Imams vs. US Airways

[ils2minimums]

More info:

With respect to the flight in question, the crew became aware of suspicious
behavior during the boarding process of 6 individuals who were sitting in
unassigned seats and not in close proximity. Other passengers, along with
an off duty commuting flight attendant witnessed unusual behavior. Some of
the examples of behavior that was reported included:

· Changing seats, stating anti war, anti US-Iraqi involvement,
negative comments concerning the President of the United States.

· Two of the passengers requesting Seat Belt Extensions when their
body size did not appear to warrant their use; seat belt extensions were
instead rolled up and placed under the seats of the passengers.

· Modified reservations, paid by cash, one way ticketing.

These are a few examples of the observed behavior that led the crew, Station
management, and SOC to restrict travel for these individuals. The decisions
made by all the parties were made as a result of the behavior of the
passengers and not as a result of their ethnicity.

So now it's obvious that the complaints were made based on more than just some Muslims praying. End of story.

End of story? I don't think so. Your smug sanctimonious comments in this thread may be dismissed by some, but I knew the information you quoted above several days ago, and it was the basis for my belief that there was more to the situation than met the eye. You wagged a pretty big finger and let the self-righteous blathering freely fly before you took the time to acquaint yourself with the rest of the story, and now you just want to call "end of story"? You were quick to condemn the crew for "over reacting" and you were even quicker to come to the defense of the imams before you knew what the facts were. You were quick to call someone ignorant for not being able to differentiate between normal prayer and "suspicious" behavior. You stated that my view of erring on the safe side violates US law, yet you sight no statutes or case law to prove it, and then seem you expect me to just accept it because YOU said it? You say that I feed into their intolerence with my own? WTF does that mean, dude? Have you ever heard anyone outside of San Francisco or an ACLU meeting talk that way?

You're a pilot, not a lawyer. Your lectures on the subject of law are comical. You talk in circles and keep repeating yourself under the mistaken impression that if you keep saying it, it'll be accepted as fact... I've read your crap on this board and another one, and the common themes are that you're constantly ending up on the left side of most arguments and you're almost always being barraged with attacks against your views... Now either EVERYONE ELSE is wrong and you're right, or you should cozy up to the fact that besides being an annoying and condescending liberal blow-hard, you're not NEARLY as smart as you think you are...

 

[ils2minimums]

There's a law against boarding intoxicated pax but there's no law against devout Muslims

Times change... 15 years ago there were no laws against Internet Predators. 30 years ago there was no law against not wearing seatbelts, 100 years ago there was a law denying women the right to vote, 150 years ago there were laws that allowed the ownership of other human beings...

Perhaps it's time that the US adopted a few laws like some that are popping up across Europe. For instance, the banning of religious garb in public schools. Yarmulkes, Crosses, Head scarves? Leave 'em at home...

 

[schafjet]

End of story? I don't think so. Your smug sanctimonious comments in this thread may be dismissed by some, but I knew the information you quoted above several days ago, and it was the basis for my belief that there was more to the situation than met the eye. You wagged a pretty big finger and let the self-righteous blathering freely fly before you took the time to acquaint yourself with the rest of the story, and now you just want to call "end of story"? You were quick to condemn the crew for "over reacting" and you were even quicker to come to the defense of the imams before you knew what the facts were. You were quick to call someone ignorant for not being able to differentiate between normal prayer and "suspicious" behavior. You stated that my view of erring on the safe side violates US law, yet you sight no statutes or case law to prove it, and then seem you expect me to just accept it because YOU said it? You say that I feed into their intolerence with my own? WTF does that mean, dude? Have you ever heard anyone outside of San Francisco or an ACLU meeting talk that way?

You're a pilot, not a lawyer. Your lectures on the subject of law are comical. You talk in circles and keep repeating yourself under the mistaken impression that if you keep saying it, it'll be accepted as fact... I've read your crap on this board and another one, and the common themes are that you're constantly ending up on the left side of most arguments and you're almost always being barraged with attacks against your views... Now either EVERYONE ELSE is wrong and you're right, or you should cozy up to the fact that besides being an annoying liberal blow-hard, you're not NEARLY as smart as you think you are...

