Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Convenience or security...you decide

Imams claim discrimination

Regardless of what anyone says, this is proof that security measures in airports work. This story makes me feel safer when I fly. The Imams in question, and their kool-aid drinking supporters, would have us believe that they were quietly praying to themselves, weren’t disturbing anyone and thus posed no threat. Well, actual eye witness reports say otherwise. These people were security threats even under the loosest definition of the term. Now, they want us all to shed a tear for them because their rights were violated, and many on the Left are echoing this message.

I honestly believe that if the airlines had removed the 19 hijackers from the planes on the morning of 9/11, the Left would have cried foul. There is no debating that. I know this because these Imams displayed the same behavior as the 9/11 hijackers and because they were removed, as they should have been, the airlines are being accused of civil rights violations. And the Left has the balls to claim that Bush and Rice were negligent in "ignoring" security threats?

That’s the difference between the Right and the Left when it comes to national security. There is nothing proactive about the Left. They feel that being proactive means violating rights. So, in their eyes, security risks are acceptable, because potentially violating civil rights is a worse crime than potentially allowing terrorists to murder thousands of people. Who’s right? That’s for the individual to decide.

The truth is, anyone who has flown since 9/11 has been inconvenienced in some way, and if anyone has displayed suspicious behavior (like these men) then they’ve been inconvenienced more. The trade off is that you don’t have to worry as much about someone standing up on your flight and slitting the pilot’s throat. To me, it’s a fair deal. Others may disagree. The point is, we live in a new world now. Gone are the days when you can walk on the plane without having to show an ID, or take off your shoes. Get over it.

If the Imams really want to do something constructive in this matter, then maybe they should direct their frustration at their "brothers" who are hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings, and not at America for trying to stop them from hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings. If they don’t want to do this, then they should take their shoes off, walk through to metal detectors, board the plane quietly and in general AVOID acting like a terrorist like the rest of us…and quit whining about discrimination.


pdaddy said...

They should do like the rest of have to do, or stay out of America. I don't complain when they do everything but cavity search me at the airport. It's a part of our life now and it's all because of their "brothers" actions.

Anonymous said...

It is discrimination because I highly doubt the same actions would be taken if it had been a group of Christians praying loudly and in a certain seating pattern. Is security important? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean it isn't discriminatory.

John The Patriot said...

No, they wouldn't have done this to Christians, but then again Christians don't hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings.

But the question is, what's more important? Securing an airliner or potentially discriminating (or profiling) against someone? What if YOU are on that airliner? What's more important?

Personally, I'd rather be discriminated against than have my plane crashed into a building. But that's just me.

Anonymous said...

Do all Muslims hijack planes? Do all Americans blow up buildings? No. Like I said, I support airport security, but I cannot deny that these men were discriminated against.