The joke must have slipped by me. Yes, that was a sincere attempt at education, as it appeared to me that you were struggling to find an opposite for “people of color”. My apologies if I came across as patronizing.

““Border Patrol may be targeting people of color (by questioning them at relatively high rates) without questioning them exclusively.”

Then it’s not “profiling.””

Here’s my definition of racial profiling (this is straight from Wikipedia, but I find it accurate): the inclusion of racial or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime

I’m assuming we can agree that true racial profiling is unfair and a form of racism. The question is whether racial profiling is going on in this case. I don’t think the evidence in this article is strong enough in either direction to conclusively prove or disprove that profiling is going on here.

The only apparent “profiling” taking place here is the profiling of illegal immigrants. The fact that there are “shockwaves” through the Irish community and, as you have pointed out, Hispanics can be of a number of different races (which demonstrates how ridiculous the classification is in the first place) shows that if you are an ILLEGAL, you have reason to fear…as you should.

You have bought in to the professional grievance group propaganda and internalized it so deeply that you reject critical thinking. That is manifest most comically in your most recent comment where you seem to be making a sincere attempt to “educate” me on the “proper” use of ethno-racial terms, not even realizing that I was making fun of such classifications when I wrote “uncolor.”

The article is self-refuting but you are just so committed to race-mongering that you don’t see it. Demonstrated:

“Border Patrol may be targeting people of color (by questioning them at relatively high rates) without questioning them exclusively.”

Then it’s not “profiling.” Sounds to me (assuming what you say is true, I don’t know for sure, because the “shockwave” has apparently struck the Irish community) as if the BP might, just might be questioning people who are more likely to be illegals. Pretty much common sense. Should Border Patrol resources be used to monitor the parking garages at a Tribeca apartment building or should BP be questioning people in areas with known high concentrations of illegals? And should BP NOT question some people if they have already questioned a certain number of people of a certain skin tone that day? Pretty much “duh” questions to which there is really only one answer. Sorry, but the truth is, illegals tend to congregate together and most illegals in this country come from one country. When they get here they tend to set up shop proximate to other people doing the same thing (things associated with being in this country illegally), so if more of them are questioned, it’s just a fact of life and it’s just BP doing its job.

Anyway, who do you think the Border Patrol would more likely question:

1) A red-haired guy in the parking lot of a Home Depot soliciting construction work from every truck that pulls up.

OR

2) A Hispanic woman who gets out of a Volvo wearing a business suit walking into the employees’ entrance to an investment banking firm with a grande mocha.

You know the answer. It’s the one who fits the “profile” of an illegal.

Also keep in mind that Latin@s may be of any race, which is why ‘white, non-Hispanic’ is technically more accurate in this case than simply ‘white’.

Fair enough summary?

My point is that there MAY be racial profiling going on. The evidence of Border Patrol treating people of color unfairly is that “witnesses have said that agents sometimes question only people of color”. The evidence contradicting this is Mark Henry’s claim that racial profiling is not going on.

It is NOT fair to question more people of color than white people, even if most illegal immigrants are people of color. While this may lead to more arrests (based on probablility), it is not fair to the individual who is constantly questioned based on his or her racial or ethnic background. This is a case of harmful discrimination and should not be tolerated.

I did not miss the point about the Irish, but I do find it irrelevant. The fact that an Irish bartender was arrested and deported says nothing about general trends in questioning patterns. Border Patrol may be targeting people of color (by questioning them at relatively high rates) without questioning them exclusively.

Let’s say that we know that 75% of illegals are “people of color.” Wouldn’t it be fair that more “people of color” are questioned than people of, um, “uncolor?”

Anyway, that’s not even the point. You decontexualized one point in a long post in order to argue an incomplete point. Did you miss the whole thing about the Irish?

Or do you think it is unfair to “profile” illegal immigrants while enforcing immigration law?