Friday, August 25: Thanks for the link and fair reading of the post, Will. 
Thursday, August 24: Julie Gorin writes: “If terrorism indeed has a distinct appeal to the average Muslim, and yet the religion is not the cause, then what is? Genetics? Is it time to start talking about the terror gene — and asking the uncomfortable question: Do they choose it, or are they born that way?
And if Islam isn’t the cause of murderous proclivities, have we considered that at the very least it must be a symptom?”
Wednesday, August 23: I agree with Daniel Pipes. It’s going to take thousands more dead Americans for the government to profile the way it knows it ought to. He writes:
“Noting the limited impact that losing 3,000 lives had in 2001 and building on my ‘education by murder’ hypothesis — that people wake up to the problem of radical Islam only when blood is flowing in the streets — I predict that effective profiling will only come into effect when many more Western lives, say 100,000, have been lost.”
I also agree with Walter Williams. I wish this country fought wars the way it used to.
Later…Can’t wait to find out who these fools are. Take a wild guess. Are they Christians or Muslims?
———————————————————————————————-
When I read that passengers on a British flight refused to fly with two Middle Eastern men on board, I knew we’d finally reached the point of no return. I’ve been waiting for something like this to happen.
Welcome to the age of terrorism.
A flight from Málaga, Spain, to Manchester, England, was held up for three hours after passengers became suspicious of two men of Middle Eastern appearance speaking what they believed was Arabic. The men were “escorted” off the airplane.
I’m as “tough on terrorism” as any red-blooded American, but I cringed when I read the story. It’s come to this. I want people to be free and happy and left alone to live their lives in peace, but that’s not the way the world works. The men likely were not terrorists, but people are fed up with this stuff. There is evil in the world, and that evil is intent on destroying as many people as it can.
It is unfortunate that Muslims with no terrorist intentions get singled out, too, but the fact is that mostly young, Middle Eastern, Muslim men are responsible for worldwide terrorism. (Including this latest attack?) That’s indisputable. So what are the rest of us supposed to do? Ignore it for the sake of political correctness?
People just don’t trust the government. Glenn Reynolds writes:
The two guys were likely entirely innocent, and didn’t deserve this, but this is the kind of thing that happens when people don’t trust the authorities to protect them. Over time, I fear that excessive political correctness on the part of governments will breed the reverse elsewhere.
Last night I watched CNN for the first time in years, and there was report about the lack of security at airport cargo holds. The CNN crew was able to drive up to cargo containers, which are loaded onto passenger planes, with no security personnel in sight. Even worse, a couple of disguised whistle-blowing employees said that most of the time, the cargo itself is not screened.
There aren’t enough resources, presumably, to watch everything all the time. Bureaucratic, soft-stepping government agencies are virtually hamstrung to do what really needs to be done. The problem is deep and cultural, and taking off our shoes at airports is as effective as trying to lift a boulder with a feather.
Muslims on a Plane: A Personal Account
Last year while on a flight back to D.C. after a road trip, I saw several men I suspected were up to no good. They were young men of Middle Eastern appearance, and one in particular was acting suspiciously. I was in an aisle seat on the right side, and he was a few seats in front of me on the left sitting with another Middle Eastern-looking man. I noticed that he kept looking back, smirking, and nodding his head at two other young men of Middle Eastern appearance several rows behind me.
It’s an understatement to say the guy was strange. He was too far away to actually talk to his companions, and I didn’t hear him speaking to the man he was sitting with. He just kept turning around, smirking, and nodding during the entire flight. My imagination kicked into overdrive. Was that a signal?
I remained alert, just in case…I don’t know. If I were mistaken, I had nothing to lose but the enjoyment of a good book. If I were right, I and everyone else on board had a lot to gain. But the flight was uneventful. I guess the man was remembering some inside joke or had forgotten to take his meds.
On a different flight, I sat a few seats behind two young men of Middle Eastern appearance. This time I wasn’t worried. Directly in front of them sat two men I believed with 90 percent certainty were air marshals. They had that look, know what I mean? Anyway, they were sitting right behind the bulkhead, and one got up to use the first class bathroom. Upon his return, he did a double-take at the men, eyeing them in a subtle but definitely alert manner. Again, the flight was uneventful, expect for a little turbulence.
I’m not sure that what happened with the Málaga-Manchester flight would happen here just yet, this being a neurotically politically correct, don’t-hurt-their-feelings kind of country, and all. People who aren’t raising a ruckus, or who merely speak in Arabic or look Middle Eastern typically don’t get thrown off planes in this country. But I’m certain I’m not the only passenger in America who’s ever suspected Middle Eastern-looking men on a plane. One day we’ll read about passenger revolts on American flights.
Do you have a “Muslims on a plane” story?
Related sources:
- Passengers explain pair’s removal
- “Islamofascism”: Beware of a religion without irony
- Islamic Fascists? What’s in a name?
- UK terror plot suspects charged with conspiracy to commit murder
(Photo source: Daily Mail)
Update: Blogger Toothpick Johnny comments:
There are over a billion Christians in the world, and only a few dozen have ever bombed and abortion clinic. More Muslims have bombed places than Christians. Again, when the IRA was very active, the British profiled people with Irish names and appearances. I have a Celtic name, so I was examined more thoroughly than most. So what? A few more minutes of my time were taken, but I wasn’t harmed. Being subjected to closer scrutiny is hardly a breach of the Constitution, and as I have already pointed out, this was a British flight, not an American one. We are not losing the “war†because we are more aware of our surroundings and more suspicious of people. As for Jose Padilla and John Lindh, they were practicing Muslims and dressed and acted in accordance with that belief.
Emphasis added.
Someone calling himself anonymous muslim writes in comments:
I sort of agree with the premise that some rational profiling should be done maybe using the acual passport information. The problem is most Westerners have no idea what a Middle easterner is. You guys keep using that word when the supects the last few months have be predominately Pakistani, which is a South Asian country.
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I use the term “Middle Eastern” as a synonym for “Muslim.” Probably not the most precise term, but there are only a few choices, semantically speaking: 1) We can profile “Middle Eastern-looking” young men; 2) Young men of Middle Eastern descent; or 3) Young men who may be Muslims.
It doesn’t matter to me which one you pick, but in this age of terrorism, it has to be one of the three, combined with background checks and behavior pattern recognition. I didn’t start this fire and certainly can’t put it out, so don’t take out your frustration on me. 
I have enough trouble trying to sidestep gangbangers and beggers on public transportation and on the street. I think the problem, as many people have said before, is that the normal, relatively prosperous, free countries of the world don’t believe in themselves, so they’re letting losers of all kinds trample all over them. I didn’t think this until I lived in Japan and went to Singapore, where they don’t have much “tolerance”.
Comment by mj — 08.21.06 @ 8:38 am
I nearly cried when this news broke. It basically means that the real bad guys have won - they’ve turned us into what they say we are. Those two men weren’t doing anything wrong and that really was racism at work there.
I understand it, too, in a way: I understand why the rest of the passengers were nervous and all, but the fact is that they wouldn’t have had the same reaction had it been two white guys speaking Arabic, or even two black guys speaking Arabic. Most ordinary people don’t really know what Arabic sounds like anyway, so they drew their conclusions from the appearance of the two men. And in any case, speaking a different language isn’t against the law.
I’m honest enough to admit to myself that I probably would have been scared, too, if I was on that plane and didn’t understand what the two men were saying. But it still makes me sad and angry (and it makes me despair) that ordinary people have been made so scared that they react like that to “the other”, you know?
We have little or no faith in the ability of our leaders to protect us, and that’s in no small part to their reluctance to confront the real issues at stake and acknowledge that this really is a battle between our way of life and an evil ideology. Sorry if that sounds over the top, but it is how I feel.
Comment by Lizzie — 08.21.06 @ 9:13 am
You are so right on! I remember after the Oklahoma City bombings there was huge suspicion cast on all young, white, ex-military males.
Comment by Roger Glass — 08.21.06 @ 9:17 am
The passengers on that airplane were taking responsibility for their OWN safety - which is as it should be. Yes, the governments around the world should be doing all that they can to protect the traveling public BUT we have to take responsibility for our own safety as well.
As to those two “victimized” Muslims - maybe they should have given some serious thought to showing up for that flight dressed in a way that caused people to suspect them of being up to no good? Maybe THEY should take some responsibility for their own inconvenience?
I’m flying Vegas in early October and as a 64-year-old white woman, I fully expect to be searched and generally irritated by airport security. And because I believe that their intentions are good, I will not lose my cool with the idiotic TSA employees. BUT, if in fact I see someone behaving in a suspicious manner, you can bet your butts I will NOT just passively assume that TSA (minimum wage government employees? come on!) has done their jobs and I will ask someone to double check the suspicious looking person(s) because that is MY responsibility to myself and my fellow passengers.
In other words - to use a word I loathe - I will be proactive!
Comment by Gayle Miller — 08.21.06 @ 9:47 am
LaShawn,
A news report that I read said that the two men, despite the intense heat, were wearing heavy leather jackets, zipped up. They kept checking their watches, and acting nervously. To be honest, the heavy zipped-up leather jackets would be enough to make me suspicious of virtually anyone in this day and age, regardless of ethnic appearance. OK, maybe not a Swedish octagenarian.
