Not first.

On the one hand, stupid for him to wear the t-shirt, regardless of whether the TSA's actions were right or wrong.

On the other hand, IT'S A T-SHIRT.

last

Fizzity fizzity first. and to think, I work in Biglaw and get paid for this.

Maybe he should have put the teeshirt into a clear 1-qt plastic ziplock bag, TSA "security theater" style.

Maybe he should have the english say "I loev the TSA" and they would have bought it.

Maybe he should have the english say "I love the TSA" and they would have bought it.

stupid why? stupid because he should have known his first amendment rights would be violated?

Great. This one will bring out all the right-wing nuts out there. Go ahead, and let the Arab-bashing begin. Of course, insert "Jew" or "Christian" instead of "Arab" or "Muslim" and the right-wing nuts will immediately reverse their argument.

3:18 -- Shouldn't you wait until there has been actual bashing before you accuse others of Arab-bashing? I mean... just a thought.

This is why I wear my "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security" whenever I fly.

3:18 Agreed

3:25 Agreed as well

The ACLU are a bunch of dolts with nothing better to do. I'll bet you dollars to donuts they sent this guy in a bait hoping this would be the result.

Hurray ACLU!!! You guys are making the world a better place....

NOT

I'm a self-described liberal (I like Biden and Kucinich, but will probably settle on Obama. And, as an aside public funding of elections now!), but the TSA's actions here don't seem out of line to me. Speech is already restricted at airports: in LaGuardia and Bush Intercontinental there are signs saying you'll be arrested for making jokes about having a bomb. Seems logical to me.

In this case, the statement "We will not be silent" could be interpreted as a thinly veiled threat. At the very least it's intimidating, and is meant to be intimidating; "We won't be silent, but we will take unspecified action."

I just don't think airports are the place to make that kind of a statement with the expectation that you won't be harassed. I appreciate what this guy is saying about profiling, but to do it in such an intimidating manner at an airport is not the proper way to communicate that message.

I'm a self-described liberal (I like Biden and Kucinich, but will probably settle on Obama. And, as an aside, public funding of elections now!), but the TSA's actions here don't seem out of line to me. Speech is already restricted at airports: in LaGuardia and Bush Intercontinental there are signs saying you'll be arrested for making jokes about having a bomb. Seems logical to me.

In this case, the statement "We will not be silent" could be interpreted as a thinly veiled threat. At the very least it's intimidating, and is meant to be intimidating; "We won't be silent, but we will take unspecified action."

I just don't think airports are the place to make that kind of a statement with the expectation that you won't be harassed. I appreciate what this guy is saying about profiling, but to do it in such an intimidating manner at an airport is not the proper way to communicate that message.

A bus driver down in FL told my uncle (who I was with at the time) to remove his shirt which had Hebrew writing on it before boarding the bus. Sucked.

If ole Rahed sat down beside me on an airplane wearing a shirt in arabic, I would promptly walk the f*ck off that plane, tell ya that right now....

"Reverse psychology" is the right principle Lat, but the application goes like this. "Everyone would think that only the most dumb-assed TSA official would call attention to himself by making an issue of the outfit."

"At the very least it's intimidating, and is meant to be intimidating."

Your'e an idiot

"...Of course, insert "Jew" or "Christian" instead of "Arab" or "Muslim" and the right-wing nuts will immediately reverse their argument"

Let's see, Body Count of specifically targeted non-combatant, innocent civilians by religion/ethnicity over the past 30 years:

Muslim-Arab: 5 - 10,000+

Jews-Israelis: 0

Western Christians: 0

Hmmm........

The picture makes it look like he could have been discriminated for being a dwarf, rather than the T-shirt.

What were your SAT verbal scores? How do you get from the English message "We will not be silent" to "Raed's a terrorist"? The far more logical interpretation is that he's a guy of Middle Eastern descent who's tired of being stared at and mistreated by people who are culturally misinformed. The t-shirt only makes sense the other way if it means "my bomb will make a very loud noise". Which, in any other locale, is a damn funny (in a dark way) t-shirt.

This is not "fire" in a crowded theater.

I'd much rather sit with Raed than the cranky, backwoods, chubby families that clog up the airports and airplanes every summer. Yes, I get it. You and your obnoxious family are on vacation. But shut up and sit down already.

3:37 - Your stats may be a teeny bit off. You forgot the thousands of innocent civilians Jews are killing in the Middle East....maybe forgot isn't the right word.

