Passenger tries to open door midflight: Terrorist?

[Twin Fist]

people who define thier reality by liberal idealogy and "feelings" NEVER apologize, even when proven wrong, as you just were

muslim is not a race, ergo, being anti muslim cannot, BY DEFINITION be racist.

just admitt you screwed up and let it go

"Arabaic dress is an indication of race"

a white man cant wear arabic dress?
Obama wore arabic dress once , does that mean he is racially arab?stop while you are behind,

" but judging another human being as a terrorist because of his dress or religion is ignorant, stupid, and counter-productive."


and you would make a ****** cop. If a report comes over the radio, two white males, dressed like bruce lee, you aint gonna stop the guy in a lakers jersey....aND RIGHT NOW, THE MAIN THREAT is from muslims, so you give muslims a second look, it isnt that ALL muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists here lately have been muslim


DUH

god the stupidity in here sometimes.....

 

[RandomPhantom700]

and you would make a ****** cop. If a report comes over the radio, two white males, dressed like bruce lee, you aint gonna stop the guy in a lakers jersey....aND RIGHT NOW, THE MAIN THREAT is from muslims, so you give muslims a second look, it isnt that ALL muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists here lately have been muslim


DUH

god the stupidity in here sometimes.....

No kidding. And in response:

However, a person being a Muslim or dressed in Arabaic garb is almost never a terrorist. Therefore, equating a person to being a terrorist BECAUSE of his dress or ethnicity is not only ignorant, it is mistaken. It is, also the classic definition of racist.

 

[WC_lun]

god the stupidity in here sometimes.....

We at least agree on this.

I will apologize when I am wrong. In this case I am not. You are the one who continues to use "feelings" and flawed analogy to support your arguement. I have shown you why your reasoning is flawed, yet you still use it. RandomPhantom and Elder understood the point well enough, why can't you? Instead you focus on the periphary of the arguement and try to make me into something I am not.

Oh, and not believing in racism and discrimination is not a "left" ideal. It is just an ideal of people who have morals. Plenty on your own side of politics also believe there is no room for racism and discrimination.

Perhaps you are right about me being a poor LEO. However, I would not be arresting brown men for crimes just because other brown men committed those same crimes in the past. I'd rely on things like descriptions of current suspects, crime scene info, behaviour of suspects, etc. You know, what real police work is based upon?

 

[Twin Fist]

you cried racism when there was none, you know it, i know it, everyone reading knows it, till you admitt it, i am done with you.

 

[WC_lun]

you cried racism when there was none, you know it, i know it, everyone reading knows it, till you admitt it, i am done with you.

Really? You should reread many of these post. They agree it is racism and even if they didn't, it is. In fact, I got a positive rep for my post saying thanks for calling a spade a spade. You want to cling to a belief even though it is being proven wrong. You don't want to hear it is racism or discrimination because that has such negative conotations, and rightly so. Sorry, but tough. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck. The good news is that beliefs can and are changed all the time. I would welcome you being done with me because then I would not have to constantly explain what is so clear to others, but I doubt you'll be able to let someone have the last word.

 

[billc]

From the article in my post:

The British officer in charge, Captain Simeon Ecuyer, reported to Colonel Henry Bouquet in Philadelphia that he feared the crowded conditions would result in disease. Smallpox had already broken out. On June 24, 1763, William Trent, a local trader, recorded in his journal that two Indian chiefs had visited the fort, urging the British to abandon the fight, but the British refused. Instead, when the Indians were ready to leave, Trent wrote: "Out of our regard for them, we gave them two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect."

1) small pox had already broken out and the indians had visitied the fort hmmmm.
2)It doesn't state more than that blankets were given to the indians, not exactly by whom or under whose orders if any. Hmmmm

On small pox:

http://www.bing.com/health/article/mayo-126125/Smallpox?q=smallpox

How smallpox spreads
Smallpox usually requires fairly prolonged face-to-face contact to spread. It's most often transmitted in air droplets when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks. In rare instances, airborne virus may spread further, possibly through the ventilation system in a building, infecting people in other rooms or on other floors. Smallpox can also spread through contact with contaminated clothing and bedding, although the risk of infection from these sources is slight.

 

[billc]

Here is another aricle addressing Captain simeon, and there is no direct mention that he is the one who ordered blankets given out, even the two specific blankets and handkerchief in question, and the only journal entry I have seen so far comes from william trent and he doesn't mention anything clearly as to who gave them out or if there was an order to do it or if it was william trent who did it.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/smallpox.htm

From the articleBut again, I don't see anything saying that Captain Ecuyer ordered the action or performed the action)

"Out of our regard for them (two Indian chiefs) we gave them two blankets and a handkerchief out of the smallpox hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect (William Trent)."
The incident with Captain Ecuyer occurred during the Pontiac Rebellion. There is also evidence that Ecuyer tried to control the spread of smallpox, at least from his own men.
In a letter to Bouquet, Captain Ecuyer writes that Fort Pitt is in good state of defense against all attempts from Savages, who are daily firing upon the Fort; unluckily the Small Pox has broken out in the garrison, for which he has built an Hospital under the Draw Bridge to prevent the Spreading of that distemper (Peter d'Errico, nativeweb.org).

Also from the article:

In 1763, Fort Pitt was under siege by Indian forces under the command of Chief Pontiac...Pontiac Rebellion (Tebbel). With smallpox in the garrison at Fort Pitt and Indians attacking the fort, two blankets would have had little to do with the spread of smallpox among the Indians. A by far greater source for spreading the smallpox virus would have been infected blood from mutilated soldier and settler bodies, scalps, clothing, and in some cases cannibalism, which occurred during the Pontiac Rebellion. Every warrior that returned from Fort Pitt to Indian villages up and down the East coast with smallpox infected war trophies carried the smallpox virus with them. Contaminated warriors spreading the smallpox virus is never mentioned by proponents of Indian Genocide; it does not fit their biased agenda. This statement on smallpox is going to make a lot of people furious...good, that is the purpose. Before venting your ire, take a few minutes to read the entire article, think about it with an open mind, and then please respond with facts to back up your argument.

