I am sure the police had sufficient reason to want to detain these people and ask some questions.

My suspicions are raised (non discriminatory by the way) by the fact that this is now national news. The full-on, "Why you pickin on me? is it 'cos I is a Muslim?" - victimhood!!!

I am sure the feral tabloid press hacks will now be crawling all over them for some background.....I hope they are as squeaky clean as they protest to be.

Posted by: Turbinehead at December 29, 2006 5:56 PM

Hmmm, looks like CAIR is going International... You would think that they would be happy that the Airport Security Forces are doing their best to keep everyone safe... I know I am...

Cheers,

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at December 29, 2006 5:59 PM

"race..."

Which is what?

Posted by: Hugh at December 29, 2006 6:04 PM

Actually I agree that they should be compensated. It wasn't their fault they missed the flight it seems. The reason I think they should be compensated is because of this quaint notion of "Innocent until proven guilty" which maybe some of you might remember from the 20th century.

I was stopped and searched at Gatwick during Gulf War 1, for no better reason that I was the only non Brit travelling on a British package holiday. I remember the words of one of the inspectors who was checking my passport on their computer to the other inspector rigorously checking my bag "He is clean" and I was gratified that I had passed their wonderful special vetting process. If I had missed my plane because of their check you're damn right I would have expected compensation.

Greetings from Sunny Australia

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:11 PM

Hugh wrote (very pithily):

" "race..."

Which is what? "

I think the race the wife was referring to was "Arab". I do think "Arab" is a race.

If we are going to hate people for being Arab, then let's get that out in the open shall we?

As long as people are checked, don't go chanting weird stuff on the plane, and are nice I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:23 PM

Muslims are committing terrorist acts, not all Muslims but some Muslims. We can say that we are not against Islam but the terrorists within Islam. We can also say that we were not fighting Germany in WWII, just the Nazis, or more precise, a minority of Nazis, Nazi extremists so we must leave Germans alone and let them overfly the East End if they want.

Come off it, we are under attack from Islam, there are 2 million of the bu****s in the UK, presumably 1M are female jihadi factories so 1M will be jihadis. Anyone young or old enough to touch two wires together in the realms of reason is therefore a potential terrorist.

Posted by: IceDragon at December 29, 2006 6:29 PM

If they missed their flight because they were detained for only 20 minutes, I assume they were late for the boarding and maybe running to their gate. Middle Eastern guys running through airports are always questioned. Some 9/11 hijackers did the same thing. Airlines tell us to arrive an hour before the flight takes off, right? Being late was their bad, but I'd still ask the airport for compensation if I was them (is this covered on the back of your ticket?).

Posted by: Bingo at December 29, 2006 6:30 PM

Hi IceDragon,

Very passionate reply, I don't think your last sentence made much sense though, "Anyone young or old enough to touch two wires together in the realms of reason is therefore a potential terrorist."

Hint: reason and terrorism probably not in the same sentence.

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:32 PM

Bingo did you read the article? They were in the boarding pass line.

Honestly, this is disappointing.

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:33 PM

You know, the more I read on this website, I find every article seems to be a trigger for hate remarks. Even an article as innocuous as this one, which I really consider to be a non story. Who cares, some people missed their flight because of a check and they want their airticket money back. If this happened to ordinary Christian Aussie Joe here, would we be whining because I made a claim? Wake up to yourselves. And look at this post from XY. Calling someone he has no information as a "mad animal"! What a filthy remark.

I come to this site to:

1. read Robert's articles and observations which I find to the point, educating and very humorous really.
2. Hugh's remarks which I mostly find interesting and particularly when he writes to the ordinary people like me
3. Snippets from Fjordman if they turn up.

More often than not all I see from the audience is hate filled nonsense and off topic rhetoric. "Mad animal" indeed....

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:48 PM

I keep seeing and reading articles where muslims rant and rave about being oppressed,racialy slurred....well you know what i am saying.

In the first place it's my honest opinion that islam is nothing but oppression and as usual the muslims point the finger in all the directions but the correct one.

If you want to see what real oppression,bigotry and hypocracy is ( which is true islam )then go to thereligionofpeace.com and read the article "Christ in pakistan ".

Islam has no leg to stand on when ranting and raving about such things.Even any inteligent politician with any idea of protecting it's citizens and homeland could see this.Yes they call for these nations to be more open and free and fair, big deal.We should stop importing these fools and exporting them back to hypocracyville tomorrow along with the politicians trying to shove them (the zombies )down our throats.

Where are our protests over this hooey? Are we all that sleepy to let all this slide by us as all the hooey in the past decades have? How many more innocent people are we to allow die in the name of something so vile as islam?

There should be mass petitions in every state calling for the resignation of all those wishing to bring the ideals of islam to our homes.All one needs to do is look around thruout the world and see what islam offers.Are the elite so bored that they wish an "intifada" by wich to sip tea and eat crumpets and watch the peasents die in the game?

I am having a very hard time understanding the reasoning of our "leaders" and surely the lazy "followers".time for patcience is past there can be no negotiation or cedeing any one thing to islam in this country because it will not end.The one thing i do begin to understand fully well is the word "extremist",take this comment as you wish but islam has no home in this land.

It amazes me that the "law makers" can sit and dream up laws for them to waste time and money over but the ones to do with reality and inteligence of mind elude them.A policy so simple to write would be "If the land if islam cannot be free and equal with all peoples and all faiths then islam should not ask why they do not get this treatment by another".

What is wrong with drawing a line and actually abiding by it? The way things go now we just may as waell hand islam the keys to the house because politics will give them over in due time.Worse yet more innocent people will die in the future than now when the people wake up.

two things need to happen in this nation and those are we need to send islam packing back to it's eden of muslims and the political houses need to be cleared of the habitual losers that seem to keep surfacing in our nations.I would rather vote for butt crack joe the plumber rather than even think about another lesser of 2 evils spolied brat elite moron.At least butt crack joe the plumber lives in my world and not a fantasy land.

When the People of this nation have sent islam back through the gate from wich it came they will be looking for answers mr./mrs. politician and it won't be the normal congressional hearing where " I don't recall " gets you a free ride to your fantasy history books.

Islam has it's foot in the door like a sleezy vaccuum cleaner salesman trying to sell you something worthless and the politicians are buying.It's yours and my future and our children,how much more time? how many more innocents? What does islam have to do say it to your face what they wish and intend for you?....They already have ,maybe you have been too stupid or too fast asleep to see or notice it.God knows the politicians have.Prove who has the power let the islamists know just who they have to deal with not who they think they have to deal with.When they see the defiance i assure you they will,without doubt show thier true and intentional face that will shake you wide awake.

Posted by: Dar al-harb at December 29, 2006 6:54 PM

More often than not all I see from the audience is hate filled nonsense and off topic rhetoric.

Payingattention--

You're not alone there. Hugh's words on the subject from earlier today might resonate with you:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/014601.php#c326419

Posted by: MarisolJW at December 29, 2006 6:55 PM

Just after I posted my remark Mr Dar al-harb posted Seven hundred and six words of OT rhetoric.

I rest my case.

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 6:57 PM

Has anyone realised that these cases about Muslims being taken off planes, acting suspicious, causing diversions etc, all seem to be working to the collective suggestion that looking at Muslims is becoming a concept that is more trouble than it's worth?

The bigger picture, think of the bigger picture.

I would guess that the ultimate objective of this will be that rules are slackened on security, Muslims will be treated with less suspicion and that is exactly what they want. They are working to force us into pre 911 levels of security. Then when they achieve that...

We cannot afford to let our guard down, not now, not next week not ever. As long as we live with Islam among us we will forever be having to watch our backs.

I for one, don't find that acceptable, I am sure none of you guys and gals find that acceptable.

Our leaders apparently do but they don't have to take the risks with the rest of us do they.

