1 us air just got my business!

2 Put em in Greyhound, luggage compartment! Put Depends on them and don't let them out til they get there.

3 "One of the Muslim scholars removed from a US Airways flight on Monday today called for imams around the country to boycott the airline after employees refused to sell him new tickets for his flight home."
 
Great!!! Not just imams, but all muslims should boycott UW Airways.
 
US Airways will probably get a hefty reduction of their insurance premiums!!!

4

They are going to boycott the airlines? Shit, I feel safer flying already.

5 Put them on a plane and fly it non-stop to Guantanamo Bay.

6 The coverage by national media on tonight's broadcast news [ABC & NBC] that I watched did not mention the connection of the Imam Shahin to a Hamas "charity."

What a surprise!?!

Also, their refusal to accept the seats they were assigned makes it appear that they were acting as agents provacateurs, attempting to create a "cause celebre" to arouse radicalism in quiescent Muslims in the USA.

That wouldn't surprise me at all.

7    "Unfortunately one aspect of freedom he forgot is that freedom also means being able to refuse to serve anyone for any reason."

Uhm. Thats not quite true.

8 Give terror sponsers a one way ticket to where they want to go most ...

Remember the Greek myth about Tantalus in Hades?

What if the Martyr goes to a heavenly cage when they die, and the virgins are on the outside? With the fruit, and the fresh water ...

Finally those poor Muslim women will have a chance for payback ...

It makes me smile

USA all the way!

9 Howie a public carrier does NOT have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
You must be thinking that the Jim Crow laws are still in effect.
All of that finally left by the early 60's using the Federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
I think maybe it is time for you to audit a high school civics class.

10 I'll be flying US Airways for the holidays.

11 Let's see, Muslims make up less than 1% of the US population. I'm sure a boycott would be devastating. NOT!

12 Jim Crow laws have nothing to do with airline safety. Even regulated interstate travel industry has rights regarding who they will let fly, and who not. The fed can only do so much without earning a fair rebuke.

I would say an airline forced by the government to do something that the airline would otherwise consider to be unsafe, could sue the government for its accountability in making such an enforcement.

If the government forced airlines to allow bombs on planes that would be obviously stupid. Forcing airlines to accept disruptive, or threatening people seems also pretty obviously stupid.

Any arguement with the feds should be handled in light of the government being held accountable for enforcing a dangerous standard.

We may be talking internment in ten years time. Debates about who can, and can't fly will have a different set of rules.

Want to place any bets on how this 'boycott' turns out?

USA all the way!

13 "Unfortunately one aspect of freedom he forgot is that freedom also means being able to refuse to serve anyone for any reason."

Fortunately, the above statement is false and

Fortunately, another aspect of freedom, that you neglected to mention, is that anyone can boycott any business for any reason, including discrimination.

5 years after 9/11, the joke that we call "Department of Homeland Security", still does not instill much of a sense of "security" in most Americans.

Maybe all prayer should be banned on airplanes, unless they are Christian prayers, spoken in English.

What power one person has, anymore.

Just pass a note to a stewardess and you can get anyone kicked off an airplane.

Probably works on the ground, just as well, too.

If you don't like one of your neighbors, call the KGB..er I mean the FBI and report some suspicious activity that you have fabricated about them.

It worked in the old Soviet Union and still works, today, in the USA.

Maybe they will be dragged from their home, in the middle of the night, and designated an "unlawful combatent", without the right of habeas corpus and you will never have to see them again.

Can't happen, right?

"Let's see, Muslims make up less than 1% of the US population. I'm sure a boycott would be devastating. NOT!
Posted by: Subvet "

Hmmm...that would be about 3 million potential customers that the airlines can afford to ignore. NOT!

Maybe Wal-Mart should stop people, at the door in order that they choose who can come in, based upon their appearance or spoken language.

But don't stop with muslims.

If customers are black, they are probably there to shoplift and if they appear to be hispanic, they are probably illegal aliens.

----------------------------------------------

You may, also, want to consider the safety record of the airline and aircraft, in addition to the passenger list.

. 20 September 1989; USAir 737-400; La Guardia Airport, New York: The crew incorrectly trimmed the rudder for takeoff and were forced to abort the takeoff. The aircraft overran the runway and was partially submerged in water. Two of the 55 passengers were killed.

. 1 February 1991; USAir 737-300; Los Angeles, CA: The USAir flight was cleared to land on a runway which also had a Skywest Metro III on the runway awaiting takeoff. The aircraft collided and burst into flames. Two of the six crew members and 20 of the 83 passengers on the USAir jet were killed. All 10 passengers and two crew members on the Metro III were killed.

