British Airline Passengers Refuse to Fly With Muslims on Board

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
And then they wonder why a majority of muslims hate them.

hate? good going... You probably agreed with Osama and what he did to America :thumbsup:

No.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
I think the entire world is reaching a point of no return in terms of dealing with the Muslim problem that exists today. Let's be serious, the majority of all terrorists attacks are implicated by Muslims.

I have no problem with airports screening every last Muslim. It just makes sense, stop looking at this through your politically correct glasses. This is about saving lives, and if that means screening every last damn Muslim then so be it. Unfortunately this is the world we live in, and it will only change when the religion of Islam and its followers undergo serious change.

Islam will not change. Americans must change to accept Islam. A few terrorists do not represent the whole of Islam just as a few american rapists in Iraq donot represent the whole American population.

 

[Buck Armstrong]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
I think the entire world is reaching a point of no return in terms of dealing with the Muslim problem that exists today. Let's be serious, the majority of all terrorists attacks are implicated by Muslims.

I have no problem with airports screening every last Muslim. It just makes sense, stop looking at this through your politically correct glasses. This is about saving lives, and if that means screening every last damn Muslim then so be it. Unfortunately this is the world we live in, and it will only change when the religion of Islam and its followers undergo serious change.

Islam will not change. Americans must change to accept Islam. A few terrorists do not represent the whole of Islam just as a few american rapists in Iraq donot represent the whole American population.

America is more than willing to "change to accept Islam", but not because we MUST, but because we WANT TO. If you think otherwise, than you are simply stupid or brainwashed; the US possesses the power to annihilate you and your entire country within minutes, while you celebrate the destruction of a single Israeli tank or American helicopter as if that even puts a tiny dent in our capability. If America was at all like you, we would've already reduced your little nation to dust with the push of a button.

But we're not the ones who desire genocide; thats you and yours. We WANT to accept you, but you have no desire or intention to ever accept us or anyone else who doesn't believe in your ridiculous medieval fairytales. So howbout you forget about causing even more death and destructon and just fvcking EVOLVE like the rest of the world has.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Termagant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a...l?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair.

"Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists.

Is this a good thing? I think it may be unfair to people only because of their appearance.

The majority of terrorists attacking the Western world are Muslims, should they be profiled?

A benefit of this practice may be that it could inconvenience the Mythical Moderate Muslims to the point where they take care of their countrymen who are terrorists.

Of course they should be profiled. It would be pure ignorance not to profile Muslims.

Really? Isn't profiling a tad unfair to the vast majority of Muslims who AREN'T terrorists? Just because it makes sense from a security stand point doesn't make it the right thing to do you know...

so how do you know someone is a muslim? because they look middleeastern? Is that really a smart way to do things, when the two largest muslim countries are pakistan and indonesia? How exactly do you prfile a belief?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: glenn beck

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Termagant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a...l?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair.

"Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists.

Is this a good thing? I think it may be unfair to people only because of their appearance.

The majority of terrorists attacking the Western world are Muslims, should they be profiled?

A benefit of this practice may be that it could inconvenience the Mythical Moderate Muslims to the point where they take care of their countrymen who are terrorists.

Of course they should be profiled. It would be pure ignorance not to profile Muslims.

Really? Isn't profiling a tad unfair to the vast majority of Muslims who AREN'T terrorists? Just because it makes sense from a security stand point doesn't make it the right thing to do you know...

you have failed at arguing

good one. Sp did you. Now you made me do it too. Anyways thanks for dragging the thread down to this level.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: glenn beck

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: glenn beck

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Termagant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a...l?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair.

"Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists.

Is this a good thing? I think it may be unfair to people only because of their appearance.

The majority of terrorists attacking the Western world are Muslims, should they be profiled?

A benefit of this practice may be that it could inconvenience the Mythical Moderate Muslims to the point where they take care of their countrymen who are terrorists.

Of course they should be profiled. It would be pure ignorance not to profile Muslims.

Really? Isn't profiling a tad unfair to the vast majority of Muslims who AREN'T terrorists? Just because it makes sense from a security stand point doesn't make it the right thing to do you know...

you have failed at arguing

No, but he has won at humanity.

you stupid hippies are the one's that are gonna get us killed.

And your the ones who will succeed where the "terrorists" have failed, and destroy ourselves from within, step by step, and become exactly what we have stood against.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison
WIthout judging these actions being right or wrong, they are hardly surprising. The muslim community has done a poor job of policing its own and condemning terrorist actions. At some point the rest of the world is going to crack down on the entire muslim community because there is going to be no other way to remove this problem.

I agree, that probably will happen...and what could have been the job of police and moderates within the Muslim community will become a full blown war between countries and within countries. Part of the blame lies with moderate Muslims failing to do anything to clean up their communities, and part of the blame lies with the rest of us for giving them little reason to do so. Threatening them (which is what we're basically doing) is NOT good motivation in this case.

