Marshals decry imams' charges (re: US Airways incident)

[Adam_Schwartz]

If you pay attention to EVERYTHING that is being reported about this incident, it appears that US Airways made the right move. Although it is just speculation (and not something I cam up with), some people think these 6 imams did what they did so they could get media attention and claim discrimination. And of course CAIR is all up in arms saying this is a travesty and there should be NO racial profiling of Muslims.

Overall, it's a total crock of shit.

Marshals decry imams' charges

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 29, 2006

Air marshals, pilots and security officials yesterday expressed concern that airline passengers and crews will be reluctant to report suspicious behavior aboard for fear of being called "racists," after several Muslim imams made that charge in a press conference Monday at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.

Six imams, or Muslim holy men, accused a US Airways flight crew of inappropriately evicting them from a flight last week in Minneapolis after several passengers said the imams tried to intimidate them by loudly praying and moving around the airplane. The imams urged Congress to enact laws to prohibit ethnic and religious "profiling." (who didn't see this coming)

Federal air marshals and others yesterday urged passengers to remain vigilant to threats. (as we all should)

"The crew and passengers act as our additional eyes and ears on every flight," said a federal air marshal in Las Vegas, who asked that his name not be used. "If [crew and passengers] are afraid of reporting suspicious individuals out of fear of being labeled a racist or bigot, then terrorists will certainly use those fears to their advantage in future aviation attacks."

But Rabiah Ahmed, spokeswoman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said Muslims "have to walk around on eggshells in public just because we don't want to be misconstrued as suspicious. You have to strike a balance between legitimate fears which people may have, but not allow passengers to have so much discretion that they can trigger a process that would violate a traveler's basic civil rights." (walk around on egg shells? is this guy for real?)

"Because one person misunderstood the actions of other law-abiding citizens, they were able to trigger a very long and daunting process for other travelers that were pulled off the plane in handcuffs and detained for many hours before they were cleared."

The imams say they were removed from the Phoenix-bound flight because they were praying quietly in the concourse. They had been in Minnesota for a conference sponsored by the North American Imams Federation.

But other passengers told police and aviation security officials a different version of the incident. They said suspicious behavior of the imams led to their eviction from the flight. The imams, they said, tested the forbearance of the passengers and flight crew in what the air marshal called a "[political correctness] probe."

"The political correctness needs to be left at the boarding gate," the marshal said. "Instilling politically correct fears into the minds of airline passengers is nothing less than psychological terrorism."

The passengers and flight crew said the imams prayed loudly before boarding; switched seating assignments to a configuration used by terrorists in previous incidents; asked for seat-belt extensions, which could be used as weapons; and shouted hostile slogans about al Qaeda and the war in Iraq.

Flight attendants said three of the six men, who did not appear to be overweight, asked for the seat-belt extensions, which include heavy metal buckles, and then threw them to the floor under their seats.

Robert MacLean, a former federal air marshal, expressed the fear yesterday that the situation "will make crews and passengers in the future second-guess reporting these events, thus compromising the aircraft's security out of fear of being labeled a dogmatist or a bigot, or being sued."

Flight attendants said they were concerned that the way the imams took seats that were not assigned to them -- two seats in the front row of first class, exit seats in the middle of the plane and two seats in the rear -- resembled the pattern used by September 11 hijackers, giving them control of the exits.

A Minneapolis police officer and a federal air marshal who were called to the plane after the imams refused to leave the plane for questioning said "the seating configuration, the request for seat-belt extensions, the prior praying and utterances about Allah and the United States in the gate area ... was suspicious."

One pilot for a competing airline said the incident would have a chilling effect on the flight crews.

"The flight crew may be a little more gun-shy about approaching people, they may have a higher standard for the next few weeks for screening unusual behavior. I hope that's not the case, because I do think US Airways did the proper thing."

Andrea Rader, spokeswoman for US Airways, said its employees "are going to do what is appropriate" to ensure that airplanes are safe and will not be dissuaded by uproar over last week's incident.

"I don't think people will be less vigilant as a result of this, and I think that's appropriate. There is a balance, and I think we will continue to achieve that. Our crews and people on the airplanes are going to watch for behavior that raises concerns."