Wow.

agreed w/ 3:35. who is the "we" that won't be silent? maybe it's the majority of Muslims who are not terrorists. in that context, it's hardly intimidating.

strikes me as similar to the justification for "free speech zones" on the theory that protestors could pose a security threat...as if a would-be presidential assassin would call attention to himself by holding a protest sign.

Its only the A-Rabs that are trying to blow up our fucking planes!

I still don't see the problem with racially profiling arabs in airports. Seems logical to me.

leave it to the tsa to make themselves look so inmature. if writing on shirts is how they go about detecting terrorists, I think we're just as safe as can be. they could have at least gone the old fashioned approach and not let him on the plane because of his ethnicity... but his shirt? please.

3:35: first, "your'e an idiot." Really? You couldn't at least proofread your insult? Is that such a totally ridiculous thing to do before calling someone an idiot?

Second, what's idiotic about the statement? I'm arguing that not only can people interpret the statement on the shirt as intimidating (apart from the author's intentions), but that the author intends the message to be intimidating. The latter, I submit, bears on the propriety of wearing the shirt at an airport.

3:42 I am sure this is the type of logic your TTT school teaches you

The TSA should detain everyone wearing anything of this sort. This is about protecting innocent people not some sick amuslim fuck who is trying to make some kind of message. These fucks should be deported. Hopefully it won't take more terrorism and possibly millions killed in this country until we wake up and take the Islamist threat seriously, but with the Democrats hoping for the US to lose in Iraq , refusing to provide immunity for those who speak out about suspicious people and vowing to repeal the ability of the government to monitor foreign communications, it just might.

Wow. There are some really ignorant people on this thread. I hope those of you making neo-fascist arguments are corporate lawyers, not litigators, because otherwise, your clients are getting bilked.

b/c it leads to ignoring those who don't fit the "Arab" visual profile, and there is no rule stating that Islamic terrorists need to look like Islamic terrorists, or that they be Islamic at all.

3:28 - Bomb jokes are not political speech. The T-shirt clearly is.

I wonder if people exercising their free speech rights in a way that inconveniences those around them (I'm assuming this created a delay?)contemplate whether they are helping or hurting their cause.

3:37,

Expand that time frame a bit and add the Crusades...and the Spanish Inquisition...and "hell", add Salem.

HAH HAH HA HAHAAAAAA. I crack myself up.

Remember...all Muslims aren't terrorists...but, thus far, all the terrorists have been Muslim.

3:37- Have you heard of the IRA? Do you count them as Islamic too?

What if as part of its movement, the makers of those t-shirts coordinated a swarm of middle eastern-looking passengers wearing that same t-shirt, along the lines of that scene in the film The Thomas Crown Affair? What would Inspector Harris have done then?

Liberals are sick sick people, who identify with those who want to destroy them. Wake and and smell reality.

3:18:

You're the one who's discriminating, saying that all right-wingers either are or support Jews and Christians.

And further broadly proclaiming that all Jews and Christians apparently are racist towards Muslims.

What this guy did was provocative and you know it. I too wouldn't be surprised if this was a "test" case by the ACLU from the get-go. Airports are not the place for these kinds of things. The T-shirt was definitely intended to be intimidating; that's how a reasonable person would read it in this context.

I think the TSA guy went a little overboard since it was only a T-shirt, but to think there's nothing wrong with wearing this shirt in an airport is ridiculous. Just like there was nothing wrong with those 5 Imams from Minnesota who each asked for seat-belt extenders before their flight, when they were of average weight and didn't need them.

Yeah, 3:48 isn't really up to snuff on his news or history.

"Some fashion advice for Arab-Americans traveling by plane: leave the Arabic-slogan t-shirts at home. Unless you want to become the plaintiff in an ACLU lawsuit."

BINGO ! give the man a T-shirt. That is exactly what he wanted. And if he wins his suit, then the TSA won't even stop someone with a shirt which says "Die you infidel motherf@#$ers."

"stupid why? stupid because he should have known his first amendment rights would be violated? "

Just like those TSA bastards keep violating my second amendment rights? I thought we all agreed a long time ago that air travel was a Bill of Rights-free zone (but damned if I'll let those bastards quarter troops in my overhead luggage compartment.

"Great. This one will bring out all the right-wing nuts out there. Go ahead, and let the Arab-bashing begin."

