NWA 327: Dry run for terrorists or misunderstandin

[Doug Taylor]

[ QUOTE ]
How about KorN? I don't even need to say much about that one for anyone that listens to old KoRn as they would know the meaning of track 6 off of the first album as much as me. This song means something different to every person that listens to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is the song entitled "Faget"? I thought it was about Jon Davis's youth when he was bullied? I might have the album wrong though, was it the self-titled?

Speaking of Korn, here's an old movie you might find interesting:

Evil Cats Video by Doug -- you might have to load it and then replay it.

[jtrain609]

[ QUOTE ]
s the song entitled "Faget"? I thought it was about Jon Davis's youth when he was bullied? I might have the album wrong though, was it the self-titled?

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed the right album, I was making the implication that the guy wasn't going to go out and pull a Columbine even though he was treated like poop in school. Probably didn't allude too well, though.

[jtrain609]

[ QUOTE ]

Evil Cats Video by Doug -- you might have to load it and then replay it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Twist, twist.

[Doug Taylor]

Korn almost got me "Kilt dead".

I was out mountainbiking and decided that I wanted to listen to some music during the ride.

Bad decision.

So I'm listening to "A.D.I.D.A.S." and riding WAY too aggressively, skidding around a tight turn on a technical downhill area, did an "endo" over a rock, slid for about 10 yards on my stomach thru brush and gravel and bloodily ripped up my shirt and riding shorts.

"Where's my bike?" I thought.

*****BAAAAMMMMMM!!!***** the bike hit me so hard in the head, it broke my helment *and* bar end on impact.

Note to self: Don't ride to music.

Cost me a lot of scabs, a neck I debated whether or not was broken, some riding clothes, two anza bar ends, a Shimano Deore XT rear deraillieur and a cordless cyclometer that I never found.

Oh, and Kristie called me a dumbass I think. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[tonyw]

Dave, what do you want me to do? Take the word of one woman with NO training in security, law enforcement or counterterrorism?

Or take the word of the air marshall that was on the flight, the spokesperson of the air marshall's service, and the FBI?

I'll go with the latter. You're entitled to go with Jacobsen if you want.

[tonyw]

First of all, I said I was wrong on the quote.

Second, if you look at her statement, it violates some pretty fundamental values of the America I want to live in:

1. We do not invade other nations unless they present an imminent threat to us.
2. We do not assasinate foreign leaders
3. We do not force people to adopt a specific religion.

What's that saying of Franklin's again about liberty and temporary security?

[mtsu_av8er]

[ QUOTE ]
What's that saying of Franklin's again about liberty and temporary security?

[/ QUOTE ]

He was a hippie communist anyway, Tony . . .

Besides, he didn't know how different the future would be. Anyone can tell that if he were here now, he'd say . . .
[/sarcasm]

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
Dave, what do you want me to do? Take the word of one woman with NO training in security, law enforcement or counterterrorism?

Or take the word of the air marshall that was on the flight, the spokesperson of the air marshall's service, and the FBI?

I'll go with the latter. You're entitled to go with Jacobsen if you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take the word of the FAM too, who said in a Time magazine article:

"I understand why the passenger felt some anxiety about activity on Flight 327," he says. "But that kind of activity was unusual but not a security incident. There was never a threat to the plane."

Also you have decided to ignore the other passengers who have spoken up and hammer the ONE woman theme. Convenient, but just ignoring facts.

My point was that these guys were acting, at the very least, like a bunch of asses. I'd say the information that has come out reinforces that, including the FAM's comments and his actions on the flight. If I get your point it is that some Syrians boarded a flight and went to the bathroom and some "bimbo" went hysterical. I disagree.

The FAM says the activity was "unusual" but didn't become a security "incident". Well duh. That's just about a perfectly filtered bureaucratic double-speak line.

And as we continue to deal with domestic security issues what are civilians supposed to do? Be alert for "unusual" activity. As a former cockpit crewmember I appreciate, for example, the guy on that flight who positioned himself at the forward galley, ready to lay it all on the line to defend the cockpit. You think, I assume, he's a racist buffoon who got shook by an hysterical woman (nobody reported she was hysterical) or just didn't understand that Syrian musicians needed to visit the lavs many times on a flight.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, I said I was wrong on the quote.

Second, if you look at her statement, it violates some pretty fundamental values of the America I want to live in:

1. We do not invade other nations unless they present an imminent threat to us.
2. We do not assasinate foreign leaders
3. We do not force people to adopt a specific religion.

What's that saying of Franklin's again about liberty and temporary security?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe anybody did not get the tounge-in-cheek point she was making. She was flipping the goal of radical Islam back on them. You do need to stay away from Coulter's columns. Besides there are other venues for biting political comments, like when Al Gore compare's the Bush administration to Hitler's. That's much more reasonable.

