be succesful, i don't know, maybe they will, maybe they won't.



<< Another tactic of Liberals is to demogogue groups by labeling them 'right-wing' without a shred of evidence. >>



kind of like you immediately assuming that group is liberal, where's your proof?

Aelus

 

[Aelus]

<< Aelus,

"ofcourse it's not, but when a group that fights against prejudice on arabs, wants to make a make a good press thingie to fight that prejudice, it seems more logical to use arab police officers than random officers. But that's just me..."

So are you saying that under certain circumstances and with good intentions that racial profiling is acceptable? >>



if it results with everyone happy, and a goal reached (or attempted), i don't see a problem.

it's the results that count, not how it appears.

Aelus

 

[Aelus]

To elaborate a bit, to make sure you won't call me a racist, or a non politically correct person, i'll add some things:

There's a major difference between highlighting certain actions to reduce prejudice, even if they only highlight the the actions of the group of people they're targetting,
and on the other hand, prohibiting someone to do something just because of his race, this doesn't serve any purpose but to confirm the prejudices of the person who's discriminating, and to insult whomever is victim.

heck, if you can't see the difference between those things, maybe you're the one with your head deeply burried in the sand of politically correctness.

Aelus

 

[etech]

"if it results with everyone happy, and a goal reached (or attempted), i don't see a problem.

it's the results that count, not how it appears."

Would it also then fit under your contention that if a certain group that is predominately made up of a certain race is threatening to commit terrorist acts against the U.S. that security agents should look at people of that group more closely.

The results justify the means.

 

[Aelus]

<< "if it results with everyone happy, and a goal reached (or attempted), i don't see a problem.

it's the results that count, not how it appears."

Would it also then fit under your contention that if a certain group that is predominately made up of a certain race is threatening to commit terrorist acts against the U.S. that security agents should look at people of that group more closely.

The results justify the means. >>



not exactly, i said, if it results with everybody happy, this example falls into category #2, where it results in pissed off victims and confirmed prejudice, if they'd coincidently find a criminal.

Aelus

 

[etech]

Wouldn't everyone be happier if the terrorists are caught before committing another act?

Can that be achieved by refusing to acknowledge that the members of the group that are presenting a credible threat are predomately members of a certain race?

 

[Aelus]

<< Wouldn't everyone be happier if the terrorists are caught before committing another act?

Can that be achieved by refusing to acknowledge that the members of the group that are presenting a credible threat are predomately members of a certain race? >>



well, basically, the people behind those actions are the ones that matter, they find people they can influence, and incite to do such actions. If they'd notice they get less success with a certain group, they'll just use another, kind of like that female who blew herself up at jerusalem, it's hard to get males in, so just use females. Or people like john walker.

If you want to trust your government to decide what groups are dangerous in society, and to allow your government to use violent actions, you shouldn't be surprised if this trust is abused, and one 'dangerous' group after another gets eliminated, and suddently, only the friends of the leaders remain.

Same thing as the nazi regime, first they decided political enemies should be put in camps, then it were 'people who didn't fit in society', then it became jews. One group after another.

Would you like your government to start using that same policy?

Aelus