Innocent 747 Pilot Dubbed 'Security risk' sues BA

[parabellum]

Sunfish - Freedom, for freedom's sake, is a non runner, real freedom can only be achieved by good security. Right now the security services are up against some very clever and very evil people, the security services have to think on the run and may well require to be innovative and non conforming, it doesn't matter, what ever it takes to keep the peace and save lives as well as preserve your precious freedom has to be acceptable.

The idea that you can have peace and freedom with a security service that is hide bound by a set of published rules and no latitude to operate outside those rules is just a Utopian pipe dream.

I really don't see how "are(sic) friend" Notsofantastic, by stating the bleedin' obvious, can, in any way, be detrimental to the cause of freedom.

[Blind Squirrel]

The IRA and "ancient freedoms"

To put that another way; does anyone remember the IRA? The bombing outside Harrods? The hotel in Brighton? The mortar attack on Ten Downing Street? Now THAT was a terrorist organisation! those were a terrorists terrorists! Yet compare our response to IRA terrorism to Islamic terrorism. Did we get our panties in knots and suspend ancient freedoms over the IRA? Did we run around denying jobs to anyone with an Irish name who was a Catholic?

Actually, yes -- on both counts. The humorously-named Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1974, rushed through Parliament in all its stages in just two days, conferred upon the Home Secretary the power to declare certain organisations illegal by fiat, those who remained members of them being punishable by prison sentences of up to ten years. The Act also set up a system of internal exile of a kind unique to Europe west of the Iron Curtain, enabling the Home Secretary to issue indefinite "exclusion orders" to persons he didn't like the look of, either confining them to Northern Ireland, or preventing them from going there. The affected person had no right to be informed of the reasons, if any, for the making of these orders, or to challenge them in the courts. Violators got five years' stir. The Act allowed suspects to be detained without charge or trial for up to seven days, without the right to see a solicitor or any obligation on the part of the state even to confirm that the arrest had taken place; some 150,000 people, nearly all Irish, were so detained during its lifetime. A similar piece of legislation adopted at the same time abolished trial by jury for terrorist offences; the two "Real IRA" suspects convicted a few weeks ago were tried in such a non-jury court, with a single judge in the agreeable position not only of determining the guilt or innocence of the accused but also adjudicating on the fairness of his own conduct of the trial. ,All of these powers were not only preserved, but extended, when the PTA was supplanted by the Terrorism Act, 2000, and its many pieces of supplementary legislation. Needless to say, the expedients pioneered in Northern Ireland, and introduced under the rubric of combatting terrorism, have now been extended to Great Britain, where today they are mainstays of regular criminal procedure: the abolition of the right to silence (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, 1994); detention without trial (Police and Criminal Evidence Act, 1984); restrictions on movement (Public Order Act, 1986); wiretapping and surveillance for such "offences" as sending one's children to a school outside one's own district (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000); the end of "double jeopardy," allowing the state to use its limitless resources to try suspects for the same crime over and over until it gets the verdict it wants (Criminal Justice Act, 2003); and much else. This is one of the drawbacks of not having a written constitution: civil liberties exist only as long as Parliament is pleased to permit them to exist. The late Lord Hailsham in 1976 famously described the British political system as an "elective dictatorship." He didn't know the half of it.

As for discrimination in employment against people with Irish names or accents: the practice may not have been codified in law, but it was nonetheless widespread in the 1970s and 1980s. Nor was it illegal at the time. It would be if revived today.

[Sunfish]

Parabellum:

Right now the security services are up against some very clever and very evil people, the security services have to think on the run and may well require to be innovative and non conforming, it doesn't matter, what ever it takes to keep the peace and save lives as well as preserve your precious freedom has to be acceptable.

That is the trouble Parabellum; who says that the security services are up against some very clever and very evil people????

Why the security services of course, that is the nub of the problem. They have a vested interest in its continuation.

From my almost totally uninformed perspective:

1) A Lot of Muslim angst would disappear if we stopped dropping bombs and firing missiles at civilians in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

2) More Angst would vanish if we pursued a more even handed policy in the Middle East in regard to the Israel/Palestine issue.

Bear in mind that these jihadis believe their cause is just and they are true patriots. I'll believe "evil" when I see a credible terrorist attack aimed at "world Domination".

