Posted on 03/30/2007 1:45:40 PM PDT by rawhide
Edited on 03/30/2007 2:08:22 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Six Muslim men removed from a plane last fall after being accused of suspicious behavior are suing not only the airline but the passengers who complained — a move some fear could discourage travelers from speaking up when they see something unusual.
The civil rights lawsuit, filed earlier this month, has so alarmed some lawyers that they are offering to defend the unnamed "John Doe" passengers free of charge. They say it is vital that the flying public be able to report suspicious behavior without fear of being dragged into court.
"When you drive up the road towards the airport, there's a big road sign that says, `Report suspicious behavior,'" said Gerry Nolting, a Minneapolis lawyer. "There's no disclaimer that adds, `But beware if you do that, you might get sued.'"
The six imams were taken off a Phoenix-bound US Airways flight on Nov. 20 while returning home from a conference of Islamic clerics in Minneapolis.
Other passengers had gotten nervous when the men were seen praying and chanting in Arabic as they waited to board. Some passengers also said that the men spoke of Saddam Hussein and cursed the United States; that they requested seat belt extenders with heavy buckles and stowed them under their seats; that they were moving about and conferring with each other during boarding; and that they sat separately in seats scattered through the cabin.
The plane was cleared for a security sweep, nothing was found, and the jet took off without the imams.
The Muslim clerics say they were humiliated, and are seeking unspecified damages from the airline, the Minneapolis airport and, potentially, the John Does.
Omar Mohammedi, the New York City attorney for the imams, said the intent is not to go after passengers who raise valid concerns about security. But he suggested some passengers may have acted in bad faith out of prejudice.
"As an attorney, I have seen a lot of abuse by the general public when it comes to members of the community creating stories that do not exist," Mohammedi said.
He denied the imams were talking about Saddam, and said that their seats were assigned and that they requested extenders because their seat belts didn't fit.
Some fear such lawsuits could weaken what has become the first line of defense against terrorism since Sept. 11 — an alert public. At airports and train and subway stations around the country, travelers are routinely warned to watch for unattended bags and suspicious activity and to notify authorities.
Ellen Howe, spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration, which oversees security at all U.S. airports, would not comment specifically on the imams' lawsuit. But she said the TSA counts on passengers to help the agency do its job.
"`See something, say something' is certainly a common mantra in this day and age," Howe said. "We would always remind passengers to be both vigilant and thoughtful."
In reaction to the imams' lawsuit, Congress has taken steps to legally protect passengers who report suspicious activity. Earlier this week, the House approved an amendment to a rail transportation security bill that would make passengers immune from such lawsuits, unless they say something they know is false.
Mohammedi said he has not yet identified any of the complaining passengers. An airport police report listed a passenger and two US Airways employees as complaining about the imams. All three had their names blacked out before the lawsuit was filed by invoking a Minnesota law that allows it, airport spokesman Pat Hogan said.
Nolting said he has been contacted by several potential John Does.
Passenger Pat Snelson, who lives in a Twin Cities suburb, said he and his wife were not among those who reported suspicious behavior. But he said his wife noticed the men praying, and he saw them moving around the cabin while others were boarding.
"These guys were up to no good," Snelson said. "We think the airport people did a real good job in taking care of it."
Bomb-sniffing dogs examined the men and their baggage. FBI agents and other federal law enforcement officers questioned the men for several hours before releasing them.
Billie Vincent, a former director of security for the Federal Aviation Administration, said he is troubled by the mere attempt to identify the passengers who raised concerns.
Airline passengers "are your eyes and your ears," said Vincent, who now owns an aviation security company. "If attorneys can get those names and sue them, you put a chilling effect on the whole system."
Interesting. Do they not eat beef, or did he think "ham"burger comes from a pig?
Bush turned out to be a Democrat's dream, as should have been clear early on. The persona he projected initially of being a "uniter, not a divider",sounded fatuous and deceitful even then, and would never work against the Democrats anyway, and may never have been designed to.Think back to 1991, and how similar it was to the vague general outlines of Clinton's "appeal".They ALL claim to be the New this or the New that, and non-ideological, to boot. The Democrats resent him for his "compassionate conservatism"(which Bush always mistakenly claimed for his Administration altruistic motives previously thought to be the province of the Left ---hahaha--look closely, the Left NEVER had those qualities) So the Democrats redouble their attacks on him precisely because they know what a willing masochist they have, and how unequipped and unwilling he is to fight back. Something is seriously WRONG with this picture, and it has been "developing" into too sharp a focus for 6 years now.
Nah. He just heard "ham" and spit it out. It was just ground beef.
Weird part was the reaction. Wouldn't a reasonable person just stop chewing and look for a way out of the situation? No. It wouldn't have mattered whether he spit it on the President, a newborn baby, or a new NASA spaceship. All about appearance, no substance.
So, the innocent passengers now have to hire attorneys to defend themselves......who pays their fees?
If I were one of those folks being slapped with a lawsuit for doing what they did, I'd be screwed because I can't afford anything like that........
I didn't see this mentioned, forgive if it's repetitious:
Not too long after the original incident there was widespread speculation, at least among americans with a brain, that this was a publicity stunt meant to coincide with a Nancy Pelosi- John Conyers sponsored bill headed for a vote in Congress. All these guys had been at a CAIR convention before the flight. The purpose of skinny guys requesting the seat belt extensions? Classic terrorist ploy, it allows them to slip out of their seats without the warning lights going off alerting the crew.
they did everything by the book to look like terrorists, hoping to get just the reaction that they did- then they intended to play the victim and time this for sympathy while Pelosi and Conyers introduced legislation which would bar all law enforcement from- get this- profiling Arab Muslims while fighting against the war on terror which was started by Arab Muslims.
