TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- WTF?!?! Nazis on the rise...
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Glenn-Holmes yeah this is one side of the story and i believe that the truth is even worst than that sadly... but on the other hand there is a serious problem of some groups of radical muslims that don't believe in what you and i believe. - sadly these people have taken themselves the right to "understand" the Kuran as they want and in the name of "god" they believe everything is accepted im not saying all or even most of muslims like that - it would be a lie to say that.

That's cool man, I understand you're not generalizing.

quote:

Originally posted by Glenn-Holmes but actions must be taken against the radical groups. wether the actions dealt on this topic are going way too far or not well thats a good question i don't know the answer to. but i think other solutions are needed. at the end of the day i try to think about the people who are just like me, wants to live their life and never did anything wrong - is it ok to just spy on them aswell?

I'm all for minimizing the threat of terrorism. The simplest way to do that is not pursue policies that will lead to an escalation of it and radicalize more and more people in the Middle East in the first place. That's a first step, and a very importnat one.

Secondly, I have no problem with spying/wiretapping etc as long as it's done legitimately and with a warrant issued by the court. That means that the feds need to have probable cause. We have laws for a reason. This administration conduct and modus operandi is a blatant violation of the Constituion & Bill of Rights, and it's gone even as far as to get bills passed that give them power and authority that are also blatant violations of the them. And that's only on a domestic level. After the Detainee Bill and Military Commision Act of 2006, they've given themselves carte blanche to disregard international law, human rights, and the geneva convension, not that they weren't doing it before.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I'm all for minimizing the threat of terrorism. The simplest way to do that is not pursue policies that will lead to an escalation of it and radicalize more and more people in the Middle East in the first place. That's a first step, and a very importnat one.

So appease, turn a blind eye, ignore or whatever you want to call it until the problem is too big to ignore and you wake up one Tuedsay morning to watch a few close friends get killed by an airplane flying into their morning meeting. Oh yeah--I forgot--you think George Bush did that.

This war on islamic facism is going to be fought sooner or later. I'd much prefer it to be fought sooner, and before the other side gets their hands on more advanced weapons and can fortify their position or shift the battlefield closer to my home. Terrorism did not start in 2001.

Why don't you tell me which policies you personally advocate rather than telling me which policies you disagree with. It seems like any and everything is incendiary in the radical muslim world these days. Wanna convert to Christianity? You might be killed. Cartoons that portray radical islam for what it is? Kill. The pope opened his mouth and dared speak the truth? He should be killed too. Anyone that has a problem with radical islam must be eliminated--that is their MO. You can recognize it for what it is or you can continually try to put lipstick on a pig and ignore the bigger picture.

How do you suggest minimizing the threat? Should we send them all care packages with free Quarans and a bag of gummy bears? Reward defiance. Yeah--that has a history of working.

Here's the article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/...1923324,00.html

I think the phrase "Asian-looking" may have been taken out of context when it was mentioned in the examples at the bottom of the article. I doubt very much whether any policy would reccommend targeting "Asian-looking" people, rather it's reccommending lecturers keep an ear out for hints of radical Islam.

Personally, I've always been suspicious of anyone who didn't indulge in copious amounts of binge drinking whilst at uni, I mean, if you go to uni to actually learn anything chances are you're up to no good

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z That's cool man, I understand you're not generalizing. I'm all for minimizing the threat of terrorism. The simplest way to do that is not pursue policies that will lead to an escalation of it and radicalize more and more people in the Middle East in the first place. That's a first step, and a very importnat one.

Appeasement simply doesn't work.
If it did, we wouldn't need a prison system and who the hell needs cops??
There has to be punishment and laws to protect the innocent.
If it happens that certain groups are the source of problems and need to be monitored then so be it but let's not deny what exactly is going on either.

quote:

Secondly, I have no problem with spying/wiretapping etc as long as it's done legitimately and with a warrant issued by the court. That means that the feds need to have probable cause. We have laws for a reason. This administration conduct and modus operandi is a blatant violation of the Constituion & Bill of Rights, and it's gone even as far as to get bills passed that give them power and authority that are also blatant violations of the them. And that's only on a domestic level. After the Detainee Bill and Military Commision Act of 2006, they've given themselves carte blanche to disregard international law, human rights, and the geneva convension, not that they weren't doing it before.

The government is going to do what it needs to do to protect it's people.
It's certainly not going to advertise to terrorists as to the hows and whys just to get circumnavigated; what would be the point.
I don't necessarily agree with everything either, but for my own safety, I'm willing to caught up a few liberties to remain safe.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Appeasement simply doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't need a prison system and who the hell needs cops?? There has to be punishment and laws to protect the innocent. If it happens that certain groups are the source of problems and need to be monitored then so be it but let's not deny what exactly is going on either.

Has it ever occurred to you that eliminating the root of the problem by targeting the situations that trigger them such as poverty, discrimination, war, et.. would be a more effective way of resolving said situations than using methods that increase the situations that trigger terrorism in the first place and in the end only increase terrorist activity instead of decreasing it?

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka So appease, turn a blind eye, ignore or whatever you want to call it until the problem is too big to ignore and you wake up one Tuedsay morning to watch a few close friends get killed by an airplane flying into their morning meeting. Oh yeah--I forgot--you think George Bush did that.