I use the quote only to point out the "liberal blowhard". I am a liberal, don't know if I am a blowhard, but I take offense that you must label anyone. Even thou I am a liberal, I think the actions that took place were justifiable. I would have had them removed off of my airplane in a heartbeat. I don't think the name calling helps just because you disagree with someones post or point of view. Why must we be just like our politicians and see only left or right? I thought most of Americans were more to the center. Oh well, rip away.

 

[ils2minimums]

sigh...

I am a liberal, don't know if I am a blowhard, but I take offense that you must label anyone.

I take offense that you took offense... If you're looking for someone to give a rats crack that you're offended, you've come to the wrong place. This is America, you have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to live unoffended. So get used to it.

I am not a conservative or a liberal. I am not religious and I'm pro-choice across the board. I believe in protecting our borders, keeping taxes to a minimum, eliminating welfare (better known as the redistribution of wealth), encouraging the use of the English language within our borders, and the preservation of our culture.

I find it interesting that the first thing you did was "label" yourself as a liberal, and then you took offense that I labeled someone?

Oh, and then there's this:

What are we supposed to do, give you Allah loving, American hating people a big hug? Give me a break.

Spoken like a true non-labeling liberal...

 

[TWA Dude]

End of story? I don't think so. Your smug sanctimonious comments in this thread may be dismissed by some, but I knew the information you quoted above several days ago, and it was the basis for my belief that there was more to the situation than met the eye.

I didn't know it. Why didn't you say so?

You wagged a pretty big finger and let the self-righteous blathering freely fly before you took the time to acquaint yourself with the rest of the story, and now you just want to call "end of story"?

Yes, and I can do that. Most of this discussion was carried on before any official version of what happened was released. I stand by my position there must be valid reasons for suspecting passengers and until the fuller story was released there weren't. You're right in that I'm not a lawyer which is why I stated that the ultimate authority in these things is the courts. You call me arrogant whilst you arrogantly think you know what's safer than I. It's called a difference of opinion. My only point is that we should uphold US laws and not discriminate. So yes, end of story.

 

[schafjet]

I take offense that you took offense... If you're looking for someone to give a rats crack that you're offended, you've come to the wrong place. This is America, you have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to live unoffended. So get used to it.

I am not a conservative or a liberal. I am not religious and I'm pro-choice across the board. I believe in protecting our borders, keeping taxes to a minimum, eliminating welfare (better known as the redistribution of wealth), encouraging the use of the English language within our borders, and the preservation of our culture.

I find it interesting that the first thing you did was "label" yourself as a liberal, and then you took offense that I labeled someone?

Oh, and then there's this:


Spoken like a true non-labeling liberal...

Whatever, dude. Having a discussion with you I see would be futile. I would say black and you would say white. Oops, there I go again, labeling. Don't worry, even thou I am offended by you, I can take it. Why do interesting discussions always have to break down to this type of rhetoric?

 

[stonewall]

Don't worry, even thou I am offended by you, I can take it.

How brave. If you can take it, why did you feel the need to cry about it?

 

[ils2minimums]

How brave. If you can take it, why did you feel the need to cry about it?

:laugh:

 

[jj21211]

Now we fight amongst ourselves. Another victory for allah!

 

[brainhurts]

WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE YOUR FLIGHT MORE UNCOMFORTABLE?
by Ann Coulter
November 22, 2006

Six imams removed from a US Airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix are calling on Muslims to boycott the airline. If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether.

Witnesses said the imams stood to do their evening prayers in the terminal before boarding, chanting "Allah, Allah, Allah" — coincidentally, the last words heard by hundreds of airline passengers on 9/11 before they died.

Witnesses also said that the imams were talking about Saddam Hussein, and denouncing America and the war in Iraq. About the only scary preflight ritual the imams didn't perform was the signing of last wills and testaments.

After boarding, the imams did not sit together and some asked for seat belt extensions, although none were morbidly obese. Three of the men had one-way tickets and no checked baggage.

Also they were Muslims.

The idea that a Muslim boycott against US Airways would hurt the airline proves that Arabs are utterly tone-deaf. This is roughly the equivalent of Cindy Sheehan taking a vow of silence. How can we hope to deal with people with no sense of irony? The next thing you know, New York City cab drivers will be threatening to bathe.

Come to think of it, the whole affair may have been a madcap advertising scheme cooked up by US Airways.