Many airports offer private rooms for prayer, but CAIR's Miss Ahmed said travelers required to arrive at airports two hours in advance to go through security inspections are too exhausted and must pray at the gate. (what...the....fuck??)

"It's convenient to check in then get to the gate and pray there," she said.

http://washtimes.com/national/20061129-121812-1240r.htm

[Adam_Schwartz]

BTW, here is a little info about one of the imams that was on that flight:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014119.php

Notice the part that says "About the Kind Hearts Organization: Treasury Freezes Assets of Organization Tied to Hamas (again thanks to LGF):"

[mikester]

Sometimes I think that people here have become so fucking stupid that the terrorists deserve to win. :uhh:

[Adam_Schwartz]

Here as in the US? I totally agree - the US is so damn concerned with being overly PC that we forget we are a sovereign nation that needs to protect itself. It is obvious to me that these imams were attempting to cause a scene and in turn politicize the event. People had better wake up to what's going on before we get hit again.

If a few imams doing suspicious activities getting tossed off a plane upsets people, then they can go fuck themselves. "Activist" groups like CAIR need to be shut down pronto - they are as much a part of the problem as anyone else.

[Always Dirty]

After hearing the full details of the situation I think it's insane that there's any criticism of the Air Marshalls or USAir, and those fuckers should be in jail for doing all of this intentionally.

[Adam_Schwartz]

There is always the possibility that some of the imams' actions were made-up or exaggerated, but there are too many reports from flight attendants, air marshals and passengers regarding their actions. And it's not just about them praying too loudly -- it goes well beyond that. The seating quirks, the seat belt extenders, the comments...it's just too much to overlook. There is ZERO doubt in my mind what their intentions were. The great thing is that they are getting called out for it.

I applaud US Airways for doing what they did and hope ALL airlines take these kinds of measures.

[Always Dirty]

There is ZERO doubt in my mind what their intentions were. The great thing is that they are getting called out for it.

:werd:

I applaud US Airways for doing what they did and hope ALL airlines take these kinds of measures.

and :werd:


I haven't been reading the papers lately - how spectacular were the cries of outrage and shame from the US muslim community, directed at these imams?

[Adam_Schwartz]

I haven't been reading the papers lately - how spectacular were the cries of outrage and shame from the US muslim community, directed at these imams?

Here is just one example of the "outrage" by Muslims (the same Muslims that don't express outrage when radicals kill in the name of Islam and tarnish the image of Muslims who are peace loving people). However, this outrage was not directed at the imams. They were directed at US Airways and in a broader sense, the US.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061121/ts_nm/religion_imams_dc

Keep in mind that CAIR is a master at politicizing events like this. If someone is beaten up and they happen to be Muslim, then they call it a "hate crime". How do I know? I have seen CAIR's emails they send out and they are full of shit, which is not unexpected.

[Pull_T]

So basically they did everything they could to mke it appear as though they might be planning something nefarious and then get pissed when people react to their actions?

When I become Chancellor of the World, I will see that people like this are executed.

[mikester]

So basically they did everything they could to mke it appear as though they might be planning something nefarious and then get pissed when people react to their actions?

When I become Chancellor of the World, I will see that people like this are executed.

You've got my vote. :thumbsup:

[Adam_Schwartz]

So basically they did everything they could to mke it appear as though they might be planning something nefarious and then get pissed when people react to their actions?

When I become Chancellor of the World, I will see that people like this are executed.

You have my vote as well.

[Wraab Wall]

So basically they did everything they could to mke it appear as though they might be planning something nefarious and then get pissed when people react to their actions?

When I become Chancellor of the World, I will see that people like this are executed.

:bow:

Got my vote.

[Pull_T]

And by "people like this", I mean idiots...being a pretty staunch liberal, I am counter to simply exterminating people based on beliefs although I am leaning heavily anti-muslim at present.

[Always Dirty]

And by "people like this", I mean idiots...being a pretty staunch liberal, I am counter to simply exterminating people based on beliefs although I am leaning heavily anti-muslim at present.

Whatever, as long as you don't start second guessing your natural instincts or take any kind of pressure or direction from the Hollywood types.

[Pull_T]

If anyone can figure this problem out, they can serve on my cabinet as Special Advisor to The Chancellor:


How do you get Muslim Extremists to specifically target their suicide bombings to only the 70% or so of the American public that needs to be culled? I am very pro-win/win, and this is the type of innovative governing I will employ.

