# OT- heads up for those who flying anytime soon...SCARY ARTICLE



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14249


----------



## talman (Dec 31, 2002)

Very interesting read.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Thanks for posting, very interesting stuff, and I'm VERY glad I wasnt on that flight, SCARY!


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Amazing article. It's reassuring to know that the government had their eye on these guys, and loaded the plane with air marshalls. But it's worrisome that the federal agents have their hands tied by ridiculous laws that may actually allow a terrorist event to take place.

Racial profiling is the answer. Sorry if you don't like it, but it's the truth. We don't get attacked by Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Italians, Swedes or Indians: we get attacked by ARABS. Over and over again, for years now. It only makes sense to focus on these guys, and watch them like a hawk. If we don't, we are writing our own ticket to disaster.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> Amazing article. It's reassuring to know that the government had their eye on these guys, and loaded the plane with air marshalls. But it's worrisome that the federal agents have their hands tied by ridiculous laws that may actually allow a terrorist event to take place.
> 
> Racial profiling is the answer. Sorry if you don't like it, but it's the truth. We don't get attacked by Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Italians, Swedes or Indians: we get attacked by ARABS. Over and over again, for years now. It only makes sense to focus on these guys, and watch them like a hawk. If we don't, we are writing our own ticket to disaster.


I agree, Racial profiling is the answer. I'm not trying to be Racist, but I guess I am. I mean I just want to protect myself and my family.It might be selfish but I dont want to die at a young age, because you only have one life.

Now not all Arabians are bad, just like Americans, not all of us our good. I mean no culture is perfect, its just _some_ Arabs are bad.


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

scary..


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm not sure it's really racial profiling that's the answer, as much as nationality profiling. we shouldn't submit anyone with dark skin to higher scrutiny, but we should sure as hell submit anyone whose passport comes from a country with a high track record of terrorist activity to higher scrutiny. 

it still puzzles me that terrorists haven't shown much imagination in regards to terrorism since 9/11. (not that I'm complaining.) 

twenty men with hunting rifles littered across the country could do far more to terrify Americans than another plane bomb. we'd eventually catch them, but if each sniper were to kill ten people each, it'd be nearly as devestating from a numbers standpoint, and far more devestating from a "where the hell will they strike next" standpoint.

grisley stuff to think about....


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "It still puzzles me that terrorists haven't shown much imagination in regards to terrorism since 9/11."


I agree. They seem bound and determined to blow up planes. Maybe it's because their countries don't own any, or they've never been able to fly on one unless someone else paid for their ticket. 

I think most terrorists are about as smart as most criminals. In other words, they are as dumb as mud. They don't seem to realize that assembling a bomb in a plane bathroom is going to draw lots of attention. Or that Americans are highly suspicious of young Arab men on airplanes these days. Or that, as you say, there are probably much better ways to kill people and frighten American citizens.

These insects need to be stomped on HARD. We need an industrial version of RAID to eradicate them once and for all.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

So, basically we have an article in a right-wing screed detailing this person's fear that several men that she describes as Arabic were actually doing a dry-run for a terrorist plot. And her evidence is an article that suggests that "intelligence" has reported that they're trying this. (Presumably the same intelligence that found all those WMDs.) At the end, there's some dismissive comment that these men _claim_ to be musicians - but of course, any terrorist could learn an instrument.

Meanwhile, the plane was apparently teaming with air marshalls, who then hassled the men after wards, but found nothing.

You know what I find scary? The woman writing the article.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Taken a 92 year old woman to PDX lately??

My sister's husband's mom is 92.
They had her remove both shoes,try STANDING on one leg at 92.
Family couldn't go in closer to help her until they checked Dennis from head to foot AGAIN... she was standing there alone,she usually has a walker or w/c.
They had already checked him once to get thru the first gate...where could he have picked up something from the first gate to the second??

Essentially they checked this woman from head to foot..practically disrobed her ..
Other people in line were saying "alright already,let her through"...

After reading an article like that ,after watching grandma getting aboard to fly to Missouri..I am scratching my head.

May I assume all those guys were checked as throughly as this frail old woman ??


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Could be wrong, but this article smells like propoganda to me...


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Thanks for the link..

I live in the LA area and I haven't seen this story on the news at all. Thankfully there's radio to inform us about this..

Anyway, in regards to the grangma story, my 5 year old daughter was searched a while back. Her and my wife were traveling together. They made my wife stand away while they searched her. They kepted telling her she needed to stand back. My daughter wasn't to scared, but wasn't sure what was going on as well.

I'm glad they checked out my daughter so well. You never know when she could get into bomb making.. :sigh:


----------



## bintim70 (Dec 31, 2002)

true?


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

*Response from a pilot*










*The Hysterical Skies*



> She survived a flight with 14 harmless Syrian musicians -- then spread 3,000 bigoted and paranoid words across the Internet. As a pilot and an American, I'm appalled.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

*Re: Response from a pilot*



> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hmmm.. Reminds me of Michael Moore. :yes: 

It already happened once, do people STILL think the U.S. is immune to this stuff?

FYI- There are other reports of terrorists bringing bomb equipment on separately, then assembling it in flight in the john.


A 14 man Syrian band? hmmm.. I'm not buying it. The only way we're going to stop another attack is if ALL of us start reporting suspicious behaviors. If the woman on the flight is correct, as well as flight crew, etc, then there was reason to be worried.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

*Re: Re: Response from a pilot*



> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>:
> 
> A 14 man Syrian band? hmmm.. I'm not buying it.


That's nice for you.

You knowing anything at all about Syrians or Syrian musicians? That's what I'm not buying.



> The only way we're going to stop another attack is if ALL of us start reporting suspicious behaviors.


Who's this "we"? Does it include Arab Americans? Or are they only allowed to be the ones other people are suspicious of?



> If the woman on the flight is correct, as well as flight crew, etc, then there was reason to be worried.


If this guy I saw on Hollywood Boulevard once is correct, we're all being brainwashed by aliens, which I would say is a reason to worry.

Y'know, it's people like the dip**** who wrote the article that probably make the work of "fighting terrorism" a lot harder. If they have to deal with every hysterical person who fills their pants every time someone with a dark complexion uses the toilet, how're they supposed to do their job? Did you actually READ the pilot's article? You know, someone who is actually in the industry?


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Response from a pilot*



> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> You knowing anything at all about Syrians or Syrian musicians? That's what I'm not buying.


NOPE. I know nothing about Syrian musicians, and I'm guessing you don't either.




> Who's this "we"? Does it include Arab Americans? Or are they only allowed to be the ones other people are suspicious of?


All of US, at least all of the American citizens that live here. Now I know there are millions of illegals that live near me and they don't care, but all of us American cititzens should take it upon us to do our part. EVEN Arab Americans are included in that. But people like Osama's brother who was on Dateline a week or so back who basically said he wouldn't turn his brother in if he knew where he lived, should not be trusted. Even if he is an American cititzen.



> If this guy I saw on Hollywood Boulevard once is correct, we're all being brainwashed by aliens, which I would say is a reason to worry.


ha ha.. Hey, if that's what you want to believe, go ahead. I'm sure it's a easier to believe terrorists are making dry runs that believing a bum talking about aliens.. 



> Y'know, it's people like the dip**** who wrote the article that probably make the work of "fighting terrorism" a lot harder. If they have to deal with every hysterical person who fills their pants every time someone with a dark complexion uses the toilet, how're they supposed to do their job? Did you actually READ the pilot's article? You know, someone who is actually in the industry?


Honestly, I could only get through half the article. I thought it was BS. It was poorly written. So, you believe that pilot even though he wasn't there, and you don't believe the pilot that was actually flying the plane? hmm.. 

If it helps, I'll let you know I'm all for racial profiling when it comes to passengers on a plane. I've heard of to many senior citizens, etc thoroughly searched, but they are afraid to check to many Arabs because of the fear of lawsuits. I know that's not the PC thing to say, but who really cares. We all know the type of person who's a terrorist and wants to kill Americans.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I just saw Annie Jacobsen interviewed on CNN. She's the woman who wrote the story about the 14 Arab men on the plane. She was very credible, very intelligent. This is not a hoax. It actually happened, and Jacobsen is convinced it was a dry run.

I concur. I've never seen a group of 14 men all get up to use the bathroom at the same time (especially just before a plane is about to land). To argue that this was a completely innocent act is absurd. Jacobsen argued very convincingly that the men were testing the reaction of passengers, crew, and air marshalls. In other words, they were finding out exactly what they could get away with on a commercial airplane full of American citizens.