It worked with me. US Airways is my official airline now. Northwest, which eventually flew the Allah-spouting Muslims to their destinations, is off my list. You want to really hurt a U.S. air carrier's business? Have Muslims announce that it's their favorite airline.

The clerics had been attending an imam conference in Minneapolis (imam conference slogan: "What Happens in Minneapolis — Actually, Nothing Happened in Minneapolis"). But instead of investigating the conference, the government is now investigating my favorite airline.

What threat could Muslims flying from Minnesota to Arizona be?

Three of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 received their flight training in Arizona. Long before the attacks, an FBI agent in Phoenix found it curious that so many Arabs were enrolled in flight school. But the FBI rebuffed his request for an investigation on the grounds that his suspicions were based on the same invidious racial profiling that has brought US Airways under investigation and into my good graces.

Lynne Stewart's client, the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel-Rahman, is serving life in prison in a maximum security lock-up in Minnesota. One of the six imams removed from the US Airways plane was blind, so Lynne Stewart was the one missing clue that would have sent all the passengers screaming from the plane.

Wholly apart from the issue of terrorism, don't we have a seller's market for new immigrants? How does a blind Muslim get to the top of the visa list? Is there a shortage of blind, fanatical clerics in this country that I haven't noticed? Couldn't we get some Burmese with leprosy instead? A 4-year-old could do a better job choosing visa applicants than the U.S. Department of Immigration.

One of the stunt-imams in US Airways' advertising scheme, Omar Shahin, complained about being removed from the plane, saying: "Six scholars in handcuffs. It's terrible."

Yes, especially when there was a whole conference of them! Six out of 150 is called "poor law enforcement." How did the other 144 "scholars" get off so easy?

Shahin's own "scholarship" consisted of continuing to deny Muslims were behind 9/11 nearly two months after the attacks. On Nov. 4, 2001, The Arizona Republic cited Shahin's "skepticism that Muslims or bin Laden carried out attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon." Shahin complained that the government was "focusing on the Arabs, the Muslims. And all the evidence shows that the Muslims are not involved in this terrorist act."

In case your memory of that time is hazy, within three days of the attack, the Justice Department had released the names of all 19 hijackers — names like Majed Moqed, Ahmed Alghamdi, Mohand Alshehri, Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi and Ahmed Alnami. The government had excluded all but 19 passengers as possible hijackers based on extensive interviews with friends and family of nearly every passenger on all four flights. Some of the hijackers' seat numbers had been called in by flight attendants on the planes.

By early October, bin Laden had produced a videotape claiming credit for the attacks. And by Nov. 4, 2001, The New York Times had run well over 100 articles on the connections between bin Laden and the hijackers — even more detailed and sinister than the Times' flowcharts on neoconservatives!

Also, if I remember correctly, al-Qaida had taken out full-page ads in Variety and the Hollywood Reporter thanking their agents for the attacks.

But now, on the eve of the busiest travel day in America, these "scholars" have ginned up America's PC victim machinery to intimidate airlines and passengers from noticing six imams chanting "Allah" before boarding a commercial jet.

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE

4520 Main Street, Kansas City, MO 64111

 

[codeone]

Ann Cou.......Auto Delete initiating!

 

[brainhurts]

Ann Cou.......Auto Delete initiating!

Oh, come now. They are only words. Funny, funny words.

 

[SkiFishFly]

Ann Cou.......Auto Delete initiating!

Perhaps if you took the time to read it you might learn something. Just because you don't agree with someone or how they addressed something doesn't mean they never have anything good or intelligent to say.

 

[AMRCostUnit]

The radical muslim stategy here is Immigrate, Procreate and Legislate. They have the highest birthrate in the world. They are good a immigrating and legislating...ask Europe and England. Now even our Congress. Just how are they going to swear in this Ellis guy? On the koran? We know what it says about all of us infidels and what to do with us. Although it appears Europe is getting weary of it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6505851


Not all muslims are terrorists but 100% percent of the terrorists were muslim.

I think the peacful muslims would find it not so peaceful of a religion outside of the freedoms of the United States.

Unit
Culture Warrior

 

[codeone]

Perhaps if you took the time to read it you might learn something. Just because you don't agree with someone or how they addressed something doesn't mean they never have anything good or intelligent to say.

I did actually take the time to read the article and per normal, among her few intelligent points are some incredibly stupid points as well.

Ann Coulter says "If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether."