Once again liberal scum works with the enemy. Please forgive if I got a detail or two a bit off, the above is from memory when this happened- and it sounds good so it works for me.
Here, I'm always a critic of people making wild claims, me no hypocrite:
(I can't say whether the incident was related or not, but it seems fishy and the CAIR/Conyers/Pelosi connection is a little too cozy for me)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014435.php
December 16, 2006
Was the Flying Imam incident staged in order to get anti-profiling legislation passed?
I have been saying for some time now that the Flying Imam rage incident was staged to help garner support for anti-profiling legislation. Just before the Flying Imams incident happened I noted that Nancy Pelosi had come out in favor of such legislation, and suggested here and here in late November that a push for such legislation was what was behind the incident. I also spoke about this on the Hannity radio show, where it was hotly denied by the truth-challenged Edina Lekovic, on December 4.
And then two days ago Katherine Kersten posited the same hypothesis in the Star Tribune, leading Allahpundit to post some pointed questions at Hot Air:
Piece this out for me: CAIR allegedly wants to engineer an incident it can sell to the public as evidence of discrimination and get the End Racial Profiling Act pushed through — and for the task it chooses a guy who admits that his mosque used to help out Osama Bin Laden, who’s been accused of raising money for Hamas, and who doubts that 9/11 was carried out by Muslims? And instead of just praying, he and the other five imams resort to hijack-type behavior that’s suspicious enough to spook multiple air marshals and pilots?
Doesn’t that actually make things more difficult for their Democratic allies in Congress? I can buy that CAIR would do this to raise their own profile; they probably are that stupid and it’s not like they have anything to lose in terms of reputation at this point. But they’ve got to know that this makes things considerably harder for Pelosi, Conyers, and Feingold in getting the bill passed. Not to mention the fact that grassroots pressure on Bush to veto the bill if it ever comes before him will be tremendous now, thanks in great part to this very incident.
Good questions. However, these facts about Omar Shahin and the other imams have not penetrated the mainstream media -- witness this Washington Post article from a few days ago that quotes indignant Muslims complaining that nobody minds when Christians pray in public, dismisses the questions about the imams' seat assignments and seatbelt extenders, and says nothing at all about the unsavory connections of Omar Shahin. CAIR probably calculated that the media reaction would mostly run along the lines' of MSNBC's Contessa Brewer's comparing the imams to Rosa Parks. Some rightwing bloggers make a fuss? Well, what do you expect from hatemongering Islamophobes?
No one in the mainstream media, after all, has ever -- ever -- asked CAIR about its derivation from the Islamic Association for Palestine, a Hamas group, or about the CAIR officials who have been arrested and convicted on various terror charges. (Why were they hired, if their Islam differed so markedly from that of "moderate" CAIR?) No one in the mainstream media has ever asked Ibrahim Hooper hard questions about his statements about wanting to see the U.S. become an Islamic state sometime in the future. CAIR enjoys a free pass from media, government, and law enforcement. Why would Hooper and Co. think the Flying Imams incident would be any different?
And so far, for the most part it hasn't been. Watch for anti-profiling legislation to pass. Then we can all count how many airplanes will have to come down before it will be repealed.
Pelosi/CAIR relationship:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25448
Imans ask for boycott of the airline:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014125.php
this is as pointed as can be:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25628
Here's something a bit unrelated, but worth mention.
Did you know there have been widespread reports of Muslim males on US flights, asking female flight attendents if they were menstruating- and if they were, refusing to be served by them- I mean truly rude and loud about it?
I could see if it were Rosie O'Donnell, but C'mon.
Lawsuit eh? I wonder if these imams have every heard of "discovery" and "depositions". Get the ****ers under oath (yes, they'd lie) and keep them there for quite some time.
The Imams should ride their camels next time.
Most don't get it, Pelosi, Clinton... are the enemy too. They are more dangerous because they try to look like they are trying to do the right things when in fact they will get us killed with their BS.
Remind me, are any or all of these imams US citizens? Because any who aren’t should be deported faster than they can yell “Allahu akbar!”. And any who are naturalized US citizens should have their citizenship applications scrutinized with a high-powered microscope for false info or material omissions, and if any is found, stripped of their citizenship and deported faster than they can yell “Allahu akbar!”.
Anyone know? — Have the names of the attorneys or their law firms been published? Decent Americans must let them know what we think of their involvement in this lawsuit that is designed purposefully to hurt Americans and harm the United States.
Not one passenger or flight crew member forced them to act in a suspicious manner which initiated their humiliation ordeal. It was the clerics who demonstrated poor to little judgement with regard to their surroundings. This would have occurred had they been Southern Baptists or heathen and pulled a similar stunt.
US Airways ought to inform them, "We no longer want your business."
I'm almost positive their prayer time would be postponed if they were sitting on a railroad track with an approaching Amtrak or if they were in the middle of making boombelts.
Then who are the named passengers? without them being specifically named, Mohammedi is acting "in bad faith out of prejudice" by seeking a blanket lawsuit.
We all know, without a warrant, passengers' names are not going to be released. This stunt is mostly for intimidation - not for winnable litigation.
Sue them for creating a hostile, intimidating atmosphere. Those passengers feared for their safety from the imams “suspicious” behavior.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.