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

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Where do you draw the line between caution and paranoia?

Ask the next guy/girl flying your plane.

[mybackpages 0]

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.

Gary, Innocent people are arrested. Innocent people are convicted. Surely these people didn't do anythign to deserve it? Why assume the imams must have done something. Reading both sides of this argument, the most likely conclusion (seems to me) is that hysteria got the best of people who were just trying to do their job.

[UmmSqueakster 54]

LOL! This is a civil case. There isn't any prosecution. What I see here is people repeating unsubstantiated claims and rumors as if they were fact. That is what pisses me off, not people's bigotry and bias.

They sat in the formation of the 9/11 hijackers? Proof?

They said anti american statements? Proof?

One of the imams was faking his blindness? Proof?

They moved around to scare people? Proof?

They chose US Airways to make a statement? Proof?

The Complaint alleges that the imams acted in a perfectly normal manner and that the FBI determined they posed no threat and let them go.

I can see how they had no choice but to file a suit. There are so many conflicting "facts" going around about what did happen, so they state their case, the defendants will state theirs, and we'll see what evidence supports which facts.

God I love the american judicial system. I may just have to go to law school after all. I do wonder if my law firm will be MAC's defense team though, since we'rve represented them on a number of occasions. This could get interesting

I would like you to just come out and defend the actions of the terrorists on 9/11. I bet you'll feel better after. Go ahead. I dare you.

Ah yes, thank you for reminding me why I don't come to VJ anymore. Ta ta!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I believe it will settle out of court because I worked with litigation attorneys for almost two decades and that's what often happens.

And it's true, as I said before posting the article. The Quran allows us to modify prayer when traveling. It's been the law for centuries. The imams know that. If most Muslim travelers aren't getting arrested in airports, why them? It may rub someone wrong, but as an Arab Muslim traveler, legal specialist, and long time political observer, I see something fishy here. Not to excuse the reactionaries, and the over simplifications from those so sure they had no agenda, something doesn't add up for me. I'm going with my instincts. We'll just have to see how it all washes out.

Edited March 19, 2007 by Green-eyed girl

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

LOL! This is a civil case. There isn't any prosecution. What I see here is people repeating unsubstantiated claims and rumors as if they were fact. That is what pisses me off, not people's bigotry and bias.

They sat in the formation of the 9/11 hijackers? Proof?

They said anti american statements? Proof?

One of the imams was faking his blindness? Proof?

They moved around to scare people? Proof?

They chose US Airways to make a statement? Proof?

The Complaint alleges that the imams acted in a perfectly normal manner and that the FBI determined they posed no threat and let them go.

I can see how they had no choice but to file a suit. There are so many conflicting "facts" going around about what did happen, so they state their case, the defendants will state theirs, and we'll see what evidence supports which facts.

God I love the american judicial system. I may just have to go to law school after all. I do wonder if my law firm will be MAC's defense team though, since we'rve represented them on a number of occasions. This could get interesting

I would like you to just come out and defend the actions of the terrorists on 9/11. I bet you'll feel better after. Go ahead. I dare you.

Ah yes, thank you for reminding me why I don't come to VJ anymore. Ta ta!

1. Posting that makes you a hypocrite.

2. You're not missed.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Where do you draw the line between caution and paranoia?

Ask the next guy/girl flying your plane.

Why do you believe anecdotal evidence? Is it because you secretly want it to be true, or because it really is?

Again I reference the example of the Brazilian electrician who was demonised by a good many people here including - if I remember rightly - your good self...

[GaryC 7]

Gary, Innocent people are arrested. Innocent people are convicted. Surely these people didn't do anythigng to deserve it? Why assume the imams must have done something. Reading both sides of this argument, the most likely conclusion (seems to me) is that hysteria got the best of people who were just trying to do their job.

Really? Surely they didn't do anything to deserve it? Then why isn't every Arab looking person led off of every plane? It's a rare event because that isn't true. They did something to cause the crew to feel threatened. Your assuming bias and that makes your assumption biased.

Edited March 19, 2007 by Iniibig ko si Luz forever

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Where do you draw the line between caution and paranoia?

