Posted on 08/23/2006 6:59:39 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
As US Democrats and the worldwide leftist power elite continue to push their patently insane message “It’s better to die than to be politically incorrect”, an intrepid group of airline passengers finally decided to take matters into their own hands. In the early morning hours of Wednesday, 150 passengers scheduled to fly Monarch Airlines flight ZB 613 from Malaga to Manchester either refused to board or walked off their plane.
The reason for this unprecedented action? It appears that they didn’t think Wednesday was a particularly good day to die. As legal groups and airlines continue to balk at passenger profiling (in the United States the ACLU-CAIR Alliance calls it “unconstitutional”) and are still failing to check all passengers for newly banned items, these passengers became fed up. Instead, their collective group decided to perform its own profiling.
The passenger revolt is reported to have begun when two passengers, despite the intense heat, were observed in the waiting/boarding lounge wearing leather jackets, thick jumpers and were continually checking their watches. They were also talking to one another in what a passenger believed was an “Arabic language”. Apparently, six passengers initially refused to board the flight and then word spread to those already on board. One family, followed by the other boarded passengers, stood up and walked off the plane. The two passengers in dispute were eventually led off of the flight, the plane’s cabin was checked and cleared and it finally took off for its destination. The two men are said to have taken another flight, later in the day.
One of the passengers, college lecturer Jo Schofield who was flying with her family, said: “The plane was not yet full and it became apparent that people were refusing to board. In the gate waiting area, people had been talking about these two, who looked really suspicious with their heavy clothing, scruffy, rough, appearance and long hair. Some of the older children, who had seen the terror alert on television, were starting to mutter things like, 'Those two look like they're bombers’.”
A Tory Homeland Security spokesman Patrick Mercer blasted the passengers’ actions with: “This is a victory for terrorists. These people on the flight have been terrorized into behaving irrationally!” But, was their behavior irrational? Let’s take a look at history and a couple of recent events.
We already know that the 9/11 Islamic masterminds performed “trial runs” on the flights they eventually commandeered and used as missiles against the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and were attempting to fly Flight 93 into either the White House or the US Capitol building—before it was brought down by passengers and crashed into a Pennsylvania field. It is also strongly believed that these trial runs are continuing. The recently foiled UK terrorist plot was designed by al-Qaeda to explode and bring down at least ten US airline carriers—and all passengers—over the Atlantic Ocean. Two of the arrested terrorists, a man and a woman, purportedly admitted they planned to use one of their infant son’s formula bottles to store liquid explosives.
On 16 August a woman carried banned items, including a screwdriver, Vaseline and matches onto her flight. A note referring to al-Qaeda was also later discovered in the woman’s possession. Despite all warnings against banned items, she was allowed on board a flight bound from London’s Heathrow Airport to Washington DC. The woman’s aberrant in-flight behaviors eventually led to her being apprehended and taken down by other passengers. And Fox News’ Brian Wilson said that on two flights he took last week, passengers were allowed to take bottles filled with water (another recently banned item) onboard his flights. Wilson said that when he brought the items up to a flight attendant, he was advised that the airline employee saw ‘no problem with it’.
Personal Note: This flight attendant should be fired.
The larger issue, here, is that when even airline employees refuse to adhere to the newly-established safety rules, how are passengers supposed to protect themselves and their loved ones from the radical Islamic terrorist menace? Apparently, the head-in-the-sand syndrome has even spread to this most currently vulnerable airline industry. It appears that if “we the flying public” are going to be safe, no one but ourselves is going to save us. The hell with political correctness! We need more mutinies of this nature. It’s our money paying for these trips and, ultimately, our lives that are in jeopardy. If the airlines and our “PC” brethren don’t like it, I say “Then follow your own rules!”
I now doubt that anything will bring the so-called “moderate Muslims” out from their hiding places, in order to speak against their suicidal and homicidal brethren. But, at least a few, or many, more of these mutinies might just get the airlines to step up and listen. Contrary to politically-correct opinion, profiling is a good thing—at least if you want to have your best chance of remaining alive.
An excellent message that needs to be repeated over and over and over..... It doesn't matter if it is gun ownership, home invasion or national security.... It doesn't matter if it is a burglar, a rapist, a murderer or a terrorist/jihadist... The issue of our age is self defense. The Democrat Left has drawn a line in the sand in Connecticut. They are against survival.
Lando 
I thought it was a strong move. But actually, it is a huge crisis for the airlines. We've got to get this war fought and won. Eliminate Bin Laden, Al Quaida and straighten out the sick freaks out who think that sick cult of Islam is going to "take over" anything.
Is this the behavior of human beings? When Islam infects a person’s soul, does the person cease to be human?
Yes, and then they stuck their collective heads in it.
It seems to me it is unconstitutional not to profile! The government of this nation is to provide for the defense of the citizens, not make us lambs to the slaughter for political reasons. I am beside myself with anger and disgust at the democrats and all leftists everywhere!!!! Should passengers take matters into their own hands, You bet they should. No one else will!
MY personal note? Sher Sieve is psychotic. The flight attendant who refused to take the bottled water is a sane person in a terrorized world.
Perhaps the flight attendent was profiling - there is no mention of the background or appearance of the passengers allowed on with water bottles. It could have been the proverbial 75 year old granny or the 10 year old boyscout.
yeah, whats the worse that a mob could do?
Absolutely! That's my point.
BTW - the greatest single hero of the "WOT" so far has been that stewardess who stopped the "Shoe Bomber". We don't even know her name, do we? No, we're supposed to worship GOVERNMENT.
The whole article makes sense except for the part about the water bottles. There should be some room for discretion, for heaven's sake. The worst problem is bureaucratic inflexibility and stupidity in the first place.
For instance, is the cap intact on a soda water bottle, with the safety ring unbroken? Or if it is an opened water bottle, why not just open it up and sniff at it? Water smells different from inflammables and explosives, IMHO. Someone needs to use common sense and develop sensible rules, rather than make passengers suffer from thirst on long flights.
This would especially be true of people with medical problems such as kidney stones who need plenty of fluids.
Nope. But we all got fed that Jessica Lynch hooey, didn't we?
pingpingpingpingping!
Houston! We have a winner!
bttt
http://www.truehoop.com/international-basketball-34826-great-article-kwame-james-fights-terror.html
Wow!
Thanks!!!!!!
Why doesn't everybody know about this? Instead,"Rudy" is supposed to be the hero ... (puke)
The time for passenger mutinies arrived during the hijacking of Flt. 93; it has never ended.
Too often, they cease to *act* human.
Like a rabid dog.
So--by analogy to rabies--do we shoot or quarantine those who are so evil.
We can't -- for their safety and the safety of others, as well as for principle's sake -- leave them to their own, err, devices.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
You might have added that nowhere are they more strongly against survival than in Great Britain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.