Engaging in warfare and invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 9-11 is not appeasement, it's ouright agression, and a very effective way of ensuring an escalation in terrorism. Killing 600,000+ civilian is appeasment? Illegal detainment and torture is appeasement? Raping wives, sodomizing kids with glowsticks dripped in battery acid in front of their parents, naked pyramids, boiling people alive in water, and setting loose attack dogs on people is appeasement? You can find most of this info in a mainstream American publication like the NYTimes. Opus was the first one to post articles containing majority of the these torture "techniques," I I recall correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka This war on islamic facism is going to be fought sooner or later. I'd much prefer it to be fought sooner, and before the other side gets their hands on more advanced weapons and can fortify their position or shift the battlefield closer to my home. Terrorism did not start in 2001. Why don't you tell me which policies you personally advocate rather than telling me which policies you disagree with. It seems like any and everything is incendiary in the radical muslim world these days. Wanna convert to Christianity? You might be killed. Cartoons that portray radical islam for what it is? Kill. The pope opened his mouth and dared speak the truth? He should be killed too. Anyone that has a problem with radical islam must be eliminated--that is their MO. You can recognize it for what it is or you can continually try to put lipstick on a pig and ignore the bigger picture.

That's right, it didn't start in 2001. US state sponsored terrorism started decades ago. Even if you with the official 9-11 story, it was nothing more than "blowback" to use one of the CIAs own term. Let's not forget who funded and trained al-Quaeda. Radicaliazation and terrorism is a consequence of US foreigh policy. And the Bush Administrations policies are only making it worse, and any more attacks, anywhere, will be the predictable consequences of their actions. So you have them to thank for that.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka How do you suggest minimizing the threat? Should we send them all care packages with free Quarans and a bag of gummy bears? Reward defiance. Yeah--that has a history of working.

How about not funding, training, and organzing these groups in the first place? So the alternative to support for opressive and brutal regimes, overthrowing democraticaly elected governments, and bombing countries to kindgdom come is a bag of gummy bears?

If you don't care about all that, then at the very least, you should be concerned about our dying Republic.

quote:

Originally posted by Glenn-Holmes and how exactly did you come to this conclusion mr. ? what a poor thing to say

Reality. In my school there were ppl buying suits from hate websites. Most of the racist individuals remain hiden and don't display their views in public. But they are still followers of Hitler or any other racist ideology.

Same thing happens in all schools. There is more than just a handful of individuals who buy racist material.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Has it ever occurred to you that eliminating the root of the problem by targeting the situations that trigger them such as poverty, discrimination, war, et.. would be a more effective way of resolving said situations than using methods that increase the situations that trigger terrorism in the first place and in the end only increase terrorist activity instead of decreasing it?

Wow and I thought I was explaining dream land...

You seem to have all the answers; explain to all of us then why we have so many criminals in our jails then?
Surely after centuries of criminal behavior being witnessed globally, and in all cultures, we should be able to find a solution for that right?
Answers isn't so cut and dry as one might think.
I do agree that eliminating the source is exactly what is needed however, what exactly IS the pin-point source of terrorism?
We may not know, but we sure do know is where the bulk of it is coming from and that's exactly what's being tackled by what's coming down the pipe in the form of legislation and bills.
It effects us all and if we think that we're going to find some magic solution that doesn't, we're living in denial.

The real question is, where do we want to be fighting this battle because if we should so choose to ignore it, or appease it (something libs like to do) the problem doesn't go away, it just grows. In fact, it festers and becomes emboldened.

All one has to do to see just how well appeasement works, is to look at France as they are currently having this, "Root problem".

Is this what we want in OUR streets???

quote:

The French Intifada Grows Steve It isn�t widely reported as such, nor widely reported at all for that matter, but the Muslim uprising from within the French housing projects they dominate (referred to by themselves as �our ghetto�) continues to grow rather than subside since the November 2005 riots. And while cartoons of The Prophet were cited then as the cause and the American war in Iraq used as an explanation by outsiders, the French Intifada has actually been caused by neither. From the UPI�s Arnaud de Borchgrave, consider the following excerpt from Analysis: Gallic Intifada� France�s Interior Ministry said 2,500 police officers had been �wounded� this year. The head of the hard-line trade union �Action Police� Michel Thooris wrote to Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy to describe conditions in housing developments turned slums as �intifada.� Police cruisers are pelted daily with stones and �Molotov cocktails� (gasoline-filled bottles with burning wicks that explode on impact) and Thooris said cops assigned to what was rapidly degenerating into �free fire zones� should be protected in armored vehicles. Entire tall buildings empty into the streets to chase policemen and free an arrested comrade. �We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists,� Thooris told journalists. Sarkozy, the leading center-right candidate for next year�s presidential election, responded by dispatching cops in body armor, equipped with automatic weapons and rubber bullets, stun and teargas grenades into several Paris suburbs with orders to �restore control� from �organized crime.� In one recent clash 250 cops dispersed a 100-strong Muslim gang armed with baseball bats. The chaotic conditions in suburbs like Clichy-sous-Bois, Montfermeil and St. Denis have grown progressively worse since the nationwide Muslim riots in November 2005 that torched 10,000 vehicles. Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin recently criticized as �overdrawn� President Bush�s frequent reference to the �global war on terror.� But the Iraq war did not appear to be part of the combustible mix in Muslim �ghettos� outside Paris. Despair, organized crime, and hatred of authority are its principal ingredients. France and the whole of Europe have before them a seemingly insurmountable challenge. So much so that it is recognized as such by French political organizations and the radical Islamist causes are being embraced for sake of electoral gains. In France, Jean-Marie Le Pen�s far right National Front appears to have opted for a can�t-lick-�em-join-�em strategy, a rapprochement with France�s large immigrant Muslim community � with undertones of anti-Semitism. Le Pen�s reasoning appears to be the recognition that Islamicization is in France to stay with 25 percent of France�s under 20 population Muslim (40 percent in some cities), 2nd and 3rd generation North Africans. FN�s tough stance on immigration is tempered by support for Arab and Islamist causes in the Middle East (Hamas and Hezbollah are two favorites). There are an estimated 6 to 8 million Muslims among France�s 62 million and Islam is now France�s second religion. Mosques are well attended on Fridays; churches aren�t on Sundays. France�s prison inmates are over 50 percent Muslim.

