Slashdot Mirror
EgyptAir Flight 804 Missing (cnn.com)
dark.nebulae writes: An EgyptAir flight disappeared on it's way from Paris to Egypt resulting in loss of 56 passengers and 10 crew members. The plane was flying at 37,000 feet when it vanished shortly after entering Egyptian airspace. It was suppose to land in Cairo at 3:15 a.m. Thursday after leaving Paris' Charles de Gaulle Airport at 11:09 p.m. local time. CNN's aviation correspondent Richard Quest said, "Planes just do not fall out of the sky for no reason, particularly at 37,000 feet." He said the plane vanished while cruising -- the safest part of the journey. We'll update the story as more details emerge.
UPDATE 5/20/16 3:57 AM (UTC): Egypt's civil aviation minister says it's more likely terrorism than a technical issue. Greek officials said the plane swerved sharply and plunged from 37,000 feet down to the Mediterranean as the plane left Greek airspace for Egyptian airspace. [Source]
UPDATE 5/20/16 3:57 AM (UTC): Egypt's civil aviation minister says it's more likely terrorism than a technical issue. Greek officials said the plane swerved sharply and plunged from 37,000 feet down to the Mediterranean as the plane left Greek airspace for Egyptian airspace. [Source]
Why do you assume it's easier to breach security in Cairo than in Paris?
TFA mentioned the tight security at CDG. Did you read TFA?
How many times over the past few years have we seen reports of "rioting youths" in Paris....
How does "rioting youths" relate to airport security?
Learn to love Alaska
So we're accepting historical context as a valid excuse now?
Are whites finally off the hook for owning slaves?
Thanks!
Second generation Muslims are the ones getting radicalized.
It would be more correct to say that disfranchised, young people in deprived areas are the ones that get radicalised. At the moment this group includes a large proportion of Muslims, but there is no reason to equate the two, for many reasons:
- We have historically seen this happen many times; in the beginning of the 20th century, we saw large numbers of Fascists, Communists and, yes, Conservatives in organised street fighting, we have seen the Suffragettes, and so on - every time there has has been a large proportion of young people who felt they had nothing to lose, and that they had to do something. Religion may have been the excuse sometimes, or idealism of one sort or another. This time there are many Muslims, because that particular group has recently contributed large numbers of migrants into Europe, and it is very hard to grow up as a teenager in between cultures. But it has nothing to do with their religion.
- Although there are many extremists at the moment, who self-identify as Muslims, they are not the only ones; we also have nominally Christian extremists (how absurd is that: 'pro-lifers' committing terrorism offences), there are some that call themselves 'Communists', 'Maoists' or Neo-Nazis. Whatever their ideology or religion, this is only an excuse they use to justify their atrocious actions to themselves.
I think, if we always point the finger of blame away from ourselves, we miss the opportunity to address the very real issues that cause this to happen. We have to accept that the anger that fuels radicalisation is, in fact, very justified, and we need to face up to the fact that we play a big part in creating these injustices. And then we need to fix the problems.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Well, not exactly. There's several books by Arabs, Moslems, etc. who point out that there really is an Islamic ideology which aims to take over the world. Think of it like Communism. Certainly, Western Islamophobia exists, but so does Islamic Westphobia. And this isn't to paint everyone with the same brush. They are quite clear though, that Islamism, or whatever you want to call it, exists, and it isn't just a reaction to bigotry and marginalisation. Besides, too often, even the general public notices that this or that young radical, actually came from a nice middle class neighbourhood and was studying medicine at university. It is an ideology. It blocks reasoned thinking. And it has some support at all levels. When the OIC (representing 57 Muslim countries) claims that "universal human rights" are ok but ONLY the ones which don't contradict Islam, that's part of the problem. Yes, Islamophobia exists, but it isn't what's driving the ideology.
the anger that fuels radicalisation is, in fact, very justified
It's not, or at least it's aimed at the wrong people. The young muslim who wasted his time in faith schools should be angry at his parents for denying him a prosperous European life. The young muslima who keeps segregating herself from her European peers by wearing a hijab should be angry at her family as well. It's not us Europeans who require these things from young immigrants. It's their families' misguided desire to be true to their roots which costs them the chance to be a valued part of the European society. It's not exclusion. It's a failure to join.
Almost everywhere is safe. there are tens of thousands of flights a day, one in a month is odds I'll take. It's better odds than me being killed by some moron in a SUV on my drive to work.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It isn't confirmed that this is a terrorist attack. Not at all.
Here's my understanding of what's actually happened:
Greek air traffic controllers made contact with the plane in the last check-in, when things were normal and the pilot seemed in good spirits. Thirty minutes later, when everything appeared normal, the Greek air traffic controllers attempted to contact the plane. This was about ten miles from the edge of Greek airspace. There was no response from the pilots. About a minute and a half later, the aircraft dropped from 37,000 feet to 15,000 feet, while swerving to the left and spinning to the right. Contact was lost at 10,000 feet.
