NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misunderstandin

Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

Well, I think that we all agree on that.

Unfortunately, folks like Jacobsen do not. Her thinking is that because these people were Syrians, they must be terrorists.

And she continues to insist on that despite every single law enforcement agency that was involved in this saying otherwise.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

UA,


It's cool dude, I was just trying to point out that I see a lot of people grouping all Arab's together saying they MUST be Muslim (they're not) and that no one does the same thing to Christians. In fact I've seen people scream that all Arab's want to kill us and they hate our way of life, but are quick to point out that McVeigh wasn't following the teachings of Christ. It's hypacritical and bugs the crap outta me. There are psycho's everywhere, and let's not forget that white dudes attacked us before dark skinned dudes attacked us.

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
The reason that people come down on Jacobsen is because she continues to insist, despite the fact that every single law enforcement agency involved says she's wrong, that she saw a bunch of terrorists planning to hijack a plane.

Add to that her spreading her fear mongering across the web, thus scaring passengers the industry needs off planes, and you've got another reason to pound her.

What do you want, Dave? You cannot prove a negative. How are those people supposed to prove that they are not terrorists? Seriously.

Besides, in the America I want to live in, we presume that people are innocent unless we have evidence otherwise. I guess not in Jacobsen's America, with her concluding that we can't give people their civil liberties.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a story about the behavior of this group. Behaviour that the FAM admitted was unusual, that some passengers found frightening, and others found strange. The reason that this got to be such a big deal is that Jacobsen had the temerity to write about her observations and suspicions.

Now we're in a classic deal where the poor Syrians who couldn't stay in their seats and spent the flight running around the cabin, are victims. The passengers that saw suspicious activity and either were frightened or in one case, positioned himself to defend the cockpit, are evil bad guys or "bimbos". The Syrians are victims because, in addition to being a dusruptive and non-compliant group, they were arabs. I think these guys knew they were causing concern and I think they asked for the scrutiny they got and I think they got off easy. And I also think the fact that they are musicians doesn't remove them from further suspicion. But that's just me.

>>I guess not in Jacobsen's America, with her concluding that we can't give people their civil liberties<< Please Tony. These guys weren't arrested. They were sent on their way. This is not even vaugely a civil liberties issue. If your contention is that being vigilant in order to protect yourself is a violation of civil liberties, then man you've got the best case to get rid of the TSA I've heard of . Go for it. I'm on your side there. Just wait until they are coming through the cockpit door then lay a few civil liberties on them with a pistol.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

Dave, it isn't the suspicion, the questioning of the musicians, or anything like that which get me. That was fine. People thought that the musicians did something strange, so they reported it, the authorities questioned them, and that's it. All well and good. That's the way the system's supposed to work, and it did.

It's Jacobsen's fear mongering conclusion which irritates me.

It's in the introduction to her column that started this whole fuss.

What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

All I have to say to her is what Ben Franklin said.

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary
security, deserve neither liberty or security

If we give up our civil liberties, then the terrorists have won.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

OK fair enough. I think it is a legitimate question.

My beef has been that this woman has been so villified. She wasn't alone, by any means, in her concern. The FAM said this for the TIME article:

>> About 25 minutes after takeoff, a flight attendant discreetly told the FAM that she thought the men were "acting suspiciously" and were congregating near one of the lavatories in the back of the plane. He alerted another marshal on the plane and also told the flight attendant to notify the captain. A short while later, the FAM asked the flight crew member to get physical descriptions of the men and their seat numbers.<<

Ms. Jacobsen said the flight attendant crew was so shook by these guys they were not doing well at reassuring the passengers. So I think Jacobsen deserves some credit. She brought up some legitimate questions. The standard that airline crews are supposed to use is "behavior" not ethnicity. Well these guys were behaving inappropriately (at best) and asking people to ignore their ethnicity is asking them to be deliberately stupid.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

Questions are fine, and reporting the behavior to the authorities is fine as well. And the musicians acted like bungholes, no question about it.

But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hold on a second . . . was she advocating taking away their civil liberties???

Sounded more like she was warning people that there might be some practice runs going on out there (which have been suspected by federal officials as well) and that WE should just be more aware and vigilant of our surroundings.