Does anyone on Earth really believe that? What happens when a group or white supremacist decides to hijack CRJs on Sunday morning and fly them into black churches around the south. Or Mexicans do the same to the US Border Patrol or Immigration Headquarters. Or any pissed off group of people for that matter. Sound far-fetched? Well so did a dozen or so Muslim extremists doing the same to the WTC, Pentagon and possibly the White House. Aiport security is ten times more important than focussing only on those who appear Muslim.

Ann Coulter says "Witnesses also said that the imams were talking about Saddam Hussein, and denouncing America and the war in Iraq. About the only scary preflight ritual the imams didn't perform was the signing of last wills and testaments."

Muslims probably should not hold any "fringe" conversations onboard an airliner if they don't want to draw additional attention to themselves in today’s climate, however nearly 50% of the US population can be heard disagreeing with the war in Iraq on any given day and to her, all those that do are traitors (though she did not say so in this article, if you know her it's implied).

Ann Coulter says "The idea that a Muslim boycott against US Airways would hurt the airline proves that Arabs are utterly tone-deaf. This is roughly the equivalent of Cindy Sheehan taking a vow of silence. How can we hope to deal with people with no sense of irony? The next thing you know, New York City cab drivers will be threatening to bathe."

There are approximately 7 millions Muslims in the US alone. If 7 million people boycott anything, it will be affected, period. In my personal opinion, it would hurt US Air more than anyone else. Oh by the way, of that 7 million, only 26% are Arab American Muslims, the rest are from a variety of other ethic groups to include White Americans.

Ann Coulter says "US Airways is my official airline now. Northwest, which eventually flew the Allah-spouting Muslims to their destinations, is off my list."
Anyone else going to not fly Northwest now? I doubt it.


Ann Coulter says "But the FBI rebuffed his request for an investigation on the grounds that his suspicions were based on the same invidious racial profiling that has brought US Airways under investigation and into my good graces."

Racial profiling again. If you have nothing to hide and are not breaking the law, racial profiling should not matter to you. However, if you are in favor of making it legally sanctioned activity by law enforcement, it should be that way across the spectrum for all criminal activity--violent, white collar, blue collar, etc. It can't just be Muslims, this IS still the United States.

Just thoughts and opinions.

 

[codeone]

The radical muslim stategy here is Immigrate, Procreate and Legislate. They have the highest birthrate in the world. They are good a immigrating and legislating...ask Europe and England. Now even our Congress. Just how are they going to swear in this Ellis guy? On the koran? We know what it says about all of us infidels and what to do with us. Although it appears Europe is getting weary of it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6505851


Not all muslims are terrorists but 100% percent of the terrorists were muslim.

I think the peacful muslims would find it not so peaceful of a religion outside of the freedoms of the United States.

Unit
Culture Warrior

Not all muslims are terrorists but 100% percent of the terrorists on 911 were muslim

 

[AMRCostUnit]

Not all muslims are terrorists but 100% percent of the terrorists on 911 were muslim

...and in Tube in London, and in Bali, and in Egypt, and in Jordan, and the Shoe Bomber, and the London Airliner Bomb plot.

Not the sharpest tool in the shed but I think there is somewhat of a pattern going on here.

Unit
Profiler

 

[atafan]

MAGNUM!! for President!

 

[codeone]

...and in Tube in London, and in Bali, and in Egypt, and in Jordan, and the Shoe Bomber, and the London Airliner Bomb plot.

Not the sharpest tool in the shed but I think there is somewhat of a pattern going on here.

Unit
Profiler

True, True. However, in a selfish sort of way, I'm mostly concerned with terrorist attacks here in the US as those will be the attacks that threaten my family and friends the most. We all know that when we travel abroad these days we are at risk. Of the terror type attacks that have occurred on US soil, the've not all been Muslims. But overall you are correct, keep an eye out.

 

[brainhurts]

I did actually take the time to read the article and per normal, among her few intelligent points are some incredibly stupid points as well.

Ann Coulter says "If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether."

Does anyone on Earth really believe that? What happens when a group or white supremacist decides to hijack CRJs on Sunday morning and fly them into black churches around the south. Or Mexicans do the same to the US Border Patrol or Immigration Headquarters. Or any pissed off group of people for that matter. Sound far-fetched? Well so did a dozen or so Muslim extremists doing the same to the WTC, Pentagon and possibly the White House. Aiport security is ten times more important than focussing only on those who appear Muslim.

