On Hannity last night, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she's "all for" profiling Muslims if it saves "innocent American lives."
Speaking about the Fort Hood shooting, she said there were "massive warning flags that were missed all over the place" because of a "fear of being politically incorrect."
"Profiling" the alleged shooter, she said, would have meant investigating the "simple things, like looking at his business card that had the secret code word for who it actually was" he was working for.
Watch:
Late update: This wasn't a one-off remark. Palin also lauded the idea of racial or religious profiling in an interview with the Weekly Standard.
"I say, profile away," she said.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

jolly ranchero
November 18, 2009 10:00 AM
like looking at his business card that had the secret code word for who it actually was" he was working for.
What is she talking about?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 10:10 AM in reply to jolly ranchero
Apparently he had business cards made up that has his name, omitted his rank, and had "SoA", which people are saying meant "Servant (Son) of Allah".
Of course, Palin has said many times that God is who guides her, so according to her logic she should be profiled too.
But she doesn't do logic, only intolerance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Odel Roo
November 18, 2009 12:57 PM in reply to Dorn76
Thats SOLDIER OF ALLAH
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 1:33 PM in reply to Odel Roo
Your point?
Because mine stands. If we're gonna profile Muslims, why not Christian Fundies too?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darter Dave
November 18, 2009 2:07 PM in reply to Odel Roo
Silly me, I thought it was School of the Americas.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darter Dave
November 18, 2009 3:18 PM in reply to Darter Dave
... or, wait, was that Sons of Anarchy? Of course, we can't rule out "service oriented architecture."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fsudirectory
November 18, 2009 2:25 PM in reply to Dorn76
I think her listening to a self-professed "witch hunter" as her religious leader should lead her to being profiled.
That scares me as much as OBL distorting Islam
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Zemer
November 18, 2009 10:01 AM
Yet another reason to despise Palin. No end to her ignorance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Snig
November 18, 2009 10:12 AM
She's right. How can we prevent another Oklahoma City Bombing if we don't screen for right-wing crazies who believe wacky conspiracy theories, are loudly anti-federal government and who belong to secessionist organizations.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
de TOQUEville
November 18, 2009 10:17 AM in reply to Snig
AMEN!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hussein Stemper
November 18, 2009 12:20 PM in reply to Snig
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
November 18, 2009 1:45 PM in reply to Hussein Stemper
+1 more.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
November 18, 2009 3:03 PM in reply to Snig
+1 more.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:32 AM in reply to Snig
Did anyone ask the Republicans who are criticizing Holder why they weren't for trying Tiommy McVeigh in a military tribunal? He was a terrorists, which by their . . . logic . . . means he was also military.
Or did someone simply show them the difference spellings and lengths of these two different words? --
Justice.
Vengeance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Why oh why
November 18, 2009 10:17 AM
Why is this brainless bimbo even talking about criminal matters?
I'm talking about Hannity, of course.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Middle Road
November 18, 2009 10:19 AM
Massive warning flags? Really?
So Ft Hood was Obama's fault, but 9/11 was Bush's triumph? Does anyone see any logic in their reflexive accusations?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ann Arbor
November 18, 2009 10:32 AM in reply to Middle Road
Logic and the wingers have been divorced for some time now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dr Cheese in WI
November 18, 2009 11:02 AM in reply to Middle Road
Ah, the flags were missed last fall, I do believe. Hence, the ball was dropped on Bush's watch, not Obama's. But facts don't really matter in the reality-challenged world of the right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
November 18, 2009 11:34 AM in reply to Middle Road
The only logic necessary is IOKIYAR
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:42 AM in reply to Middle Road
No: 9/11 was Clinton's fault because Bushit was in office at the time.
Presumably had Clinton been in office on that day, it would have been prevented, and it was Clinton's fault for not being in office.
That's how wingnut logic actually works; it's just that they have an impossible time communicating the whole of it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prof Wagstaff
November 18, 2009 10:25 AM
"Bailin'" Sarah Palin said she's "all for" profiling Muslims if it saves "innocent American lives."
Wouldn't those Muslims she's in favor of profiling be innocent Americans as well?
