Ann Coulter: Torture & Patriot Act are "Great"

[rambone]

Oh Gosh Rambone... Profiling doesnt have anything to do with search and seizure.

Maybe I am misunderstanding then. Ann Coulter said that brown people should be served cocktails while they receive an "extra check," which I took to mean checking their pockets, bags, etc.

If not for a search, what then? What do you imagine happening when a person is pulled aside due to racially profiling?

Possession doesnt not necessarily equate to ownership.

Well that's what I'm talking about.

As for her being progressive... I dont see how that works.

For me, a progressive is someone who wants to keep chip-chip-chipping at our liberty. There are progressive liberals and progressive conservatives. Progressively, in 1°F increments, the frogs are being brought to a boil. Apparently it is too "Politically Correct" to make government discover probable cause before invading someone's privacy. Chip, chip, chip away so that Ann can feel safe.

 

[rambone]

Damn it. She actually said that the Patriot Act was "FANTASTIC." Another thread title fudged. Ugh.

 

[pinshooter45]

I don't like a lot of things in the Patriot Act but we should stop kidding ourselves about airport security. And stop checking little old ladies in wheel chairs. Profileing is nothing more having a list of criteria based on experience, little old ladies and red headed Irishmen did not fly aircraft in to our buildings. While I've never flown in and out of Israel I know a few people that have, one of them was my Aunt. And she said you don't even look at the Israeli guards wrong or they will pull you out of line and interogate you. And I can't remeber the last time an Israeli arline had any trouble.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

Oh Gosh Rambone... Profiling doesnt have anything to do with search and seizure. You pay more attention to people that have arab names and people that a) have an arabic passport b) have just come from an arabic country c) seem suspicious. As far as the constitutionality of it... it doesnt come into conflict with the BOR or Constitution is they dont line up all the people with arabic names and say "spread your cheeks and cough"... or maybe you werent in government class that day.

It very much does... the argument has always been that the searches are "reasonable"....

Some believe racial characteristics yield reasonable cause for suspicion, and others do not....

The ninth circuit court of review ruled in United States. v. Aukai "airport screening searches, like the one at issue here, are constitutionally reasonable administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme in furtherance of an administrative purpose, namely, to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft, and thereby to prevent hijackings." and another part read “where the risk to public safety is substantial and real, blanket suspicionless searches calibrated to the risk may rank as ‘reasonable’-for example, searches now routine at airports and at entrances to courts and other official buildings.” . To my knowledge, the Supreme Court has not weighed in on this fourth amendment exception.

How I see it, we cannot always expect profiling to weed out the terrorists... in some instance too much emphasis on characteristics like race could let a few slip through the cracks:

 

[rambone]

Damn it. She actually said that the Patriot Act was "FANTASTIC." Another thread title fudged. Ugh.

Who in their right mind thinks the Patriot Act is fantastic? How many boots do you have to lick before tyranny starts tasting so good? I just don't get it.

If the "Right" got 100% of its policies put in place, the tyranny would be just as real as if the "Left" got everything they wanted.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

What part of "profile for terrorists, not race" do you not understand? How did profiling get stuck in your heads as being "racial"? The idiotic idea that all profiling is racist is a tool of certain groups whose main identity is either tied in with race or religion, and it serves their purposes well to control the definition of "profiling" so as to deflect scrutiny from themselves. Apparently it's working with some of you.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

What part of "profile for terrorists, not race" do you not understand? How did profiling get stuck in your heads as being "racial"? The idiotic idea that all profiling is racist is a tool of certain groups whose main identity is either tied in with race or religion, and it serves their purposes well to control the definition of "profiling" so as to deflect scrutiny from themselves. Apparently it's working with some of you.

I never stated that all profiling is racial profiling... but racial profiling does exist in our society, contrary to the fact that terrorists (or criminals) can come from any background...

It happens, and disagreeing with the practice does not equate to deflecting reasonable scrutiny, or disagreement with reasonable means of profiling.

 

[Denny347]

Because . . .

The Patriot Act is "great" and we need more torture for one. Words of an idiot.

 

[Phil502]

It very much does... the argument has always been that the searches are "reasonable"....

Some believe racial characteristics yield reasonable cause for suspicion, and others do not....

The ninth circuit court of review ruled in United States. v. Aukai "airport screening searches, like the one at issue here, are constitutionally reasonable administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme in furtherance of an administrative purpose, namely, to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft, and thereby to prevent hijackings." and another part read “where the risk to public safety is substantial and real, blanket suspicionless searches calibrated to the risk may rank as ‘reasonable’-for example, searches now routine at airports and at entrances to courts and other official buildings.” . To my knowledge, the Supreme Court has not weighed in on this fourth amendment exception.

How I see it, we cannot always expect profiling to weed out the terrorists... in some instance too much emphasis on characteristics like race could let a few slip through the cracks:

5 guys is a small percentage of terrorists though, there are exceptions.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

5 guys is a small percentage of terrorists though, there are exceptions.

Terrorists are a small percentage of humanity as a whole - there are exceptions.

 

[rambone]

If Mass Shooters are considered terrorists, there are a LOT more than 5 of them that were white.

 

[Big Naughty]

Let's send Ann down to Gitmo for a few months and see if her attitude is the same. It's real easy to talk tough in her position.

 

[rambone]

Let's send Ann down to Gitmo for a few months and see if her attitude is the same. It's real easy to talk tough in her position.

Impossible. She would have to be accused of knowing something important first.

 

[Phil502]

Terrorists are a small percentage of humanity as a whole - there are exceptions.

Too bad they killed thousands of people though.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Let's send Ann down to Gitmo for a few months and see if her attitude is the same. It's real easy to talk tough in her position.

I expect if Ann Coulter or you or I were sent to Gitmo for a few months under the conditions pertaining to the unlawful combatants incarcerated there, we'd all do just fine (well, Ann and I would, anyway.)

 

[DragonGunner]

I think Rambone an Ann would make the perfect couple.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I think Rambone an Ann would make the perfect couple.

She'd chew him up & spit him out.

 

[rambone]

I eat neocons for breakfast.

 

[Dirtebiker]

How can racial profiling possibly fit with the 4th Amendment? Does Ann Coulter not understand the Bill of Rights or does she just not care? Constitutionally, it doesn't freaking matter if she hones her racial profiling down to a science. The fact remains that the government MUST have probable cause to search people. Being brown isn't evidence of anything.

All mass shooters were gun owners. Maybe all gun owners should be searched anytime because of an arbitrary trait shared with mass shooters. That should fit with the ends-justifies-the-means Progressive logic coming out of her mouth.

What probable cause do they have to check grandpas colostomy bag? Or to make me take off my shoes, belt, coat, go through an x-ray, and kiss their ass, just to get on a plane????

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

Too bad they killed thousands of people though.

Yes, and mass killings are horrible atrocities... but that does not validate any argument in favor of racial profiling.

What probable cause do they have to check grandpas colostomy bag? Or to make me take off my shoes, belt, coat, go through an x-ray, and kiss their ass, just to get on a plane????

They don't have probable cause, they have opinions exempting the practice from fourth amendment scrutiny... and that is where the problem lies. The supreme court could take up the question at any time, and decide it is not an exemption.

They do not claim to follow the rules, they claim the rules do not apply.