Travelling experiences.... ;)

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Rissask

how humiliating!

Exactly!!

[itsmysecondtime]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Possibly they were connecting at the next city and the FAs needed to tell them something or ask them something...possibly they had messages...possibly they had both left things at screening...possibly they had asked to be bumped up to first class if there was room and they needed to tell them yes or no, etc. Could have been lots of reasons besides racial profiling.

I applaud your refusal to give in to the corrosive cynicism that has been gaining rampant force just about everywhere around us these days.

Somehow I really enjoyed your particular expression of resilient effort to avoid falling into the conventional trap of seeing or imagining that ethnocentrism or racism are driving our social, political, domestic and foreign policies so pervasively these days. And while it is evident that indeed some of the choices made in legislating and putting certain anti terror policies into action have been contaminated by ethnocentric and racist biases, I admire your reluctance to whitewash it all with such cynical strokes.

While today's world is afflicted both by fear and by politically drastic measures used to convey the impression of effective, decisive action against the causes of such fear, you still insist in grasping the ordinary, the normal variations that could account for the very outcome in question here.

Indeed it could have been a host of possible alternatives, none of which related to the extraordinary times tormenting the post 9/11 society we're part of. It could well be that the reason why the two individuals were so identified pertained to connecting flights, or meals, or an important message, seat reassignment or upgrade, screening, or a host of other 'ordinary' possibilities.

In effect, if I read you correctly, you're simply saying that it can't always be some nefarious or paranoiac scheme officially concocted to basically identify, segregate & marginalize certain groups. There are legitimate issues that arise in the course of a plane trip with no nexus to terrorism-based matters. And to that extent I am in full agreement with you.

However, having said that, we also need to consider the plausibility of the other comments, and especially those comments that tend to actively ponder the very possibility of blatant ethnocentrism/racism i.e. profiling.

Taking the gloomy scenario that has been hovering above us all, a condition that is even more pronounced in these very instances involving planes and airports, the idea that we should defer to what we observe as anachronistic and capricious safety policies is not only ineffective, but actually negligent conduct. Human dignity is sufficiently relevant a value to challenge any assertion of safety concern as a reason for precluding the necessity of treating everyone alike, with equitable consideration. In addition, the lack of any credible evidence to incriminate certain individuals should not be construed against such individuals by reference to aberrant identifiers such as race or ethnicity or religion. The fact is that not all Muslims, or Arabs, or non-Christians are terrorists, just as not all Christians are terrorists.
<o:p> </o:p>
Moreover, the acts of airline companies, be they policy oriented or subject to the discretion of each and every air carrier, implicitly reflect our values. If we do nothing about it, we are in effect condoning/or consenting to such abject conduct by our very silence.
And if in fact the conduct in question is really intended to profile particular groups of passengers, our silence may potentially be even more inflammatory, since the act of condoning (either overtly or by omission) the practice of profiling will only serve to provoke even further animus (against us complicit citizens) from those affected. In short, it's like being close to the one pocking at a hornets' nest with a little stick that does nothing other than provoke the wrath of the affected hornets and expose you to the painful consequences of the other's actions.
<o:p> </o:p>
But so far we’ve been dealing with these positions speculatively. In the end, without additional facts to validate and/or substantiate either facet of the positions advanced, this exercise will remain just that, mere conjecture, with no practical value what-so-ever. However this is not to say that this is all in vain. A more significant issue emerged here in the process of asserting our views of this matter; namely, the voicing of our concerns and perspectives on the peculiar situations that took place aboard some planes.

Thus the critical issue at the every epicenter of these particular posts is not the need to have safety policies in effect to protect the passengers from terrorism, but our very sensitivity and reaction to the manner and substance of the policy making process regarding safety and responses to potential threats these days. Given these turbulent times, and the obvious fear or uncertainty that affects us all, it would have been so easy to give in, blindly, and simply go along with whatever measures are officially adopted under the pretext of national security or public safety (the ill fated 'govern knows best' syndrome). But that is not what transpires from most of these posts. I read the encouraging concern for the preservation of civility and common sense, and respect, along with concern over the visible erosion of due process and a host of civil rights that define our democratic way of life.

This concern is not only important; it is fundamental to the health and vitality of the American democratic project. After all, this democracy has survived for over 230 years, not by default, as though it were a predictable result, but rather as the outcome of numerous disputes, as the result of our persistent collective engagement as a people, and subsequently as the result of accountability by our elected officials. So this concern, rather than becoming anathema, or something to be shunned, is the very source responsible for the longevity of our democratic experiment, and without such active, restless engagement we're simply doomed to darker days ahead.

Moral of the story is: get involved, give them politicians hell, and only then will they remain accountable, and do the right thing for the greater good, i.e. passing legislation that acknowledges and defers to the inherent dignity of all 'persons' in this great land, and not just divert pork for them friends littering the boards of oil companies.