Hey Sarah, how about internment camps for Muslim-Americans too? Ya know, just to be safe. You betcha!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SBG
November 18, 2009 10:57 AM in reply to Prof Wagstaff
I think we should require that Muslims wear a large paper crescent pinned to their outer garments at all times.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:44 AM in reply to Prof Wagstaff
So all Americans are innocent except the Muslims?
And when we're done with those, who's next?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MarinCoUSA
November 18, 2009 10:32 AM
Hannity + Palin = 1 gigantic, heaping mass of stupidity.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
imagiste
November 18, 2009 11:26 AM in reply to MarinCoUSA
H + P = 1 small oily puddle? 1 smelly piddle? We could go on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
November 18, 2009 10:32 AM
Those "massive warning" flags as she puts them all occured under BUSH! This guy was promoted under BUSH! This ignorant bitch should try something else. So far we know that MOTHER HOOD AND POLITICS are not her forte! Hopefully, she will meet up with some of the Muslim soldiers when she visits Ft. Hood. The fact that they contacted her and told her she should still come shows the military continues to be it's own worst enemy!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
November 18, 2009 10:38 AM
Perhaps we should profile all Pro Life, or as they should be called anti-choice Christians. We wouldn't want another Dr. Tiller killer wandering around in our churches. Perhaps we should question all Christian soldiers about their views We don't want any of these womb chasers learning how to use a gun!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
seashell
November 18, 2009 10:41 AM
Ummm, wait a minute. Hasan was investigated by a terrorism task force under the FBI.
Wasn't Bush still President then?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 2:07 PM in reply to seashell
You have obviously underestimated Obama's ability to time travel. He is therefore responsible for all of the bad things that happened during Bush's presidency. (Which, I guess, is just about everything that happened during Bush's presidency...)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
seashell
November 18, 2009 4:25 PM in reply to slb
True! No sense in hoping historians will wipe out the mistakes (all of them) in the future when you can blame Obama in the present.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JadeZ
November 18, 2009 10:51 AM
Notice the demeanor of palin here when she knows she is with "one of her own".
Then go watch a segment of the oprah interview, or any interview where the host isnt falling at her feet.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
November 18, 2009 10:58 AM
Seriously, who the fuck cares. I had kind of hoped TPM wouldn't fall for the MSM trap of reporting every bit of crazytalk that comes out of Palin's piehole. Guess I was wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NuttyProf
November 18, 2009 11:01 AM in reply to agio
she is, after all, providing conservative "talking points"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lege'
November 18, 2009 11:19 AM in reply to agio
No I think it's important that we watch her every move. If we ignore her like we ignored Bush, she just might become president too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lege'
November 18, 2009 11:23 AM in reply to agio
No I think it's important that we watch her every move. If we ignore her like we ignored Bush, she just might become president too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Prof Wagstaff
November 18, 2009 11:57 AM in reply to agio
Personally I'd like to see everything that comes out of this whackjob's piehole be reported and recorded. Just for future reference.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
November 18, 2009 2:03 PM in reply to agio
Sadly, she's becoming the queen of the nutcases in our country. Watching/listening to what she says gives us ammo to hold her accountable later. To ignore her would be to court disaster.
The increase in militia and their members is proof that she may be a complete idiot, but her lies, fear-mongering and "real American" drivel are biblical quotes to these whackjobs. They're calling for a revolution and a civil war and she does absolutely nothing to condemn their rants. A flippant smile, toss of her head and a “But, they just want their country back” is all she offers. Her comments above are point one.
I say...watch the bitch. More importantly, watch her supporters. They’re friggin insane.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
seashell
November 18, 2009 4:22 PM in reply to WaitWut?
Sadly, she's becoming the queen of the nutcases in our country.
You forgot about Orly Taitz! Now there's someone that's diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
November 18, 2009 11:04 AM
That's ok. Ever since Christians detonated two nuclear bombs on civilian cities I've been profiling Christians.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mk3872
November 18, 2009 11:05 AM
In other words, to not discriminate against a Muslim is over-the-top PC.