You forgot to mention the blame on others for interfering and policy choices as well. Not that it's total, of course, just additional. I mostly bring this up because I don't see much blame being laid on moderate Christians to reign in extremists, and other similar situations.

When were the last MASS MURDERS committed by Christians? Especially something as horrific as 9/11?

I think the russians raised gronzy pretty much, and just a few years ago. Christians mass killing eachother and others is just something so common that noone even cares anymore.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison
WIthout judging these actions being right or wrong, they are hardly surprising. The muslim community has done a poor job of policing its own and condemning terrorist actions. At some point the rest of the world is going to crack down on the entire muslim community because there is going to be no other way to remove this problem.

I agree, that probably will happen...and what could have been the job of police and moderates within the Muslim community will become a full blown war between countries and within countries. Part of the blame lies with moderate Muslims failing to do anything to clean up their communities, and part of the blame lies with the rest of us for giving them little reason to do so. Threatening them (which is what we're basically doing) is NOT good motivation in this case.

Much of the blame on our part is not doing something sooner and just hoping the problem would go away. Hopefully people are getting tired of these antic and stop crying about profiling.. Maybe the the muslim community would do something about this problem everything if every muslim had to be frisked before they get on any form of public transportation. It is past time to inconvenience the portion of the population that is causing the problems.

Yes, because the best way to get people to help you is treating them all like a bunch of criminals. If we start treating all Muslims like they are terrorists, we're going to be giving that much more support to the radical elements. After all, it's hard to refute the words of a radical cleric telling Muslims that the west is anti-Muslim when they are getting harassed at airports while white Christians breeze right through security.

We'd be far better off helping and supporting moderate leaders within the Islamic community, the rather questionable security gains from profiling would be offset by the damage we'd do the moderate influence.

So far being nice to them and encouragin the moderates has gained us nothing. There groups is causing the problems, it is time to crack down on that group. It is past time to stop being PC with this problem.

But it hasn't hurt us, either. Your plan looks like a recipe for disaster.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: RainsfordSo? Most stupid people I know seem to vote Republican, does that mean it's ok to assume all Republicans are stupid?

And democrats wonder why they cant win elections....

Thank you for proving my point...

You did not prove anything. You proved that if you wanted to find stupid people, you would profile voting booths for republicans. I mean, if you are trying to find stupid people and you think they are republican, you dont check for them at DNC headquarters.

Edit for your edit.

No your comment was stupid and an ad hom and has the same obvious answer.

but of course, you would miss all the stupid people at the democratic headquarters. Which is the point of the analogy, btw.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
You know full well that I can't tell you that "cultivating those kind of friendships isn't an important consideration", because its perhaps THE MOST important consideration! I already admitted that its WRONG for a group of passengers to declare "We will not fly with you because you are Muslim and/or Arab", and you are correct that I would personally be humiliated and furious if they did the same to me based on my religion or race. So whats the answer then? Is there a middle-ground between giving all Muslims a free boarding pass so as not to piss them off, and also focusing our efforts on the factual, very narrow parameters defining those who can and will slaughter me and my entire family just for boarding a plane to Disney World?!

If so, I'm all for it!

So the question is, if you were humiliated by this, would you go back to your church and say lets go blow some stuff because we dont deserve this treatment...

Of course not. Thats one of the main things people in the West choose to ignore for whatever reason. When Pat Robertson says the president of Venezuela should be assassinated, a very few Christians might agree, but none of them actually get on a plane and go kill him! And when the Pope plays his greatest hits, "Homosexuality is evil, no masturbation or birth control", etc., even Catholics laugh at him! There IS a difference between our extremists and theirs; ours are marginialized and mocked even by the religious, while theirs will actually kill you and everybody standing next to you over a fvcking cartoon!

Actually alot of people would agree that chavez should be killed, and i really see no reason for it except that "he hates us"

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong

Originally posted by: senseamp
I didn't know the Brits were a bunch of cowards. Oh noes, two Muslims on a plane, we are all going to die.
This is in a country that used to rule over hundreds of millions of Muslims only a century ago. Pretty sad.

They're not cowards, and if you knew anything of their history, you wouldn't say that. They have repeatedly proven as brave or braver than us in more dire circumstances, and they're also not isolated and protected by two vast oceans and the most powerful military in the world. Plus, they have a much larger percentage of radical Muslims in their country than we do, and they've lived under a perpetual threat since 9/11. As in WWII, they are on the frontlines while we are in the rear, and they have taken constant fire from the rest of the world for going along with the US' failed policies.

