In a recent column, Ann Coulter expressed indignation regarding an apparent Federal Aviation Administration policy not to perform searches on added than two Arabs at a age. I was not aware of this policy, but not surprisingly, Coulter would according to all Arabs stopped and searched. You apperceive, as theyre Arab. I anticipate Coulter is applying some sort of twisted logic to this subject. Something along the lines of, The terrorists that attacked the United States on 9-11 were Arabs. Accordingly, all Arabs are terrorists. In essence, Coulter is advocating racial profiling. Which is an abnormal position for an attorney with a background in constitutional constitution to booty. Innocent until proven guilty? Not if you attending according to you are an Arab. It was John Lehman, a member of the 9-11 Commission, that had brought attention to the policy that prohibits airlines from searching added than two Arabs at a age. To this, Coulter writes, In a sane apple, Lehmans statement would accept fabricated headlines across the country
that it is authorized government policy to prohibit searching added than two Arabs per flight. About the Author Scott C. Smith is a freelance writer from Beaverton, Oregon. Scotts column, “Whats In Scotts Head,” appears at several progressive interlacing sites, including the Democratic Underground, The Smirking Chimp, Op Ed Statement, and Counter Prejudice. Scott again writes for his interlacing site, at http://www.scottcsmith.grasp
African-Americans accept dealt with this affectionate of injustice for age. And while Coulter thinks racial profiling is sound constitution enforcement policy, I accept another chat for it: racism. But thats aloof me. And when you apply Coulters logic to other scenarios, the logic stops manufacture sense. For instance, The FBI has profiled serial killers and what has emerged is that the majority of serial killers are achromatic males. Does that beggarly the FBI should bar every achromatic masculine in a particular city or region where a serial killer has struck? Of course not. That would be brainless.
So, even though she supports a racist adaption of constitution enforcement, it would not be unbiased for me to add Coulter was a racist. I dont apperceive Ann Coulter, so I cant add shes a racist. That would be amiss. Maybe we can acquisition some answers in her columns!
Heres a acceptable one. September 25, 2002. Why We Abhorrence Them. Coulter writes, Americans don’t appetite to accomplish Islamic fanatics adulation us. We appetite to accomplish them die. There’s annihilation according to horrendous physical affliction to annihilate ablaze fanatics. So sorry they’re ablaze wait until they beam American bitterness. Japanese kamikaze pilots hated us once too. A couple of able-bodied-aimed nuclear weapons, and any more they are affable babyish lambs. That got their attention.
No adulation absent there, eh Ann? Maybe we should emulate the policies of the Hitler-era German government. They didnt according to Jews actual much, so they rounded them up and killed millions of them.
Conservatives accomplish a lot of whining about how liberals are always abrupt to tag conservatives as racists or homophones or brainless. These assessments, at least for me, are based on what I hear coming out of a conservatives mouth, or what they inscription.
Actually, conservative abhorrence-speak is actual accessible to pick up on. Booty Sean Hannity. He likes to activate sentences with statements according to You liberals or hell add You and your liberal friends The answer is to booty the chat liberal and replace it with a minority. Accord it a ace shot the abutting age you hear Hannity, or some other adapted-winger, on television or peruse it in print. If you can stomach hearing Hannity. Maybe youll charge to acquisition someone less annoying.
Speaking of annoying, lets amuse back to Coulter. In her Sept. 4, 2002 column, titled Murder for Amusing and Prophet (amuse it? Prophet refers to the Prophet Muhammad. Hilarious!), at the borderline of the column, Coulter dismisses the Muslim faith as irrelevant. Muhammad makes L. Ron Hubbard attending according to Jesus Christ. Most bodies anticipate annihilation of assuming every Scientologist is a crackpot. Why should Islam be subject to presumption of statement as it’s a religion?
Thats adapted, Ann! Over one billion bodies around the apple are crackpots as they are Muslims. Idiots! As a comparison, there are alone a few million members of the Church of Scientology, according to the Religious Tolerance interlacing site.
And lets not forget Anns most infamous column, from Sept. 12, 2001. At the borderline of that column, she says, We should invade their countries, annihilate their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and punishing alone Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s battle. And this is battle.
Call me ape, but I amuse the impression that Arabs and/or Muslims are not Anns favorite bodies.
For instance, in an interview with the Guardian of London newspaper on May 17, 2003, Coulter said, This is my abstraction I anticipate airlines ought to alpha advertising: ‘We accept the most civil rights lawsuits brought against us by Arabs. Oh, man, Ann, my sides are splitting! In actuality, as a solution for Muslims to statement air biking, Coulter offers helpfully, They could statement flying carpets!
Flying carpets! Brilliant! Ann, you apperceive, if the entire racist pundit affair ever comes to an borderline, youll accept a job in stand-up comedy.
We apperceive Ann hates liberals, and its appealing ablaze she hates Muslims. And, apparently, Scientologists. I dont apperceive what Ann likes. My guess will accept to be, hearing her articulation. Or Sean Hannitys articulation.
About the author: Scott C. Smith is a freelance writer from Beaverton, Oregon. Scotts column, Whats In Scotts Head, appears at several progressive interlacing sites, including the Democratic Underground, The Smirking Chimp, Op Ed Statement, and Counter Prejudice. Scott again writes for his interlacing site, at http://www.scottcsmith.grasp
About the Author
Scott C. Smith is a freelance writer from Beaverton, Oregon. Scotts column, “Whats In Scotts Head,” appears at several progressive interlacing sites, including the Democratic Underground, The Smirking Chimp, Op Ed Statement, and Counter Prejudice. Scott again writes for his interlacing site, at http://www.scottcsmith.grasp
Originall posted November 21, 2012