But to discriminate against Christians is un-American.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 11:23 AM in reply to mk3872
That about sums it up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 11:24 AM in reply to Dorn76
She's not even trying to hide it, is she?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
C-Phil
November 18, 2009 3:29 PM in reply to Dorn76
Why would she hide it? Her fans eat this up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
November 18, 2009 11:28 AM
Sarah who?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eric
November 18, 2009 11:29 AM
Wow, here presidential bid is already self-destructing. What an idiot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
November 18, 2009 11:35 AM
Next up, profile the Wiccans. She can get her witch doctor to help.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mikedrevguy
November 18, 2009 11:43 AM
What she really meant - "I'm all for profiling Muslim - American people - if it saves non- Muslim-American lives."
welcome back to the concentration camps seen across the US during WWII that held Japanese-American. was wrong then - is wrong now
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kinkistyle
November 18, 2009 12:29 PM
I guess she'd better start drawing up the genealogy trees then. Don't want to miss the half-muslim, and people who originally descended from islamic ancestors -- they're sure to have sympathies. After that we could go after people who harbor and protect suspected muslims.
When she's elected president she could even create a government department dedicated just to rooting out muslims. It would be one fine solution.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TeddyKGB
November 18, 2009 12:36 PM
I'm all for profiling conservatives if it saves innocent American lives.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
November 18, 2009 2:06 PM in reply to TeddyKGB
I think that's what we're doing here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cheesemoose
November 18, 2009 12:53 PM
Unfortunately, in this instance, Sarah Palin is making sense. Of course this guy should have been profiled. I say "unfortunately" because it is a missed opportunity for progressives to show that they can use common sense when it comes to the potential for violence. We can't just pretend that radical fundamentalism doesn't exist, and that it's dangerous.
For instance, if you were a school teacher, and one of your fellow teachers was part of a group of Christian fundamentalists who thought doctors who performed abortions should be killed - wouldn't it be a good idea to keep an eye on that person? Maybe it should even disqualify him or her from working in a school. Of course, this would be violating this person's rights. But members of groups who have a history of violence must be monitored. It's time that liberals stop letting conservatives make hay with a position that simply makes sense to the average person.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
November 18, 2009 1:11 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
The problem with going forward with things that "make sense to the average person" is that, until not terribly long ago, the "average person" would have agreed with statements like "If you're not like me, go hang from a tree".
The real issue in the Hasan case is the same as in hundreds of other cases - you take a mentally unstable individual and give them a religious framework to justify the voices in their head, and people get killed. The problem wasn't Hasan being a Muslim, it was Hasan being batshit crazy.
The takeaway that we *should* be getting from this is that the armed forces need to be more aware of the symptoms of mental illness in ALL the troops.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 1:11 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
All groups have a history of violence.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 2:12 PM in reply to shrivti1
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
davcbr
November 18, 2009 1:53 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
I think that the problem ol' cheesmouth has is that he doesn't know "profiling" in this context. Sarah is saying that "Muslims" be profiled - that is to say that if you are a muslim, you are suspect.
The point is that you actually end up WASTING RESOURCES by profiling, because only 0.5% of muslims are really to be suspected, whereas profiling a meaningful subgroup based on observable behavior will yield a lot better results.
You see, Sarah's problem is that she is TOO POLITICALLY CORRECT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 12:55 PM
Nobody has said that this is Obama's fault, yet almost every comment says something about George Bush being president at the time, as if that is turning the tables. In fact, that point turns the tables on the liberal agenda, showing that the military under the Bush Administration was not racist or discriminatory.
Political correctness and the fear of losing your job, being reprimanded or branded a racist, sexist, or any of the myriad phobias used to lever people is bigger than the President. It's about our society not doing what needs to be done. Nobody is talking about internment camps, they are talking about taking these threats and warning signs more seriously when they come from a person or group that espouses terrorism. You guys are lemmings.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 1:13 PM in reply to johnny b
Warning signs coming from a person = totally understandable, I agree completely.