My experiences with Muslims on a plane is that everyone goes out of their way not to offend them. My 74 year old, white-haired mother suffering from cancer would be searched and made to drink from her water bottle (this was in 2002), while middle eastern males were passed through airport security without a problem. This happened at least twice, once at Dulles and once at Reagan National airport.
Comment by Phoenix — 08.21.06 @ 9:48 am
Phoenix:
These two wearing heavy jackets are unlikely to be serious terrorists.
Serious terrorists would likely do everything they could so they did NOT stand out from the crowd.
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 08.21.06 @ 10:32 am
One of the objects of TERRORism is to create an atmosphere of terror, and this story indicates that they have scored some successes. We are comicly frightened of our own shadows now. It doesn’t help, of course, that our media and politicians have added to the climate of fear. OBL must be laughing his a** off.
Very very regretable.
Comment by Kman — 08.21.06 @ 10:44 am
I say good for those passengers who decided to stop playing politically correct charades and made a stand against insanity. The fact is that no muslims anywhere can be trusted because the “peaceful” ones are making no efforts whatsoever to curb the radicals in their midst, and are even actively supporting them. Every muslim alive must be treated as a hostile enemy until they prove otherwise; after all, it’s how white Southerners have been treated for a century and a half now.
Comment by Improbulus Maximus — 08.21.06 @ 10:47 am
Would you feel similarly uncomfortable if you saw a Christian lurking around a planned parenthood office? What have you done to “curb radicalism” in christianity? True muslims do not have to apologize for the actions of deranged terrorists, just as true christians don’t have to answer for the deaths of abortion doctors.
What many seem to be saying here is this:
Assuming that every young muslim male is a terrorist is the right thing to do…but we don’t because it’s politically incorect. THAT IS IDIOTIC. We don’t do it because that sort of behaviour will further alienate moderate muslims and create more hate and fundamentalism. And because it’s just stupid to assume in the first place. Muslims should be able to appreciate the US for the land of freedom that it is…but as many have written about, things turned hateful towards them after 9/11, and they saw the ugly side of a country they loved so much.
Instead of giving them paranoid looks, why not talk to them…see what they’re about. Ask them how it feels to have everyone’s eyes on them. You’ll find you’ll be put to ease when you realize how silly your fears were. Out of 1 billion muslims, even if there are 1000 plane-bombing terrorists (which is an awfully high estimate), there’s only a 1 in a million chance that the young muslim guy is a terrorist.
I suppose you can live your lives in fear if you want. If you assume the worst about everything, you fear everything, and that’s no way to live your life.
Comment by Pman — 08.21.06 @ 11:19 am
Unless the “peaceful” Muslims stand up to the thugs in their midst, then they can expect the same thing to keep happening. Kman, the main goal of these nuts is to EXTERMINATE us and our way of life, not make us fearful. Better to give into fear now and then than to have more innocents murdered.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 11:28 am
A classic fault in logic is to assert that if most ‘A’ are ‘B’, then most ‘B’ are ‘A.’ This error lies underneath “It is unfortunate that Muslims with no terrorist intentions get singled out, but the fact is that mostly young, Middle Eastern, Muslim men are responsible for worldwide terrorism.”
The fault in this logic is apparent if we think of some other crime, like drunk driving, that is dominated by some other demographic. If the large majority of fatal drunk-driving accidents are caused by white men, would we consider it a wise, effective policy to restrict the driving privileges of white men more than other people? Or would our public safety be better insured by devising better drunk-driving prevention and detection practices that catch drunk drivers regardless of their demographic?
And would many people stand behind, say, a group of people in a highway rest stop who decide to take the car keys from a young white man who was laughing too loud on the basis that they didn’t trust law enforcement to protect them from someone who looked, to them, as if he might be one of those white-male drunk drivers?
Comment by Karen James — 08.21.06 @ 11:29 am
#4, Gayle…
I TOTALLY agree with you. I too would ask Airport Security to re-check a passenger if I felt uncomfortable or suspicious. Better to delay a flight and reach your destination alive than to be blown to bits.
Folks, always trust your instints…
Comment by Tate — 08.21.06 @ 11:42 am
“Instead of giving them paranoid looks, why not talk to them…see what they’re about.”
Nope. The ball is in their court. If Muslims want dialog, let them start. Let the peace-loving non-radical Muslim majority (the folks we keep hearing about but never hear FROM) condemn the violence of Islamofascists, and do so loudly and unequivocally. Crickets chirping won’t do it.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.21.06 @ 11:45 am
So much for the enlightened principles of personal liberty that our domestic legal and political system (OUR COUNTRY) is based on.
We abandon our principles, but the terrorists haven’t won, really.
Comment by Pman — 08.21.06 @ 11:45 am
If airport security put PC aside and made it common practice to put Middle Eastern men through more intensive security procedures, then this would never have happened. The passengers would be assured that those men had passed a rigorous inspection, and the men (who, as stated, were probably innocent) would’ve been inconvenienced but would otherwise have had a chance to travel in peace.
If 9/11 had been perpetrated by brown haired, blue-eyed men with thick Southern accents, then I would be fine with airport security profiling brown haired, blue-eyed, Southern men, even if that meant I would be inconvenienced. I’d probably be annoyed as all get out, but I’d be more annoyed at the perps, who had started it all, than the airport security, who would just be doing their jobs.
Comment by Jay — 08.21.06 @ 11:55 am
Pman, first off, this wasn’t in our country. And how is profiling a group who has members who are responsible for about 80-95% of all international terrorist incidents since 1972? WE are not stripping them of any rights, nor are we rounding them up and sending them to camps. We are looking at them more closely, and perhaps inconveniencing them for a short time. Yeah, big abandonment of principles.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 11:59 am
A Pakistani woman and supposed resident of one of our local communities for the past year purchased a one-way ticket to Michigan the day before her scheduled flight. TSA inspectors detained her at the Tri-State Regional airport.
Comment by JD Pendry — 08.21.06 @ 12:04 pm
Toothpick Johnny,
it isn’t hard to understand. If we explicitly profile for Muslims, they will send a christian-looking woman on a plane with a bomb instead, and she will get through easier than if we just randomly searched everyone (any statistician can prove this).
Profiling in this way is impossible anyway, as muslims exist with all colors of skin, hair, eyes, etc… unless you want that group to have to wear a distinguishing mark. remind you of anything? just replace the star of david with a crescent! Sometimes I think the whole profiling argument comes about because ignorant people just assume that they can spot a muslim on sight. Sorry, but not every muslim fits into your preconceptions, and that’s where this whole thing breaks down. See Jose Padilla (obvious muslim name, right?) and John Walker Lindh for examples of white muslim terrorists.
Also, being singled out for special treatment based on one’s religious or ethnic background isn’t just not PC. It’s wrong, it’s stupid, it’s innefective. It’s also self-righteously satisfying to people who see the world in neatly divided ways, who beleive we’ll be safer by focusing on the brown people, who are the only ones who do wrong.
Comment by Pman — 08.21.06 @ 12:39 pm
As to those two “victimized†Muslims - maybe they should have given some serious thought to showing up for that flight dressed in a way that caused people to suspect them of being up to no good? Maybe THEY should take some responsibility for their own inconvenience?
Wow, I completely disagree. Imagine, for a moment, that Christians were under suspicion. Would you feel comfortable dressing in a miniskirt and a baby t-shirt just to identify yourself as “not Christian enough to be a terrorist?” Probably not, and you shouldn’t have to. Even if those men were in robes and traditional Muslim clothing, they should not be held responsible for dressing in a way that their religion deems appropriate.
I am not hard-left on this issue. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to give extra scrutiny to Muslim passengers, especially those who look suspicious. But it’s horrible to blame Muslims for choosing to visibly identify themselves as such, like if they could just suck it up and blend in with the rest of us at the expense of their beliefs then they deserve what they get, or something. I don’t think they deserve it AT ALL, but I think it is necessary, and that’s an important distinction to make.
My story: I was flying back from college, home to New York, two weeks after September 11. The flight was nearly empty, and we all had strict security measures and checks, and I was so upset about the whole thing, but the thing that made me feel better about it all was seeing two obviously Muslim men go through security and, once they had cleared, be treated politely and accepted by all the other passengers. No one gave them a hairy eyeball or anything, maybe because we had all been under such scrutiny that they couldn’t have had anything on them and gotten through, but it made me feel much better and proud to live in this country. That, on a plane of mostly New Yorkers returning home for funerals, we could still find the basic humanity in ourselves to understand that blind hatred and blame wasn’t going to make anything better.
Comment by Alexandra — 08.21.06 @ 1:02 pm
On a different flight, I sat a few seats behind two young men of Middle Eastern appearance. This time I wasn’t worried. Directly in front of them sat two men I believed with 90 percent certainty were air marshals. They had that look, know what I mean?
Memo to easily offended, highly sensitive homosexual lurkers, LSB is not alluding to the police officer in the group Village People!
