Cool, then we agree. I don’t think it’s possible that I’m overstating the threat either. 
And you’re the one portraying a few boxcutter-armed scum as being Marvel Comics superheroes or Bruce Lee. There is no way a few boxcutter-armed shits are going to be able to last very long against a crowd which is going to be throwing shit at them and trying to tackle them. I could see laptops going into the face, unopened soda cans being sidearmed, hot coffee being thrown, and a few larger males just charging in and whaling. Sure a few passengers may die, or at least get seriously wounded - but there is no way the terrorists are going to be able to focus on breaking down the door while this chaos is going on. And I think most people know that if they don’t do something - anything - they’re going to be augering-in at 600mph into a swamp somewhere.
And I can see a well orchestrated team pulling off getting through a cockpit door on an overnight flight armed with nothing more than box cutters before passengers even realized they’re not dreaming. I won’t argue these scenarios any more. Believe what you like.
D’oh!
But, seriously, while I don’t doubt that a team of elite commandos could hold off a plane full of civilians with nothing more than a length of string and a piece of fresh fruit, we’re not talking about the SAS or Delta Force, here. How many of the 9/11 hijackers had any sort of a military background at all? How many terrorists have any more military experience than that of an average foot soldier? And is any terrorist organization going to waste members with extensive military backgrounds on suicide missions?
If the mission entails overcoming passengers and pilots to pull off another 9/11, why not? They threw away some educated engineers who were capable of becoming pilots and flying passenger planes into specific targets like the towers and Pentagon.
I don’t have any cites, but I recall reading reports of how the 9/11 terrorists trained all day for months using no weapons other than box cutters to overcome passengers and crew. Would they have to use a different plan in a post 9/11 world? Maybe. But I don’t think it’s something that requires one to believe the terrorists must be made up of Bruce Lees and superheroes.
I can only assume at this point that you and the people you know have different reading habits than I and the people I know have. I honestly believe that the number of non-Muslims in the wold likely to do that kind of in-depth study of Islam exceeds the number of Muslim terrorists by a significant factor.
No shit?
I did not imply that reading books designed for muslims makes you a terrorist. You asserted that the books he was carrying likely had no relation to his religion, which I said was incorrect. I even further went on to agree with your obvious assertion that being muslim does not make one a terrorist, just in case you wanted to come back with a post exactly as misleading as this one. Guess I couldn’t stop you.
What does it have to do with race? Well, in the mind of the average liberal, white people are always assumed guilty of racism until proven innocent, and proving innocence once accused is damn near impossible.
bolding mine. I’d be concerned if an airline passenger was skinning people!
This guy was either a first class idiot, a stoned out moron or an attention seeking whore. I’ve read books on Islam and terrorism, the Bible and a study guide to the Koran (I am not interested in converting so I wasn’t going to take the time to read the whole thing). I do seem to remember a non-fiction book called Fear Itself about terrorism, but I can’t find it online anywhere. Just having the books doesn’t make me a terrorist.
However, this guy:
- Had books related to the religion of the 9/11 terrorists
- Had the same type of weapon as the ones the 9/11 terrorists used
- Had it in a concealed place
All together it would raise some serious alarms for security personnel. Whether he was Middle Eastern in appearance or not doesn’t matter (remember the American Al Queda?) because anyone could be a threat.
The news reports mentioning his choice of reading materials is just another case of alarmism, not racism or religious bigotry. If one news source didn’t mention it, another would have.
Your assumptions are misplaced. Since 9/11 there have been consistent efforts to test commercial aviation security measures. The idea that the same tactics would be used is the flaw in your argument.
Whether this is one of the attempts to test security is debatable. What is certain is that this person just bought himself a manila folder with his name on it.
I asserted no such thing. The OP appears to believe that the fact that he was reading books about Islam makes him dangerous. I pointed out that while the OP would have an exceptionally weak case if the suspect were known to be Muslim, he in fact had NO CASE because it was NOT known that he is Muslim.
Is the suspect more likely than a random person to be Muslim based on his reading? Yes. Did I deny this? No. Does this have jack shit to do with anything? No. Are you being an obnoxious, condescending ass to someone you basically agree with? Apparently so.
I think he’s probably muslim based on the books he’s reading. If you think so, too, you did a poor job of demonstrating that. We’re on the same page now, let’s go on a picnic and fart sunshine and rainbows.
Now watch the personal insults. We’re not in the pit.
Wait, what? I’m not sure what you’re saying.
No, that’s not apparent at all. Nothing written in this thread makes it apparent that the OP believes those who read books about Islam makes them dangerous.
What’s apparent is that the OP thinks a man illegally carrying a box cutter hidden inside of a hollowed out book along with five books about Islam and one Bible when there is limited carry on space is a more serious case than another man carrying a box cutter without the religious books. If by “more serious case” he means that he’d rather be on the plane with the man with the box cutter sans the books, I would too.
Oops! I thought we were in the Pit. (And even in the Pit I hardly ever let myself go like that. Ironic that the one time I do, I’m not in the Pit after all.) I’ll report my own post, so the mods know what happened. Mea culpa!
The goal of using aircraft for acts of terrorism has not changed.
Hasn’t it? I thought that previously the goal was always to use the people on the airplane as hostages. Now there’s the possibility that the goal might be to use the airplane itself as a giant weapon. Isn’t that a change?
I think it’s important to recognize the difference between goals and tactics. The original **goal ** was to attack the United States at it’s political, military and economic roots. The use of people as hostages was a tactic just as the use of the aircraft was. Looking at it from a broader perspective it was an attack against the symbols of power. By deliberately including people in the plan it becomes a terrorist event. The act of deliberate terrorism is a tactic toward a goal.
The brilliance of the plan was that they took poorly trained individuals willing to die and created a half trillion dollars of damage to the aviation industry without spending a dime. The weapons (aircraft and fuel) were rented for the price of the tickets, which were charged to Visa. On top of the damage created they struck at the heart of US military power (the Pentagon) and almost succeeded in striking either the White House or the Capital building.
While the specific tactics of 9/11 are no longer feasible the use of aircraft as weapons is still possible. Why this was pursued doesn’t make sense because it exposes assets that should be of a limited nature (suicide volunteers).
The Noble Qur’an is simply one of the two or three standard English translation of the Qur’an. It is no more “propagandistic” than is the “Authorized Bible” as though God, herself, had authorized that translation. (Spare me the Jack Chick references, please.)
= = =
Regarding x-ray vision’s fantasies of “highly trained” teenage mutant ninja Muslims, or whatever, even if one needs to hold such a belief a single guy with a single boxcutter, (and lacking the other makeshift weapons that flight attendants reported were brandished by Mohamed Atta and his band), is clearly not a serious threat, except to himself.
Should the guy face appropriate penalties for demonstrating excessive stupidity? Sure. That still does not make him a real threat.
I’m not sure what you’re suggesting here. The threat is the act of smuggling a weapon on an airplane. If this guy is a nutjob it doesn’t diminish the seriousness of the event. He may not be a mutated ninja tortoise but he’s earned every inch of the long arm of the law up his ass.