Warning signs coming from a group = I have no idea what you're talking about. You mean Muslims here? What "group" in this instance are you talking about?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DiveIn
November 18, 2009 2:53 PM in reply to johnny b
Nobody has blamed this on Obama? How about Pete Hoeskstra (R-MI):
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/lacking_evidence_hoekstra_blames_obama_admin_for_f.php
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
November 18, 2009 8:12 PM in reply to johnny b
And if you want to sic surveillance on someone just because they're Muslims and don't like American foreign policy, you're a bigot - and it is you who is trying to be politically correct.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 1:10 PM
I don't know what's worse...the fact that she said this, or the fact that she is unaware of how truly awful it is that she said it, or the fact that most other people won't realize how truly awful it is that she said it.
Not very Christian of her, is it?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TeddyKGB
November 18, 2009 1:15 PM
Hasan was a devout Muslim in the military; the only people who believe that he wasn't being watched have an ideological axe to grind - and are now ranting and raving with the benefit of hindsight.
I'm sure Timothy McVeigh and Dr. Tiller's killer were both on watchlists; that didn't make the government clairvoyant enough to know when they were going to go off.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Waltz
November 18, 2009 1:23 PM
That's cool, but we have to do it for the Christian nutjobs as well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cheesemoose
November 18, 2009 1:26 PM
@TeddyKG: This is a good point - and one that should be made by liberals. Instead of reacting in a knee-jerk way against profiling, we should make the starting point of the discussion an agreement that people who belong to groups with a history of violence should be scrutinized. Like you say, that doesn't guarantee that the McVeigh's and Hasan's can be stopped. But we can all agree that sticking our heads in the sand is no way to deal with a dangerous situation. And I won't be forced into that stance by political correctness.
I am really, really sorry to find myself in agreement with Sarah Palin on anything. But liberals need to wake the fuck up and stop thinking about this stuff in such an abstract way. It's bad policy and it's bad politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JayR
November 18, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
Palin is married to a secessionist. By the rules of profiling that should mean she's excluded from any position within the government.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 1:46 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
"People who belong to groups with a history of violence"...
You mean like Americans?
This "pc" thing is the ultimate red herring. It's not political correctness that caused Ft. Hood, it's incompetence. You're falling in to a trap here, Cheese. Don't.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 1:35 PM
13 people died at Ft. Hood and the main reason this has become such an issue is because the mainstream media and our government is more concerned with not offending people than anything.
This guy subscribed to radical Islamic thought and that is what motivated him to do this. Participating in what he feels is a war against Islam was the final straw. The logical conclusion is that while we shouldn't remove the Muslim soldiers and officers from the military, we should be more serious and quick to action if we find that such a soldier or officer espouses those ideas and/or may be prone to action. What is so wrong with that, and who the fuck are you to say that what she said was awful?
The nut who shot Tiller was immediately and clearly labeled a fundamentalist Christian extremist, yet the MSM and our weak government officials will not call this guy a fundamentalist Islamic extremist. I didn't hear any excuses for him, why make excuses for this guy or any other person who serves our government yet plots against it? It's treason and this was an act of war.
This is what Jihad is today. It is a network of small to large sleeper cells just waiting to go off. Don't believe it if you want to stay nice and warm in your multi-cultural utopian fantasy, but its the truth.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 1:49 PM in reply to johnny b
Be very afraid, we know.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 1:50 PM in reply to johnny b
Be civil in your response. Who the **** am I? Who the **** are you? You don't have to agree, but civility would be nice.
I think it was awful because this guy was not part of some "sleeper cell" or "jihadist group." He was an extremist, and an insane person, but there is no evidence that he was doing anything but acting on his own insane ideas, without being in coordination with some vast Islamic conspiracy.
I think what she said was awful because she is implying that the "secret code" on his card should have made people suspicious, when apparently all it implied was that he was a Muslim, if indeed it even existed or implied anything at all, and she further insinuates that being a practicing Muslim is all it takes to have suspicion leveled at someone. That is ridiculous and un-American.
I make no excuses for the shooter. He is crazy. My heart aches for the families and friends of those who are lost. I just think that people are way too quick to make knee-jerk reactions. Your example of the guy who shot tiller is a telling one. Yes, he is a nut, but you don't want him associated with all Christians. The Fort Hoot shooter, likewise, is a nut, but should not be associated with all Muslims, which is what Palin et. al. are doing, purely for political gain.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 3:20 PM in reply to shrivti1
you're absolutely wrong in that last statement. Every political pundit has explicitly stated that not all Muslims should be lumped in with this guy.
