LOL! I don't play golf in a thunderstorm because I don't like to get wet, not because I am scared of getting struck by lightening. It's a matter of preference, not fear, and I am not taking it out on an innocent bystander. Better luck next time...
I believe in that post I stated racism was a factor but was unclear how much, hardly crying racism and I also offered a solution. If you see something suspicious on a flight don't take things into your own hands but tell the flight attendent. New Yorker; You like to get on people's cases for jumping to conclusions yet you seem determined to defend people here for letting their fears drive them to jumping to conclusions. If you're going to argue, and I will say there is some merit to the argument, that people are too quick to jump to the conclusion that racism was the motivating factor but you seem fine to allow people to jump to the conclusion that someone may be a terrorists. In fact you encourage it by saying "better safe than sorry." So while you claim to be trying to make people more open minded on one hand you're encouraging people to be close minded on the other.
There's probably a far far higher probability of getting struck by lightning. According to NOAA the odds are something like 1/5000 chance in your lifetime for an American. http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm I don't know what the odds are of being a terrorist victim but I'm betting its higher as there are far far fewer terrorists attacks compared to thunderstorms.
Certainly people shouldn't jump to conclusions about anything....whether someone is a terrorist or whether they are a racist. But it's very hard to pinpoint things. We humans are clearly imperfect, but we do have something called intuition. Intuition isn't folly - it's a real way we learn and come up with correct conclusions - even though there's not a logical pathway. This is scientifically proven and a big topic in neuroscience today. Of course - there is a difference between fear and intuition. If someone acts purely on a fear based on just the color of ones skin - then yeah, that's subversive racism. But let's remember that it's a kind of racism based on fear versus hate. Now, intution comes from subtle things...a person reveals intent through millions of subtle muscle movements and facial expressions. People don't understand that on a logical conscious level - but you get that funny feeling - you're intuitive side - the limbic part of your brain...letting you know that something is very wrong. We don't know if the guy acted out of fear or if it was intuition. Did they jump to conclusion? Who knows...maybe they did, and maybe they didn't. Look, I could simply agree and say - boo hoo the racist...but then, there wouldn't be a debate would there? Sure the guy could have been a closet racist just itching to be a hero. Or maybe he sensed something...and turned out to be terrible wrong. Maybe there was something dark about that guy (dark as in evil, not skin color) but it just had nothing to do with terrorism. Maybe the guy was a slimeball. Who knows. The point is...these are dangerous times. And while we do need to ensure the rights of minorities - and i say this as being one of them....we also need to heed that we are all on watch....we are all a bit different now. It may not necessarily be fear....just a bit more caution. For some reason, this guy decided to act immediately. He must have believed that the guy was an immediate threat. We haven't heard his side of the story - just of a passenger that was inconvenienced. Therefore - we simply can not make any conclusion. We don't even know if the passenger jumped to a conclusion. Like I said, this passenger most likely has flown with other Muslims before - could there be a reason he decided to act now? I don't know. While conventional wisdom says the guy was probably overzealous in his reaction this time around....it doesn't mean that passengers shouldn't be aware of other passengers around them. It's worthwhile to look at the people around you and just keep a note of how they are behaving. As a matter of fact...what prevents another hijacking of a plane isn't the increased security. It's not. It's that the passengers would never allow it to happen. Even if a group of terrorists got on a plane with a few knives...they now would have to face a melee with at least dozens of people. That alone makes a repeat of 9/11 impossible. Let's credit the passengers of flight 93 - they may have served the best notice to terrorists. By rising up the terrorists now know their previous tactics to fly planes into buildings can not work. I'm not saying praise the man. But let's not completely condemn him...yet!
But the odds of you dying in a lightning strike is only 1/50000 If we had a terroist attack on the scale of 9/11 once every 20 years..... Then the estimated odd of dying in an attack would be around 1/25000 Man....I can play this statistics game
I've studied the situation, and I believe you are Indian. Anyways most whites/Anglos can't or don't decipher the difference between an Indian and a Middle Easterner. To them they are all potential terrorists. Instead of feeling empathy toward Middle Easterners, I find it comical that you would side with your aggresor.