[Pull_T]

Whatever, as long as you don't start second guessing your natural instincts or take any kind of pressure or direction from the Hollywood types.

Yeah, I'm pro-rights...yet I hate people.

[Throtex]

How do you get Muslim Extremists to specifically target their suicide bombings to only the 70% or so of the American public that needs to be culled? I am very pro-win/win, and this is the type of innovative governing I will employ.

Move critical infrastructure to Hollywood.

[Wraab Wall]

Move critical infrastructure to Hollywood.

:spit:

[Adam_Schwartz]

More fun stuff from this whole episode - if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck.

Props to the Washington Times for bringing this info forward.

Imam disputes tie to Hamas

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
December 1, 2006

Omar Shahin, one of six imams removed from a flight last week, says he has traveled the country since the September 11 attacks to promote understanding of the Muslim religion, but he once worked for a group linked to terrorist financing. He insists that the terrorists who leveled the World Trade Center were not Muslims.

Mr. Shahin says he cut ties to KindHearts after the Treasury Department began investigating the group, that "true Muslims" do not murder and were not responsible for the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

"If they claim they are Muslim, they are wrong," Mr. Shahin said yesterday in a telephone interview. "Despite what religion they claim, even if they are all Arabs, to say they are Muslims is wrong, completely wrong.

"We have been asked by God and by the prophet Muhammad to respect all human life. The Koran is very clear, to save one life he saves all human life, and whoever kills one person, he kills all humankind, and that is what Islam is all about." (must explain why only an "itty bitty" percentage of Muslims are radicals)

Mr. Shahin was a representative and fundraiser for KindHearts, which the Treasury Department says "coordinated with Hamas leaders and made contributions to Hamas-affiliated organizations," in a Feb. 19 statement after freezing the groups' assets.

KindHearts was established by Khaled Smaili, an official with the Global Relief Foundation, after the government froze the al Qaeda-affiliated foundation's assets, according to the Treasury Department.

"When they shut down, I had no clue what they were doing," Mr. Shahin said. "I made sure they are licensed as an American organization with the federal government and states, and that's all I did, I was just a fundraiser and representative.

"I stopped and have no relations with anyone, anymore, because they are under investigation."

Mr. Shahin said that KindHearts donated money, through his efforts, to the tsunami victims in Southeast Asia, to Southerners hit by Hurricane Katrina, and to the Red Cross in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Mr. Shahin lives in Phoenix and is the president of the North American Imam Federation, which serves the spiritual and tangible needs of Muslim scholars, helps them improve their relationship with the community, and encourages Muslims to observe the Islamic acts of worship.

He has a doctorate in Islamic law and is a professor at the Graduate Theological Foundation. He also received degrees in Islamic study from universities in Sudan and Saudi Arabia, and holds a diploma in Koranic recitation from the University of Jordan.

He is a native of Jordan and is a naturalized American citizen.
Mr. Shahin is the spokesman for the imams who attended his federation's conference last week in Minnesota and were evicted from US Airways Flight 300 because of suspicious behavior.

The imams dispute the account of seven witnesses, including two law-enforcement officers, that the imams shouted hostile slogans and took unassigned seats in a pattern used by terrorists. Mr. Shahin calls the reports "exaggerations" and "false statements."

"I did everything normal, I did not do anything that is not normal in my mind." He said he and his colleagues were removed from the plane because three of the men said prayers in the concourse.

Mr. Shahin said they did not orchestrate the event to create a lawsuit or make a public issue of profiling Muslim passengers. (oddly enough, BOTH of these things are taking place now)

"We love US Airways, and we want to fly with them," Mr. Shahin said. The Council on American-Islamic Relations will pursue a lawsuit on the imams' behalf, Mr. Shahin said. (as I have said before, CAIR should be shut down and its members deported)

Mr. Shahin says they were not led off the plane in handcuffs, as reported, nor were they kept in handcuffs during their five-hour detention, and they were not harassed by dogs.

Witnesses and aviation-security officials say security concerns arose because of the seating arrangement which resembled a controlled pattern used by the September 11 hijackers -- two in front, two in the middle, two in the rear of the plane. Law-enforcement officials say the men were not in their assigned seats.

The request by three passengers, including Mr. Shahin, for seat-belt extensions, also concerned flight attendants. "That was a dead giveaway," one federal air marshal said yesterday. Flight crews are cautioned about giving out seat-belt extenders because you can turn it into a weapon very easily. You swing that belt buckle, and you can potentially kill someone."

Mr. Shahin says that after they were questioned and released, US Airways declined to sell them another plane ticket, even after an FBI agent intervened at the imam's request. "I told him, 'Please sir, to call them.' And he did and talked for more than 20 minutes. He was trying to tell them we have no problem with the government and we can fly with anybody, but they still refused. He told me, 'I'm sorry I did my best.' I really appreciated it."

Paul McCabe, FBI spokesman in Minneapolis, says no such call took place on behalf of the men. "That never happened," Mr. McCabe said.

[Adam_Schwartz]

BTW, here is a site that discusses some of the CAIR members, past and present. There are numerous instances of CAIR members being found guilty of having ties to terrorist groups, which you won't ever hear from Fox, CNN, etc.

http://www.americansagainsthate.org/cw/profiles_cw.php

Are all CAIR members "bad"? Of course not. Do enough of them have shady pasts and/or connections to shady groups for the US to be concerned? You bet your ass!!

[Always Dirty]

How do you get Muslim Extremists to specifically target their suicide bombings to only the 70% or so of the American public that needs to be culled? I am very pro-win/win, and this is the type of innovative governing I will employ.

Flood middle eastern streets with bootlegged copies of Glitter, Gigli, and all post-Field of Dreams Kevin Costner movies. :dunno:

[Pull_T]

Flood middle eastern streets with bootlegged copies of Glitter, Gigli, and all post-Field of Dreams Kevin Costner movies. :dunno:

Tin Cup was good, so was Dances With Wolves...hell, I don't even think The Postman is a bad flick.

[Adam_Schwartz]

How about Waterworld? That was horrible!

[Pull_T]

How about Waterworld? That was horrible!

Was mediocre to bad.

However, it doesn't make much of a counterpoint to say:

"I disagree, not all of his post Field of Dreams work is bad...I mean, look at Waterworld, it's really bad"

[Adam_Schwartz]

Exactly! It's not bad -- it's horrible!!

[JimmyCarter]

Ok, I think I'm going to get a group of people to dress up as crusaders and hang out around this Imam's mosque. Just do stuff like speak out loudly against the Muslims, ask for stuff like swords or tar for burning, pray loudly to God, etc. We're not going to actually kill anyone, just remind them of the last time we did and how we did it. Who's with me?

[Always Dirty]

Our alma mater's mascot would be in for some of that.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3561/88crusfzv7.jpg

[Stevo Stitches]

Profiling works. :yes:

[Adam_Schwartz]

Profiling's good, m'kay!

[Adam_Schwartz]

The latest on this debacle. Now the imams have taken on CAIR as their legal counsel, which should send up massive red flags. But they are also trying to shake money out of US AirWays, which is pathetic and laughable at the same time.

Imams seek to settle with airline

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A group of Muslim imams is seeking an out-of-court settlement with US Airways, saying they should not have been removed from a Minnesota-to-Phoenix flight last month and were not behaving suspiciously.

Five of the six Islamic religious leaders have retained the Council on American-Islamic Relations for legal representation and are seeking a "mutually agreeable" resolution, said Nihad Awad, CAIR executive director.

US Airways scheduled a meeting with the imams on Dec. 4 to discuss the incident, but the men canceled it and hired the activist group to act as legal counsel.

"With the hopes of reaching an amicable resolution to this matter, we would like to take this opportunity to ask for a formal meeting with US Airways executives and legal counsel," said Arsalan Iftikhar, CAIR's national legal director, in a letter to the airline.

The imams represented by CAIR include Omar Shahin, Didmar Faja, Ahmad Shqeirat, Marwan Sadeddin and Mohamed Ibrahim.

Mahmoud Sulaiman of New Mexico is the only imam not included as a plaintiff.

Mr. Sulaiman is the passenger who asked another passenger to switch seats with him to accommodate a blind imam and was one of three imams who asked for a seat-belt extension even though the police report cites his weight at 170 pounds.

The Washington Times first reported on Nov. 28 that the imams were not in their assigned seats, but seated in a formation similar to the September 11 hijackers and controlled the exits to the plane. The men also requested seat-belt extensions but did not appear to need them, and engaged in conversations critical of the United States, according to police reports and eyewitness statements.

The imams and CAIR officials maintain that press reports as well as Internet sites and blogs have circulated charges they say misrepresent the facts of the Nov. 20 incident. (of course, everyone else is wrong and you are right - what's new?)

"Unfortunately, the false claims and smears used against these religious leaders only serve to cloud the real issue involved, that of how national security can be maintained while preserving constitutionally protected freedoms and respect for religious diversity," said Mr. Awad.

CAIR says the men were handcuffed for several hours and is also demanding hearings on religious and ethnic profiling at airports. (hmmmmm, see paragraph below with comments from one of the imams...anyone see a problem??)

Mr. Shahin told The Washington Times he was only handcuffed for "10 or 15 minutes" and that the imams were not led off the plane in handcuffs.

Federal air marshals and pilots called the imams' actions a probe of airport security as well as a probe of the politically correct mentality of air passengers.

The Washington Times reported in 2004 that flight crews and passengers were experiencing a number of terrorist probes, most notably Northwest Airlines Flight 327 from Detroit to Los Angeles in June 2004, during which 14 Syrian men posing as musicians may have practiced a dry run.

Also in July 2004, a passenger from Syria was taken into custody at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport while carrying anti-American materials and a note suggesting he intended to commit suicide.

A pilot reported that he watched a man of Middle Eastern descent at the Minneapolis airport using binoculars to get airplane tail numbers and writing the numbers in a notebook to correspond with flight numbers. (he is just an airplane watcher, no big deal)

An airline spokeswoman says they have received the request from CAIR for a meeting, as well as a meeting request from Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, Minnesota Democrat, the first Muslim elected to Congress, but no date has been set. (now we see the real Keith Ellison...while he was campaigning, he completely downplayed the fact that he is a Muslim, but now he is Super Muslim)

"As far as we are concerned, we are done, and we will continue to back the crew, but we do want to reach out to the passengers," said spokeswoman Andrea Rader. (props to US Airways for sticking to their guns)

Muslims held a pray-in recently at the Minneapolis airport and called for a prayer room to accommodate their rigorous prayer schedule.

"Actually, the topic of a prayer room never came up in our meeting," said airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "They mentioned it to the press before the meeting."

The airport already has two areas where anyone of any faith can pray -- a privately operated Community Counseling Center operated by a minister who encourages people of all faiths to pray in his facility and another area on the mezzanine level.

"Our intent at present is simply to increase public awareness of those facilities through signage and other outreach activities," Mr. Hogan said.

"If over time we find we need more space to accommodate people's needs, we would consider looking at other alternatives. In any case, the space would be for people of all faiths -- or none, for that matter -- and not dedicated to the practice of a particular belief system," he said.

[Adam_Schwartz]

Link for above story: http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20061211-124608-1061r.htm

[Adam_Schwartz]

Something of interest related to this incident. Not that it isn't obvious, but more people are waking up to the idea that these 6 imams had much bigger plans in mind when they did what they did on that US Airways jet. These imams and those who they align with want to financially rape any airline that dares protect itself and its passengers from suspicious activity. But even more, the main goal is to outlaw any type of profiling, no matter how effective it is.

Also, it's really no wonder that this happened in the same district that Keith Ellison represents, the same Keith Ellison who was a member of the racist Nation of Islam in college and is now buddy-buddy with CAIR.

I am sure some of you don't give a shit about this, but I think (actually, I know) it's very important and could snowball into bigger and worse things. The US cannot allow itself to be taken over by groups like CAIR - it's unacceptable.

Katherine Kersten: The real purpose behind the imam publicity blitz

By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune

Last update: December 14, 2006 – 11:17 AM

On Dec. 1, a curious report on the grounded-imams incident at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport appeared on the website of the Iranian Quran News Agency. The report quoted extensively from Madhi Bray, executive director of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation. The foundation is the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group," according to the Chicago Tribune.
Bray's initial statement about the incident had an all-American, see-you-in-court ring. He demanded "large financial compensation for the imams," adding, "We want US Airways and any other airline displaying this type of behavior against Muslims to be hit where it hurts, the pocketbook."

The report echoed statements made by the imams themselves. Omar Shahin, their spokesman, has portrayed the incident in a way that's consistent with a lawsuit and a public relations offensive. He's called for a Jesse Jackson-style boycott of US Airways, and applied classic civil-rights rhetoric to the incident: "This is prejudice; this is obvious discrimination," the Star Tribune quoted him as saying. "I cannot change the color of my skin," he told Newsweek. (but you CAN change the way you behave on an airplane!!)

But the report on the Iranian website, which has appeared on a variety of Muslim websites worldwide, had a larger primary focus. After the imams incident, it quoted Bray as saying Muslims want "new, broad-sweeping legislation that will extract even larger financial and civil penalties for any airline that participates in racial and religious profiling."

The report is optimistic that Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will lend his support to new legislation. Ellison, it says, has expressed his opposition to "such racial and religious profiling." Ellison, through a spokesman, declined to comment.

One piece of legislation in the works is the End Racial Profiling Act. It is an important priority of Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, whose district includes one of the largest Muslim populations in the country. Conyers introduced the bill in 2004 and 2005, but it went nowhere. Now the alignment of forces may be changing. Conyers will probably be chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when the new Democratic-controlled Congress convenes next month.

Nancy Pelosi, who called herself a "proud" cosponsor of the Profiling Act in 2004, is the incoming House speaker. And in January, Ellison, who represents the district where the imams incident occurred, will take his seat in Congress.

The act, although it doesn't as yet impose large penalties, would bar any federal, state or local law enforcement agency from "relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in selecting which individuals to subject to routine or spontaneous investigatory activities." That would include questioning, searches and seizures. (in other words, we'd be succumbing to yet another special interest group, thus sacrificing our own security. Makes sense to me!)

One of the act's central features is its definition of illegal profiling. Under it, if airport security personnel question passengers who are disproportionately Muslim or of Middle Eastern descent, this alone would constitute a presumptive violation of the law. Law enforcement agencies would bear the burden of proving that discrimination was not the cause.

What would the effect of such a law be?

"A law that would compel security professionals to focus on keeping their statistics within certain norms rather than on their mission keeping airline travel safe would have a devastating effect on our ability to ensure airline safety," said Daniel Horan of the Los Angeles Police Department in an interview. He worked at the Los Angeles airport on profiling-related issues for 6 years.

In the past few weeks the public relations campaign for the Profiling Act has moved into high gear. On Tuesday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations advised American Muslims to beware of the dangers of "flying while Muslim." (right, because Muslims are sooooo oppressed in the US) In light of recent allegations of "airport profiling," it said, the council has set up a toll-free hotline for pilgrims traveling to Mecca for the hajj, or annual pilgrimage, who believe that their rights have been violated. in other words, CAIR wants more ammo for its political agenda

The End of Racial Profiling Act has languished until now. What did it need to reinvigorate it? New congressional leadership, and that's coming in January. But it needed something else in this media age: a high-profile incident to jump-start it.

What better than the media circus at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport on Nov. 20?

Katherine Kersten • kkersten@startribune.com

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/874480.html

[gabe]

<=== definitely not flying to london (or on the return flight) with any muslims.

[Always Dirty]

Do we have any muslims on the board that I can take my frustration out on subtly and without apparent reason over a long period of time?

[Thunder Dump]

mrhairy2guy

[Pull_T]

Do we have any muslims on the board that I can take my frustration out on subtly and without apparent reason over a long period of time?

There's really nothing wrong with Islam. Just an issue that there is a large contingent of people who rally behind that banner to legitimize horrible ideas and acts.

Really no different than catholic, protestant and eastern orthodox Christian violence against each other and other religions/peoples over the last dozen or so centuries.

[Adam_Schwartz]

Right, it's those who practice Islam and are stuck in the 7th century that is the main problem, as well as those who appear to be moderate but are as conservative as the dirty beards in Afgahnistan.

We can only hope that some type of enlightenment occurs among the "antiquated" Muslims, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. That would require moderate Muslims to step up and take control of their religion. However, most moderates are too scared or are not given enough coverage to make an impact.

