Two Held After Raf Typhoon Jets Escort Pakistan Plane Over Uk

[7by7]

The problem with making them pay for the disruption is that they obviously have low paid jobs so it would be impossible for them to do.

Never heard of an attachment of earnings order?

[transam]

Wasted transam.

chill.

Mai pen rai krab.

I know, but I feel for ordinary folk of what ever religion that are faced with this stuff.

[samran]

Page 1 of this topic go look yourself.

Yes, I've read that; he is merely repeating what the witnesses said.

The police, including the bomb squad, searched the plane thoroughly, there was no evidence that this was an attempted terrorist act.

Do you consider this man to be a terrorist?

Or this one?

How about all of these?

Some of whom said they had a bomb or were going to kill the pilot or similar.

>28th November 2007 : Anchorage, USA

Alaska Airlines Flight Threatened

On the Alsaka Airlines flight from Seattle to Anchorage Kirk Frederick Forest of Wyoming allegedlly caused a disturbance and insued a threat reportedly containing the word "bomb". He was restrained and the aircraft landed in a remote area of the airfield on arrival, where he was arrested for interfering with a flight

crew.

You really don't understand ''terror'' do you ?, in the minds of the innocent. Especially for folk inside an aluminum tube miles above the ground.

Not sure you should be educating others about comprehension there Trans.

[Tywais]

Messed up quote and the arguments due to it have been removed.

[7by7]

Page 1 of this topic go look yourself.

Yes, I've read that; he is merely repeating what the witnesses said.

The police, including the bomb squad, searched the plane thoroughly, there was no evidence that this was an attempted terrorist act.

Do you consider this man to be a terrorist?

Or this one?

How about all of these?

Some of whom said they had a bomb or were going to kill the pilot or similar.

>28th November 2007 : Anchorage, USA

Alaska Airlines Flight Threatened

On the Alsaka Airlines flight from Seattle to Anchorage Kirk Frederick Forest of Wyoming allegedlly caused a disturbance and insued a threat reportedly containing the word "bomb". He was restrained and the aircraft landed in a remote area of the airfield on arrival, where he was arrested for interfering with a flight

crew.

You really don't understand ''terror'' do you ?, in the minds of the innocent. Especially for folk inside an aluminum tube miles above the ground.

I'll try again.

I am sure that the passengers and many of the crew on this flight were, indeed, terrified. As were the passengers and crew on all the other similar incidents I listed and the many others which have occurred.

This does not make the perpetrators terrorists.

Criminals, yes; terrorists, no.

I am an epileptic in my late fifties; a smoker, not very fit.

I was recently attacked from behind by a fit, young man after I had refused to give him a cigarette.

Was I terrified? You bet I was!

Does this mean he is a terrorist? Of course it doesn't.

He is now serving 2.5 years for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

It may interest you to know that the police officer who came to my aid is a Muslim.

[transam]

Page 1 of this topic go look yourself.

Yes, I've read that; he is merely repeating what the witnesses said.

The police, including the bomb squad, searched the plane thoroughly, there was no evidence that this was an attempted terrorist act.

Do you consider this man to be a terrorist?

Or this one?

How about all of these?

Some of whom said they had a bomb or were going to kill the pilot or similar.

<

blockquote>

>28th November 2007 : Anchorage, USA

Alaska Airlines Flight Threatened

On the Alsaka Airlines flight from Seattle to Anchorage Kirk Frederick Forest of Wyoming allegedlly caused a disturbance and insued a threat reportedly containing the word "bomb". He was restrained and the aircraft landed in a remote area of the airfield on arrival, where he was arrested for interfering with a fligh

tcrew.

You really don't understand ''terror'' do you ?, in the minds of the innocent. Especially for folk inside an aluminum tube miles above the ground.

I'll try again.

I am sure that the passengers and many of the crew on this flight were, indeed, terrified. As were the passengers and crew on all the other similar incidents I listed and the many others which have occurred.

This does not make the perpetrators terrorists.

Criminals, yes; terrorists, no.

I am an epileptic in my late fifties; a smoker, not very fit.

I was recently attacked from behind by a fit, young man after I had refused to give him a cigarette.

Was I terrified? You bet I was!

Does this mean he is a terrorist? Of course it doesn't.

He is now serving 2.5 years for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

It may interest you to know that the police officer who came to my aid is a Muslim.

You obviously don't understand the word ''Terror''. Someone who causes terror IS a terrorist.

If I was on that flight I would be terrorised IF I did not have an means to protect myself. Read into that what you like.

[transam]

This posting thing seems to be out of hand. All above is NOT my doing EXCEPT the last para.

[7by7]

Transam, have a read of The Definition of Terrorism by Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C.

You will see that one (the?) major factor in defining a terrorist act is that the act was carried out to further political or religious aims.

You will also see that this factor is included in all other definitions; including that of the UN.

This incident, from all the reports, obviously was not an attempt to further a political nor a religious aim; so is a criminal offence, not a terrorist one.

[SinglePot]

Take care transam.

Eagle doesn't fly with sparrow.

[transam]

Take care transam.

Eagle doesn't fly with sparrow.

I know but I care about sparrows.

[SinglePot]

Eagle would give sparrow cigarette.

[transam]

Eagle would give sparrow cigarette.

Not my last one.

[SinglePot]

Eagle would give sparrow cigarette.

Not my last one.

Shame on you!

Catch you in a day or two.

All the best.

SP

[transam]

Transam, have a read of The Definition of Terrorism by Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C.

You will see that one (the?) major factor in defining a terrorist act is that the act was carried out to further political or religious aims.

You will also see that this factor is included in all other definitions; including that of the UN.

This incident, from all the reports, obviously was not an attempt to further a political nor a religious aim; so is a criminal offence, not a terrorist one.

Have you ever been in a situation where you have been scared xxxxless. I have, and what ever you want to call a terrorist is up to you. If you want to make excuses for folk that is up to you too. But I can tell you without any fear of contradiction that the folk on this flight were scared xxxxless.

THAT is TERROR. Somebody tell me it is not ? Please.

[F430murci]

The problem with making them pay for the disruption is that they obviously have low paid jobs so it would be impossible for them to do.

Never heard of an attachment of earnings order?

Is that the politically correct term for jobless losers mooching off and draining society. Or perhaps the term is for mindless fools causing damage they cannot pay for.

[overherebc]

The problem with making them pay for the disruption is that they obviously have low paid jobs so it would be impossible for them to do.

Never heard of an attachment of earnings order?

Do you honestly believe that these two Numpties are going to stay in the same jobs and use the same NI number after they get out.

That's assuming they have NI numbers at the moment.

[canuckamuck]

@TransAm

Well it would be terror to me, but this point is lost on those struggling to win points on semantics. (edit: example in the post below this one)

We could call it a terrorist act, which would be the kind of thing a terrorist would do, but the execution of it might not line up with a textbook definition of terrorism.

Perhaps the commission of a terrorist act is not terrorism if the perpetrator does not have an objective that is deemed political enough to be accepted as true terrorism.

Maybe what happened on this flight was merely terroristic, or terrorism inspired terror; which would have been a great relief to the passengers had they known. There may have even been a few less soiled undies to deal with.

I know that when I travel I absolutely prefer terroristic terror over terrorism terror, but I don't like to get too political.

[7by7]

Transam, have a read of The Definition of Terrorism by Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C.

You will see that one (the?) major factor in defining a terrorist act is that the act was carried out to further political or religious aims.

You will also see that this factor is included in all other definitions; including that of the UN.

This incident, from all the reports, obviously was not an attempt to further a political nor a religious aim; so is a criminal offence, not a terrorist one.

Have you ever been in a situation where you have been scared xxxxless. I have, and what ever you want to call a terrorist is up to you. If you want to make excuses for folk that is up to you too. But I can tell you without any fear of contradiction that the folk on this flight were scared xxxxless.

THAT is TERROR. Somebody tell me it is not ? Please.

Yes I have; I described one such a few posts back.

The legal definition of a terrorist is not up to me, nor you. Have you read my link to it?

This is not the first time you have accused me of making excuses for criminals and, in the Woolwich thread, terrorists. I challenged you to find one single instance where I had done so. You have not yet been able to find one. for the simple reason that there are none.

Will you now apologise for this continued libel of me; or at least cease making it?

I have absolutely no doubt that the folk on the flight were terrified. As were the folk on the flights in all the other examples I gave. But none of these incidents were terrorist acts; they were criminal acts.

[7by7]

The problem with making them pay for the disruption is that they obviously have low paid jobs so it would be impossible for them to do.

Never heard of an attachment of earnings order?

Do you honestly believe that these two Numpties are going to stay in the same jobs and use the same NI number after they get out.

That's assuming they have NI numbers at the moment.

As they are British citizens legally working in the UK it is safe to assume that they do have NI numbers.

Even if they don't, they are now known to the authorities.

[overherebc]

I'm 'known' to the authorities but it wouldn't stop me getting a job where I was paid cash in hand and no questions asked in UK.

By 'known' I mean I have a NI number and full tax records.

[7by7]

Which, as they are British citizens legally working in the UK they must have.

They obviously were not working illegally as their employment has been mentioned in several news reports.

[Mosha]

Transam, have a read of The Definition of Terrorism by Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C.

You will see that one (the?) major factor in defining a terrorist act is that the act was carried out to further political or religious aims.

You will also see that this factor is included in all other definitions; including that of the UN.

This incident, from all the reports, obviously was not an attempt to further a political nor a religious aim; so is a criminal offence, not a terrorist one.

Have you ever been in a situation where you have been scared xxxxless. I have, and what ever you want to call a terrorist is up to you. If you want to make excuses for folk that is up to you too. But I can tell you without any fear of contradiction that the folk on this flight were scared xxxxless.

THAT is TERROR. Somebody tell me it is not ? Please.

Yes I have; I described one such a few posts back.

The legal definition of a terrorist is not up to me, nor you. Have you read my link to it?

This is not the first time you have accused me of making excuses for criminals and, in the Woolwich thread, terrorists. I challenged you to find one single instance where I had done so. You have not yet been able to find one. for the simple reason that there are none.

Will you now apologise for this continued libel of me; or at least cease making it?

I have absolutely no doubt that the folk on the flight were terrified. As were the folk on the flights in all the other examples I gave. But none of these incidents were terrorist acts; they were criminal acts.

I'm not allowed to call you dipstick, but don't you understand normal every day people do not give a xxxx about legal definitions?

[Scott]

Unfortunately, this topic is going absolutely no where in a hurry.

//Closed//