We as a society that wishes to live in peace, have a right to observe, report, and scrutinize activities that are deemed to be suspicious and a threat to our security.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
Questions are fine, and reporting the behavior to the authorities is fine as well. And the musicians acted like bungholes, no question about it.

But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.

[/ QUOTE ]

I missed where she advocated that. In fact I missed that this was ever an issue of civil liberties.

I don't know if we will ever know everything about this flight and this group. Was it a coincidence that there were FAMs on this flight? If so it was a big one, but it's possible. I'm inclined to think they were assigned the flight because these guys were on it. Is that a civil liberites issue? 14 Syrian nationals on one flight, seems like a good place to put FAM resources.

I don't trust the "official" version at all. Just because it's the officiat version. (That's one of the ways I protect MY civil liberties, I don't trust government officials).
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
Hold on a second . . . was she advocating taking away their civil liberties???

[/ QUOTE ]

What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

Yeah. She is. Tell me any other way to interpret that.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hold on a second . . . was she advocating taking away their civil liberties???

[/ QUOTE ]

What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

Yeah. She is. Tell me any other way to interpret that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been a question ever since 9/11. Hence the dreaded Patriot Act, questions of enemy combatants and their status etc. I don't see much advocacy in her statement. The question for everyone is: which do you desire; freedom and the risks that entails, or security with the requisite loss of freedom. Americans over the years have opted for less freedom and more security. That's how the federal government has gotten so huge. A lot of liberties had already been given up in the name of the war on drugs. So it's a great question.. On the one hand I favor everybody getting a gun and handling any bad guys ourselves. Lots of liberty. On the other hand these guys are working toward playing with nukes and chemical and biological weapons so they've got me outgunned. Dead doesn't give me and mine much liberty either.

Man whatr a downer subject.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

Yeah. She is. Tell me any other way to interpret that.

[/ QUOTE ]

That she's QUESTIONING it, NOT ADVOCATING it! You quoted it yourself . . . "caused me to QUESTION . . . "

questioning is not advocating . . . or is it wrong to question things also?
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
That she's QUESTIONING it, NOT ADVOCATING it! You quoted it yourself . . . "caused me to QUESTION . . . "

questioning is not advocating . . . or is it wrong to question things also?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, if it's only the freaking foundation of what this country was founded on. Questioning that is just, well, un-American.

Ben Franklin said it best. Give up a little liberty to get some security, and you deserve neither.

Someone needs to pound that into Jacobsen's head.

If you want to live in a free society, there are some risks associated with that freedom. In a country where people can walk around unchallenged by the cops, rent SUVs, and so on, there's always the risk that someone will rent an SUV, pack it full of explosives, and detonate it. Or walk on down to the mall with a backpack full of explosives and blow that up.

But the alternative is worse.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
Ben Franklin said it best. Give up a little liberty to get some security, and you deserve neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he did, and he was a great founding father for America, but as others have said regarding other issues (i.e. homosexuality is wrong according to the bible, slavery is normal) . . . times change.

This country is not USA of 1776. Because of our growth and the threat of destruction unparalleled in the 1700s, giving up just a little libery may be a necessary evil.

I would hate to think of it, or actually witness our country track movement across state borders and other stuff, but I REALLY hate to think about another 9/11 after 9/11 after 9/11 because we are hated so much by the world, with many willing to go to great lengths to carry out such horrific acts.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

JH
I think we agree somewhat on this one. You are always going to have a few bad apples...blah blah blah you know the rest. What was this post about again?

UA
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

Yeah, it's getting harder to talk about founding principles with a straight face. None of the founders would recognize the US as a model for what they formulated. Income tax, Federal Departments of Education, Agriculture, etc. welfare, agricultural subsides, on and on. But then again they might not be too surprised. That's why they wanted the people to have the right to bare arms. so they could rise up again when it all went south. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ben Franklin said it best. Give up a little liberty to get some security, and you deserve neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he did, and he was a great founding father for America, but as others have said regarding other issues (i.e. homosexuality is wrong according to the bible, slavery is normal) . . . times change.

This country is not USA of 1776. Because of our growth and the threat of destruction unparalleled in the 1700s, giving up just a little libery may be a necessary evil.

[/ QUOTE ]

I told you, Tony....

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's that saying of Franklin's again about liberty and temporary security?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



He was a hippie communist anyway, Tony . . .