I'm not accusing you of being a fan of MSNBC or Keith Olberman, but this is precisely what is wrong with those kinds of mediums, FOX included. Instead of listening to what is being said, we are hearing what is said about what was said, and it is clearly biased.
Same thing goes for those against illegal-immigration. They are all branded anti-immigration, with that all too vital word "illegal" omitted.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 4:21 PM in reply to johnny b
I'm listening to what she said, and it sounds to me like she said that she's all for profiling people based on their beliefs, in this case, Muslim beliefs. Did I not hear her correctly? What part am I not understanding?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
November 18, 2009 8:24 PM in reply to johnny b
Most of us are against illegal immigration, dude.
It';s those who use bigotry, and focus on the Mexicans whist ignoring our ports who we criticize.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TeddyKGB
November 18, 2009 1:43 PM
Uh, you misunderstand me. You're starting off with preconceived notions that we're NOT watching extremists and that we're doing it because of "political correctness" or whatever else bothers you about liberals.
We ARE watching these people, I promise you; there's just this krazy liberal idea called The Rule of Law and the fact that we don't have access to Minority Report precognition about who's going to do what when. I'm pretty sure that's why they call it terrorism.
But, hey - if you want the Obama administration to start cracking down on anti-government extremists, we should start by detaining the Teabaggers, amirite? Then they could play out their militia fantasies for real!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 1:54 PM
First of all, calling them "teabaggers" is offensive to them and to me...but I guess people being offended doesn't bother you as long as they are center-right white Americans.
I consider myself a constitionalist and oppose any legislation that opens the door to government intrusion on American citizens. HOWEVER, there has got to be a compromise here and I honestly believe that were it not for the "sensitive" nature of this man's religious beliefs and the fear of being attacked by CAIR, this would have been handled differently. The government wasn't tipped off to this guy's radical leanings through unwarranted wire-tapping, but through this guy's own statements and actions.
I think everyone on this site is jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about what America is really talking about. Nobody wants our civil rights trampled, but when does it end? That is the great question of the American philosophy. Liberals have made a concerted effort to push the boundaries of liberty, and that is not a bad thing, but in many instances it defies logic, common sense and survival instinct.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 2:00 PM in reply to johnny b
Did you just play the race card? For real?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 2:26 PM in reply to shrivti1
Yes, I did play the race card and I'll do it again. Had the shooter been a white man who shot 13 blacks and was known to frequent "Sons of the South" meetings, speak with patients about the rebel South and how it will rise again, spoke with the Grand Wizard about the "final solution" over the internet AND the government knew about it, what would you think about this? This forum would be singing an entirely different song and YOU KNOW IT!
I digress. What essential liberty will we be giving up when as you stated, the government already is watching these people (and apparently that is all they are doing.) Why are we so afraid of "profiling" based on affiliation?
On the topic of essential liberty, is profiling conspirators really unconstitutional? If an American citizen conspires with the enemy isn't he a traitor that should not be afforded the rights of an American citizen, but as an enemy combatant? In this case I believe there should be a pretrial to determine whether or not he is an enemy combatant. If so (which he is) his case should be turned over to a military tribunal, not held in a court of law. And No, that is not a slippery slope, it is the way things work.
We are so worried about compromising the liberties that the founding fathers crafted that in the long run we are losing them.
Liberty has and always will be a delicate thing, with tyranny lurking around every corner. We just need more checks and balances to make sure that the actions we take to protect liberty do not have the adverse affect. Yet, people such as yourself create little pejorative hot words like "teabaggers" and "hatemongers" (just as the Bush administration called the opposition "un-American") when it happens to be their agenda that is being "checked."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
November 18, 2009 2:44 PM in reply to johnny b
Yes, the history of oppression of white folks in America is long and sad. I feel your pain, Mr. Victim.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 3:04 PM in reply to johnny b
I think I'd be singing the exact same song. The tune goes like this: the guy is a nutjob, but all Christians (whites, Muslims, etc. etc.) should not be under suspicion because of that guy's crazy actions. I still fail to see how race enters into it.
