So now we kick Muslims off planes for praying?

[hmurchison]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230939,00.html

The imams were among the passengers who boarded Phoenix-bound Flight 300 in Minneapolis, and had been attending a conference of the North American Imams Federation. They were removed Monday evening after three of them recited their evening prayers in the airport terminal before boarding the plane, a leader of the group said.

"We call on relevant authorities to investigate whether proper procedures were followed by security personnel and members of the US Airways flight crew," said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Washington-based Council on American Islamic Relations.

"We are concerned that crew members, passengers and security personnel may have succumbed to fear and prejudice based on stereotyping of Muslims and Islam," he said.

A passenger initially raised concerns about the group through a note passed to a flight attendant, according to Andrea Rader, a spokeswoman for US Airways. She said police were called after the captain and airport security workers asked the men to leave the plane and the men refused

"They took us off the plane, humiliated us in a very disrespectful way," said Omar Shahin, one of the six clerics. Shahin and four of the others are from the Phoenix-Tempe area while the sixth is from Bakersfield, California.

Shahin attributed any concerns by passengers or crew to ignorance about Islam.

"I never felt bad in my life like that," he said. "I never. Six imams. Six leaders in this country. Six scholars in handcuffs. It's terrible."

CAIR planned a news conference Tuesday in Phoenix in which it said it would call on authorities to investigate the incident.

The clerics told CAIR they suspected the "suspicious activity" cited by authorities was the performance of normal evening prayers, according to a statement by the advocacy group.

The clerics also denied that they refused to leave the plane or that they chanted "Allah," the Arabic word for God, as they were escorted from the flight, said CAIR.

Public prayer is not a threat to safety or security and should not be viewed as suspicious or criminal activity, said the statement by CAIR.

Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR's spokesman, said the conference which the clerics attended drew about 150 imams from all over the country, and that those attending included Democratic U.S. Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, who just became the first Muslim elected to Congress.

Shahin said they went as far as notifying police and the FBI about their meeting in advance. He also expressed frustration that, despite efforts by him and other Muslim leaders since even before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, that so many American know so little about Islam.

"If up to now they don't know about prayers, this is a real problem," he said.

Shahin said Tuesday that the group spent Monday night in the Minneapolis area at the home of a local imam. Hooper said US Airways refused to put the men on another flight.

Hogan said more information would likely be released Tuesday.



I'm pretty disgusted. No one would have batted an eye had they made any open statement to Christianity. There are enough protections in our Airports now. Why are people still willing to disrespect those who do not pray to the same God?

[gregmightdothat]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230939,00.html




I'm pretty disgusted. No one would have batted an eye had they made any open statement to Christianity. There are enough protections in our Airports now. Why are people still willing to disrespect those who do not pray to the same God?
Just a nitpick, but actually, they do pray to the same god. The Qur'an specifically states he's the same as the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

[hmurchison]

While the methods of mayhem may be different Christians (of which I am) have their own history of bloodshed. May God never let me or my Religion bear the brunt for the actions of a few radicals.

[spindler]

Personally, I don't believe extreme Muslims or Christians belong in this country. If you don't believe that the democratic ideals that all people are created equal takes precedence over everything else, I really don't mind if you get kicked out of America. If any group of people's ultimate goals are to please God, rather than all people leaving at peace and being equal, they don't deserve to be in America.

Any group of people who MUST wear certain garb or do extreme things like praying on a plane has my extreme suspicion. Religion has done enough damage and as an American I shouldn't have to see anyone praying on a plane. If you simply can not wait until you land, your religion seems extreme enough to quickly override all the democratic ideals that are American. If they can't wait until the plane lands, screw them. The only religion allowed should be vague references to ideals like kindness, etc. When things start getting extreme, I really couldn't care less. I don't care about your "right" to slaughter an animal in a cruel way because your god is watching and wants it killed by slitting its throat. Sorry, that's kooky. If you can't wait until you get home to pray, I'm guessing you're a kook.

[hmurchison]

The actually prayed before getting on a plane. I think the question is if a Christian did the same thing before hopping on a plane would they be ejected? I don't think the typical American knows about how strongly Muslims interwine their faith with their lives. While we go to Church on Sundays and sometimes Wednesdays Muslims pray 5 times a day and whole cities will grow quiet as the process happens. I was in Saudi and it was just magical...Riyadh would just slow down to a murmer with bells and music in the background.

I agree Fundamentist/Radicals do a disservice to both but we have codified freedom of religion in our very own Constitution so why are we usurping these Muslims' faith. Why must their practice of their religion show deferrence to our irrational fears?

