THE ENEMY AMONG US
Posted by Joe PyloricDec 23
Guest correspondent Joe Pyloric here.
In basic medical and psychological evaluation, an organism’s response to threat is frequently used as an indicator of its ability to function and survive. A patient who does not flinch at an object suddenly moving towards it may be sensory-impaired – or barely alive. One who repeatedly puts their hand in boiling water most likely suffers a severe form of impairment. And that is where we, as a nation, find ourselves.
We do not respond appropriately, appropriately being defined as in a manner to improve our rate of survival, to direct threat. We have taken to defending, and even advocating for our attackers, those who would do us collective harm if given any opportunity.
Pedophiliac murderer? Aw, poor guy, he probably had some bad experience a long time ago when he was little. Probably just needs a little understanding. Someone break into your home, pistol-whip you and your family and rob you blind? Well, you callous ingrate, you have it pretty good, and maybe he just has some issues and needs of his own.
Radical Muslim jihadists disrupting an airline flight and scaring everyone to death? Aren’t you culturally sensitive? They probably just act like that because that’s the way it’s done in their country. Probably ought to apologize, give them some money and some free airline tickets.
Sound like Pyloric is just off on another rant? Think again. The following is a partial list of incidents on airlines that have been handled in the same way the lobotomized patient reacts to the scissors coming towards his eye. Credit for compiling the list and the anecdotal comments goes to Mr. John Leonard.
“America West Flight 90 — Nov 19, 1999. In this pre-September 11th incident, two passengers speaking Arabic roamed the plane without permission and attempted to enter the cockpit in what has been described by the 9/11 commission in their report as a dry run. “Students” Muhammed al-Qudhaieen and Hamdan al-Shalawi were placed in custody and removed from the flight. Bomb-sniffing dogs were brought to search the plane. The airline was sued for discrimination, but the case was dismissed.
Northwest Flight 327 — Jun 29, 2004. Described by flight marshals as a terrorist dry run, thirteen men of Syrian descent changed seats, congregated in the aisles, used the bathrooms excessively, appeared nervous, and behaved in a strange manner long enough to draw attention and concern from fellow passengers. Air marshals on the plane instructed the flight crew to radio ahead for law enforcement to meet the plane when it landed in Los Angeles.
US Airways Flight 300 — November 20, 2006. The infamous case of the flying imams, who allegedly changed seats in order to take control of every entry and exit route from the plane, ignored their assigned seats, requested unnecessary seat belt extensions, and disrupted the flight. The unused seat belt extenders were left lying on the airplane floor. Hmmm. Webbed strap belts with metal heads attached — why would anyone be concerned about that? Who worries about customers acting strangely who make obviously unnecessary and unusual special requests?
The imams were removed from the plane but cried discrimination after the fact. They sued the airline and received an undisclosed settlement. CAIR and the imams declared victory.
AirTran Flight 175 — Jan 1, 2009. According to an article published by the Atlanta Business Chronicle, nine Muslims traveling to an Islamic conference were removed from the plane after two members of the group allegedly engaged in a debate about the safest location to sit in the event of a bombing on the plane. The conversation alarmed other passengers, who alerted the flight crew and caused the plane to be diverted. According to Doug Hagmann in the Canada Free Press:
[N]one of the remaining 95 passengers made it to their ultimate destinations on time, AirTran refunded some tickets and made other booking arrangements due to the incident, which cost the airline dearly in time, money, and passenger goodwill.
A press release from AirTran found at EuroInvestor.co.uk incredibly reported that AirTran actually rewarded the nine Muslims who disrupted the flight, saying:
The airline has refunded the air fares of the nine passengers detained for questioning, has agreed to reimburse the passengers for expenses incurred by taking another airline and has also offered to transport the passengers home to Washington, DC, free of charge.
So let me get this straight: the nine Muslims who caused the flight delay and scared other passengers profited from their misconduct? Their airfare was refunded and they got a free flight home? Sounds like a pretty good deal to me…is this a great country, or what?
United flight 22 — September 28, 2009. According to the KTLA.com, two men of apparent middle-eastern descent were removed from a flight at LAX, and the flight was delayed while the bomb squad searched the plane. An article in the LA Times reported the incident as follows:
A law enforcement source said at least one of the men ran into a restroom on the plane and appeared to hide while the New York-bound jet was taxiing on the runway, according to the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the case was ongoing.