>>Source<<

quote:

Originally posted by homerj14 did this certain someone govern your state at one time? if so I really meant these small liberation attacks

Note:

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z No, majority of the terrorism is state sponsored terrorism, which is far worse in terms of it being much greater in scale and magnitude, and also has far more devestating effects. Guess who the leading terrorist state is? I'll give you a hint, it's the same one that trained and funded al-Quaeda in the first place.

A state, as in a country, not any particular individual.

Here's some more info on the subject...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5411172.stm

these terrorists are not norweigan, german, mexican, chinese, indian, russia, etc. they are muslims. it's in the interest of the entire country as a whole to keep an eye on the demographic group of people where the terrorists are coming from.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Here's some more info on the subject... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5411172.stm

With propaganda like that meant to whip up paranoia and fear, I wonder how long until we're hated as much as the Jews were and suffer the same fate or worse.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Has it ever occurred to you that eliminating the root of the problem by targeting the situations that trigger them such as poverty, discrimination, war, et.. would be a more effective way of resolving said situations than using methods that increase the situations that trigger terrorism in the first place and in the end only increase terrorist activity instead of decreasing it?

Has it ever occured to you that this is not any governments job in regards to another country? A governments primary concern is its own people.

Has it ever occured to you that no country that is "against" the US would accept direct aid (By direct I mean beyond monetary), charity, or help from the United States government?

It is true that the best way to combat Islamic extremism would be to attack it at its roots, "such as poverty, discrimination, war, etc.". However this is not the job of governments, but of individuals and groups of "concerned" persons. The American government is to demonized, by its owns actions and by the propaganda of its enemies, to effectively follow such policies. If you want the world to change you cant depend on politicians, you have to do something about that yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by NebulousQ Has it ever occured to you that this is not any governments job in regards to another country? A governments primary concern is its own people.

And having a different religious/ethnic background makes you a non-citizen? And does that mean the Government can disregard/change the law and violate it's foundational principles?

And it isn't any goverments "job" to merge with corperate interest and rape and pillage the rest of the world by whatever means they choose (war, coup d'etat, terrorism, sanctions etc.) eigther. Nor is it their "job" to control and influence as much as they possibly can outside their borders.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z And having a different religious/ethnic background makes you a non-citizen? And does that mean the Government can disregard/change the law and violate it's foundational principles?

Uh, I wasn't really referring to your original post, but to the idea that the government is responsible for going into other countries to combat poverty, disrimination, etc. I mean its not American, nor British, raised Muslims that are spearheading Islamic extremism.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z And it isn't any goverments "job" to merge with corperate interest and rape and pillage the rest of the world by whatever means they choose (war, coup d'etat, terrorism, sanctions etc.) eigther. Nor is it their "job" to control and influence as much as they possibly can outside their borders.

Umm. I dont see how this relates to my post at all. And I basically said that a governments primary concern is its own people.

My bad, I misunderstood your post.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I'm all for minimizing the threat of terrorism. The simplest way to do that is not pursue policies that will lead to an escalation of it and radicalize more and more people in the Middle East in the first place. That's a first step, and a very importnat one.

I mean I completely I agree with this post, except for the fact that I don't think it is simple. ( I guess that means I don't completely agree, but w/e)

No western government is going to be able to do this in the face of radical Islam without sacrificing something regarding their own citizens. It is like a catch - 22 (catch - 21? I cant remember and I even read the book): If you (as a government) don't do anything radical Islam will grow and threaten everything in your country that is not radical Islam. (Clearly this history of appeasement shows this.) If you (as a governemnt) do something, it usually turns out to be the wrong thing and makes everything worse. (Such as Iraq, French clothing restrictions, and this British spying thing.) I think you would agree that most of the things radical Islam espouses and does should be stopped. How to "not pursue policies that will lead to an escalation of it and radicalize more and more people in the Middle East" is not as easy as it sounds.

Then someone comes along and says this:

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Has it ever occurred to you that eliminating the root of the problem by targeting the situations that trigger them such as poverty, discrimination, war, et.. would be a more effective way of resolving said situations than using methods that increase the situations that trigger terrorism in the first place and in the end only increase terrorist activity instead of decreasing it?

Which caused my post. I assumed, since most of the arguements in this thread revovle around the activities of various governements, that he meant a government should do these things. And since its not the poverty in America, Britian, or other Western countries that is contributing to the rise of radical Islam, I assumed he meant the western governments should go about resolving such problems in other countries. Thus the content of my previous post.
I believe a government's primary concern is its people and should make policies to benefit its own people. As individuals it our responsiblity to make sure that the government doesn't go overboard with its policies, like the topic of your original post; and it is also our responsibility to go about : "eliminating the root of the problem by targeting the situations that trigger them such as poverty, discrimination, war, etc."