What "enemy" did this guy "conspire" with? Where exactly is the "conspiracy" besides in your own mind? He went to a mosque. He held some horrible beliefs that are a distortion of Islam, and he murdered a lot of people. But what exactly makes him an "enemy combatant" here? He is a criminal, and a horrible one, but our criminal justice system is pretty good at dealing with horrible people.
I would argue that we're losing our liberties because we're not nearly concerned enough about protecting them.
PS I don't know to whom you're addressing yourself. I never said "teabagger" or "hatemonger". Do you think everyone on this board is one person all engaged in a liberal conspiracy against you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 3:28 PM in reply to shrivti1
sorry about that, we all have the same generic avatar. But in response to your comment, he not only attended a mosque but spoke regularly with a radical Imam. You raise the million dollar question though. Is this the perfect enemy? Is it an enemy that can't be named, thus we cannot be at war with them? We are not involved in a war against Islam, but a war with Muslim extremists. If we are at war with radical Muslims, then anyone who conspires with them to commit an act of war or terror, whether they be middle eastern or not, are enemy combatants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 3:59 PM in reply to johnny b
I see where you're coming from with this comment. I think semantics matter here. What precisely constitutes "Islamic extremism"? Does speaking with someone who holds views outside the mainstream make someone an enemy, or worthy of suspicion? What about freedom of association? Who decides what is "radical" and what isn't? Is it "radical" to pray five times a day? Is it "radical" to take a month and go on the Hajj? Would that be considered associating with unsavory elements? What about supporting the Palestinian fight for statehood? I'm sure there are people who think all kinds of things during that pilgrimage. Should we watch our citizens who choose to fulfill that religious duty? What about supporting the Palestinian fight for statehood? Suspicious? Can you see where I'm going with this?
I'm not implying that you personally would think that way, but you'd better believe there would be a lot of people who could be led into thinking this...and a lot of politicians who would be more than willing to exploit that ignorance for their own gain. It's happened over and over again in history, and there's no reason to think it wouldn't happen here if we're not vigilant.
I think it is very problematic to be at "war" with an enemy that can't be named and a goal which is undefined and unachievable. It is far too easy for those in power to define the "enemy" and use this "war" in ways meant only to keep power and advance their agenda. Again, historical examples of this abound.
If it were politically possible, the administration would distance themselves from the idea of calling it a "war." I think the terror trials upcoming in NYC and the eventual closing of Guantanamo are steps in that direction. It's simply not a war. It is a major national security concern, and an ongoing threat which merits constant attention, but not a war.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darter Dave
November 18, 2009 3:13 PM in reply to johnny b
Speaking of profiling based on affiliation: Timothy McVeigh - US Army Veteran; Terry Nichols - US Army Veteran; John Allen Muhammed - US Army Veteran; Nadal Malik Hassan - US Army active duty.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 3:46 PM in reply to Darter Dave
relevance?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
November 19, 2009 6:04 AM in reply to johnny b
The entire christian community wasn't under threat of profiling just because someone who shares their religion did something horrible.
If that is not relevant, then you, kiddo, are blind.
Or just a facetious bigot - more likely...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 4:26 PM in reply to johnny b
If an American citizen conspires with the enemy isn't he a traitor that should not be afforded the rights of an American citizen, but as an enemy combatant?
Well, there's part of the essential liberty you are asking people to give up right there.
Under the current Constitution, there is no provision for stripping someone of citizenship, and especially not upon mere suspicion of a crime. A citizen suspected of "conspiring with the enemy" remains a citizen and retains the rights of a citizen. A citizen convicted of "conspiring with the enemy" remains a citizen. Being convicted of even a heinous crime does not strip you of citizenship.
Note also that many of the rights secured by the Constitution apply to all persons, not just those that are citizens.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 1:58 PM
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Benjamin Franklin
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jack of All Tirades
November 18, 2009 2:10 PM in reply to shrivti1
But how far do you want to take this? Should we not have any airplane security whatsoever? No gun control laws?
To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, extremism in the defense of liberty is still extremism.