[Doggiemom]

Originally Posted by itsmysecondtime

I applaud your refusal to give in to the corrosive cynicism that has been gaining rampant force just about everywhere around us these days.

Somehow I really enjoyed your particular expression of resilient effort to avoid falling into the conventional trap of seeing or imagining that ethnocentrism or racism are driving our social, political, domestic and foreign policies so pervasively these days. And while it is evident that indeed some of the choices made in legislating and putting certain anti terror policies into action have been contaminated by ethnocentric and racist biases, I admire your reluctance to whitewash it all with such cynical strokes.

While today's world is afflicted both by fear and by politically drastic measures used to convey the impression of effective, decisive action against the causes of such fear, you still insist in grasping the ordinary, the normal variations that could account for the very outcome in question here.

Indeed it could have been a host of possible alternatives, none of which related to the extraordinary times tormenting the post 9/11 society we're part of. It could well be that the reason why the two individuals were so identified pertained to connecting flights, or meals, or an important message, seat reassignment or upgrade, screening, or a host of other 'ordinary' possibilities.

In effect, if I read you correctly, you're simply saying that it can't always be some nefarious or paranoiac scheme officially concocted to basically identify, segregate & marginalize certain groups. There are legitimate issues that arise in the course of a plane trip with no nexus to terrorism-based matters. And to that extent I am in full agreement with you.

However, having said that, we also need to consider the plausibility of the other comments, and especially those comments that tend to actively ponder the very possibility of blatant ethnocentrism/racism i.e. profiling.

Taking the gloomy scenario that has been hovering above us all, a condition that is even more pronounced in these very instances involving planes and airports, the idea that we should defer to what we observe as anachronistic and capricious safety policies is not only ineffective, but actually negligent conduct. Human dignity is sufficiently relevant a value to challenge any assertion of safety concern as a reason for precluding the necessity of treating everyone alike, with equitable consideration. In addition, the lack of any credible evidence to incriminate certain individuals should not be construed against such individuals by reference to aberrant identifiers such as race or ethnicity or religion. The fact is that not all Muslims, or Arabs, or non-Christians are terrorists, just as not all Christians are terrorists.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p>
Moreover, the acts of airline companies, be they policy oriented or subject to the discretion of each and every air carrier, implicitly reflect our values. If we do nothing about it, we are in effect condoning/or consenting to such abject conduct by our very silence.
And if in fact the conduct in question is really intended to profile particular groups of passengers, our silence may potentially be even more inflammatory, since the act of condoning (either overtly or by omission) the practice of profiling will only serve to provoke even further animus (against us complicit citizens) from those affected. In short, it's like being close to the one pocking at a hornets' nest with a little stick that does nothing other than provoke the wrath of the affected hornets and expose you to the painful consequences of the other's actions.
<o:p></o:p>
But so far we’ve been dealing with these positions speculatively. In the end, without additional facts to validate and/or substantiate either facet of the positions advanced, this exercise will remain just that, mere conjecture, with no practical value what-so-ever. However this is not to say that this is all in vain. A more significant issue emerged here in the process of asserting our views of this matter; namely, the voicing of our concerns and perspectives on the peculiar situations that took place aboard some planes.

Thus the critical issue at the every epicenter of these particular posts is not the need to have safety policies in effect to protect the passengers from terrorism, but our very sensitivity and reaction to the manner and substance of the policy making process regarding safety and responses to potential threats these days. Given these turbulent times, and the obvious fear or uncertainty that affects us all, it would have been so easy to give in, blindly, and simply go along with whatever measures are officially adopted under the pretext of national security or public safety (the ill fated 'govern knows best' syndrome). But that is not what transpires from most of these posts. I read the encouraging concern for the preservation of civility and common sense, and respect, along with concern over the visible erosion of due process and a host of civil rights that define our democratic way of life.

This concern is not only important; it is fundamental to the health and vitality of the American democratic project. After all, this democracy has survived for over 230 years, not by default, as though it were a predictable result, but rather as the outcome of numerous disputes, as the result of our persistent collective engagement as a people, and subsequently as the result of accountability by our elected officials. So this concern, rather than becoming anathema, or something to be shunned, is the very source responsible for the longevity of our democratic experiment, and without such active, restless engagement we're simply doomed to darker days ahead.

Moral of the story is: get involved, give them politicians hell, and only then will they remain accountable, and do the right thing for the greater good, i.e. passing legislation that acknowledges and defers to the inherent dignity of all 'persons' in this great land, and not just divert pork for them friends littering the boards of oil companies.

HUH??????

[Seakony]

Originally Posted by Doggiemom

HUH??????