Posted by: IceDragon at December 29, 2006 7:08 PM

"Muslims claim police bias,"...

Should compensate them with one-way air tickets and bar them from returning. Islamists have no place in the land of the infidels.

Posted by: FreedomSeeker33 at December 29, 2006 7:10 PM

"Who cares, some people missed their flight because of a check and they want their airticket money back. If this happened to ordinary Christian Aussie Joe here, would we be whining because I made a claim?" (payingattention)

I think you overlook the whole point, which was the couple playing the "race" card, which in turn in the first paragraph of the Independent story has morphed into a religious issue, in line with standard MSM blurring of categories. None of which is relevant to the "Christian Aussie Joe" scenario.

On Hugh and Marisol's taking issue with invective in the comments, surely I understand your position as JW/DW mods, and particularly in the light of MSM coverage of the blogosphere that makes no distinction between editorial stuff and us lowly writers of comment (such as the recent piece by David Selbourne). However, not all of us are as gifted writers as Robert when reacting to the latest play-the-victim scam, and some of us (I know I have been guilty of this) carry this pent-up urge to vent, being stifled by apologists around us as well as by clueless MSM fodder. This, as I see it, is what lies behind some of our more "unhinged" comments.

Posted by: anti-uffe at December 29, 2006 7:25 PM

I second PayingAttention's comments. The articles by Robert and Hugh are interesting and informative. The comments are all too often off topic, bigoted, illogical, and dismissive of any sort of debate or even questioning.

Posted by: billposer at December 29, 2006 7:37 PM

"...nationality and race were the sole reason they were held."

So, what? The TSA is routinely making us take off our shoes, jewelry, harassing us and then telling us that we could be terrorists and they are just doing their job. So, if these Muslims, who fit the profile a million times more congruently than I do are questioned and searched, they are outraged? I haven't a shred of sympathy since their very existence in civilized countries means that everyone has to be treated like they are in a line-up just to board a plane. But, Muslims are outraged if they are treated like the 'usual suspects' that they are and have been since the problem with terrorism began in the U.S.

"South Wales Police would only confirm the couple were detained under the Terrorism Act 2000. The human rights group Liberty is representing the couple and is investigating the possibility of legal action against the police."

But, for the existence of terrorism brought to us by Islam the TSA and every other law enforcement agency has a legal right to inspect, detain and prevent them from boarding on time if they have sufficient reason. I have been detained at the gate, had valuable property taken and not returned to my handbag (later returned onboard by a visit from the gate agent) and, did I complain. HELL NO! Why? Because even though the TSA agent was an anal-retentive drone on a politically-correct demonstration of the hunt for non-Muslim suspects, I complied and wouldn't bother to file a complaint. I'm not into hasseling people trying to do their jobs. Even, if I don't agree with their methods.

CAIR and the rest of these whiners are seeking immunity from the very scrutiny they invited by their disobedience, disrespect and flagrant abuse of the privilege of air travel. I suggest that the return to their "Muslim rights are superior" cultures NOW!

Posted by: BurkasforHitlery at December 29, 2006 7:42 PM

"Ms Pritchard said they had passed through securitywithout issue and were only stopped as they neared the boarding gate. "

"The couple claim officers from South Wales Police questioned them for around 20 minutes and then decided to remove their luggage and search it."

Looks like the luggage was removed from the plane?

This would have only been done if there was cause for concern.

Posted by: kasper1062 at December 29, 2006 7:51 PM

Paying Attention in name perhaps, but you seemed to miss the point of Robert's post, which is that there is an on-going CAIR/Muslim campaign to PC-beat authorities into cutting back on security checks. I think that is news-worthy, and worth attending to, don't you?

Posted by: Brett_McS at December 29, 2006 8:03 PM

I have no problem whatsoever with the security agents being bias profilers,or any other politically incorrect action on behalf of public safety.

But in all fairness, they should be compensated for the cost of the tickets and nothing else based on reading the article.

Posted by: Mackie at December 29, 2006 8:12 PM

There was slightly more info in the local news; he guy was a Palestinian and he was stopped by two special branch officers. If they were clean it was a bit mean about the £1500 - otherwise he should hardly be surprised at being given special treatment.

Posted by: wallyUK at December 29, 2006 8:38 PM

How do Arabs define an "Arab"? Mainly, as a linguistic matter. Why would that be?

If a conquering population is quite small relative to those conquered, it wishes to do several things. One is to offer up a belief-system that will be different enough from the accepted belief-systems (i.e., religions)to enable those bringing it to claim that this belief-system itself is their mission and also the justification for their conquest, even a reason for future conquests. Yet, at the same time, it must also be familiar, so as not to scare or alienate those on whom it is imposed or to whom it is being offered. Islam appropriates, and interprets in its own way, many of the stories, and all of the major figures (their names are retained, but much about them is changed as they become the "Muslim Jesus" and the "Muslim Moses" and the "Muslim X and Y") of Christianity and Judaism, the prior monotheisms whose adherents were the first peoples conquered by the Arabs.

But then, having imposed Arabic as the language of rule, the Arabs sought to enlarge their numbers. A good way to do this was to force converts to Islam to take Arab names, to make them use Arabic as the language not only of rule but of public life, and then, having persuaded or forced many still-unconverted Christians and Jews to have Arab names and to write and speak in Arabic, to start defining an "Arab" as one who used Arabic -- i.e., to make it largely a linguistic matter.

The word "Arab" does not define a "race" though Arabs and Muslims are happy to invoke the charge of "racism" -- though one assumes John Walker Lindh or David Hicks would pose at least as great a threat, as converts to Islam who chose it deliberately, as that posed by those who are born into it, and who may not necessarily be quite the enthusiasts that the converts seem to be.

Posted by: Hugh at December 29, 2006 8:43 PM

"Aisha Pritchard and her husband, Sadi Elhaloul..."

"Ms. Pritchard..."

Since when do wives keep their maiden names? Anyhow, we have here another Western female who got sucked into some Muslim marriage, perhaps attracted to an Omar Sharif lookalike?

Posted by: remote_control at December 29, 2006 9:02 PM

How do Arabs define an "Arab"? Mainly, as a linguistic matter. Why would that be?

If a conquering population is quite small relative to those conquered, it wishes to do several things. One is to offer up a belief-system that will be different enough from the accepted belief-systems (i.e., religions)to enable those bringing it to claim that this belief-system itself is their mission and also the justification for their conquest, even a reason for future conquests. Yet, at the same time, it must also be familiar, so as not to scare or alienate those on whom it is imposed or to whom it is being offered. Islam appropriates, and interprets in its own way, many of the stories, and all of the major figures (their names are retained, but much about them is changed as they become the "Muslim Jesus" and the "Muslim Moses" and the "Muslim X and Y") of Christianity and Judaism, the prior monotheisms whose adherents were the first peoples conquered by the Arabs.

But then, having imposed Arabic as the language of rule, the Arabs sought to enlarge their numbers. A good way to do this was to force converts to Islam to take Arab names, to make them use Arabic as the language not only of rule but of public life, and then, having persuaded or forced many still-unconverted Christians and Jews to have Arab names and to write and speak in Arabic, to start defining an "Arab" as one who used Arabic -- i.e., to make it largely a linguistic matter.

The word "Arab" does not define a "race" though Arabs and Muslims are happy to invoke the charge of "racism" -- though one assumes John Walker Lindh or David Hicks would pose at least as great a threat, as converts to Islam who chose it deliberately, as that posed by those who are born into it, and who may not necessarily be quite the enthusiasts that the converts seem to be.

Posted by: Hugh at December 29, 2006 9:10 PM

How do Arabs define an "Arab"? Mainly, as a linguistic matter. Why would that be?