And BTW, your number one point is wrong. Completely contradicted by our national history. This is a comment intended to make Bush look bad that just doesn't work. Start with Clinton and Kosovo and work your way back through all our military excursions and see how many times you can make that statement true.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
Hence when she was told they were musicians, she was still insisting it was a "dry run." We already have enough panic in the streets at every loud noise and person wearing a turban. We don't need this nutcase making it worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all what were the 9/11 terrorists occupations? Did they put "terrorist" on credit applications? Oh, OK, they're musicians, that settles that.

Second, she was there. She insists she saw what she saw. Other people that were there agree, including one frequent flier who spent most of the flight standing in the galley in position to defend the cockpit. And a FAM who agreed it was "unusual" activity and did a lav search and called ahead for people to meet the flight.

So she was there and says she saw what she saw. People that weren't there insist she didn't see what she saw. Hmmmm. I'll go with her version, especially since it's backed up by other passengers who were there, including a FAM.

[TheShortOne]

I think flyover, what he is trying to say is that once she found out that they were musicians, were released by the FBI, did go play a concert (etc) she still wrote the article which basically made more people afraid to fly again. Her writing the article created an unnecessary hysteria that could have been easily avoided. I think that's what Tony meant by that quote.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
I think flyover, what he is trying to say is that once she found out that they were musicians, were released by the FBI, did go play a concert (etc) she still wrote the article which basically made more people afraid to fly again. Her writing the article created an unnecessary hysteria that could have been easily avoided. I think that's what Tony meant by that quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

People are throwing the "hysteria" thing around like candy. I haven't noticed much of it. Here's the interesting thing to me. When I was in a postion to get information directly from field guys I heard about dry-run operations. The comments were direct and to the point. We "know" they are happening and we are tracking them.

Then the top guys, in an effort to squelch this story, say "oh,no. There's nothing like that going on. Never heard of such a thing."

What happened here, I think, is someone observed something and was in a position to write about it. Like many people who bring messages that are unwelcome to bureaucrats, she's getting her knees cut off. She is sticking to her guns and getting some support from other passengers. Clearly it is her opinion that it was a dry-run. She could be right or wrong. But the idea that nothing unusual or suspicious was going on during that flight just doesn't add up, in my opinion.

[tonyw]

The reason that people come down on Jacobsen is because she continues to insist, despite the fact that every single law enforcement agency involved says she's wrong, that she saw a bunch of terrorists planning to hijack a plane.

Add to that her spreading her fear mongering across the web, thus scaring passengers the industry needs off planes, and you've got another reason to pound her.

What do you want, Dave? You cannot prove a negative. How are those people supposed to prove that they are not terrorists? Seriously.

Besides, in the America I want to live in, we presume that people are innocent unless we have evidence otherwise. I guess not in Jacobsen's America, with her concluding that we can't give people their civil liberties.

[UA_Wildcat]

Is this in the lav yet?
John H. the only thing I missed was the chance to respond in a timely manner to your post...my bad (I only log on at work.) The point I was trying to make is that when you group or "lump" anyone into a category and then use a microscopic number of that group to define the whole it is wrong no matter what side your on (right or left.) The generalization was made by skibum to cast a negative shadow on a very large of group of christians and I think it was wrong. I also think that lumping "homicidal maniacs" into the Arab Muslims group is wrong.

[Doug Taylor]

I think it's doing pretty 'ok' outside of the lav. On topic, for the most part and no one started the "You're a stupid dummy head" yet.

[tonyw]

Well, I think that we all agree on that.

Unfortunately, folks like Jacobsen do not. Her thinking is that because these people were Syrians, they must be terrorists.

And she continues to insist on that despite every single law enforcement agency that was involved in this saying otherwise.

[jtrain609]

*Ding ding ding*

Someone give Tony the qupie doll

[jtrain609]

UA,


It's cool dude, I was just trying to point out that I see a lot of people grouping all Arab's together saying they MUST be Muslim (they're not) and that no one does the same thing to Christians. In fact I've seen people scream that all Arab's want to kill us and they hate our way of life, but are quick to point out that McVeigh wasn't following the teachings of Christ. It's hypacritical and bugs the crap outta me. There are psycho's everywhere, and let's not forget that white dudes attacked us before dark skinned dudes attacked us.

Cheers


John Herreshoff

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason that people come down on Jacobsen is because she continues to insist, despite the fact that every single law enforcement agency involved says she's wrong, that she saw a bunch of terrorists planning to hijack a plane.

Add to that her spreading her fear mongering across the web, thus scaring passengers the industry needs off planes, and you've got another reason to pound her.