Nazis are on the rise. Its ironic that Russia lost millions of people in World War II rooting out that disease (I'd like to call it such), but today is home to the world' largest nazi following. Since the end of Soviet era, more and more Russian youth become nazi members (racist, pro-Hitler, goals to purify the race and create a fascist empire). But many estimates there are anywhere up to 100,000 nazis in Russia - thats more than anywhere else in the world probably. Very scary. And there's sharp increase in racial and ethnic crimes in Russia (and the pussy-ass pathetic government is doing little to battle it).

These kids apparently dont know much about Russian history and dont understand what their actions can do to the country. Many of Russia's prolific people (scientists, leaders, historians, generals, etc.) are ethnically Tatar, Chechen, Bashkir, Jew, Chuvash, Georgian, Ukrainian, etc.

The much beloved Pushkin, one of the world's most famous poets and Russian legend who shaped the language was actually born to an African woman. Ivan the Terrible's wife was Kabardino-Balkarian. There's many more examples.

quote:

Thursday, October 19th, 2006 Extraordinary Rendition Victim Maher Arar Accepts Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Award On Wednesday night, the Institute for Policy Studies presented its 30th Annual Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Awards in Washington DC. But one of the main award winners -- Maher Arar -- was unable to attend. He remains on the U.S. no-fly list even though his own government in Canada has publicly acknowledged he is an innocent man. Arar is the Canadian citizen who was abducted by U.S. officials at Kennedy airport in New York in 2002. He was then transported to a prison in Syria where he was held for 10 months and 10 days in a cell that resembled a grave. He was beaten, tortured and forced to make a false confession about having ties to Al Qaeda. He was eventually released without charge. He became the first survivor of the U.S. government�s secret extraordinary rendition program to speak out. In September the Canadian government cleared his name and criticized the Bush administration for its actions. At last night�s awards ceremony, a video message from Maher Arar was shown. * Maher Arar. Videotaped acceptance speech to IPS Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Awards. AMY GOODMAN: At last night�s awards ceremony, a video message from Maher Arar was shown. MAHER ARAR: Hello, my name is Maher Arar. Sorry I could not join you for today�s ceremony. All CCR staff and I are humbled to have been chosen this year's recipient of the Letelier-Moffitt International Human Rights Award. This award means a tremendous amount to us. It means that there are still Americans out there who value our struggle for justice. It means that there are Americans out there who are truly concerned about the future of America. We now know that my story is not a unique one. Over the past two years, we have heard from many other people who have been kidnapped, unlawfully detained, tortured, and eventually released without being charged with any crime in any country. My nightmare began on September 26, 2002. I was transiting through New York airport, JFK Airport, when they asked me to wait in a waiting area. I found that to be strange. Shortly after, some FBI officials came to see me, and they asked me whether I was willing to be interviewed. My first and immediate reaction was to ask for a lawyer, and I was surprised when they told me that I had no right to a lawyer because I was not an American citizen. Eventually, on October 8th, against my will, they took me out of my cell. They basically read a piece of document to me saying that �we will be sending you to Syria.� And when I complained, I said to them, �I did explain to you that if I�m sent back, I will be tortured.� And I remember the INS person flipped a couple of pages in this document to the end of this document and read to me a paragraph that I still remember until today. It�s extremely shocking statement she made to me. She said something like, �The INS is not the body or the agency that signed the Geneva Convention Against Torture.� For me, what that really meant is, �We will send you to torture, and we don't care.� After 12 hours of detention, unlawful detention, in Jordan, I was eventually driven to Syria. And I just didn't want to believe that I was going to Syria. I always was hoping that someone -- a miracle would happen, the Canadian government would intervene, a miracle would happen that would take me back to my country, Canada. I arrived in Syria that same day at the end of the day, and I was able to confirm that I was, in fact, in Syria after my blindfold was removed and I was able to see the pictures of the Syrian president. My feeling then -- my feeling then is, I just wanted to kill myself, because I knew what was coming. I knew that the Americans, the American government, sent me there to be tortured. AMY GOODMAN: Maher Arar, in a video message last night, awarded the Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Award in Washington, D.C., by the Institute for Policy Studies. He was awarded by Vanessa Redgrave. You can turn to our interview with her that we did yesterday on Democracy Now! at our website, democracynow.org. And we�ll put Maher Arar�s full video statement on our website, democracynow.org, as well.

Source: Democracy Now!

