If it's crap ... We'll tell you
The BBC Top Gear presenter claimed that the long delays at Heathrow border control were because immigration officials were no longer allowed to use their discretion to wave certain passengers through.
He said: “Nobody is waved through any more. The result is plain for all to see. There’s a two-hour wait.
“And the problem is: the only possible solution is to introduce a bit of racism.”
He added: “Nobody likes a racist. Nobody likes prejudice. It has no place at work, at play, or in government.
“But at Heathrow airport? Hmmm.”
Clarkson, who is now notorious for his provocative comments, used his Sun newspaper column to wade into the controversy over passengers facing queues of up to three hours at Heathrow.
He claimed that liberal attitudes prevented officials targeting only passengers deemed “high risk”.
“You can’t get that sort of thing past the bleeding-heart liberals. They believe that … a hook-handed imam with fire in his heart and hatred in his eyes is just as likely to whip up anti-western sentiment as Joanna Lumley.”
A spokesman for the Public and Commercial Services Union, which represents Border Force workers, said: "Clarkson is an idiot."
Clarkson, 52, has a long record of making controversial remarks. He provoked a wave of complaints last November when he jokingly suggested on BBC’s The One Show that striking public sector workers should be shot in front of their families.
Chucky G, I totally agree. More respect.
The things major media outlets say ARE total bullshit and irrelevant at the stage we've reached as a species, and I include the BBC.
Please check out The Keiser Report if you're interested in listening to a different point of view, assuming it's not blocked to you which I suspect it may be.
It's shocking, but hear them out.
Wow. That guy is definitely not getting on the plane without the full cavity search. He looks like a real life Disney villain.
is common sense really the same thing as racism?
checking every person is stupid, and a waste of time. Stereotypes aren't absolute, but they are accurate enough.
It is true that a terrorist can be any color, or background, but it is also true that the western world's main "enemy" is the Islamic extremist. Most Islamic Extremist look a certain way, and come from certain countries. The western world is screening for a certain kind of terrorist, is that racist? Personally I don't think so, or if it is I don't care. In the 80's we were focused on the Russians, in the 40's it was the Germans, and Japanese ect ect ect. It isn't about color it's about politics.
I hear dumb ass liberals all the time saying that illegal immigrants come in every color so targeting Hispanics is unfair, and racist. Technically they are correct you don't have to be Hispanic to be an illegal, but there are tens of millions more Hispanic illegals so when we are writing anti illegal legislation the Hispanic community is going to be affected, or targeted. Is that racist, or common sense?
Don't kid yourself- it's racist. It's singling out a person based on race or ethnicity. Boom, racism. But it's also efficient, effective, and makes way more sense than random screenings or purposefully not looking for Arabic, African, or southwestern Asian men, all in the name of tolerance . But in all honesty, catching a terrorist at the airport right before he blows up a plane is a shitty counter-terrorism strategy anyway. I mean do we really want the TSA as our biggest line of defense against this stuff?
Ha, that's a great point about the TSA. You can't really blame them for being crabby fuckwits, though; "TSA agent" has got to be one of the shittiest and least envied jobs in the western world.
I thought hate had to be a factor in order to consider something racist. If it is truly racism then it is a watered down version with a completely different connotation. I think you are describing prejudice. Which isn't all that great either, but lacks the malice of racism in my humble opinion.
I really don't think it's all that shitty of an anti terrorist plan. Obviously it shouldn't be our only line of defense, but in a free chaotic world it's just about all we can hope to do. Unless we are talking about the seriously well connected most psychos are most likely off the radar of law enforcement.
I thought hate had to be a factor in order to consider something racist.
I'm with you here, Kiz. Hate, and I might add, a supposition of superiority due to the racial difference. Why do people feel the need to call everything racist? To expect a certain thing from a certain person from a certain region or background would be considered prejudiced. I'm hosting a group of people from our Indian office. If I expect that some of them might be needing halal or vegetarian meal options, am I racist? I have an understanding that I may have to make certain considerations for my guests based on the region and possible upbringing. I am prejudging, you can supply your own negative or positive connotations.
