When The Government Doesn't Act, The Public Might

[Annie]

I'm beginning to fear that with all the mantra of 'multiculturalism' and its effect upon government actions, people may start their own type of 'security measures', which are bound to be worse than what's illustrated here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=401419&in_page_id=1770

British holidaymakers staged an unprecedented mutiny - refusing to allow their flight to take off until two men they feared were terrorists were forcibly removed.

The extraordinary scenes happened after some of the 150 passengers on a Malaga-Manchester flight overheard two men of Asian appearance apparently talking Arabic.

Passengers told cabin crew they feared for their safety and demanded police action. Some stormed off the Monarch Airlines Airbus A320 minutes before it was due to leave the Costa del Sol at 3am. Others waiting for Flight ZB 613 in the departure lounge refused to board it...

...Passengers noticed that, despite the heat, the pair were wearing leather jackets and thick jumpers and were regularly checking their watches.

Initially, six passengers refused to board the flight. On board the aircraft, word reached one family. To the astonishment of cabin crew, they stood up and walked off, followed quickly by others...

..."Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

"There was no fuss or panic. People just calmly and quietly got off the plane. There were no racist taunts or any remarks directed at the men...

 

[toby]

Well it should happen, when you can't find a Muslim who condems terrror attacks without saying that the west deserves it. Some people are now willing to fight back.

 

[OrnotBitwise]

A word to the wise, Not-Damon. When you find Toby agreeing with you it's time to take a good hard look at your initial position.

Law exists both to protect people from the actions of extremists and to protect innocents from the extreme over-reactions of paniced mobs. The fact that a group of people on a plane acted as a paniced mob isn't all that surprising, nor is it, in my opinion, particularly significant.

The assertion that "there was no panic" is laughable. An appeal to moronic literalism, while it can be amusing, isn't to be taken seriously.

To quote further from the Daily Mail article:

Patrick Mercer, the Tory Homeland Security spokesman, said last night: "This is a victory for terrorists. These people on the flight have been terrorised into behaving irrationally."

 

[toby]

Read the article, no laws were broken people got off the plane, no problem, some did not get on the plane. NO big event. they have that right.

>>Initially, six passengers refused to board the flight. On board the aircraft, word reached one family. To the astonishment of cabin crew, they stood up and walked off, followed quickly by others...

..."Then a family stood up and walked off the aircraft. They were joined by others, about eight in all. We learned later that six or seven people had refused to get on the plane.

"There was no fuss or panic. People just calmly and quietly got off the plane. There were no racist taunts or any remarks directed at the men...

 

[Annie]

A word to the wise, Not-Damon. When you find Toby agreeing with you it's time to take a good hard look at your initial position.

Law exists both to protect people from the actions of extremists and to protect innocents from the extreme over-reactions of paniced mobs. The fact that a group of people on a plane acted as a paniced mob isn't all that surprising, nor is it, in my opinion, particularly significant.

The assertion that "there was no panic" is laughable. An appeal to moronic literalism, while it can be amusing, isn't to be taken seriously.

To quote further from the Daily Mail article:

The people excercised their choice not to board or to leave. As far as the Daily Mail quote, if the government were carrying out policies that made people feel safer, this wouldn't something that may escalate.

BTW, did you know that the woman on that plane the other day, WAS carrying screwdriver, matches, lighters, water bottle, lotion? Did you KNOW that the FBI has said they think she was planted as a diversion?

I don't trust the FBI, they were very quick to say she was NOT carrying those things, was NOT a terrorist threat, then they get to court.

 

[evince]

A word to the wise, Not-Damon. When you find Toby agreeing with you it's time to take a good hard look at your initial position.

Law exists both to protect people from the actions of extremists and to protect innocents from the extreme over-reactions of paniced mobs. The fact that a group of people on a plane acted as a paniced mob isn't all that surprising, nor is it, in my opinion, particularly significant.

The assertion that "there was no panic" is laughable. An appeal to moronic literalism, while it can be amusing, isn't to be taken seriously.

To quote further from the Daily Mail article:

your missed my friend

 

[Jarod]

Well it should happen, when you can't find a Muslim who condems terrror attacks without saying that the west deserves it. Some people are now willing to fight back.

Toby, is that really you? Are you back?

 

[Jarod]

Did the flight make it to their destination?

Were these guys terrorists?

I have no problem with people getting of the plane if they chose, but they missed out. They don't deserve a refund.