In short, be very afraid. The terrorists are among us. They are training and practicing for the next big strike. This is their mission, their passion, and their "crusade." Don't doubt it for a moment.

It's time to get tough with these vermin. If we have to kick every young Arab male out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> 
> It's time to get tough with these vermin. If we have to kick every young Arab male out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country.


Hope your ethnic cleansing campaign goes well.

Meanwhile I have a flight on the 31st of this month, should I be paranoid?


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Couldn't hurt.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> I just saw Annie Jacobsen interviewed on CNN. She's the woman who wrote the story about the 14 Arab men on the plane. She was very credible, very intelligent. This is not a hoax. It actually happened, and Jacobsen is convinced it was a dry run.


Well then she can't be the person who wrote the article, because that person was only credible to a paranoid idiot. Oh wait... nevermind.



> Jacobsen argued very convincingly


It is a flagrant abuse of language to use the word "argument" in describing Jacobsen's pathetic musings. The fact that her breathless non-story is getting any play at all is pathetic. Let's see: how many people were hurt? Oh, none. Were the "terrorists" thoroughly questioned? Yes. Was there ANY indication they were other than what they claimed? No. Oh wait - yes - they were ARABS! Hide the children before they eat them.



> In short, be very afraid. The terrorists are among us. They are training and practicing for the next big strike. This is their mission, their passion, and their "crusade." Don't doubt it for a moment.


I doubt they would use the word "crusade". That's reserved for crazy fundamentalist Christians. Like our President.

Yes Talkhard, you should DEFINITELY be afraid. They now know that you have seen through their disguise. They will target you especially, because you are working tirelessly to awake the shamelessly un-afraid American masses and turn them against the brown-skinned traitors in their midsts. I'd stay away from the windows if I were you. Now's the time to use that bunker you prepared for just this eventuality.



> It's time to get tough with these vermin. If we have to kick every young Arab male out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country.


It's too late Talkhard, *your* country was ruined when they gave ******* and women the vote.


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

It amazes me how insulated some people are. Too much violent imagery makes it easy to rationalize real violence as non-valid. They see the news on the same tv they see the horror movie on so it's all the same. 

I guess one's reaction to reality depends on how large they envision their domain. If you feel that your domain only extends to the end of your nose it's easy to put blinders on. Of course that kind of limits your definition of civic duty and proves your value as a citizen.


----------



## TOballer (Aug 29, 2003)

u guys think racial profiling doesnt take place already? my mom (who is middle-eastern--Persian) was invistigated for hour by Americans at the airport here in Toronto before her flight to Chicago. her plane was supposed to leave at 3...she ended up payin for another plane and leaving at 9:30...conciderin that our family is anti-religious and my mom is very much modern for a 40-yr-old this was very disturbing for her...imagin gettin held up at an airport for 6 hours. racial profiling isnt the answer. next thing u know these terrorists will find chinese ppl to kill for them...money does alot these days. is it fair for my step dad to shave off his beard (which actually looks stylish on him) every time he has to pass the boarder to go to Buffalo for business?(he still gets held up for hours)...i dont know what the answer is but i dont think racial profiling is it.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

That article was completely retarded, I don't believe a word of it. And to the incompetent fellow who says lets kick all the Arabs out of airports and our country well ur pretty much screwing up the economy as u know the Bin-Laden family has so much money invested in this country, they are Arabs, do you want to go ahead and do that? It's really great thinking, really.....great.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "It is a flagrant abuse of language to use the word "argument" in describing Jacobsen's pathetic musings. The fact that her breathless non-story is getting any play at all is pathetic."


Your ignorance of the facts would be amusing if it were not so dangerous. As long as you and other Americans refuse to open your eyes to what is going on, these terrorist scum will be free to continue their illicit activities. Here is just one article that confirms what is going on.



> "Flight crews and air marshals say Middle Eastern men are staking out airports, probing security measures and conducting test runs aboard airplanes for a terrorist attack."


http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040721-101403-1508r.htm


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> If we have to kick every young Arab male out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country.


If we have to kick every disgusting bigot out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> Well then she can't be the person who wrote the article, because that person was only credible to a paranoid idiot. Oh wait... nevermind.


I see. If someone doesn't agree with you, they must be idiots.. Ok, I see your way of thinking now.



> I doubt they would use the word "crusade". That's reserved for crazy fundamentalist Christians. Like our President.


I KNEW IT! From the second article sounding like Michael Moore wrote it, to the comment above, I knew this thread would turn political. I guess it's time to jump ship from this thread. Nothing gets accomplished on this board between Dems and Reps..


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "If we have to kick every disgusting bigot out of the country, so be it. We're talking about our survival as a country."


Good thing you don't teach logic. 

The fact is, we've always had bigots in this country and we have somehow survived despite it. In fact, we have flourished! Whites have hated blacks, blacks have hated whites; the Irish have been persecuted, the Hispanics have been reviled, the Jews have been tormented, and on and on. It's not a nice part of our history, but it has been there all along. And yet we are still a shining model of tolerance and equality. Not a perfect model, by any means, but about the best one going. That's why people come here to live from all over the world.

Terrorists, on the other hand, are a real and serious threat to our economy and our existence. A handful of terrorists, by selecting the right targets, can potentially bring our economy to a standstill. Imagine what would happen if another terrorist attack hit New York. There could be a mass exodus of business out of the city, and a worldwide erosion of confidence in the U.S. markets. A depression could even ensue. What if our water supply were poisoned, and people began dying by the thousands? What if our nuclear facilities were attacked, and the fallout spread over a large metropolitan area? The repercussions of this kind of attack could be incredible.

Terrorists are trying to achieve these goals every day. They sit around and dream up ways of crippling our ecomomy, terrorizing our citizens, and undermining our government. They have committed themselves to DESTROYING the United States, in case you haven't noticed.

Bigots? Yes, they're despicable. But they don't begin to compare to well-armed and well-organized fanatical Muslim fundamentalists.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

*The Last Word*

From that well-known commie pinko rag, the National Review:



> *The Syrian Wayne Newton*
> The man inadvertently behind a scare in the skies.
> 
> By Clinton W. Taylor
> ...






















> Anyway, this is good news. Nour Mehana's band might have acted like jerks on the plane, but it appears safe to say they were not casing Northwest Airlines for a suicidal assault, and we can quit worrying about this being a "dry run" or an aborted attack. And if Jacobsen was wondering why one man in a dark suit and sunglasses sat in first class while everyone else flew coach, well, it seems pretty clear that this was the Big Mehana himself.


Presumably the logical conclusion is that WAYNE NEWTON IS A TERRORIST TOO! My God, this thing goes deeper than we dreamed!


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> Good thing you don't teach logic.


Good thing you don't teach American ideals. The fact that you can say that we should send out all young Arabic men from the country with a straight face sickens me. Some of us actually know young Arab men and value them as friends and people. 



> And yet we are still a shining model of tolerance and equality.


Sometimes I think along these lines. Then I read your posts and wonder...

If you want to live your life at Orange/Red/Purple alert - go ahead. Build your bomb shelter, stock up on canned foods, whatever. But not all of us have to buy into all of this mass hysteria and paranoia. 

Your own fears and worries do not give you the right do discriminate against an entire race of people.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>:
> 
> Your ignorance of the facts would be amusing if it were not so dangerous. As long as you and other Americans refuse to open your eyes to what is going on, these terrorist scum will be free to continue their illicit activities. Here is just one article that confirms what is going on.


What, you still here? For God's sake, Talky-boy, SAVE YOURSELF! You're too brave, staying out of the bunker trying to alert the rest of us. Give up your noble crusade and head underground.

Oh, and while you're there, you can pray to the Messiah that owns the massively money-losing newspaper you just cited. Not to question its credibility or anything.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

IMMHO, racism has nothing to do with it. Arabs are not the enemy - there are many Christian Arabs, for example.

The enemy is radical Islam. Every terrorist act of suicide in memory was committed by radical muslims. This is the doctrine with which we are at war.

IMMHO, the US should keep tabs on all those who frequent mosques known to be radical (here in the UK the police do precisely this with the handful of mosques which preach terrorism, and a lot of plots have been foiled). A worldwide database could be made of suspicious people. And one would naturally screen all foreigners who can be identified as muslims and NOT excluded from the database because they are known to frequent moderate mosques.

This is not discriminating against people because of their skin colour. It is discriminating against people because they believe that Americans should be killed. I would say that this defines them as the enemy.