Even if you don't die from a lightning strike its not something I would care to experience. In either case though the odds of either event happening to any given person at any given time are extremely remote and fear of such at any given time would be irrational.
I agree with most of what you say in this post what I don't agree with you is in regard to your earlier statements that would encourage such action by arguing "its better to be safe than sorry." The problem with that attitude is aggressive action on board a flight could have disasterous consequences so a passenger acting out of what they consider to be a legitimate fear could precipate a situation putting everyone else in danger. I agree every situation has to be assessed on its own merits and we don't know all of the facts here but it seems to me that you're validating a dangerous course of action just to make an anti-PC point.
I know logic is never your strength, and it seems neither is statistics. Where did you get your false premise that a terrorist attack on the scale of 9/11 would happen once every 20 years? How many times did it happen in the past 40, 60, 80, and 100 years? Then again, what's the statistics you are referring to? I am really curious. Based on a false premise, applying a false method/logic, without a sample size, you threw out a result, and claimed it to be statistics?
dont forget about the poor brazillian guy who was shot and killed by the british when trying to board a train because they thought he had a bomb.
i thought you didnt go around bringing up your race? you have said that, yet you seem to freely bring it up every chance you get. are you bipolar or something? its been a week and we havent heard fake cops side - i dont think we ever will. but we do have mr. steins side of the story and we do have american airlines saying that he was attacked because he went to the bathroom, listened to his ipod and had a tan, which aroused suspicion in the fake cop, so much so that he alerted the crew. the crew checked him out and told fake cop to go back to his seat, which is when he assaulted mr. stein. and is that what you call assault - being "inconvenienced"? if anyone ever tries to "inconvenience" me like that i will knock their teeth out.
Well, concern for a lightning strike is when you are in a thunderstorm and you're the highest point out there....or very close to something that is.... and concern for a terrorist attack is when you are on a plane and there's someone behaving very suspiciously....
They say 3 percent of the people use 5 to 6 percent of their brains, 97 percent use 3 percent and the rest goes down the drain. Now, I don't know which one I am, but I'll bet you my last dime 99 percent think we're 3 percent 100 percent of the time. They say 65 percent of the world's statistics are made up right there on the spot, 82.4 percent of the people believe them whether they are accurate statistics or not. Now I don't know what you believe but I do know there's no doubt, I need another shot of something 90 proof I got too much to think about. Too much to think about, Too much to figure out, Stuck between hope and doubt, It's too much to think about. They say 74 percent of everything you learned in school was just bull**** you'll never need, 83.4 percent of everything you got you bought to satisfy your greed. Because 91 percent of the world's population links possessions to success, Even though 88 percent of the wealthiest one percent of the population drinks to an alarming excess. More money, more stress. Too much to think about, Too much to figure out, Stuck between hope and doubt, It's too much to think about. They say 84 percent of all statisticians truly hate their ****in' jobs, The average bank robber lives within 20 miles of the bank that he robs. There's a little bank not far from here I've been watching now for a while, Lately all I can think about is how bad I want to go out in style. Too much to think about, Too much to figure out, Stuck between hope and doubt, It's too much to think about. Hey, hey, It's too much to think about. Amen, It's too much to think about.
I never advocated violence unless under the most extreme conditions such as what occured on 9/11 or with the shoe bomber. As for the "better safe then sorry" mentallity - you know that's part of rhetorical debate right?
odds and probablitiy falls under the science of statistics. Statistics isn't just about sample sizes. I stated my assumptions at the beginning. I think saying a 9/11 once every 20 years is a fair model....but it's just one premise since clearly we have no means to predict the loss of life from a terrorist attack over the course of the next 80 years. By the way, if you wish to continue the person ridicule - that's your choice. BUt it's my choice not to respond to posts with your attacking attitude. So don't cry when I stop responding and know why it is that I've stopped.
since when is going to the bathroom, listening to an ipod and having a tan "behaving very suspiciously"?