If a conquering population is quite small relative to those conquered, it wishes to do several things. One is to offer up a belief-system that will be different enough from the accepted belief-systems (i.e., religions)to enable those bringing it to claim that this belief-system itself is their mission and also the justification for their conquest, even a reason for future conquests. Yet, at the same time, it must also be familiar, so as not to scare or alienate those on whom it is imposed or to whom it is being offered. Islam appropriates, and interprets in its own way, many of the stories, and all of the major figures (their names are retained, but much about them is changed as they become the "Muslim Jesus" and the "Muslim Moses" and the "Muslim X and Y") of Christianity and Judaism, the prior monotheisms whose adherents were the first peoples conquered by the Arabs.

But then, having imposed Arabic as the language of rule, the Arabs sought to enlarge their numbers. A good way to do this was to force converts to Islam to take Arab names, to make them use Arabic as the language not only of rule but of public life, and then, having persuaded or forced many still-unconverted Christians and Jews to have Arab names and to write and speak in Arabic, to start defining an "Arab" as one who used Arabic -- i.e., to make it largely a linguistic matter.

The word "Arab" does not define a "race" though Arabs and Muslims are happy to invoke the charge of "racism" -- though one assumes John Walker Lindh or David Hicks would pose at least as great a threat, as converts to Islam who chose it deliberately, as that posed by those who are born into it, and who may not necessarily be quite the enthusiasts that the converts seem to be.

Posted by: Hugh at December 29, 2006 9:11 PM

Bingo did you read the article? They were in the boarding pass line.
Honestly, this is disappointing.

If you read the article a bit more closely, you will see that the couple were 'near' the boarding gate; no mention was made that they were standing in line with other passengers. So for all we know the couple could have been late, running for the plane, and therefore high on the list of those needing further security scrutiny.

Payingattention, did you read the article? They were near the boarding gate, not in the boarding pass line.
Honestly, this is disappointing.

Cheers from Watery Minnesota

Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at December 29, 2006 9:44 PM

We should not be afraid of using racial criteria for our rational profiling methodology, since most Muslims are, in fact, non-white non-Westerners. To allow ourselves to be crippled by our hyper-anti-racist PC Multiculturalist presuppositions might well cause loss of innocent lives that could otherwise be saved.

See my 2-part essay on my blog:

Racial Profiling and the Problem of Islam

http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/07/racial-profiling-and-problem-of-islam.html

Racial Profiling and the Problem of Islam -- Part 2

http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/07/racial-profilingpart-two.html

Posted by: remote_control at December 29, 2006 9:47 PM

Anybody speak German?

In Pankow/Berlin in a small town called 'Heinersdorf' (former East Germany) the government imposed the building of a mosque against 90% of the wishes of its residents.
Joachim Swietlik, a rather brave fellow, was leading the fight against the Ahmadiyyah movement which bought the site where the mosque is to be built.

There were mass-demonstrations planned for this weekend and it seems the authorities have already disabled all the relevant websites and links to this case, try to google 'Moschee in Pankow' or Heinersdorf and "Joachim Swietlik' and see if you get lucky.

The 'racism' canard has become a baseball-bat against criticism and reason, the multi-culti madness has infected everyone. The awakening will be horrific!

http://sheikyermami.com/2006/12/30/volkszorn-in-pankowberlin/

http://www.stoertebeker.net/blo/pivot/entry.php?id=1079

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at December 29, 2006 9:57 PM

Bacon- I Will Miss Thee said

So for all we know the couple could have been late, running for the plane, and therefore high on the list of those needing further security scrutiny.

Let's see, they were detained for 20 minutes, and by then their plane was gone. Aren't you supposed to arrive at the gate at least 1 hour early for domestic flights, 2 hours for international (which this was)?

Posted by: special_guest at December 29, 2006 9:58 PM

It is way past time that the legal protection that Moslems use to subjugate us be be abrogated at worst and denied them at best.

Wait! Wait! Before you who are so concerned about legal protection under the Constitution etc., come down on me, screaming at my perceived bigotry, intolerance, and, heaven forbid,--"islamophobia"--look at our US history.

Did the Nazis in the United States have the protection of the law to harass our security authorities and threaten lawsuits?

I'll tell you the answer: "No!"

They were declared enemy aliens, if they were not citizens, and not allowed to own a short-wave radio nor given all the rights provided by the Constitution.

I do not want to belabor the point, such as referring to what happened to the Japanese (-American or not), but it is time to wake up and do away with harassment of security authorities by imams and any other provocateurs and outlaw the groups that support this disruptive behavior that is intended to weaken our defenses.

We can start with CAIR (and go on from there)

read all about it at

http://islamic-danger-blogspot.com

Posted by: unicorns62000 at December 29, 2006 10:02 PM

I dont know what other countries have put in place for security arrangements, though I would suspect they are similar to what exists in the United States, so yes.

If this couple fit the profile characteristics for people who need further security scrutiny, then that is the way it is, the nature of the world we now live in since 911.

Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at December 29, 2006 10:04 PM

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who said…I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.

Race? An invention of man. God only sees the sheep (those trusting in the saving work of Jesus Christ) and the goats (those trusting in their own works to make them acceptable to God).

And even if you want to consider people groups, there are only three: Caucasian, Black and Asian. And most of us are a combination of any of these. Just different amounts of melanin, thickness of hair and deposits of fat around the eyes.

Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at December 29, 2006 10:05 PM

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who said…I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.

Race? An invention of man. God only sees the sheep (those trusting in the saving work of Jesus Christ) and the goats (those trusting in their own works to make them acceptable to God).

And even if you want to consider people groups, there are only three: Caucasian, Black and Asian. And most of us are a combination of any of these. Just different amounts of melanin, thickness of hair and deposits of fat around the eyes.

Acts 17:26
And (God) hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at December 29, 2006 10:08 PM

I wonder if the foolish "human rights" group "Liberty" mentioned above realizes that the muslims they are defending would, of course, NOT do the same for them and would happily chop off their infidel heads in a split second if they could? Probably not. They are probably still in their drug-induced fantasy world of "America is to blame for everything" and so forth. Fools. Suicidal, masochistic fools.................

Posted by: A.I. Steamroller at December 29, 2006 10:10 PM

remote_control/

I don't know what women do elsewhere in the world but in the UK, amongst the people whom I know, it is quite common for a woman to keep her maiden name for professional reasons. Getting one's name changed on all one's certificates and professional qualifications, and on professional listings, and at your professional body, and on the police computer, and on the National Health Service computer, and on one's National Health Service card, and on the social security register computer, and on one's driving licence, and on one's passport, and at one's bank, ... and on, and on, and on ... can be such a hassle that many, many professional women choose to keep their maiden name for professional reasons.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 29, 2006 10:24 PM

Actually, I find the comments on this site, in general - I have a great deal of enjoyment - some bringing a spark of laughter. The majority of the people are
aware and well- read. These people have a RIGHT to they say, opinion and to defend their culture. ANd always I learn more - certainly when I hv a difference of opinion I go forth and do research - and confirm or deny.

I start my day opening the comment page.

I appreciate all input in the comment section. They are always a fascinating read.

-------
As to what race Arabs are - from my previous research in history - my take is that the Maditerranean Basin was colonized by the ancient Egyptians, & as you know the Carthegenians, the well-known Phoenicians, then Greeks & Romans. In the coastal areas. Certainly, before that were the original Peoples - that were pushed to the interiors.

So there is a whole mix of Peoples. Race was NEVER considered in the ancient world - only achievements and education.

When the Arabs sweep through from their HOme country - they were few - but took the top echelons - became the veneer over all - across the board. Pushing to former status quo down. So everything to be aspired to was Arab.

Don't forget that after the Arab conquest - there was even more slavery - those natives enslaved and slaves brought fr outside.

The area was/is even more of a conglomerate.

As an ex. fr only one country, let me present the following:

From Moustafa Gadalla
http://www.egypt-tehuti.org/articles/modern-egypt.html

Who Are Those MOdern Day Egyptians?