Ann Coulter says "Witnesses also said that the imams were talking about Saddam Hussein, and denouncing America and the war in Iraq. About the only scary preflight ritual the imams didn't perform was the signing of last wills and testaments."

Muslims probably should not hold any "fringe" conversations onboard an airliner if they don't want to draw additional attention to themselves in today’s climate, however nearly 50% of the US population can be heard disagreeing with the war in Iraq on any given day and to her, all those that do are traitors (though she did not say so in this article, if you know her it's implied).

Ann Coulter says "The idea that a Muslim boycott against US Airways would hurt the airline proves that Arabs are utterly tone-deaf. This is roughly the equivalent of Cindy Sheehan taking a vow of silence. How can we hope to deal with people with no sense of irony? The next thing you know, New York City cab drivers will be threatening to bathe."

There are approximately 7 millions Muslims in the US alone. If 7 million people boycott anything, it will be affected, period. In my personal opinion, it would hurt US Air more than anyone else. Oh by the way, of that 7 million, only 26% are Arab American Muslims, the rest are from a variety of other ethic groups to include White Americans.

Ann Coulter says "US Airways is my official airline now. Northwest, which eventually flew the Allah-spouting Muslims to their destinations, is off my list."
Anyone else going to not fly Northwest now? I doubt it.


Ann Coulter says "But the FBI rebuffed his request for an investigation on the grounds that his suspicions were based on the same invidious racial profiling that has brought US Airways under investigation and into my good graces."

Racial profiling again. If you have nothing to hide and are not breaking the law, racial profiling should not matter to you. However, if you are in favor of making it legally sanctioned activity by law enforcement, it should be that way across the spectrum for all criminal activity--violent, white collar, blue collar, etc. It can't just be Muslims, this IS still the United States.

Just thoughts and opinions.

Your "points" are asinine drivel. Pure wasted finger movements. Any airline that could advertise itself as "Muslim Free" would make tons of money. Its sad that a small % of muslims are the problem. Its sadder that the rest of the Muslims do not step up to the plate and express their outrage. I take the silence to mean they either support the terrorists or do not care.

 

[codeone]

Your "points" are asinine drivel. Pure wasted finger movements. Any airline that could advertise itself as "Muslim Free" would make tons of money. Its sad that a small % of muslims are the problem. Its sadder that the rest of the Muslims do not step up to the plate and express their outrage. I take the silence to mean they either support the terrorists or do not care.

1. Only and Ann Coulterite would tell someone who has as many combat hours as you have posts that they support terrorists or don't care.

2. Any airline that advertised itself as "Muslim Free" would be bankrupt by 1 Jan 2007 due to lawsuits, after all this is still the US, not the Middle East.

3. You are correct in that it's sad that good Muslims don't step up to the plate. Who knows why they don't, but I doubt you are the one guy in the world that does.

4. My silence means that I do have a life outside FI.

Good day Mr. Drivel

 

[brainhurts]

1. Only and Ann Coulterite would tell someone who has as many combat hours as you have posts that they support terrorists or don't care.

2. Any airline that advertised itself as "Muslim Free" would be bankrupt by 1 Jan 2007 due to lawsuits, after all this is still the US, not the Middle East.

3. You are correct in that it's sad that good Muslims don't step up to the plate. Who knows why they don't, but I doubt you are the one guy in the world that does.

4. My silence means that I do have a life outside FI.

Good day Mr. Drivel

1. Be careful of who you compare combat hours with. I have more than my posts. How are you claiming that my post calls you a terrorist? Are you a Saudi national flying F15s? I am claiming Muslims are turning a deaf ear. Are you a Muslim? It does not seem so from your past posts.
2. I said "Any airline that could advertise itself as "Muslim Free" would make tons of money" The point being (and I can't believe I am explaining irony to such a decorated ((whats that 200 devices on your air medal?)) Eagle driver) That no airline could make that claim due to our laws.
3. 3/4 right. On the last--I have no idea--except ingrained fear.
4. I am guessing you are possibly a Muslim AmericanF15 guy. Your silence is deafening. Enjoy your life outside of FI.