AirTran 297 — Nov 17, 2009. A group of ethnic passengers used electronic devices on tarmac preparing for takeoff, changed seats, moved around, ignored flight attendants’ instructions, and caused flight delay as the plane returned to terminal.
UA 227 — Dec 9, 2009. A group of passengers believed to be of Middle Eastern descent changed seats and allegedly moved other passengers’ luggage at the gate while the plane prepared for departure, prompting their removal from the flight and bomb-sniffing dogs to check the baggage.
Two possibilities that come immediately to mind are either that these incidents are orchestrated as a ploy to create a scenario to litigate for profit like the imams from US Airways Flight 300 — or something more sinister is in the works. In the aftermath of Fort Hood, can we afford to ignore warning signs of abnormal or pattern behavior any longer?”
If we were evaluating a comatose patient for visible signs of life, or at least survival instinct, consideration may be given to pulling the plug, removing all the machines and hooking them up to someone who has a chance. If we are so overly concerned with not offending that we A) tolerate this type of behavior like sheep, and B) feel the compulsion to apologize and compensate for any offense taken, as a culture, we can’t be far from splatting on the ground without even being aware it is going to happen.
Unfortunately, I don’t see any sort of pulse that anything will change. The radical muslims continue to quickly take over the world through breeding, as well as by intimidation. They may not even need the violence that is so central to their hating philosophy. Since 9/11, where are the “moderate” islamics, chastising the extremists who are misrepresenting their “religion”? Please show me the examples. Have the “good ones” turned in any of the bad ones?
As a nation of “sensitive apologists,” we have created a fertile field for our enemies to thrive in. In some older forms of punishment and torture, victims were forced to dig their own graves before being rendered unto them. As a nation, we now seem to do that willingly.
No tags for this post.

F.D. Obama:
“Hmmmm….well, the Japanese have fired on our ships, captured some, are building ports and massing ships on their eastern coast stocked with new fighters and bombers. Radio transmissions have switched to encoded traffic. But let’s not jump to conclusions.
Okay, so they bombed Pearl Harbor and killed some of our military people. Is that any reason to go to war?
Oh, please. Just because Hitler has announced his intention to conquer Europe and the United States, is that any reason get all defensive?”
Exactly. Even right after 9/11, there was a big push to "learn all about Islam and understand our Muslim friends and neighbors." To be a good Muslim, it is a requirement to hate and try to kill "all infidels," which means everyone who doesn't believe in their way of thinking. Maybe there will be a budget line in the new healthcare bill for more sensitivity training for everyone.
Now they are testing how far they can push on the airlines – once again – and even the airlines drop into politically correct mode. All the while, grandmothers are getting searched and harassed by TSA, etc. Last time I flew, they made me break the file off of my nail clippers, but they will issue seat belt extenders to those who – if we were to (perish the thought) profile, just might be possible terrorists.
There is a huge problem in America when it comes to immigration. These people use the our own political correctness against us. It happens every day. In my workplace, Asians, Hispanics, blacks and women are crying to our HR department every day. They think that everything is a conspiracy against them. Its no surprise that terrorists are doing the same things. Its a joke.
So, when you break the rules…..try to bring a file on board, the TSA is too severe. You know if you were the wrong color or race you might have been arrested. On the other hand when someone else asks for a seat belt extension which is not against the rules they aren't sever enough. I am sure this has nothing to do with race because you keep telling me that you are not racist. Interesting how rules are different for different people. Maybe if we had the same rules for everybody they wouldn't complain when we made up rules as we go along.
I guess you completely missed the fact that we invaded a country that had nothing to do with the attacks and killed hundreds of thousands of people. Seems like a bit of an over reaction to me. Yep we are the good guys.
You know it is really ridiculous the way God put our oil under their sand.
You know if we use your "patient" analysis, the attack in Iraq would be like a patient doing the one thing that would be sure to cause him more harm.
Treating all people the same regardless of race is the best way to make sure we don't create more enemies.
Merry Christmas RA! I would have known it was you even if you hadn't signed it!
