|
fenix83
Moderator
Dec 6, 2006, 1:59 PM
Post #1 of 24
(1178 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 22, 2004
Posts: 2397
|
Airport security probe? Publicity stunt? You decide...
Report this Post
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'd guess it was both, a nice way to disguise a probe and hopefuly make a buck too... Whatever it was, I have to agree with the pilot. I actually think they got off light.
In reply to: Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Those are the words that started it all. Six bearded imams are said to have shouted them out while offering evening prayers as they and 141 other passengers waited at the gate for their flight out of Minneapolis International Airport. It was three days before Thanksgiving. Allahu Akbar: God is great.
Full article. Worth a read.
-F
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Dec 6, 2006, 2:36 PM
Post #2 of 24
(1172 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8572
|
WTF? Who does that? That's like walking into a police station, loudly declaring that everyone there would die, then sue after the beatdown that ensued because you meant it in a philosophical sense.
I'm all for equal rights and all, but shouting "fire" in a theater is not constitutionally protected speech. And since we've all been trained to watch for suspicious activity when we're flying (its been that way since I first flew... in the 1980s), their actions don't really fall under the category of protected speech. I think if neo-nazis did anything similar (perhaps substituting a "heil" for "allahua ackbar"), we'd get the exact same response.
They paid their airfare, they agreed to the rules. Nobody made them get on the plane. So why are they suing?
|
|
|
|
|
snoangel
Dec 6, 2006, 2:48 PM
Post #3 of 24
(1162 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2004
Posts: 1715
|
I agree. That is completely repulsive. 
|
|
|
|
|
fenix83
Moderator
Dec 6, 2006, 2:48 PM
Post #4 of 24
(1162 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 22, 2004
Posts: 2397
|
That's kinda how I feel too.
I really do mean it when I say they got off easy, and not just legally (couldn't they be prosecuted for unruly behaviour, disturbing the peace or something similar?). I know quite a few people who might have been more proactive in their response to this, even as civilians.
-F
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Dec 6, 2006, 10:24 PM
Post #5 of 24
(1138 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
well, after reading the article i believe that what they did was wrong.
thought i doubt terrorist would actually dress as ME people and pray in public before taking over a plane, they certanly did so with the intentions of disturbing ppl.
and if they only prayed, that wouldve been totally f*cked up (like you getting arrested for saying 'thank god'), but their actions justified the treatment imho. just to teach them a lesson, if nothing more. and i hope some muslim beats them up for making fun of hes religion.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 6, 2006, 10:59 PM
Post #6 of 24
(1132 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
Considering that the goal of terrorism is to disrupt folks' daily lives and create panic, and considering that the simple act of praying to Allah (or Jesus, Buddah, the Great Pumpkin, or whatever) on a plane can do that, then didn't these folks succeed in doing so?
You can create disruption without killing, can't you?
It would seem so.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Dec 6, 2006, 11:33 PM
Post #7 of 24
(1129 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Publicity stunt... What's the worst they could have done ??? Cut up some passengers or crew, but the doors have been hardened. And I think it more likely that 6 guys would get their asses beaten to bloody pulps by 100's of people, as I doubt anybody will "lie down" anymore.
How publicity ??? The super left in the US will cry foul, and make a stink... But more importantly, while we can't see their shows, they can see ours, and they can easily spin it into propaganda that us Americans are treating Muslims like shit, and coax many into wearing a vest of TNT and ballbearings.
I think the action was fine, but we are too transparent for our own good... Our enemies are opaque, and we have to work hard for intel, yet we just give it to them.
Example:
How many Americans do you think know that lots of US ships were sunk in the Gulf of Mexico during WWII, right off the coasts of Texas and Louisiana by German U-Boats, and that we even sunk one of them ??? Not many. Why ???
Because during WWII we had censorship, as "loose lips sink ships". Do you think WWII was any less bloody that Vietnam or Iraq ??? Nope, in fact it was worse, but we didn't have TV coverage casualties showing the true nature of war to us in our homes. Think about it... Which war was the first war that had large scale protests ??? Vietnam, why ??? It was the first to be brought into our homes, and not be censored. Hell, now we have Geraldo over there.
We handicap ourselves to a degree directly proportional to our transparency to our enemies. The Israilies take care of shit, and don't brag about it... We blow up a car in some country near Afganistan with a missle launched from a predator drone and kill 4 high level Taliban and Al Quida, and the FBI brags about it in the papers the next day, "Can't escape the US, we'll find you and get you". That day, the CIA gets told by the government that allowed the predators to fly in their airspace that they couldn't do that anymore, since we were supposed to keep quiet about it, but instead we embarrassed them with our big mouths.
Do I advocate censorship ??? Yes, to a degree, as we don't need to let everybody know our business, even if people like Al Sharpton and Jane Fonda disagree. Some shit is none of my business.