. 3 January 1992; USAir Express (Commutair) Beech 1900; Gabriel, NY: The aircraft hit high ground on approach 3.9 miles (6.2 km) from the runway at about 1600 feet (490 meters) above minimum altitude at that point. The NTSB believes that the glide slope indicator may have been unreliable due to precipitation static. One of the two crew members and one of the two passengers were killed.

. 22 March 1992; USAir F28-4000; New York, NY: The aircraft crashed just after takeoff in snowy conditions due to icing on the aircraft's wings. Three of the four crew members and 24 of the 47 passengers were killed.

. 2 July 1994; USAir DC9-31; Charlotte, NC: The aircraft encountered heavy rain and wind shear during approach at about 3.5 miles (5.6 km) from the runway. The crew executed attempted to go around for another landing attempt, but the aircraft could not overcome the wind shear. All five crew members survived, but 37 of the 52 passengers were killed.

. 8 September 1994; USAir 737-300; near Pittsburgh, PA: The aircraft lost control at about 6,000 feet (1830 meters) during approach. All five crew members and 127 passengers were killed.

. 8 January 2003; US Airways Express (Air Midwest) Beech 1900; Charlotte, NC: The aircraft crashed into a maintenance hanger at the airport shortly after it departed for a flight to Greenville, SC. The NTSB determined that the loss of pitch control resulted from a combination of an incorrectly rigged elevator control system and by the airplane’s aft center of gravity being substantially aft of the certified limit. Both pilots and all 19 passengers were killed in the crash.

Oh, yeah, I feel much better about flying US Airways, now.

And remember, before you fly next time, insist upon seeing the passenger list, before you board the plane just to make sure that there are no "undesirables" on the plane.

"Forcing airlines to accept disruptive, or threatening people seems also pretty obviously stupid.
Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 22, 2006 02:15 AM"

What "disrupted or threatening" people was the airline forced to accept, this time?

Obviously, they were not "forced" to accept these muslim passengers, as the word of one passenger was able to get them removed from the plane.

Your exclusion criteria? They dress funny, speak funny, have a beard, pray funny, have a funny muslim-sounding name.

Remember that it is your patriotic duty to, personally, keep as many "undesirables" off of your airplane as possible.

Not everyone has the "right" to fly and you can do your part by helping toy decide who should be able to fly and who shouldn't.

Of course, every other passenger will be watching you, too, so be careful not to look or act suspicious or they could have you thrown off the plane.

But, I'm sure you won't mind, since it is in the interest of national security.

Not to worry, though.

The worst president in US history is keeping us safe.

I feel much better, knowing the President Moron is in charge.

14 Puddle duck: please send your novel to a publisher not a comments section I cant even read it.

15
The worst president in US history is keeping us safe.

Bullshit. Jimmy Carter is doing nothing about terrorist beyond supporting them.





Your so full of shit Puddledick. If somebody is disruptive and refused
to sit where they are assigned they most certainly can be refused
service. We know you want to defend your terrorist heroes at any cost.

16

US Airways soon to be the safest airline in the country.

 

Puddleduck: You're nothing but a low life commie. Punk!

17 Puddleduck is not a low life commie, or a punk!
<stick's out tongue>
So There!
Play nice kids.

18 "Maybe all prayer should be banned on airplanes, unless they are Christian prayers, spoken in English."
 
What an "asshat" (hattip to LGF) response and the fact that they are only 1% says to me that their day is a coming.  Americans will only take so much shit before they start doing more then just removing them from the plane.  CAIR cares nothing for Americans they are in the business of trying to place us in glazed over position to be able to have their caliphate however a great many of us will never glaze over and the pc of us will wake up one day to.  God Bless the United States of America.  How's that prayer for you?

19 Puddlefuck, you're an idiot at your best. Oh, since you've been busted do you still pretend you're a vet? I hope not.
Go away now.

As far as these Islamic pukes go, they've just made US Airways the safest airlines to fly.

""I am calling for a boycott of US Airways because I'm not going to stay
silent," said Shahin, who is Jordanian. "I came to this country to
enjoy justice and freedom."…"

20 Piddle a "vet"?  LOL. Sure he is.

21 No fear and puddleduck. Now we have two commie punks.

22 Please, if we don't stop this name calling NO ONE will get a window seat.
PD has some good points. So does Michael Weaver. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between.
If we lean to far toward the right or the left the plane will tip over.
Or something like that.

23

Yes, I know it's not to far, it's too far. Sorry I get nervous when I fly.

24 Ok, look. There has to be a way to maintain security, keep us safe, without giving up our rights afforded us by the Consitution.
Maybe while taking a break from all the inane insults we can find a way.

