The real target of the 6 imams' 'discrimination' suit

[Caladan 19]

I'm sorry, are we now equating a cashier not scanning a pork product with flying planes into buildings? Moving seats to sit next to a blind friend with the events of 9/11? And we're still claiming we're not prone to overreacting? Heck, you get three people from this thread on that plane and it won't take off because people will be too scared of the imams.

If a Muslim hands you a sheaf of papers and you get a papercut, have you just been beheaded? ("It's a continuum!") If they throw a paper airplane at you, did they just knock down the twin towers? Can we get a little perspective on this?

Security's one thing, but the reason I suspect the imams didn't do anything intentional to panic a bunch of nervous flyers is that people are clutching the pearls left and right, right here, on a forum nowhere near an aircraft. They'd been through security. All names on flights are checked. They were clear. It is fine to have extra security.

Jane Doe freaking out because she tawt she taw a tewwowist isn't security.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sorry, are we now equating a cashier not scanning a pork product with flying planes into buildings?

Isn't that ironic - all it takes is a few news stories about Target cashiers and airport taxi drivers and suddenly people start seeing terrorists everywhere.

Has anyone considered that the reporting of these isolated events plays up to the unspoken prejudices of many people? Its for this reason we have all these fictional/rhetorical wars on Christmas, Culture and the Middle Class.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

I would rather have my pilot err on the side of caution. I guess I'm a nut.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

There is some going overboard with the "facts", for sure. I have my own reasons for being suspicious and they have nothing to do with rumors. I don't reason by rumor.

Edited March 19, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Did someone mention prosecution? Civil cases have trials. I'll bet anyway that the case will be settled without a trial. I'll be surprised if there is one.

[GaryC 7]

Did someone mention prosecution? Civil cases have trials. I'll bet anyway that the case will be settled without a trial. I'll be surprised if there is one.

Your probably right. They will settle out of court and we won't hear any more about it.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Muslim Leader Disappointed by Imams' Lawsuit

March 13th, 2007 @ 12:00pm by Bob McClay/KTAR

A Valley Muslim leader is upset about a lawsuit filed against US Airways by imams.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, director of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, said it wasn't necessary for the imams to act the way they did on the plane.

Six imams returning from a religious conference in November were taken off a plane in Minneapolis, handcuffed, and questioned. They prayed on their prayer rugs in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport before the flight, and after they boarded, a passenger passed a note to a flight attendant. When the men returned to the airport the next day, they said, the airline refunded their fare and refused to sell them another ticket.

Jasser said most Muslims disagree with the imams. "Their actions don't speak for the majority of Muslims who understand that the gates and the airline are on the front line of the war on terror, understand that flying is a privilege and that there may be times where we are inconvenienced."

"Religiously, when you're traveling, you can pray at home. You can combine prayers. You don't have to pray exactly on time and even if you want to pray on time, you can pray at the comfort of the chair. You don't always have to do the movements if the circumstances don't allow."

Jasser said most Muslims don't believe in stirring up controversy. He believes the lawsuit is a bad idea. "It's our belief that the fallout and the public response to this type of litigation in response to a private airline is going to be wrong for American Muslims, wrong for American security and wrong for American freedom."

"And, I as a Muslim and most Muslims will tell you God tells us that he did not make our religion to be difficult or imposing," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Muslim Leader Disappointed by Imams' Lawsuit

March 13th, 2007 @ 12:00pm by Bob McClay/KTAR

A Valley Muslim leader is upset about a lawsuit filed against US Airways by imams.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, director of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, said it wasn't necessary for the imams to act the way they did on the plane.

Six imams returning from a religious conference in November were taken off a plane in Minneapolis, handcuffed, and questioned. They prayed on their prayer rugs in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport before the flight, and after they boarded, a passenger passed a note to a flight attendant. When the men returned to the airport the next day, they said, the airline refunded their fare and refused to sell them another ticket.

Jasser said most Muslims disagree with the imams. "Their actions don't speak for the majority of Muslims who understand that the gates and the airline are on the front line of the war on terror, understand that flying is a privilege and that there may be times where we are inconvenienced."

"Religiously, when you're traveling, you can pray at home. You can combine prayers. You don't have to pray exactly on time and even if you want to pray on time, you can pray at the comfort of the chair. You don't always have to do the movements if the circumstances don't allow."

Jasser said most Muslims don't believe in stirring up controversy. He believes the lawsuit is a bad idea. "It's our belief that the fallout and the public response to this type of litigation in response to a private airline is going to be wrong for American Muslims, wrong for American security and wrong for American freedom."

"And, I as a Muslim and most Muslims will tell you God tells us that he did not make our religion to be difficult or imposing," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Refreshing to hear. I hope his life isn't on the line now.

