Posted on 11/20/2006 11:02:16 PM PST by MrCFdovnh
The tactic that people were correctly disturbed by here is "probing". We should expect all sorts of strange behaviors - to find out what our own courts can be cowed by, and how far the MSM guilt can be stretched.
And they only have to beat us once.
"This sounds completely and totally unjustified. One passenger's phobias should not be a reason for detention.
If there was a demonstrable problem with these particular individuals, they should have not been allowed on the plane to begin with. Apparently, there was not."
The article above leaves out a lot of details. First of all, there was not a demonstable problem until they were on board the plane.
Then one or more passengers on the plane understood the language they spoke, and they were saying many anti-American things. That is what started the note to the flight crew.
Then the flight crew, and I think the captain requested they leave the plane.
They refused to leave the plane. Every company has the right to refuse service to anyone. The fact these imams refused to leave the plane was, by itself, a reason for arrest.
That would be convenient for you if it were true.
Islamic *organizations* in this country most certainly were formed in opposition to this country.
I'm sure some are. But are Islamic organizations inherently anti-American any more so than (to take a previous century's bigotry as an example) Catholic organizations?
It matters what their "last prophet" said.
And it matters how the saying were interpreted. But fundamentally, the faithful must recognize a prophet as such before parsing God's word. Needless to say, no one will be scrutinizing your writings 2000 years from now because no one will mistake you for a prophet. If they did, that would set them apart from other faiths.
Which Pope thinks this? Benedict?
It's Church doctrine:
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church "841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
I would guess you consider yourself "right thinking" (ie politically correct) here.... Amusing.
You're confusing "politically correct" with "correct".
Enoch Powell didn't say he wanted to bring forth rivers of blood
He said that was what would happen if the UK didn't adopt his xenophobic views. And his intellectual heirs in the BNP have been added rivulets and creeks that will bloody the Thames if they are not stopped.
The followers of Islam are my country's enemy
You can believe that if you want. Those who want to harm Americans are America's enemy. And you are quite content to count yourself among them.
and I'm willing to bet I've a better and longer claim to citizenship than you.
Leaving aside the unintended irony of your statement, you can never be a real American if you think that some citizens are more equal than others.
If you aren't Muslim yourself, be advised that your efforts on their behalf won't guarantee they kill you last.
The only thing that will kill me is Death himself. And if I'm in a fight with anyone else, you're damned right Death will take me last of all.
You do understand that "they" and "their book" do not support your claim.
Glad I'm not a Catholic, then.
That makes two of us. May God have mercy on your soul, but I'm happy to know that I won't have to deal with you when I get to Heaven.
That's a foolish and ignorant statement. There is no comparison between the god of the moon rock and God.
Between 2000 years of Christian theology and your own cursory, amateur and uninformed theo-linguistic parsing of the Arabic word "Allah", it's clear which view is the studied, considered, and time-tested one and which view is "foolish and ignorant."
Or not recognize a false one doing Satan's bidding.
That's another way.
"Citizens" who hold a "faith" that teaches the overthrow of everything not Muslim are only "citizens" by law, not oath and allegiance.
Well I have news for you: we live in a country of laws, not tribal blood-oaths or feudal bonds to a gilded Queen. If you don't respect our laws, you can leave our country.
It's been my experience that liberal fools tend to be incapable of defending themselves.
You have me confused with someone else. You anti-Constituionalists and bigots tend to confuse yourselves when you try to pass as conservatives.
"Is it ruled by regal fiat? Or can you show us where an airline has rules that prohibit its passengers from speaking certain languages?"
One of the laws we have in this country is that a business can refuse service to anyone at any time.
There are details not listed in the article above that bother me. One is the imams were changing seats, two is that they were requesting seat belt extensions that were not needed, three they were saying anti-American things (the reports indicate that this is what they were speaking in Arabic), four, when asked to leave the airplane they refused. I don't know the legal ramifications of the others, but the refusal to leave is not their right, it is the right of the airline to refuse service to them.
"I'm defending my country and my fellow Americans against those who wish to destroy our way of life and bring forth rivers of blood."
I'm defending my country and my fellow Americans for those who wish to destroy our way of life and bring forth rivers of blood.
There, fixed it for you.
There are details not listed in the article above that bother me. One is the imams were changing seats,The better to facilitate individual conversations?
two is that they were requesting seat belt extensions that were not needed,
three they were saying anti-American things (the reports indicate that this is what they were speaking in Arabic),A non-native speaker of a language will often misunderstand overheard conversations in that language caused by homonyms or near homonyms. Consider the difference in meaning when the tilde is added to the Spanish word "ano", and consider that when spoken quickly they sound similar.
four, when asked to leave the airplane they refused.Or did they merely ask for a reason? Most Americans would not go quietly for no reason. At least that was the case in the past.....
-Eric
Apparently they didn't even pray on the airplane.
-Eric
Your "correction" not only contradicts my original statement, it also makes it grammatically incorrect.
If you won't read it with a critical (as opposed to "bigoted") eye, I can't debate it with you.