Just to try to bring everything back to the center of the article, this is not about discrimination, this is about self-preservation. The "file" you refer to is the one that comes when you buy a pair of nail clippers, just the little ones you keep in your pocket to keep your fingernails looking neat, or at least many people do. To keep my research up, I just Googled "deaths caused by fingernail clippers" and came upon the TSA blog, wherein it is written:
"Just wanted to jump in with a quick post based on some of the comments we’ve received so far about lighters, nail clippers and batteries. We just wanted to let you know that lighters and nail clippers are allowed through the checkpoint. Lighters were allowed starting in July 2007, (not including torch lighters) and nail clippers, as well as smaller scissors and tools, have been allowed through the checkpoint since December 2005. Unlike improvised explosives devices (IEDs), these items do not present a significant threat to an airplane."
Guess I just got an over-exuberant TSA screener. But they will let you bring a lighter on board, just don't use it – please? And please don't use it with the less-than-3 ounces of gel you were allowed to conceal in your shampoo bottle which is really gasoline, OK? Please? IEDs in checked baggage only – please?
I hope you see the difference in the scenarios Mr. Leonard outlined and (even when it was "against the rules") getting busted with a 1" file on my nailclippers. Sort of like the little old lady in the wheelchair that gets super-frisked, perhaps for plastic explosive in the hump on her back.
What would your reaction be if some (hate to profile, but) 18-30 year old males from middle eastern origins began walking the aisles of your plane, acting in a belligerent manner, and swinging some seat belt extenders around? I'm sorry, they were perfectly within their rights to play with those toys, weren't they?
I missed no facts, as you attempt to insert somewhere where it isn't relevant. My point is ignoring very real security threats. The secondary point is the limp-dick response to persons who would otherwise cut off your head in the name of Allah. You start talking about racism and Iraq, and treating everyone the same. Oh, were it so simple. We are not the good guys. And neither are they. But whichever guys we are, I am not ready to die so that some cretin can allegedly go see 70-some virgins in the sky, like that is something worth anyone dying over.
Sorry for the profiling (see my latest post), but if TSA were allowed to use profiling, the skies would certainly be a lot friendlier – and safer, at least in my humble opinion. Go to the airport, RA, and tell them you have the same philosophy they do, and ask for your free tickets. Come visit.
I don't mind the rules/laws being enforced, and I wouldn't like anybody, no matter their age or religious background swinging belt extenders around the cabin. But then again nobody said these guys where swinging the belt extenders around, only that they requested them. My point is that the laws need to be enforced on everyone. You are upset that they would dare to think that you might be a problem. Too bad. I'll bet you can't find any deaths by seat belt extenders either.
As far as bringing Iraq into the discussion goes, this is relevant because this is the USA over reacting. As opposed to what you think is an under reaction. Both can be a problem. We caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by over reacting in Iraq. We have created uncounted numbers of terrorist by killing innocent people. Under reacting caused no where near that many deaths and created no terrorists.
In my opinion, the airlines would be dramatically safer if we stopped killing people for no reason.
BTW I find it very interesting/telling that you respond to a comment from someone calling themselves "Obama is a Nazi" and you agree with them and never mention to them how distasteful and anti-American it is to say such a thing about the elected President of the United States.
Let's go backwards this time, since that seems to be within the realm of acceptable possibilities in your debates. A name is a name is a name, whether you find it to carry some deep connotation or not. Your screen name, abbreviated from your previous "Real American", may carry different connotations to different people. I do not think that I have the ability to determine everything about someone by their chosen screen name. Or race. Or creed. Or religion. Or national origin. But I digress into previous dialogues with you.
It sounds like you have a very strong conviction regarding racial and other stereotypes, and I applaud you for that. But I don't agree that you can overlay that into every other situation and use it essentially as an excuse for whatever you may believe. I also don't think that interjecting obtuse variables into a conversation serves any purpose, to wit, the war in Iraq and its many variables vs. day to day airline security. If your crayon connects the dots easily on that one, mine does not, and therein we disagree. It doesn't mean you are right because your crayon made that trip. And, BTW, the "My Christmas Apologies" post was meant entirely with humor and good cheer. Good cheer to you this holiday season.