The Rulers (Afrangi) and the Ruled (Baladi)

The silent majority of Egyptians are called (and they call themselves) Baladi, meaning natives. The loud minority of Egyptians (high governmental officials, academicians, journalists, and the self-proclaimed intellectuals) are described by the silent majority as Afrangi, meaning foreigners.

The Afrangi are the Egyptian people who compromised the Egyptian heritage to gain high positions and approval of foreign invaders of Egypt. As a tool of foreign forces, like Arabs, the Afrangi rule and dominate the Baladi--the natives. The Afrangi are, like their foreign masters, arrogant, cruel, and vain. After foreign forces left Egypt, the Egyptian Afrangi continued their role as the righteous rulers.

It has been written and repeated, that the Ancient Egyptians accepted the domination of the Ptolemaic and Roman rules, that they had willingly changed their religious beliefs into Christianity, and a short time later, they willingly accepted Islam as a substitute for Christianity. Accordingly, many conflicting sides, who use Ancient Egypt to promote each's own agenda, insist that the ancient religion and traditions have died. The truth is that they never died, and they continue to survive within the silent majority--the Baladi people of Egypt.

Because of the ironclad control of Islam over history writing since 641 CE, Moslem historians publicize that Egyptians forgot their identity and became a part of a big happy family called "Arabs". No one can dare oppose the line that Islam saved Egypt from previous Gahe-Liya (ignorance era). As a result, we witness an intellectual state of terrorism that conceals realities into a cloud of dust by the dominating Afrangi Egyptians.

The Egyptian Baladi (natives) have suffered from foreign rule (including and especially the moslem/Arabs) for about 2,000 years. They learned to survive. They kept the old traditions under a thin exterior of Islam, in order to survive the foreigners and their Egyptian Afrangi.

--------------------

Posted by: allat at December 29, 2006 10:24 PM

unicorns62000/

You're link, as posted, doesn't work. What is the correct link?

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 29, 2006 10:28 PM

I wish they would just shut up already!

Just a bunch of selfish ingrates!

Go back to the land of Rape and torture.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 29, 2006 10:35 PM

They'll never win any "legal action against the police", as they were only doing their JOB! Next time, get to the airport two hours early, because everyone knows you may get stopped again. Too bad.

Posted by: champ at December 29, 2006 10:43 PM

Once again, muslims have only THEMSELVES to blame...attack the west and you're gonna get delayed at the airport. Complain to the mullah's and imams who preach the hate. Complain to Al-Qrapda. Complain to those who visit your local mosques and listen to the garbage teachings from the Book of Hate (i.e.the koran). But DON"T COMPLAIN to the security guards who are trying to protect their own children from more islamic madness. Because they and we DON'T CARE. Islam is crazy. They know it and we know it. But if you wanna be a muslim and remain blind to reality, then EXPECT TO GET DELAYED at the airport because, remember,YOU ATTACKED US!!!! So LIVE WITH IT, or GET OUT OF THE WEST. Because we AIN'T GONNA LIE DOWN for your insane cult to kill our children.

Posted by: angryeagle at December 29, 2006 10:49 PM

I'm watching Fox, looks like ol Saddam has joined his kids.

Back to these poor Muslim travelers. If this story is true and they were pulled out for questioning (I have been) something triped the security at the airport. Whatever that was would not necessarily be shared. You don’t want people knowing what the tripwires are, or they figure away around them. I am betting this will end up like the imam story. They did something, dunno what-something.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 10:58 PM

Better to quietly compensate the couple for the fare than to allow this sort of publicly aired grievance to exact the much greater cost of undermining the "Terrorism Act 2000", under which they were apparently detained in the first place. Priorities.

Posted by: Caroline at December 29, 2006 11:00 PM

True Caroline. But there is also value in exposing their efforts to cause these events and test our political willpower.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:03 PM

payingattention

My first instincts were to agree w/ you re: the couple being wronged i.e. missing their flight, and the ticket being non transferable, non refundable. But as was pointed out further down, their being merely 20 minutes late meant that they didn't allow for enough time when they got to the airport. I don't know whether the UK has the same requirements as the US when one flies i.e. check in 1 hour ahead for domestic flights and 3 hours for international (not 2, special_guest), but if they didn't allow for the recommended time, then it's their fault, particularly when they knew they are Muslim and therefore worthy of extra scrutiny.

Also, had I been in their shoes, I'd have pursued compensation just like you'd have, but refrained from going to the media crying racism or Islamophobia. I'd simply have tried to work it out with the Airlines, and had that failed, just taken it to court.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 29, 2006 11:15 PM

1. Brett Mcs: There is no report of CAIR or Muslim whatever of Britain citing concerns about their treatment. Give them time perhaps.

2. Bacon - sounds like youve been soaking in too much water in Minnewherever. These people had enough time to check their bags through, and then be boarding the plane. You will forgive me for using a word that doesn't exactly connect with your vocabulary, Board pass and boarding gate are the same thing. But for their bags to be on the plane they must have checked in on time. Please read the article.

3. Does the article actually say this guy is a Muslim? Or have we decided that from his name? (See Hugh). Don't they have Palestinian Christians anymore?

So if we presume someone is a Muslim from the country they come from, what is that called exactly?

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 11:22 PM

Infidel Pride most of us would have done the same unless we set this all up or our Imam asked us to push it.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:23 PM

Yeah Saddam has been put down. He was a mass murderer and a generally not nice man. I don't think he ever actually declared Jihad against the west, did he? But I cannot wait to read the gleeful comments that will come out of this web site as soon as an article about it goes up.

While I am reading about it I will think about those awful Palestinians who danced and handed out sweets on September 11.

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 11:28 PM

Alright it says "A Muslim couple" OK fine. Mea Culpa

Posted by: payingattention at December 29, 2006 11:31 PM

I don’t remember a call for Jihad exactly but he added the Arabic script to their flag during Desert Shield. His newfound piety didn’t help him.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:33 PM

BTW it is the shahada "there is but one God and his name is Satan" or something like that.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:35 PM

allat/

Race is a function of culture (which may, or may not, include religion and religiously derived ideas), language and nationality along with a smattering of geographically (environmentally) determined biology.

Biologists define a race as a subdivision of a plant or animal species. The members of the same species resemble one another in many essential ways. Most importantly, they can breed with one another and produce fertile offspring. Members of different species usually cannot interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Grizzly bears and black bears, for example, are closely related North American bears. Despite their similarities, grizzly bears and black bears do not, and cannot (without man's intervention), interbreed. Therefore, they belong to different species.

All human beings are descended from people who lived hundreds of thousands of years ago. Thus, we all share a common ancestry. This means that all people living today are related to one another. But even though we are all related, we do not all look alike. Our bodies have different sizes and shapes, our skins have varying shades, our eyes differ in colour and shape, our lips and noses have different shapes, and our hair has different colours and textures - this is the demonstration of environmental biology. If we didn't have our modern methods of travel and communication then speciation would occur - in exactly the same way that it occurred between Homo sapiens sapiensa and our ape cousins present in the wild today. As it turns out there is no race of Homo sapiens sapiensa that cannot interbreed with any other race of our species (although there is some little evidence that in some cases it has already become difficult and, in some cases, the genetic consequences of interbreeding are not as good as they could be - a natural and anticipated consequence of prolonged geographical separation of population groups) - in other words, speciation has not yet occurred.

However, and as I said in my first paragraph in this post, 'race is a function of culture, ... language and nationality along with a smattering of ... environmentally determined biology' and, since we, as a race (Homo sapiens sapiensa), are comprised of social creatures then the culture, language and nationality of any one (or more) of us, as it appears to any one (or all) of us, is more important to any one (or all) of us than any biological process of speciation.