That information says it's highly likely that the plane crashed into the Mediterranean. I don't think there's much doubt of that. Beyond that, it's virtually impossible to know what happened. I can think of multiple things that could explain what happened.
1) There may have been a mechanical problem that required the attention of the flight crew and prevented them from responding. A loss of control such as what would occur in a stall could explain these maneuvers.
2) A naferious act by the pilot could explain these behaviors. There have been multiple instances previously of pilot suicide. That could explain these maneuvers.
3) A terrorist attack could explain these maneuvers, especially if the crew was prevented from responding to the calls. That's all speculation.
I don't think it's clear at all that terror was responsible. I do think it's virtually certain the plane crashed into the Mediterranean. It's extremely likely that debris will be found soon because of the large number of search assets in the region and that those waters are heavily trafficked. But it's too early to say it's an act of terror.
Oh dear. You're not on message. You need to be very afraid (terrorists) and concerned (children). You have to big-up the terrorists, exaggerate their capabilities, and greatly exaggerate the danger they pose.
Remember, terrorists use encryption. So don't do that, please.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Muslim population is 10% and growing. Are they integrating with Post-Catholic France? No.
At what point would you know longer call it a "few muslims"?
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
How many Syrian refugees have Islamic countries taken in?
About 4.4 million.
(2.7 million in Turkey, 1.5 million in Lebanon and 1.2 million in Jordan).
What was your point?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Isn't that also the agenda of Christianity and every other fanatical missionary religion in human history?
With some historical differences.
Both Islam and Christianity are spreading religions. That is, it's a tenet of faith that it's a good thing to spread the faith by conversion. One can compare this to, e.g., Judaism.
Christianity has been spread by both force and by missionary activity. The earliest conversions were almost entirely underground and "bottom up." Many later conversions were "top down". Today it's pretty much universally agreed that conversion cannot be forced and must be personal. Even the most imperialist missionaries of the the 18th and 19th centuries were almost always essentially aid workers as well (building schools, hospitals, etc). Yes, they did have an ulterior motive!
Islam has also been spread by both force and by missionary activity (See the relatively peaceful spread of Islam in e.g. Malaysia and Indonesia). Unlike Christianity, the early and most rapid spread of Islam followed pretty much exactly with the Arab conquest of North Africa through Central Asia, southern Europe through Africa. Islam has historically been linked much more tightly to political apparatus than Christianity--I like to think of it in terms of Islam being a "triumphalist" religion (winning battles and expanding rapidly in the time of Muhammad) versus Christianity as underground of subversive religion--spreading underground through conversion (think even today, the house churches in China). The climax of Islam is Muhammad receiving revelations from god and winning. The climax of Christianity is Jesus being executed for his beliefs and actions. Quite a difference!
Islam has also been much more concerned that Muslims live in Islamic controlled states--not that the polities necessarily have to be 100% Muslim. This is Marshall Hodgson's term "Islamdom." The sphere of the world controlled by Islamic political powers and largely Islamicate (his term, again) in terms of culture, but that may not even be majority Muslim in terms of faith of the population! So historians think that it may have been the 18th century before a majority of Egyptians were Muslim, for instance (after over a millennium of Islamic rule).
In terms of that interesting word jihad, that's widely debated. Some would argue that jihad is never about conversion. I don't believe that. For recent examples, see for instance the area of Afghanistan formerly known as Kafiristan (Lands of the Unbelievers) and now known as Nuristan (Land of Enlightenment) after a jihad of forced conversion in the 1890s. See also the jihads of forced conversion in West Africa in the 18th and 19th centuries. Or, for the matter, the stealing of Nigerian Christian girls and their forced conversion in Nigeria today.
So, that all boils down to, do Christianity and Islam both have as its agenda to "take over the world?" Yes and no :-) I would say that Islamic theology has long had a greater interest in Islamic institutions being in political control than has Christian theology. IMHO, that's one of the reasons Europe was able to overcome religion and secular humanism, the age of reason, and all that good stuff came about.
Jesus, look at you guys - even your strawmen have strawman arguments now. If you want to know what somebody thinks, try asking them instead of playing your six degrees of imaginary argument bullshit. The first thing you are likely to discover is that (big surprise), people are more complex than 'Liberal' and 'Feminist' and the ridiculous mischaracterized personae that you have built up behind those words. I could type out the epic debate where I utterly trounce a 'Conservative Christian' or a 'Trump Supporter' who just keeps thinking the same dumb shit; but I don't, because that is a cartoon character not a person, and because that would be a masturbatory, idiotic thing to do.
But you guys go ahead and give 'em what for though - everybody's cheering for you! And by everybody I mean all the other fictional characters who populate your papier mache worldview.