<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who should fly &#8211; the innocent, or the scaremongers?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.takingaim.co.uk/who-should-fly-the-innocent-or-the-scaremongers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.takingaim.co.uk/who-should-fly-the-innocent-or-the-scaremongers/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Mar 2007 22:33:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.takingaim.co.uk/who-should-fly-the-innocent-or-the-scaremongers/comment-page-1/#comment-1407</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.takingaim.co.uk/?p=262#comment-1407</guid>
		<description>I think perhaps I could have been clearer when I said that the passengers response was &quot;possibly understandable&quot;.

I was referring primarily to their concerns about whether the two men in question were acting suspiciously, and whether they should inform someone about their concerns. This, I think, they were correct to do if they beleived their suspicions to be well founded.

If the authorities, having investigated, were satisfied that there was no threat to the plane, the passengers should have accepted that.

They should certainly not have refused to fly in an attempt to have the two men removed. They were, however, perfectly entitled to refuse to fly and make alternative arrangements for themselves at their own expense if they wanted to do so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think perhaps I could have been clearer when I said that the passengers response was &#8220;possibly understandable&#8221;.</p>
<p>I was referring primarily to their concerns about whether the two men in question were acting suspiciously, and whether they should inform someone about their concerns. This, I think, they were correct to do if they beleived their suspicions to be well founded.</p>
<p>If the authorities, having investigated, were satisfied that there was no threat to the plane, the passengers should have accepted that.</p>
<p>They should certainly not have refused to fly in an attempt to have the two men removed. They were, however, perfectly entitled to refuse to fly and make alternative arrangements for themselves at their own expense if they wanted to do so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rebecca</title>
		<link>http://www.takingaim.co.uk/who-should-fly-the-innocent-or-the-scaremongers/comment-page-1/#comment-1406</link>
		<dc:creator>Rebecca</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.takingaim.co.uk/?p=262#comment-1406</guid>
		<description>&quot;The reaction of the passengers was a little scary, but possibly understandable.&quot;

No. Absolutely not. This is racism. Don&#039;t explain it away or make it &quot;understandable&quot;. It is not acceptable to condemn people because of how they look or sound. EVER. That should be non negotiable. I&#039;m disappointed that you would add to the chorus of voices in the media giving the impression that such behaviour is in some way excused because &quot;all terrorists have brown skin and speak Arabic&quot;. Rubbish. If you yourself don&#039;t subscribe to this view, which I know you don&#039;t, then it is patronising in the extreme to see such a level of ignorance and bigotry as acceptable in the public at large. The masses are only ill-informed if they are allowed to be. You know better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The reaction of the passengers was a little scary, but possibly understandable.&#8221;</p>
<p>No. Absolutely not. This is racism. Don&#8217;t explain it away or make it &#8220;understandable&#8221;. It is not acceptable to condemn people because of how they look or sound. EVER. That should be non negotiable. I&#8217;m disappointed that you would add to the chorus of voices in the media giving the impression that such behaviour is in some way excused because &#8220;all terrorists have brown skin and speak Arabic&#8221;. Rubbish. If you yourself don&#8217;t subscribe to this view, which I know you don&#8217;t, then it is patronising in the extreme to see such a level of ignorance and bigotry as acceptable in the public at large. The masses are only ill-informed if they are allowed to be. You know better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: curson</title>
		<link>http://www.takingaim.co.uk/who-should-fly-the-innocent-or-the-scaremongers/comment-page-1/#comment-1405</link>
		<dc:creator>curson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:39:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.takingaim.co.uk/?p=262#comment-1405</guid>
		<description>I agree. This is &lt;strong&gt;scary&lt;/strong&gt;.
Actually, I really don&#039;t see how the airline in question could ever be acted in this way. I think they even could be sued for kidnapping by the two men. Of course every airline has the right and the power to deny boarding to someone, but that has to be done under specific and proven circumstances (someone being drunk, unruly, clearly a threat to airplane security and so on...).
Incredible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree. This is <strong>scary</strong>.<br />
Actually, I really don&#8217;t see how the airline in question could ever be acted in this way. I think they even could be sued for kidnapping by the two men. Of course every airline has the right and the power to deny boarding to someone, but that has to be done under specific and proven circumstances (someone being drunk, unruly, clearly a threat to airplane security and so on&#8230;).<br />
Incredible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