I agree? HUH????

IN all my years of travel to Cancun and the area on a charter flight..I have never seen any Middle easterners or people who look middle eastern on my plane. For Religious reasons I don't see why they would even want to go to the Riviera and be exposed to such decadance as nudity and booze. So I would find it a little strange. Of course they could be going on business but I wonder how much business an Arab would have in that area. I am sure some do go, but I have never seen any there.

[NiceTom]

Originally Posted by Doggiemom

HUH??????

I agree. 2ndtime, your wordage is covering up your message. You'd convey more meaning by "dumbing down" your posts. I knows you is saying somethin, but I ain't always sure what it is (not my inclination to be querulous-just my thoughts).

[jx2]

Originally Posted by NiceTom

I agree. 2ndtime, your wordage is covering up your message. You'd convey more meaning by "dumbing down" your posts. I knows you is saying somethin, but I ain't always sure what it is (not my inclination to be querulous-just my thoughts).

Confused with the rest of ya'll

[BonnyW]

I like what he was saying, and the way he says it...I find it stimulating
Here is what I read...
He liked what Rissask had to say, because she gave a reasonable answer instead of simply profiling them as terrorists. He also suggested there would be another alternative explanation that we hadn't thought of before.
He speaks of pro-human dignity, and suggests that we consider that people should be treated with respect... not just blindly follow profiling techniques in the name of national security....because it is one of the foundations upon which our nation & democracy was based.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by BonnyW

I like what he was saying, and the way he says it...I find it stimulating
Here is what I read...
He liked what Rissack had to say, because she gave a reasonable answer instead of simply profiling them as terrorists. He also suggested there would be another alternative explanation that we hadn't thought of before.
He speaks of pro-human dignity, and suggests that we consider that people should be treated with respect... not just blindly follow profiling techniques in the name of national security....because it is one of the foundations upon which our nation & democracy was based.

Thanks for the Cliffs Notes Version (I, too find his discourse interesting, both in style and content)

[NiceTom]

2ndtime, don't mind me-post as you wish. After all, I'm no roads scholar. -I just thought that it might help your ideas reach a wider audience.

Back on topic, I don't necessarily disagree with profiling, but that should have all taken place at the security point, and not aired-out by "non-security" personnel on the plane. After going through the security process, everyone on that plane should have been treated equally, out of courtesy, since they are all paying customers of that airline.

I've seen some of the security behavior applied in random manner, i.e. checking children's shoes, frisking middle-aged women, etc.

[cuffedlinks]

Originally Posted by NiceTom

2ndtime, don't mind me-post as you wish. After all, I'm no Roads scholar.

Ahhhh...
The former namesake of Zimbabwe and Zambia...
(Rhodes)

[nworowley]

I was thinking that if itsmysecondtime speaks the same way they write it would be a hoot to be in said company whilst sipping tequila!

[RonH]

Originally Posted by Doggiemom

HUH??????

!!!!!! I couldn't have said better myself. Second time, I love your speachafying.

[itsmysecondtime]

Originally Posted by Seakony

I agree? HUH????

IN all my years of travel to Cancun and the area on a charter flight..I have never seen any Middle easterners or people who look middle eastern on my plane. For Religious reasons I don't see why they would even want to go to the Riviera and be exposed to such decadance as nudity and booze. So I would find it a little strange. Of course they could be going on business but I wonder how much business an Arab would have in that area. I am sure some do go, but I have never seen any there.

Take a look at Dubai, see any direct and/or indirect paralels with Cancun and the Mayan Riviera? How much business do you think there is in Dubai? And how much business do you think such folks would find, or create in Cancun and PDC or further south?

[BonnyW]

Originally Posted by itsmysecondtime

Take a look at Dubai, see any direct and/or indirect paralels with Cancun and the Mayan Riviera? How much business do you think there is in Dubai? And how much business do you think such folks would find, or create in Cancun and PDC or further south?

There are some similarities...Dubai has a huge immigrant working 'class.' It has a huge amount of 'expatriates' living there. It too is on the water. It is also a tourist destination. Real estate values are increasing. It is different in that it is soliciting biotech and international computer-related companies to start businesses and is growing very quickly. There have been some riots, mostly over unfair labor and human rights grievances....Let's hope that doesn't happen in Playa or Cancun...

[itsmysecondtime]

Originally Posted by cuffedlinks

Ahhhh...
The former namesake of Zimbabwe and Zambia...
(Rhodes)

But hardly anyone remembers such fine distinctions these days.
The force of custom has always defined the norm.
Thus even though the old Southern and Northern 'Rhodes'ia(s) have long conformed to more distinct differentiating between the north and the south, (i.e. Zimbabwe and Zambia) there still remains a vital link between both via them 'Roads'.