SIGN UP

Michael Leary - Racial Profiling

Avatar Image
Deskdiary | 16:50 Sat 22nd Feb 2020 | News
149 Answers
Michael Leary has been accused of encouraging racism.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51596125

But he's right, isn't he?

When it comes to safety, what's wrong with profiling?

Answers

61 to 80 of 149rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
retrocop - // Just to muddy the waters - Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 'underwear bomber' is Nigerian.
With a name like that you will be telling us he is Jewish next. //

Is that an attempt at humour?

Why would I be telling you that a man with a clearly Arabic name is Jewish?

In actual fact of course, I would not be 'telling you' anything of the sort - I don't go for racial stereotyping in the way that you do.

naomi - // Oh no! We've hit a snag! One bomber might be a woman! Oh well, good enough reason to wave everyone through with no checks at all. :o/ //

That is clearly neither what I said, or what I meant, and you know that, which is why you are being mischievous, or, in your own idiom, silly.

No checking system is faultless, but the notion that you start overtly targeting devout Muslim men because of their appearance simply plays into the propaganda of Islamists.

How much would they delight in the evidence that what they believe is true - that Westerners hate and fear Islam, and should be resisted with Jihad - because here are Westerners persecuting innocent Muslim men based purely on the visible evidence of their faith.

The point I am making is that the system has to be discreet and carefully controlled, and not advertised in a honking great PR stunt by an airline chairman.
Question Author
AH - you’re quite keen on the ‘so’ rule. It’s your rule and you’ve employed it countless times.

Can I introduce a ‘whataboutery’ rule? A rule that states a poster will post a whataboutery scenario or question that that is entirely irrelevant to the question
Posed.

If we can do this, then, AH, you’d be guilty of it.

And not a single ‘So’ anywhere.
"Whataboutery" is already a "rule". That any time women post about anything... a man will show up and ask "what about men". Not appropriate here.
Question Author
^^^entirely appropriate here. See AH at 4.29pm yesterday.
I've just gone back to see it, dd. And it is nothing to do with "whataboutery".
If you are using a different definition... what is is please?
What Michael O’Leary appears to overlook is the fact that it’s the innocuous looking family that might have had something planted on them. He seems to me to be coming more from the angle that wants actually less stringent security for certain types of passenger. But I think that shows a misunderstanding of how security at airports works. I’m sure that the security staff know perfectly well that certain passengers are less likely intentionally to be carrying explosives etc. They aren’t idiots.
I’d be surprised if it’s political correctness that demands all passengers be subject to a minimum
level of checks that are after all still very strict.
Dd, assuming I am getting the right post... it says "Deskdiary - Would you, as a white man, consent to being profiled at an airport because a number of white men are rapists/murderers/thieves/sex abusers - delete as you wish?"

I am sure you would totally understand being stopped and checked for those reasons, as they are the most likely. Wouldn't you?
Question Author
Pixie - you’re wrong.

AH’s question is absolutely a whataboutery question.

Whataboutery questions are entirely pointless and are questions I absolutely refuse to answer due to their pointlessness.
You refuse to answer... due to their relevance. If you are unable to answer, fair enough.
Could you answer mine, dd? Would you be horrified in being checked out, because white, middle-aged males are everyone's highest risk?
And if so, why?
Deskdiary - // AH - you’re quite keen on the ‘so’ rule. It’s your rule and you’ve employed it countless times.

Can I introduce a ‘whataboutery’ rule? A rule that states a poster will post a whataboutery scenario or question that that is entirely irrelevant to the question
Posed.

If we can do this, then, AH, you’d be guilty of it.

And not a single ‘So’ anywhere. //

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about!

The 'So' Rule is a light-hearted attempt to point out where posters start a post with the word 'So', as in "So what you're saying is …" and then they say something the poster has not actually said at all, and then fall out with the poster over something they did not say.

It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the nonsense you are offering, so I suggest you stick to the thread - or come back when you have figured out what you actually mean.
Andy, DD is using an internet "rule" to mean something different. Ignore... x
Question Author
Ok - even though it’s an entirely irrelevant question, a complete whataboutery question, I’ll try to answer it as objectively as I can.

IF the safety in the air perception we currently have was due to white middle aged males, I would be happy for white middle aged males to be profiled.

But it’s not white middle aged males, is it. Which makes your question totally pointless.
It is fair to profile whoever is statistically most likely to commit a crime.
Deskdiary - // IF the safety in the air perception we currently have was due to white middle aged males, I would be happy for white middle aged males to be profiled.

But it’s not white middle aged males, is it. Which makes your question totally pointless. //

What pixie is offering you is an opportunity to imagine that you, on the basis of race, skin colour and general appearance, were subject to this level of analysis, how would you feel about it?

It's called putting yourself in the other person's position to see how it would feel to you - sorry if that's too complex a concept for you.
What if white middle aged men were hi-jacking most of the planes?
What if white middle aged men were being profiled?
Sure sounds like whataboutery to me.
Personally, If it did annoy me, I'd blame the white middle-aged men who were hi-jacking planes, not the security staff/rules.
But, anyway, despite Pixie believing everything is the fault of white middle aged men (she did a course) it isn't and neither is this.
It really is moot.
When stating truths it's wiser to chose words carefully and be diplomatic.
Naturally you assign your resources to maximise effectiveness, but stating your policy allows the folk you're trying to thwart to better avoid your checks.
Spice, look at the statistics and stop obsessing with whichever course you imagine i did...
I suspect I already know far more about the real stats than you do.
But humour me. Give me a few of the stats that have brainwashed you into thinking middle aged white men are the most dangerous group in the world.

61 to 80 of 149rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Michael Leary - Racial Profiling

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.