Freedom of speech/expression = terrorism

quote:

Does Tee Stand For Terrorist? NYC Student Stopped on Staten Island Ferry For Wearing T-Shirt Saying �We Will Not Be Silent� in Arabic Hunter College student Stephanie Schwartz says Coast Guard officials stopped her two weeks ago aboard the ferry. During the summer, Iraqi blogger Raed Jarrar was stopped by security officials for wearing the same t-shirt at JFK Airport. He was forced to change the shirt before boarding a JetBlue flight. [includes rush transcript] Later today a protest will take place at the Staten Island Ferry in New York city. Recently, a woman riding the ferry was stopped, surrounded and questioned by U.S. Coast Guard officials. She was wearing a T-shirt that had Arabic print on it. It read "We Will Not Be Silent." The student was Stephanie Schwartz -- and she joins me now here in our Firehouse studio. Raed Jarrar is still with us from Washington DC. A few months ago Raed was wearing a similar t-shirt as he was boarding a JetBlue airways flight at Kennedy airport in New York. Airport officials forced him to change his T-Shirt before getting on the plane. We left a message with the Coast Guard public affairs office but did not hear back from them. * Stephanie Schwartz, Hunter College Student who was recently stopped by Coast Guard officials for wearing T-shirt with Arabic writing * Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi blogger and architect. His blog "Raed in the Middle" is at raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com. Raed is Iraq Project Director for Global Exchange. Rush transcript: AMY GOODMAN: The woman was Stephanie Schwartz. She joins us in the studio now. Hi, welcome to Democracy Now! STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: Thanks. AMY GOODMAN: You�re a student here in New York? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: Yeah, I�m a student at Hunter College. AMY GOODMAN: And tell us exactly what happened and when it happened. STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: Sure. Two weeks ago, I got on the Staten Island Ferry. It was a Monday morning, and I was wearing this t-shirt. AMY GOODMAN: And for our radio listeners, what does it say? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: It says, �We will not be silent,� both in Arabic and then in English. And as soon as my friends and I sat down on the ferry, four Coast guard -- armed Coast Guard officers came and, you know, positioned themselves around us and -- you know, a lot of times on the ferry, you�ll see Coast Guard people patrolling, but I�ve never seen four people stand in one place that long. And I kind of joked to my friends, like, �Do you think it�s because of my t-shirt?� But I didn�t really believe that they would have made such a big deal about it. And we sat there for the half-hour ferry ride, and they didn�t move. And as I was getting off the boat, I was stopped by a security guard who said, you know, �Excuse me, Miss, but you better not wear that shirt on the ferry again.� And I was kind of taken aback. �Excuse me? You know, what are you talking about?� And he said, �Well, I don�t think it�s safe. This is a high-security area.� And, you know, I asked him, �Well, what�s unsafe about this shirt? What do you think it means?� And he didn�t actually comment on what the shirt meant. He just asked me, you know, �Isn't it in Arabic?� And I said, well, you know -- I just kind of looked at him incredulously. I couldn�t believe he was actually saying that. And he said, �Well, you remember what happened on that JetBlue flight?� referencing over the summer, when Raed Jarrar was wearing the same shirt boarding a JetBlue flight at JFK. And I said, �Yeah, I remember that incident. I think it was racial profiling, because they didn�t allow him to wear the shirt on the plane, simply because it was in Arabic, and they said they didn�t have a translator to tell them what it meant.� And he said, you know, �Well, obviously you�re not a threat to us, but someone else wearing that shirt might be.� And, you know, I asked him if he meant by that that, you know, an Arab wearing a shirt with Arabic script on it would be considered a terrorist. And he didn�t answer the question. He just told me again that I better not wear this shirt on the ferry. AMY GOODMAN: And what are you doing now about this? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: Well, just from talking to some other activists in the city, people are pretty outraged that this is going on, that the Coast Guard thinks they can just tell us what we can and cannot wear. It�s a pretty clear violation of free speech. So this afternoon at 5:00, there will be a group of us, all wearing this shirt, boarding the ferry to see what happens. And, you know, hopefully in numbers we�ll be able to get on the boat and not have any problems. But if we do have problems, I hope we�ll make a big stink about it and let it be known that the Coast Guard is not allowing people to wear shirts that express their opinions. AMY GOODMAN: Raed Jarrar, you started this a few weeks ago, or perhaps it was a month ago. For our viewers and listeners who are not familiar with what happened to you, could you briefly repeat the story of trying to get on a JetBlue flight at Kennedy Airport? RAED JARRAR: Yeah, I had a similar incident to what Stephanie was describing. I was stopped in the airport, and a number of officials from TSA and JetBlue and other agencies prevented me from going to my airplane, because I was wearing the t-shirt in both Arabic and English, and I was told in that time that wearing a t-shirt with Arabic script and going to an airport in the U.S. is like going to a bank and wearing a t-shirt that reads, �I�m a robber.