240,000 dollars awarded to man forced to cover Arab T-shirt

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I do think it's very difficult to ascertain what is "suspicious" behavior in this type of situation. If someone ever feels another passenger is acting suspiciously, it needs to be addressed. I think it probably would have been sufficient to ask him what his shirt meant.

I don't know - this seems like couched crap to me (and I don't mean that as a personal attack or anything, it's just illustrative of a mindset that I think is becoming pervasive that I don't like - I'll elaborate...).

It seems like we have to have it one way or another - either this type of 'suspicious' behavior (of which being Muslim and wearing a shirt with Arabic writing is, um, probably not a good example to start, but bear with me for purposes of illustration) should be dealt with in a strong fashion, such as detainment or in-depth questioning, or we have to admit this just isn't suspicious and move on, because the 'middle ground' option of "Please, sir - what does your shirt say?" seems like the least efficacious and most insulting of all possible options.

I don't know- that's just my initial impression. I could probably be convinced otherwise, but initially, it seems like we're saying "I'm leery, but I realize it's wrong to do anything about it, so I'll espouse fear while giving a very neutral suggestion to fix." Doesn't it really have to be all or nothing, so to speak? Am I missing something?

[epchick]

Just a little FYI for those who still don't understand why Arabs hate Israel (and the US support of it)

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...k-1230046.html

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by epchick

Just a little FYI for those who still don't understand why Arabs hate Israel (and the US support of it)

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...k-1230046.html

thanks for posting that, it was a good read


I read an article the other day -in print, no links, sorry- by some Israeli writer and he suggested that peace would only come through a secularization of the region (Palestine/Israel and their shared/disputed land)

Good job for Egypt though, for trying to get peace

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

thanks for posting that, it was a good read


I read an article the other day -in print, no links, sorry- by some Israeli writer and he suggested that peace would only come through a secularization of the region (Palestine/Israel and their shared/disputed land)

Good job for Egypt though, for trying to get peace

Yeah, good luck with that.

A question for the lawyers, if US Transportation Security Authority officials hadn't been involved could the airline on its own legally prevented him from flying? On the one hand it seems like they could have whatever dress codes for their passengers they wanted to put in place and enforce consistently. On the other, because in this case it's the guy's ethnicity that makes the shirt threatening to some people, they'd be discriminating against him probably to address the dress code issue. So, could the airline probably have gotten away with saying, turn your shirt inside out or we won't let you on the flight?

I have another question too that I wondered what you all thought about. How much should the desire to avoiding racial or ethnic discrimination overrule the use of correlations that seem to have pretty good validity in law enforcement, assuming that any really existed?

Obviously, expecting all the members of a racial, ethnic or religious group to just accept that they already have one profile "strike" against them and therefore have to bear a certain loss of civil liberties is crazy and wrong.

But if you watch and read as much kind of "true crime" crap as I do, there are frequently repeated claims like most serial killers are white guys and that it's especially rare for serial killers to seek victims of a different race. If these claims bore out statistically, is it okay for law enforcement agents to focus more scrutiny on suspects of certain races, assuming that there are other non-racial reason that the people came under suspicion?

ETA: obviously, my serial killer example involves a specific crime that the police know has already been committed and most "profiling" seems to me to be about preventing a crime that hasn't happened yet when were talking airlines or an assumption about a crime that might be occurring but that there's no definitive proof off like drug transportation. Does that matter if it's you that the police think might be guilty based partially on your race?

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by epchick

Just a little FYI for those who still don't understand why Arabs hate Israel (and the US support of it)

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...k-1230046.html

Hmmm...Over Christmas, I was talking to my (VERY evangelical) parents about the situation. They have a religious basis for protecting Israel at all costs, regardless of what Israel has ever done. I asked them if Israel was completely innocent in all that has happened. To them, it doesn't matter.

I don't believe in killing, period, so I'm in favor of peace all the way around.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Hmmm...Over Christmas, I was talking to my (VERY evangelical) parents about the situation. They have a religious basis for protecting Israel at all costs, regardless of what Israel has ever done. I asked them if Israel was completely innocent in all that has happened. To them, it doesn't matter.

I don't believe in killing, period, so I'm in favor of peace all the way around.

My mom said something similar the other day when we were talking about this (and also about the 7 signs of the end of the world...or whatever its called). According to my mom, the Israel from biblical times was just as vicious as present-day Israel, so their actions shouldn't be a surprise.

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

I read an article the other day -in print, no links, sorry- by some Israeli writer and he suggested that peace would only come through a secularization of the region (Palestine/Israel and their shared/disputed land)

Secularization? Not gonna happen. It might be better for Israel to do it (since all 3 religions are very prevalent in Israel) but Palestine is ruled too much by Islam to be able to separate them.

