[QUOTE=CervaiseYou’re free to box yourself up inside your own paranoid fantasies, but please don’t invade my reality with your ludicrous twitching anxiety.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I didn’t realize how sensitive you were or the the effect that my words have on you.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
In the US when the Nazis or the KKK march there are huge counter demonstrations that usually outnumber the original protestors. When the Vietnam war was going on there were huge marches by those who disagreed with US policy. On the rare occasions that members of the current administration make it to Portland they are “greeted” by large numbers of protestors (including me, BTW). I just don’t see it among Muslims in the US and Britain. I would be royally pissed if Americans took to the streets demanding “death to Muslims” and I would be out there on the streets counter pro-testing. I joined the protests at the start of both the Gulf and Iraq wars because I objected to what the US was doing in my name.
[Bolding mine.]
Do you have a cite for this? In regards to the ratios of each side represented, I mean. I have no doubt that one could extrapolate an opinion of how things look from those sorts of demonstrations, but I believe that at best, you’d only have a guesstimate. Which, in any words, would only be an opinion.
That said, I’d march against policy I disagreed with to. Doesn’t mean everyone would though, as has been my observation from news reels of those who supported our involvement in Vietnam. I don’t feel qualified to determine what numbers fall where, but I’m sure it appears obvious depending on whether you were a returning soldier (or family member/loved one of same) or an activist of some kind. So, just like Anne Frank hid instead of fought, I can believe you get both sides of one coin. Meaning, in my humble view, there are probably more Muslims predisposed to peace than terrorism. Obviously, your mileage (frequent flier? 
) varies.
Oh, and since this all was a highjack of the original topic (sorry!), to answer that now…
I agree completely. This does a disservice to our real freedoms and targets potentially innocent (until proven guilty, right?) people. Or as Mr. Franklin said best: “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”
This reminds me of the thing a couple of years ago when those guys heading to Vegas to play in a show got FBIed for using a prayer mat.
Let’s hope none of the people mentioned ever fly Emirates. And may I also register embarrassment at my chavvy countrymen.
Yeah that was the (stupid) joke. Even when the phantoms are gone we’ll still be after shadows. Yay America!
I don’t understand what you expect. Do you really think there’s regular pro-terrorism rallies on the streets? If so, you’ve been fed a lie by the media. I’m guessing you’re thinking of those few people holding up “Behead those who insult Islam” posters in the Danish cartoon fiasco? If so, they’re a miniscule minority, and would have remained such if the media had not decided that they made a good splash story.
Ditto (except replace UK for US). So did many many Muslims. Are those same Muslims now the ones who are somehow supposed to show that terrorism is also not being done in their name?
I didn’t want to be the first to say it …but never mind racial profiling, we know exactly which characters decided to cause this fuss in the first place.
Rah rah ree,
bomb the embassy!
Rah rah rommer,
with a suicide bomber!
I can’t help it. That’s just the image I got. It also involved Osama Bin Laden in a cheerleading uniform. I’m sorry.
Now that is a niche fetish!
Did you bother to follow the link to the throng chanting “we are all Hizbullah”? What do I expect? How about a few thousand people chanting “we are NOT all Hizbullah, some of us think they’re a bunch of murderous bastards”. How about the residents of the neigborhood where the latest terrorists were arrested expressing some remorse instead of insisting that those arrested are the result of anti-muslim bias.
I’ve flown Monarch and yes, I’m afraid I will reinforce that stereotype.
Do I agree that it’s possible that a group of patient psychopaths could possibly take down an airplane with me on it? Yes.
Do I intend to worryabout it? No. No more than I intend to worry about getting struck by lightning or being ambushed by axe murderers in my kitchen, beyond taking obvious, sensible precautions. It is impossible to make airplane travel completely safe; there will always be the possibility that some nutcase will shove a tube of dimethylmercury up his rectum, or that some member of the ground crew will flip out and start sneaking bombs amongst the checked bags (probably a far greater vunerability). The best we can do is take sensible precautions, and accept that the odds of coming to harm on an airplane are very, very low.
Flipping out at the mere sight of someone speaking “what passengers took to be Arabic” while wearing a heavy jacket and checking his watch is not a sensible precaution. It’s just crying “fire” in a crowded movie theatre.
“Nervous” is one thing; “over-reacting hugely” is another. Also, what Revtim said.
Isn’t Hezbollah the bunch that Israel just negotiated with?
Seriously…first, evidence of a group supporting Hezbollah isn’t the same as evidence of a group supporting suicide bombings in the west, nor supporting Al Qaeda. Secondly, the footage you supplied demonstrated my point perfectly, because it was a ‘demonstration’ that involved few dozen people and nothing more. I’ve seen similar numbers turn out to oppose the erection of a mobile phone mast.
What do you expect? I’m a football fan. I see footage of England fans fighting. I see reports of the carnage in Poland, in Turkey, and elsewhere where hooligans still run riot. I don’t take to the streets. Whose side am I on?
Some fucking remorse? Other than implicating the entire population via collective guilt, how can you seriously say this can be a reasonable expectation?
After seeing your links Dan, I’ll have to (hopefully) gracefully concede that point. My Google-fu has never been much more than perfunctory, so that no matter how I try to search the opposite (under “pro war” + Vietnam + demonstration or some combination thereof), I can’t come up with anything useful other than obvious devotion (IE: different service personal), paranoid ramblings or simple brief mentions that don’t support proof of huge gatherings in favor of our presence there. So I apologize for doubting that particular contribution. Thanks for taking the time to ferret those out.
And now that I have my humble pie to go eat, I think I’ll simply take it back to some of the other fora to play and leave my generalized beliefs about the faith and its people to either sink or swim on its own.
I think there is a big difference here. The ranks of axe murderers is pretty limited and there are no organized groups supplying money and training to axe murderers. There are, however, many organized and well funded groups instigating suicide bombers. To date their success bombing planes has been rather limited, but that is because of constant vigilence such as searching carry-on luggage, checking IDs, no fly lists, etc. If these were to go away tomorrow I’d imagine we’d have a plane a week going down. We learned recently that the suicide bombers have come up with new ways to specifically get around the safeguards that were in place. The passengers were responding with extra vigilence given what they knew. I say bully to them. Too bad there weren’t some equally suspicious passengers on 9/11.
Well, you may so claim.
But…
I’m sorry, but I believe your analysis of the above is simply not as good as mine is.
Emphasis added.
Now, go back to the post of mine you quoted and re-read the part about “sensible precautions”. Am I suggesting that all airline security should just “go away tomorrow”? NO.
I’m suggesting that there’s a point where overzealousness becomes both counterproductive and insane, and these passengers took a giant running leap over that line.
“Vigilence”? Bullshit. Paranoia, is more like it. They were responding to the oh-so-terrifying threat of two men in coats checking their watches frequently (in an airport of all places, I mean who could possibly be worried about the time in an airport?) speaking a language which may or may not have been Arabic. This is the kind of paranoia that got Jean Charles de Menenez shot last year, and that got three Canadian doctors kicked off a flight in Winnipeg on the say-so of a single passenger.
These people aren’t protecting themselves from terrorism, they’re jumping at shadows and paralyzing themselves with fear.