Comment by Joseph Magee — 08.21.06 @ 1:24 pm
I sort of agree with the premise that some rational profiling should be done maybe using the acual passport information. The problem is most Westerners have no idea what a Middle easterner is. You guys keep using that word when the supects the last few months have be predominately Pakistani, which is a South Asian country. I havent read that those guys on the plane were actually Muslim. The problem with just profiling based on looks alone is that Westerners can’t tell the difference between an Pakistani Muslim, Indian Sikh, Indian Christian, Arab Muslim,etc. Actually , I doubt most Americans could tell the difference between Arabic and Hebrew. Basically you guys are advocating profiling all brown people who make you nervous no matter what religion.
Comment by anonymous muslim — 08.21.06 @ 1:36 pm
Two years ago I was taking a tourist trip in downtown Chicago and noticed a Muslim man taking pictures of the top floors of one of the main entrances to the train station across the street from the Sears tower. There was nothing compelling about these floors over the train station. I wondered to myself if he was a terrorist, yet stupid me didn’t take a picture of him taking a picture. Recently we heard about the plot to blow up the Sears Tower. To this day I rue the day I didn’t photograph this guy and send it to the FBI.
I think we have a duty to be vigilant for our own safety and the safety of our countrymen. Call it racial profiling or whatever you want. Fact is, this world has changed and we are being forced to change with it. Obviously some people are so afraid they won’t even sit on a plane with Muslims. That may be extreme, but hey, it’s the way it is and it’ not going to get any better.
As an aside, last nite I was watching C-span book tv and listened to Vali Nasr describe his book, The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future. To say the discussion was compelling is an understatement. The secular divide between the Shias and the Sunnis is going to intensify as the Shias gain more and more power with the support of Iran. We are in for a terrible ride in the months and years ahead with this secular war within Islam itself, with the terrorists monopolizing on it as Hezbollah recently did in Lebanon.
Comment by dianne — 08.21.06 @ 1:47 pm
I enjoy the company of Muslims and would fully appreciate the opportunity to sit with them on a plane. In fact, I would rather sit with Muslims than with paranoid and bloodthirsty Americans, and I am an American.
And no, Muslims don’t hate us because of our so-called freedom. This is a simplistic and idiotic line of thought.
Comment by John — 08.21.06 @ 1:48 pm
Reading through the responses and the original post, I had several thoughts inspired by the following passage from the Declaration of Independence.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Given how some people seem to advocate profiling as a means to stop or prevent crimes, I wonder how these same people would react to other profilings…
Why aren’t we profiling corporate executives after ComCast, Adelphia, Enron, and every other corporate scandal? It seems that the executive officers in these heinous business failings, that destroyed the lives of thousands of pensioners, are the only ones to commit these crimes, so let’s put every executive in America on the rack to make sure they’re not trying to steal from their companies, eh? And why aren’t the executive officers from the companies that aren’t suffering from corporate officer abuse calling for draconian punishments of the other corporate officers?
Why aren’t we, in sports, drug testing every single athlete in America for steroid usage? Jeeze, with so many athletes admitting to drug use, why the heck aren’t we testing all of them?
And those darned Christians, and their doctor murdering, can’t let Christians near abortion clinics because they’ll bomb them if they get the chance.
[You’re comparing abortion clinic bombings perpetrated by a few so-called Christians with world-wide terrorism perpetrated by mostly Muslim young men of Middle Eastern descent intent on destroying entire non-believing populations? It’s obviously silly comments like this that cause me to consider, every now and then, to shut down public commenting. - Admin]
If it isn’t clear I abhor the idea of profiling. I apologize if some people think those examples go over the top, but I think they’re illustrative. I abhor profiling because to me it goes against the idea of our nation and its constitution. To me, profiling is denying someone their right to life and liberty. To embark upon the path that some claim is common sense is to abandon what our nation is. We can beat terrorism, and we can stop it without having to give in to the tyranny of a police state.
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.21.06 @ 1:56 pm
Your quote from Glenn Reynolds hits the nail on the head, I think.
Truthfully, I’m totally for profiling. But my heart still breaks for all the people who will be singled out, even though they are completely innocent themselves. Those guys may have been nervous because of the looks they probably get when they board a plane.
Still, at the end of the day, I blame the terrorists for causing this to happen.
Comment by Christine — 08.21.06 @ 1:57 pm
Another battle the terrorists have won.
This is turning into a rout.
Comment by Robert — 08.21.06 @ 1:57 pm
Hey La Shawn, I had a very similar experience yesterday. I was flying from Wichita to Atlanta. I was on the aisle in the Exit row. Next to me was a middle eastern looking man who was dressed in all black. Black Jeans, hiking boots, a black shirt/jacket thing that covered his neck down past his wrists.
He was reading flash cards on how to fly a Hawker BeachJet 400a and kept reaching down between his seat and the exit door. I am not making this up. I looked back and another Middle Eastern man was looking right at me smirking.
I asked the guy if he was learning to be a pilot but he said he already was one. He was nice but not talkative. We had awful turbulence but that was the only thing that happened.
I wasn’t going to post this on my blog but I think I will now.
Comment by Randy — 08.21.06 @ 2:00 pm
A few “so called christians”.
You’re right. Its probably a very minute percentage.
BTW, there are over a billion Muslims in the world. How many want to blow up planes? 80%? 90%?
I’d say less than .01%.
How about that comparison Left-Coaster makes about corporate executives?
Do you think the % of corporate execs who have screwed their pensioneers is lower than the % of Muslims who would kill us for our freedoms?
Not hardly.
Comment by Robert — 08.21.06 @ 2:09 pm
Pman–now you’ve got me paranoid about Christians. What do they look like? Have you talked with any of them like you advise us to do? What did they have to say? I’m sure you were open minded and tolerant, according their views the respect you expect for your own, right?
MB
Comment by MBrown — 08.21.06 @ 2:13 pm
Questionable Actions On Yesterday’s Flight
I wasn’t sure I was going to blog this but after reading Muslims On A Plane by La Shawn, I thought I would go ahead. La Shawn writes:When I read that passengers on a British flight refused to fly with two Middle Eastern men on board, I knew we’d fin…
Trackback by Everyday Thoughts Collected - By Randy Thomas — 08.21.06 @ 2:17 pm
anonymous Muslim wrote:
“I doubt most Americans could tell the difference between Arabic and Hebrew.”
Most Americans can’t point to Louisiana on a map, so I’d say you’re probably right.
Comment by John — 08.21.06 @ 2:17 pm
There are over a billion Christians in the world, and only a few dozen have ever bombed and abortion clinic. More Muslims have bombed places than Christians. Again, when the IRA was very active, the British profiled people with Irish names and appearances. I have a Celtic name, so I was examined more thoroughly than most. So what? A few more minutes of my time were taken, but I wasn’t harmed. Being subjected to closer scrutiny is hardly a breach of the Constitution, and as I have already pointed out, this was a British flight, not an American one. We are not losing the “war” because we are more aware of our surroundings and more suspicious of people. As for Jose Padilla and John Lindh, they were practicing Muslims and dressed and acted in accordance with that belief.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 2:19 pm
#31- Only because standards have been slashed so that kid’s self-esteem isn’t hurt.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 2:21 pm
Hey LaShawn-
Should we apply your policy to black men walking in white neighborhoods? I’m just asking. I mean, you know how “informed” citizens in America always know who the perpetrators of crime are, and are thus qualified to prejudge who potential criminals are.
Comment by Pang — 08.21.06 @ 2:22 pm
Child molesters and serial killers are almost always “creepy looking” white midde age class dudes. I never let my children near them. Most white middle class men are OK but can you blame me for not wanting to take a chance? There is evil in the world. Thousands of children fall prey to these people every year (far more than become victims of terrorism!) and we as non-white middle class male Americans have to stop it. I’m sorry if it makes them “uncomfortable” but if they are innocent they should have nothing to worry about.
Comment by Koolkurt — 08.21.06 @ 2:22 pm
Pang, people who aren’t familiar with my blog or my writings tend to ask questions like that. “What if it were a black man walking down the street minding his own business,” blah, blah, blah. I am not against racial or religious profiling. My own brother, who is a black man, has been profiled before. I don’t like it, but I understand the rationale behind it, my personal feelings notwithstanding.
Stick around, and you’ll learn a lot more surprising things about me. Assumptions are nothing to play with.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.21.06 @ 2:25 pm
And those darned Christians, and their doctor murdering, can’t let Christians near abortion clinics because they’ll bomb them if they get the chance.
[You’re comparing abortion clinic bombings perpetrated by a few so-called Christians with world-wide terrorism perpetrated by mostly Muslim young men of Middle Eastern descent intent on destroying entire non-believing populations? It’s obviously silly comments like this that cause me to consider, every now and then, to shut down public commenting. - Admin]
I was hoping that the over-the-top wording would help inply hyperbole, but that aside:
Admin - Agreed.
There is no way to compare the damage, in human cost, of world-wide terrorism to the anti-abortion terrorism.
The real reason why I added that example isn’t to show the loss of life, but rather to show that such extremism is possible in any religion or any belief structure. And to single out a race because of radicals is not only unjust, but impractical. I did not clarify that.
In terms of clarification, please look at the comparison in this light: You note that it is young, so-called Muslim men that are intent on eradicating other beliefs through violence. I contend anti-abortion-terrorists are so-called Christians that are attempting to eradicate abortion through violence.