Double Bingo - Admit it, every time you hear some CAIR stooge on TV talking about a "backlash", the first thought to pop into your head is "of sh*t, what did they blow up now?"

Anonymous at 03:37 PM:

So...all the victims in the WTC were "Muslim-Arab"?

3:48 - depends how you define the word "terrorist". Keep in mind, much of the world considers Israel, and even the US, terrorists.

Yea, anyone who isn't a spineless, bed-wetting, liberal is "ignorant." Typical.

Remember...all Muslims aren't terrorists...but, thus far, all the terrorists have been Muslim.

hmmm, I smell the foundation for a good LSAT game

3:51--

Case in point for ignorance.

3:47 has a point. the Puritans were as bad as any radical Muslims. there was a time that a Quaker couldn't set foot in Massachusetts for fear of being killed.

"depends how you define the word "terrorist". Keep in mind, much of the world considers Israel, and even the US, terrorists."

Rightt before they (a) try to move here, (b) beg for money or (c) demand that the US solve all the world's problems.

"Yankee go home (and take me with you)!"

3:46. You're right on! I'm a Lib and a member of the Democrat Party, and in between trying to spread the Homosexual Agenda I love nothing more than trying to undermine out troops and protect terrorists. I also hate freedom.

Hey 3:41:

Last time I checked, it was the Muslims from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, etc.. that targeted and launched rockets indiscriminately into civilian population centers and forced groups their OWN people (esp. women and children) to become human shields in their firefights.

Not Jews. Any by the way, the correct term is Israelis. Not all Israelis are Jewish, and certainly not all Jews are Israeli.

Patrick --

Move to Canada; you'll fit in great.

Listen up towelheads! Keep acting up and I will issue an Executive Order calling for the internment of everyone that even looks arab, whether they are or not. Dats how we do dings in Texas!

3:51: Sure, they think they're terrorists. But those same people think they get to have seventy-odd virgins if the blow themselves up. I think we can live with their flawed logic.

3:51: Sure, they think we're terrorists. But those same people think they get to have seventy-odd virgins if they blow themselves up. I think we can live with their flawed logic.

I don't know. I'm pretty happy reaping the benefits of my top-10 J.D. here...

Reminds me of my wife and I returning from our honeymoon last year and this guy is wearing a HAMAS t-shirt under his jacket.

To be sure, I was more than a little alarmed, but a cooler head prevailed when he removed his jacket to reveal a BAHAMAS t-shirt.

Not comparing it to this idiot's poor choice of location for a political statement, just noting that it reminded me of the aforementioned occurrence.

And, as an aside, I always dress well when I travel. My father taught me that years ago. He is from a time when one dressed well to travel. I enjoy dressing well to travel and I have found that it serves one well when one finds oneself in need of assistance from the powers that be.

The IRA was indeed a terrorist organization. That's why I used the term "thus far," by which I meant to adjust the frame of reference to the period since 9/11/2001.

And by terrorist I mean nne who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve his objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant.

Listen up towelheads! Keep acting up and I will issue an Executive Order calling for the internment of everyone that even looks arab, whether they are or not. Dats how we do dings in Texas!

I think that the T-Shirt MIGHT read, "I will not SUBMIT" (not "I will not be "SILENT"). Not sure, but I think that's pretty close to what the real translation is. Check Michelle Malkin's site, I believe she was the one who advertised that some company was selling them.

I'd think that Osama Bin Laden, Musab Al-Zarqawi & Their Evil Minions are actually rather proud and not too offended.

#21 This Quiz, Humorous While Still Being Factual In Nature Offends Mostly:

(a) Democrats, Who Seek To Impose A Politically Correct Mentality That Will Get Us All Killed

(b) Terrorist Sympathizers

(c) Terrorists Osama Bin Laden, Musab Al-Zarqawi & Their Evil Minions

(d) All Of The Above

Systematic violence and intimidation with the stamp of sovereignty is a-ok.

I think that the T-Shirt MIGHT read, "I will not SUBMIT" (not "I will not be "SILENT"). Not sure, but I think that's pretty close to what the real translation is. Check Michelle Malkin's site, I believe she was the one who advertised that some company was selling them.

The dumbest part of the whole thing, the security guard just asked him to cover up the message, he didn't forbid him from going on the plane. So he obviously had no legitimate concern that the guy posed any danger. This is a free speech issue, not safety.