To put that another way, I think most of our problems are of our own making.

I've travelled in the largest Muslim country - Indonesia - 200 million people for Thirty years and apart from a bit of sectarian barstardry in Bali and Sulawesi, I've seen nothing but happy people, liberated women and good beer.

[cwatters]

Did the pilot concerned in this case "associate" with other pilots at the airline? Anything happen to them?

[KBPsen]

Anything happen to them?

Guilty by association is only applicable to those of a certain religion and skin tone.

[parabellum]

who says that the security services are up against some very clever and very evil people????

Do I really have to explain that Sunfish? The remainder of your post suggests that you are escaping reality. I agree that Bintang Baru is excellent beer and the majority of Indonesians are peace loving but that still leaves sufficient evil people to nurture and spread terrorism, which they do.

I won't comment on the Israeli/Palestinian issue, we wouldn't agree, anymore than we would agree on why bombs are dropped on Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan.

That is the trouble Parabellum; who says that the security services are up against some very clever and very evil people????

You really have to be kidding.

[Clandestino]

Originally Posted by Notso Fantastic

The nutters are still out there. They come from branches of one religion,

Not quite, lest I'm mistaken about religious affiliation of Timothy McVeigh an Anders Breivik.

Originally Posted by Canadian Break

Does anyone know what exactly what the "damages" that this guy was awarded are?

None, so far. Trial is underway.

Originally Posted by Ancient observer

continue hanging around with undesireables, and we'll take an interest in you.

Good advice, however, practical application in the actual case might be somewhat difficult as "undesirables" have been cleared by the court and one of them was, depending on version, either brother or brother in law of our fired colleague. We would all cut ties with our kin, if ordered so by security, would we?

[infrequentflyer789]

Originally Posted by KBPsen

Guilty by association is only applicable to those of a certain religion and skin tone.

Well that rule certainly seems to be working for Stuart Pearce in the media today, assuming you think he's got the same religion and skin tone as the BA pilot...

Might also be worth noting that where association involves having the same parents, the same skin tone and religion are going to be highly correlated.

Wonder which route the investigators go for first - lets look at all <skin-tone> <religion> in this area, or lets look at these guys' relatives & business associates....

Originally Posted by cwatters

Did the pilot concerned in this case "associate" with other pilots at the airline? Anything happen to them?

By "associate" do you mean have the same parents ? And having passed large sums of money between them suspiciously enough to be charged with money laundering?

If there were other BA pilots associated in that way, I would be genuinely suprised if they were still flying now.

[CONF iture]

Originally Posted by Sunfish

To put that another way, I think most of our problems are of our own making.

First create terror to unleash war on terror.

[Sunfish]

Parabellum:

Do I really have to explain that Sunfish?

Yes Parabellum, you do.

1. There is no credible existential threat.

2. 99% of Muslims want nothing more than a peaceful existence and have no animus towards the West. They even drown by the boatload trying to reach us because they admire our way of life.

3. 99% of commentators are biased and hype the threat for their own reasons,

like this - the wife of a former American Undersecretary of Defence:

the slaughtering, death-worshiping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women—those who aren’t strapping bombs to their own devils’ spawn and sending them out to meet their seventy-two virgins by taking the lives of the school-bus-riding, heart-drawing, Transformer-doodling, homework-losing children of Others—and their offspring—those who haven’t already been pimped out by their mothers to the murder god—as shields, hiding behind their burkas and cradles like the unmanned animals they are, and throw them not into your prisons, where they can bide until they’re traded by the thousands for another child of Israel, but into the sea, to float there, food for sharks, stargazers, and whatever other oceanic carnivores God has put there for the purpose.

Genocidal Arab-Bashing Muslim-Hating Rant From Pro-Israeli PAC's Founding Board Member | loonwatch.com


And this - from a Fake terror expert at the FBI:

Controversial training material about Islam provided to a small pool of FBI agents at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va. were inappropriate and offensive, FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress today.

The briefing documents, first revealed by Wired’s Danger Room blog, emphasized that mainstream Muslims are violent, and included a graphic that shows that Muslims who are, “Pious and Devout” have tended to be more violent historically than Christians or Jews. The briefing slides noted, “Jihad is motivated by the strategic themes and drivers in Islam,” while another described the prophet Mohammad as a “Cult Leader.”

