Cat Stevens on Terrorist Watchlist - Plane Diverted

CFLarsen said:
Perhaps you could open a new thread and give examples of my superstitious beliefs? I, for one, would be most happy to know.

Really? That's quite a reversal from your position in the Schwarzenegger thread, where you pronounced the subject closed when confronted with some of your woo beliefs about history and geography.
 
CFLarsen said:
But the point is, they did cause a stupid international incident. The security check in the UK thought "Hey, this can't be this guy" and sent him on the plane. However, it was that guy.
Indeed, I'm arguing that the international system has inherent flaws that are not the fault of FBI/CIA, or by extension, Bush.
CFLarsen said:
Exactly. He must have bought his ticket some days ago, and no system flagged anywhere? It isn't as if this should come as a surprise to the people at the gate, should it?
It puzzles me. I assume the ticket had to have been in his name. I don't think you can fly on any ticket not in your own name. But how was that ticket purchased. Was it by his wife, was it by his mosque, or some other business entity that was not watch listed?

Was there a spelling error that slipped past the computer. The ticket taker may have made a correction to the ticket if it did not match the passport name. But I would have thought that the UK and US being close to a single mind on the need to fight terrorism, that when a known individual goes on a no fly list that his passport is flagged and that a ticket taker types in each travelers passport number as one of several checks.

It may be though that Yusef Islam is not considered a terrorist for any no fly consideration in the UK but he is in the US. That would be weird. But I think the US was making demands on Europe and the rest of the world's countries and airlines to supply passenger lists for international flights to the US and those demands met stiff opposition. A deal was worked out such that Britain, I believe, supplies a list 2 hours before takeoff. I'm not sure about that - I'll look around.

Perhaps when there are better, cheaper biometric tests these incidents will become rarer than they are. It should not have happened and it makes the US look mean to muslims and the UK look porous to international threat.
 
Atlas said:
Indeed, I'm arguing that the international system has inherent flaws that are not the fault of FBI/CIA, or by extension, Bush.

Sure it is. Everything is Bush's fault! Didn't you read the memo? :)

Atlas said:
It puzzles me. I assume the ticket had to have been in his name. I don't think you can fly on any ticket not in your own name. But how was that ticket purchased. Was it by his wife, was it by his mosque, or some other business entity that was not watch listed?

Dunno, but it would only be one of the things they should look for.

Atlas said:
It should not have happened and it makes the US look mean to muslims and the UK look porous to international threat.

Yup. If they have reason to suspect someone based on their actions (and not their religion in general), check them out. If they don't, leave them alone.
 
crimresearch said:
Really? That's quite a reversal from your position in the Schwarzenegger thread, where you pronounced the subject closed when confronted with some of your woo beliefs about history and geography.

"Woo"? I can be right or wrong regarding history or geography, but where does the paranormal belief come in? :confused:
 
My earlier comment about US demands for International flight lists apparently started last January with a Sky marshall debate.

Europe balked at the idea and so the US said at the very least you gotta tell us who is on the incoming planes. Europe still balked but relented after several British flights were grounded on mere suspicion that terrorists had plans to use them. There are allusions to the demanded flight lists in several articles googled with the phrase: US demands international flight lists -- but none gave the 2 hour time limit I mentioned earlier. So that might be bogus.

I ran across an interesting article from that google (from August) that suggests UK citizens are perturbed by the US's increasing demands.

In general, some Britons argue that, even as the United States presses demands for new passports with digital identity information, security at American airports has become a recurrent nightmare. Not only are the rules tighter, the argument goes, but those who enforce them are badly prepared.

"It's a sort of general level of arrogant incompetence," said Gwyneth Dunwoody, a British legislator from the governing Labour Party, who complained of being harassed by airport security officials in several cities, including New York, during an official visit to the United States last January.

