A U.S. air marshal interviewed about the “six imams” case (in which some imams who claim they were falsely accused of suspicious behavior on an airplane are getting a lot of play in the media, which they plan to extend by suing…someone) talks about a very effective means of subduing a population without spilling an ounce of blood:
The imams say they were removed from the Phoenix-bound flight because they were praying quietly in the concourse. They had been in Minnesota for a conference sponsored by the North American Imams Federation.
But other passengers told police and aviation security officials a different version of the incident. They said suspicious behavior of the imams led to their eviction from the flight. The imams, they said, tested the forbearance of the passengers and flight crew in what the air marshal called a “[political correctness] probe.”
“The political correctness needs to be left at the boarding gate,” the marshal said. “Instilling politically correct fears into the minds of airline passengers is nothing less than psychological terrorism.”
The passengers and flight crew said the imams prayed loudly before boarding; switched seating assignments to a configuration used by terrorists in previous incidents; asked for seat-belt extensions, which could be used as weapons; and shouted hostile slogans about al Qaeda and the war in Iraq.
Flight attendants said three of the six men, who did not appear to be overweight, asked for the seat-belt extensions, which include heavy metal buckles, and then threw them to the floor under their seats.
Robert MacLean, a former federal air marshal, expressed the fear yesterday that the situation “will make crews and passengers in the future second-guess reporting these events, thus compromising the aircraft’s security out of fear of being labeled a dogmatist or a bigot, or being sued.“
I think the air marshal makes an important point—that political correctness can be dangerous. Which is why I think we need to creat anti-political- correctness attire to wear in public. You know—just in case of PC Probe Attacks (TM). Maybe something like this:
3 comments ↓
[...] probing analysis [...]
[...] So far so good. But you knew that it’s not all champagne and roses, right? So—predictably, there are those hotheads who want Bloomberg to fire the police commissioner, who threaten street protests and congressional hearings. Then there’s Al “Jack-in-the-Box” Sharpton, a one-man PC Probe Attack ™ machine: The Rev. Al Sharpton, for example, is organizing a meeting of black and Latino elected officials, clergy members and labor leaders on Tuesday to discuss their next moves, hinting at some sort of mass civil action just as the city gears up for the holidays. He already called in national leaders like the Rev. Jesse Jackson and corralled a group of lawyers to represent witnesses to the shooting, which occurred on the day Mr. Bell was to be married. … Mr. Sharpton, a veteran of other police-conduct controversies, has again acted as a point person, taking the lead in putting a focus on the case’s potential civil rights aspects. [...]
[...] Howard Kurtz sets up his Reliable Sources segment by calling Ann Coulter a “bomb-thrower” and then CNN gets in on the action by playing—without bleeping***—Ann Coulter’s lame joke (aka a PC Probe Attack ™) about the “faggot” John Edwards. KURTZ: Let me turn now to Ann Coulter. She is the noted lawyer, author and bomb-thrower. She threw another bomb, I guess on Friday. She appeared at the CPAC Conference. That’s the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference, an annual event in Washington. [...]
Leave a Comment