I agree, this conversation could be a bit more civil amongst the posters, but I don't want TPM to become an echo chamber either (there's always redstate for that). This is a good, healthy debate to have - I usually like to come away from these discussions knowing more than I did previously.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 2:15 PM in reply to Jack of All Tirades
I think profiling Muslims because of the insane actions of one man acting alone is taking it too far. For example.
I respect people who think differently. I just don't swear at them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnny b
November 18, 2009 3:56 PM in reply to shrivti1
Who is talking about profiling Muslims?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shrivti1
November 18, 2009 4:01 PM in reply to johnny b
Palin.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:35 AM in reply to shrivti1
Let's profile Palin!
Or send her somewhere for regrooving.
Or turn her into Soylent Green.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 2:37 PM in reply to Jack of All Tirades
You're ignoring the qualifiers.
And that's not exactly a paraphrase of Goldwater; it's a complete inversion of the original.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jack of All Tirades
November 18, 2009 2:51 PM in reply to slb
My (sub)inversion of Barry Goldwater was entirely intentional:
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
I'm making the point that we can't always pull out the Benjamin Franklin quote - we sometimes have to use common sense with regard to our safety - freedom of speech, right to bear arms, etc. - all have limits to them. That said, we should take every precaution that we don't end up coming up with muslim internment camps or profiling someone on the basis of their religious faith alone. As far as I understand, this person contacted a radical Yemeni imam, went out of his way never to be photographed with a woman, etc. He probably should have been removed from active duty long ago. I don't think it was political correctness as much was it was gross incompetence - we're just waiting for the results of the investigation to be over.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 4:01 PM in reply to Jack of All Tirades
I realize your version of the Goldwater quotation was intentional, but it was not a paraphrase. A paraphrase says the same thing in different words.
And Benjamin Franklin would have been the last person in the world to ignore common sense. As I said, you are ignoring his qualifiers: essential liberty vs temporary safety.
As for Hasan, there has been so much confused and contradictory reporting on this case that I would prefer to wait until an investigation can put the actual facts together before deciding where the blame lies and what should be done to try to prevent such things in the future.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jack of All Tirades
November 18, 2009 5:00 PM in reply to slb
Good points! Seeing how bad the MSM got the original facts wrong (there were multiple shooters, Hasan was killed, etc.), we're going to have to wait a while before we pass judgment on how this was handled.
Back to 'paraphrasing', how would you quote someone while subverting what they said? For example, if my kid tells he can't cut the grass because the lawnmower is broken, aren't I paraphrasing Rumsfeld if I were to say 'You mow the lawn with the mower you have, not the mower you wish to have'?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hidden Oak
November 18, 2009 2:00 PM
Queen of the Culture of Duh.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TeddyKGB
November 18, 2009 2:08 PM
Just so I have this straight: you're all for political incorrectness, except when it's directed at you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kinkistyle
November 18, 2009 2:18 PM
"I think everyone on this site is jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about what America is really talking about. Nobody wants our civil rights trampled, but when does it end? That is the great question of the American philosophy. Liberals have made a concerted effort to push the boundaries of liberty, and that is not a bad thing, but in many instances it defies logic, common sense and survival instinct."
I agree. How about we start with gun liberties? This guy was able to walk into a store in Texas called "Guns Galore" and buy a 31-round "cop killer" gun. To me, the most common sense and logical thing to do would be to profile gun owners and recent gun purchasers (especially of high-powered weaponry) since these people would be the most likely to go on mass shooting sprees. If we are considering effectiveness, I think this profile would be much more fruitful in terms of catching potential terrorists.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
November 18, 2009 2:39 PM in reply to Kinkistyle
Amen!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Darter Dave
November 18, 2009 2:19 PM
C'mon people! Give Sarah a break. Didn't you hear what she said? She's only for the "good" kind of profiling.. the kind that saves innocent people's lives. She's not for the "bad" kind that unfairly targets and persecutes innocent people because of their race, ethnicity, or religion. And really, people, when you choose to oppose Sarah politically, aren't you just as guilty of profiling her based on her lack of intelligence.. Think about it!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fsudirectory
November 18, 2009 2:26 PM in reply to Darter Dave
You are innocent as long as you are white and christian (maybe jewish if cameras are around).