[mybackpages 0]

I would rather have my pilot err on the side of caution. I guess I'm a nut.

erring on the side of caution is one thing, but you can't break the law to do it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Where do you draw the line between caution and paranoia?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I would rather have my pilot err on the side of caution. I guess I'm a nut.

erring on the side of caution is one thing, but you can't break the law to do it.

what law was broken?

[Saddle Bronc 124]

].... They were being first class chopf#cks ...

Methinks you can swap "were being" for "ARE".

[Caladan 19]

Did someone mention prosecution? Civil cases have trials. I'll bet anyway that the case will be settled without a trial. I'll be surprised if there is one.

Your probably right. They will settle out of court and we won't hear any more about it.

If you believe it's a stunt, then you probably should also believe that it's a stunt that is a legal challenge of the policy, so you shouldn't expect to have it settle out of court.

Erring on the side of caution is fine, but praying in an airport is only equivalent to making terroristic threats, if you think that all praying Muslims are likely to be terrorists. And once you believe that, practically anything they do is suspicious. Fat guy gets a seatbelt extender? Going to strangle the flight attendant. Switches seats? Positioning himself to take the plane. Pages the flight attendant? Wants to identify her for future reference. Asks for a pillow? Going to smother the pilot. Reads the inflight magazine? Trying to secure the exits.

Orders a Coke? Try to up his blood sugar for the jihad. Doesn't order a Coke? Trying to keep himself pure.

The guys didn't have to pray, says another imam. They could have delayed their prayers. But what we're avoiding asking is why praying in an airport counts as 'suspicious.' It really shouldn't. Terrorists don't wear big shiny signs and draw attention to themselves. It's nice to believe that they'll be really obvious about it and if we had just been really careful on 9/11, we'd have caught the bad guys because we would have noticed them praying.

I'm all for security, but security doesn't work if you chase down leads based on bad assumptions. If bin Laden wants to try 9/11 again, all he has to do is tell his guys to lighten their hair and pray before they leave the hotel, because we'll be chasing imams.

[slim 1,525]

There was a time in American history when a whole bunch of people got arrested for not sitting on the back of the bus, or going into diners to get food.

Granted, that was before the Internet, and threads to ###### about stuff like that, but all the same, they looked different, said different things, and did different things. But, I think we would be hard pressed to find anyone on here today that would say these folks were wrong for doing what they did.

Maybe 40 years from now, we'll be saying that about the imams too.

[GaryC 7]

Did someone mention prosecution? Civil cases have trials. I'll bet anyway that the case will be settled without a trial. I'll be surprised if there is one.

Your probably right. They will settle out of court and we won't hear any more about it.

If you believe it's a stunt, then you probably should also believe that it's a stunt that is a legal challenge of the policy, so you shouldn't expect to have it settle out of court.

Erring on the side of caution is fine, but praying in an airport is only equivalent to making terroristic threats, if you think that all praying Muslims are likely to be terrorists. And once you believe that, practically anything they do is suspicious. Fat guy gets a seatbelt extender? Going to strangle the flight attendant. Switches seats? Positioning himself to take the plane. Pages the flight attendant? Wants to identify her for future reference. Asks for a pillow? Going to smother the pilot. Reads the inflight magazine? Trying to secure the exits.

Orders a Coke? Try to up his blood sugar for the jihad. Doesn't order a Coke? Trying to keep himself pure.

The guys didn't have to pray, says another imam. They could have delayed their prayers. But what we're avoiding asking is why praying in an airport counts as 'suspicious.' It really shouldn't. Terrorists don't wear big shiny signs and draw attention to themselves. It's nice to believe that they'll be really obvious about it and if we had just been really careful on 9/11, we'd have caught the bad guys because we would have noticed them praying.

I'm all for security, but security doesn't work if you chase down leads based on bad assumptions. If bin Laden wants to try 9/11 again, all he has to do is tell his guys to lighten their hair and pray before they leave the hotel, because we'll be chasing imams.

Ok, I know your trying to be ridicules and you made that with flying colors. They were praying before they got on the plane. That isn't what attracted the attention. As the other guy was saying, he prays all the time and he never was led off. It was their actions after they got on the plane that got them in trouble. Your assuming that these guys were minding there own business and some ignorant red-neck just dropped a dime on them. These guys were drawing attention to themselves in a way that made the passengers and crew suspicious. Things like this don't happen in a vacuum. They made other feel threatened and they got taken off for it. Your being just as bad as you are accusing the passengers. Your assuming that they did nothing and they were a victim of bias and racism. That makes your assumptions biased. Your assuming that just because they were Muslim that us ignorant biased red-necks are jumping to conclusions. People don't get led off planes for innocent reasons. They did something to cause it.