Biological speciation is not necessarily a bad thing. The emergence on this planet of several distinct species of Homo sapiens sapiensa would, perhaps, increase the long-term chances for the survival of intelligent life here because we live on an incredibly active planet in a very dangerous universe. That some of such emergent species would perish would not be the issue - mankinds legacy of culture, of philosophy, of attainments and achievements, would go on into the future no matter which emergent hominid survived. The human race (Homo sapiens sapiensa) has passed through many genetic constriction events in its history - as evidenced in (or should that be 'on') our genome - and has always managed to find a way to carry forward its understanding and knowledge.

However, at this stage in our history the barbarian creed of islam seeks a uniform world: a world where all that does not conform to its version of how the world should be must be destroyed; a world where all cultures must become one; a world where there can be no enquiry beyond that which has already been laid down in the barbaric texts of the koran; a world where all races must, absolutely must, become one great race under the insular, stupid and barbarian beliefs of islam - no cultural differences permitted, no linguistic differences permitted, no national differences or traditions permitted, biological environmental differences smeared out in deference to the barbaric concepts of islamic totalitarian domination theology.

That is not a future. It is genetic death - the end of human kind.

That is why I oppose the barbarous, narrow-minded words and beliefs of islam with every fibre of my being. Because the barbarian creed of islam, if allowed to triumph, would spell the end of mankind - not free mankind, not democratic mankind, not liberal (with a small 'l') mankind, but all of mankind as a species. This islam, this savage creed masquerading as mankind's only hope, could (in my opinion), if it gains any type of planet-wide acceptance, spell the end of our species - of mankind's future!

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 29, 2006 11:39 PM

Wow Dominic. Well said but don’t candy coat it, how do you really feel?

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:41 PM

paying attention: "Yeah Saddam has been put down. He was a mass murderer and a generally not nice man. I don't think he ever actually declared Jihad against the west, did he? But I cannot wait to read the gleeful comments that will come out of this web site as soon as an article about it goes up.

While I am reading about it I will think about those awful Palestinians who danced and handed out sweets on September 11."

I don't want to misread you here but are you saying that from your perspective, the joy you might see expressed among people after Saddams' hanging would be no different in kind than the joy you saw expressed by Palestinians after 9/11?

Posted by: Caroline at December 29, 2006 11:49 PM

Ronin/

LOL.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 29, 2006 11:50 PM

Hugh wrote (very pithily):

" "race..."

Which is what? "

I think the race the wife was referring to was "Arab". I do think "Arab" is a race.

If we are going to hate people for being Arab, then let's get that out in the open shall we?

As long as people are checked, don't go chanting weird stuff on the plane, and are nice I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: payingattention

Hello payingattention:

I don't fly often any more (Thank God) but when I do I am always subjected to feeling humiliated. I am a 5'3" BLONDE and always have to take my shoes off now thanks to you know who. On my last trip coming back from Paris, I had my TOILETRY BAG inspected very carefully and slowly. The person checking my TOILETRY BAG took so long in fact that there were other passengers passing by me and I ended up being one of the last ones to board the plane. A friend of mine who has a BLONDE German client and travels a lot says she always gets stopped more than other passengers. Not everyone goes through this to such a degree. As a matter of fact my sister who is very tough looking always goes right through to the gate.
Happy New Year.

Greetings from sunny New York.

Posted by: pigtails not veils at December 29, 2006 11:51 PM

20 minutes for them, boo hoo!

Posted by: pigtails not veils at December 29, 2006 11:52 PM

This entire thing upsets me. I hate to wish ill of anyone but what choices did we have? Let Saddam fall into Shia hands and he would be tortured and killed slower or Sunni hands. They would give him a rifle and his old job back. His only way out was death, it was also the only way for the Iraqi people and the US.

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:55 PM

pigtails not veils if you convert to Islam and wear a burka you go right through, no questions asked. (please don’t)

Posted by: Ronin at December 29, 2006 11:57 PM

Ronin: "True Caroline. But there is also value in exposing their efforts to cause these events and test our political willpower."

Except that in this case, unlike the case of the flying imams, there is no evidence that they were attempting to "cause" anything. If there were such evidence, I would agree with you whole-heartedly. In this case, it would be much more cost-effective in the long run to merely give them a free ticket.

I wonder if a lesson one might take from this is that screeners maybe ought to wander out into the line for pre-screening, to insure that folks can't wait until the last minute to create some suspicion and then when detained, demand compensation for a missed flight.

Posted by: Caroline at December 30, 2006 12:00 AM

Hi Ronin,
Thanks, don't worry, I would never convert. They will have to kill me first. Honestly.
Happy New Year to you.

Posted by: pigtails not veils at December 30, 2006 12:02 AM

According to (50 minutes ago):

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4434219.html

"Saddam Hussein, the shotgun-waving dictator who ruled Iraq with a remorseless brutality for a quarter-century and was driven from power by a U.S.-led war that left his country in shambles, was taken to the gallows and executed Saturday, Iraqi state-run television reported."

Can anyone confirm this from other sources?

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 12:04 AM

Nihad Awad of CAIR is set to comment on Muslim reactions to this evenings hanging of Saddam Hussein tomorrow morning at 7:54 AM EST.on C-SPAN 1's Washington Journal.

07:45 AM EST
0:45 (est.) LIVE
Call-In
Execution of Saddam Hussein
C-SPAN,
Nihad Awad , Council on American-Islamic Relations

Posted by: Mackie at December 30, 2006 12:09 AM

Caroline when I fly overseas I get checked, every time, accident? Nah, one look at my passport and I am “picked randomly”. I don’t know why these folks were picked, last passport stamp, a comment over heard at an airport bar, checking out jihadwatch on a laptop? Whatever it was, I will never believe it was random. In my case a retired military ID card and I am on my way. A last minute check, especailly at the gate is never a random act, I would rather chalk this up to the professionalism of the security force, at least until I know more details.

Posted by: Ronin at December 30, 2006 12:10 AM

pigtails not veils, I was never worried and Happy New Year to you as well.

Posted by: Ronin at December 30, 2006 12:13 AM

Dominic his own Lawyer confirmed it

Posted by: Ronin at December 30, 2006 12:15 AM

Ronin: "This entire thing upsets me. I hate to wish ill of anyone but what choices did we have?"

Please tell me you're kidding! Hanging was a more than fair death for Saddam and if you doubt it for one minute, just question whether that wasn't a humane end for someone who put even one human being through a shredder, let alone actually killed millions. He slept in his bed soundly at night while knowing that thousands of people were being held and slowly tortured to death in dark dungeons upon his own orders. He ordered people's children murdered in front of their parents in order to bend their will. All that was routine. I'm not jumping around my living room for joy. But that's simply because I'm not that ghoulish. I don't have that "blood lust" that apparently inspires so many. But that aside, seriously, what can you possibly mean by, "This entire thing upsets me"?

Posted by: Caroline at December 30, 2006 12:16 AM

OT Dominic but check this out:

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/

I didn't make it but it was worth sharing

Posted by: Ronin at December 30, 2006 12:16 AM

Caroline,
What I meant was I can not get joy at anyone’s death, even his. Do I think it was justified? Absolutely and I would have pushed him, but yes, I am always upset when it comes to this. In this case because it will lead to yet another excuse to target our troops. This is the classic damned if you do and damned if you don’t scenario. No Muslim will except other Muslims tried, convicted and executed him. We will be blamed.

Posted by: Ronin at December 30, 2006 12:22 AM

And:

"As American and Iraqi officials met in Baghdad to set the hour of his death, Saddam's lawyers asked a U.S. judge for a stay of execution."

according to:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/30/ap/world/mainD8MATDQ01.shtml

How strange and what an irony - that a moslem dictator should have to rely upon the 'infidel' west, upon 'the great satan', for his life.

How wonderful, and how correct, that:

"U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said U.S. courts do not have jurisdiction to interfere in another country's judicial process."