25 lilcrash...oh wait, I mean No Fear...you're only called "lilcrash" over on newshounds...
Anyway, I hope you're having fun here.  I know it's all a joke to you, I've read what you've written.

So tell me, what you're saying is they should have let these people on the plane, even though they were spouting anti-American rhetoric before getting on the plane?

Call me what you will, but I wouldn't have felt safe on a plane with ANYONE of any race, color or creed who was spouting that kind of stuff.  I would have reported them as well, even if they were white, middle-aged, blonde-haired, blue-eyed Texans.  I'd rather be safe than blown up into tiny smithereens.

26 No Fear. You seem to be able to hold an adult conversation but I am
surprised you would defend a moronic troll such as Puddledick.

There has to be a way to maintain security, keep us safe, without giving up our rights afforded us by the Consitution.

Where does it say in the constitution that you can disrupt flights?
Where does it say you can ignore lawful demands to debark or you can
willfully ignore seat arrangements and sit wherever the hell you want?



What is your take on the historical precedence with the executive
branch to have extra powers during times of war. It has been well
established by Lincoln, Wilson and FDR. They took much greater
liberties during times of war and after the war things went back to
normal. And now hang on....the country went back to normal without
legions of hyperventilating NGOs lecturing us that every time a
terrorist isn't read his Miranda rights the constitution is shredded.
How can FDR be such a liberal hero when he listened in on every single
call that came in and went out of the country?

27 How can FDR be such a liberal hero when he listened in on every single
call that came in and went out of the country?

Randman, the answer is he is not a Liberal's hero at all any more.  They sold out his legagcy for the new I hate America NeoLiberalism. 

28 Yes Kelly, lilcrash. So?  I never have hidden who I was. Anyone who cared to could figure that out. I gave you the link remember and I stand by everything I have said. You have exposed nothing.
Why so combative? Humor can and often does diffuse a heated arguement. If you can find fault in that motive be my guest.
"So tell me, what you're saying is they should have let these people on the plane, even though they were spouting anti-American rhetoric before getting on the plane?"
Ummm no. I don't think I said that. In fact I know I haven't.
What I did say that there should be away to protect ourselves without giving  up all our rights that so many have fought and died for. Past and present.

29 Randman, Puddleduck is passionate about what he believes in. He mades some valid points.  Don't worry about it. In fact he's alittle pissed at me right now I think. But that's my problem.
Ok, I don't pretend to be able to solve the balance between security and protection of our rights. I don't know what the answer is. Both of those are serious issues. Believe me I'm concerned about all of it. I wish I had a solution. If I did I won't be sitting here right now.

30 Combative?  Sister, I'm not even close to being combative.  Fact is, I don't trust you're here for actual debate anymore.  Do me a favor, and explain this comment you left and what you meant by it.  Maybe then I'll feel you're actually here to learn something from the other side.

"
Give them enough rope, divide and conquer. Give me some time."
Posted by: lilcrash () on Wed 11.22 10:37am

And I apologize, I attributed a PD comment to you.  The other part of my comment should have been directed to him, not you.

Taking someone off a plane is not giving up rights.  Drunk and obnoxious people are removed from planes.  Combative people are removed from planes.  Unfortunately, the passengers should have drawn attention to the people causing the problems prior to boarding.  That would have been the smart thing to do.

People have a right to be afraid.  It's not easy to forget that three planes were hijacked five years ago.  Makes you a little gunshy.

31 It's an old joke taken out of context. To explain it I would have to go back and give you exerpts of conversations that go back over nearly a year. Frankly I just don't have that kind of time. It's innocent enough. Relax. Not every word is a plan to bring you tumbling down. Really.

As far as the rest of your post goes. I do agree.
But there has to be a way to maintain and protect our rights. I don't have an answer to this.
In any case I have Thanksgiving to attend to. We'll have to continue another day.
Kelly and everyone else.... Have a great Thanksgiving.

32 I'm sorry Kelly I was being dismissive. That wasn't my intendtion. I don't want you to think I was cutting and running when I was pressed. You have made a point. A  good one.
"People have a right to be afraid.  It's not easy to forget that three planes were hijacked five years ago.  Makes you a little gunshy."
I may have to re-think my postion. On this. But I really do have to go. Company just got here.
Thanks for hearing me out. What you believe and what you don't I have no controll over. Time will tell.

33 PuddleDuck
If the government shouldn't try to force airlines to accept passngers who begin to cause trouble with the crew, AND make any menacing statements. Who cares about their religion? They aren't any better than the Christian ministers wife that got in trouble a few months back, when she was disruptive.