Also consider that the IRA is an Irish so-called patriotic organization, that until recently, sought violence as a way to eradicate Brittish “occupation” of Northern Ireland. Yet there are no calls for, nor any profiling of the Irish… why not?
In continuance of idealogical comparisons, I ask the admin and all readers to consider: with the existance of the KKK, and their purported Christian justification of their racism, why aren’t all Christians detained or profiled for racism?
I reiterate that to single out an entire race or group of believers because of radicals and extremists that claim that group or belief for justification is not only unjust, but impractical.
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.21.06 @ 2:32 pm
Oof… Toothpick, didn’t know about Irish profiling, hadn’t heard anything about it, I retract my comments about the Irish.
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.21.06 @ 2:35 pm
LOL. Was back in the day. I was flying into Glasgow from the US, but I was a young teenager and looked rather scruffy. It was before the peace in N. Ireland and the IRA was still very active, so they looked at my brother and I closely. No harm, no foul.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 3:00 pm
Fair enough. I disagree, but you’re philosophically consistent, I guess. I think the problem with profiling is that you have to trust the profilers to be operating within the law and fairly. I, personally, do not. We don’t even officially profile people, and at this moment some middle eastern guys are sitting in jail because somebody (white) thought that middle eastern guys shouldn’t be able to buy a certain number of cell phones… Is this fair? Is this what we want? Does this make us safer? I am going to say no, no and no. I am sure people will reply and say this is an extreme example, etc. But this is the example we know of. What about the ones we don’t know of? It is up to us to determine whether we live in a free spociety or a police state. When the authporities can be trusted to make extra-legal decisions, then we can allow profiling. Until then, we must fight to defend our freedom and liberty.
Comment by Pang — 08.21.06 @ 3:06 pm
Addendum: I have no problem with profiling of Irishmen to this day. Irish terrorist committed many evil acts in the UK, and they deserve to be found out and punished. All terrorists are scum, no matter what race, religion or political affiliation.
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 3:07 pm
Pang, how is profiling a threat to our liberty? Please explain in detail. How is it extra-legal?
Comment by Toothpick Johnny — 08.21.06 @ 3:13 pm
One thing people are forgetting is that nobody has an absolute “right” to fly.
Air travel is not public transportation in the same way as subway and bus.
It’s publicly regulated, but the airlines are essentially private.
Maybe it’s because I’m a Pisces (fish don’t fly LOl).
But, I don’t see the particular urgency with air travel.
I can certainly understand it with subway and rail.
But I view air travel as a privilege, not an absolute entitlement, no matter what your race.
Comment by Glamchild — 08.21.06 @ 3:16 pm
European Islamofascists Have Their Day in Court
Youssef wanted the avenge the death of his Sunni brother in Lebanon by blowing up trains in Germany(?)…
Trackback by Gateway Pundit — 08.21.06 @ 3:18 pm
When you can see the President of CAIR on television nearly every night defending the latest outrageous action by some radical Islamofascist thug and you NEVER EVER hear moderate Muslims speaking out, one of two things is at work here: (1) there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim or (2) moderate Muslims aren’t news. Despite that, I would definitely be reassured if I could hear from SOME moderate Muslims who are willing to be counted on the side of the Western World and can speak loudly enough to force the mainstream media to publicize their views.
Don’t look good in blue; not holding my breath!
Comment by Gayle Miller — 08.21.06 @ 3:24 pm
Oh my goodness what a can of worms has been opened now. Some of the screeching at this site sounds like my roommates reaction when I told her about the stand taken by the other passengers.
Honestly, I expect that these 2 men were not terrorists, but they saw no problem with frightening other passengers with their antics. I really doubt after all that’s happened recently that they could not be aware of how their actions might look to bystanders. So I would refrain from calling them “innocent”. In a way they are more guilty than the terrorists themselves. The terrorists at least have the courage of their convictions, must as I despise the logic and religion that led them to theor choices. These “Asian-looking” men who act suspiciously and then derive pleasure from seeing others upset are merely trading on the nasty reputation of others and need to beware the potential retaliation.
And that is the problem with the “moderate peace-loving” muslim community. Too many of them probably do want to see peace, but are happy to accept the perceived increase in stature created every time another fanatic blows himself up and takes out innocent bystanders in the process.
In truth its nice to see that someone, even if it was panicky passengers, is willing to stand up and point out that the behavior of any other passenger is unacceptable. Remember the crazy lady who ended up caysing a flight to be diverted to Boston, and who supposedly used the aisle as a bathroom. I’m not one to advocate physically striking a woman, but someone should have forced her back into her seat and then tied her into it for the remainder of the flight. Instead she was allowed to distract the passengers for quite some time. Imagine if there had been one of these gel bombers on that plane. Would anyone have noticed him in time?
The truth is that being on a plane and travelling is a priviledge. We do pay for that priviledge, but the airlines do have the right to refuse service if they deem you a danger or feel that your travelling with them will hurt their sales in the long run. I would be very unsurprised to see some airlines start to pay closer attention to nationality of passengers as well as other factors and adjusting their pricing and services accordingly. If no one wants to fly with muslim-appearing men because of the history of terrorism associated, so no airline will want to allow them to fly, because others will seek to go on what they perceive to be “safer” flights.
Lots to think about, no right answers.
Comment by Mark — 08.21.06 @ 3:47 pm
LaShawn…. You just did a 180 degree turn (giving me mental whiplash).
Just last week you argued in favor of profiling.
With this story we have two men profiled (this is a taste of how it would be in the world that you argued in favor of last week)….
Then you also stated that- If you’re Muslim…too bad.. that’s you’re problem.
FAST FORWARD TO THIS WEEK:
Now all of a sudden, this week, you appear to actually show concern or sympathy with the two Muslim men who were profiled in this story.
You stated: “I want people to be free and happy and left alone to live their lives in peace”
But it’s hard to reconcile the two positions… your statements are contradictory.
If you support profiling… this is how it is going to be EVERYDAY…for tens of thousands of innocent Muslims in the UK, if profiling became part of official policies and procedures. And this story represented only one aspect, one glimpse into how it would be…just a mere taste.
I don’t see how you can make the statements you made last week…and then turn right around this week and say that you want people to be left alone….etc..
Your position also goes against the great civil rights struggle & tradition in this country….(not talking about the Al Sharptons or the Jesse Jacksons who are riding the coat tails of the movement… i’m talking about the real Civil rights tradition in America). Your parents, grandparents, and great grandparents were profiled as a matter of official and unofficial policy in the United States. How can you then support the same methods for an entire religious group (in this case Muslims)? Just out of respect for your ancestors you should at least be a lot more skeptical about something such as racial profiling.
Has it come to this? Yes…. It’s come to the point of being a very complex matter….and it will take creative solutions and complex analysis to remedy the problem. The simple minded approach that a lot of Conservatives have- the “just kill them all” approach (I have this argument with my boss all the time… a white country guy) is too simplistic for the problem. The same goes for profiling…. it’s an old Conservative approach that is being rehashed/recycled.
What is your real position on the matter? You seem a little torn. Either you’re for it or you’re not.
Comment by The Angry Independent — 08.21.06 @ 3:49 pm
I don’t think it would be very hard to go through this list of comments and make a list of those folks that seldom, if ever, have to fly. They’re the ones on the “If we profile, or if we refuse to fly with suspicious looking males, the terrorists win” side of the argument.
Comment by Hogarth — 08.21.06 @ 3:54 pm
Controversy for controversy’s sake, eh Angry? Tedious, but not unusual.
That I sympathize with groups and individuals who are profiled does not mean I’m against profiling. I have no clue how you made that logical leap. As a human being, I can’t help but regret and even resent the pain of others. But pain is part of a fallen world. I can support profiling and — incredible as it may seem — feel bad that it has to be done.
My archives — blog and columns — attest to my consistency, so before you comment here again, perhaps you should peruse a few posts and columns to protect yourself from more whiplash.
By the way, I certainly don’t need or lecture from you or anyone else about what black Americans have dealt with in our history. Just because blacks are profiled, particularly in certain high-crime areas, doesn’t mean my support, as a black person, for Muslim profiling is somehow logically unsound.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.21.06 @ 3:55 pm
This is definitely a sad story. First of all, I’m not sure passengers speaking Arabic counts as acting suspicious. Secondly, I don’t believe the kind of profiling advocated in this post is a good idea, simply because it isn’t very efficient. I believe that everyone needs to be vigilant, but people need to learn to recognize suspicious behavior, facial expressions, body language, not facial features or skin color. As others have pointed out, John Linde, Jose Padilla, and I’ll add Richard Reed, John Allan Muhammad, and Robert Anderson, (he was sentenced to five life sentences last year for offering to hand over information on the Abrams I tanks used in Iraq to Al Keida in order to help the cause), were/are all Muslims, but not Arabs. Profiling based on appearance and dress breeds complacency, and that’s dangerous. As regards Muslim moderates speaking out, I can see both sides of this issue. One one hand, we’re all screaming for more involvement on their part. On the other hand, whenever one does speak out, he or she isn’t believed. Read the Muslim blogosphere, and you’ll find them all over. Then there’s the issue of just how many do we expect to speak out before we’ll be satisfied that there’s an active opposition. One? Two? Six? Ten? No one has a right to fly, and if you’re acting suspicious then you should have every reason to expect to be put through the ringer. But Anonymous Muslim is right. Arabic sounds very similar to Hebrew, especially to untrained ears. The people on that plane mostly couldn’t have made the distinction between the two, to say nothing of the differences in appearance between Arabs and Pakistanis, who look very similar to Indians and other Southeast Asians. They weren’t being vigilant, they were being bigotted, and I can’t believe people are confusing this kind of bigotry with heroism.