Want another example:
myspace.com is now going to check profiles against a national database of registered sexual offenders to aid in protecting our kids from predators. I think its a great idea, but I heard about it on CNN today, and they even said that it will only work if the offenders don't lie about information... Do you think any pervs will change their info since hearing this ??? They would have done much better to leave that out of the news.
(This post was edited by rrradam on Dec 6, 2006, 11:38 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
fenix83
Moderator
Dec 7, 2006, 7:29 AM
Post #8 of 24
(1103 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 22, 2004
Posts: 2397
|
Adam, I agree with everything you in your post, but I still believe it was a probe, at least to some degree.
It's not about what these guys could have done, because it wasn't their goal, it's about a way to test and note the security forces' reaction times, protocols and procedures. A side benefit might even be that with all the stink this is causing some of the more PC-minded people might actually think twice before speaking up or otherwise confronting suspicious behaviour, thus making it easier for the enemy...
-F
|
|
|
|
|
tatertot
Dec 7, 2006, 1:30 PM
Post #9 of 24
(1081 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2005
Posts: 26
|
I think I agree with adam more than anything, this incident was probably an act to piss off more arabs in the middle east (they can see our tv, but we dont see theirs), so if they see what is going on here then they misinterpret it just like the liberal media here in the US misinterprets the war in Iraq and tells the truth but only tells the truth that manipulates it to confuse the audience.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Dec 7, 2006, 2:48 PM
Post #10 of 24
(1070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
fenix83 wrote: Adam, I agree with everything you in your post, but I still believe it was a probe, at least to some degree. It's not about what these guys could have done, because it wasn't their goal, it's about a way to test and note the security forces' reaction times, protocols and procedures. A side benefit might even be that with all the stink this is causing some of the more PC-minded people might actually think twice before speaking up or otherwise confronting suspicious behaviour, thus making it easier for the enemy... -F
Example... I work at operating nuclear power plants around the country, and I won't go intodetails, but even a highly trained force would NOT be able to gain entry into any VITAL areas of the plant, and if they were not highly trained, they would not even gain access into the PROTECTED areas before being killed dead. Even a plane crashed into one of the containment buildings would just end up being a burnt pile of aluminum outside the building.
They would rather blow up an elementary school or mall to create fear, as they are soft targets with a high yield of casualties... They are not going to fling themselves at an impenetrable wall. Even in Iraq, you don't see them attacking hardened bases, they attack soft targets (i.e. buses, markests, out inthe street, etc...)
(This post was edited by rrradam on Dec 7, 2006, 2:55 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
crankinv9
Dec 8, 2006, 4:31 PM
Post #12 of 24
(1030 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 713
|
The article you all keep referring to is an opinion piece and it is slanted pretty hard to the right. Look at the author's creds at the bottom, she is not a journalist.
Now, those guys did screw up and they are probably lucky that there wasn't some vigilante style justice handed out. But, they can file a law suit because it is their right to do so. Will the case go anywhere? Doubtful.
But, to take away from this incident the idea it is OK to infringe on my rights is bullshit and scary. Are you people that afraid? Seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Dec 9, 2006, 12:39 AM
Post #13 of 24
(1010 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
crankinv9 wrote: The article you all keep referring to is an opinion piece and it is slanted pretty hard to the right. Look at the author's creds at the bottom, she is not a journalist. Now, those guys did screw up and they are probably lucky that there wasn't some vigilante style justice handed out. But, they can file a law suit because it is their right to do so. Will the case go anywhere? Doubtful. But, to take away from this incident the idea it is OK to infringe on my rights is bullshit and scary. Are you people that afraid? Seriously.
(This post was edited by rrradam on Dec 9, 2006, 12:40 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Dec 9, 2006, 2:09 AM
Post #14 of 24
(1003 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
rrradam wrote: They would rather blow up an elementary school or mall to create fear, as they are soft targets with a high yield of casualties...
CNN Headline news just said they arrested a guy (recent Muslim convert) in Rockford, Il as he was going to blow himself and others up at the Cherryvale Mall with hand-grenades during the Christmas holiday shopping rush.
The coincidence is not so much that I said this just yesterday, but instead about 9-10 years ago I did a 4 month job in Rockford at a nearby Byron Nuclear Station, and am still good friends with people that live there, and I've even been to that mall plenty of times... In fact, I think I saw the Matrix there.