When they "ruled over hundreds of millions of Muslims", they WERE the greatest power in the world, and said Muslims were in many ways much better off under their rule than they are today. They are, and have been for centuries, our most loyal ally, and they have suffered much because of it. So don't judge them too harshly; they are some of the finest people on this planet, and partly because of us, they are in an almost impossible situation. ANY other country would have long since abandoned our alliance in pursuit of their own best interests.

The us was a closer ally of france for at least our first 50 years, and england didn't become our primary ally until ww2. And how do you judge the current british by the actions and deeds of their long dead great grandparents?

Also im not sure that Britian was ever the most powerful country in the world, after the franco-prussia war it was prussia/germany, and before that it was france, and to go further back you might need to look at the ottomans at their peak. The british ruled the seas for a while, but even that time period was short basically the 18th and 19th centuries. They may have owned tremendous tracts of the earth and been incredibly wealthy, but they never maintained the leverage of these areas for them to be anymore than areas for private citizens to profit from.

 

[Enig101]

The "Terrorist victory" statement is entirely true. The entire objective of Terrorism is to, guess what, scare people. If you are too scared to sit on a plane with middle-eastern people you (apart from being pathetic and racist) have let the Terrorists succeed.

Profiling muslims or middle-eastern people is exactly the same as stepping off a plane they are on. It is racist, immoral and completely unnecessary. Terrorists can be any ethnicity.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Enig101
The "Terrorist victory" statement is entirely true. The entire objective of Terrorism is to, guess what, scare people. If you are too scared to sit on a plane with middle-eastern people you (apart from being pathetic and racist) have let the Terrorists succeed.

Profiling muslims or middle-eastern people is exactly the same as stepping off a plane they are on. It is racist, immoral and completely unnecessary. Terrorists can be any ethnicity.

That's really not exactly true.

The goal of many muslim extremists is the elimination of non-muslims.

The goal of terrorism is to make a stand for a principle (or set of principles) against an overwhelming opponent - ideally resulting in a change of some sort that is beneficial to your cause.

Fear isn't the goal, it's the tool. They want fear to provoke action; specifically in this case to get the citizens of the US to force the government to change policies which they view as wrong or harmful.

Although most people classify terrorist actions as a form of war, I believe there is a good argument for more closely relating them to a political action, or even self-defense. I can also provide arguments against those ideas, but they still have merit.

 

[Enig101]

Very well, I concede it is more accurate to say that fear is the "tool". However, that still makes it an objective to the terrorists, and in the case of these persons they have already suceeded to a large degree.

This ties into things like wire-tapping infringing on our freedoms because people are afraid of losing a little security.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Enig101
Very well, I concede it is more accurate to say that fear is the "tool". However, that still makes it an objective to the terrorists, and in the case of these persons they have already suceeded to a large degree.

This ties into things like wire-tapping infringing on our freedoms because people are afraid of losing a little security.

Completely agree. I just wanted to point out the distinction.

 

[5150Joker]

People that are afraid to fly with others based on them looking like a certain ethnic/racial group are just pussy bigots, thats all.

 

[Gaard]

I wouldn't say that. But then I'm guessing neither would you. I'm thinking you just want to 'stir the pot' a little.

Anyways, I'm wondering what it'd be like if the roles were reversed and they suffered a huge loss. Would the ME use profiling as a defense tactic and how would it be accepted over there?

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong

Originally posted by: senseamp
I didn't know the Brits were a bunch of cowards. Oh noes, two Muslims on a plane, we are all going to die.
This is in a country that used to rule over hundreds of millions of Muslims only a century ago. Pretty sad.

They're not cowards, and if you knew anything of their history, you wouldn't say that. They have repeatedly proven as brave or braver than us in more dire circumstances, and they're also not isolated and protected by two vast oceans and the most powerful military in the world. Plus, they have a much larger percentage of radical Muslims in their country than we do, and they've lived under a perpetual threat since 9/11. As in WWII, they are on the frontlines while we are in the rear, and they have taken constant fire from the rest of the world for going along with the US' failed policies.

When they "ruled over hundreds of millions of Muslims", they WERE the greatest power in the world, and said Muslims were in many ways much better off under their rule than they are today. They are, and have been for centuries, our most loyal ally, and they have suffered much because of it. So don't judge them too harshly; they are some of the finest people on this planet, and partly because of us, they are in an almost impossible situation. ANY other country would have long since abandoned our alliance in pursuit of their own best interests.

The us was a closer ally of france for at least our first 50 years, and england didn't become our primary ally until ww2. And how do you judge the current british by the actions and deeds of their long dead great grandparents?

Also im not sure that Britian was ever the most powerful country in the world, after the franco-prussia war it was prussia/germany, and before that it was france, and to go further back you might need to look at the ottomans at their peak. The british ruled the seas for a while, but even that time period was short basically the 18th and 19th centuries. They may have owned tremendous tracts of the earth and been incredibly wealthy, but they never maintained the leverage of these areas for them to be anymore than areas for private citizens to profit from.