Holy heavens! Does anyone rememebr Timothy McVeigh? How about the guy who bombed the Atlanta Olympics? Selective memory must be nice.

3:37 and 03:56 PM -- It is easy to cherry pick. Don’t forget to add McVey and the Atlanta Olympics bombing and the many abortion clinics bombings, or VT, or Columbine, or Waco, Ruby Ridge, Japanese sarin attacks… idiots.

Well done, 4:07 twins.

4:07 - Good timing.

Many people think that if we give up our so-called "civil liberties" (the right to wear of pro-jihad t-shirt on a plane after Sept. 11) we have lost to the terrorists . The interesting thing is that if we use the constitution to protect this type of "speech," we may not have a country to go along with the constitution.

Patrick | August 9, 2007 04:03 PM:

When systematic violence and intimidation is done "with the stamp of sovereignty," then it is possible for others to attempt to prevent the violence because the perpetrators are easily identifiable by virtue of their connection to the sovereign (i.e. they wear uniforms).

To put it simply:
Shooting a uniformed soldier = soldier killed in action.
Shooting a terrorist before he blows up = civilian killed by imperialist pigs.

What's worse, not having a country or not having a constitution? And I mean that seriously.

Whoever wrote that the number of innocent civilians killed by Western Christian extremists is 0 needs to read up on Tim McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, and other American Christian terrorists. Granted they are not generally representative of American Christianity (given that 88% of Americans self-identify as Christian), but there are plenty of Christian terrorists who attack abortion clinics, participate in gay bashings, or commit other acts of violence against innocent civilians for political/religious reasons.

It should be noted, if it hasn't been already, that Mr. Raed Jarrar is recognized journalist who has worked continuously for western democracy in his home region.

But it's not like the BIGLAW slaves here understand anything other than a potential BOK claim, or a possible slipup in regulatory schemata, so I understand that they're underequiped to deal with ConLaw, since that's the only class where they got the dreaded B-. (or, if you're from Chicago, a 172).

3:56 - is a clear example of someone disseminating the kind of Israeli propaganda fed to the US media and government that got us into the Iraq war and is brainwashing people in the US. The sad this is that I used to think it was only uneducated people being swayed by that kind of cherry-picking, but I guess not. Thousands of acts of violence occur each day by various people in the US, and over time, more people have been killed in the name of Christianity that Islam.

Lat - WTF is up with people who post on this blog? I am no longer a fan....

Hey Anonymous at 4:14:

is that a serious question? Has your desire to remain "liberal" corrupted every bit of sense and reason left in your head? If you are implying that the total destruction of our country may be a better result than a more conservative interpretation of our contitution which will trample on the rights of people to wear whatever they want on an airplane, you need a CHECKUP FROM THE NECKUP.

the list came from Ann Coulter, but I agree....

Hey interesting observation - I was rather being more philosophical than that, albeit curtly. I intended to point out that the dangers to our country are not only existential in the sense of invasion or destruction, but I would consider my country just as lost were it to become a fascist dictatorship. I don't mean to imply that conservative readings are preparing us for fascism, but you seemed to raise the possibility of abandoning our civil liberties altogether, which to me would pretty much be fascism. I am sorry I don't have some sort of pithy, rhyming bon mots with which to finish.

Yup...right on schedule. They're here! Missed you guys. How's that whole kill all the "a-rabs" thing going ? How was the gangbang with Malkin last night? Cool. Have fun spreading the hate and I'll see y'all at the church bake off.

Now I'm wondering what they'll think of my tattoo in Arabic that reads: "Made in America."

"3:18 -- Shouldn't you wait until there has been actual bashing before you accuse others of Arab-bashing? I mean... just a thought."

Um...right. 'Cause this wasn't predictible or anything.

4:14- not having a constitution. no point in having the country then...at least not one i'd want my loved ones to live in.

and enough with the McVeigh, etc. references. everyone who's intelligent knows that REAL terrorism is radical Islamic terrorism, esp post 9/11. it's not like McVeigh, etc killed real people or anything...right? and besides, isn't it way easier to hate our enemy when we picture him looking different than us? get with the program, will ya?

How tough is it to not wear an arabic language t-shirt on a plane? It was selfish of him to do so. MY rights, MY freedom. How 'bout not being a dick to your fellow passengers? He's the guy that made a big deal over a t-shirt, by insisting on wearing it. He knew it would be controversial, but fuck other people, I HAVE RIGHTS! Asshole.