� And after that, after I was intimidated and I felt threatened that I would get arrested or at least miss my airplane, I covered my t-shirt with a t-shirt that they bought for me, but the incident -- AMY GOODMAN: Wait, wait, wait. Can you explain that? Who went and bought a t-shirt for you? RAED JARRAR: A JetBlue employee ended up buying a t-shirt for me, because I refused to take off my t-shirt or put it upside-down. And then, after -- AMY GOODMAN: And what did the t-shirt say, that he bought for you? RAED JARRAR: She. She bought a t-shirt that says �New York,� just from the market. In fact, they had a small debate among them, the security forces -- the security guards, whether they should buy a t-shirt that reads, �I love New York,� or not. And then they decided that maybe I will be offended, because they said, "No, we don�t want to take him from one extreme to another?" And I asked them, �Why do you think that I don�t love New York if I was wearing an Arabic t-shirt?� And they did not answer. But we ended up just buying another t-shirt with, like, �New York� or something. And I covered my first t-shirt, and I felt really bad about it. I informed them that I�m not doing this as a compromise. I�m doing it, because I don�t want to get arrested, I don�t want to lose my flight, and I�m going to pursue the issue through legal organizations. But they did not stop there, in fact. They changed my seat from the beginning of the airplane, and they changed it from like maybe the third seat of the airplane to the last seat or the seat before the last. And they said that -- I asked why. I said, �It�s my right to choose my seat. If you have any limitations for Arabs or Muslims to pick their seats, you should inform me on your website.� And they said, �No.� They just mumbled something about a, you know, baby, like �We need the seat for another person,� or something. But I felt really bad, because this reminded me of what used to happen to African Americans in the �40s and �50s, where they used to be sent to the back of buses because there were black, and I felt that I�m being sent to the back of airplane because I�m an Arab and because I�m brown. AMY GOODMAN: Stephanie Schwartz, are you wearing this t-shirt because Raed Jarrar wore this t-shirt? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: I actually got the t-shirt before the JetBlue incident. I bought it at a protest this summer. We were in Washington, D.C., protesting Israel's crimes in Lebanon, and I saw the shirt, and I just thought, you know, what a great way for people to kind of speak out in a very simple way against the racial profiling that has been going on against Arabs and Muslims in this country and just to say, you know, we -- Arabs, Muslims and the people who support them -- won�t be silent. AMY GOODMAN: Are you Jewish? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: I am. AMY GOODMAN: Does that weigh in here? STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ: You know, I think I grew up, you know, with the same kind of Hebrew school education that I think a lot of Jewish kids grew up with, you know, kind of unquestioned support of everything that Israel does, and, you know, I think when the war in Iraq started, it started to bring out to me a lot of contradictions that, you know, that I had in my own politics, that how could I, you know, oppose the war in Iraq and support what Israel was doing in Palestine? And it just became clear to me that if I was going to have principled politics, I had to oppose both of those occupations and, you know, I decided it was time to actually speak out against the crimes that Israel is committing in Palestine and now in Lebanon. AMY GOODMAN: Raed, the fact that the Coast Guard on the ferry, the Staten Island Ferry, actually invoked what happened to you as a precedent for telling Stephanie she wouldn�t be able to wear this t-shirt anymore that has Arabic script above the �We will not be silent,� what is your response to that? RAED JARRAR: I am very shocked, in fact. I am very shocked to see how my incident, my oppression in JFK is being used as a precedent to justify oppressing more people. It makes me feel more responsible to take this case furthermore and try to make a precedent out of it, that you cannot oppress people and you cannot oppress the freedom of expression. I thought that people like security officers will feel ashamed of what happened and just people not use it as a victory that will justify repeating the same shameful incident to other people. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we�re going to leave it there. Raed Jarrar, Iraqi architect now living in this country. But a final question is, you said you are bringing legal action? Have you filed a lawsuit? RAED JARRAR: I have taken a number of legal steps with a number of organizations, like ADC, the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee. They opened a number of official investigations in Homeland Security and JetBlue to reach to what happened, and I�m in contact with the ACLU to see whether we will take any further action. AMY GOODMAN: Raed Jarrar, thank you for joining us, and Stephanie Schwartz, for joining us, as well. Your protest today at 5:00 over at the Staten Island Ferry. We�ll be covering it and bringing our audience the developments tomorrow.