Is such a system perfect? Of course not. Mistakes are, and will be, made. Some people, just because they are carrying a Koran, for example, may be inconvenienced. But it would beat the heck out of "randomly" screening grandmothers and children and making air travel hell for everyone.

I repeat: EVERY TERRORIST ACT AGAINST AMERICANS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY A RADICAL MUSLIM MALE BETWEEN THE AGE OF 17 AND 40. I can give a list if y'all would like. 
:|


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

The lady in the article and a lot of people on this thread are acting like racial profiling is something that they aren't doing...

It happens constantly. The government does keep tabs on all people that they believe to be potential terrorists - they can tap phones, do whatever they want to watch them. They don't need any more power than they have.

I work with a lot of Indian-Americans and Indian Nationals. They get stopped and searched EVERY time they fly - and they're not moslems. They're not even Arabs. They just happen to be BROWN.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

The 9/11 Commission has identified that it is a violation of the rules for any airline to detain more than two people of Arab appearance. So racial profiling is not allowed.

Want proof?



> DOT, Delta Reach Settlement(Fined for profileing swarthy types)
> http://dms.dot.gov ( docket number OST-2004-16943.) ^_ | Monday, June 21, 2004 | Bill Mosley
> 
> 
> ...


Can you think of anything more nuts than punishing people for trying to stop terrorists? The airline is also a line of defense. People may well lose their lives because of the idiocy of the Transportation Dept, under the leadership of Norm Mineta, one incredibly stupid man.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

This is from a non-copywrited email, and can be quoted freely...


Be careful with your answers. Don't wanna to offend anybody, you know . . . 

Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following Multiple Choice
Test. 
No need to keep score. The events are actual cuts from past history. They
actually happened ! 
Do you remember?

1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
a. Olga Corbitt
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzeneger
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

3. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

4. In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year-old
American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davy Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a U.S.Navy diver
trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresad.
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

10. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to
take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into
the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers.
Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

11. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

13. On October 20, 2000 the USS Cole had an unprovoked attack which resulted
in the slaughter of 17 of our young sailors. This attack was carried out by:
a. Captain Nemo
b. Flipper
c. Moby Dick
d. Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40

Nope, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?

So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to
profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, identification, Secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning former Governors, and leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone because of profiling.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> 
> I repeat: *EVERY* TERRORIST ACT AGAINST AMERICANS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY A RADICAL MUSLIM MALE BETWEEN THE AGE OF 17 AND 40.


Timothy McVeigh was a radical muslim?

STOMP


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "Timothy McVeigh was a radical muslim?"


Cute. 

This is the same old line that liberals drag out every time someone mentions that all terrrorist are radical Muslims. "But, but, look! Timothy McVeigh was a white boy! Even worse, he was a hick! An ignorant backwoods doofus from Oklahoma. And a protestant! Yes, yes! One of those creepy God-fearing types from the Midwest! How awful! How horrible! How frightening!"

Liberals can only get worked up about types like Timothy McVeigh. They are the REAL threat, don't you know? But those muslim extremists, why, they're just poor misunderstood folk from downtrodden countries who would not have attacked us if we hadn't done something terrible to them first.

By the way, loved your list of terrorist attacks, Iwatas. It makes the point brilliantly.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> 
> 
> Timothy McVeigh was a radical muslim?
> ...


I stand corrected. I should have clarified: Every suicidal terrorist. McVeigh did not blow himself up: he ran.

This is an important distinction. It takes a really fanatical man to blow himself up, or fly an airplane into a building. And these human bombs are the hardest to stop -- unless one is willing to racially profile.

Also, McVeigh does not come from a culture where significant percentages of people say they support what McVeigh did. And virtually every American has no hesitation in condemning McVeigh and what he did. I wish that the Muslim community would do the same for their bad guys.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>:
> IMMHO, racism has nothing to do with it. Arabs are not the enemy - there are many Christian Arabs, for example.


Oh they're CHRISTIAN are they? We-ell, they MUST be decent chaps then.



> The enemy is radical Islam.


So THAT'S why we're not bothered about North Korea's nuclear weapons, the Anthrax mailer and White Racists like Timothy McVeigh - they must be our buddies.



> I repeat: EVERY TERRORIST ACT AGAINST AMERICANS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY A RADICAL MUSLIM MALE BETWEEN THE AGE OF 17 AND 40. I can give a list if y'all would like.


You said you were in the UK. A lot of terrorist attacks carried out by white Christians there - including blowing up the hotel that contained the then-Prime Minister. About time we started rounding up those Christians, you think?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "I stand corrected. I should have clarified: Every suicidal terrorist."


Or, more to the point, every *foreign* terrorist. We don't get attacked by Germans, Frenchmen, Brits, Poles, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Austrians, Slovaks, Swiss, Dutch, Aussies, Japanese, Koreans, Canadians or Mexicans. We get attacked by MUSLIMS--every damn time!

Sure, every once in awhile we have to deal with our own nuts (McVeigh, or the environmentalist wacko who was mailing bombs to people, etc.), but they aren't organized and they usually aren't trying to destroy the country.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>:
> 
> This is the same old line that liberals drag out every time someone mentions that all terrrorist are radical Muslims. "But, but, look! Timothy McVeigh was a white boy! Even worse, he was a hick! An ignorant backwoods doofus from Oklahoma. And a protestant! Yes, yes! One of those creepy God-fearing types from the Midwest! How awful! How horrible! How frightening!"


Erm, I don't think Stomp said any of that. But maybe it was in small print. And I don't think you know that he's a liberal - except that he must be, right? Otherwise he'd OBVIOUSLY endorse the claim that all terrorists are Muslim.



> Liberals can only get worked up about types like Timothy McVeigh. They are the REAL threat, don't you know? But those muslim extremists, why, they're just poor misunderstood folk from downtrodden countries who would not have attacked us if we hadn't done something terrible to them first.


You know, I DO teach logic (once in a while) and you're giving me some great examples. That was a straw man and a false dilemma rolled into one.



> By the way, loved your list of terrorist attacks, Iwatas. It makes the point brilliantly.


What point was that? Don't you think that any group could come up with such a list? If I could be bothered, I could come up with a long list of atrocities committed by those bigots you're so pleased to share a country with. One'll do for now, unless you want more.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "You know, I DO teach logic (once in a while)"


I'm sure you do. The class probably lasts 2 minutes.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>:
> 
> I'm sure you do. The class probably lasts 2 minutes.


Is this a joke? Is the point meant to be that I know so little about logic it would just take 2 minutes to teach it? Or are you praising me for my ability to condense information? Your humour is so esoteric.

Tell you what, Talky-boy, I'll send you a syllabus if you send me a copy of that book you eschewed health insurance to write.

Oh, and by the way, what do you think of that article in the NRO? Have they been infiltrated by extremists, you think? Are you going to cancel your subscription?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> I could come up with a long list of atrocities committed by those bigots you're so pleased to share a country with. One'll do for now, unless you want more.


I am waiting for this LONG LIST of atrocities that even remotely compares to those committed by radical islamic terrorists.

Oh, hate to be a stickler for detail, but only include events that have occured in my lifetime. Your link has nothing to do with the discussion. Was it a joke?


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh they're CHRISTIAN are they? We-ell, they MUST be decent chaps then.


Name the last time an Arab Christian committed an act of terror.



> A lot of terrorist attacks carried out by white Christians there - including blowing up the hotel that contained the then-Prime Minister. About time we started rounding up those Christians, you think?


None of these were suicidal terrorists. Only Islam (or a radical fringe of it) has convinced people to blow themselves up in order to kill innocent strangers.

Wake up! Don't pretend that everyone will sell their lives so cheap. Only one religion right now *celebrates* murder, *celebrates* suicide, and *celebrates* the random killing of strangers, even when it costs the lives of guys on their own side.

That religion is radical Islam.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

I'm not going to try and argue that radical Islam isn't the largest threat.

However, I'm pretty sure that the Homeland Security folks are keeping tabs on every radical muslim that they know of...

Also, how many Arabic people do you really need to search per flight? 50? 100?

I think after Talkhard ships out all the young muslims, he'll ship out all of the democrats and independents (apparently, that's the same thing?). THEN and only then, will our country be safe...


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> Only Islam (or a radical fringe of it) has convinced people to blow themselves up in order to kill innocent strangers.


I am muslim and no damn book or teaching is telling me to go blow up some building in order to kill some americans. You don't know anything about Islam. You probably don't know anything about other religions either. I suggest *you* and *Talkhard* go to a library and take some books about islam for example and read what it teaches. Aight man?????