Comment by Amanda Rush — 08.21.06 @ 4:38 pm
bravo to the good folks on that plane who took responsibility for their safety into their own hands! when the government tells you obvious lies, and refuses to properly look at the group of people who are going around killing innocents in the name of their barbaric pseudo-religion, it’s up to the people themselves to look after themselves.
and since middle-eastern arabic-speaking islamic fascists are causing all the trouble, it seems only logical to refuse to fly with people like that on board. as an earlier poster noted, there is no “right to fly”. they can dress like everyone else and sit quietly in a non-suspicious manner if they want to fly, no? and if doing so hurts their feelings, tough.
the REAL question here is about the folks who’ve posted things like “why don’t you try and talk to them; get to know them as people?” and “hey! christians are mean, too!!” and “i’d rather sit with homicidal religious fanatics than with bucolic ignernt americans”. are responses like that indicative of A) pavlovian knee-jerk political responses programmed into them by their teachers? or B) gross idiocy?
Comment by ed — 08.21.06 @ 4:59 pm
Ed,
Your exposed bigotry lends no credit to your argument. I’m going to assume that you’ll give a blank check to the KKK and the Aryan Nation to fly where they please? They have killed, they terrorize, and yet you’ll allow them to fly but not the Muslims? Is it because of the religion or the actions, Ed. What is it you are trying to prevent? Violence? Destruction? Murder?
If anything I’ve read so far is knee-jerk, I’d say its your comments on the motivation of people that have posted rationally.
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.21.06 @ 5:34 pm
It’s not rational to refuse to acknowledge the religious and ethnic group responsible for almost all terrorism.
Once we do have the honesty and the fortitude to say, as Mr. Bush did, that we’re at war with Islamic Fascists (Islamofascists), we can begin to construct policies and safeguards that make sense, provide maximum protection, minimize social chaos and protect individual rights. But it must start with factually straight talk, something sorely lacking in the liberal/leftist world.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.21.06 @ 5:55 pm
Make your own choices, folks - as for me personally, I’m profiling.
What neighborhood I would not take a stroll through, dine out at, or country I’d not visit directly correlates with “who” lives there. I consider that using good sense and discretion.
If I’m boarding a plane with someone that “looks” like who we are at WAR with, I’m taking another flight. If that gets me the “R” label, I don’t give a rat’s rectum.
My in-laws know that label won’t stick anyway and that does matter.
Comment by Dave in AZ — 08.21.06 @ 5:58 pm
aww….i see where poor leftcoasty is upset at someone daring to point out that pretty much all the terrorism out there is being done by islamic fascists. responding with the classic ‘brainwashed-by-the-profs’ “defense” of cries of “KKK!” and “aryan nation!”, just as teacher instructed him/her to. oddly, he/she neglected to include the ‘earth first’ terror organization, who’ve killed more people in THEIR terror actions than the KKK/aryan nation has in quite some time now. (look it up)(then too, is leftcoaster suggesting that he/she would sit mildly by with no problems at all when her airline seatmate turns out to be a KKK kleagle decked out in full robes and hood? because objections based on that person’s dress and customs is “wrong”? SURE he/she is.)
leftcoaster’s righteous indignation aside - full of sound and fury and all that - the fact remains that, while not all moslems are terrorists bent on killing innocent (and conveniently unarmed) civilains, 99% of all terrorists ARE moslems. not klansmen, or aryan nationites, not even earth firsters. MOSLEMS.
so looking askance at, or refusing to fly with, moslems is “wrong”…..why, again? because it hurts their feelings? too bad! why are their tender sensibilities deemed more important than everyone else’s right to a worry-free flight? if it makes anyone feel better, i’m sure even the KKK or aryan nation would agree with that.
Comment by ed — 08.21.06 @ 6:15 pm
“Can’t speak for anyone else, but I use the term “Middle Eastern†as a synonym for “Muslim.—
So does that mean you know what someone’s religion is by looking at them?
Comment by dave — 08.21.06 @ 6:29 pm
Rumors On The Internets: Everybody’s Fightin’ For The Promised Land
Help support the GWOT by wearing a “Terrorists should die, ask me why” button. [IMAO] Bush’s approval rating: really, really, positively not related to congressional campaigns. Also, Gallup just makes that shit up. [Wizbang Politics] …
Trackback by Wonkette — 08.21.06 @ 6:38 pm
Fear, paranoia, and dangerous stereotypes
La Shawn Barber has a disturbing story on her blog which talks about the fact that for some people having Muslim passengers on a plane is as disturbing if not more disturbing that having snakes on a plane. I find
Trackback by Globalclashes — 08.21.06 @ 7:22 pm
Ed,
I can see how you make it easy on yourself to express so much vitriol. You tag people with names (Leftcoasty) to trivialize them in your eyes. Once trivialized, you then no longer need to see them as an equal, and you talk down to them, regardless of who they might be. Your arrogance and self-assured writing style give you up as a bigot trying to disguise himself.
–aww….i see where poor leftcoasty is upset at someone daring to point out that pretty much all the terrorism out there is being done by islamic fascists.–
Pretty much? Paint with as broad a brush as you need to Ed, but don’t forget the other terrorism going on. Africa, India, Nepal, South America.
–responding with the classic ‘brainwashed-by-the-profs’ “defense†of cries of “KKK!†and “aryan nation!â€, just as teacher instructed him/her to. oddly, he/she neglected to include the ‘earth first’ terror organization, who’ve killed more people in THEIR terror actions than the KKK/aryan nation has in quite some time now. (look it up)–(
I find it juvenile to attempt to denigrate my thoughts by attributing them to academia or some other demonized institution. Again an attempt to trivialize the poster by claiming the arguments aren’t mine, and they belong to someone else. And to be honest, even though you claim that Earth First killed more than the KKK or the Aryan Nation, I don’t see what body counts have to do with profiling. If anything, you’re adding to my argument by bringing them up. In fact, since you’re so kind to include them, they’re terrorists apparently, and they’re not espcially tied to Islam. Hmmm, a non-islamic terror organization. Definately seems to support my argument against racial profiling. How the hell are you supposed to profile for Earth First, KKK, and the Aryan nation? Sure, you might be able to pick out the extreme elements of the group, but I’m sure that there are memebers that don’t stand out immediately to a visual inspection. Hmmm, similar situation with the Muslims, Ed. You might tag a few with visual inspections, but you’re delusional if you think that anyone can eyeball every single terrorist. And, since you can’t tell the difference, you’re being lazy and branding them all as dangerous. Don’t forget to keep all white folk off the plane as well. Espically them dangerous Earth Firsters!
–(then too, is leftcoaster suggesting that he/she would sit mildly by with no problems at all when her airline seatmate turns out to be a KKK kleagle decked out in full robes and hood? because objections based on that person’s dress and customs is “wrongâ€? SURE he/she is.)–
If you believe that I implied anything like that in my last comment, you strech concepts better than plastic-man. I simply asked if you would accept racial profiling to keep the KKK or the Aryan Nation from flying. And you somehow turned that around to me inviting a KKK Kleagle to sit next to me? Heh. If the KKK kiddie was decked out, as you say, he’d be sitting by himself. I would move to be away from him. But I wouldn’t say he couldn’t fly. That call is up to the Pilot.
– leftcoaster’s righteous indignation aside - full of sound and fury and all that - the fact remains that, while not all moslems are terrorists bent on killing innocent (and conveniently unarmed) civilains, 99% of all terrorists ARE moslems. not klansmen, or aryan nationites, not even earth firsters. MOSLEMS.
so looking askance at, or refusing to fly with, moslems is “wrongâ€â€¦..why, again? because it hurts their feelings? too bad! why are their tender sensibilities deemed more important than everyone else’s right to a worry-free flight? if it makes anyone feel better, i’m sure even the KKK or aryan nation would agree with that. –
So how do you tell if someone is Islamic, Ed? Unless you’re saying you don’t want to fly with any brown people, that you want your airplane lily white?
Muslims aren’t all one color. How do suppose the airline personnel are going to tell if someone is Islamic or not? Are you proposing that all Muslims need to register their religious affiliation? Are they going to have to wear a Red Cresent on their clothes if they want to travel? Are you saying that the government now has the right to spy on every person in the world, in order to ferret out their religious affiliation in order to better protect your white vision? Is that what you’re saying? If so, they you are absolutely right. Any KKK or Aryan nation memeber would support your vision.
Profiling is racist. Support for it, no matter in what way is still racist. It is making a decision based on someone’s race or in this case Religious belief. Profile all you want, just don’t shy from the racist label, wear it proudly.
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.21.06 @ 7:30 pm
A disproportionate percentage of crimes in some areas are committed by young black men.
Do you see where this is going?
Another reader unfamiliar with LBC. I believe profiling young black men in certain areas is a permissible and rational response, as they do commit crimes, particularly violent crimes against other black men, at a disproportionate rate. I, unlike certain other blacks, try not to let my skin color and emotions get in the way of my reasoning ability. Welcome to LBC. - Admin
Comment by tubino — 08.21.06 @ 7:33 pm
It seems like LaShawn asked for “Muslims on a plane” stories and didn’t get too many. But I do have one. Last fall my husband and I were in San Diego for my son’s graduation from Marine boot camp. Our return flight flew into Chicago quite late at night where we were met by my daughter. She said “everyone off that plane was either obviously military with their families or Muslim.” I HAD noticed a fair number of Muslim men on board (some of whom looked very surly) and I was nervous about it. I comforted myself that our seatmate had seen combat (and was preparing to return for another tour) and that every newly graduated Marine on-board was itching for combat so I figured “they could take ‘em” and I’d be safe.
In light of world events since then I wonder just how many dry runs the terrorists make every day and if that’s the reason they were on board. San Diego Marines have certainly done some damage to the terrorists’ cause.
Comment by MamaTod — 08.21.06 @ 8:50 pm
“Hey LaShawn-
Should we apply your policy to black men walking in white neighborhoods? I’m just asking. I mean, you know how “informed†citizens in America always know who the perpetrators of crime are, and are thus qualified to prejudge who potential criminals are.”
~That happens all over America already. Officially and unofficially.
“Can’t speak for anyone else, but I use the term “Middle Eastern†as a synonym for “Muslim.†Probably not the most precise term, but there are only a few choices, semantically speaking: 1) We can profile “Middle Eastern-looking†young men; 2) Young men of Middle Eastern descent; or 3) Young men who may be Muslims”
~”Middle Eastern” and “Muslim” are not interchangeable descriptors. Middle Eastern describes your or your ancestors area of birth, while Muslim is the way of life one follows.
There are a lot more Middle-Eastern Christians all the time.
Comment by Mark La Roi — 08.21.06 @ 8:52 pm
Look, many innocent, non-Muslim men of Middle Eastern descent will be subjected to profiling, even Christians. This is not ideal, but as long as terrorists fit a certain profile, similar men will be profiled. That’s a permissible and practical intelligence technique.
Comment by La Shawn — 08.21.06 @ 9:07 pm
LaShawn,
Used properly, profiling, even racial profiling, is nothing more than a simple, reasoned process, necessary for efficient law enforcement.
The irony is that most of the so called “victims” of racial profiling are not even offended. The only people who are offended are liberals. Even the terrorists and criminals themselves are only pretending to be offended; they know they’re terrorists and criminals. Sometimes I wonder if everyone who seems offended by racial profiling is only pretending. Victimhood can be fun.
Comment by d — 08.21.06 @ 9:10 pm
Maybe it’s because of where I live. In the area from Detroit and Dearborn down to Toledo, there is a sizeable population of people from Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and surrounding areas. It would be an odd day for not to interact with someone from the Middle East. My favorite pediatrician in my kids’ ped group is from Syria. My favorite restaurant is run by Lebanese. I have art on my wall created by a Palestinian friend. I watch sports at the house of a guy from Egypt. My neighborhood grocery carries several kinds of hummous, baba ghanouj, pita, etc.
The idea of profiling in this area is almost laughable. Almost. But the point really is that with a little familiarity, you realize the absurdity of changing your view of ALL THESE ordinary harmless people because of some tiny percentage of fundamentalist nutcases, however horrible that tiny percentage can be.
The real reason not to profile is that it doesn’t work, and is counterproductive. David Harris has shown that it’s LOUSY POLICING, and takes resources from better places.
Comment by tubino — 08.21.06 @ 9:11 pm
I think bringing up the KKK, or Arian Nation, or whacky sudo-Christians is missing the point. I think we can all agree that some sort of profiling needs to take place, the disagreement is over which type. As I’ve said before, I’m in favor of profiling people based on their actions, not their facial features, simply because I believe it to be a more efficient way of doing things. I don’t care whose feelings get hurt. Terrorists, at least those of the Muslim variety, are a lot like the Borg. They adapt to whatever situation or group they happen to be in or trying to infiltrate. I hope this isn’t seen as some sort of “leftist” dribble, because I’m definitely not a liberal. I just happen to believe that profiling people’s behavior, as well as their answers to certain questions if the suspicions of security personel are raised, is the best way to handle the situation, pretty much like the Israelis handle terrorists.
Comment by Amanda Rush — 08.21.06 @ 9:57 pm
Phoenix:
These two wearing heavy jackets are unlikely to be serious terrorists.
Serious terrorists would likely do everything they could so they did NOT stand out from the crowd.
Comment by Frank Zavisca
Frank unless you are one of the premiere counter-terrorist investigators in America it is best to assume you are utterly ignorant of what a “serious terrorist” is.
As of now, the public has been instructed to either let others be aware of what their instincts scream is a person or situation amiss or conversely: (Don’t worry! Shop! Travel!) “trust your Hero Protectors from Norm Mineta right down to the min wage Fed TSA worker fresh out of McDonalds. Part of the limited advice people are supposed to “BOLO” even under Mineta’s idiotic rules - on - are sweaty, nervous, heavily overdressed young men. Heavy leather jackets in August apply.
Glenn Reynold’s caution on “Over PC” applies. Muslims are not masters of stealth in all counts. And a big, rarely mentioned part of 9/11 was ticket agents in Portland Maine that said Mohammed Atta scared them and both had decided THAT is how a terrorist looks, has death in their eyes, how a terrorist behaves…but both were cowed into silence by PC rules. And worry liberal Jewish lawyers from the ACLU would show up to sue the company and demand the Portland agents be sued, arrested for hate crimes - if they were wrong about their Mohammed Atta concerns and had taken action to have police detain and question him.
La Shawn’s own example reflects a different problem. There have been many incidents where young toughs can Smell Fear and decide to f____with and terrorize a women, frequently of a different race or culture. I have no doubt the Muslims sensed La Shawn’s reaction and revelled in their power over infidel pig passengers like her, and felt their imaginary might over others. It is the real fear of Muslim violence that gives others Islamics not inclined to terror or crime the belief that they can gain dominance and “mess with people’s heads” through association with the real threat. This behavior is seen by white, black, and hispanic thugs as well - who feel that they can intimidate and terrorize - even if no violence is planned - because people will not instantly assemble a mob of law-abiding to say “No!!! - or else!!” In Europe, reports of thugs crossing the line and others too fearful of intervening lest they are sued or arrested are commonplace.
In other times, and as other posters accurately note, in nations like China, Singapore, Germany, India, America until the late 60s…the behavior of La Shawn’s Muslim passengers deliberately messing with others minds and intimidating is not tolerated - and they know it.
*********************************
My own Muslim stories are two…one dealing with airplanes, one not.
In the first case, a Newark to Detroit flight had 5 Marines returning from Iraq and 3 ME looking men and their families of 12 or so. 4 of the 5 Marines were subjected to extra search (not with family, time in a nation sponsoring terror (Iraq), one way ticket. shrapnel in one set off metal detector). I was extra-searched as well ( along with a white haired granny and two young black kids) and threatened with more when I said it was royally stupid to screw with Marines serving the nation. None of the Muslims, coming back from “Palestine” were searched, except a 8-10 year old who her parents demanded be patted down through her hajib. Brilliantly disusting.
The second time was a little ugly and right after we went into Iraq in 2003. At a music club, two Muslims became belligerant with the staff over a credit card they had being rejected. The argument went on until the Muslims stormed out…but one stupidly turned and said “All you…you people…BOOOM!” motioning with his hands. A bunch, inc security from the club and patrons like me bolted after them, caught them…and figured they weren’t terrorists when both started crying and shivering at the sight of a nightstick and 2-3 holstered guns. One had 8 Mastercards on him. Security turned them over to the cops for making terroristic threats and about the credit cars. They were released after an hour and charged they were singled out as Muslims and death threats were made (they were in fact made, saying that if either came back, the assumption would be they were back to blow the place up, and they might be shot on sight.) Nothing came of it, as two of the clubs security were minorities who had been racially slurred by the Muslims as soon as the cops arrived and the two thought it was safe to spout off. (Are there any filthy black Jewish apes in Boston??)
*********************
Anyhow, a bit long-winded, but trust your instincts. If you think there is a danger from ME persons in your midst, alert authority and tell others. If you feel menaced, tell them to desist, if they persist or become actual threats, try for authorities to handle it. If they can’t, won’t, or are nowhere around….you and others can react rather than be sheep. Flight 93 resisted without the saction of a single “Bush Hero officer kinda guy”, without a single ACLU lawyer explaining why the passengers couldn’t resist without running afoul of due process rights, enemy civil liberties, or hate crime law, without a single lawyer in robes as the plane headed for DC saying it was OK to fight back.
If only the Portland ticket agents on 9/11 weren’t in such well-warranted fear of their jobs!!