Source: Democracy Now

Thanks to Groudhog Boy for posting this in the other thread for background info:

quote:

Raed Jarrar's Story - An outrageous incident at JFK. I went to JFK in the morning to catch my Jet Blue plane to California. I reached Terminal 6 at around 7:15 am, issued a boarding pass, and checked all my bags in, and then walked to the security checkpoint. For the first time in my life, I was taken to a secondary search . My shoes were searched, and I was asked for my boarding pass and ID. After passing the security, I walked to check where gate 16 was, then I went to get something to eat. I got some cheese and grapes with some orange juice and I went back to Gate 16 and sat down in the boarding area enjoying my breakfast and some sunshine. At around 8:30, two men approached me while I was checking my phone. One of them asked me if I had a minute and he showed me his badge, I said: "sure". We walked some few steps and stood in front of the boarding counter where I found out that they were accompanied by another person, a woman from Jet Blue. One of the two men who approached me first, Inspector Harris, asked for my id card and boarding pass. I gave him my boarding pass and driver's license. He said "people are feeling offended because of your t-shirt". I looked at my t-shirt: I was wearing my shirt which states in both Arabic and English "we will not be silent". You can take a look at it in this picture taken during our Jordan meetings with Iraqi MPs. I said "I am very sorry if I offended anyone, I didnt know that this t-shirt will be offensive". He asked me if I had any other T-shirts to put on, and I told him that I had checked in all of my bags and I asked him "why do you want me to take off my t-shirt? Isn't it my constitutional right to express myself in this way?" The second man in a greenish suit interfered and said "people here in the US don't understand these things about constitutional rights". So I answered him "I live in the US, and I understand it is my right to wear this t-shirt". Then I once again asked the three of them : "How come you are asking me to change my t-shirt? Isn't this my constitutional right to wear it? I am ready to change it if you tell me why I should. Do you have an order against Arabic t-shirts? Is there such a law against Arabic script?" so inspector Harris answered "you can't wear a t-shirt with Arabic script and come to an airport. It is like wearing a t-shirt that reads "I am a robber" and going to a bank". I said "but the message on my t-shirt is not offensive, it just says "we will not be silent". I got this t-shirt from Washington DC. There are more than a 1000 t-shirts printed with the same slogan, you can google them or email them at [email protected] . It is printed in many other languages: Arabic, Farsi, Spanish, English, etc." Inspector Harris said: "We cant make sure that your t-shirt means we will not be silent, we don't have a translator. Maybe it means something else". I said: "But as you can see, the statement is in both Arabic and English". He said "maybe it is not the same message". So based on the fact that Jet Blue doesn't have a translator, anything in Arabic is suspicious because maybe it'll mean something bad! Meanwhile, a third man walked in our direction. He stood with us without introducing himself, and he looked at inspector Harris's notes and asks him: "is that his information?", inspector Harris answered "yes". The third man, Mr. Harmon, asks inspector Harris : "can I copy this information?", and inspector Harris says "yes, sure". inspector Harris said: "You don't have to take of your t-shirt, just put it on inside-out". I refused to put on my shirt inside-out. So the woman interfered and said "let's reach a compromise. I will buy you a new t-shirt and you can put it on on top of this one". I said "I want to keep this t-shirt on". Both inspector Harris and Mr. Harmon said "No, we can't let you get on that airplane with your t-shirt". I said "I am ready to put on another t-shirt if you tell me what is the law that requires such a thing. I want to talk to your supervisor". Inspector Harris said "You don't have to talk to anyone. Many people called and complained about your t-shirt. Jetblue customers were calling before you reached the checkpoint, and costumers called when you were waiting here in the boarding area". it was then that I realized that my t-shirt was the reason why I had been taken to the secondary checking. I asked the four people again to let me talk to any supervisor, and they refused. The Jet Blue woman was asking me again to end this problem by just putting on a new t-shirt, and I felt threatened by Mr. Harmon's remarks as in "Let's end this the nice way". Taking in consideration what happens to other Arabs and Muslims in US airports, and realizing that I will miss my flight unless I covered the Arabic script on my t-shirt as I was told by the four agents, I asked the Jet Blue woman to buy me a t-shirt and I said "I don't want to miss my flight." She asked, what kind of t-shirts do you like. Should I get you an "I heart new york t-shirt?". So Mr. Harmon said "No, we shouldn't ask him to go from one extreme to another". I asked mr. harmon why does he assume I hate new york if I had some Arabic script on my t-shirt, but he didn't answer. The woman went away for 3 minutes, and she came back with a gray t-shirt reading "new york". I put the t-shirt on and removed the price tag. I told the four people who were involved in the conversation: "I feel very sad that my personal freedom was taken away like this. I grew up under authoritarian governments in the Middle East, and one of the reasons I chose to move to the US was that I don't want an officer to make me change my t-shirt. I will pursue this incident today through a Constitutional rights organization, and I am sure we will meet soon". Everyone said okay and left, and I went back to my seat. At 8:50 I was called again by a fourth young man, standing with the same jetblue woman. He asked for my boarding pass, so I gave it to him, and stood in front of the boarding counter. I asked the woman: "is everything okay?", she responded: "Yes, sure. We just have to change your seat". I said: "but I want this seat, that's why I chose it online 4 weeks ago", the fourth man said " there is a lady with a toddler sitting there. We need the seat." Then they re-issued me a small boarding pass for seat 24a, instead of seat 3a. They said that I can go to the airplane now. I was the first person who entered the airplane, and I was really annoyed about being assigned this seat in the back of the airplane too. It smelled like the bathrooms, which is why I had originally chosen a seat which would be far from that area. It sucks to be an Arab/Muslim living in the US these days. When you go to the middle east, you are a US tax-payer destroying people's houses with your money, and when you come back to the US, you are a suspected terrorist and plane hijacker. If you want to call Jet Blue and ask about their regulations against Arabic script, you can use the following numbers: * If calling within the U.S., Bahamas or Puerto Rico: 1-800-JETBLUE (538-2583) * If calling from the Dominican Republic: 1-200-9898 * If calling from outside the U.S. or Dominican Republic: 001-801-365-2525 * Customers who are deaf or heard of hearing (TTY/TDD): 1-800-336-553

http://www.parkerstudio.com/AAW/JFK_story.html

EDIT: The only reason why this is in the news is cuz the guy didn't roll over.

Add these to the list. Note that the 2nd one isn't in America, but in Canada.

quote:

Man questioned and misses flight for speaking Tamil By BRAD WONG P-I REPORTER A 32-year-old man speaking Tamil and some English about a sporting rivalry was questioned at Sea-Tac Airport and missed his flight Saturday because at least one person thought he was suspicious. The Port of Seattle dispatched its police officers to investigate the case, which occurred Saturday around noon, said Bob Parker, airport spokesman. The Chicago man was preparing to board an American Airlines flight to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. The man was speaking Tamil, a language largely used in India, Sri Lanka and Singapore, on his cell phone at the departure gate and on the aircraft. An off-duty airline employee heard the conversation and informed the flight crew. The man also apparently said something in English about a sporting rivalry at his alma mater. "It's a big misunderstanding," said Parker. "He had a perfectly innocent explanation that all added up." Parker said it is incumbent on airport officials to investigate reports of suspicious activity. "It's hard to triage over the phone," he said. But Parker had no explanation as to why a man speaking Tamil, which is spoken worldwide, would be considered suspicious. The person who contacted airport officials could give an answer to that question, he added. Parker said the man was cooperative and boarded a later flight to Texas. He told officials that he would not speak in a foreign language on his cell phone at an airport in the future. Source - http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local..._tamil02ww.html

quote:

