In the aftermath of the explosion in Boston, Muslims again appear the target of arbitrary suspicion and detention. On a flight from Boston to Chicago, passengers became alarmed when two different passengers were heard speaking in Arabic. The two passengers were not traveling or seated together but the flight crew returned to the gate to have the two passengers detained.
Several passengers were marathoners. The two men were removed from the plane and detained . . . for speaking one of the most common languages on Earth.
Putting aside the prejudice in the treatment of Arabic speakers, it is illogical to think that terrorists would speak in Arabic if they were truly going to harm passengers. True terrorists try to blend in with population.
The airline bears responsibility for this conduct. There should be more than simply speaking Arabic to have a plane returned to the gate and passengers detained.
Just for the record, estimates indicate that there are 422 million Arabic speakers in this world. I am not sure what is required from Arabic speaking people? Should they simply not speak in public while traveling in the United States to avoid security alerts and detention?
SOURCE: KRMG
If the whole TSA security thing isn’t a bad joke on the American people there’s little if any reason to be concerned with people speaking some Mideastern language or any other language on a plane. People just need to chill out. I’m still in the ‘it was improperly discriminatory’ camp.
leejcaroll:
I have to assume some judge somewhere believed there was a rational basis upon which the probable cause to search decision was made. We don’t have the affidavit to judge but we can’t assume because nothing was found that no reason existed to conduct the search. We make our decisions moving forward — not backward after we know the outcomes.
Gyges:
“You seem to be ignoring my main point, which was There was NO REASON to suspect that there would be a terrorist attack on a commercial airplane.”
****************
I thought I answered your claim of no rational basis for the decision by pointing out that contextual, historical, anecdotal, and statistical reasons exist which support the decision. We may disagree with the decision but can we really question its rational basis without resort to emotional revulsion over the seeming unfairness of it?
Ralph Adamo, How offensive, those that don’t agree with you must be Anti-American, You need to look up the definition of democracy and what America (used to) stand for, you know pesky things like freedom of opinion.
Mespo Was it right that the Saudi man who was injured in the attack had his home invaded, his things searched and looked at as a potential actor in the bombing rather then a victim of the attack before there was any reason (if ever there is one) to suspect him?
By that reasoning any time an arab person is injured in an attack or anywhere they should be immediately suspect of being a bad guy. It is akin to the internment of Japanese Americans, Good American citizens being rounded up without cause but for their ethnicity.
With Muslims throughout the world–including those living in the USA–cheering the attacks on Americans, and only sorry that there were “not enough casualties,” responses like this one are very sensible. Only the anti-American leftists (and is there any other kind of leftist?) would be offended by such cautious moves to protect Americans. The leftists think and believe that Americans have terrorist attacks “coming to them” for their “imperialist” policies. They are essentially disgusting Islam-firsters.
Mespo,
So, are people NEVER allowed to speak Arabic on airplanes? Or is it just after terrorist attacks with no connection to commercial aviation?
You seem to be ignoring my main point, which was There was NO REASON to suspect that there would be a terrorist attack on a commercial airplane. Not by people speaking Arabic, not by people speaking English, and not by people using an elaborate cypher involving two decks of cards.
Porkchop:
We could have that discussion but I think we’d need to set different parameters. Here, we’re not talking about interning these two Arabic speakers. We’re talking about stopping the plane to gauge their intentions before taking off. That seems a relatively minor intrusion into their rights compared to the Japanese internment of men, women, and children in the functional equivalent of concentration camps. But it’s a discussion worth having, I agree.
Mespo:
“Caution in the face of crisis is no vice and while discrimination is always regrettable it is certainly understandable given the terrible consequences of ignoring similar warning signs in the past. We need not ignore reality in service to principle. If so, what value is there in those principles.”
Mespo, while that sounds ever so reasonable on the surface, it is essentially the same reasoning that led to the removal of Japanese-Americans from the West Coast to internment camps during World War II. I assume you would agree that there was no constitutional or factual basis for doing so. If not, I suppose there is a different discussion to be had.
