|
there has to be a point past which this logic of assuming anything said involving "security" that implicates someone who is muslim is legitmate enough to act on should stop, yes?
why for example is it not just as reasonable for an airline to talk with both group--the paranoids and the objects of that paranoia if you like--determine that nothing more's going on than paranoia and announce as much to the people who are on the plane?
while it's maybe more awkward as a solution, it does not have the same effect of legitimating this residual paranoia tipping into racism that the "war on terror" is built around as a brand.
this is not to say that there are no legit concerns at any point--but it seems to me important at this juncture that folk be confronted with the simple fact that not all "concerns" are legitimate and that they be called out for setting into motion concerns that are "concerns"--it seems to me that this would enable the security argument (which i personally find to be nonsense, but that's my own position and not something i would generalize) to appeal to those it appeals to, but would balance it to some extent by making just as public the fact of paranoia.
think about it: if you were going to carry out an action on a plane, why would you sit around talking abotu security? if you were going to carry out an action on a plane, why wouldn't you dress as innocuously as possible? if you were going to carry out an action, everything would hinge on your NOT drawing attention to yourself....
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|