(This post was edited by rrradam on Dec 9, 2006, 2:11 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
pgdarmi
Dec 10, 2006, 2:13 PM
Post #15 of 24
(963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2003
Posts: 5
|
Infringe on your "rights"?? WTF are you talking about?? Your "rights" (& everyone else's) first & foremost include the "right" not to be murdered by someone as you innocently go about your daily life. Everything else is details.
|
|
|
|
|
colotopian
Dec 10, 2006, 3:13 PM
Post #16 of 24
(961 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Posts: 518
|
fenix83 wrote: I'd guess it was both, a nice way to disguise a probe and hopefuly make a buck too... Whatever it was, I have to agree with the pilot. I actually think they got off light. In reply to: Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Those are the words that started it all. Six bearded imams are said to have shouted them out while offering evening prayers as they and 141 other passengers waited at the gate for their flight out of Minneapolis International Airport. It was three days before Thanksgiving. Allahu Akbar: God is great. . Worth a read. -F
How about both; a security probe and a publicity stunt. Maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
colotopian
Dec 10, 2006, 3:24 PM
Post #17 of 24
(958 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Posts: 518
|
rrradam wrote: ...while we can't see their shows, they can see ours...
Why is this?
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Dec 11, 2006, 2:49 AM
Post #18 of 24
(939 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
colotopian wrote: rrradam wrote: ...while we can't see their shows, they can see ours... Why is this?
thats easy... quite a lot of US mayor networks transmit via satelite...
and how many afhghan, iraqui or lebanese stations that transmit via satelite do you know of?
|
|
|
|
|
rhaig
Dec 11, 2006, 8:02 AM
Post #19 of 24
(930 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 2179
|
crankinv9 wrote: But, to take away from this incident the idea it is OK to infringe on my rights is bullshit and scary. Are you people that afraid? Seriously.
what you don't get is that those planes you feel it is your right to travel on are the private property of some large corporations. and they have the right to refuse service to whomever they wish. Also to dictate the terms of that service. You have the right not to fly on their planes.
Nobody is infringing on your rights. At least not unless you have something to refer to other than the airport equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded room.
|
|
|
|
|
crankinv9
Dec 11, 2006, 11:55 AM
Post #20 of 24
(916 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 713
|
Where did I say that my right to fly is being infringed upon?
I'm talking constitutional rights and if you read what is written above my post you'll see people saying it is OK to censure what people say and do.
If you want to ask me my beliefs, fine. Don't try to read into my post something that isn't there. And, answer my question.
|
|
|
|
|
rhaig
Dec 11, 2006, 12:03 PM
Post #21 of 24
(914 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2006
Posts: 2179
|
crankinv9 wrote: Where did I say that my right to fly is being infringed upon? I'm talking constitutional rights and if you read what is written above my post you'll see people saying it is OK to censure what people say and do. If you want to ask me my beliefs, fine. Don't try to read into my post something that isn't there. And, answer my question.
to answer your question, no, you didn't say your right to fly was being infringed upon. you said
crankinv9 wrote: But, to take away from this incident the idea it is OK to infringe on my rights is bullshit and scary. Are you people that afraid? Seriously.
So how is this different from yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre? (which is not accepted as protected speech). note: I said
rhaig wrote: Nobody is infringing on your rights. At least not unless you have something to refer to other than the airport equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded room.
|
|
|
|
|
ninja_climber
Dec 17, 2006, 1:25 PM
Post #22 of 24
(866 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2005
Posts: 403
|
At first when I read the first paragraph I was pissed off at the airlines, but the further on I read , what they (The Imams) did was horrible... I don't understand that. Real religious people don't do that, as far as I was taught, when it comes to your religion keep to yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
unabonger
Dec 17, 2006, 7:18 PM
Post #23 of 24
(850 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 2688
|
ninja_climber wrote: as far as I was taught, when it comes to your religion keep to yourself.
Wake up. Many if not most religions teach followers proselytizing and conversion.
|
|
|
|
|
squierbypetzl
Moderator
Dec 18, 2006, 12:17 AM
Post #24 of 24
(836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3428
|
Obvious publicity stunt that might yield some valuable information to some bad people about security in US airports.
Stupid sobīs. Unless the defense is a damn moron they should lose their civil suit for sure (complicated though the issue may be).
These guys knew theyīd cause a stir by yelling that at an airport, now they cower behind the US constitution and mistreatment of muslims in airports.
Letīs say I wanted to make a statement about how people donīt take young black women seriously, and for this I arrange:
1) a white woman wearing a suit walks into the middle of a crowded theater (to keep with examples set by others) and yells "Fire! Help Fire!!".
2) a darker skinned woman wearing low cut jeans and a white cutoff tanktop walks into a theater with the same number people in it and also screams Fire!.
Then, to show everyone how black women arenīt taken seriously, I compare statistics on how quickly word spread and how long it took to evacuate the building.
Iīd be upholding my right to make a statement, wouldnīt I? . . . guess what? Fuck no.
Another example: Itīs not free speech if someone attends a G8 gathering, runs up to the reunion table and screams "Youīre gonna Die M---F--!!". And that person sure as hell wouldnīt have the right to complain about getting plugged with a few dozen .45cal rounds by people who didnīt understand that he was simply making a nihilistic statement about peopleīs mortality.
I hope they get to spend a little time behind bars, dumbasses, but that would only harshen fundamentalist/radical critiques overseas against the US.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
