This is getting ridiculous. How many of the so-called terrorists in the last plot had Muslim names?
Money transfer agencies like Western Union have delayed or blocked thousands of cash deliveries on suspicion of terrorist connections simply because senders or recipients have names like Mohammed or Ahmed, company officials said.
In one example, an Indian driver here said Western Union prevented him from sending US$120 (euro96) to a friend at home this month because the recipient’s name was Mohammed.
Next it will be friends of people named Mohammed…
Well, as long as the average American bed-wetter “feels” safe…
Crunchy, why are you insulting people who want the US to be safer from terrorist attacks? What is your point?
Why, that they suffer from nocturnal incontinence, of course, Jim. Why do you ask?
Why are you insulting people who want the US to be safer from terrorist attacks?
Because of this quote no doubt:
Cripes! John we need a preview or edit button.
Here is the quote:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. – Benjamin Franklin
What “liberty” exactly are you, as an American, giving up in this case?
Max, silly me… but then, why allude to bedwetters? I wouldn’t want to piss them off.
why are you insulting people who want the US to be safer from terrorist attacks? What is your point?
I get the impression that it is somthing along the lines of: “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”
Just because someone “wants the US to be safer from terrorist attacks” doesn’t mean some of their ideas for making us “safer” aren’t asinine.
One of the people involved in the 9/11attacks was named Mohamed Atta al-Sayed, so they block transfers to anyone named Mohamed??
How does that make us “safer”?
i wish my name was achmed so I could sue the hell out of western union
Ironically, one local paper reported on two men who were caught in a stolen car. Both had Hispanic names, so naturally, the Neocons locally decided they must be ‘illegals’
here’s the link
Yes, and some sailors may be horny on shore leave. Shall we base all jurisprudence on stereotypes?
OK,
you are a terrorist,
You smuggle yourself into this country..
Either thru canada, and a forged passport, or slip into Mexico from Brazil..
UMMM, wouldnt you TRY and augment/change your name, NOT to draw attention??
I hope no one tries to send money to Mohammed Ali for his charities.
I totally agree that America must do anything it can to protect itself from terrorists, even if that means blocking access to financial services to people with names that are similar to the name of a terrorist.
From now on, no one with the first names Timothy or Terry, or the last names McViegh or Nichols shall be allowed to use Western Union.
What “liberty” exactly are you, as an American, giving up in this case?
So if I want to send some money to my cousin, Mohammad Fusion, in Pakistan, I can. As an American citizen, is there some reason he should change his name to Smith or Shrub to get the money?
“”Mohammed and Ahmed have become problematic names because they are so common on the list of terrorists,” said Nixon Baby, who runs a Western Union franchise in Bur Dubai”
So it’s not just “one of the people” as you say Mike. Facts are facts. You would rather ignore such clues in favor of inconveniencing a few Mohammads? The name is attched to the terrorists religion. They are religious fanatics that like to name themselves after their profet. But hey, let’s ignore that big tip. That really makes sense.
Let’s see, we can’t keep a lookout for Arabs or Pakisani, no Muslims, no Mohammed’s or Ahameds or any other frequent terrorist name, we can’t follow money transactions from foreign sources.
The US may as well wear a big sign… “KICK ME”
No wonder youi have bed wetters.
#16, Jim, are you suggesting that my cousin Mohamed is a terrorist? Or a religious fanatic? Why would you say something like that. You not only don’t know him, you have no idea of his politics. A great religion like ours has a lot of Mohammads in it. A lot. Now how many of them are accused of being terrorists? So no, it doesn’t make sense that Mohammads would be targeted simply because of their name.
This is simply a case of religious discrimination being used to mollify the bed wetters that something is being done to protect them.
Q: Where did I say, or even suggets, that all Mohammads are terrorists?
A: I didn’t.
You, on the other hand, are afraid of being politically incorrect at the risk of thousands more dying at the hands of terrorists.
Your “cousin” will just have to “suck it up” for now, or make his complaint to Al’qaeda and thank them very much for screwing over all Muslims, and putting innocent people under scrutiny.
I agree with JimR on this. So what that a few thousand people are being inconvenienced by this. Suck it up! Yes, thank the Alqaeda for all this, don’t blame America.
