CAIRwatch Radical Review (newsletter) The Politics of Terrorism (radio show) BLOG

Saturday, November 25, 2006

An Agenda Exposed?

It appears that the eight imams who were removed from the US Airways Flight might have done so as part of a scheme to reduce airline security. Here's what Investors Business Daily said in an editorial:
Turns out among those attending their conference was Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, (D-MN), who will be the first Muslim sworn into Congress (with his hand on the Quran). Two days earlier, Ellison, an African-American convert who wants to criminalize Muslim profiling, spoke at a fundraiser for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim-rights group that wasted no time condemning US Airways for "prejudice and ignorance." CAIR wants congressional hearings to investigate other incidents of "flying while Muslim." Incoming Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, (D-MI), has already drafted a resolution, borrowing from CAIR rhetoric, that gives Muslims special civil-rights protections.
It's stunning to think that John Conyers, CAIR-Michigan's 2005 Man of the Year, drafted this resolution by "borrowing from CAIR rhetoric." Then again, Conyers has carried CAIR's water for ages. It's also curious that the imams chose to pray in such an 'in-your-face' way, considering this fact, disclosed in an email to Gateway Pundit:
Greetings Jim,

As a person raised a Muslim and practicing Islam. I was taught that if a Muslim's time of prayer comes and needs to pray. But is in a confined space or in a situation which would attract negative attention. That a Muslim could pray sitting in chair etc...and use nodding or bowing to symbolize the Rukaahs and Sejdas needed for prayers. The prophet Mohamed has advised Muslims to not attract negative attention and not to act in a way perceived negatively by our surroundings. In airports in many Muslim countries there are special rooms for praying so as not to be praying in a waiting area.
These Imams must have known what their praying in a waiting area in an airport (if it is in fact what they did) filled with people would do. Muslims should not be inviting or seeking trouble.
I am saddened to see how far some Muslims have strayed from Islam.
Based on that email, it's difficult to imagine that this wasn't staged to trigger an investigation. Here's a couple other reasons why I think that's likely:

Keith Ellison is demanding to talk with US Airways officials;
Speaker-in-waiting Pelosi met with CAIR in July, 2004 to strategize on how to block the reauthorization of the Patriot Act. Here's what we know about Rep. Conyers contribution to the meeting:
Working with Conyers, the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Democrats have introduced legislation to end racial profiling, limit the reach of the Patriot Act, and make immigration safe and accessible. Leader Pelosi is a proud cosponsor of the End Racial Profiling Act, the Security and Freedom Ensured Act (SAFE), and the Safe, Orderly, and Legal Visas Enforcement Act (SOLVE).
Here's another significant piece of information from that meeting:
"Since September 11th, many Muslim Americans have been subjected to searches at airports and other locations based upon their religion and national origin, without any credible information linking individuals to criminal conduct," Pelosi continued. "Racial and religious profiling is fundamentally un-American and we must make it illegal."
"When the Patriot Act was enacted, it was intended to be accompanied by strong Congressional oversight to prevent abuses of our civil liberties. That oversight has not occurred, particularly with the mass detention campaign ordered by Attorney General Ashcroft, which to date has led to more than 5,000 foreign nationals being detained since September 11th. Moreover, individuals' assets have been frozen on the basis of secret evidence that they have no opportunity to confront or rebut, and such processes are a fundamental denial of due process. We must correct the Patriot Act to prevent abuses of our civil liberties."
The first question I'd want to ask Ms. Pelosi is why she thinks it's "fundamentally un-American" to profile people of the same racial and religious backround as the 9/11 hijackers. Another question I'd want answered is why she thinks profiling should be illegal, especially when it's done to prevent terrorist attacks. Another question I'd ask is why she's so worried about terrorists' due process rights when she didn't seem to have a problem with John Murtha ignoring the Haditha Marines' due process rights when he played judge, jury and executioner. Here's what Mr. Murtha said back in late May:
"Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Based on those exchanges, it isn't unreasonable to think that Nancy Pelosi cares more about terrorists' due process rights than she cares about the due process rights granted to our military. After all, the only organizations that had their assets frozen were charities that funneled money to organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, of which the Holy Land Foundation was the most prominent organization whose assets were frozen.

It's also noteworthy that Ms. Pelosi and Rep. Conyers couldn't provide specific instances of Muslims' civil rights being abused when the House debated renewing the Patriot Act. It was so noteworthy that it raised red flags with veteran Capitol Hill reporters like Fred Barnes and Mort Kondracke. The lack of proof of any civil rights abuses won't deter Pelosi and Conyers from carrying CAIR's water once again. In fact, it's a safe bet that the Flying Imam Fiasco will be offered as proof positive that Muslims are being unfairly targeted and that they need civil rights relief.

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog


Blogger Always On Watch said...

The whole prayers-on-the-plane scenario was staged--such was myy impression from the moment the story was released. Yet every day since, the msm have been beating the drum about this story. I don't believe that "the average American" buys the media's story. Will that stop Congress from trying to take action? No!

4:11 PM  
Blogger American Crusader said...

CAIR would like us to believe that the removal of six imans from a U.S. Airways flight was a violation and abuse of their religious beliefs.
They demand an investigation into the actions of security personnel and US Airways crew members who were only acting to protect the security of the aircraft, the crew and the passengers.
The imans originally refused to leave the plane then they chanted 'Allah' as they were escorted from the flight. In addition:

• Asked for seat-belt extensions even though a flight attendant thought they didn't need them.

• Refused request by the pilot to disembark for more screening.
Also, three of the man had only one-way tickets and no checked baggage.
Police had to forcibly remove the men from the flight.

The evening prayer or Salat al-Jama’is a communal prayer but should be performed in relative privacy to avoid staring from non-Muslims.
The imans deliberately made a show of their prayer.
The only reason I can think of doing this was to purposely attract attention.
When entering the aircraft, the six paired off and sat in unassigned seats.
Nihad Awad, CAIR's executive director, said in a news release today that the organization is "concerned that crew members, passengers and security personnel may have succumbed to fear and prejudice based on stereotyping of Muslims and Islam."
CAIR is calling for a boycott of the airline. If all Muslims follow suit, I know which airline I will feel safest flying.

3:49 PM  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

CAIR is calling for a boycott of the airline. If all Muslims follow suit, I know which airline I will feel safest flying.

:) :) :)

I hadn't thought of that.

8:10 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Any problems, please send e-mail to

Copyright © Americans Against Hate 2006. All rights reserved.       E-mail: