BS roo_ster.
It's not one, and doesn't look like one. and he doesn't look Arab. Berber blood not withstanding. There is no visual evidence. Here's a thought, if you don't know what Arabic script looks like, and you don't know what Arabic garb looks like, and you don't know what an Arab looks like, you're not qualified to say the person sitting next to you might be an Arab scribbling in Arabic.
No but I'd like to get back to the part where people STFU in the face of absolutly no evidence of jihad at all for fear of being responsible to for the outcome of their actions. This women had zero credible evidence, and she cost the people on the plane and the airline time and money that is not easily replaceable. Had she yelled "Fire!" on that plane with no evidence she'd be facing criminal charges, we wouldn't be saying "Well she's not a fire fighter, so she can't be expected to know what smoke is. Better safe then sorry." Had she locked down a Wal-Mart over a CCW, this forum would be eviscerating (metaphorically) her as a myopic, hoplophobic idiot.. But she yelled "terrorist" with the same level of accuracy and evidence. Only those whose conformation bias this fits think this is OK.
Patterns are patterns and dogmush is a fine example of the sort of folk who would outlaw--or at least levy fines against--pattern recognition and those who do not assess the evidence at hand to his satisfaction. In this case, a literal fabric pattern. And dogmush must have limited experience with folk of Mediterranean extraction and their range of common phenotypes. Tip: not every arab looks like a caricature of Yassir Arafat.
dogmush, it doesn't help when you:
1. Lie about what she did. She did not yell "terrorist!"
2. Make up completely noninterchangeable hypothetical situations. Again, no yelling involved, so yelling "Fire" is not applicable. Also, there was more than a single bit of evidence such as seeing the outline of a gun against a tight t-shirt.
Turns out she did engage him in conversation.
He was not forthcoming and willing to engage in sociable small-talk with a woman. That's another bit of data for the gal to process. Too bad she did not recognize his foreign accent as Italian.
Let us look again at what the gal of admittedly limited experience and cognitive talent had to work with:
0. Possible article of clothing indicating MENA origin/sympathies.
1. Phenotype in range of MENA origin.
2. Unwilling to engage in small talk with a woman.
3. Foreign accent.
4. Writing in unintelligible script that reminded the gal of arabic.
Again, I wish she had more familiarity with mathematics, as the (to her) unintelligible script seems to be the one bit of evidence (among several) that caused her concern enough to voice them quietly to airline personnel. I also wish she had more experience with foreigners speaking English such that she might catch an Italian accent.
Still, to call her a bigot or insist she be fined is asinine, given the circumstances. Which is why there will be no fine, as airline personnel and LEOs take a more reasonable attitude toward reportage of existential threats than does dogmush. There were signs enough for the average LEO to give the guy a looking over and to engage in probing conversation. Which is what happened, as they determined that Guido was Italian, not MENA, and was working on math, not splodey-dope apologetics.
And if you read the various articles on this incident, you can sniff out dogmush's lovely attitude of, "STFU, ignorant bigot" permeating them. The articles emphasize the math bit in the title, but bury the other bits later in the article. dogmush's preference may not yet be codified in law, but you can be darn sure it is the line being pushed by the MSM. Why is that?
All it should have taken was a couple of the cabin attendants to look at the "Arabic script", say "We'll actually that is some mathematical formula's, Ma'am. The flight goes on."
I think part of it is no one wants to be accountable, which I get when it comes to stuff blowing up, but still, some basic common sense would go a long way to keep some of this nonsense in check.
I doubt there is much math required of stewards & stewardesses. They may be as ignorant as the passenger. And influenced to think "arabic" from the passenger's suggestion. I'd think they would be more likely to eliminate a false positive with conversation, if they could get some from him. They'd be more likely to spot an Italian accent than suss out any math.
But, yeah, I bet there is a rather rigid procedure for dealing with these sorts of things.