Comment by Chris Ford — 08.21.06 @ 10:52 pm
You need terms and labels to define the situation. How is Islamofascist? There are a lot of arguments above wishing to avoid the unpleasant facts by comparison to other situations in the world like racism or your neighbors or abortion clinics. The comparisons don’t hold water. Offer solutions instead of whimsy. A national ID card would be a good start, one that details ones religious affiliation. We will have to give up some rights to set Islamofacists back. The wisdom in that activity will measure how strong our democracy is.
1 billion Muslims. Reports say 10 percent of them are radicalized. That is 100 million people isn’t it? You can’t kill them all, but you do need to educate them on the proper way to live in the world. There is no avoiding it. They wish to visit you.
If an airline offered Muslim free flying, I would pay extra for the flight. It would decrease my risk. The less Muslims in my life the safer i am. That being impractical then you have to reach them through education of a secular and spiritual nature. A war can be a form of education on both sides.
Comment by Jd — 08.21.06 @ 11:00 pm
The much publicized “frisking of old ladies” may all be a front, thrown up for public consumption to neutralize the lovers of political correctness in political, academic and media establishments. Behind the scenes, a lot of serious profiling is most likely going on. At least this is what we HOPE is happening, but still people are suspicious of the gubment and its PC pandering..
On Lashawn’s incident, Middle eastern looking men looking back and smirking doesn’t suggest terrorism to me, just some lame hijink or joke passing between the groups of men. Lashawn sez she was comforted by would-be “air marshals” who “glared” at the men. I don’t know if this will help others, but would-be terrorists must know by now that there will be passengers on most American flights who will “take matters into their own hands”. A sophiscated bomb in the checked baggage of course (like the kind that brought down the Lockerbie flight) makes all that irrelevant.
Hysteria over profiling some Middle Eastern looking suckas is the least of our worries. One of the British bombers on 7/7 was of black West Indian descent- a Muslim convert, but he looked like a typical Jamaican, not “Middle Eastern”. “Shoe bomber” Richard Reid was a mixed thug- black father- white mother- another Muslim convert. Look for more such “helpers” too in time to come.
Rather than get upset about profiling, the sloppy cargo handling is the real scary part of LaShawn’s article. Another area is foreign airlines that may not have as stringent security or have security loopholes or willing collaborators terrorists can exploit. Hundreds of such carriers are landing in the US every day. It is only a matter of time.
Another area that doesnt get much press is the threat from the ocean lanes, with its vast number of ships under bogus names and registrations, and the ease with which ships can be hijacked. The book “The Outlaw Sea” offers a grim portrait of what is possible. Smart terrorists will be exploiting that area too in the years ahead.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0865477221/sr=8-1/qid=1156216453/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-3033564-4085653?ie=UTF8
Comment by Enrique Cardova — 08.21.06 @ 11:15 pm
ah, dear dear leftcoasty! (oh, my. is the diminutive use of your handle somehow demeaning? pity.) what a pompous, sanctimonious, and quite LONG load you’ve dumped onto poor LaShawn’s ‘comments’ section. in order to save time and bandwidth, i’m not going to do a 20 paragraph screed, rebutting each and every word you’ve posted - you know, like you just did - but will cut right to the chase.
which is, pretty much every point you’ve made is A)wrong and B)a lie. contrary to the racist dogma fed you by your teachers and profs, using one’s common sense to….say…..observe that 99% of terror acts are committed by middle-eastern arabic-speaking males, and then act on that observation is just COMMON SENSE. not pure evil. people have the right to defend themselves, and the right to not wish to fly with suspected homicidal maniacs, sunshine. and should the possible maniacs in question not like it; or them crying “racism!” is really too “darn” bad.
of course, you already know and practice this, which is where the ‘lie’ comes in. despite your mendacious posting to the contrary, were a KKK’er in full robe-n-hood regalia to sit next to you on a plane, and then speak in his preferred and customary manner about the relative merits of african-americans, you’d not only refuse to fly with him…you’d demand he be removed. and arrested. and silenced.
and any worry about HIS feelings; or respect for HIS culture; or concern for HIS free-speech rights would enter into your mind…..not at all. you know it; i know it. i see it every day at the university where i work - where the tolerant leftwing robots try to silence mere republicans, never mind KKK’ers - and no matter how loudly or longly you screech to the contrary, that’s the truth.
so why is it ok for you and your ilk to profile what YOU consider to be “bad people” and not the good folks who quite sensibly refused to fly with people they didn’t trust?
Comment by ed — 08.22.06 @ 2:26 am
SOme comments:
- The person writing in regarding who is a Middle Easterner is correct. Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan are Southwest Asian countries. For some reason, when people say “Middle East” they forget that Israel is in the region and an Israeli would be a “Middle Easterner.
- The majority of Muslims are in Indonesia, not the Middle East.
- While many Arabs are “swarthy,” I was married to a Palestinian Arab (Muslim) and most of his friends were light haired and light eyed. You will find this among Palestinians, Jordanians, Lebanese. A good friend of my is Egyptian. He is dark - almost African (of course Egypt is in North Africa). His mother is blonde and blue eyed!
- There is a large population of Muslims in the Balkans. These people have more a Slavic look than Middle Eastern.
The point is, it’s difficult to generalize.
Comment by mainer — 08.22.06 @ 7:32 am
- The majority of Muslims are in Indonesia, not the Middle East.. There is a large population of Muslims in the Balkans. These people have more a Slavic look than Middle Eastern.
Correct. Those going by “Middle Eastern appearance” will be sadly mistaken in the future. There is for example a large bloc of Black Muslims in the Britian. One blew himself up on 7/7, and another tried to blow up a plane by lighting plastic explosives in his shoe. In the US, black Muslim sniper Malvo killed a number of people during his weeks of drive by shooting terror. Also some of the deadliest terrorist acts in the world today are not committed by “Middle Eastern appearance” people, but by South Asians, notably the Tamil Tigers of Ceylon. And id the majorit of Muslims are in Indonesia, expect more Asian looking folk to join the bandwagon.
Getting mad at “Middle eastern” looking people is understandable but besides the point. The real culprits are Caucasians with white skins- notably members of the US white political and media establishment that still continue to excuse and subsidize terrorists today, from “ceasefires” arranged for terror groups responsible for the murder of Americans, to continual butt-kissing of “our friends the Saudis”, to the continual flow of our tax dollars to establishment yet another Arab terrorist “state” in the Middle East, to failures to mobilize and communicate vigorously with the American people as to what this war will require, to the spineless PC pandering, disinformation and outright media lies. This has been a pattern for several decades. Our main enemy may be the white skins, not some Arab looking guy going about his legitimate business in Row 22.
Comment by Enrique Cardova — 08.22.06 @ 9:15 am
“You’re comparing abortion clinic bombings perpetrated by a few so-called Christians with world-wide terrorism perpetrated by mostly Muslim young men of Middle Eastern descent intent on destroying entire non-believing populations?” - posted by Admin.
Because we all know that muslim terrorists are much more representative of muslims as a whole than intolerant right-wing christian terrorists are representative of intolerant right-wing “christians”. How do we know this? We just do. Just like we know that muslim terrorists are intent not on achieving some political end, but on DESTROYING US ENTIRELY! Talk about hyperbole! The terrorists COULDN’T destroy us and most don’t want to - they just want America to stop conducting poly-sci experiments on the middle-east. Face it the only way terrorists are going to “destroy us” is by tricking us into destroying ourselves. Maybe they are not doing such a bad job.
Comment by STParker — 08.22.06 @ 9:55 am
Phoenix: These two wearing heavy jackets are unlikely to be serious terrorists.Serious terrorists would likely do everything they could so they did NOT stand out from the crowd.
Comment by Frank Zavisca
Not quite. In Israel, one of the suspicious items that mark “suicide” bombers for Israeli security forces is people wearing bulky jackets or clothing. Such attire is often used to conceal the bomber’s deadly payload. Suicide or rather homicide bombers only need to get close- they don’t need to actually enter a specific room or building to do their dirty work. And no doubt in due time, they will be “Coming to America.” In such a case we can only hope assorted security forces are profiling hard for clues rather than “celebrating diversity.”
Comment by Enrique Cardova — 08.22.06 @ 10:34 am
If an airline offered Muslim free flying, I would pay extra for the flight. It would decrease my risk. The less Muslims in my life the safer i am. That being impractical then you have to reach them through education of a secular and spiritual nature. A war can be a form of education on both sides. Comment by Jd
Maybe as to war, but separate flights for Muslims would not appreciably decrease your risk. All the separate flights in the world mean little when the gubment is arranging “ceasefires” for Muslim terror groups, sending tax money to subsidize terrorist groups in Palestine, and pandering to assorted “friends” in the Muslim world. Nor will they mean much when political and media elites and leftist/liberal sympathizers continually spin a web of disinformation and falsehoods as to this war, not to mention stubbornly refusing to take steps to break our dependence on oil procured from said “friends.” Separate flights do not cover ground transportation like the subway bombings by the “martyrs” of 7/7. It may feel good to glare down assorted Muslim travelers, but the enemy that is almost as dangerous Muslim terrorists has white skins primarily.
