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

Thursday, December 07, 2006

Imams Retain CAIR

The Arizona-bound imams who were removed from US Airways Flight 300 have retained CAIR as their legal counsel in the matter. That isn't surprising to anyone who has been watching this unfold. What is surprising is that CAIR and the imams are going forward with this after Richard Miniter's article on the incident. Here's a refresher on what Miniter wrote:
Contrary to press accounts that a single note from a passenger triggered the imams' removal, Captain John Howard Wood was weighing multiple factors.
  • An Arabic speaker was seated near two of the imams in the plane's tail. That passenger pulled a flight attendant aside and, in a whisper, translated what the men were saying: invoking "bin Laden" and condemning America for "killing Saddam," according to police reports.
  • An imam seated in first class asked for a seat-belt extender - the extra strap that obese people use because the standard belt is too short. According to both an on-duty and a deadheading flight attendant, he looked too thin to need one. A seat-belt extender can easily be used as a weapon - just wrap one end around your fist, and swing the heavy metal buckle.
  • All six imams had boarded together, with the first-class passengers - even though only one of them had a first-class ticket. Three had one-way tickets. Between the six men, only one had checked a bag.
  • And, Pauline said, they spread out - just like the 9/11 hijackers. Two sat in first class, two in the middle and two back in the economy section, police reports show. Some, according to Rader, took seats not assigned to them.
Here's a portion of CAIR's official statement:
Airline and law enforcement officials say the imams were taken off the flight November 20th for alleged "suspicious activity." They were handcuffed and questioned for several hours by authorities before being released. CAIR, along with other civil rights organizations, has called for congressional hearings on religious and ethnic profiling at airports in response to the incident.
Since their removal from the flight, a number of charges have circulated in the media and on the Internet that the imams say are false, distorted or a misrepresentation of actual events.
"Unfortunately, the false claims and smears used against these religious leaders only serve to cloud the real issue involved, that of how national security can be maintained while preserving constitutionally-protected freedoms and respect for religious diversity," said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad.
Since this statement came out, I found some additional information, at Powerline blog, in the form of an email from a Minneapolis Airport policeman. Here's what he said about the imams being handcuffed:
First off, none of the Imams were handcuffed in the airplane. They were handcuffed before they were placed in the squad car and the handcuffs were then taken off when they were brought back to our office. This is a standard operating procedure for when we transport anybody that is being arrested or being detained. Unless someone was looking out the window, it is doubtful anyone else would have known these guys were handcuffed.
You'd never know that the imams weren't handcuffed inside the airplane if all you had to go on was CAIR's official statement. Thank goodness for this airport police officer supplying that additional information.

Furthermore, CAIR's statement that "the false claims and smears used against these religious leaders only serve to cloud the real issue involved" is a smear to the people filing statements with the police. When they make such a report, they do so knowing that they can be prosecuted for making false allegations. CAIR pushes forward despite knowing that it's highly unlikely that the police reports filed are false or part of a smear campaign.

The fact that they're still pushing this issue raises some questions for me, not the least of which is:
  • Why does CAIR persist when the facts appear not to be on their side?
  • Is it that the facts aren't that important to CAIR?
  • Are they pushing this in an attempt to persuade members of Congress to vote for the Conyers Resolution? Remember that the Conyers Resolution would give "Muslims special civil-rights protections."
Though I don't expect CAIR to respond to my questions, I strongly encourage them to do so.

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog


Blogger justmom said...

It is absolutely clear that truth has no value to these "holy men". Let this case go to court. When the facts overwhelm the plantiffs let the shit hit the fan. Not only will these 'pious' miscreants lose this case since it bears no merit, but will be open civil cases against the imams based on this result.
I hope the airline, perhaps as a class action for all airlines (as well as the affected passengers), will countersue for all costs and damages incurred.
In addition, each and every imam that becomes a party to this countersuit should be placed on a no-fly list permanently. These 'pious'imams and mischievous muslims in general think this is all a game. It's not, and we damn well better get serious.

8:42 PM  
Blogger Greg said...

"Not only will these 'pious' miscreants lose this case since it bears no merit, but will be open civil cases against the imams based on this result."

I would not assume the case will be lost just because CAIR doesn't have a case. They will judge shop and I'd say they have a 50/50 chance of winning. Proof? Look at all the other cases won by unworthy plaintifs.


12:56 AM  
Blogger IgnorantInfidel said...

I think the airlines should do one or more of the following:

(1)Advertise that each plane carrys alcoholic beverages.

(2)Have a dog at each door of each plane while passengers are boarding.

(3)Find an inexpensive or economical pig/swine product they could use on each plane and advertize the fact.

1:58 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Any problems, please send e-mail to

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