I consider myself a non-denominational christian, and thats for disclosure. Even still I think she screwed up, and she, or anyone else disruptive should not be on a plane.

They are all the same to me if they are disruptive. It is not a good idea to put yourself 20000 ft in the air with someone who is acting like they could be irrational, or aggressive.

If the goverment tries to force the airline to allow disruptive passengers, the the government should be held accountable with evryone else.

And for the record dude, I would be an undesirable to a lot of people. I have friends in the Montana Militia. It isn't Hamas, but it still makes a lot of people cringe. Could that keep me off a plane? Maybe. I'm not a member, but my world is small, and I have a lot of associations.

I will accept that for the time being we need to watch out not just for drunks, and lunatics, but for people who want to kill Americans just because they are American. If the Imams were patriots, they would accept that openess will return, when Muslims stop hijacking planes.

Anyway, as to all the police state type concerns you express, like I said, I have friends in the Milita, so I hear all about it. A lot of them think the Left will bring such a state about. Sometimes they make sense.

I hope everyone has an awsome Thanksgiving Holiday (Including my Indian friends) and I may not be back till afterwards so don't think I'm dodging the argument.

USA all the way!

34 Trolls are good for stomping.

35 No, You are right you cannot systematically discriminate on a basis of race ethnicity or gender. Religion too. But, if someone makes trouble for you or your patrons you can refuse to serve them. Provided you are not providing some essential service they cant get anywhere else or are in dire need of. I'm talking about refuseing to serve them based on prior behaviour. Their behaviour obviously caused discomfort among the other passengers. Cost losts of time and money and was unnecesary. But Anybody can refuse service to anyone under those conditions. The thought of their race never entered my mind, being Muslim doesn't matter, and if it does go bitch about Mohammad Atta. I'm sure lots of Muslims fly without acting like asses. It would be interesting to know how many Mulsims flew American that day with no problem. 100's thousands maybe? So the claims of unfair treatment are crap. It has nothing to do with like or dislike. You people are racist, Fuck off.

36 Oh and my state never had Jim Crowe laws so you'll have to excuse me for being a damn yankee.

37 No, it won't sell any extra tickets, but it won't hurt much either. Just a lot of hot air on both sites.

Make a real post if you find any proof that they ere just acting up intentionally. More likely they are just assholes.

38 Those imams have flown in America many, many times before. They know exactly what is acceptable behaviour on a plane and what kind of behaviour will get them tossed off a plane.

Anyone who claims they wern't deliberately trying to get thrown off is a liar or an asshole. Either that, or a lying asshole, which is even worse.

Americans just aren't stupid or complacent ebough to buy leftist bullshit about discrimination against oppressed muslim jihadis anymore. This isn't the first time islamopitheicine agitators were thrown off a plane just as they had planned, and it wont be the last. When koranimals deliberately act like terrorists, they will be removed from flights and investigated.

I suggest all you moonbat traitors get used to it, becuase the rest of us are going to ensure that's what happens every single time.

And you know what? There's not a damn thing you pussies can do about it.

39 "Puddle duck: please send your novel to a publisher not a comments section I cant even read it.
Posted by: DAT at November 22, 2006 07:08 AM"

Just scroll to the bottom of a long post and if you see "PuddleDuck", just ignore it.

I knew you could do it.

40 How is it that these muslims were intentionally acting up, and that's what got them tossed off the plane?

Did I miss something, or are you guys reading between the lines, again, to try to spin this incident to make it look like it was the muslims fault?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at November 22, 2006 11:33 PM

On another rant, again, huh, Jeff?

It's Thanksgiving.

Say your prayers (in english, of course - we wouldn't want anyone to think that you were planning to highjack an airplane, now would we?),
take one of your happy pills and try to chill out for the rest of the day.

41 I know that this is going to be a extreme statement.
 Having said that, let's all be thankful on this day that we have rigths, afforded to us by the constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Otherwise none of us would be here arguing this at all. Those rights need to protected, At All Cost. 
Happy Thanksgiving To All Of You And All Your Hold Dear.
 
Have no fear, we'll live to debate another day.
 

42 Our rights under the constitution and bill of rights will begin to be restored, beginning in January, and fully restored in 2009.

And we won't have to share them with the neogoons, since they will have all moved to the mountains and stocked up with food and ammo, awaiting the inevitable muslim onslaught.

Damn that Nancy Pelosi!! (well, you know it can't be President Moron's fault).

43 PiddleDick and Fear Monger:


You two didn't have to tell me you were lying assholes. I already knew that. Hell, everybody here knows that.


Meanwhile, real Americans will continue to eject jihadis from flights and you two will continue to piss and moan impotently.

44 I think that no fear wears a barka.