(That last also from:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/30/ap/world/mainD8MATDQ01.shtml )

None-the-less, I, and many others, still oppose the death penalty - not because it's wrong but because one cannot trust, absolutely, the processess and the institutions involved in its imposition and because the life of a human being is at stake. Call me a soft-hearted idiot if you will but this whole thing sticks in my craw - it smacks to me of the usual islamic desire for violence masquerading as justified revenge. I am left with a sour and bitter taste in my mouth. This type of thing is not something I want to be associated with.

Remember, also due to be hanged are Saddam's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, the former Chief Justice of the Revolutionary Court - and their trials got little or no publicity in the west. Are we certain that this is right? Can we, should we, trust Iraqii due process? Is it as rigorous as our due process is?

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 12:25 AM

Ok, I heard you, when you said,

"unicorns62000/

You're link, as posted, doesn't work. What is the correct link?

Dominic."

Here is the link again:

http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/

If it does not work, click on my name and it'll get you there.

Thanks for notifying me.

unicorns62000

This is in regards to:

It is way past time that the legal protection that Moslems use to subjugate us be be abrogated at worst and denied them at best.

Wait! Wait! Before you who are so concerned about legal protection under the Constitution etc., come down on me, screaming at my perceived bigotry, intolerance, and, heaven forbid,--"islamophobia"--look at our US history.

Did the Nazis in the United States have the protection of the law to harass our security authorities and threaten lawsuits?

I'll tell you the answer: "No!"

They were declared enemy aliens, if they were not citizens, and not allowed to own a short-wave radio nor given all the rights provided by the Constitution.

I do not want to belabor the point, such as referring to what happened to the Japanese (-American or not), but it is time to wake up and do away with harassment of security authorities by imams and any other provocateurs and outlaw the groups that support this disruptive behavior that is intended to weaken our defenses.

We can start with CAIR (and go on from there)

read all about it at

http://islamic-danger.blogspot.com/

If it doesn't get you there, click on my name below. It's worth reading. we have to put a stop to what organized Islam is doing to us.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at December 30, 2006 12:26 AM

unicorns62000/

Thank-you. It works now.

Interesting reading.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 12:30 AM

I feel pretty good about his death . yes indeed!

If that drags me down to his level , so be it.

Compssion for ALL people is why The West is in such peril.
I don't have compassion for anyone who can Torture, Maim, have Gov't sponsored Rape rooms and for anyone who can Callously order the Executions of hundreds of thousands of Men , Women and Children without a trial and in the most inhumane ways possible.

Shake the rocks out of your heads! That Hippie shit does not Fly in the Islamic world.It's a nice pipedream but it is merely an invitation to them do all the above to you and yours.

When all the Husseins in the world are hanged , then maybe , just maybe that kind of thinking will be safe.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 30, 2006 12:33 AM

PA, looks as if youre suffering from heatstroke in Oz.

You can challenge the meaning of "boarding pass" and "boarding gate" all you desire, it doesnt alter the conditions present during the described event.

Yes, the couple's bags were on the plane but that fact is irrelevant to what happened to cause security personnel to detain them. Bags are checked before security screening but that doesnt mean the passengers need to head immediately to stand in the boarding pass/boarding gate line.

The operative word in the article is "near", as in the couple was "near" the boarding area. Whether you call it boarding pass or boarding gate, being "near" it isnt being at it. The couple attracted the attention of the police after proceeding through the initial security screening, what caused that extra attention? Was Bingo's assumption valid that perhaps they were running to the gate, maybe from having dinner or praying or making a phone call?

Please read the article, concentrate on the word "near" and try not to be disappointed.

Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at December 30, 2006 12:52 AM

Dominic --

You really are a tender-hearted person, which is one of the things I like about you. But come on, this is Saddam Hussein we're talking about. How can you possibly wonder if the death penalty was the right choice for someone like him?

And I know you're a Christian, so do you think that Jesus opposed the death penalty?

I don't believe He did. In fact, one day soon He is going to come back to earth and judge this world and impose the death penalty on those who have rejected Him.

Jesus is a merciful God, but He is also a just God -- a God of wrath.

Posted by: champ at December 30, 2006 12:52 AM

Concerned Canadian/

We are right, we are right. What is more, we will prove it by hanging every last one of you who dares to say that we are wrong.

"Thank God for the quiet grave." (Keats, I think.)

Why, I wonder, was it so necessary to hang the idiot Saddam so quickly (a scant fifty-six days)? Were we really afraid of what yet he might have to say? Who knows, and who, now, will ever know?

'Tis a "...most convenient death ...", I suspect - for many of the 'quislings' in the west!

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 12:58 AM

Dominic - please! The death penalty actually exists for the likes of Saddam Hussein! That's what it's for! (I'm open to debate on the issue when it concerns some punk who shoots a convenience store owner he was intending to rob but instead shot in a panic.)

Ronin: "What I meant was I can not get joy at anyone’s death, even his."

Well me neither - frankly, I feel nothing. (But the opposite of nothing isn't necessarily "joy".) And certainly nothing for Saddam Hussein. But that didn't quite come across when you wrote, " I hate to wish ill of anyone..."

Ronin: "In this case because it will lead to yet another excuse to target our troops. This is the classic damned if you do and damned if you don’t scenario."

OK. Now I understand where you're coming from. But the only rational response to that is "Balderdash!" Then move on. How much credence can we possibly give to those who mourn the guy's death and see it as morally wrong, especially from the cultural view of those who believe in an eye for an eye, let alone from the POV of our own moral values?

Posted by: Caroline at December 30, 2006 1:03 AM

To revise and extend my earlier remarks about running through airports-

Airport security personnel look for telling signs of physical distress in passengers that may signal evil-doing. This includes fast breathing, sweating, and that big neck artery pumping too fast. These are all signs of nervousness or deception. Running through an airport to catch your plane causes all of these conditions, and so throws off airport personnel. Therefore a flag goes up, and the runner is taken away for questioning, to check for intentional deception. Mohamed Atta and his boyfriend ran through Logan Airport, don't forget...

BTW, were there any Western reporters at Saddam's hanging? It's like this news is coming from the dark side of the moon.

Posted by: Bingo at December 30, 2006 1:03 AM

Concerned Canadian/

"That Hippie shit does not Fly in the Islamic world."

True. But it's about how it demeans us. How it makes us and our systems and beliefs look cheap and tawdry and no better than their's. We are better than them - so we have to get everything correct. No exceptions permitted.

We don't owe it to them, we owe it to ourselves.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 1:06 AM

Dominic.

I'm certainly not Implying that we are always right or that we don't make mistakes . I am saying though that our desire to be good and just has led us astray. We no longer recognise true Evil. We no longer have the Courage to stand up to Tyranny and do what is TRULY right.

I can't help it but i see Black and White when it comes to Jihadi's , Murderers and Murdering Dictators such as Saddam. i don't see them as Human , but abominations that need to be eliminated. and i don't see the point in delaying the inevitable. that is far more cruel to me. if that may make me a bad person , but i have read and learned too much from History to NOT know how over Compassionate thinking can Do way more harm than good.

This WILL send a Message that Noone is above Justice.

" We are right, we are right. What is more, we will prove it by hanging every last one of you who dares to say that we are wrong."

I have a couple for you too :

“Remember that it is not by a tyrant's words, but only by his deeds that we can know him”
-Dwight David Eisenhower

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
-John Adams

No tyrant need fear till men begin to feel confident in each other.
- Aristotle

The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it.
- John Hay

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 30, 2006 1:15 AM

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said U.S. courts do not have jurisdiction to interfere in another country's judicial process.

Back to the original topic, I understand that the wife's last name Pritchard remained. But how does someone with the last name Pritchard get a first name Aisha? Dominique, any theories? (and no jokes about what her age was when she married him ;-)

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 30, 2006 1:16 AM

Concerned Canadian/

"That Hippie shit does not Fly in the Islamic world."