[spindler]

I'm not too fond of being around a bunch of Christians praying either. Any kind of religion en masse is scary. If Americans really had any sort of interest in the human race, they would boycott the stations that bring us Dr. Phil and the latest child molester. Until that happens, any religion on a large scale does nothing but scare me.

[spindler]

I do see your (HMurchison's) point that you have to be consistent though.

[Chris Cuilla]

This sort of thing is indicative of what happens when we substitute presumed intent as a reason to "convict" or "indict" a person (or group).

Clearly prayer (public or otherwise) is not an illegal activity, in fact it is constitutionally protected.

As to whether this would have happen if they were Christians. Who knows. The general climate today suggests it might have. Sadly different people would have risen to the defense/justification of both sides depending on who the wronged party was/is rather than appealing to the general principle that these people had done nothing at all to harm another person by force or violence and were merely exercising their freedoms as declared in the constitution. Frankly all supporters of liberty should be concerned about this report. As to the claim that "No one would have batted an eye had they made any open statement to Christianity."...that is certainly a fallacious claim.

I think we can all understand the emotional concern/fear here. But these emotions need to be balanced with facts (specifically that these people were not or had not done anything to threaten violence or harm to anyone). Obviously if they had begun to take such actions later in the flight, the circumstances change (now we have actual actions...rather than presumed intentions) to deal with.

( having said all of that, we also ought to be careful about assuming that we have all of the facts of the situation...often there are things not reported that change the circumstances...not saying that there are in this case...just a cautionary warning we should all heed )

[southside grabowski]

Jihad Watch, Michelle Malkin and Alah Pundid are following this. Atleast one of these so called imams has terrorist links: "Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch notes that "Omar Shahin, one of the imams removed from the plane, has links to Osama bin Laden and Hamas." Power Line has more. Allah has background and Jim Hoft sums it up:

As long as Muslims are trying to explode their shoes on Trans-Atlantic flights, planning to use baby bottles as bombs from London to New York, and smashing jets into skyscrapers, we will see more instances like this one.
The six imams might as well get used to it.:"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014125.php

[Chris Cuilla]

Jihad Watch, Michelle Malkin and Alah Pundid are following this. Atleast one of these so called imams has terrorist links: "Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch notes that "Omar Shahin, one of the imams removed from the plane, has links to Osama bin Laden and Hamas."

I think we need to be very careful here.

Is having "links" (whatever that might be/mean) to someone or some group illegal? If so, why? How? Under what circumstances?

The first problem with the "links" argument (another variation on the presumed intent argument), is that anyone could be "linked" to anyone else with a little creativity.

The second problem is that it (once again) presumes that just because someone has "links" to a particular person (or group) a) they share the same views, beliefs, ideas, etc. or, b) they will carry out some particular action that the other "linked" person/group advocates or promotes. Neither of these may be true.

NOTE: I have not even address the tenuous nature of "links" because I don't even think it is a valid line of argument against someone...but "links" could mean that they buy their suits at the same store for crying out loud! But even if I were to take a more generous interpretation and say that they attend the same mosque...how does that further any guilt? If someone that attends the same church as I do perpetrates a terrorist act, am I also suspect because I have "links" to that person?

[Hassan i Sabbah]

OK. In an ideal world, in an ideal America, I mean an America that lives up to its ideal, it would be wonderful if Muslim people could pray before they boarded a plane and no-one objected. Indeed, if people were proud of their tolerance.

Those fuckers want to kill us? We will continue being generous to our fellow Americans. We will take pride that we are better than the people who want to kill us. This means we will be proud right here, in America, because we know that's worth something.

Terrorism is about instilling fear. That's why it's called 'terrorism'. Giving into fear is a victory to the terrorists. There is nothing patriotic, noble or dignified about giving into fear. It is capitulation. It is giving the fuckers what they want, the exact thing they've attempted to achieve.

Islam's NOT THE ENEMY. Muslims ARE NOT THE ENEMY. The enemy, and I'm sorry if this sounds clichéd, is fear, and capitulation to fear.

[hmurchison]

Didn't Frank Sinatra have mob links? The Bush family knows the whole Bin Laden family.....would that not constitute a "link to terrorism"

It's fairly black or white here. The Constitution clearly states that one has the right to practice their religion unencumbered by potential retribution
by the Govt. Now clearly the airlines are not the Govt and I stand by their decision inashmuch as they had the right to make it. What I don't have to
agree with is their motives. What they did was not done in the spirit of what makes America the best place on the planet to be and for that I'm disappointed.

[Bergermeister]

Before a ball game, the players all pray. When a new player comes on the field, he crosses himself. After scoring, players again cross themselves.