 

[billc]

Here is another article on the Fort Pitt event. Once again, there doesn't appear to be an actual link between Captain Eculer and the infected blankets.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/801650/posts

From the article:

Journal of William Trent, excerpt:

[May] 24th [1763] The Turtles Heart a principal Warrior of the Delawares and Mamaltee a Chief came within a small distance of the Fort Mr. McKee went out to them and they made a Speech letting us know that all our [POSTS] as Ligonier was destroyed, that great numbers of Indians [were coming and] that out of regard to us, they had prevailed on 6 Nations [not to] attack us but give us time to go down the Country and they desired we would set of immediately. The Commanding Officer thanked them, let them know that we had everything we wanted, that we could defend it against all the Indians in the Woods, that we had three large Armys marching to Chastise those Indians that had struck us, told them to take care of their Women and Children, but not to tell any other Natives, they said they would go and speak to their Chiefs and come and tell us what they said, they returned and said they would hold fast of the Chain of friendship. Out of our regard to them we gave them two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect. They then told us that Ligonier had been attacked, but that the Enemy were beat of

***the website http://www.thefurtrapper.com/indian_smallpox.htm an interesting thought regarding the trent journal entry, I also noted that the indians that were given the blankets seemed to be friendly to the people in the fort which makes one wonder why they gave them infected blankets, this website also asks wether or not the Captain himself or even the others, knew the blankets were infected.
Indian forces under the command of Chief Pontiac laid siege to Fort Pitt (June 22, thru July, 1763). Several weeks before the siege (May 24th, 1763), William Trent, commander of the local militia, wrote:

"Out of our regard for them (two Indian chiefs) we gave them two blankets and a handkerchief out of the smallpox hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect.
​

The above paraphrased quote from William Trent's Journal has been taken as the major evidence for using smallpox blankets...but...the full quote by Trent is subject to a different interpretation.

"[May] 24th [1763] The Turtles Heart a principal Warrior of the Delawares and Mamaltee a Chief came within a small distance of the Fort Mr. McKee went out to them and they made a Speech letting us know that all our [POSTS] as [at] Ligonier was destroyed, that great numbers of Indians [were coming and] that out of regard to us, they had prevailed on 6 Nations [not to] attack us but give us time to go down the Country and they desired we would set of immediately. The Commanding Officer thanked them, let them know that we had everything we wanted, that we could defend it against all the Indians in the Woods, that we had three large Armys marching to Chastise those Indians that had struck us, told them to take care of their Women and Children, but not to tell any other Natives, they said they would go and speak to their Chiefs and come and tell us what they said, they returned and said they would hold fast of the Chain of friendship. Out of our regard to them we gave them two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect. They then told us that Ligonier had been attacked, but that the Enemy were beat of."
​

The full quote indicates the giving of the blankets was a gesture of gratitude towards friendly Indians. At this time, there is no evidence Captain Ecuyer, Commander of Fort Pitt, knew the blankets were infected with smallpox. Several weeks later, June 13, 1763, Captain Ecuyer wrote to Colonel Bouquet:

Fort Pitt is in good state of defense against all attempts from Savages, who are daily firing upon the Fort; unluckily the Small Pox has broken out in the garrison, for which he has built an Hospital under the Draw Bridge to prevent the Spreading of that distemper.
​

The above quote from William Trent's Journal was written two months before the exchange of letters( July 13-26, 1763) between Amherst and Col. Bouquet. In a footnote of a letter (July 16, 1763) to Colonel Bouquet, Lord Amherst wrote:

"Could it not be contrived to send the Small Pox among those disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them".
​

 

[Twin Fist]

blah blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda whine cry ***** moan complain blah blah

Alinsky 101 repeat the lie often enough, the dumb ones will believe it......
plus some Alinsky 103 (when proven wrong, ridicule the person doing it) for good measure


you are boring me now.

 

[billc]

Also from the furtrapper.com article:

The Amherst-Bouquet letters have been used to support the proposition of germ warfare against native populations. Amherst may have discussed it in correspondence with Bouquet, but there is no evidence Colonel Bouquet carried it out. As he mentioned in his reply, Bouquet was afraid of what it would do to his own men and with good reason. 1763 was twenty-three years before Jenner’s work on vaccination, and one hundred years before Pasteur advanced his germ theory. The only thing known about smallpox in 1763 was…age, color of skin, social status meant nothing to the smallpox virus...an infected person died or, if lucky enough to survive was often disfigured for life. No matter how bad Amherst wanted to be rid of the Indians, it seems doubtful if Bouquet would unleash a disease on his soldiers which had already killed millions of his own countrymen.

 

[WC_lun]

Alinsky 101 repeat the lie often enough, the dumb ones will believe it......
plus some Alinsky 103 (when proven wrong, ridicule the person doing it) for good measure


you are boring me now.

ROFL So sorry to bore you. How did I ridicule you? By stating how and why you are wrong? If you don't like my arguements then counter them intead of the constant BS posts you have been writing. You should probably look closer at who your rules apply to.

 

[Twin Fist]

Alinsky 105: Deflection. Accuse the other person of doing exactly what you are doing, it confuses them and gives you time to ridicule and tell more lies.

 

[WC_lun]

Alinsky 120, post total nonsense hoping someone will believe it. See I can do it too.

I thought you were done. You post an awful lot for being bored and done.

 

[Twin Fist]

sadly, i am also easily amused