Comment by Enrique Cardova — 08.22.06 @ 10:44 am
Way to go Enrique!! Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Comment by tjack — 08.22.06 @ 10:55 am
Because we all know that muslim terrorists are much more representative of muslims as a whole than intolerant right-wing christian terrorists are representative
of intolerant right-wing “christiansâ€. How do we know this? We just do. Just like we know that muslim terrorists are intent not on achieving some political
end, but on DESTROYING US ENTIRELY! Talk about hyperbole! The terrorists COULDN’T destroy us and most don’t want to - they just want America to stop conducting
poly-sci experiments on the middle-east. Face it the only way terrorists are going to “destroy us†is by tricking us into destroying ourselves. Maybe they
are not doing such a bad job.
Muslim terrorism has nothing to do with our foreign policy toward the ME. That’s just an excuse. They try to blow us up because they want to destroy the west, since they can’t dominate it and turn it into some sort of extention of the Muslim empire that stopped existing in 1919. The above is a better example of hyperbole than anything said in LaShawn’s post, or anything in the comments. And it’s definitely pointless.
Comment by Amanda Rush — 08.22.06 @ 11:25 am
“Frank unless you are one of the premiere counter-terrorist investigators in America it is best to assume you are utterly ignorant of what a “serious terrorist†is”
However, if your comment is in FAVOR of profiling, then you are a premiere counter-terrorist investigator.
Actus is back! - Admin
Comment by dave — 08.22.06 @ 12:19 pm
Sorry, Ed. Can’t let you make up stories and put them in my mouth.
– ah, dear dear leftcoasty! (oh, my. is the diminutive use of your handle somehow demeaning? pity.) what a pompous, sanctimonious, and quite LONG load you’ve dumped onto poor LaShawn’s ‘comments’ section. in order to save time and bandwidth, i’m not going to do a 20 paragraph screed, rebutting each and every word you’ve posted - you know, like you just did - but will cut right to the chase. –
Too lazy to read or write, ed? Maybe there’s the beginning of the understanding of where your point of view comes from. My turn: pity. There, now that we pity each other, let’s move on to the rest of your argument.
– which is, pretty much every point you’ve made is A)wrong and B)a lie. –
Man that must have taken all of… um… 2 seconds to formulate? It seems you have fallen into the lazy trap of misunderstanding exactly what I said. So here’s the short version for Eds everywhere:
Just for you ed 
1. Ed demeans people to argue
2. Ed ignores terrorism in other parts of the world, so he can keep hating Muslims.
3. Ed pretends people can’t think for themselves (attributes ideas to “profs” and “teachers”).
4. I say that if people want to argue for profiling young men of middle-eastern descent, then they must also accept profiling of white males, or young white males, or southern white males. One cannot claim it is OK to profile poeple of Arabic descent because of Islamic terrorists without doing the same to white people because of the existance of the KKK, the Aryan Nation, and a whole slew of groups like Earth First. It seems as if the prevailing notion is it’s ok to profile someone who isn’t white, but its uncomfortable when you have to start profiling whites.
5. I’m not against people flying that hold inflammatory views. I am against people flying that act on those inflammatory views. I’ll touch on this in rebuttals below.
6. You can’t visually tell who’s Muslim or not. It simply doesn’t work that way. To think otherwise is plain ignorance. Now, profiling based on behavior isn’t a cracked out idea. It will take some effort to train people to recognize the right behaviors, and I think it will take more effort to program a tool to pick out these behaviors through video surveillance. It can be done, but I wonder if it is being done.
– contrary to the racist dogma fed you by your teachers and profs, using one’s common sense to….say…..observe that 99% of terror acts are committed by middle-eastern arabic-speaking males, and then act on that observation is just COMMON SENSE. not pure evil. people have the right to defend themselves, and the right to not wish to fly with suspected homicidal maniacs, sunshine. and should the possible maniacs in question not like it; or them crying “racism!†is really too “darn†bad. –
Again attributing my thoughts to proffesors and teachers… and on top of that calling it racist as well? Just calling it a name (racist) doesn’t make it so, Ed. Please explain how any of what I’ve said racist.
And not to put too fine a point on it, but have you read anything about the terrorism in South East Asia? India? South America? Not everyone involved there speaks Arabic or is of Middle-eastern descent. You might consider that when you make your example about “99% of terror acts are committed by middle-eastern arabic-speaking males”. Not to mention, acting on that assumption is the easy choice, not the right one. The right one, if you believe in the ideals of the United States, is to assume someone is innocent until proven guilty.
– of course, you already know and practice this, which is where the ‘lie’ comes in. despite your mendacious posting to the contrary, were a KKK’er in full robe-n-hood regalia to sit next to you on a plane, and then speak in his preferred and customary manner about the relative merits of african-americans, you’d not only refuse to fly with him…you’d demand he be removed. and arrested. and silenced. –
Telling me how I’d act? Without ever having met me? This is just silly, ed. Judging by the terms you’ve used in that little gem, I’m guessing that I have a better grasp on what the Freedom of Speech means. I’d most likely be disgusted by his remarks as to (your words here:) “the relative merits of african-americans”; in fact, I know I’d be disgusted if he compared African-Americans to apes, monkeys, or any other derrogtory name. But here’s the crux: If all he did was talk about his views, and not refer to anyone in particular, then he’s welcome to keep his views. The minute he acted on, or incited someone else to act upon his views, however, I’d call the cops. Freedom of Speech means you’re allowed to hold whatever idea you want. But that does not mean you are allowed to voice it at all times, and, it most certainly does not give you license to act upon your views at all times.
– and any worry about HIS feelings; or respect for HIS culture; or concern for HIS free-speech rights would enter into your mind…..not at all. you know it; i know it. i see it every day at the university where i work - where the tolerant leftwing robots try to silence mere republicans, never mind KKK’ers - and no matter how loudly or longly you screech to the contrary, that’s the truth. –
So now we see where Ed’s hatred of academia comes from. I have to wonder if, given the above example, you are equating KKK views with Republicans? I mean, that’s the leap your asking readers to make. That somehow, if liberals talk down republicans on a college campus, that also means that liberals would talk down a member of the KKK?
– so why is it ok for you and your ilk to profile what YOU consider to be “bad people†and not the good folks who quite sensibly refused to fly with people they didn’t trust? –
What? Huh? Where did this drivel come from? Where did I say anything about profiling? In fact, I mentioned that I’m against profiling in any case. So this is certainly a misplaced comment… not to mention the chilling thought of subjecting flight restrictions to the subjective “trust”. It seems as if you’ve already passed sentance on anyone who isn’t like you, ed. Where I live, we still try to believe that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
I’ll leave you with two quotes from Ben Franklin:
“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”
Benjamin Franklin
and
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin’s Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775
Comment by Left-Coaster — 08.22.06 @ 1:06 pm
I see a lot of bold statements by folks who don’t know much about terrorism.
They should know that most terrorist attacks in the United States over the past 25 years have actually been committed by Non-Arab/Muslims. Most terrorist attacks in this country have actually been committed by white men.
The same goes for the UK. Most Terrorist attacks there over the past 25 years have actually been committed by white men (Christians)…. not Muslims.
So do we profile white males?
Comment by The Angry Independent — 08.22.06 @ 1:47 pm
why aren’t we profiling corporate executives after ComCast, Adelphia, Enron, and every other corporate scandal? so let’s put every executive in America on the rack to make sure they’re not trying to steal from their companies, eh?
Actually before such CEOs are hired, they are ALREADY being profiled. It’s called background checks. If they do something AFTER they are hired, that’s hardly a case against not doing background checks. As for “racks,” profiling is not convicting people as guilty, but giving them extra scrutiny because of certain patterns in their background. There is no need for “the rack” when a background check reveals a prospective hire has been involved in fraud before.
And why aren’t the executive officers from the companies that aren’t suffering from corporate officer abuse calling for draconian punishments of the other corporate officers?
Actually they have. Just Google it. You will not find Bill gates or any other CEO cheering on Enron style practices.
Why aren’t we, in sports, drug testing every single athlete in America for steroid usage? Jeeze, with so many athletes admitting to drug use, why the heck aren’t we testing all of them?
Actually atheletes in sports where drug enhancements are corrupting the integrity of performances are ALREADY doing drug testing. Your rhetorical questions are really falling flat. Somewhat ludricriously however, your “lets do everybody” approach would involve drug testing for elementary school athletes. Now that really makes sense…
And those darned Christians, and their doctor murdering, can’t let Christians near abortion clinics because they’ll bomb them if they get the chance.
Actually those who have threatened violence against said clinics before, where “profiled”, are kept away from the clinics by restraining orders and use of statutes such as racketeering laws. As for murdering medical personnel, that seems to be a Islamist speciality, to judge from terrorist use of dual bombs in Israel - one to attract emergency workers to the scene, the other to detonate when said emergency workers arrive.
If it isn’t clear I abhor the idea of profiling. I apologize if some people think those examples go over the top, but I think they’re illustrative. I abhor profiling because to me it goes against the idea of our nation and its constitution. To me, profiling is denying someone their right to life and liberty. To embark upon the path that some claim is common sense is to abandon what our nation is. We can beat terrorism, and we c