What do you want, Dave? You cannot prove a negative. How are those people supposed to prove that they are not terrorists? Seriously.

Besides, in the America I want to live in, we presume that people are innocent unless we have evidence otherwise. I guess not in Jacobsen's America, with her concluding that we can't give people their civil liberties.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a story about the behavior of this group. Behaviour that the FAM admitted was unusual, that some passengers found frightening, and others found strange. The reason that this got to be such a big deal is that Jacobsen had the temerity to write about her observations and suspicions.

Now we're in a classic deal where the poor Syrians who couldn't stay in their seats and spent the flight running around the cabin, are victims. The passengers that saw suspicious activity and either were frightened or in one case, positioned himself to defend the cockpit, are evil bad guys or "bimbos". The Syrians are victims because, in addition to being a dusruptive and non-compliant group, they were arabs. I think these guys knew they were causing concern and I think they asked for the scrutiny they got and I think they got off easy. And I also think the fact that they are musicians doesn't remove them from further suspicion. But that's just me.

>>I guess not in Jacobsen's America, with her concluding that we can't give people their civil liberties<< Please Tony. These guys weren't arrested. They were sent on their way. This is not even vaugely a civil liberties issue. If your contention is that being vigilant in order to protect yourself is a violation of civil liberties, then man you've got the best case to get rid of the TSA I've heard of . Go for it. I'm on your side there. Just wait until they are coming through the cockpit door then lay a few civil liberties on them with a pistol.

[tonyw]

Dave, it isn't the suspicion, the questioning of the musicians, or anything like that which get me. That was fine. People thought that the musicians did something strange, so they reported it, the authorities questioned them, and that's it. All well and good. That's the way the system's supposed to work, and it did.

It's Jacobsen's fear mongering conclusion which irritates me.

It's in the introduction to her column that started this whole fuss.

What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

All I have to say to her is what Ben Franklin said.

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary
security, deserve neither liberty or security

If we give up our civil liberties, then the terrorists have won.

[flyover]

OK fair enough. I think it is a legitimate question.

My beef has been that this woman has been so villified. She wasn't alone, by any means, in her concern. The FAM said this for the TIME article:

>> About 25 minutes after takeoff, a flight attendant discreetly told the FAM that she thought the men were "acting suspiciously" and were congregating near one of the lavatories in the back of the plane. He alerted another marshal on the plane and also told the flight attendant to notify the captain. A short while later, the FAM asked the flight crew member to get physical descriptions of the men and their seat numbers.<<

Ms. Jacobsen said the flight attendant crew was so shook by these guys they were not doing well at reassuring the passengers. So I think Jacobsen deserves some credit. She brought up some legitimate questions. The standard that airline crews are supposed to use is "behavior" not ethnicity. Well these guys were behaving inappropriately (at best) and asking people to ignore their ethnicity is asking them to be deliberately stupid.

[tonyw]

Questions are fine, and reporting the behavior to the authorities is fine as well. And the musicians acted like bungholes, no question about it.

But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.

[Windchill]

[ QUOTE ]
But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hold on a second . . . was she advocating taking away their civil liberties???

Sounded more like she was warning people that there might be some practice runs going on out there (which have been suspected by federal officials as well) and that WE should just be more aware and vigilant of our surroundings.

We as a society that wishes to live in peace, have a right to observe, report, and scrutinize activities that are deemed to be suspicious and a threat to our security.

[flyover]

[ QUOTE ]
Questions are fine, and reporting the behavior to the authorities is fine as well. And the musicians acted like bungholes, no question about it.

But after the authorities questioned and let the people go, concluding that we need to curtail our civil liberties because of this indicent is wrong. And then spreading it all over the web is even more so.

We can't give up those civil liberties. It's what makes us American.

[/ QUOTE ]

I missed where she advocated that. In fact I missed that this was ever an issue of civil liberties.

I don't know if we will ever know everything about this flight and this group. Was it a coincidence that there were FAMs on this flight? If so it was a big one, but it's possible. I'm inclined to think they were assigned the flight because these guys were on it. Is that a civil liberites issue? 14 Syrian nationals on one flight, seems like a good place to put FAM resources.

I don't trust the "official" version at all. Just because it's the officiat version. (That's one of the ways I protect MY civil liberties, I don't trust government officials).

[tonyw]

[ QUOTE ]
Hold on a second . . . was she advocating taking away their civil liberties???

[/ QUOTE ]

What I experienced during that flight has caused me to question whether the United States of America can realistically uphold the civil liberties of every individual, even non-citizens, and protect its citizens from terrorist threats.

Yeah. She is. Tell me any other way to interpret that.