 

[codeone]

1. Be careful of who you compare combat hours with. I have more than my posts. How are you claiming that my post calls you a terrorist? Are you a Saudi national flying F15s? I am claiming Muslims are turning a deaf ear. Are you a Muslim? It does not seem so from your past posts.
2. I said "Any airline that could advertise itself as "Muslim Free" would make tons of money" The point being (and I can't believe I am explaining irony to such a decorated ((whats that 200 devices on your air medal?)) Eagle driver) That no airline could make that claim due to our laws.
3. 3/4 right. On the last--I have no idea--except ingrained fear.
4. I am guessing you are possibly a Muslim AmericanF15 guy. Your silence is deafening. Enjoy your life outside of FI.

I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about Ann Coulter tough guy. I did'nt mean to interrupt your workout. Keep guessing and I am, very much so.

 

[stonewall]

MAGNUM!! for President!

I'm flattered, but I'm not quite old enough yet! :beer:

 

[brainhurts]

I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about Ann Coulter tough guy. I did'nt mean to interrupt your workout. Keep guessing and I am, very much so.

We were talking about Ann Coulter war hero. Then you posted nonsensical drivel answering her well chosen sarcasim as if she were not making a literary point--through sarcasm. You took offence and your drivel and nonsensical writing is confusing to follow. Do you think Muslims are right for staying silent? If you are a Muslim, are you silent because you are afraid your family will be targeted by Islamic death squads? If so, do you think that a religion that operates that way is the religion of peace? I will state again that a US airline that could advertise "Muslim Free" service would be full and be able to raise prices. Thanks for reminding me about my workout. I think you are late for your call to prayers.

 

[codeone]

We were talking about Ann Coulter war hero. Then you posted nonsensical drivel answering her well chosen sarcasim as if she were not making a literary point--through sarcasm. You took offence and your drivel and nonsensical writing is confusing to follow. Do you think Muslims are right for staying silent? If you are a Muslim, are you silent because you are afraid your family will be targeted by Islamic death squads? If so, do you think that a religion that operates that way is the religion of peace? I will state again that a US airline that could advertise "Muslim Free" service would be full and be able to raise prices. Thanks for reminding me about my workout. I think you are late for your call to prayers.

Funny guy too. In my reply to your Ann Coulter post, I made some points that you have not replied to yet, drivel or not. Or are you simply interested in a war of words.

I'm not Muslim and no they are not right for staying silent. Who knows why they remain silent. I don't claim to. Maybe you can enlighten us. However, would that in any way change anything or simply make us non-Muslims feel better in some way? It would not change our need for better security and a stronger border.

Stating that any airline that could advertise as "Muslim Free" is about as nonsensical as anything I've read on this board. Any restaurant that could be "Black Free" or any state, movie theater, etc, etc. It does not solve anything and is totally unrealistic in the US. If it was meant to be serious, it's a joke. If was meant to be funny, well it's still a joke.

Finally, I don't claim to be a war hero. However, based on my opinions of the war and government decisions of late, Ann Coulter would coin me a traitor. I do pray, but normally only once per day.

 

[brainhurts]

Funny guy too. In my reply to your Ann Coulter post, I made some points that you have not replied to yet, drivel or not. Or are you simply interested in a war of words.
You admit its drivel and you want me to respond? I have responded:
"you posted nonsensical drivel answering her well chosen sarcasm as if she were not making a literary point--through sarcasm. You took offence and your drivel and nonsensical writing is confusing to follow" What that means is you are responding to her sarcasm as if it were real. That is nonsensical.
I'm not Muslim and no they are not right for staying silent. Who knows why they remain silent. I don't claim to. Maybe you can enlighten us. However, would that in any way change anything or simply make us non-Muslims feel better in some way? It would not change our need for better security and a stronger border.
We need to be enlightened by Muslims. That is why I am asking the question. Maybe if that question is asked more directly by elected officials, we would glean some reasoning. Depending on the answer, non Muslims may wake up to the fact that Islam is trying to make the entire world bow to Shira law. Or maybe they would all just apologize, police themselves, and we could all hold hands and celebrate Kwasramadanhanakamas. We agree on security and border protection.
Stating that any airline that could advertise as "Muslim Free" is about as nonsensical as anything I've read on this board. Any restaurant that could be "Black Free" or any state, movie theater, etc, etc. It does not solve anything and is totally unrealistic in the US. If it was meant to be serious, it's a joke. If was meant to be funny, well it's still a joke.
Uh, dude, its the point of the article. This link may help you:
http://www.sarcasmsociety.com/howtobesarcastic/
It's not embarrasing anymore to be sarcastically challanged.
Finally, I don't claim to be a war hero. However, based on my opinions of the war and government decisions of late, Ann Coulter would coin me a traitor. I do pray, but normally only once per day.
OK, on the war hero thing. But you did say:
1. Only and Ann Coulterite would tell someone who has as many combat hours as you have posts that they support terrorists or don't care.
This could be construed to mean that you wanted to point out your combat hours to defend a whacky notion that I called you a terrorist. I did not. However if you are an advocate of liberal cut and run policies (which I am not saying you are) which include the press's nonstop glee at American deaths, CindySheehanMichaelMooreBarbaraStreisandBarbaraBoxer type antics which encourage our enemies, then yes, I am sure Ann Coulter would consider you a traitor. Continue your praying--we will need them.

