Muslim/Cop Melee at Rye Playland

I've dealt with this variety of Muslim before. There is no reasoning with them when they get like this. You eventually have to lay down the law and say "that's the way it is, discussion over whether you agree with the rule/law or not". I would imagine the police were very diplomatic about it but eventually, receiving no cooperation from these idiots, were left with no other option.

For the record before Rags makes a comment insinuating that I have a problem with "brown people", I've known plenty of Muslims who are not like this, so the veiled allegations of racism can just be posted elsewhere. There's buttholes in all races, creeds, colors, etc. These just happen to be Muslims being buttholes.

 

""The cops started getting loud with her and she started getting loud, too. They pushed her on the ground and arrested her," Meawad said.

Her cousin, Kareem Meawad, 17, went to try to protect the woman and was beaten by cops and also arrested, she added. Her brother, Issam Meawad, 20, was pushed to the ground and taken into custody when he tried to help his cousin, she said."

Perhaps the people did make a scandal - I'm not sure what role Islam plays into this, though, dissatisfied customers of any minority stripe can be a problem imo. Still, the article doesn't really say just what did happen. If what this person says IS true, then I'd say the cops went beyond what might be necessary. Does nobody just get told to leave nowadays, or simply handcuffed? The whole "get them on the ground" thing only makes sense if someone is dangerous imo - here it was an apparently unarmed young woman. I'm not sure if religion makes a big difference for 2 guys when their cousin/sister gets that treatment - I'm not sure how many people here would just let it happen.

That a minority would make a big issue and how it happened because they are Muslims over it is imo unfortunately quite predictable. Is there anyone in America not suffering from a victim complex?

Still, one part really makes me wonder what this is all about:

""Part of our rules and regulations, which we painstakingly told them over and over again, is that certain rides you cannot wear any sort of headgear," Tartaglia said. "It's a safety issue for us on rides, it could become a projectile.""

Waaait... it's a freaking headscarf, can you tell me just how it becomes a projectile? What, do they take it off and use it as a sling to lob coke cans at people?

 

I assume it's in this context:

"Projectile" may have not been the best word, but I can fully get behind a policy that would prevent me and others from dying some horrible death on a crashing rollercoaster.

 

LKD,
sober up and try to relax. Maybe some deep breathing?

We have headgear bans here as well, and I see no problem with that. None whatsoever. If the cops were more belligerent than necessary, it might be because of quality (not) instruction. If that was so there would be a problem.

What I do not accept as a sufficient reason is that this is the law and that's why we do it. That's a dim argument, and an insufficient one if one wants to take, as one must, freedom of religion seriously. It is acceptable to infringe upon that right, and one has to understand is that it is indeed an infringement, because there are overriding justifications for that, like the risk to bodily harm if the headgear was worn. That is in a school context, where it is accepted that mandatory public education is an important state imperative, and where parents can't opt their kids out. In that context it overrides freedom of religion.

As a result, headgear troubles features prominently in school sports where headgear, just like jewellery, is banned because of the obvious injury risks. Conservative Muslims don't like it. Well, who cares? It's just the same with coed male female sports classes. Religious fundamentalists - and that includes Muslims for the headgear, and Muslims and Christians for the coed sport and the like - always make a fuss about it, and when they sue, they lose, always. I recall that we had a Christian family from South Germany that emigrated to America to seek political asylum because of such horrible persecution here. Good riddance.

Here in the amusement park case it is even simpler - since participation is not mandatory but for these customers elective, it's their pick - either remove the headgear or don't ride, because there is an injury risk. The entity operating the amusement park is entitled set the rules accordingly. It's very simple. Well, almost: What they very probably cannot do is ban headgear (from head scarves to burqa to shtreimel) on their premises altogether; that would be a discrimination without a rational justification.

As a side note: A friend of mine is a teacher; he was almost reprimanded because a fundamentalist Christian pupil's parents had complained about him showing an "obscene movie" - American Pie - to a class of 16 year olds, at their express wish, when he was filling in for another teacher. Yeah, what a pervert. It was only when he learned what movie it was about that his principal got it that he was dealing with nuts on the parent side. Religious nuts have an obvious kerfuffle potential. It is practically guaranteed.

 

If they had simply accepted the rule and went on it would have been done and gone.

Rushing to each others aid, while being mugged or robbed is one thing, but to gang up on cops?
Thats not the way authority likes it. There is no need to believe that cops would simply subdue and handcuff one for the frakk of it. She must have gotten quite animated to the point they felt it was needed.

She took the ban of head-ware too offensive, feeling their Muslim-ness addressed negatively and made a big deal of it. And the group-thinking/protectiveness of family came into play and it escalated.

 

Apparently, as I doubt they were doing it just for kicks. The question is, were they right? We don't really know just how far any of the parties went. It's possible either party was wrong to a degree.

Yes, the best case scenario (as in this case there was some justification for the ban, as in "objective security concerns") would be if the girl pouted and just went home, but that's not always how it goes with people when they don't get their way. Perceived religious discrimination most likely played some role in making this worse; whether the cops contributed to it with their behavior is uncertain.

 

Darion,
only because the cops did it that doesn't mean it was probably justified. Cops screw up all the time; that isn't a rare phenomenon.