"Catholic" is not the whole universe of Christianity.
Interesting that you think that Muslims worship the moon based on the similarities between the Arabic word for God and the name of some 2000 year old pagan deity, but you can't understand that "Catholic" does mean "universal".
That Catechism isn't based on "2000 years of Christian theology".
Of course it is. Your hatred of Catholics is showing, be aware that it is less acceptable here than your hatred of Muslims.
Tell that to your Muslim friends.
My Muslims friends know it very well. You seem to have a problem understanding the implications of living in a country ruled by laws rather than kings or queens.
You side with those who would overthrow it in favor of their religious law
I do not. You are lying and putting words in my mouth. Stop it.
I know your type, zimdog. You are weak.
If you knew my type, you would know not to pick a fight with me
Another law says that a business cannot discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion or national origin.
"There are details not listed in the article above that bother me. One is the imams were changing seats,
The better to facilitate individual conversations?
two is that they were requesting seat belt extensions that were not needed,
three they were saying anti-American things (the reports indicate that this is what they were speaking in Arabic),
A non-native speaker of a language will often misunderstand overheard conversations in that language caused by homonyms or near homonyms. Consider the difference in meaning when the tilde is added to the Spanish word "ano", and consider that when spoken quickly they sound similar.
four, when asked to leave the airplane they refused.
Or did they merely ask for a reason? Most Americans would not go quietly for no reason. At least that was the case in the past....."
Good questions.
Regarding the changing seats, this is not allowed by the airline industry. They need to know who is where in case of disaster so they can identify bodies. It is a gruesome thought, but when you buy a seat on an airplane you are assigned a seat for that reason. The airlines have been sued in the passed over this. I don't like it, but that is their right.
Regarding the language barrier, you may be correct, but then neither of us knows if the translator was barely experienced or very experienced. All I can say is what the report was. I do not always trust reports, so it could be wrong or misleading.
Regarding the refused to leave vs the asked why they were being asked to leave. I doubt they would have been arrested for only asking a question. I have to put a little trust in the report here for a couple of reasons. One the reports have specifically stated they were asked to leave and refused. Second this happened a week ago, and they, themselves have not commented that they only asked why they should leave. The third reason I touched on, they probably would not have been arrested if they responded to being asked to leave with a question of why. I do agree that may not be the case, but I would think if they only asked why, they would be hollering it from the rooftops that they were arrested for asking a question. I would.
"Another law says that a business cannot discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion or national origin."
Another law we have says innocent until proven guilty. Another says the burden of proof is on the prosecution. This has not even gone to court and you have determined that this could only be caused by discrimination. There are several acts that these imams are accused of doing besides praying and speaking in a foreign language. The airline has a right to ask them to leave, that does not mean the airline asked them to leave because the airline or the passengers were discriminating. Changing seats is one of those acts and airlines have assigned seats in case of a disaster. They set that policy long ago for everyone.
You side with those who would overthrow it in favor of their religious lawMany American Muslim immigrants, perhaps even most of them, came here to get away from the fundamentalist sharia nuts. They're our allies against those people.I do not. You are lying and putting words in my mouth. Stop it.
We're not at war with "Islam". We're at war with people who share a particular perverted view of it. Some of our most effective allies share the faith, but reject the view.
-Eric
"Many American Muslim immigrants, perhaps even most of them, came here to get away from the fundamentalist sharia nuts. They're our allies against those people. "
What makes you think this? Hope?
"We're not at war with "Islam". "
Perhaps, but Islam is at war with us.
"We're at war with people who share a particular perverted view of it."
That's just it - it isn't a "particular perverted view". It's "mainstream" FUNDAMENTAL Islam.
"Some of our most effective allies share the faith, but reject the view. "
That's make them apostates.
Oh, come on. No Middle Eastern Muslim country is an "ally"
here. They use us for their own ends.
"Many American Muslim immigrants, perhaps even most of them, came here to get away from the fundamentalist sharia nuts. They're our allies against those people. "Reality. Knowing some of them. Listening to others. Observing how they live, work, and act.What makes you think this? Hope?
"We're not at war with "Islam". "It is not. But that is what the AQ types hope for. They are trying to recruit the rest of Islam, and comments like yours help their cause.Perhaps, but Islam is at war with us.
"We're at war with people who share a particular perverted view of it."Now you're abusing language. In religious terms, "fundamentalist" means hard core and extreme. Fundamentalist Christians, for example, are not the mainstream.That's just it - it isn't a "particular perverted view". It's "mainstream" FUNDAMENTAL Islam.
"Some of our most effective allies share the faith, but reject the view. "In the views of the fundamentalists, yes. Sort of like some of the more extreme Baptist sects consider Catholics to not be Christians.That's make them apostates.
Oh, come on. No Middle Eastern Muslim country is an "ally" here. They use us for their own ends.As we do them. That's what countries do. But in this case, unless one is a conspiracy believer we are clearly the enemy of their enemy (AQ and Iran), which makes us a friend.
-Eric
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.