Buck, if you re-read your history books you will see the one thing the brits were good at is 'divide and rule'. Who do you think was responsible for the root of current terrorism? I refer to the displacement of Palestinian people. It was the brits. Who divided a large portion of the ME into the countries you see today? The brits. Who created a muslim homeland (Pakistan - where most of the brit terrorists come from today) out of India? The brits. Who was partly responsible for the overthrow of the elected prime minister of Iran Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953 - which eventually lead to the Iran revolution? And why? Because he wanted to negotiate higher royalties from the British for the oil they were extracting from Iran.

I could go on but you should get my point. The brits are IMHO a bunch of jerks who created the concept of colonization and discrimination long before anyone else did. In many ways they are reaping what they sow.

 

[BarneyFife]

We have one guy on this thread who is trying to imply that Abortion clinics being blown up is a serious problem equal to Muslim wackos. I'm sure this person would compare 9/11 to Waco in order to defend his blind love for Muslims.

We have others who think that its not ok to profile because it may hurt feelings and that we don't know what a Muslim looks like. Well I'm pretty sure I can guess 99/100 times who a person of middle eastern descent looks like and since they usually blow things up, then I'm gonna look at them more closely than Bob Green from Nashville, TN.

If I have an overseas flight from the US to London, damn right I want them to profile every arab/south pacific person on the plane. When you hear of a building being blown up, who are the first suspects that come to your mind? Yes, Muslims.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
We have one guy on this thread who is trying to imply that Abortion clinics being blown up is a serious problem equal to Muslim wackos. I'm sure this person would compare 9/11 to Waco in order to defend his blind love for Muslims.

We have others who think that its not ok to profile because it may hurt feelings and that we don't know what a Muslim looks like. Well I'm pretty sure I can guess 99/100 times who a person of middle eastern descent looks like and since they usually blow things up, then I'm gonna look at them more closely than Bob Green from Nashville, TN.

If I have an overseas flight from the US to London, damn right I want them to profile every arab/south pacific person on the plane. When you hear of a building being blown up, who are the first suspects that come to your mind? Yes, Muslims.

You mean America should discriminate between Middle Easterners and the rest of the world. The term for that is racism. Should Americans break the very basis of their constitution just because Bush says a few terrorists may blow up a couple of planes?

Racists!

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
People that are afraid to fly with others based on them looking like a certain ethnic/racial group are just pussy bigots, thats all.

QFT

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
We have one guy on this thread who is trying to imply that Abortion clinics being blown up is a serious problem equal to Muslim wackos. I'm sure this person would compare 9/11 to Waco in order to defend his blind love for Muslims.

We have others who think that its not ok to profile because it may hurt feelings and that we don't know what a Muslim looks like. Well I'm pretty sure I can guess 99/100 times who a person of middle eastern descent looks like and since they usually blow things up, then I'm gonna look at them more closely than Bob Green from Nashville, TN.

If I have an overseas flight from the US to London, damn right I want them to profile every arab/south pacific person on the plane. When you hear of a building being blown up, who are the first suspects that come to your mind? Yes, Muslims.

You mean America should discriminate between Middle Easterners and the rest of the world. The term for that is racism. Should Americans break the very basis of their constitution just because Bush says a few terrorists may blow up a couple of planes?

Racists!

Change the "may" to the already did.

 

[firewall]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I don't understand why the 'protesters' weren't just allowed to get off and miss their flight.

 

[Deptacon]

Originally posted by: Termagant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a...l?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair.

"Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists.

Is this a good thing? I think it may be unfair to people only because of their appearance.

The majority of terrorists attacking the Western world are Muslims, should they be profiled?

A benefit of this practice may be that it could inconvenience the Mythical Moderate Muslims to the point where they take care of their countrymen who are terrorists.

ifthe majority of peopel want someone of a plane then so be it, he could be drunk, smell like crap, fartign, being loud and rude....doesnt matter why, if the vast amount of the passengers want him off then so be it...

Do i think its right, well, no, but what are you going to do about it?

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Deptacon

Originally posted by: Termagant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a...l?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair.

"Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists.

Is this a good thing? I think it may be unfair to people only because of their appearance.

The majority of terrorists attacking the Western world are Muslims, should they be profiled?

A benefit of this practice may be that it could inconvenience the Mythical Moderate Muslims to the point where they take care of their countrymen who are terrorists.

ifthe majority of peopel want someone of a plane then so be it, he could be drunk, smell like crap, fartign, being loud and rude....doesnt matter why, if the vast amount of the passengers want him off then so be it...

Do i think its right, well, no, but what are you going to do about it?

You are equating someone's origin with someone's behavior?