There are numerous examples of such terror hype going back to the start of the Iraq war and before.

Lest you think I don't believe there is a terror threat, I do believe there is a terror threat, but if all we listen to is cant and hype, we are going to be focussing our resources on the wrong people and the wrong threat.

Just remember that the majority of the 911 hijackers were Wahabists from Saudi Arabia - mates of the guy David Cameron is now sucking up to:

[RoyHudd]

Silly rhetoric

Buzz off Sunfish. You are trying to hijack this thread to espouse your personal views. Not interested, dude.

[Sunfish]

Hud, they aren't personal views.

You are subject to a wide ranging campaign aimed at demonising Islam for policy purposes by a variety of actors for their own reasons. What that does is:

(a) Result in abominations like the treatment of the Pilot in question.

(b) Lines the pockets of the "security" industry, to the consternation of passengers and Pilots alike.

(b) Prevents us from clearly analysing and dealing with the real threats.

[parabellum]

I am reminded of the proud mother who stood by the side of the rode to watch her soldier son march by and was heard to remark, "Ooh look! There goes my Sunfish and he is the only one in step".

You can have the last word Sunfish, I'm finished, this is Hamster Wheel stuff now.

[CONF iture]

Hamster Wheel stuff for those who prefer to accept the propaganda.
Is the earth still the center of the universe parabellum ?

[Jurassic Jet]

A bomb hidden in the underwear of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, now 25, caused a fire but failed to explode on a Delta Airlines flight from Amsterdam carrying 289 people on December 25.

"The jihadi is proud to kill in the name of God and that is exactly what God told us to do in the Koran," said Abdulmutallab, who had pleaded guilty in October.

[CONF iture]

The Colossal Deceit Known As The Underwear Bomber Case
by Kurt Haskell

In closing I will just say that regardless of how the media and government try to shape the public perception of this case, I am convinced that Umar was given an intentionally defective bomb by a U.S. Government agent and placed on our flight without showing a passport or going through security, to stage a false terrorist attack to be used to implement various government policies.

[stator vane]

and.....?

after checking the link Contact supplied and reading 3 other articles and the comments below them, i really can't see any reason to accept that viewpoint as any more reliable as any other.

after reading Walter Lippman et al. i must admit that most of us plebs are restricted to reading several different published papers, books, shows on radio or TV and must somehow make some evaluation as to which is the truth.

and i can only verify the few small items that i witness and even that is limited to perspective and timing.

but i just cannot accept everything as truth and i cannot refuse evertything as false.

so, once again, we must make our own decisions about what we think the truth might be. we can debate but we should not dictate.

i do wonder how some people can appear to be so sure about things they have read about in a paper or a blog of any sort.

[M.Mouse]

I clicked the link posted by Contacted but didn't bother reading anything except the website name. Stuff published in the Beano would have more plausibility!

[Genghis McCann]

Sunfish - total claptrap. You have a clear political agenda, and like most people who hold the personal views you do seem unable to make sensible judgements on a whole raft of issues. There are enough Muslims holding views that regard the killing of non-Muslims under the 'right' circumstances as not just acceptable but desireable to cause concern. Given the enormous potential for destruction that a 747 in the hands of a nutter offers, it would seem reasonable to me that BA ensures the people flying them show no likeliehood of wanting to crash one into the Houses of Parliament because God told them to. A pilot who voices support for the 9/11 mass murders is, by definition, unfit to be anywhere near the controls of a commercial airliner. That is doubly so if he associates with others who have overtly stated their support for terrorist acts. I have no problems with people being Muslims, but have a major issue with the culture of violence that surrounds much, but not all, Islamic thinking. The right to worship any God you wish is an inalienable right - one that is incidentally denied to nearly all citizens of 'Muslim' countries. When your belief structure leads you to see murder as acceptable, which it does for a number of Muslims, then I see no need for British Airways to provide the means for it to happen. They simply had no choice here and I commend them for their willingness to face financial penalties for doing the right thing.

[CONF iture]

Originally Posted by stator vane

we can debate but we should not dictate

Where is that debate on the victim impact statement produced by Kurt Haskell then ?
I do wonder how some people can still appear to be so sure about things advanced by officials and complicit media ... any known history for lies ?