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "I think after Talkhard ships out all the young muslims, he'll ship out all of the democrats."


Great idea!!


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "I am muslim and no damn book or teaching is telling me to go blow up some building in order to kill some americans."


You better get acquainted with the Koran, my friend. It advocates the killing and destruction of all non-believers (i.e. infidels). Here are a few choice quotes from that holy guide to your "peaceful" religion:



> "Fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them . . . those who reject our signs we shall soon cast into the fire . . . those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads . . . as to the deviators, they are the fuel of hell."


http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1998


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> Great idea!!


I knew you would dig that... in fact we could ship out all of the poor people too, and minorities!

We could make America into a utopia of rich white people, just like our forefathers envisioned.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> It advocates the killing and destruction of all non-believers (i.e. infidels).


Not the Qu'ran that I have. Like I said I suggest you go ahead and read for yourself. And then come here and tell us whos bad and whos good. And who should we kick out of the country and who should we not.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazer Ringbearer</b>!
> 
> I work with a lot of Indian-Americans and Indian Nationals. They get stopped and searched EVERY time they fly - and they're not moslems. They're not even Arabs. They just happen to be BROWN.


I know Greeks who have been stopped and searched. Because they're brown. Orthodox Christians, but you can't tell them ******* apart, seems to be the policy.

Did the terrorists win? Well, if transforming our country into a less free, less tolerant one is a victory for them, they did.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> 
> I am muslim and no damn book or teaching is telling me to go blow up some building in order to kill some americans.


A heck of a lot of imams disagree with you. Are you willing to publicly, and in your own name, openly condemn suicide attacks? Are *your* religious leaders willing to do the same thing? Because that is what it will take to convince most people that decent muslims are willing to go toe-to-toe with Wahhabism and Al Qaeda and the Ayatollahs of Iran. And when *that* happens, good people all over the world will have a common enemy, and radical Islam can be defeated.

But as long as muslims are not willing to reject the radicals, both in word and deed, then Al Qaeda always has a haven in muslim communities. And that is a terrible thing for everyone.



> You don't know anything about Islam. You probably don't know anything about other religions either. I suggest *you* and *Talkhard* go to a library and take some books about islam for example and read what it teaches. Aight man?????


How do you know? I certainly have read the standard textbooks, including Bernard Lewis' amazing work (whom I recommend to everyone, especially muslims). I also have a pretty decent college degree, and have studied medieval history to the post-graduate level. I am not ignorant enough to accuse others of knowing nothing just because they state a pretty obvious truth.

Radical Islam is the enemy. Will moderate muslims stand up and take this position, and avoid being tarred with the same brush?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> 
> Radical Islam is the enemy.


Radical members of *any* religion are the enemy of society. Christian radicals who shoot doctors suspected of providing abortions in their own living rooms are one example.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "Radical members of *any* religion are the enemy of society. Christian radicals who shoot doctors suspected of providing abortions in their own living rooms are one example."


My God, man! You are the epitome of cultural relativism and political-corrrectness. You are so immersed in your political theory that you can't see the truth right in front of your nose. No one here is saying that people ought to go around shooting abortion doctors, but you can't equate that with radical Muslim terrorists. The latter are a much graver threat to our peace, prosperity and security. Intelligent people are able to make this kind of judgement, to weigh two different "threats" and see the greater potential for harm in one over the other. I truly hope you can.

Your argument reminds me of the kinds of "debate" I used to have with guys in college, when everybody was sitting around shooting the bull and trying to be clever. But the time for sophomoric exercises is over. This is the real world. Life and death is at stake. Get serious and talk sense.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Radical members of *any* religion are the enemy of society.


Nope. Because radical Islam is the only one which celebrates killing innocents, and is willing to commit suicide in order to achieve it. They are not equivalent, and you are smart enough to see it.

Radical Islam is hardly a religion at all. It is a death cult. And death cults are far more dangerous to society than a lone person, or small group, that believes that abortion is murder, and that killing an abortionist would save lives. One may even agree with the principle without accepting that murder is the solution. 

But with a death cult like radical Islam, the principle *itself* is death for as many people as possible. If pro-lifers strapped bombs to themselves and strode into clinics to blow themselves up, then you would be right. But they don't. And you know why? Because fundamentally, they believe in *life*, and seek to preserve it. They are polar opposites of radicals from Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, etc. etc. etc.

Whether you are a libertarian, a republican, a democrat, or a green, you should be able to call this duck precisely what it is: A profound danger to America.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> Radical members of *any* religion are the enemy of society. Christian radicals who shoot doctors suspected of providing abortions in their own living rooms are one example.


I agree that radical members of (almost) any religion are enemies of society... if they're not a pain in someone's butt nobody calls them "radical".

But as you know, radical anti-abortionists killing doctors in the name of Christ doesn't really affect how we should treat radical Muslims who are trying to crash planes into more buildings... unless, of course, we are going to punish religion in all its forms.

I agree that radical Islam (and it seems to me more specifically radical militant Islamism) IS the enemy we currently have as a nation. Not the only enemy, but the largest one.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> But as you know, radical anti-abortionists killing doctors in the name of Christ doesn't really affect how we should treat radical Muslims who are trying to crash planes into more buildings...


That was in no way what I was implying. I was arguing the perception that Islam is, in some way, more sinister and more of a danger from extremists. Islam is a religion of peace and extremists corrupt the real religion. Just as Christian extremists corrupt Christianity. Those who corrupt religion to make it mean what they want it to are equally dangerous.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> 
> 
> Your argument reminds me of the kinds of "debate" I used to have with guys in college, when everybody was sitting around shooting the bull and trying to be clever. But the time for sophomoric exercises is over. This is the real world. Life and death is at stake. Get serious and talk sense.


"Sense" like bigoted notions of mass deportations.

As a brown-skinned resident of the US, I feel more endangered by people like you than by Al Qaeda. People like you are, by percentage chance, much more likely to cause me harm than an Al Qaeda attack.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> That was in no way what I was implying. I was arguing the perception that Islam is, in some way, more sinister and more of a danger from extremists. Islam is a religion of peace and extremists corrupt the real religion. Just as Christian extremists corrupt Christianity. Those who corrupt religion to make it mean what they want it to are equally dangerous.


I think that, in theory, you might be right. Beyond some history of Islam classes in college and general reading on the religion lately, I don't know that much about it and don't profess to be terribly knowledgable about Christianity or Islam.

As I said, in theory you might be right: Christians at the extremes might pose a massive danger to Americans and the US Government. In PRACTICE, though (i.e., the Real World), there is no such massive danger. There is such a danger, IMO, from radical Islam.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> As I said, in theory you might be right: Christians at the extremes might pose a massive danger to Americans and the US Government. In PRACTICE, though (i.e., the Real World), there is no such massive danger. There is such a danger, IMO, from radical Islam.


In practice, I agree, radical Muslims pose a greater danger at the moment. That's because when we actually turn to the current reality, we have to look at circumstances in play. It's a group of Muslims who, right now, feel oppressed by the US. If we were, for some reason, imposing our will on Christian fundamentalists, I don't think the *radical* elements of that society would espouse "turn the other cheek."

Radical Jews, in Israel, have espoused very harsh solutions involving destroying the Palestinians once and for all.

Radical elements of any group who feel "attacked" pose a great danger.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> Just as Christian extremists corrupt Christianity. Those who corrupt religion to make it mean what they want it to are equally dangerous.


That is simply hooey, and you know better. Is a Hindu who corrupts his religion to make it reflect his particular transcendental approach *EQUALLY DANGEROUS* as Al Queda? Is a Chasidic Jew who thinks (at no harm to anyone else) that his Rebbe is the Messiah *EQUALLY DANGEROUS* to Al Qaeda? 

And in the rare events when a really baaad Christian movement starts up, you know full well what happens: it is condemned and ostracized. Because modern Christianity, whatever its faults, really does not seek the death of innocents.

But here we have radical muslim groups. WHY HAVEN'T 99.99% OF THE MUSLIM WORLD CONDEMNED THEM?!


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Radical Jews, in Israel, have espoused very harsh solutions involving destroying the Palestinians once and for all.


Really? Quote your source, please. Actually killing millions of people?

As far as I know, the most radical want to separate Jews and Palestinian Arabs, including the forcible transfer analogous to what happened in Alsace (France/German border) several times in the past 150 years, and in India and Pakistan, and in countless other countries as a result of conflict. In fact, the radical Jewish plan to forcibly expel Palestinians is NO more radical than the Bush agenda, which is to forcibly expel Jews from their homes to which the Palestinians object!!