I don't hate Muslims...but a lot of them seem to hate me.

3:48,

A quick history lesson will show that some of the first terrorists came out of the anarchist movement, and Russia in particular (Narod- naia volia). And you are obviously unfamiliar with the history of Ireland and South America in general.

4:33...don't worry; lots of others hate you, too. they hate me as well.

Arabic is considered to be the Fourth-most widely spoken language in the world. We're really just going to ban it wholesale from airports?

Interesting Observer = blatant TownHall trolling..

Wow, we are afraid of T-Shirts and foreign languages now, what a powerful country we are, no wonder the rest of the world laughs at us...

??? | August 9, 2007 04:34 PM,

A quick read of the posts above would have let you know that:
"The IRA was indeed a terrorist organization. That's why I used the term "thus far," by which I meant to adjust the frame of reference to the period since 9/11/2001."

Interesting Observer = blatant TownHall trolling..

??? | August 9, 2007 04:34 PM,

A quick read of the posts above would have let you know that:
"The IRA was indeed a terrorist organization. That's why I used the term "thus far," by which I meant to adjust the frame of reference to the period since 9/11/2001."

??? | August 9, 2007 04:34 PM,

A quick read of the posts above would have let you know that:
"The IRA was indeed a terrorist organization. That's why I used the term "thus far," by which I meant to adjust the frame of reference to the period since 9/11/2001."

3:48,

Global Incident Map of terrorism (and other suspicious activity)

http://www.globalincidentmap.com/home.php

Aside from which, have you ever heard of the Basques?

"The IRA was indeed a terrorist organization. That's why I used the term "thus far," by which I meant to adjust the frame of reference to the period since 9/11/2001."

Well, if that is how you were using the term "thus far," you were misusing it. It's not shocking that people would have thought you meant what it actually means.

Jesus (Allah, God, Yahweh, , someone fix the submit button...I only clicked it ONCE and ended up with three duplicate posts.

Hey, loonies and racists:

they did not say the guy COULD NOT BOARD the plane. they said HE MUST COVER THE MESSAGE ON HIS SHIRT.

do you think the ink was going to explode?

I mean, if they had pulled the guy out for an extra 'wanding' or something, then your rantings might at least support the questionable actions complained-of. But here, it is clear they would have let the same guy board the plane if he covered his shirt or changed clothes. WTF? How many of those quiz answers are, "some dudes who wore shirts advocating a political philosophy"??

Climb down off your soapboxes and sell your Gamblin' Bill Bennett books at the DAR meeting. Take the funds you receive and BUY A CLUE.

Lat, are all the terrorized yahoo, drooler and pimp rantings coming from the same IP address? Was Eric Rudolph paroled?

I'm a big fan of determining everything i dislike as terrorism. Many Southern Baptists, for example, practice domestic terrorism.

Sorry about the use of "thus far". Us patent prosecutor types are accustomed to being our own lexographers...and I don't think it's beyond the realm of reason to refer to a recent period since the state of world terrorism was change using the term "thus far".

4:49- yeah, but it was a scary message. terrorizing old ladies from beloit and all. freedom isn't free! hooah!

Waco? Ruby Ridge? wtf? Those are scenarios of nut-jobs with guns refusing to submit to authority and getting into fire-fights with the government over it - not massacres.
pretty sure whoever made the quiz forgot to add in the Snipers that were terroizing the east coast for a few months several years ago.
I'm not even sure I would include the 'crusades' as an example of Christian terrorism. Islamists invaded some European/Christian lands, and Europeans/Christians invaded the Muslims back. It was a mideivil war over land with slaughtering on both sides. but terrorism?

4:21 - Why do you equate the question list with Israeli propoganda? I count only two questions that are related to Israel and two others where persons were killed for being Jews (Americans). I agree that this list is cherry picking but what is the connection to Israel?

4:58- read about Tancred. then say it isn't about terrorism.