CAIR would be a PERFECT group to improve Islam's image and promote its moderate followers, but instead they have turned into another "we are oppressed, our civil rights have been violated" Nation of Islam wanna-be.

[kurt_bradley]

Tin Cup was good, so was Dances With Wolves...hell, I don't even think The Postman is a bad flick.

I'm with you on Tin Cup, but not the others. Everything else he's done was crap. And for the record, Field of Dreams is in my top 5.

[Adam_Schwartz]

Who didn't see this coming? It was painfully obvious that these imams did what they did to make profiling a crime. Now it is being seriously considered by our politicians. Forget the fact that US Airways had every right to do what they did given the actions of the imams, not to mention the shady ties some of these imams had to radical groups. The US is basically opening the door to more attacks IMO, assuming this passes.


Congress Pressured to Ban Racial Profiling

By FREDERIC J. FROMMER
AP

WASHINGTON (Jan. 28) - The repercussions of an airline's decision to remove a group of imams from a commercial flight in Minneapolis could be heard in Congress this year, with civil rights groups pushing Democratic lawmakers to ban racial profiling. (notice there is no mention of WHY these imams were removed?)

The incident happened in November, made national news and reinvigorated an old proposal that got little attention from the GOP.

Now, a champion of the legislation, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on the issue. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who sponsored legislation to ban racial profiling in the last Congress, now chairs the Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution.

No bill has been introduced so far, but Feingold made it clear the issue will be a priority for him.

"Many law-abiding African Americans, Arab Americans, Latino Americans and others live with the fear of being racially profiled as they go about their everyday lives," Feingold said. Although the vast majority of law enforcement officers don't engage in the practice, he added, some do and it must be addressed.

"I look forward to working with Chairman Conyers in the House as well as others to ensure that no one is judged by how they look or where they worship," he said.

Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington office, said he was optimistic a bill could get through Congress.

"I'm convinced that once the body of evidence of racial profiling occurring in our nation is presented before the U.S. Congress and the American people, that indeed they'll be compelled to do something about it," he said.

Shelton said he's spoken about the issue with Conyers and is hopeful for action on legislation soon — perhaps as early as next month. Conyers declined to comment for this story.

Feingold's last bill would have banned federal, state and local law enforcement officials from "relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion" during investigations.

An exemption would have been made for specific information that "links a person of a particular race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion to an identified incident or scheme."

Some security-oriented groups are gearing up to fight a new version of the bill.

"It would have the effect of estranging police officers from the community that they serve," said Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police. "It would make them more hesitant to stop people who might well be in violation of the law for fear that they're going to get written up because of some racial protocol."

Peter Gadiel, of Kent, Conn., president of 9/11 Families for a Secure America, mocked the legislation.

"The 9/11 atrocity was committed by 19 young single men from Arab nations. If you want to hand this country over to terrorists, why don't you say it right out front?" said Gadiel, whose son, James, died in the attacks on the World Trade Center. "We don't have to worry about 80-year-old ladies with bleach-blonde hair and southern accents."

Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 — twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air — even though he has done nothing wrong.

"It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated," said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. "This is not the country I came to know."

Eric Blum, a Customs and Border Protection spokesman, said that while he couldn't comment on specific cases, the agency does not use racial profiling.

"However, we will scrutinize cargo and individuals coming from high-risk countries — no matter what your nationality," he said, adding that people can also be detained if their name matches one on a watch list.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/congress-pressured-to-ban-racial/20070128120409990001?cid=2194

[M TYPE X]

The air marshals are sane ... the politicians? Not quite.

[Adam_Schwartz]

The politicians just want to add to their already large following of "oppressed" citizens.

The issue I have with the US Airways incident is that the imams were acting suspiciously, not just being Muslims. But you don't see that from most media outlets - maybe the Washington Post and a few others, but certainly not AP and Reuters. Now politicians are going to attempt to pass one more law that ties our law enforcement agents' collective hands behind their backs. Bush damn well better veto this, assuming it even makes it to his desk.

[Adam_Schwartz]

The latest on this issue. Looks like the imams want to only target "John Does" who are racists and bigots....uhhhhh, OK.