I'm not sure that's a very apt comparison. I don't agree that looking at terrorism as a cultural thing should be acceptable. Assuming that an Indian person could be vegetarian is definitely not racist; if anything, it shows a degree of cultural awareness, because a huge percentage of the Indian population adheres to a certain diet. And I'll admit everybody who watches the evening news knows that some cultures are much more likely to produce terrorists than others. But it seems to me that the chances of a random Middle Eastern Muslim in any given airport actually being a terrorist are so low that the idea of singling those people out as "high risk" is racist. Maybe I'm being naive, but if we want to cut down on the line times in the airport, why don't we just cut down on some of the arbitrary bullshit that we all know is worthless and maybe stop randomly screening families with small children? Maybe we could stop being so afraid all the time and admit that we've gone a little overboard on the anti terrorism measures? Just a thought.
I have heard that. My dad goes to Thailand almost every year, and he's had nothing but good things to say about how the Bangkok airport is run.
Racism doesn't require hate but hate does naturally accompany it quite a bit. Racial prejudice is a form of racism. It's certainly a less dangerous form of racism (it's not hatred of a group based simply upon race), but it's still racism. I support profiling, but call it what it is. But the racial aspect aside, it's a bad plan because:
A) It tends to be much more reactionary. The TSA really only looks for things that have already happened- such as underwear or shoe bombs. They aren't able to catch the new stuff and seem to always be several steps behind the terrorists.
B) They still miss the stuff they are supposed to catch. The date is from 2005 or so, but since the TSA won't release its own testing rates, it's the best data we have. The failure rate is around 70%. Here's a short article about it from The Economist.
C) Travel related threats are only a part of the picture. Blowing up planes or trains is part of the terrorist playbook and those are the most visible acts so far, but what terrorist organizations are really after is the big stuff. Dirty bombs, biological or chemical weapons, or a nuclear weapon detonated within a major city. And those plans can bypass the TSA completely.
Now what causes the TSA to be so ineffectual is up for debate. After all, the Israeli travel security is pretty impressive, so why can't the TSA seem to get its shit together? I personally think it's the culture of bureaucracy, incompetence, and apathy. What's really going to stop these threats is intelligence work- the stuff the military, CIA, or FBI is doing. Local police probably aren't going to do much.
I don't buy into all these different "forms" of racism. To me Racism only means one thing like rape only means one thing. Rape means non consensual sex. Racism means Hate based on color. Some things are so bad you can't give them a hundred different quasi definitions, or it diminishes the impact, and meaning of the concept. In short if racism doesn't include hate then I don't care about it, probably don't consider it wrong, and feel lumping it together with something as toxic as real racism is foolish. Here I'll call profiling what it is rational, and effective.
Like the word sex offender. It really doesn't mean anything, and includes people who molest 3 yr olds, as well as 18 yr olds who have sex with 17 yr olds. To me calling Clarkson a racist is as valid as calling that 18 yr old a sex offender. Once racism becomes an umbrella phrase then everyone is a racist, and we lose sense of what real racism is, and what we need to be offended by.
Lab Rat brought up Superiority, and I think we agree to a point. If you think your genetic make up makes you superior to others that differ from you, then you are absolutely a racist, and that is a form of hatred, but personally if we are talking about cultural superiority, or national superiority, I don't think hate has to be involved. I think some social concepts are objectively superior to others. Ex Free Speech, Freedom of religion, Freedom to own property, ect ect ect. So when I say that the modern western world is superior to the 3rd world I don't think there is any hate, or racism involved. Even though I accept, and understand that there are many racial components that you have to recognize when considering how the western world was formed.
Sorry that got a little off topic.
Are you really comparing the task of protecting Israeli airports to protecting the airports in the United States? There are 3 international airports in Israel about 30 all together including military. The united States has about 6,000. Terrorism can't be stopped only punished.