Thread: Advocates push Congress to ban profiling

Jan 28, 10:27 AM EST

Advocates push Congress to ban profiling

By FREDERIC J. FROMMER

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The repercussions of an airline's decision to remove a group of imams from a commercial flight in Minneapolis could be heard in Congress this year, with civil rights groups pushing Democratic lawmakers to ban racial profiling.

The incident happened in November, made national news and reinvigorated an old proposal that got little attention from the GOP.

Now, a champion of the legislation, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on the issue. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who sponsored legislation to ban racial profiling in the last Congress, now chairs the Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution.

No bill has been introduced so far, but Feingold made it clear the issue will be a priority for him.

"Many law-abiding African Americans, Arab Americans, Latino Americans and others live with the fear of being racially profiled as they go about their everyday lives," Feingold said. Although the vast majority of law enforcement officers don't engage in the practice, he added, some do and it must be addressed.

"I look forward to working with Chairman Conyers in the House as well as others to ensure that no one is judged by how they look or where they worship," he said.

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington office, said he was optimistic a bill could get through Congress.

"I'm convinced that once the body of evidence of racial profiling occurring in our nation is presented before the U.S. Congress and the American people, that indeed they'll be compelled to do something about it," he said.

Shelton said he's spoken about the issue with Conyers and is hopeful for action on legislation soon - perhaps as early as next month. Conyers declined to comment for this story.

Feingold's last bill would have banned federal, state and local law enforcement officials from "relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion" during investigations.

An exemption would have been made for specific information that "links a person of a particular race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion to an identified incident or scheme."

Some security-oriented groups are gearing up to fight a new version of the bill.

"It would have the effect of estranging police officers from the community that they serve," said Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police. "It would make them more hesitant to stop people who might well be in violation of the law for fear that they're going to get written up because of some racial protocol."

Peter Gadiel, of Kent, Conn., president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America, mocked the legislation.

"The 9/11 atrocity was committed by 19 young single men from Arab nations. If you want to hand this country over to terrorists, why don't you say it right out front?" said Gadiel, whose son, James, died in the attacks on the World Trade Center. "We don't have to worry about 80-year-old ladies with bleach-blonde hair and southern accents."

Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 - twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air - even though he has done nothing wrong.

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

Eric Blum, a Customs and Border Protection spokesman, said that while he couldn't comment on specific cases, the agency does not use racial profiling.

"However, we will scrutinize cargo and individuals coming from high-risk countries - no matter what your nationality," he said, adding that people can also be detained if their name matches one on a watch list.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.


http://link.toolbot.com/ap.org/57408

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington office, said he was optimistic a bill could get through Congress.

"I'm convinced that once the body of evidence of racial profiling occurring in our nation is presented before the U.S. Congress and the American people, that indeed they'll be compelled to do something about it," he said.

Will it REALLY be "presented before the American people"? Or is that just a nice way to make us feel included in the decision process?
If it were up to me, racial profiling would be considered a necessity depending on the circumstances. 'Fact-finding' is not a racial or discrimatory issue.

Originally Posted by UB

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

You are sure right about that one! Thanks to people like you, the US now has 2,973 fewer citizens!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks

With the Imams it could hardly be called racial profiling. It was behavorial profiling from all accounts. These guys wanted to be kicked off the plane. Their behavior was deliberately provocative. I'm afraid that p c will win out on this issue. It seems odd that everyone ridicules political correctnes yet it is snowballing and generally completely out of control.

This whole affair reeks of Keith Ellison and his pro-Islamic politics. Just google away...

http://www.rightnation.us/forums/index. ... pic=116121

Ellison named to Judiciary Committee

Associated Press Last update: January 10, 2007 – 4:26 PM
Renee Jones Schneider , STAR TRIBUNE

<Excerpt>

WASHINGTON — Rep. Keith Ellison has been named to the House Judiciary Committee, a panel that has oversight over issues such as civil liberties, immigration and courts.

In a prepared statement Wednesday, Ellison, D-Minn., called the selection an honor and privilege.

"I look forward to pursuing a progressive agenda in the committee, including the restoration of American citizen's civil liberties that have come under increasing attack over the past six years," said Ellison, the first Muslim member of Congress.

Ellison, a freshman lawmaker, said this week he'd like to see a ban on racial profiling, an issue that could come up in the Judiciary Committee.

<End of excerpt>

But a ban on racial profiling really comes as a result of Ellison pushing for the rights of terrorism rehearsals masquerading as civil rights! Ellison does not really want a ban on racial profiling. He wants potential terrorists to have an easy time entering our country by crying "racism" everytime they are stopped!

READ:

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/ ... 008702.php

December 14, 2006

Flying Imams A Campaign Stunt

The obvious nature of the provocation made by six Muslim clerics on a US Air flight last month has people wondering what purpose it served for them. Did the imams intend to make a name for themselves in the Muslim victimhood campaign? Did they want to test the security procedures of the airline to determine their capabilities? Kathryn Kersten has a different answer in today's Star Tribune column -- and it's one that encompasses many of the guesses:

On Dec. 1, a curious report on the grounded-imams incident at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport appeared on the website of the Iranian Quran News Agency. The report quoted extensively from Madhi Bray, executive director of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. The foundation is the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group," according to the Chicago Tribune. Bray's initial statement about the incident had an all-American, see-you-in-court ring. He demanded "large financial compensation for the imams," adding, "We want US Airways and any other airline displaying this type of behavior against Muslims to be hit where it hurts, the pocketbook." ...

But the report on the Iranian website, which has appeared on a variety of Muslim websites worldwide, had a larger primary focus. After the imams incident, it quoted Bray as saying Muslims want "new, broad-sweeping legislation that will extract even larger financial and civil penalties for any airline that participates in racial and religious profiling."

The report is optimistic that Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will lend his support to new legislation. Ellison, it says, has expressed his opposition to "such racial and religious profiling." Ellison, through a spokesman, declined to comment.

One piece of legislation in the works is the End Racial Profiling Act. It is an important priority of Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, whose district includes one of the largest Muslim populations in the country. Conyers introduced the bill in 2004 and 2005, but it went nowhere. Now the alignment of forces may be changing. Conyers will probably be chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when the new Democratic-controlled Congress convenes next month.

Have you heard of the End Racial Profiling Act? I had not until now, and that seems to have been the problem The bill has been introduced in both the House and the Senate (by Russ Feingold) and goes back to before the 9/11 attacks. ERPA has gone nowhere since then, languishing on the fringes of politics. In order to get it into the center of debate, its backers needed a high-profile incident.

Enter the Flying Imams. It seemed suspicious to many that this incident took place at the end of a Muslim political action conference here in Minneapolis. The incident seemed too pat, too much of a set-up to just be a coincidence. No one has a transcript of the conference, but one might speculate that such a conference might have ERPA on its agenda. Given CAIR's support of ERPA and their involvement in this case, it seems more than just speculation that the deliberate provocation had this in mind.

It's no surprise that the Muslim Brotherhood and its American political arm wants an end to profiling in airport security. They do not want Muslims singled out for scrutiny. Given the Brotherhood's consideration of religious minorities in nations where they have political clout -- Egypt, Syria, and the like -- that stance is unlikely to spring from a sense of liberal altruism. The Brotherhood has a long history of supporting terrorism as a political tactic, and they would like nothing better than to leave American airliners vulnerable to exploitation.

First of all most people aren't profiled by the police. I had some African American classmates complain and I asked them if they would go for coffee with me and we would listen to my police radio and you will get a better understanding about why some people get pulled over. When they heard about certain crimes, the description of the person who committed it and the vehicle they drove, they realized that they weren't being profiled after all. I think the politicians should listen to that as well. As for the Hispanics they usually get pulled over less often than white people as per one of my police textbooks. If it is a city where they are close to being the majority then what do they expect?

They are just saying that you should not be arrested becuase you are illegal or have competed a crime. When I travel to Az, I get stopped by border patrol everytime, and I am red hair with pale skin. I have to show ID so I cannot believe that border patrol is profiling when they set up road blocks. Enough of this mess with the politicans. They are protecting illegals and ruining the country.

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

Well you should be blaming your own people for that, and I haven't seen this happen yet. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but like many of us, I travel a lot for my job and I've seen people of every race being searched EXCEPT anyone who looks of muslim descent.
And where is the proof they were racially profiling this group? Did they honestly think the airline is going to stop the flight so they can finish their dusk prayer?
Call me crazy, but groups like this act just like spoiled rotten kids. "Gimmie this, gimmie that...whaaa whaaa...." Cry me a river.

Profiling is just an excuse for them to get away with things. When I was originally coming here from Canada, I was accused of overstaying which I didn't. I was here for just under 2 months and was able to prove it. I was not allowed to reenter and had to make various phone calls to correct the problem and be allowed to come here. My daughter was with me at the time and her dad had his residency and was allowed to cross the border. No one cared that the family was being separated. I am a white female that is one quarter Native Indian with blonde hair and brown eyes.

Originally Posted by UB

Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 - twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air - even though he has done nothing wrong.

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

It appears Steve Mustapha Elturk has a reason for welcoming a ban on racial profiling. I've been waiting for Schlussel to post on it.......I knew she would. So here it is:

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archi...ingold_an.html

January 29, 2007
The Feingold Anti-Profiling Bill Poster Boy: Who is Steve Mustapha Elturk?

By Debbie Schlussel

Virtually every mainstream media news outlet is covering Senator Russ Feingold's announcement that he will re-introduce a absurd bill prohibiting "racial profiling by law enforcement."

But this isn't "driving while Black," and it's not about "race" at all. It's about religion, ie., the Muslim religion.

Cited in every story is one Steve Mustapha Elturk, who is identified as "an imam in Troy, Michigan":
mustaphaelturk.jpgrussfeingold.jpg
"Steve" Mustapha Elturk & Senator Russ Feingold:
Extremist Muslims & Idiot Senators Should be Profiled More, NOT Less

Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 - twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air - even though he has done nothing wrong.

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

What Mustapha Elturk (Steve is just his adopted American nickname to make us think this extremist is "just like us") really means is:

This country is not as gullible as I came to know. (But close enough.)

Elturk is exactly the kind of guy we should be profiling. He openly supports Hezbollah and HAMAS. He is the founder of a new extremist mosque in Warren, Michigan. The mosque was originally rejected by the Warren City Council because a lot of smart people live in Warren, and they worried that his mosque would embrace terrorist groups. Unfortunately, Islamist lawyers and the U.S. Department of Justice--which doesn't believe in the democratic process in Warren, when it doesn't get the right PC results--breathed down the neck of Warrenites, promising a federal lawsuit. And the Warren City council caved.

Elturk founded the nebulously named Islamic Organization of North America to get the new mosque approved without scrutiny. But federal agents tell me that it's just a new name for the same old Islamic extremist groups.

Last year, I attended a "Meet Your New Neighbors" community event in Warren held to answer questions about Elturk's new mosque. I asked him if he would condemn HAMAS. No. I asked if he would condemn Hezbollah. Nope. I asked if he would condemn Hezbollah's murder of 300 U.S. Marines and civilians in Beirut. No way. He and CAIR-Michigan chief, Dawud Walid (more about him later, today), said homicide bombings are not terrorism, that they are justified against those who are "at war with us."

Elturk also identifies himself as a member of "Tanzeem e-Islami," (the Islamic Organization) and in the name of that group delivers lectures with the title, "Why are Muslims Humiliated and what is the Way Out." Not exactly comforting, given the topic, and the fact that another Tanzeem, a faction of Fatah terrorists, murdered Jews and other innocent civilians at random on behalf of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Most of them are now part of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.

Elturk objects to profiling, when profiling was designed for exactly this type of man--the type of man who believes violence against innocents--no matter where in the world (even in America)--is justified.

That the extremist, bearded, thobe-wearing Elturk was only detained four times at the border and airports is disappointing. That means he wasn't on many other occasions. That Elturk is Feingold's new national poster boy against profiling tells us exactly why he's among the most clueless Senators, Harvard degree notwithstanding.

It also tells us that Russ Feingold needs to be profiled, too. Liberal Dhimmiwit U.S. Senators who bend over backward--and forward--for our enemies are extremely dangerous. And a threat to this country's national security.