Gyges:
“So, on the one hand, we have speculation based on…. nothing related to the recent crime, on the other hand we have NO REASON TO BELIEVE that the people who were involved in the bombing were planing on doing anything with a plane.”
*******************
No, we have a sustained history of Arabic speakers waging war against the people and vital interests of the United States. We also have a declared jihad by Arabic speakers and a pattern of plane hijackings in furtherance of their murderous aims. Thus we have reason to at least suspect Arabic speakers. And we have even more.
Here is a summary of the terror statistics from the US State Department.
Sunni extremists accounted for the greatest number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for the third consecutive year. More than 5,700 incidents were attributed to Sunni extremists, accounting for nearly 56 percent of all attacks and about 70 percent of all fatalities. Among this perpetrator group, al-Qa‘ida (AQ) and its affiliates were responsible for at least 688 attacks that resulted in almost 2,000 deaths, while the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan conducted over 800 attacks that resulted in nearly 1, 900 deaths. Secular, political, and anarchist groups were the next largest category of perpetrators, conducting 2,283 attacks with 1,926 fatalities, a drop of 5 percent and 9 percent, respectively, from 2010.
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195555.htm
Thus, Arabic speakers in US airspace immediately following an act of terrorism which statistically is likely the result of Sunni Arabs and with the flight originating from the location of the site of the attack merits our attention, our caution, and our innate human good sense to keep two from combining with two to create four.
Reality doesn’t come with sensitivity; it hits you square in the face.
Gyges, yea, a real sweety.
Lotta,
And, what about that Unibomber fellow? What a softy he was.
Gary: …. “domestic terrorists have traditionally targeted public institutions, and have tried to minimize the injuries to regular people. Just list all the American terrorist attacks in the last 40 years.”
***
“Timothy James “Tim” McVeigh (April 23, 1968 – June 11, 2001) was an American terrorist who detonated a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Commonly referred to as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the attack killed 168 people and injured over 800.[3] It was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.[3] As of 2013, the bombing remains the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in United States history.” — Wikipedia
I’d hate to think of the casualties had he not attempted to minimize the injuries to people. Terrorism only works if people die or are injured. The only difference between the internal and external terrorists, in practical terms/results, is … none.
4chan is the definition of a mob, which aren’t exactly known for their skills at determining guilt or innocence. If you want to talk in terms of credibility 4chan is somewhere above a guy selling me a magic rock, but only if the guy is holding up a sign saying “I’m a Liar.”
Either way though, the ethnicity of the criminals has nothing to do with the fact that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THEY WERE PLANNING ON TARGETING A PLANE. None, nadda, zip, zilch, zero.
Look at post above yours. Two suspects are in pictures
Mespo,
“While we have very little evidence to suggest exactly who is responsible for the tragedy in Boston, it would be pure obscurantism to ignore the fact that much of the threat to US security originates among Arabic speakers from the Middle East. Fifty plus years of living supports this observation”
We have very little evidence to suggest exactly who is responsible for the tragedy in Boston, and we have very little evidence to suggest that they had plans to hi-jack\bomb\whatever an airplane. I mean, that’s a huge departure from
So, on the one hand, we have speculation based on…. nothing related to the recent crime, on the other hand we have NO REASON TO BELIEVE that the people who were involved in the bombing were planing on doing anything with a plane.
Call me crazy, but I’m going to go with there being absolutely no reason to remove those two men.
Suspects are 2 middle eastern males. The 4chan community figured it out for us.
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18ku22s096ytrjpg/original.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hahatango/8653847788/sizes/k/in/gallery-stephenpate-72157633259078734/
Nick,
My contacts in the travel industry says that it was not computer problems…..It was something to do with a package at a Terminal …..at DFW….. that’s all I can say….
Allah punished AA w/ computer problems yesterday.
Sounds like they listened to Fox news and their commentators such as Rush (not Limaugh, this is the one with the last name Rush) who said Kill all muslims in his tweet related to his belief who did this.