Dunwoody's remarks prompted a torrent of letters to The Daily Telegraph from readers who told of experiences that included being held and handcuffed before deportation from Kennedy International Airport and other American airports. In an interview in June, Dunwoody also criticized what she depicted as increasingly intrusive American demands for personal information about passengers on flight lists.
What is it about the Brits that has us picking on them. Are they bringing French wine and cheeses with them?

It does suggest that Yusef Islam, who was apparently not handcuffed and was treated respectfully, is only one of a class that makes it to our shores before being unceremoniously sent home.
 
I didn't expect to be defending the decision to divert the plane here, but some thoughts occurred to me.

The government is responsible for the contents of the watch list, not the airline. If you think it's silly for Cat Stevens to have been on the list, the people to gripe to are the people that wrote the list.

However, given a particular list, would it be good for an airline to second-guess the watch list? Did we want anyone in this process to have the discretion to say, "Nahh, they couldn't possibly want to keep him off the plane."

I just want to separate the issue of Cat Steven's fitness to be on the watch list, with the airline's actions. I would want them to react in a consistent manner to any irregularity.

As for the music? Love it. Was introduced to it as part of an education into the 60's and 70's by hippy-dippy roommates :)

If the less complimentary things people have said about him are indeed true... then I am saddened. Doesn't make the older message bad...
 
I wonder how many CDs he'll sell because of this.

Logging into eMule, I see the download queues for his discography are very, very long.

Cat Stevens was about as obscure as a celebrity could get, but now he's famous again.

And if he really does 'fund terror' (maybe based on that catchy 'followed by a moon shadow' song), he'll probably have extra money to do it from his residuals.

I think I'd have way too much fun if I worked for the company that developed and maintained this list. There are any number of obscure celebrities that could be 'linked to terrorists' if you tried hard enough.

Awww, someone beat me to it...
http://www.boingboing.net/2004/08/20/senator_kennedy_on_n.html
 
Maybe tht will be Janet Jackson's next sad attempt to gain nototriety for her flagging career...
 
Yusuf Islam, formerly Cat Stevens: Salman Rushdie, indeed any writer who abuses the prophet or indeed any prophet under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death.
article
Maybe he was just clarifying Islamic law on behalf of his spiritual leader, the Ayatollah, versus stating his own opinion. (Yah sure.)
 
By the same sort of interpretation, Biblical law also supports death for being an infidel, as well as speaking the lord's name in vain, and for children talking back to your parents.

I saw video of the quote. He sounded like someone interpreting a technicality in the same sort of law. With the sort of 'well it's written that way' sort of waver in his voice.

But maybe I read too much into the WAY people say things, and the inflections they put on their words.
 
So why was it relevant when *you* asked the same question in one thread, after being given the answer in an earlier thread?
 
evildave said:
By the same sort of interpretation, Biblical law also supports death for being an infidel, as well as speaking the lord's name in vain, and for children talking back to your parents.

I saw video of the quote. He sounded like someone interpreting a technicality in the same sort of law. With the sort of 'well it's written that way' sort of waver in his voice.

But maybe I read too much into the WAY people say things, and the inflections they put on their words.
Well, he could have said he was opposed. Might there be a follow-up quote that unequivocally denounces the fatwah?

Believe me, there are plenty of home-grown whackos who, if citizens of another country, I might argue they be denied entry.
 
crimresearch,

I can be right or wrong regarding history or geography, but where does the paranormal belief come in?

I'm really curious.
 
TillEulenspiegel said:
Did I mention Cat Stevens sucks?

Oh and I agree with BPSCG "Bush sucks!!!"
Either you forgot to take your antihallucinogens again or you forgot to hit the "irony meter" icon.
 
Skeptic said:
0.50-inch calibre Bren Machine Gun.

I know what it is, and so do the people who gave Jon links every time he asked the question in different threads about guns...I was just saving him the trouble of asking yet again...
:D
 
crimresearch said:
I know what it is, and so do the people who gave Jon links every time he asked the question in different threads about guns...I was just saving him the trouble of asking yet again...
:D

Continuing to ignore the question?

Ah, well....
 

Back
Top Bottom