There might be some kind of "peace" if Israel would just do what they say and stops occupying Gaza & the West Bank.

[moe.ron]

Originally Posted by epchick

Secularization? Not gonna happen. It might be better for Israel to do it (since all 3 religions are very prevalent in Israel) but Palestine is ruled too much by Islam to be able to separate them.

That's not 100% true. Yes, Hamas is an Islamic based movement, but Fatah is far from an Islamic base movement. It's more of a Pan-Arabic movement with secular ideology. Some of Fatah's higher ranks are Christians.

Fatah itself has an "observer" status with the Socialist International

[AlphaDeltaDelta]

Originally Posted by epchick

There might be some kind of "peace" if Israel would just do what they say and stops occupying Gaza & the West Bank.

Would you pull all of your military out of an area that at every chance keeps attacking your country? Come on, be reasonable... There are people on both sides who are largely in the minority and perpetuate this situation, but to blame one side or the other is pretty ridiculous IMHO.

To address the quote about ancient Israel being aggressive, if you/your mother actually read up on a bit of history, ancient Israel was constantly being attacked by the Romans, Greeks, Philistines, Babylonians, the list goes on. They weren't going around conquering more land. The only offensive battle I can ever remember hearing about by the ancient Israelis (Judea) was the battle of Jericho, in which they initially took the land of Israel.

I also resent the term aggressive. Israel is constantly provoked by countries whose leaders want every man, woman and child there dead. The Israelis do things no other army would do (drop leaflets ahead of time warning of bombings for one). Sorry I need to stop posting about this before I blow my top haha...

[epchick]

Originally Posted by AlphaDeltaDelta

Would you pull all of your military out of an area that at every chance keeps attacking your country? Come on, be reasonable... There are people on both sides who are largely in the minority and perpetuate this situation, but to blame one side or the other is pretty ridiculous IMHO.

Both sides are to blame, but if your going to make a "promise" (of sorts) keep it. Israel gave those two territories to the Palestinians, yet continue to occupy the land. Yes they should pull out of "Palestine." Pulling out doesn't not mean they should stop protecting themselves, but Israel should protect themselves on their side, instead of keeping their soldiers on Palestinian "land."

Palestine is as much to blame as Israel, but let's not pretend that Israel is innocent either. Let's not forget they were the one that broke the ceasefire on the 4th of Nov, and again on the 18th of Nov. (according to the UN)

You can resent the term aggressive, doesn't mean it isn't true. You think other countries want all men, women and children of Israel dead? Hmmm...how many women and children in Gaza have died by the hands of the Israelis in the past week or so? Come on now.

ETA: Numbers don't lie. Numbers aren't slanted/biased. As of Jan 8.--763 Palestinians had died in Gaza, most of them children, while another 3000+ were injured. How many Israelis have been injured/killed?

[AlphaDeltaDelta]

Originally Posted by epchick

Both sides are to blame, but if your going to make a "promise" (of sorts) keep it. Israel gave those two territories to the Palestinians, yet continue to occupy the land. Yes they should pull out of "Palestine." Pulling out doesn't not mean they should stop protecting themselves, but Israel should protect themselves on their side, instead of keeping their soldiers on Palestinian "land."

Palestine is as much to blame as Israel, but let's not pretend that Israel is innocent either. Palestine is not attacting Israel "every chance they get."

You can resent the term aggressive, doesn't mean it isn't true. You think other countries want all men, women and children of Israel dead? Hmmm...how many women and children in Gaza have died by the hands of the Israelis in the past week or so? Come on now.

For one, many Israelis do not believe the Palestinians should have any land, and had no say in the matter (these are usually the more religious hard-liners). If you think about this from any other countries perspective, whether it is land that they gave to the other people or another country altogether, if they have the military might and are being constantly attacked, they will occupy that country to ensure these attacks are minimized... It's basic logic. I feel for the citizens of Gaza, because most of them just want a home in which to raise their children and live their lives, but when you make a stupid decision like they did in 2006, electing a known terrorist group as the leaders of your region, it really isn't going to end well for you. I really feel for the 43% who voted for the much more levelheaded Fatah party.

"Palestine" is not attacking Israel at every chance they get, but the Hamas militants are, and this has been going on for some time now, Israel has just gotten sick of it's citizens dying/being injured and its property being destroyed.

If you cannot see the distinction between a national ideology of exterminating an entire race of people and collateral deaths due to the enemy constantly hiding itself amongst the civilian population, I really can't have a reasonable conversation with you on this topic. Also, as I previously pointed out, some of those "women and children" being killed are either militants or the wives/children of militants. As I said before... I hardly consider a 16 year old wielding an AK-47 a child.