Ask the next guy/girl flying your plane.

Why do you believe anecdotal evidence? Is it because you secretly want it to be true, or because it really is?

Again I reference the example of the Brazilian electrician who was demonised by a good many people here including - if I remember rightly - your good self...

Bad reference. The pilot will just have people removed pending further investigation. The Brazilian was gunned down on a street. Big difference.

[mybackpages 0]

Gary, Innocent people are arrested. Innocent people are convicted. Surely these people didn't do anythigng to deserve it? Why assume the imams must have done something. Reading both sides of this argument, the most likely conclusion (seems to me) is that hysteria got the best of people who were just trying to do their job.

Really? Surely they didn't do anything to deserve it? Then why isn't every Arab looking person led off of every plane? It's a rare event because that isn't true. They did something to cause the crew to feel threatened. Your assuming bias and that makes your assumption biased.

Let me clarify I was asking if you believed that even innocent people who find themselves arrested in convicted did something to deserve that situation. By these people I meant innocent people in this situation, not the specific people on this plane.

Sometimes i nnocent people are mistreated and their rights are violated. Thats the original intent behind having half of the rights in teh bill of rights to protect the accused.

Your assuming bias and that makes your assumption biased.

I am not assuming bias, I am assuming hysteria. Good people with the intention of doign their job but things were mishandled.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Bad reference. The pilot will just have people removed pending further investigation. The Brazilian was gunned down on a street. Big difference.

Really? Not from the point of view of this discussion. Very many people demonised and condemned a complete stranger for his alleged actions, based on police statements and that of alleged eye witnesses. The inquest into the death dismissed a most of that early testimony as erroneous.

[LaL 418]

i am just shocked and saddened by so many of the things i read here.

*exits thread*

[Caladan 19]

gary, if it was solely their actions on the plane that got them in trouble, then why is everyone focusing on saying "well, they shouldn't have been praying like that. makes people suspicious. they don't *have* to pray like that. they're imams, they should know better." What was the suspicious action on the plane absent that? What action would you say "Don't do that."

Maybe they drew attention to themselves. The trial will tell that, if it comes to it. But if they did so, they did so by doing nothing illegal or dangerous or threatening, just by appealing to people's prejudices. That's true whether they are innocent victims or careful civil rights plotters.

And you can get arrested on a plane for almost anything. I'll look up the article later, but there's a very funny story from this summer about someone who dropped an iPod or a cellphone by accident in the toilet on an airplane en route to Ottawa, couldn't get it out, called the flight attendant, and when the plane landed, found himself interrogated by Canadian and American officials for about three hours, because they had to rule out that he was trying to fiddle with some sort of explosive in the toilet. And after questioning, he was released. (Just like the imams, who weren't held for anything, either.)

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

gary, if it was solely their actions on the plane that got them in trouble, then why is everyone focusing on saying "well, they shouldn't have been praying like that. makes people suspicious. they don't *have* to pray like that. they're imams, they should know better." What was the suspicious action on the plane absent that? What action would you say "Don't do that."

Maybe they drew attention to themselves. The trial will tell that, if it comes to it. But if they did so, they did so by doing nothing illegal or dangerous or threatening, just by appealing to people's prejudices. That's true whether they are innocent victims or careful civil rights plotters.

And you can get arrested on a plane for almost anything. I'll look up the article later, but there's a very funny story from this summer about someone who dropped an iPod or a cellphone by accident in the toilet on an airplane en route to Ottawa, couldn't get it out, called the flight attendant, and when the plane landed, found himself interrogated by Canadian and American officials for about three hours, because they had to rule out that he was trying to fiddle with some sort of explosive in the toilet. And after questioning, he was released. (Just like the imams, who weren't held for anything, either.)

It's the sum of the parts.

Certain rights are suspended when you get on a plane. Try to jokingly say "I have a bomb". I don't care what your race, sex or religion is you are going to jail.

[almaty 19]

i am just shocked and saddened by so many of the things i read here.

*exits thread*

amen...to that...

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

i am just shocked and saddened by so many of the things i read here.

*exits thread*

amen...to that...

I agree. Seriously sad