If they are Christian, it's OK.

Hmmm...

[hardeeharhar]

OK. In an ideal world, in an ideal America, I mean an America that lives up to its ideal, it would be wonderful if Muslim people could pray before they boarded a plane and no-one objected. Indeed, if people were proud of their tolerance.

Those fuckers want to kill us? We will continue being generous to our fellow Americans. We will take pride that we are better than the people who want to kill us. This means we will be proud right here, in America, because we know that's worth something.

Terrorism is about instilling fear. That's why it's called 'terrorism'. Giving into fear is a victory to the terrorists. There is nothing patriotic, noble or dignified about giving into fear. It is capitulation. It is giving the fuckers what they want, the exact thing they've attempted to achieve.

Islam's NOT THE ENEMY. Muslims ARE NOT THE ENEMY. The enemy, and I'm sorry if this sounds clichéd, is fear, and capitulation to fear.
Quite right.

[mydo]

Echo echo echo ....

[southside grabowski]

Before a ball game, the players all pray. When a new player comes on the field, he crosses himself. After scoring, players again cross themselves.

If they are Christian, it's OK.

Hmmm...


If radical Christians had flown airplanes into buildings killing thousands in recent history, we would be just has concerned about Christian display in public. The Muslims have lost the trust of the people. It is not too complicated.

[Bergermeister]

A radical Christian controls the WH and has lost the trust of the people. We should be concerned.

The British seem to think Bush is right down there on the level of Bin and Kim:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1938436,00.html

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2006/11/02/world10a.jpg

[Bergermeister]

No, Southside. It was a discriminatory act, period, and it shows how low American society has sunk post 9/11 (which by the way has not been completely proven to have been caused by Muslims alone; Bush needed provocation for his war and quite frankly, I do not trust anything he says).

[Chris Cuilla]

The British seem to think Bush is right down there on the level of Bin and Kim:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1938436,00.html

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2006/11/02/world10a.jpg

And, of course, because the British think it is so...it is so. Sheesh.

[Bergermeister]

Hi, Chris. I have missed your style.

The British think that way... many people around the world think that way... what about the Americans? Does America care that the world is scared of the US president?

The world:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=825

As for what Americans think:

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
Scroll down to
"Do you think the war in Iraq has helped the war on terrorism, or has it hurt the war on terrorism?"

This one is good, too:
"Do you think the war with Iraq has made the U.S. safer or less safe from terrorism?"

More Americans think the Iraq war (Bush's policy) has hurt the war on terrorism (what war?) and made the US less safe. Oddly, American polls never ask about making the world safer or not; selfishness, I guess.

I would argue that the war of terror and blah blah blah is leading to problems like the one at the top of this thread.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

Chris, if even the British think your President is a liability, you clearly have a problem.

[Chris Cuilla]

( at the risk of lending more credence to this derailment into the "George W. Bush is evil and everyone agrees" red herring... )

Bergermeister, I think you have missed my point.

First, while GWB may (or may not) be as evil as OBL or Kim (or <insert evil leader here>) isn't the point. The problem is your pointing to an opinion poll to support this assertion. Secondly, I find it ironic that you point to the overwhelming (and possibly irrational) opinion of fear (of GWB) as a counter point to a different (possibly irrational) opinion of fear (of Muslims getting onto planes and using them as missiles).

[segovius]

Have to agree with Chris C a couple of posts above. This would and does happen with Christianity also.

Witness the recent UK case where a woman member of staff was banned by British Airways for wearing a cross. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6051486.stm)

Personally I have no interest in the issue from a religious/rights pov but I think what we are seeing is a whole host of minority interest groups who could not push their agendas previously but are now empowered to do so in the wake of 911 and the anti-Muslim sentiment that pervades all societies.

I do not think any of these groups are anti-Muslim per se but merely use that as the convenient hook, there are racist groups, political groups, atheist groups - all using it as a means to leverage their agenda.

In many of these cases I think there is an anti religion agenda being played out rather than a specifically anti-Islam one. If you look carefully behind the headlines of the 'big ticket' items such as debate on veils or prayers on planes you will see many anti-Christian, anti-Jewish agendas being played out and uncommented on while everyone is looking elsewhere.

We should see this for what it is before we form an opinion one way or another - there is an anti-religion bandwagon rolling and it is hiding behind the WOT etc - but if you are religious of any stripe it is most certainly rolling in your direction.

[southside grabowski]

Have to agree with Chris C a couple of posts above. This would and does happen with Christianity also.

Witness the recent UK case where a woman member of staff was banned by British Airways for wearing a cross. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6051486.stm)

Personally I have no interest in the issue from a religious/rights pov but I think what we are seeing is a whole host of minority interest groups who could not push their agendas previously but are now empowered to do so in the wake of 911 and the anti-Muslim sentiment that pervades all societies.

I do not think any of these groups are anti-Muslim per se but merely use that as the convenient hook, there are racist groups, political groups, atheist groups - all using it as a means to leverage their agenda.

In many of these cases I think there is an anti religion agenda being played out rather than a specifically anti-Islam one. If you look carefully behind the headlines of the 'big ticket' items such as debate on veils or prayers on planes you will see many anti-Christian, anti-Jewish agendas being played out and uncommented on while everyone is looking elsewhere.

We should see this for what it is before we form an opinion one way or another - there is an anti-religion bandwagon rolling and it is hiding behind the WOT etc - but if you are religious of any stripe it is most certainly rolling in your direction.




Some truth here, but not the basis of the flying Imams problem. There is a war on religion in general. This is most true in Western Europe.

The Imams were not victims of the war on religion, however. Most modern terrorism is committed, sincerely or not, in the name of Islam. We are and will continue to be vigilant of Muslims. Nothing complicated here.

[segovius]

Some truth here, but not the basis of the flying Imams problem. There is a war on religion in general. This is most true in Western Europe.

The Imams were not victims of the war on religion, however. Most modern terrorism is committed, sincerely or not, in the name of Islam. We are and will continue to be vigilant of Muslims. Nothing complicated here.

Funny - that's the same logic that Islamic extremists use; most of the acts they object to are committed by Americans so therefore they oppose all Americans and their activities regardless and without dsicrimination.

The two camps are very similar and are based on the same (lack of) reasoning.

But we knew that.

[southside grabowski]

We are vigilant of Muslims. They want to kill all Americans. Not at all the same thing.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

We are vigilant of Muslims. They want to kill all Americans. Not at all the same thing.
Um... what, all Muslims?

All Muslims want to kill all Americans?

[southside grabowski]

Islamic extremists . I should have quoted by friend Sego to put it in context.

Moe

[southside grabowski]

some interesting points from Michelle Malkin:

Watch the MSM coverage of this publicity stunt carefully.

Will they mention Shahin's admitted ties to Osama bin Laden and denial of the 9/11 al Qaeda plot?

Or his connection to a Hamas-linked terror charity front?

Will they mention Mahdi Bray's terror-sympathizing statements and stances?

Or the Muslim American Society's radical embrace of sharia and faux pose as the "moderate" front for the Muslim Brotherhood? (My debate on Laura Ingraham's radio show with one of the double-talking MAS spokesmen here.)

Or will they mindlessly play along with the grievance-mongers, lazily echoing the cries of "Islamophobia" and joining in self-flagellation?

http://michellemalkin.com/

[segovius]

some interesting points from Michelle Malkin:

Watch the MSM coverage of this publicity stunt carefully.

Will they mention Shahin's admitted ties to Osama bin Laden and denial of the 9/11 al Qaeda plot?

Or his connection to a Hamas-linked terror charity front?

Will they mention Mahdi Bray's terror-sympathizing statements and stances?

Or the Muslim American Society's radical embrace of sharia and faux pose as the "moderate" front for the Muslim Brotherhood? (My debate on Laura Ingraham's radio show with one of the double-talking MAS spokesmen here.)

Or will they mindlessly play along with the grievance-mongers, lazily echoing the cries of "Islamophobia" and joining in self-flagellation?

http://michellemalkin.com/

Yeah fascinating :rolleyes:

[southside grabowski]

The left has had its knee jerk shout of racism, but we continue to hear more about this situation:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061128-122902-7522r.htm

http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/28/the-flying-imams/

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/016045.php


These look like suspicious fellows to me.

[MacRR]

Let's break it down to view points:

The offended in this forum:
Obvious religious intolerance because they were de-boarded and handcuffed for praying.

The passenger who handed the note to the airline employee:
Obvious muslims praying in the terminal moments before boarding plane (especially if they were on the strict muslim prayer schedule for the time and place) who may or may have not been speaking badly about the Iraq war <- this is worthy of offense IMO- but it's not the end of the view points involved- just someone's gut feeling.

Airline crew and airport security:
Report of muslims praying together in airport terminal who subsequently boarded the plane and then sat in different sections of the plane- first class and two different areas of coach including the rear of the plane. Also, they did not sit in their assigned seats.

Now does this not sound familiar? If you were security, would you not be obliged to make sure this was not shady?

