Answer: Mohammed.

Yes, some of the terrorists had the name Mohammed, so do A LOT of people.

http://www.tk421.net/trivia/

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.