5:12 - link?

safety -- in the sense of preventing a bombing -- was not the only value arguably at stake here. the other obvious interest was in avoiding passengers being terrified, even if there was in fact no danger to them, aboard a confined space where freaks outs themselves can be dangerous. and no, i don't think it's wholly unreasonable for someone to be concerned about someone wearing that particular t-shirt. to be clear, i doubt most people here would advocate banning all arabic from airports (at least I hope this would not be the case). rather, the concern is with this particular arabic message. i have no idea what it was intended to convey, either by the t-shirt manufacturer or by the guy wearing it, but it is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, some of them ominous in the setting of an american airport, although other interpretations are admittedly benign. if the guy had no other factors suggesting that he was a flight risk, he should have been permitted to fly, as he was/would have been. but i don't think it's outrageous to ask the guy to cover up the shirt while he's in the air to prevent the not-unreasonable discomfort of some of his fellow passengers and the possible safety risk that a passenger freak-out, *even if* baseless, could nevertheless pose to everyone on the plane, including especially the guy wearing said t-shirt.

and guess what, i'm a liberal democrat. and no, i didn't attend a TTT law school -- sorry to disappoint, but it was top 3 (schools, not tiers).

bong hits 4 we will not be silent!

I was on the Airtrain to JFK just the other day, and I gained a little insight into the TSA.

I was standing next to this kid with his huge T-shirt, gold chains, and jeans around his knees who was talking into his day-glow cell phone held sideways up to his mouth out from under his Mets hat equally sideways, but in the other direction. Yeah, sue me for being judgmental, kid looked like and was acting like a punkass.

He's complaining about his work schedule to whoever is on the other end of the phone, but then we stop at Federal Circle and this TSA guy gets on. The phone guy looks up and sees him and then yells "Out the way, it's the TSA!!!"

Everybody kind of turns around shocked and is like, WTF, does this guy want to get arrested or something? The TSA guy walks up to him all hard and serious and gets in his face and then says really quietly... "whattup." They laugh and the guy starts bitching about his schedule again.

Oh, I realize. Punkass AND federal employee. They worked together. The gist of their remaining conversation was that the guy with scheduling issues was annoyed he had to come in on his day off but really glad he'd just passed his "scanning test," which is the test they have to take before they can wand you at the metal detectors, and he had, apparently, failed a couple of times because, in his words, he "always forgot the feet." His friend offered the helpful mnemonic, "meet, greet, seat, feet," and the fellow allowed that this was probably the most helpful thing that he had ever heard anyone tell him.

Getting off at terminal 1, I felt just a little safer flying the friendly skies.

I'll bet that the TSA would have done the same thing regardless of what his shirt said. What if he had been wearing a Zildjian t-shirt?

TSA: "What does your shirt say?"
RJ: "Zildjian."
TSA: "What does that mean?"
RJ: "I don't know, it's just a name."
TSA: "Sir, please step over here."

4:05-- actually, it does read "we will not be silent" The root of the key word (nusmut-- we are silent) is --s, m, t-- which means silence, quietness, etc.

Actually, hebrew and arabic share many roots for words. I wonder if s-m-t isn't associated with silence in hebrew as well?

3:37,

Let's take it back to 1945. and include Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That was about 200,000 innocent civilians that we westerners targeted.

524: Exactly. What's the harm in asking this guy a few extra questions? I see that shirt, it's at least ambiguously intimidating, and I want to ask questions.

Sounds imminently reasonable to me whether you're conservative or liberal.

"eminently" reasonable

4:20, a 172 is a C, not a B-

Bs start at 174. DUH. I mean, it's so intuitive...

If you hold the shirt upside down before a mirror, it says, "Twist my tender man nipples". This is against the Koran and the National Electrical Code. Hence, the arrest was righteous.

3:51: Keep in mind much of the world are morons.

5:24: "i don't think it's outrageous to ask the guy to cover up the shirt while he's in the air to prevent the not-unreasonable discomfort of some of his fellow passengers"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler's_veto

HTH

5:24: "i don't think it's outrageous to ask the guy to cover up the shirt while he's in the air to prevent the not-unreasonable discomfort of some of his fellow passengers"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler's_veto

HTH

Prior to 9/11 wasn't the worst act of terrorism on US soil committed by an ex US soldier? Not included in the thus far I guess...

And instead of constantly ranting about how liberal bed-wetting fags will get you all killed, why not actually look at the results your idiotic administration has achieved "thus far" pursuing the simplistic "they hate our freedoms!" rhetoric. It has caused an explosion in support and recruitment for radical groups.

Who actually feels safer now than they did 5 years ago? Not me.

When pursuing your ideology consistently leads to disastrous outcomes including mind boggling numbers of excessive deaths as well as economic and political turmoil, along with perpetual fear and suspicion, perhaps it's time to rethink it a little.