There is that breed of cop that plays it like: "I am the law. You mess with me, you pay". If they encountered a group of Muslims, perhaps, kin, they would stand in for their kin if they felt challenged. In such a situation, a confrontative stance probably inevitably leads to escalation.

Cops tend to achieve better results with de-escalation in such situations.

 

I concede Rag!
The argument about the cops is quite valid. And as the Shaman asked, was it valid? We don't know.
Weren't there.

But the Islamaphobia, me thinks, works booth ways.

Sure, there can be cops like that. But it could have also been an overreaction on the Womans part for she could have assumed an direct attack on her religion.

People are too stingy about such Theme-park rules.

 

Darion,
as I said, religious conservatives of all persuasions are perfectly capable to be pricks, that's for sure.

I already told of the Christian pricks pestering my buddy. Well, they are not alone.

Among Muslims, people wear headscarves for different reasons. It may be a marriage strategy - a colleague of mine, so my suspicion goes, is fat, plain and late in her studies - but, oh, she's virtuous, and a good house wife (all her [better looking] friends are notably un-scarved)! *shudder* Others are just pious. Others again, especially when young, are told in the Muslim equivalent to Sunday school that they are to wear headscarf because they are something special, and pure, (unlike all those sl*ts at school). That sure leads to an obnoxious attitude in the girls, not to mention a really bad one with the boys (unscarved girls are fair game). And then you have the fervent religious hotheads and screw balls who always cause trouble, with the worst IMO being converts.

 

we've got 2 injured park rangers and 100 officers were called from surrounding departments, this was not a bunch of innocent hard-done-by muslims making a complaint, these people can get quite millitant when they feel that their 'beliefs' (I put beliefs in '' because the hijab is not required to be worn by Islam) are being hindered, in the UK the government backed down.... they are actually allowed to ride motorcycles without helmets.

An 18 yearold muslims account of the events is not sufficient evidence that the officers were belligerent in any way, there were no reported injuries to revellers.

 

You reflexively side with the police, or any government entity for that matter, and the only thing wrong about that is that it is a reflex.

Just re-read the article:

I.e. they started arguing with staff about the refund, and staff called the cops and it went downhill after that.

I wouldn't put it quite as: 'A Muslim mob went on a rampage after someone forbade them to wear headscarves, and injured two policemen, and a hundred cops were necessary to put an end to it'. Just saying.

It appears to be apparently first of all about the money. It's a little bit like a probable dispute between restaurant renting out a room and catering to a Jewish convention, to serve pork - or to rent a room to an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, to serve beer only.

 

since the evidence normally supports it and anything against is normally opinion... yes I do.

strange that :

but these particular muslims were treated like animals and beaten with sticks and thrown to the floor just for asking for a refund.... hmm, these organisations mood swings are quite drastic these days, one minuite theyre giving refunds and the next theyre beating the $h!t out of people.

should they have recieved a refund?

after all, all you have to do is look at their website and you will see a key at the bottom of the rides pages, Im betting that the park map would have the same, the dragon coaster doesnt have a (H) next to the name, ignorance is not an excuse. and :

so, as a result of people getting upity because they didnt read the restrictions and the MSA have a communication issue with its members, the park had to refund money which it had earned fairly.

This Dena Meawad is unconvincing because she has the 'we're the victims everyone is against us because we're muslim' mentality as given by this quote:

Im sure it did you narrowminded self important prejudice little cow.

so, yes, I would put it as

Just saying...

 

All they are doing is playing the persecution card. They have no leg to stand on and need to be told in no uncertain terms that that sort of crap will simply not be tolerated.

 

I was at Six Flags New England with an Orthodox Jew. He was told he couldn't ride Superman with his Yarmulke on. He asked why, and they explained it the exact same way. It flying off his head at 70 MPH could injure himself or worse someone else or even worse damage the ride which could injure many people. He thought about it for a second, took it off his head, kissed it, put it in his pocket, and said "Hashem will understand" and then proceeded to scream his head off on the ride.

I also think this is a horrible overreaction by the guests and I blame the group who organized the trip for being morons. In my town elementary school age kids aren't allowed on the playground if they are wearing sweatshirts with drawstrings. It seems like common sense for an amusement park.

As an aside, wasn't this similar to the plot of Final Destination 3

 

So what Snook is saying is that faced with a reasonable safety request, a decent person cooperates. In the case that started this thread, though, we have imbeciles who thought that they could act ignorant and disrespectful and get away with it. Thus isn't about discrimination or religious intolerance. It's all about people thinking they can flout rules and be aggressive and threatening toward staff and police. It pisses me off.

 

Totally agreed with all of this. Well, except for the Final Destination part...I honestly don't know.

The issue here has nothing to do with Islam. The problem was this particular group of people being jagoffs.

 

I'm not familiar with Rye Playland, but unless it's a state-owned and operated park, it's unlikely the cops would have been there to enforce private rules or even responded to do so. (The rule in question sounds like it's a private matter, not a state law or anything like that.) The far greater likelihood is they responded to a call for help, which means that trouble was already brewing at the park before they got there ... which casts serious doubt on the claims that the cops were there targeting muslims or that beatdowns ensued without provocation.

When the cops show up somewhere and a fight is already in progress or people are being disorderly, they don't tend to play nice. But they also don't tend to just show up at places at random and start f***ing with people, especially on private property. I suspect on the part of the 'victims.'