The bomb suspect was allowed on a plane despite being on the “no-fly list.”
The country’s in the very best of hands.
13 thoughts on “Hey, It Wasn’t A No-Taxi List”
Comments are closed.
The bomb suspect was allowed on a plane despite being on the “no-fly list.”
The country’s in the very best of hands.
Comments are closed.
From what I heard this morning, they deliberately let him on board the plane while observing to see if he made contact with any of the other passengers. The news reports this morning said that he and two other passengers were taken off of the plane. Potentially, this sounds like good police work to me. The goal is to catch as many who may have been in on it as possible, if indeed there was more than one person involved.
What larry j says actually rings true. I heard Janet “from another Planet” Incompetano’s interview in which [s]he was asked how someone on a no-fly list got on the plane, and her reply was pretty deliberately oblique. Not the stumbling oblique of someone for whom every question is a major life challenge, but someone who is trying to brush aside something she can’t talk about. It was the first professional-sounding thing I’ve ever heard from her, in fact.
It seems like they did some pretty good work on this one. I know it was a major disappointment (especially to the press) that the perp was an actual Islamic terrorist, and not the hoped-for conservative white guy, but they did catch him.
Yea, and now we’re all supposed to not rush to judgment on anything all of a sudden.
He didn’t look like a teabagger.
Speaking of the country being in the best of hands (and my looking for an excuse to brag, I admit) my oldest son today signed up to work for those people running the country by enlisting in the United States Marine Corp Reserve.
He plans on attending college (he’s been accepted by ERAU) on the USMCR’s dime and upon graduation become a USMC officer and going to fly school in hopes of flying Marine fighters.
Hopefully by that time the country will be in the hands of some who believe in the Constitution that my son just swore an oath to defend.
Mr. Trotter, congratulations on having a son who has chosen to (potentially) put his life on the line for his country. Let’s hope he ends up having superiors worthy of him; all too often soldiers have not had that privilege particularly with regard to the CinC. (Soldiers in a general sense; I would not presume to impugn the US Marines and calling one of them a soldier might be a faux pas.)
On the subject of the oath, I believe that the oath includes a promise to obey the orders of his superiors and to uphold the Constitution. (Correct me if I’m wrong, please.) What happens if a lawfully appointed superior officer gives an unconstitutional order? Which part of the oath takes precedence?
On another subject – am I the only one who thinks that the fact of the airliner being owned by Emirates Airlines is relevant?
On the subject of the oath, I believe that the oath includes a promise to obey the orders of his superiors and to uphold the Constitution. (Correct me if I’m wrong, please.) What happens if a lawfully appointed superior officer gives an unconstitutional order? Which part of the oath takes precedence?
The oath of office for US military officers is as follows:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
The Oath of Enlistment for enlisted people includes the clause about obeying the orders of the officers appointed over them. Regardless of whether the service member is enlisted or an officer, the key is that they must obey the lawful orders of their superiors. The key is lawful. When I was in the military, I was told that I have the duty and obligation to refuse to obey an unlawful order. It’s a risky call – if I were wrong and the order was indeed lawful then I was in big trouble. However, if I obeyed an unlawful order (such as firing indiscriminately on a group of unarmed civilians), I was in even bigger trouble. The Nuremberg War Crimes trials established the precedent that “I was simply following orders” is not a legal defense.
Mr. Trotter, I also congratulate your son. He’s choosing a hard career path that isn’t for everyone. As a Marine officer, he’ll first have to qualify as an infantry leader before he goes to flight school. The Marines have a philosophy that everyone is a rifleman. Spending 6 months in infantry training means your son will be fully familiar with the needs and lingo of the people on the ground that he’ll be supporting from the air. Most of all, your son will learn what it is to be a leader. Things can be managed but people – especially combat people – need leadership.
They are required to not follow unlawful orders (e.g.: “Go shoot that baby.”)
Props to CT & Son. Once saw a documentary on USMC air support — even they go through the ground training and represent with camo helments.
Congrats Cecil. My stepson just became a citizen this year and is now looking at the navy. His mother is happy with her greencard and will always be a Russian (from the Ukraine.)
An article on the subject.
Oops. The article.
Ken Anthony nails it with that article; no, it wasn’t clever police work, but slow bureaucracy. The airline didn’t update soon enough. I’ve seen that data in other recent articles so he saved me the trouble of linking to it.
Cecil, please tell your son I said thank you! Good on him.
Fletcher: um, no. I don’t doubt it’s easier to get a one-way ticket to Afghanistan from an airline based in that region, as opposed to a major carrier. Just to riff on Rand’s post below this one, “Let’s not make things work by guessing, people.” 🙂
Arrgh, that should have been “make things worse“!!