It's not like airport security descended and took these people into custody for praying- they certainly didn't fly out of the woodwork as soon as the guys started praying. There was a passenger tip, then airline employees looked at the whole situation and reported it to security because it fit an uncomfortable pattern. Hell, if the guys sat together and in one section of the airplane in their assigned seats it might not have been an issue.

If there is religious intolerance, I just don't see it all things considered.

[MacRR]

And for the conspiracy theorists- why not look at this as a possible scenario.

IMO, it would be pure strategic genius to manufacture situations like this- scream racism and break security down until it was possible for muslims to get through and repeat 9/11.

And let's pretend muslims are the only ones to be severely inconvenienced by airport security. there are shit tons of examples of people who are not muslims treated exactly the same.

[Chris Cuilla]

Obvious religious intolerance because they were de-boarded and handcuffed for praying.

In all fairness. That is about all that the original article reported. Admittedly that article contained information primarily from the offended or their representatives. Only one comment from an airline spokesperson...none from any passengers or airport security or the police.

If there is religious intolerance, I just don't see it all things considered.

OK...but you have added some new details (the seating situation for example...the sitting apart things isn't a big deal...but the unassigned seats might be a possible clue of intended malfeasance...but even that depends right? I mean was a guy sitting in 16A instead of 16B...you get what I am saying).

Don't get me wrong...they folks may very well have intended to perpetrate some terrorist act. We don't really know...and all we really have is circumstantial evidence of the possibility that maybe they might have thought about planning to...blah blah blah.

EDIT: Having gone back to read some of the additional links provided upthread, my original suggestion seems to have been worth heeding:

( having said all of that, we also ought to be careful about assuming that we have all of the facts of the situation...often there are things not reported that change the circumstances...not saying that there are in this case...just a cautionary warning we should all heed )

If these additional facts are correct, then it seems that the airline and security staff reacted cautiously and wisely. That said, here are things that are not necessarily valid reasons (in and of themselves) to raise the alarm:

- they prayed (before or after boarding) :rolleyes:
- they prayed loudly (one witness' stated concern) :rolleyes:
- they made some anti-American and/or anti-war comments (before or after boarding) :rolleyes:
- thhey had "links" to a known terrorist or terrorist group
- they sat apart from one another (I can't hardly get my family or 4 seated together even when I have booked a flight months in advance!)
- one or two of them asked for seatbelt extensions that they didn't appear to require

Things that are valid concerns:

- deliberate mis-seating (and refusal to return to assigned seat)
- non-use of requested seat-belt extensions (flight attendants should have then retrieved them)
- seating pattern issue
- they all asked for seatbelt extensions that they didn't appear to require
- other deliberately disruptive behavior and refusals to respect flight attendant and flight crew requests/orders

In light of all these things. The next question is how things would have been handled had these guys not been detected and they began to take action to hijack or otherwise terrorize the plane? These thing, perhaps, highlight additional security measures that need to be implemented by the airlines. Not sure what they all might be. But there are probably a couple of obvious ones.

[talksense101]

This is stupid. All I can say is that the American media has done a good job of brainwashing you lot.

[sammi jo]

We are vigilant of Muslims. They want to kill all Americans. Not at all the same thing.

(1) We are vigilant of Muslims. (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/11/29/mayfield.suit/index.html) There is little doubt about that.

(2) They want to kill all Americans.
Ok, lets look at some facts. The US borders are porous. 3500 undocumented people come across the US-Mexico border every day. "Al Qaeda", if it really exists (http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006DFED.htm), as promoted by BushCorp, is supposedly based in the middle east and is awash in oil money and arms.... and if it was committed to "killing Americans"... would have no difficulty in getting into Mexico, and streaming over the US border undetected. If mostly poor Mexican fruitpickers do it so easily, then all those "hordes of well- funded Islamic paramilitary personel with a deadly mission" would breeze it... and they would be bombing and strafing all those soft unsecured targets in the U.S. (like theaters, sports stadiums, hotels, malls, train stations etc etc etc etc.,) on a daily basis, like any *real* terrorist group historically has.

The glaring lack of Muslim "inspired" terrorism on US soil, when it would be so easy for a committed group to do such with so much ease, brings one to the unavoidable conclusion that the idea that "they want to kill us all" is a steaming pile of paranoid fearmongering BS designed to scare us all into supporting an extreme agenda that would otherwise be laughed out of court. Take a look at the Guantanamo Bay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detainment_camp) fiasco: not a single person held there has been found guilty of terrorism charges. The U.S. military has never officially released even the names of any detainees except the ten (!!!) out of some 800 or so, who have been charged with an offense.

They are mostly making this shit up, and so many of us swallowed the scam. Now look at the worldwide mess we gotta somehow tidy up.