its sad how rabid people were regarding these imams before they ever read the "klemmer" email or the police report. par for the course i guess. i am more afraid of newt gingrich than i am of a praying muslim. if newt has his way they will shut my ass up and put me in a fema camp. and i know the ayn rand/libertarians won't give a rats ass (pun intended).
And if both are behaving normally (not very hard to do) they should <b>still</b> both get the same scrutiny according to you? Obviously, you don't see Muslim hijackers as much of a threat to <b>your</b> personal safety, so therefore you take the luxury of feigned naiveté on this particular issue. If the problem was staring <b>you</b> straight in the face, as with illegal immigration, you wouldn't be sitting there smugly, detachedly taking positions you know to be illogical. I'm done with this.
If behavior is normal, then treat them normally. No, I do see radical extremist Muslim hijackers as a potential threat, but with a locked pilot door, they are not a threat to control the plane. Imagine, if after hijackings in the past prior to 9/11, the FAA had done one simple thing: Locked the pilot door. No entrance to pilots, no 9/11. End of story. Would we be having this conversation right now if they had made that a policy? __________________________ Perhaps you are getting emotional at the end of your comments, maybe not, who can say? Perhaps you feel spurned by your "offer" of some PMs. If you had really wanted to discus something with me in private, you would have done so, privately and quietly, without making the whole idea a big deal and there for all to witness... Okay, now you can post your "troll" comments...and the audience can all wonder who actually baited whom...
Other groups, in this case? Which other groups are you referring to? I look at it this way: Groups are made of individuals. Most groups that serve a shared purpose follow a leader. Handle the individuals and/or handle leader, you end up getting a handle on the group... If some individual or group of individuals break protocol, the security professionals do their job. If the passengers observe a problem, they do their "duty" and report it. Pretty simple stuff...don't you think? We are going to get sufficient scrutiny from the anti Muslims that are everywhere these days who will be watching Muslims like an old paranoid lady peering out her window looking for kids getting into trouble, add that to the normal security measures, and it will be somewhat difficult for the "group" to get away with "evil" doings... Meanwhile, all a young Muslim with bad intentions has to do is grow a droopy mustache, put on a poncho and a hat, and walk over the border from Mexico...
non sequitur n 1: a reply that has no relevance to what preceded it WordNet® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University Sounds about right.
Just because you don't follow what I wrote, does not mean that what I wrote did not follow your comments I responded to. Oh, and "does not follow" doesn't require a dictionary to comprehend... Doh! Any time you want to actually show where it doesn't follow, by all means, you can even use whatever props you deem necessary to put on your show... "I did not say that we should not look at all suspicious behavior. What I originally asked is how we can be more vigilant towards other groups in this case? If they act suspicious, then it should be reported. How do you show that they are making a concerted effort to manage all suspicious behavior if other groups so far have not displayed any suspicious behavior? My response: "Other groups? What other groups are you referring to?" Sure seems to follow, sure seems relevant questioning what groups you are talking about... That I see groups as collections of individuals, often following a leader, is quite accurate... Please, try harder next time, okay?
If you were as smart as you say you are, you know exactly what I meant when I said other groups. You addressed it in previous posts when I mentioned white people. What you are doing is evading the question posed and rambling on about not understanding what I mean by other groups. That is a non sequitur on your part, or it is an admission of ignorance on your part. In any case, like in most discussions we attempt to have, you do not want to stay on topic, so I am done discussing it with you. What is truly pitiful is that you will believe that you are right because I will leave this discussion. I leave because you have nothing to provide in the way of reason or intelligence.
Not into filling in your blanks. If you want to answer the question I posed about what groups you refer to, fine. If not, equally fine. If you want to flame out the door like a woman with her panties in bunch, that too is fine...