True. But it's about how it demeans us. How it makes us and our systems and beliefs look cheap and tawdry and no better than their's. We are better than them - so we have to get everything correct. No exceptions permitted.

We don't owe it to them, we owe it to ourselves.

Dominic.

=================================================

US? I thought that Hussein was tried ( for over a year ) , Convicted , and sentenced by an Iraqi Court and Judge? I was under the impression that Hussein was in US custody to protect him from Vigilantes and from Shiite revenge . if he was not in US care we would have seen his body in the streets long ago.

I don't see this as a Blemish on us at all . if anything the Tyrant got his due process. something a lot of innocent murder victims by his regime never got.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 30, 2006 1:22 AM

Concerned Canadian and Champ and Caroline/

I stand (actually sit) at my keyboard humbly corrected. None-the-less, please allow me my distaste for the capital penalty. Please!

A soul has gone from us without ever knowing the great love of God and the redemptive power of Christ. A soul has been lost - perhaps not a soul which we could have reclaimed but now we will never get the chance to try.

One man - a murderer of millions - has met his fate. But think on this, he, more than most, needed to hear Christ's message - and now he cannot and never will.

Pray, oh do please pray, for his victims, but do not, I beg of you, hate so much that you cannot pray for his soul also.

You're right, Champ. I'm too soft-hearted. I'd never make a dictator, even if, in my daydreams, I sometimes think that I could sort out this sorry mess.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 1:34 AM

Dominic, you are a good person.no doubt! I respect that.

There are two types of people in the world. those who side with good , and righteousness and those who take up allegiences with Satan or Evil or whatever you want to call it.

not everyone wants or can be redeemed. somwtimes they are just EVIL. and i can't pity that. I won't trade on Hussein's redemption for hundreds of thousands of dead innocent people. My conscience won't let me.

Peace.

Posted by: Concerned Canadian at December 30, 2006 1:43 AM

Dominic: "But think on this, he, more than most, needed to hear Christ's message - and now he cannot and never will."

Why would you imagine that it is our duty to play the role of Christ on this side? We're only human. Christ is presumably more than that. If Christ's message is there to be heard, far be it from me to imagine that Christ doesn't have the power to speak to Saddam and ask him a few questions and reach out to him once he reaches the other side! It's not like we tortured the guy to death or something!

Posted by: Caroline at December 30, 2006 1:49 AM

Concerned canadian/

Thank-you, but I am not a good person - just average and wishing that I could be better.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 1:54 AM

Caroline/

"Why would you imagine that it is our duty to play the role of Christ on this side."

Because, unlike Cain, or Joseph's brothers, I am my brothers' keeper because Christ charged me, and us, with that responsibility. I must be the Good Samaritan, I must love my neighbour as myself and, finally, I must love my enemy - remember the Sermon on the Mount (Christ's own words):

“Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.’ But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”

That is what marks us out from the hating, barbarian, moslem horde - that and, most importantly, John, Ch. 13, Verses 34 and 35: "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

In other words, Caroline, the very words of Christ Himself tell me that it is my duty to make myself as Christlike on this side as is possible - in my opinion, which, of course, may not be yours.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 2:10 AM

Several years ago, my sister (who is BLONDE) was taking a flight home to Lansing, Michigan, but she had a stop-over in Atlanta before heading home. While she was in Atlanta, they spent SO much time regarding her baggage and carry-ons, she missed her flight entirely. Besides this, she was alone with two young children.

She was eventually compensated for this stupidity, but the question comes to mind as to WHY there isn't ANY profiling done in regard to checking passengers boarding flights. For GOD'S SAKE, she was boarding with two children ages seven and four!

The ONLY way to prevent terrorist acts aboard airliners is to use proper profiling of the passengers. Targeting blonde mothers with young children is outright stupidity.

Posted by: yohannbiimu at December 30, 2006 2:30 AM

To anyone else who has been following this discussion/

Please tell me where in the barbarian book of lies known as the koran you can find the absolute equivalent of Matthew Ch. 5, Verse 43 - "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."; or John, Ch. 13, Verses 34 and 35 - quoted in my last post (above); or Leviticus Ch. 19, Verse 17 - "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart..."

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 2:33 AM

Caroline/

"In the Shia holy city of Najaf, where his security agents murdered ayatollahs, Friday prayers were filled with bloodthirsty cries for Saddam’s head and the proclamation that his death was “God’s gift” to Iraqiis." From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2523653,00.html

That is disgusting. That should disgust you.

The God of Love could never demand as a gift the death of any man however evil. Could you imagine our Lord Jesus gloating like this. Of course not!

That is what makes us superior to them. Christian or post-Christian - our world view, quite simply, is superior to their's.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 3:03 AM

Dominique

There are a lot of things that I condemn in Muslims. This particular one isn't one of them. It isn't merely a primitive primal cry for revenge: it's a desire for justice and closure. While I share the desire of many to see internecine warfare between Muslims, let's look at it for once from the Shia POV. They had some millions of their people massacred by Saddam over his reign, and a lot of them still fear him, even though he was imprisoned.

Even after his ouster, his loyalists continued to back death squads that went after both Shia leaders, as well as ordinary Shia. Part of the motivation there, particularly among Baathists, was that once the US was out, they'd somehow blackmail the Iraqi government, and at some point in time, re-install his regime. Note that at no point in his trial did he express the slightest regret or remorse at what he had done. There are still people in Iraq who wouldn't lose their fear of him until he was dead. For their sake, it was worth executing Saddam. I agree with Caroline above when she said that Saddam is exactly the type of person for whom the death penalty is for.

Also, the 'love thy enemy' injunction in Matthew 5:43 is a potential suicide pact, if taken to the limit. One has to draw the line somewhere.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 30, 2006 3:26 AM

Sorry for misspelling your name, Dominic.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at December 30, 2006 3:27 AM

But in case we all have some virtuous glow of satisfaction here, there are a few small and inconvenient statistics which ought to be considered.

"The USA stands alongside China, Saudi Arabia and Iran as carrying out the greatest numbers of executions per year. According to Amnesty International, 94% of the 2005 executions took place in those countries" (from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6211741.stm ).

And - "no one knows how many people are put to death in the country [China] each year but Amnesty International estimates that in 2005, it carried out an estimated 1,770 executions and sentenced nearly 4,000 people to death."

And - "Most Muslim [sic] countries retain capital punishment, with Iran and Saudi Arabia carrying out the most executions. Iraq's government has released video of criminals being hanged. Methods of execution in Islamic countries vary and can include beheading, firing squad, hanging [long drop - usually] and stoning. In some countries public executions are carried out to heighten the element of deterrence. In 2006 in Iran, a group of human rights defenders, mostly women, began a campaign to abolish stoning to death, after reports that a man and woman had been stoned to death in Mashhad, despite an official moratorium on such executions."

It is estimated that sixty-nine countries still use the death-penalty whereas eighty-eight do not and ten do so in only very special circumstances. In the first-world only the USA still permits the execution of people under twenty-one years of age and in the whole world only the the USA permits future executable execution - that is, sentenced to death but the sentence cannot be carried out until the prisoner reaches the age of majority - as applied in the state in which the minor was convicted. Although on the statute books of most states in the USA this has not been used, except in Texas and Florida, since 1984.

Iraq is the first country since Romania, on Christmas Day in 1989, to execute a former Head of State.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 3:48 AM

Infidel Pride/

Although I agree with you in principle and in politics, I find that I cannot agree with you in faith. I will only draw the line, in this instance (each case is unique) where God draws the line, which, for me, is “Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord". From Leviticus in the Old Testament to Romans in the New, both Christians and Jews have been told to never seek vengeance against one or another, “but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord”. (Leviticus 19:18)

Every Christian child who ever went to Sunday school learned, “Do not be overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good”, and “Therefore if your enemy hungers, feed him”, (Romans 12:21/20).