Imams narrow target of 'Does'

By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 31, 2007

A group of imams suing US Airways for discrimination amended their lawsuit this week to target only the "John Doe" passengers who they say are racist and falsely accused them of behaving suspiciously.

The six imams were removed from a flight in Minneapolis in November for disruptive behavior reported by passengers and members of the flight crew.

The lawsuit filed earlier this month targeted "passengers who contacted US Airways to report the alleged 'suspicious' behavior of plaintiffs performing their prayer at the airport terminal." so in other words, they are going after ANYONE they can in order to potentially scare others from reporting suspicious activity in the future...NICE!!

The amended lawsuit identifies possible John Does as individuals who "may have made false reports against plaintiffs solely with the intent to discriminate against them on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity and national origin." (what?!?)

"The only individuals against whom suit may be raised in this litigation are those who may have knowingly made false reports against the imams with the intent to discriminate against them," Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in a letter this week to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm. The Becket Fund had publicly condemned CAIR for supporting the case. more evidence that CAIR sucks pig balls

"The imams will not sue any passengers who reported suspicious activity in good faith, even when the 'suspicious' behavior included the imams' constitutionally protected right to practice their religion without fear or intimidation," Mr. Nihad said. "When a person makes a false report with the intent to discriminate, he or she is not acting in good faith."

The imams are being represented by New York lawyer Omar Mohammedi in the lawsuit, which has triggered an outcry among lawyers who say they will defend the "John Does" for free.

Becket Fund Chairman Kevin Hasson criticized the amended changes in a letter to CAIR on Thursday.

"There is no way Mr. Mohammedi can possibly determine whether the John Does 'knowingly made false reports' against his clients 'with the intent to discriminate against them' without taking their testimony under oath, at least during pretrial discovery," Mr. Hasson said.

"That prospect alone, of being dragged into court proceedings, will certainly provide a great disincentive for other citizens to come forward with their own suspicions," he said.

The case prompted House Republicans on Tuesday to insert a shield law for "John Does" into a rail safety bill. The legislation would protect passengers against lawsuits for reporting suspicious behavior that foreshadows a terrorist attack.

It is "unconscionable" that those who report suspicious activity could be "terrorized in our own court system in our own country," said Rep. Steve Pearce, New Mexico Republican, who introduced the measure.

"Religious liberty is not absolute," Mr. Hasson said. "It must yield before the government's legitimately compelling interests. And the prevention of terrorism aboard airlines is certainly such an interest."

The Becket Fund labeled the case "legal terrorism," which Mr. Awad said "only adds to the empty and sensationalistic rhetoric of those who seek to disparage and demonize a segment of our society."

"It was not meant as an insult," Mr. Hasson said. "I think the public outcry over the targeting of the John Does proves the point I was trying to make. That legal tactic is self-defeating."

[Always Dirty]

Legal terrorism. Perfect term.

[Adam_Schwartz]

Nothing surprises me anymore. I am soooooo sure these people who accused the imams were all racist and said that morning "You know, I really want to falsely accuse some imams of suspicious activity. I sure hope I see some at the airport today!"

I said it a long time ago that these imams were on a mission to attempt to make it nearly impossible for anyone to accuse a Muslim of suspicious behavior, unless of course the accused had already lopped someone's head off. This was a highly calculated event, that is apparent IMO. Once CAIR got their dirty noses involved, that confirmed it for me.

And your phrase of 'legal terrorism' is dead on.

[Always Dirty]

Not mine - from your article. But it really does capture the situation perfectly.

CAIR's actions are premeditated and all have a single purpose. That they're able to take advantage of our current politically correct environment is a tragedy that needs to be recognized before things get any further out of hand.

[Adam_Schwartz]

Not mine - from your article. But it really does capture the situation perfectly.

CAIR's actions are premeditated and all have a single purpose. That they're able to take advantage of our current politically correct environment is a tragedy that needs to be recognized before things get any further out of hand.

Duh, I knew that. You should have just taken credit!

As Young said a few months ago, there are other "Islamic rights" groups in the US that make CAIR look like a sewing club. But CAIR receives serious airtime and uses their leverage for cases like this. The great thing is that more people are realizing that CAIR is full of shit and has a clear cut agenda. Of course they paint themselves as oppressed by Islamophobes, but they have gone to that well one too many times.