Fuck Jarrar. If he's too insensitive and stupid to show up in an airport wearing clothing with arabic writing on it, then too bad. Deport his sorry ass.

And fuck all liberal puke individuals with a JD degree who holler and scream about protection of personal freedoms. Hypocrites. Lets see what some of them say when a family member or friend is blown to bits by a suicide bomber who wakes up one morning and decides to walk into an office tower or local grocery story.

4:58: Very well said.

Hello 11:20

Why not just stay in your house, stock up on weapons (you can get most of what you need on E-Bay), mine the yard, buy a surplus missile defense system (there are a lot left over from the Reagan administration) to protect your airspace, learn to live without food (cut calories to under a thousand a day and you will lose a lot of that weight, particularly around the ears - high weight is the worst kind - and that will help you live longer), and then start picking people off as they wander in front of your sights? Why wait for them to attack you? It's a dangerous fucking world out there and the sooner you wipe out everyone else the safer you will be. Water is the only problem I foresee, but if you buy bottled water in quantity as regulation forces others to cut back, you can probably get a pretty good deal. Just don't buy any of that tap shit. It has has fluorides in it. Dear Park might deliver until the news of your gunshots gets around.

Little overmatched by life, are you?

10:49 - Actually the attack carried out on 9/11 was carried out by ex-agents of the the US military.

LAST!

I'm as liberal as they get. I disagree very strongly that it should be impermissible to wear ANY Arabic language T-shirt to the airport, but, as someone stated above, a shirt that makes a thinly veiled threat ("we will not be silent"=some action will be taken) ought to justify at least a little bit of security attention. Of course, the power of context is so strong here that I do think that there's discrimination aimed towards Arabs or Arab-Americans, in that an Israeli wearing the same shirt in Hebrew probably wouldn't get asked about it.

I'm as liberal as they get. I disagree very strongly that it should be impermissible to wear ANY Arabic language T-shirt to the airport, but, as someone stated above, a shirt that makes a thinly veiled threat ("we will not be silent"=some action will be taken) ought to justify at least a little bit of security attention. Of course, the power of context is so strong here that I do think that there's discrimination aimed towards Arabs or Arab-Americans, in that an Israeli wearing the same shirt in Hebrew probably wouldn't get asked about it.

Just thought about this issue some more and I realized more fully why, surprisingly, I wasn't opposed to the idea of this guy getting stopped by security. It's the fact that the intended audience of the T-shirt was such a closed group, that the guy wasn't trying to send a message to the general community. Rather, he was trying to send a message to other Arab speakers and/or the US government. I did a little thought experiment:

Hypothetical A:
The shirt's message is written in English. Suddenly security measures appear a lot more questionable.

Hypothetical B:
The fairly well-known hypothetically real organization Fathers Against Drunk Driving has a slogan of "We will not be silent." The shirt has that message in English, though with no insignia suggesting that it's related to "FADD." It appears now that we've crossed the line, IMO, into illegal discrimination, because you could imagine that an Arab-American would attract more attention with the shirt than anyone else.

Thoughts, anyone? As a liberal concerned about the erosion of civil liberties in this country, I'm troubled by how I feel about this.

"10:49 - Actually the attack carried out on 9/11 was carried out by ex-agents of the the US military.

Posted by: e | August 10, 2007 09:00 AM"

I thought it was alredy widely accepted that it was carried out by the Mossad?

I hate to say it, but "I told you so!" -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

"we will not be silent"=some action will be taken...
but what kind of action? Those words could easily mean that these people will vocally (get it? not being silent!) challenge those who threaten them.

This is yet again one of my biggest issues with the common law canard of "what a reasonable person" would deduce from a particular set of facts...sorry, I consider myself pretty reasonable, going into the 2nd year of law school, but see nothing overtly threatening about the t-shirt's statement.

Exactly what is a reasonable person?

"we will not be silent"=some action will be taken...
but what kind of action? Those words could easily mean that these people will vocally (get it? not being silent!) challenge those who threaten them.

This is yet again one of my biggest issues with the common law canard of "what a reasonable person" would deduce from a particular set of facts...sorry, I consider myself pretty reasonable, going into the 2nd year of law school, but see nothing overtly threatening about the t-shirt's statement.

Exactly what is a reasonable person?

that's wack.