Besides, he didn't know how different the future would be. Anyone can tell that if he were here now, he'd say . . .
[/sarcasm]


[/ QUOTE ]

You predict it!!
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
What happened here, I think, is someone observed something and was in a position to write about it. Like many people who bring messages that are unwelcome to bureaucrats, she's getting her knees cut off. She is sticking to her guns and getting some support from other passengers. Clearly it is her opinion that it was a dry-run. She could be right or wrong. But the idea that nothing unusual or suspicious was going on during that flight just doesn't add up, in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Yeah. And I was abducted by aliens. Granted the doctors said it's a delusion, and the bureaucrats refuse to listen to me. But DAMMIT! I know what I saw!"

How is that statement any different? This woman is given facts to back up what, in some cases, the people she complained to told her to her face. Instead, she sticks to her original story. I'm not "villifying" her, I'm just saying she's not listening to reason. It would be totally different if this were just a post on someone's blog, but this is in a published magazine. How can we laugh off the Star and the Enquirer, but take this one seriously? The magazine gives her story weight, that's why. I can guarantee you on any flight I go on, I can FIND suspicious activity if I'm looking for it. That guy over in 13A keeps going to the bathroom. Is he building a shoe bomb, or does he have a bladder infection? Those two teenagers are looking at me funny. Are they just being normaly angst ridden teens, or are they plotting on how to take me down during a hijacking? The big guy in 24C keeps getting up and opening the overhead bin. Is there something suspicious in there, or was there not enough room under the seat in front of him for his bag?

A little dose of paranoia is fine, but jumping at shadows is ridiculous. If articles like this make they're way into Time and Newsweek, Ashcroft will have his wish, and we'll all have cameras in our homes. It's bad enough the government knows what I check out from the library.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

Two questions:

1. Do you really think that giving up some civil liberties will make things safer? Fine, let's not let any Syrians, Iranians, North Koreans, or Iraqis into the country. And al Qaeda will just find another way to attack us. There are Aussies and Brits down at Gitmo. John Walker Lindh was as American as can be. It will be just like Franklin said. We will give up essential liberties for temporary security, and we'll get neither.

2. Tell me just what more you'd like from these musicians. What would it take to make you say, you know what, that woman was out of line? Actually, let me ask you this. Prove you're not a terrorist. I mean, after all, you might be an al Qaeda operative under deep cover, learning to fly, trying to get a job at an airline, and then you'll take over the plane and crash it into a building. Oh, you're not? Well, prove it to me. Can't do it? No, you can't. It's impossible to prove a negative.
 
Re: NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misundersta

[ QUOTE ]
Two questions:

1. Do you really think that giving up some civil liberties will make things safer? Fine, let's not let any Syrians, Iranians, North Koreans, or Iraqis into the country. And al Qaeda will just find another way to attack us. There are Aussies and Brits down at Gitmo. John Walker Lindh was as American as can be. It will be just like Franklin said. We will give up essential liberties for temporary security, and we'll get neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely, border control is a necessary part of security. If we shut border entry down completely to all but US citizens it would have absolutely nothing to do with civil liberties. No foreigner has a "right" to come into the US unless we grant that courtesy.

[ QUOTE ]
[2. Tell me just what more you'd like from these musicians. What would it take to make you say, you know what, that woman was out of line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget Jacobsen was just the messenger. You've got her pegged as the central character in this. The cabin crew was the first to go to the FAM with their suspicions early in the flight. Other passengers were concerned, at least one to the point of crying by the end of the flight. And one frequent traveler positioned himself in the forward galley to protect the cockpit. And the FAM decided to call in backup at the airport. So we have a long line of people that need to apologize to these poor abused band members.

I think what these guys need to do in the future is advise the airline beforehand that they are "special needs" passengers. That they require frequent trips to the lavoratory, are unwilling to comply with the seat belt sign or directions from the crew, and must move around and communicate with group members on a frequent basis. Then the captain could make a PA advising the other passengers and everyone would be happy. Is this enough Tony? That would certainly be accomodative of these guests in our country, and would not oblige them to act like reasonable people.

For their part they could make an announcement either saying they aren't into the whole terrorism thing, or that they are only interested in the death of those passengers that are Jewish. (This might upset Jacobsen again, but she's an hysterical bimbo anyway).

I think this would fix things up. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top