Co-Pilot crashed plane on purpose (Germanwings)

[Nathan James 7]

You can't really call the pilot an idiot and moron etc. and apply our healthy, logical thinking to someone who was clearly ill and probably very disturbed. He could have had a full blown episode up there. He might have been severely schizophrenic. We don't know. It's tragic and devastating, but just saying the pilot was a massive **** and how dare he do this is only a short term way of processing it. Hopefully we actually learn from this rather than sweeping it under the carpet and forgetting about it, because it's happened before. 

[Better Day 5,766]

This is actually horrible. I hate the thought of a plane now. They should actually ban planes with the amount of death and devastation it can cause. So many horrible plane crashes in the last 2/3 years

[Morphine Prince 109,769]

This is actually horrible. I hate the thought of a plane now. They should actually ban planes with the amount of death and devastation it can cause. So many horrible plane crashes in the last 2/3 years

​You can't be serious   We're actually in a time where plane crashes are at its lowest levels. It's just that there's been high profile cases, especially in the last year. 

[Better Day 5,766]

​You can't be serious   We're actually in a time where plane crashes are at its lowest levels. It's just that there's been high profile cases, especially in the last year. 

​150 lives. If we banned them we would have 150 lives still alive. 

[faux 2,190]

 i'm horrified 

[Morphine Prince 109,769]

​

​You must be trolling. 

Anyway, this incident could have been prevented if European airlines had different security procedures. I even made a thread on it: 

Post your thoughts there if you'd like.

[Whispering 18,865]

​150 lives. If we banned them we would have 150 lives still alive. 

We would also have to ban ships, ferries, trains, buses and all cars. 

How would you travel? Horse and Buggy? 

[lego 44,165]

Some media coverage before all the details emerged

Christian televangelist Pat Robertson suggested on Thursday that the co-pilot’s decision to crash Germanwings Flight 9525 could be explained if he was a Muslim.

....

 

“The co-pilot then takes the plane, pushes it into a dive and crashes it. The passengers are screaming as the plane went down. The pilot is yelling.”

“What a terrible tragedy,” the TV preacher continued. “Was that co-pilot a Muslim? Was he suicidal? What was it about him?”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/pat-robertson-was-the-co-pilot-a-muslim-why-did-he-want-to-kill-all-those-people/

 

Screenshot from Italian press

"Allah is Great, 150 dead"

.....

[Morphine Prince 109,769]

Some media coverage before all the details emerged

Christian televangelist Pat Robertson suggested on Thursday that the co-pilot’s decision to crash Germanwings Flight 9525 could be explained if he was a Muslim.

....

 

“The co-pilot then takes the plane, pushes it into a dive and crashes it. The passengers are screaming as the plane went down. The pilot is yelling.”

“What a terrible tragedy,” the TV preacher continued. “Was that co-pilot a Muslim? Was he suicidal? What was it about him?”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/pat-robertson-was-the-co-pilot-a-muslim-why-did-he-want-to-kill-all-those-people/

 

Screenshot from Italian press

"Allah is Great, 150 dead"

.....

​The investigators won't reveal the co-pilot's religion, so it will just feed these accusations tbh.

People are so paranoid. I know many were saying it was ISIS, so I'm not shocked by these statements. 

[lego 44,165]

​The investigators won't reveal the co-pilot's religion, so it will just feed these accusations tbh.

People are so paranoid. I know many were saying it was ISIS, so I'm not shocked by these statements. 

Yeah I was about to post another one

I see these as desperately trying to link this with Muslims.

[lego 44,165]

#Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr answering question (again) on terrorism. (Translated from German): "I'm not a lawyer, and I don’t want to define this in one way. As the CEO of a big company, if 1 person takes 149 ppl with him into death, it’s another word, and not suicide."

https://mobile.twitter.com/ismat

Journalist covering the business of travel for @IBTimes.

[Erotica 34,931]

​150 lives. If we banned them we would have 150 lives still alive. 

​The amount of deaths in car crashes is bigger than plane crashes. Should we ban cars too then?

[Vernier 3,786]

I'm scared I have a flight on Sunday

Too many plane crushes in 2 years!!

This pilot is disgusting and crazy!

​Plane crashes make news when they happen because they're usually spectacular and take lots of lives, but overall they're not a very common occurrence, probably like 1 or 2 for every million or so flights, you don't have to worry  

[xoxo cupcakke 4,781]

Yeah I was about to post another one

I see these as desperately trying to link this with Muslims.

This irrational scapegoating; it's so unwarranted. Also, why even bring religion into this is my main question with that tweet? CNN just wants that hit tweet I guess

[lego 44,165]

This irrational scapegoating; it's so unwarranted. Also, why even bring religion into this is my main question with that tweet? CNN just wants that hit tweet I guess

I found good article about this

...

 

Amidst uncertainty that the crash of the Germanwings flight on Mar. 24 was not an accident, but a deliberate act by the co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, who flew the Airbus into the ground, killing 150 people, at least one thing seems clear: this was not a terrorist act. Stating this was the German minister of interior, who found “no indications of any kind of terrorist background” to the crash. French interior minister had said on Mar. 25 that terrorism was not a likely hypothesis, but that no scenario could be excluded: but when it became clear that the co-pilot crashed the plane, and that the co-pilot had no “terrorist background,” the terror motive was ruled out.

It might be surprising to some that the terrorist motive was excluded so quickly, when after these kinds of tragedies the official approach is always not to exclude any possibility. But then again, this tragedy appeared to lack what, since 9/11, has emerged to be considered the conditio sine qua non of terroristic attacks: the pilot was not Muslim.

Andreas Lubitz was not Muslim, how could he possibly be a terrorist?

“I can’t imagine what would happen if he shared my name,” commented on Facebook on Quartz’s story on the accident Mohamad Najem, Lebanese, wearing a keffieh—a traditional Arab headdress—in his profile picture. Indeed, can you imagine?

If a Muslim—or an Arab—were flying the plane, this would be a terroristic attack, until there were proof to the contrary (and even then, Muslims would probably be held responsible). Authorities would call it a “suspected” attack, but certainly the narrative in the less scrupulous media would be terrorism, jihad, fight against the West. The ancestors of the pilot would be identified, the members of his family or friends with extreme ideologies would be scrutinized in search of a confirmation of fundamentalist influences and motives.

When the Malaysia Airline flight MH370 went missing in March 2014, the possibility of a terrorism attack was immediately contemplated, although considered unlikely because Malaysia “has only a tiny number of Muslim fundamentalists.”  When, in 2011, 92 people were killed in an attack in Norway, the first hypotheses—then dispelled upon arresting the author, Anders Behring Breivik, a Christian fundamentalist—were of a jihadi attack. It’s almost automatic: despite the fact that Muslims are responsible for only 6% attacks on American soil from 1980 to 2005, and less than 2% in Europe over the last five years, the word “attack” seems to immediately connote something perpetrated by a Muslim fundamentalist.

The precipitous judgment of terrorist acts is problematic even when the perpetrator is Muslim. As Glenn Greenwald noted after the Boston marathon bombing, the immediacy with which attacks conducted by Muslims are linked to fundamentalism can be misleading, as it fails to show the difference between religious and political motives.

Alas, we are not asking all Germans (or all pilots) to stand up and condemn the act of this one individual pilot. Of course they condemn it—how come we don’t need them to say it? There is a word for it: it’s prejudice.

Prejudice comes from the latin prae-, in advance, and judicium, judgment. It means to judge a person or a situation before knowing, before checking, before verifying. A judgement that should be a conclusion becomes the starting point, and since a prejudice is just as strong as a judgment it’s hard to shed it, once applied. A case like Andreas Lubitz’s, by showing how things proceed in the absence of such prejudice, highlights how unfair it is, for those who are not white, not Western, and hence aren’t afforded the benefit of the doubt.

This is not to say that the Germanwings crash should be labelled as terrorism. The definition of terrorism implies an ideological or political motive—if it’s not found, then the cause is different, and hence the labeling should be. But it’s undeniable that the speed at which we ruled out a terrorist act highlights the strong Islamophobic bias that affects the Western world.

http://qz.com/370787/why-authorities-were-so-quick-to-dismiss-terrorism-as-the-cause-of-the-germanwings-crash/