 

[codeone]

What that means is you are responding to her sarcasm as if it were real. That is nonsensical.
With Ann Coulter, her sarcasm is identical to her reality. It's in her articles, her interviews, her assessments of the Dems, and I hear it's in her books, though I've not read them.

We need to be enlightened by Muslims. OK. That is why I am asking the question. Valid question. Maybe if that question is asked more directly by elected officials, we would glean some reasoning. Perhaps less sarcasm and reasonable recommendations along with government accountability would help too. Depending on the answer, non Muslims may wake up to the fact that Islam is trying to make the entire world bow to Shira law. Nothing depends on the answer. Our nations offensive and defensive capabilities need to remain the best in the world and we should all remain vigilant. But if good Muslims do not want to speak up and non-Muslims remain unconcerned, so be it. We as a nation have to protect those people too. That's just how it goes. Or maybe they would all just apologize, police themselves, and we could all hold hands and celebrate Kwasramadanhanakamas. Not likely.

Uh, dude, its the point of the article. This link may help you:
http://www.sarcasmsociety.com/howtobesarcastic/
It's not embarrassing anymore to be sarcastically challenged.
As a fighter pilot, I'm well aware of sarcasm and you already know my thoughts on that in regard to AC.

OK, on the war hero thing. But you did say:
"Only an Ann Coulterite would tell someone who has as many combat hours as you have posts that they support terrorists or don't care."
This could be construed to mean that you wanted to point out your combat hours to defend a whacky notion that I called you a terrorist. I did not. OK, I did misread your "support the terrorist or don't care" comment as being directed at me. Hence the red above. I realized it after I clicked "Reply". My bad dawg. But that is what AC would say and I've heard her say it many times. I'm sure you have too.

However if you are an advocate of liberal cut and run policies (which I am not saying you are) which include the press's nonstop glee at American deaths, CindySheehanMichaelMooreBarbaraStreisandBarbaraBoxer type antics which encourage our enemies, then yes, I am sure Ann Coulter would consider you a traitor. I totally disagree with "Cut and Run". I wholeheartedly agree with "Win and Leave". My final question to you is define WIN in your terms?

Bottom line on AC is that she is a far right, sarcastic spokeswoman whom I cannot stand. You will not change that opinion. I hope to fly with you some day and not know it. Is std a new type of airplane?

I'm out.

 

[brainhurts]

I totally disagree with "Cut and Run". I wholeheartedly agree with "Win and Leave". My final question to you is define WIN in your terms?
Win and leave is good for me. Win means defend Iraq from a united sheite/Iranian controlled hunk of real estate with lots of oil to pay for the destruction of the US.
Bottom line on AC is that she is a far right, sarcastic spokeswoman whom I cannot stand. You will not change that opinion.
Let the tea work. (See Zoolander)
I hope to fly with you some day and not know it. Is std a new type of airplane?
std stands for supersonic transgalactic deathship which is highly classified. (Thats sarcasm: http://www.sarcasmsociety.com/howtobesarcastic/ ) Actually I keep my MWS to myself because if I posted them, you would find out I am MANGUM! using 2 screennames so I can back myself up when I get in a heated debate (again--sarcasm)



I'm out.

 

[ils2minimums]

As a fighter pilot, I'm well aware of sarcasm

I'm not sure what this means... It's the equivalent of saying "as an ice dancer, I'm well aware of intransitive verbs"...