I dare you to find any religious group which is not widely condemned by the mainstream, which desires to kill innocent civilians and is willing or even eager to embrace suicide missions to accomplish such evil goals. Heck, I dare you to find ANY "extremist" Christian or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist group which openly advocates killing millions of people.

And if you cannot, then you should admit that not all extremism is equally dangerous or barbaric.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> 
> 
> That is simply hooey, and you know better. Is a Hindu who corrupts his religion to make it reflect his particular transcendental approach *EQUALLY DANGEROUS* as Al Queda? Is a Chasidic Jew who thinks (at no harm to anyone else) that his Rebbe is the Messiah *EQUALLY DANGEROUS* to Al Qaeda?


No, but it was pretty obvious that my entire post was referring to radicals and extremists. I wouldn't call either of your examples ones of extremism or radicalism.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>!
> 
> I dare you to find any religious group which is not widely condemned by the mainstream, which desires to kill innocent civilians and is willing or even eager to embrace suicide missions to accomplish such evil goals.


What does "condemned by the media" have to do with anything? Of course any group that desires to do those things would be condemned by the media...as well as by average people who have heard about it and by the vast majority of the mainstream version of their religion, just as nearly all Muslims condemn Al Qaeda.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> 
> My God, man!


1. Minstrel's not your, or anyone's "man".
2. Yes, what is YOUR God like? Does he approve of all the thousands of innocent civilians killed in Afghanistan and Iraq? What does he think of the 94 confirmed cases of torture/abuse/murder of probably innocent people in US custody in Iraq? If he approves because "they done it too!" doesn't that make *him* a relativist?



> You are the epitome of cultural relativism and political-corrrectness.


You know, you right-wingers are the real relativists. Apparently now there is no truth that cannot be tinged with political bias these days. If 99% of scientists say that Global Warming is a reality, you guys dig up some kook and point to him and say "look - a scientist who denies that there's global warming! That proves that all the others who say there is are just LIBERALS pushing their LIBERAL agenda!"



> You are so immersed in your political theory that you can't see the truth right in front of your nose. No one here is saying that people ought to go around shooting abortion doctors, but you can't equate that with radical Muslim terrorists.


Because more people died?
Now, given that far more *civilians* (you know, people who had nothing to do with anything, just innocent bystanders) have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than were killed in the twin towers and the Pentagon combined, does that mean anything? Or were they the "vermin" that have to be stamped out?



> The latter are a much graver threat to our peace, prosperity and security.


Stress on the "our". 
You know, I think the problem is that Americans like you are so used to being sat on a continent isolated from death. People in Europe who've had World Wars fought in their country are of the opinion that the Bush Administration are a worse threat to world peace than any Muslims. But I guess that's just because they're LIBERALS!



> Intelligent people are able to make this kind of judgement,


They can also spell it, but that would be a cheap shot.



> to weigh two different "threats" and see the greater potential for harm in one over the other. I truly hope you can.


All that your assessment of threat reveals is who you care about. You know AIDS is a far greater threat to the world than Muslim terrorists. The US Army will probably have killed more than ten times the people killed by terrorists by the time this is over.



> Your argument reminds me of the kinds of "debate" I used to have with guys in college, when everybody was sitting around shooting the bull and trying to be clever. But the time for sophomoric exercises is over. This is the real world. Life and death is at stake. Get serious and talk sense.


You really are a blowhard aren't you? What exactly are YOU doing about it? 
"What did you do in the War against Terror, Unc'y Talkhard?" 
"Oh, I was wounded in action! I got... CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME. Sorry children, I should've shielded you from that, I know, but tough times call for tough typing. SOMEbody had to set those insidious Liberal basketball newsgroup readers straight!"


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> As a brown-skinned resident of the US, I feel more endangered by people like you than by Al Qaeda. People like you are, by percentage chance, much more likely to cause me harm than an Al Qaeda attack.


That doesn't seem a very realistic assessment of your risks. You seem to be focused on the recent past to guide you to dangers.

Being a victim of a hate crime: 1 in 1,000.
Being killed from such act: 1 in 50,000.

Being killed by Al Qaeda destroying a skyscraper: 1 in 1,000,000 on the assumption that you avoid NYC and don't work or live in a skyscraper.

Being killed by Al Qaeda hijacking a plane: 1 in 1,000,000 on the assumption that you now avoid flying to minimize that risk.

Thus your comment.

I disagree.

Al Qaeda is very popular in some parts of the world and has received and still receives lots of money and support from those sympathizers. That is not the case for US racists.

Al Qaeda is organized in a methodical way and has clear methods and goals the members strive to achieve. That is not the case for US racists to any significant extent.

Al Qaeda has declared war on not only the US government, and not only all US citizens, but "collaborators". Meaning, they rationalize the killing of any person they like anywhere. That is not the case for most US racists.

Al Qaeda has declared its intention to procure weapons of mass destruction and to USE THEM. That is not the case for US racists.

Al Qaeda still exists and is a viable organization. Even if Al Qaeda were destroyed, the ideas that underpin its recruitment will not be.

In assessing odds of being harmed by Al Qaeda you have to take into account a relatively high probability that Al Qaeda or a similar group will succeed in this task within the next 50 years. If a powerful enough WMD, such as several suitcase nukes, or 1 shipping container nuke, or biological weapon, is deployed you will be unable to escape harm from Al Qaeda. Even if you personally escape death or injury, even if every family member does too, even if all your friends and associates escape physical harm, the US and world economies will be plunged into economic chaos and depression. The loss of civil rights will significant. And, perversely the likelihood of being the victim of random racially motivated violence will increase significantly.

So, Al Qaeda, a group that has in some parts of the world huge popular support, succeeds in their stated goal of killing as many Americans as possible and ruining the world economy, fails to harm your person: But someone you know likely is; you likely lose your job or otherwise lose significant income as many others do; the tax burden goes up dramatically to pay for security, travel is difficult, civil liberties are reduced and you are now far more likely to be attacked by idiots if you look somewhat mid-eastern. And you fear Talkhard?

Whether you want it or not, the war with Al Qaeda and radical militant islam is your war. Resisting that war - which is inevitable - will only bring about that which you fear.

As for being killed by a random US racist that you don't know, the chances are small in any event. Most people murdered in the US are either involved in criminal activity - on the job hazard - or are killed by someone they know. You are many times more likely to die at the hands of a family member than a racist. You are many times more likely to be murdered over a crime of passion than by a racist.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Iwatas</b>:
> 
> Name the last time an Arab Christian committed an act of terror.


Define "terror". And why do they have to be ARAB Christians? Are they extra peaceful or something?



> None of these were suicidal terrorists. Only Islam (or a radical fringe of it) has convinced people to blow themselves up in order to kill innocent strangers.


What does "suicide" have to do with it? Just so you can rule out Timothy McVeigh (who, by the way, is dead - and didn't exactly cower from it)? But to play along:

1. You are in fact wrong: the Tamil Tigers were among the earliest and most successful users of suicide bombers, and they don't even promote a religion. (And that's ignoring the Japanese Kamikaze pilots of WWII.)

2. Isn't that just a sign that believers of other religions don't have strong enough faith? I mean, it's not as if Christians mind killing other people - are they just not sure enough in Heaven that they have to save their own skins?



> Wake up! Don't pretend that everyone will sell their lives so cheap.


I thought these guys thought they got 40 virgins in heaven for all eternity. I don't call that cheap.



> Only one religion right now *celebrates* murder, *celebrates* suicide, and *celebrates* the random killing of strangers, even when it costs the lives of guys on their own side.
> 
> That religion is radical Islam.


Oh, so "RADICAL Islam" is its own religion now, separate from ACTUAL Islam? Well in that case, I'm sure you can find plenty of Aryan Nation nutballs who celebrate murder in the name of the Christian God. And it's not as if there isn't plenty to draw on in the Bible.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>:
> 
> I am waiting for this LONG LIST of atrocities that even remotely compares to those committed by radical islamic terrorists.


Tell you what: you first. You list all the atrocities committed by the radical islamists, and I'll see if I can match it. Now, do I have to match it in actual *effects* or *intent*? 



> Oh, hate to be a stickler for detail, but only include events that have occured in my lifetime. Your link has nothing to do with the discussion. Was it a joke?


Wasn't the discussion about what people are capable of? 
And what part of it did you find funny? Was it those nice white Americans using Indians' sex organs as tobacco pouches? Fricking hilarious.

But of course that's all in the PAST, and we're all SO much more civilized now.