If you are Muslim, whoa buddy, you can't be American, should just get outta town cuz we dont take too kindly to your types 'round here
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pbres
November 18, 2009 2:57 PM
G_d help you guys if you ever allow the right wing periphery into power--then we might be able to use the Hitler analogies with some validity. ( A concerned Canadian -- eh )
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jimson
November 18, 2009 3:08 PM
"Hey, I'm all for profiling. . . as long as I'M not the one being profiled."
Maybe they should exclude the lone Muslim in congress from voting on certain bills, "just to be safe."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:39 AM in reply to jimson
I think everyone who's for profiling should be profiled.
Except for me, of course.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuyleh
November 18, 2009 3:11 PM
So where would it stop? I could just see her condemning Buddhists next "because it sounds funny, and so do Muslim names!" or some pathetic rhetoric like that. And then us Pagans, along with the Wiccans because we are tree worshiping peacers or something.
Bad analogy, likely, but you get my point. This needs to be shot down, or someone will take her idea to the next level. And then anyone that's not a right wing Christian nutso will be in the cross-hairs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jack of All Tirades
November 18, 2009 3:19 PM
I'm torn - on one hand, I'm all for making her the face of the Republican party - that guarantees Obama a walk in 2012 - on the other hand, every utterance makes 25% of our country even more crazy.
It would be nice if the MSM stopped reporting on every stupid idea she has (that's pretty every thought in her head)- do you see them reporting everything Boehner says?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
November 19, 2009 4:37 AM in reply to Jack of All Tirades
The media reeports everything she says based upon telling themselves that "America" cares becasue they have the hots for her.
And she's sells millions of books -- for a week.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pbres
November 18, 2009 3:23 PM
Read this: http://inrepair.net/2008/01/20/why-the-peaceful-majority-is-irrelevant/ Replace the word 'fanatic' with right wing wingnut (Hannity-Palin-Limbaugh-Coulter-etc etc)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kilroy77
November 18, 2009 6:17 PM
I have to say that I'm blown away by the ignorance in so many of these posts. I think so many of you need to open your eyes and come to your own conlusions. All this media hype surrounding SP is rediculus. She said that she's all for racial profiling! Who the hell wouldn't be at this point?!?! The funny thing is, if there were muslims that happened to get "profiled" wrongly, why would they mind? If you aren't doing anything wrong, if you have America's best interest at heart, you should understand why it's being done. It's not hate. It's not racism. It's protecting the men and women in this country. Everyone in this country. Not just Christians. I'm embarassed that all you ingnorant morons are more concerned with blasting Palin than trying to understand where her words come from. Morons.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nanorich
November 18, 2009 7:17 PM in reply to Kilroy77
Let's start by profiling you. For posting racist unAmerican messages...
I sense a terrorist mindset. You need to go to Gitmo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kilroy77
November 19, 2009 11:32 AM in reply to nanorich
Hey.... FYI?? I HAVE been to Gitmo. I was deployed there for 2 months. I think better yet, YOU should go to Gitmo, or any other military instalation where you place your own life on the line for your country. Then, by all means, talk all the nonsense you want to me about being "un-American". I love my country and I have lived my entire adult life protecting her. Think twice before you spout off things you know nothing about.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
November 18, 2009 8:13 PM in reply to Kilroy77
Way to go, fascist.
Let's all think like fundamentalists!
GO, GO AMERICAN TALIBAN!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beagle
November 19, 2009 12:44 AM in reply to Kilroy77
Just like this woman, I don't think you understand what profiling means.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
November 18, 2009 8:18 PM
I think given the open threats to Obama from the fundamentalist right wing christian community, it's time we stopped being politically correct, and spy on their entire community - then simply pick out the most likely next Timothy Mcveigh, and stick 'em in jail. There will be tens of thousands of them, sure. But hey - they're patriots.
After all: if it's for the greater good, shouldn't they be happy they're helping save innocent lives?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kilroy77
November 19, 2009 11:29 AM in reply to cinesimon
You are an idiot. Why don't you pick up an M16 and head out to Iraq or Afghanistan and serve with those men and women. Then come back here and run your ignorant mouth about "American Taliban" BS. You should be embarassed for your thoughtless comments.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?