Also, we should take it a step further. We should round up the Muslims and anyone named a Muslim name in American and put them in relocation “camps”. Yes, this will be a minor inconvenience for them, but if they were true Americans or supporters of America, they would “suck it up” and understand this is for the greater good of America. While this may be politically incorrect for a short time, it would greatly reduce the risk of thousands more dying at the hands of terrorists.
Of course, I’m not suggesting that all Muslims are terrorists, but concentrating them into camps will certainly help us determine if indeed “some” of them are working with terrorists, and protect the safety of the others from overly patriotic Americans who wish to extol vengeance upon them. So it’s actually protecting American Muslims and keeping them safely contained and concentrated.
This whole intertube anonymity thing is way out of control. They let anybody on this truck.
#19 I wonder how many will get your alias… Well all know that kind of program worked so well for the Japanesse in WWII.
Of course, I was being sarcastic/ironic. Notice the “Comment by A. Eichmann”?
I stopped short of putting in a line of “this can be a final solution to the Muslim problem”. Just showing that things like JimR suggests can spiral out of control…not unlike they’re doing already.
#18, Q: Where did I say, or even suggets, that all Mohammads are terrorists?
A: I didn’t. …
Comment by JimR — 7/6/2006 @ 9:03 pm
let see, less then one hour earlier there was this post…
#16, So it’s not just “one of the people” as you say Mike. Facts are facts. You would rather ignore such clues in favor of inconveniencing a few Mohammads? The name is attched to the terrorists religion. They are religious fanatics that like to name themselves after their profet.
Comment by JimR — 7/6/2006 @ 8:22 pm
Jim, not only are you a bigot, you are a hypocrite too. Everyone else may sacrifice something but you, and you can live with that. This what Bush wants, divide the American population and then blame the weakest parts.
BTW, I’m really Irish, I don’t have a cousin in Pakistan, nor are any of my cousins named Mohammad. I only wanted to make a point.
In the War on Terror, everyone is guilty, until proven innocent. Considering that the small annoyance of not being able to go about your daily business will last the life time of the War on Terror which will last for decades, I think stopping services based on a name is wrong. The service should proceed as normal but with it being flagged.
Terrorist have the advantage in using names. Just think of a terrorist using the name Smith. Or John? Ted Kennedy has already found out how nice it is to have you name on the terrorist names list.
When you name gets on the list you will have trouble with flying, buying a car, using credit cards, getting loans and other such task. Now the question is would you mind if your name was on the terrorist name list?
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
That you even support singling an entire group of people out just for their name is frightening. No matter how you slice it, that kind of thinking is reminiscent of what the Nazis did.
Shall we smash the windows of every household and businesss owned by a person named Mohammed? Or just force them out of the country by preventing them from handling money?
Wrong anwer. Your straw-man argument is bullshit.
To decry this practice does not mean that one is anti-countermeasures. It only means that one recognizes the ineffectiveness of this particular policy and the stupidity and racism behind it.
Should we keep an extra watchful eye on Muslims in America because the 9/11 terrorists were Muslims? There are 12 million of them in the United States. Let’s watch them. Further, every member of Klu Klux Klan is a Christian. Let’s start staking out the churches.
After 9/11 we went to Afganistan, followed mysteriously by Iraq. Apparently we want to hit the terrorists where they live. Never mind that they were mostly from Saudi Arabia.
You would see that I have answered you if you could only understand the argument.
Here’s what I said there, and it applies here as well:
This is not about collecting names. Its about a blanket block against a specific name just because of its identification to a movement.
You twist this into your own wierd argument and then attack us for not answering your stupid question.
OK, here’s a short list:
1) Go to the Saudi Government and ask them to track the Bin Laden family’s movements, communications, and financial transactions. Don’t be surprised if they say no.
2) Go to a judge and get a warrant to tap the lines and track the finances of known Pakistani Bin Laden supporters. Good luck there, too.
3) Check on Arabic charities to make sure their money goes to those who the charities claim it is for. Ditto all other charities.
There’s three. I complained about one program, and so here’s three in exchange. Every single one, if implemented, would do far more to curb terrorism than this stupid racist pathetic action.
Now shut up and leave me alone.