(Oh, and how long does your lifetime stretch? 13, 14, 15 years?)


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>:
> 
> You better get acquainted with the Koran, my friend. It advocates the killing and destruction of all non-believers (i.e. infidels).


With your exhaustive knowledge of comparative religions, would you say that that quote was representative of the overall spirit of the Koran, or just a quote taken out of context? Because, you know, there just aren't ANY parts of the Bible that we can't all wholeheartedly endorse, are there? Not like:

*Leviticus:*

For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death. (20:9)

He that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. (24:16)

*Numbers:*

And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel. (25:4)

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. (31:15-19)

*Deuteronomy:*

And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. (2:34)

And we utterly destroyed them, ... utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. (3:6 )

And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them. (7:2)

And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them. (7:16 )

Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. (13:15)

And the man that ... will not hearken unto the priest ... that man shall die. (17:12)

And there's plenty more that I can't be bothered to transcribe here.

You know, all you religious types make me *very* nervous. Next time I board a 'plane, I'm not going to rest until all the God-botherers have been kicked off.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> As a brown-skinned resident of the US, I feel more endangered by people like you than by Al Qaeda. People like you are, by percentage chance, much more likely to cause me harm than an Al Qaeda attack.


Same here man. I remember very well when me and my family were going back to my country a year ago for vacation. They were checking my aunts daugher who was 1 year old. Telling us to remove her shoes and s***. Thats BS. Just because we look like foreigners or maybe not as white as they would like us too then we get checked more then others. :twocents:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> Same here man. I remember very well when me and my family were going back to my country a year ago for vacation. They were checking my aunts daugher who was 1 year old. Telling us to remove her shoes and s***. Thats BS. Just because we look like foreigners or maybe not as white as they would like us too then we get checked more then others. :twocents:


Out of curiousity, why do you blame it on your party being less white? I get checked all the time when I fly (although it's been reduced in the last year or so) and I'm not dark. I've seen plenty of blue eyed, blond haired travelers be searched. Old caucasian people in wheel chairs...

Nobody likes the time and hassle of a search (especially when you get a jerk who mumbles orders and then gets huffy when you don't know what he wants) but I'm curious to know why you assume the reason YOUR party was searched was because of skin color.

Ed O.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> 
> 
> Out of curiousity, why do you blame it on your party being less white? I get checked all the time when I fly (although it's been reduced in the last year or so) and I'm not dark. I've seen plenty of blue eyed, blond haired travelers be searched. Old caucasian people in wheel chairs...
> ...


There were hundreds more with us and they were only stopping people that they "thought" were a threat to this country or could do damage or something. They mostly stopped people that were talking another language and stuff like that. I guess they stopped us because we were speaking a different language. :whoknows:

And I'm not saying that thats wrong. But just check everyone and not try to discriminate and choose only a certain kind of people. Peace


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

And another thing guys. Those terrorist that they claim that they are killing for the sake of islam and doing good stuff, thats all BS. They don't even have a religion. Religions don't teach to kill, hate, or do other bad things. They use religion as an excuse to do that kind of stuff.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> With your exhaustive knowledge of comparative religions, would you say that that quote was representative of the overall spirit of the Koran, or just a quote taken out of context? Because, you know, there just aren't ANY parts of the Bible that we can't all wholeheartedly endorse, are there? Not like:


Okay, meru, you got me on that one. I have to admit, that list of texts from the Bible is a bit overwhelming. I had forgotten just how much violence there actually is in the Old Testament. Perhaps it's time to adjust my evaluation of the Koran. 

Thanks for the enlightenment.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> 
> Tell you what: you first. You list all the atrocities committed by the radical islamists, and I'll see if I can match it. Now, do I have to match it in actual *effects* or *intent*?
> ...


Thanks for answering the question, albiet in a roundabout way.

For those readers that don't want to wade through it:

The answer is YES the link was a joke. Having nothing to do with a war that is being fought TODAY against a determined enemy that is plotting TODAY with the ideological and emotional support of millions of followers of an anti-western, anti-reason, anti-freedom, anti-choice, anti-life ideology who TODAY harbor and nurture the warriors who want to kill us (US citizens in particular, more broadly, many people in the world that aren't them) TODAY.

The study of past racist atrocities has value. But to throw it into this discussion is a joke. A lame attempt at a conversation bomb. You think that story nukes the thread? Its relevance is what? Americans are supposed to feel so guilty for what happened generations ago that it should or would change the battle now faced?


----------



## TOballer (Aug 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> And another thing guys. Those terrorist that they claim that they are killing for the sake of islam and doing good stuff, thats all BS. They don't even have a religion. Religions don't teach to kill, hate, or do other bad things. They use religion as an excuse to do that kind of stuff.


or also to make it seem like a bigger cause than it actually is.

P.S. how ignorant is it to kill in the name of something whose existence cannot even logically be proven? i dont mean to offend any of you religious guys but nothing in the history of civilization has had more blood attached to it other than religion. IMHO Religion is the basic foundation of most conflicts.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>:
> Thanks for answering the question, albiet in a roundabout way.
> 
> For those readers that don't want to wade through it:
> ...


All right, do you know TODAY (or at least, in the past year) what government has been most responsible for the death of *innocent civilians* than any other government or organization? Hint: just about everybody in the rest of the world hates them, not just Muslims.



> The study of past racist atrocities has value. But to throw it into this discussion is a joke. A lame attempt at a conversation bomb. You think that story nukes the thread?


"Coversation bomb"? "Nuke the thread"? I don't even know what that means. Is this the way kids talk today?



> Its relevance is what? Americans are supposed to feel so guilty for what happened generations ago that it should or would change the battle now faced?


I've explained the relevance. Go back and read the post.

And you know what really pisses me off? All this "war" talk. A "war on terror" is about as likely to succeed as the "war on drugs". All it does is justify invading countries because, after all, you really can have "wars" with them, even illegal "pre-emptive" ones. 

The terrorists didn't "declare war" - they just killed a lot of people. And we've killed a lot more. Is the world, or even the US any safer? Of course not, as just about everybody outside of the right in this country realises.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> 1. You are in fact wrong: the Tamil Tigers were among the earliest and most successful users of suicide bombers, and they don't even promote a religion.


They are motivated by their existence as a people.

A couple of good friends of mine are Sri Lankan Tamil brothers. Their family left their homecountry because of the over two decade long aggressive ethnic cleansing of their people by the (Sinhalese) gov't, specifically after their home and affluent neighborhood was leveled by tanks. 

Their dad was a national hero after winning a gold medal in the high jump in the 1958 Asian games, but until recently the current gov't refused to recognise his achievement because of him being a Tamil. He currently works for the U.N. fighting for the recognition of his people and hopefully a separate state in Northern Sri Lanka for the Tamils to live in peace.

The Tamils have historically used everything from child suicide bombers to diplomacy to fight for their cause of not being wiped out as a people. The US has the Tamils on their official terrorist list.

http://www.eelam.com/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/526407.stm

STOMP


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>:
> 
> Okay, meru, you got me on that one. I have to admit, that list of texts from the Bible is a bit overwhelming. I had forgotten just how much violence there actually is in the Old Testament. Perhaps it's time to adjust my evaluation of the Koran.
> 
> Thanks for the enlightenment.


Okay, now you're just freaking me out.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TOballer</b>!
> 
> 
> or also to make it seem like a bigger cause than it actually is.
> ...


Exactly man. I came here because of war and it was because we were different then serbians and also religion played a part too. 500 years ago we (albanians) were catholic. Then the ottoman empire (the turks) came and stayed there for a about 2-3 hundred years and changed our religion. Big wars happend and millions of people died. Why?? because of religion. :twocents:


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> The terrorists didn't "declare war" - they just killed a lot of people. And we've killed a lot more. Is the world, or even the US any safer? Of course not, as just about everybody outside of the right in this country realises.


Of course war was declared by Al Qaeda. A long time ago. Look it up. But you knew that.

But hey. If you are a pacifist, you should have declared so early on. Just say what you mean - that the US in particular and the West in general has either no right or no need to protect itself from attack. As a pacifist, your comments make more sense. Trying to rationally talk your way out of a colossal and inevitable (at this point) conflict of ideas is pointless, and is why you don't make a lot of sense. But keep trying if you like. More native slaughter stories from 150 years ago should help.


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>:
> Of course war was declared by Al Qaeda. A long time ago. Look it up. But you knew that.


Can't you save me the trouble?