Jewish man removed from airplane for praying Last Updated: Tuesday, September 5, 2006 | 11:12 PM ET CBC News Some fellow passengers are questioning why an Orthodox Jewish man was removed from an Air Canada Jazz flight in Montreal last week for praying. The man was a passenger on a Sept. 1 flight from Montreal to New York City when the incident happened. The airplane was heading toward the runway at the Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport when eyewitnesses said the Orthodox man began to pray. "He was clearly a Hasidic Jew," said Yves Faguy, a passenger seated nearby. "He had some sort of cover over his head. He was reading from a book. "He wasn't exactly praying out loud but he was lurching back and forth," Faguy added. The action didn't seem to bother anyone, Faguy said, but a flight attendant approached the man and told him his praying was making other passengers nervous. "The attendant actually recognized out loud that he wasn't a Muslim and that she was sorry for the situation but they had to ask him to leave," Faguy said. The man, who spoke neither English nor French, was escorted off the airplane. Air Canada Jazz termed the situation "delicate," but says it received more than one complaint about the man's behaviour. The crew had to act in the interest of the majority of passengers, said Jazz spokeswoman Manon Stewart. "The passenger did not speak English or French, so we really had no choice but to return to the gate to secure a translator," she said. The airline is not saying if the man was told he was not allowed to pray, but a spokesperson said the man was back on board the next flight to New York. Jewish leaders in Montreal criticized the move as insensitive, saying the flight attendants should have explained to the other passengers that the man was simply praying and doing no harm. Hasidic Rabbi Ronny Fine said he often prays on airplanes, but typically only gets curious stares. "If it's something that you're praying in your own seat and not taking over the whole plane, I don't think it should be a problem," said Fine. The Jewish group B'nai Brith Canada has offered to help give Air Canada crews sensitivity training.

quote:

But Parker had no explanation as to why a man speaking Tamil, which is spoken worldwide, would be considered suspicious. The person who contacted airport officials could give an answer to that question, he added.

Because alot of Americans are incredibly ignorant.

quote:

Parker said the man was cooperative and boarded a later flight to Texas. He told officials that he would not speak in a foreign language on his cell phone at an airport in the future.

Yeah, that's great. Bent to the will of "authority" even when you haven't done anything wrong.

quote:

The action didn't seem to bother anyone, Faguy said, but a flight attendant approached the man and told him his praying was making other passengers nervous.

The passanger's have clearly lost their mind if it makes them nervous.

quote:

"The attendant actually recognized out loud that he wasn't a Muslim and that she was sorry for the situation but they had to ask him to leave," Faguy said.

And if he was it would be completely justified.

What's your point? It's obvious that Muslims aren't the only ones subject to authoritarian attitudes, but most other people as a group aren't treated like this, unless you're black or hispanic, but they're not automatically assumed to be terrorists. Muslims/Arabs get it alot worse than them now. The only point I think you're making is that we should all be concerned about a loss of liberty and abusive authority.

EDIT: It just occured to me that I may have assumed to much and you're simply pointing out what I said at the very end. In that case, ignore the " s"

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z What's your point? It's obvious that Muslims aren't the only ones subject to authoritarian attitudes, but most other people as a group aren't treated like this, unless you're black or hispanic, but they're not automatically assumed to be terrorists. Muslims/Arabs get it alot worse than them now. The only point I think you're making is that we should all be concerned about a loss of liberty and abusive authority. EDIT: It just occured to me that I may have assumed to much and you're simply pointing out what I said at the very end. In that case, ignore the " s"

LOL, c'mon, just because we don't see eye-to-eye on everything doesn't mean I'm posting these up to refute your arguments. I think the current state of US civil liberties is in pretty poor shape.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy LOL, c'mon, just because we don't see eye-to-eye on everything doesn't mean I'm posting these up to refute your arguments. I think the current state of US civil liberties is in pretty poor shape.

Yeah, which is why I quickly added the edit . But you're right, this f'n suck!

EDIT: And everyone else should be up in arms about it too. Our generation really f'n disappoints me.

quote:

Muslims face 'serious prejudice' Members of London's Muslim community are "disproportionately" victims of hate crimes, a report from the mayor's office has claimed. Mayor Ken Livingstone said that as one in every 12 Londoners were Muslims, they faced "serious discrimination and prejudice". The report, Muslims in London, also said that the community has the lowest rates of employment. The report aims to "combat ignorance and Islamophobia", Mr Livingstone said. High unemployment There are 706,000 Muslims in the city, of which 40% were born in the UK (according to the 2001 census). In 2005-2006, there were more than 1,000 religiously aggravated attacks reported in the capital, which is a 87% increase since the previous year, the report said. "Muslims in London face serious discrimination and prejudice... Muslims are disproportionately victims of religiously aggravated crime, more so than any other faith," Mr Livingstone said. The community also has the highest levels of unemployment, 42% in the 16-24 age group, compared with the 60% of the general population. The report recommended public bodies should investigate direct and indirect cases of discrimination and improve Muslim representation in the government. The mayor said: "I hope this report will increase understanding between communities and combat some of the ignorance, prejudice and Islamophobia stirred up by some sections of the media." Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), and the report's co-author, said it documented "the needs of the community and identifies policy initiatives. The report is a role model for other major cities".

Source: BBC

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.