And that, my friend, is what we are fighting for. This execution merely throws into stark relief our superiority as a society - Christian or post-Christian. Quite simply, as long as we had no hand in this, we are better than they are. But, if we are tainted by it then Heaven, quite literally, help us.

Damn, shades of the Pontius Pilate argument - see what I mean: there is no way off the hook of responsibility, here.

It was evil before we interferred and we have not made it any better - or, I suppose, any worse.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 4:08 AM

Infidel Pride/

"Also, the 'love thy enemy' injunction in Matthew 5:43 is a potential suicide pact, if taken to the limit. One has to draw the line somewhere."

Why?

Jesus didn't. That's why Easter!

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at December 30, 2006 4:13 AM

Sheik Yermami, there is hardly any information about building a huge mosque in Heinersdorf near Berlin in the mainstream German media. Even though the Ahmadyia community is only 160 strong , the mosque is told to have a capacity for at least 1000, including also "congress centre" and similar facilities. Only 5 members of this 160 strong community have work, - the rest lives from the generous welfare from the German state. It is simply terrible. I read this some time ago on various blogs.

Posted by: Serbian girl at December 30, 2006 5:54 AM

Re: Wales: Muslims claim police bias -- for being detained 20 minutes at the airport

Islam is a "religion" of deception-hypocrisy in which one thing is said in private and another in public. It is the deception of belief-system adherents which is the foundation of the violence of the Jihadists. We must at least respect the violent Jihadists for their honesty. The set-ups, the stunts, the hypocrisy, the lack of candor, is in the DNA of Islam and the basis of violence against Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Posted by: Frank at December 30, 2006 7:47 AM

"I am sure the police had sufficient reason to want to detain these people and ask some questions."

Yes... 'sufficient reason' being that they were Muslims.

Is it not a crime, punishable by death, for a Jew or Infidel to enter Mecca?

As long as this state of affairs exists, what could possibly be more fair, just and reasonable, than that Muslims be put to death for setting foot on any Infidel soil, for the crime of 'Being Muslim'?

Muslims have zero respect for the values all non-Muslims (not to mention that they also have zero respect for the lives of all non-Muslims) ...so the correct 'Attitude towards Muslims', and their 'values' (not to mention their lives), for a non-Muslim, is one of zero respect.

Posted by: cheese_burger at December 30, 2006 8:10 AM

Dominic, Saddam Hussein was a psychopath, and psychopaths never change.

I am against the death penalty on principle, but I'm sure not going to be that concerned about his execution.

Posted by: Voltaire at December 30, 2006 8:51 AM

Caroline:

Hi there. I find joy expressed at either event to be tasteless and frankly disgusting. Any joy at any death is barbaric.

Hi Pigtails

Glad to hear NY is Sunny this time of year.

I heard gentlemen prefer blondes so maybe that is the reason you've been singled out.

Bacon: You're too wet all your salt has washed out.

Posted by: payingattention at December 30, 2006 9:32 AM

To avoid this problem we should build the largest
catapult ever built and just lob these cretins
to whatever destination they desire.

Posted by: aladdinsane57 at December 30, 2006 9:56 AM

payingattention: "And look at this post from XY. Calling someone he has no information as a "mad animal"! What a filthy remark."

But I do have information on him. I know he's a Palestinian. You know, the people who elected Hamas, who has tv-shows teaching children the virtue of killing jews (one poll showed some 70% of the children wanted to die for Allah killing jews), and so on.

Sure, not every single Pali may fit that description, but mental corruption is epidemic among them. It really is. Former Palestinian terrorist Walid Shoebat (who seems like a decent guy these days, btw) describes the people in Gaza as suffering from mass-psychosis in their relentless hate and bloodthirst.

But it is typical of some people to resent a truthful description of the Palestinians rather that the murders and threats of the Palis themselves. Defending the Palis isn't better than defending downright Nazis.

Posted by: XY at December 30, 2006 9:58 AM

I wrote: "....rather tha[n] the murders and threats of the Palis themselves." Should be: "... the murders and threats done by the Palis." (If that isn't what it means, not sure, English isn't my main language.)

Posted by: XY at December 30, 2006 10:04 AM

But for the record, my comment was out of line and was correctly deleted by our esteemed hosts.

"But in all fairness, they should be compensated for the cost of the tickets and nothing else based on reading the article."

I agree. If indeed they were found to be innocent they should be compensated (possibly get more than the cost of the ticket, although not American-style more when people get astronomical amounts of cash for ridiculous 'crimes' done to them).

Posted by: XY at December 30, 2006 10:20 AM

Pigtails and Yohannblimu -

I'm a short blonde myself and I've been pulled before, for whatever reason usually on little domestic puddle jumper flights. One overzealous luggage fascist took apart my makeup compact! To be fair I think my belt set off something, though when I took it off and didn't beep any more they still pawed through all my stuff...

Annoying as it is, I think they pick random June Cleaver-looking people so that accusations of racism can be discarded. Which is why I'll be furious if this thing becomes an issue.

Posted by: GoldieLox at December 30, 2006 11:14 AM

If some are offended by comments made here, they should remember we are talking about the war for our whole way of life.
Islam is on the march across the planet, CAIR is using our own laws to expand islam in our lands, and you wonder why we get a little exercised?
Muslims and airlines make for a lot of nervousness. Now we are to blame for their inconvenience.
I am really weary of the "say what you want...but watch what you say" , not just here but in every venue today. We are already self-censoring because of islam. This isn't good folks.
We see clearly who the enemy is, and we are becoming hesitant to name them, because someone may be offended.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 30, 2006 11:33 AM

One more thing.
If we are going to win in this "war", we are going to have to get tough, tough as in General Patton tough.
This bomb here...but not there, rules of engagement,
"King's X" war is a recipe for defeat in this war for the Western way of life.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 30, 2006 11:50 AM

Hello everyone. I agree with carolyn2 except IMO gen pershing's example was more relevant to todays situation

Posted by: defender at December 30, 2006 12:46 PM

http://www.bobtuley.com/georgepatton.htm

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 30, 2006 1:29 PM

One more thing.
If we are going to win in this "war", we are going to have to get tough, tough as in General Patton tough.
This bomb here...but not there, rules of engagement,
"King's X" war is a recipe for defeat in this war for the Western way of life.

Posted by: Carolyn2

Agreed. There's been many places and times when these Jiahdists have congregated in numbers. Recent memory brings me to a funeral where a thousand Taliban were assembled or recently in Somalia where there was a large congregation of the Islamic thugs deciding how to further oppress the native African population. A couple of misplaced (?) daisy bombs would have made big steps in beating these gangsters.

Posted by: Briars at December 30, 2006 1:37 PM

I am profiled every time I fly...security screenings..take off my boots...remove my coat ... empty my pockets.........I want to sue!

Posted by: sounder at December 30, 2006 2:45 PM

From my link about Patton,

On July 28, 1944, Chief Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower finally turned Patton loose on the Germans. In less than two weeks, Patton's army attacked the Germans harder than they had ever been hit. In one non-stop blitzkreig attack, never stopping, dishing out only fire and murder, the 3rd army pushed the Germans back more than 600 miles in only two weeks leaving nothing in their wake but destruction and death. Patton loved to attack. Only attack... refusing to let American boys die taking the same ground more than once like he had seen in the fields of France during the Great War in 1917.
By the time the shooting stopped in Europe, Patton's army had inflicted more than 1,500,000 casualties against the German enemy. The only time Patton ever slowed down was when his 3rd army liberated the Nazi Concentration camp at Buchenwald. When he saw what the Germans had done to the Jews and Gypsies of Europe he was so disgusted that he immediately enacted a strict policy forcing all German citizens in neighboring cities and towns to tour the camps to witness the result of their their hateful nationalism. Other generals adopted Patton's policy upon liberating other concentration camps.

Oh for a General Patton today!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at December 30, 2006 2:47 PM

My favorite:
You know . . . My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at