So what counts as a "war" these days? I'm serious. There is a ton of Aryan literature that declares "war" on non-whites. Does this count as declaring war? Does this mean we can send in the Army to rural Idaho? What if they kill a few people, can we do it then? I was kind of the impression that you could only have *actual* war (rather than the metaphorical war, as in "war on drugs") between *nations*. Can you give me any other examples of actual wars between a nation and a non-nation?

And how is it that suspected Al Qaeda members aren't covered by the Geneva Convention, which covers the rules of war?



> But hey. If you are a pacifist, you should have declared so early on. Just say what you mean - that the US in particular and the West in general has either no right or no need to protect itself from attack.


Who said I was a pacifist? Certainly not me. If you think what I've said implies that, please enlighten me. (And here, "enlighten" is used metaphorically, like "war".)



> More native slaughter stories from 150 years ago should help.


You really *do* find it funny, don't you? Hold on, I'll see if I can dig up some accounts of the founding fathers engaging in cannibalism, that'll have you rolling in the aisles. Be sure to explain to your local tribe how funny all this is next time you're playing the slots, because, after all, it's in the past, so it's not relevant to anything.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

At 05:45 in the am I leave for work.
I listen to Imus in the morning driving to work..it's a 40 minute drive.
This am they were talking about the lady and the "musicians"
on the plane.

They talked to some guy that told another strange story.
He said a marshall was on a plane,and thought it was strange that this "foreign Arab looking" guy was in the bathroom so long...
He moved to a seat in the front ,then knocked on the door and no answer from the bathroom.
Finally after pushing on the door,the door opened and the man came out.
The mirror was pulled off the wall,and "someone" had been digging on the wall...as if to break into the wall.
The other side of this wall is the cockpit.

The marshall couldn't prove that this man had done it..but there was obviously someone who had done it,and only after pushing his way in was he able to see the man face to face.
What was disturbing to the marshall,was that ANYONE else,would have been freaked out to see the digging on the wall and would have reported it to the attendants.. This guy said nothing,and just walked to his seat.

I am relaying this as I heard it..he seemed like a credible gentleman on the phone. He said the marshalls are all over the planes,you just don't know it.

Interesting huh??


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Wow...and here I've been working away and missed all the fun.

Thanks for not caving to this hate filled rhetoric Talkhard. You are the man.

I do feel sorry for the darker skinned innocents that are prejudged to be part of a group of young men that would commit violent acts against their fellow man. It's a real shame. Innocent people shouldn't be subjected to those indignities anywhere no matter their race or beliefs. 

To me it would make sense for the innocent people subjected to such treatment to be outraged and outspoken. Couldn't ask them not too. I would be. 

What amazes me is that the people on this board that are outraged and outspoken about it place very little (if any) blame on the group of young men that would commit violent acts against their fellow humans.

Sure they adamantly claim they do not support terrorists. But do they truly denounce it? I haven't seen it. 

I've seen them denounce the fairer skinned man that became outraged about 9/11 though. I've seen them call Iwatas, Talkhard and I bigger threats to their security than Saddam Hussein and Palestinian suicide bombers. 

So yeah. It's a shame that people racial profile and it's a shame that America is being ripped apart. It's also a shame that you aren't pissed off about people that look like you killing people. Maybe if more people like you got more pissed off at those young men and told them they aren't welcome to commit those acts of violence in your name they would stop. 

Doesn't sound like too much to expect. Does it?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Masbee</b>!
> 
> In assessing odds of being harmed by Al Qaeda you have to take into account a relatively high probability that Al Qaeda or a similar group will succeed in this task within the next 50 years.


One would need to agree with you that the probability of that is high to agree with this premise. I don't necessarily agree with you. Some of that is due to the fact that despite all the reports of how easy it would be, no such large scale mass destruction from a terrorist action has ever occurred, as far as I know. The closest I can think of are instances like the WTO attacks, or the Tokyo subway attacks.



> If a powerful enough WMD, such as several suitcase nukes, or 1 shipping container nuke, or biological weapon, is deployed you will be unable to escape harm from Al Qaeda. Even if you personally escape death or injury, even if every family member does too, even if all your friends and associates escape physical harm, the US and world economies will be plunged into economic chaos and depression. The loss of civil rights will significant. And, perversely the likelihood of being the victim of random racially motivated violence will increase significantly.


Certainly. And there's some chance all of that could happen. However, you make the mistake of assuming by "harm," I only refer to death by hate crime. There's always that chance, too, but I was more referring to all the other, lesser harms that "people like that" can wreak, whether by passing laws or by being police officers who racially profile or by whatever other means. In fact, if I were just to boil "experience harm from people like Talkhard" down to, "experience racism," I could say that my contention was already true (because I've already experienced racism several times, making that side of things 100%, and harm from Al Qaeda is not 100% certain to happen).



> And you fear Talkhard?


I like to believe that any real harm from bigotry is not very likely so, in that vein, I think I wouldn't phrase it as, "I fear Talkhard," and more, "The dangers of intolerance as a backlash to such terrorist actions are greater than the dangers of the terrorist actions themselves, to the average citizen."



> Whether you want it or not, the war with Al Qaeda and radical militant islam is your war. Resisting that war - which is inevitable - will only bring about that which you fear.


I'm not among those who believe that the this is a Clash of Cultures, or that terrorism has suddenly become an issue that will swamp us if we don't make war upon it.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> But just check everyone and not try to discriminate and choose only a certain kind of people. Peace


Why? Why make flying miserable for 100% of the public instead of for the 2% of the public who actually might pose a threat?

Isn't this ridiculous? If you are looking for a rapist, you tend not to arrest women. If you are looking for a suicide bomber, based on what we know from a long track record, limit it to muslim men aged 17-40. This does not mean kicking them off the flight -- it means taking care to ensure that they are not a risk.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> And another thing guys. Those terrorist that they claim that they are killing for the sake of islam and doing good stuff, thats all BS. They don't even have a religion. Religions don't teach to kill, hate, or do other bad things. They use religion as an excuse to do that kind of stuff.


Excellent! Now do you, and your community, and your leaders all stand up and publicly condemn those who corrupt Islam? Are moderate muslims like yourselves clearly isolating the Al Quedas and radical Shiites etc. who have hijacked your faith and a fair number of muslims, for the purpose of promoting death?


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>meru</b>!
> 
> And how is it that suspected Al Qaeda members aren't covered by the Geneva Convention, which covers the rules of war?


Because soldiiers who do not fight in uniform do not get treated as POWs under the Geneva Convention. See, Al Qaeda, for this reason and several others, is already an illegal army under the Geneva Convention. 

For the same reason, it is a violation of the GC to use ambulances for military purposes (which bad guys have done in Iraq), and to target civilians. Ditto.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

More terror in the skies...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/archive/2004/07/22/drunkcrew.DTL

STOMP


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> "Why? Why make flying miserable for 100% of the public instead of for the 2% of the public who actually might pose a threat?
> 
> Isn't this ridiculous? If you are looking for a rapist, you tend not to arrest women. If you are looking for a suicide bomber, based on what we know from a long track record, limit it to muslim men aged 17-40. This does not mean kicking them off the flight -- it means taking care to ensure that they are not a risk."


Stop it!! Stop it!! You're making too much sense! 

By the way, Iwatas, if you ever run for public office, you have my vote!


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

A bit more actual news related to the original story:



> LOS ANGELES | July 22, 2004 – Undercover federal air marshals on board a June 29 Northwest airlines flight from Detroit to LAX identified themselves after a passenger, “overreacted,” to a group of middle-eastern men on board, federal officials and sources have told KFI NEWS.
> 
> The passenger, later identified as Annie Jacobsen, was in danger of panicking other passengers and creating a larger problem on the plane, according to a source close to the secretive federal protective service.
> 
> Link (Scroll Down)


So... it seems that the Air Marshalls -- you know, the people actually doings something to defend Americans from attack -- were much more concerned about Annie Jacobsen's paranoid hysteria than they were about a bunch of Middle Eastern musicians in matching shiny red track suits. (Do terrorists usually wear uniforms?) I think this probably ought to lay to rest any stories people like Don Imus made up about suspicious activity in the bathrooms, etc; if anything like that actually happened, I doubt the air marshalls would be slamming Jacobsen in print after the fact. This story, combined with the National Review's discovery that these guys were actually musicians who were actually booked to play an actual concert at a SoCal casino, should pretty much lay to rest any theory that this was a 'test run' for terrorism. This was a case of one paranoid American freaking out because a bunch of Middle Eastern guys were on her plane. And, according to the air marshalls, *she*, not the terrorist/musicians, made everyone on board less safe.

