Comment by alfiedotwtf

1 day ago

> "Free Palestine, F Zionists"

Does the FBI usually get involved when someone says these words in public in the US?

Not directly, no, but they’ll build a file for what they consider extremist views. Just look back to the Civil Rights Movement era for the list of things people said that would get them an FBI file - we have a long and storied history of surveilling anyone and everyone who says things that go against what political power desires.

That being said, I do think any cabin crew pitching a fit over such a hotspot name is absolutely in the wrong. That’s not a threat, that’s personal opinion, and it’s not the hotspot owner’s fault the crew conflates Zionist ideology specifically with Jewish Faith in general like an ignorant fool.

> when someone says these words in public in the US?

Depending on where the plane was, it might not even have happened in the US.

Not sure why this is downvoted. This was an example from the same article.

And the answer is that the FBI wasn't involved. That was a threat the pilot made, which comes psychologically from the same place as terrorist bomb threats (and also "eat your vegetables or you'll die early" parenting). You want to control someone's behavior so you threaten maximalist retaliation.

An aircraft is not really public. The Captain and FO have a tremendous amount of power they can wield to make sure a flight passes without incident. A plane is not the place to make statements.

Granted though, the FBI didn’t actually get involved. But why let facts get in the way of rage?

  • > A plane is not the place to make statements

    Sounds like they should only be made in freedom designated zones a-la Bush-Cheney

No. It’s not illegal to express that opinion (or any opinion) in public in the US in any normal scenario. I’m not sure to what extent the law is different on planes, but you can go outside on the street and yell “free Palestine, F Zionists” to your heart’s content and you will not have broken any laws.

Imagine getting your jimmies this rustled over expressing antipathy for a genocidal regime, and sympathy for an oppressed people.

  • I wouldn't want to see slogans like this on an airplane of all places. I agree with the slogan. There are plenty of other times/places to say it. Unfortunately freedom is already out the window the moment you go through TSA security, so if I'm getting my crotch patted down to fly, they can be quiet for a few hours too.

  • Cognitive dissonance can explain a lot. If you don’t think the current regime is genocidal (whatever that even means) then you might get very concerned that anybody who says it is genocidal is a dangerous lunatic or terrorist sympathizer. Even saying something obviously truthful like “there are good people on both sides” becomes a threatening provocation. Hate is a system.

The "Palestinian" movement _invented_ airplane hijacking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings_an...

So yes, the FBI will get involved in this case. In this context it is something to worry about.

  • Biased much? You could have used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_hijacking

    That says:

    "Airplane hijackings have occurred since the early days of flight. ...Pre-1929, 1929–1957, 1958–1979, 1980–2000, and 2001–present."

    "...Between 1958 and 1967, there were approximately 40 hijackings worldwide..According to the FAA, in the 1960s, there were 100 attempts of hijackings involving U.S. aircraft: 77 successful and 23 unsuccessful....

    "..In a five-year period (1968–1972) the world experienced 326 hijack attempts, or one every 5.6 days.."

    And your conclusion is "Palestinian" movement (that you wrote between quotes)...invented airplane hijacking?

  • Which is kind of ironic, considering modern terrorism was basically an invention of the Zionist movement in Palestine.

    • It's also completely false because they cited only Palestine-related hijackings, and not the parent article that goes back far further and proves they're lying.

  • > In this context it is something to worry about.

    Would you really be worried if someone said or wrote that near you in any context?

    Short of them holding a weapon, this is baffling.

    HN is generally absolutist when it comes to ‘freedom of speech’, and I don’t agree with having no limits, but in this instance it’s some overly sensitive overreaching BS.

  • [flagged]

    • > so-called “Israel”

      What’s with the ‘so-called’? That’s what the country is called. Israel. But I’m not sure that you’re aware but there was a really big one 25 years ago this coming September. Maybe you heard of it?

      6 replies →

The government of Israel has more freedom of speech and control over the US than voting citizens do.

  • Give citizens time, one of them might persuade Trump to attack another country, levelling the score.

    Greenland isn’t out the danger zone yet.