This, to me, is something of a microcosm of what's wrong with America in the age of the "War on Terror." 9/11 (quite understandably) made us all freak out, and now through a series of overreactions and panic moves, we've tragically made our society less secure, less just, and less free.

Stepping Razor

PS I do respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, although they often scare me


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

Dang it! I'm flying out to Phoenix to see my girlfriend in a month. This creeps me out. Now, I am in no way a racist, but I have to admit that since 9-11, I have kept a more watchful eye on the race of people on the same flight with me. It's not too bad if you're flying within the States, but international flights can be scary. I just got back from spending a year in Australia, and I can say that I was pretty nervous when I saw several Arab men board my flight out of LA. The only comfort was that they seemed not to know each other. Good article though.:uhoh:


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

They flew from Syria to do a concert in Southern California ???

What on earth would be rational about that story??
THAT doesn't sound believable..

If you told me that Syrian guys who lived here, flew for a concert to Southern Calif,I still might be a bit sceptical,unless it's for a National Holiday gathering or something..

But to fly from Syria for a gig in Southern California ??

Color me suspicious,but that just doesn't make sense.


And the Don Imus show was not a call in from some nut..it was air marshall that Don Imus asked him to call the show.

A dark Arab looking guy hanging out in the bathroom for ions
would make me nervous also..
That's just the state of affairs right now...
You want to remember something..

VietNam lasted from 1959 to 1975..
I never felt at anytime that they were going to harm me or my country...this is different.
Common sense would tell you that all the pictures of the killers are Arab decent..watch them if they act suspicious.

They want to come here and kill you...get it?????


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

"Do terrorists usually wear uniforms?"

Uh..I don't know,do terrorists rent trucks and pose as workmen
and enter the WTC as in 1993 ??
Yeah,I do believe they could rent uniforms.

However that story turns out,I don't believe Americans can let their guard down one bit..

The Russsian guy that got killed by a man standing with an
umbrella, that shot a lethal dose of something in to his leg thru the end of the umbrella sounds rather far fetched doesn't it??

True story..
Gorgie something or other..


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>4-For-Snapper</b>!
> Dang it! I'm flying out to Phoenix to see my girlfriend in a month. This creeps me out. Now, I am in no way a racist, but I have to admit that since 9-11, I have kept a more watchful eye on the race of people on the same flight with me. It's not too bad if you're flying within the States, but international flights can be scary. I just got back from spending a year in Australia, and I can say that I was pretty nervous when I saw several Arab men board my flight out of LA. The only comfort was that they seemed not to know each other. Good article though.:uhoh:


Your chances of being killed in a traffic accident are still much much higher than being involved in a terrorist incident. And yet I'll bet that doesn't creep you out at all.

I think people are a little too fixated on air terror. There are millions of ways to die.

barfo


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> "Do terrorists usually wear uniforms?"
> 
> Uh..I don't know,do terrorists rent trucks and pose as workmen
> ...


Jackie, you're sort of missing his point here. He's not saying, would terrorists wear _disguises_, he's saying, would they all dress alike in matching jumpsuits. Of course posing as workmen makes sense. Posing as guys wearing matching jumpsuits doesn't.



> However that story turns out,I don't believe Americans can let their guard down one bit..


Yeah, you stay focused on terrorists. There's nothing else bad out there, after all.



> The Russsian guy that got killed by a man standing with an umbrella, that shot a lethal dose of something in to his leg thru the end of the umbrella sounds rather far fetched doesn't it??
> True story..
> Gorgie something or other..


Bulgarian. And he was a defector killed by the Bulgarian secret service in London. In the '80s. Do you really think TERRORISTS are going to start attacking us with umbrellas? Somehow the good people of London stayed pretty calm around umbrellas after this incident.

Look Jackie: they WERE musicians. It doesn't matter if you don't believe it, or if you're suddenly suspicious of everything Muslims do. Are you seriously suggesting they should just stay home?


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> Your chances of being killed in a traffic accident are still much much higher than being involved in a terrorist incident. And yet I'll bet that doesn't creep you out at all.
> ...


True enough. And let me make clear that I'm not a neurotic worry-wart. I'm just a tad cautious (who wouldn't be?) when I see young Arab men on my flight. One or two doesn't bother me one bit, but 6,7, or 8 sure would. And I'm well aware of the risks of driving accidents, and I know that my chances of being killed in that instance are much higher, but we need to remember that since 9-11 Americans have it psychologically hot-wired into their minds that an air-terrorism attack is a possibility, no matter how minute.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Puleaze !!!

"Do you really think TERRORISTS are going to start attacking us with umbrellas? "

no I don't !!!

But it was just inserted to go with my point of view.

Please don't take it to extremes.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/article_landing.aspx?titleid=1&articleid=711
OR
http://www.kfi640.com/ericleonard.html

personally I found the "explanation" less believable than the original story...

I am a huge world music lover,and NOWHERE have I seen just
who these guys were.
Wouldn't it have been very helpful to at least name this traveling
group????? 

If they weren't of large star quality,the trip wouldn't pay for itself with the contract money made..it just doesn't make sense .
Flying that many musicians from the Far East for a gig in a Casino??

Generally the Casino talent is less than the main attractions anyway..
less money,oh well whatever.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/article_landing.aspx?titleid=1&articleid=711
> OR
> http://www.kfi640.com/ericleonard.html
> ...


Here's your man: 










Nour Mehana, "The Syrian Wayne Newton." 

Jackie, it may or may not seem believable, but it's true. The Syrian Wayne Newton (!) and his band were the "terrorists" in question. (Hence the matching shiny red satin tracksuits with the band's name stitched in Arabic lettering across the back; as I said before, an unlikely terrorist uniform.)

An enterprising reporter for the National Review -- which, as I'm sure you're aware, isn't exactly some left-wing pinko publication, but is in fact probably the country's most well-respected organ of rock-ribbed conservative opinion -- sat down with Google to figure out whether the Syrian musician story really added up. It did.

If you read to the bottom (and it's definitely worth it for the pictures, if nothing else) you'll see that the author, in his rock-ribbed conservative way, agrees with you in thinking Annie Jacobsen's terrification (not a real word, but I think it captures the idea) was justified.

I'll stick with the opinion of the air marshalls, who, we should remember...

a) were closely monitoring the musicians for the duration of the flight. 

b) never felt that anything the musicians were doing warranted their intervention.

c) felt that it was Annie Jacobsen's hysterical reaction to the musicians that presented the greatest danger to the passengers on board her flight.

It seems to me, once we get past Jacobsen's breathless overreaction melodramaticization of the events, this story should make us feel better, not worse, about the state of security in the skies. 

Basically, a bunch of harmless Syrian musicians on a flight were carefully monitored by undercover air monitors, who were ready to intervene at a moment's notice if these guys turned out to be anything more frightening than musicians.

In the words of one of our very few truly great presidents, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Let's meet the challenge of the very real threats presented to us without hysterically creating imaginary ones under every rock, behind every tree, or within the shiny red satin tracksuits of every Syrian Wayne Newton.

Although, presumably, there's only one Syrian Wayne Newton.

Stepping Razor


----------



## Target (Mar 17, 2004)

Musicians eh? So it was drugs then. Not terrorism. hmmmm.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Hey thank you, for a most interesting article !


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

http://orientaltunes.com/realaudio/Emta_Ezzaman-288.ram

undoubtedly this brought the house down.. 

But seriously,I am crazy about Cheb Mami and Cheb Khaled and any RAI music..


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

I was away for awhile, so I just now read the first few pages of this thread. 

Man oh man, what a fun thread! I'm so sorry I missed it in real time. I laughed, I cried, I laughed some more. Ok, I didn't really cry. 

This wins my award for best OT thread of the month. Here are some bananas to celebrate:

:banana: :vbanana: :bbanana: :rbanana: 

Hmm... why are those bananas dancing so close together? And not a white banana among them... 

barfo


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> I was away for awhile, so I just now read the first few pages of this thread.
> 
> Man oh man, what a fun thread! I'm so sorry I missed it in real time. I laughed, I cried, I laughed some more. Ok, I didn't really cry.
> ...


barfo, you kill me! :rofl:


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

Why in the world did they all have to go to the bathroom constantly? It seems strange.

They should just drive next time.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

MSNBC just reported that 13 of 14 have expired visas..
7/25 11:26 am


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

Boy, this didn't go very far after I chimed in.

Now there's a terror alert for financial sectors. Uh oh.


----------

