Flying Imams -- US Airways Dismissed; Suit Continues Against Law Enforcement

The press has been remarkably silent these past three years on the subsequent events in the famous flying imams suit. You may remember that on November 20, 2006, six imams, fresh form a Muslim conference, were removed from a U.S. airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix after a passenger complained that the imams were acting suspiciously.

The imams were detained for six hours and flew home on another airline after U.S. Airways refused to carry them. There is a dispute about the activities deemed suspicious. The imams claims it was simply because they were praying. In fact, the activities included loud cursing about the United States' war against Saddam, requests for seat-belt extenders that appeared to a passenger to be unwarranted; seating that appeared to to the passenger to be strategic (i.e., which could facilitate a hijacking).

With help of CAIR (the unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case), the imams sued the airline, the police, and the passengers. After an outraged Congress passed a bill granting passengers "qualified immunity," the imams dropped the passengers from the suit.

After three years, the various defendants filed motions for summary judgment to ask the court to dismiss the suit. On July 24, 2009, the United States District Judge issued her ruling ("Memorandum Opinion and Order") which is available here.

There are essentially two major rulings:

1. The court dismissed all claims against U.S. Airways.

2. The court refused to dismiss the claims for unlawful arrest under state and federal law against the various law enforcement officers (except state law claims against an FBI agent). The court said that the qualified immunity passed by Congress did not protect law enforcement officers.

Although the legal effect of the ruling is to send the case to trial against the law enforcement officers only, the judge in her analysis suggests that the facts as presented in the motions essentially mean the law enforcement officers will be liable for the unlawful arrest and detention of the imams.

Bottom line: No liability for removal from the aircraft; no liability for investigatory stop, but there is liability for arrest without probable cause and six hours detention. That is how I understand the decision.

This decision will put great pressure on the insurers of the law enforcement officers to settle the case if they can. What is six hours of detention and the embarrassment of being arrested worth? What is the added publicity worth to the imams? What would a Minneapolis jury be likely to award for six hours detention?

I suspect the imams will get more in settlement at this point than they would by going to trial. Look for a settlement, probably on confidential terms.

Mass Murders in Jewish Seminary Praised by Hamas

The Columbus Dispatch carries the story of a mass murder (7 dead, 10 wounded) in a Jewish seminary. HAMAS responds:

“We bless the (Jerusalem) operation. It will not be the last,” Hamas said in a text message sent to reporters.

There is no excuse for this sort of behavior, either the behavior of the mass murders or their blood-thirsty organization.

Not surprisingly, the web site of the unindicted co-conspirator, HAMAS-front, Council on American Islamic Relations lacks any denunciation as of 4:21 pm EST.

Update: 8 dead, 35 injured.

Update Friday March 7: Still no expression of sympathy for the victims by CAIR. What a surprise.

M. Zhudi Jasser Speaks Out

In an interesting article in the Middle East Quarterly, M. Zhudi Jasser, a Muslim activist against radial Islamists, describes his contacts with teh Flying Imams. At the end of the article, Mr. Jasser echoes my own thinking on what needs to be done by Muslims and non-Muslims:

Countering Islamism and combating Islamist terrorism should be a greater public responsibility for the organized American Muslim community than the obsession with civil rights and victimization in which current Islamist organizations engage. Americans living in fear for their security are looking to moderate, traditional Muslims to lead this fight. The credibility of the Muslim community suffers because groups such as CAIR, ISNA, and the North American Imams Federation deny the interplay between Islamism and terrorism.

Non-Muslims also have a role. Both the U.S. government and mainstream media often give Islamists and their organizations exclusive voice to speak on behalf of American Muslims, which creates a cycle of apparent, if not real, empowerment. Seldom do they turn to non-Islamists and anti-Islamists who may represent far more American Muslims. The recent refusal of PBS to air the ABG Films, Inc. documentary Islam v. Islamists is a prime example of the manner in which media producers and executives shield Islamists from criticism.

CAIR Continues its Evil Ways

Good for the United States House of Representatives. They have passed a bill to protect the "John Doe" passengers who blew the whistle on the lying, flying imams in Minneapolis airport on November 20, 2006.

My mother always said that if you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all. but I cannot help myself.

Nihad Awad of CAIR has proven himself to be a true piece of human garbage. Why? When asked to dismiss the so-called John Doe defendants in the lying flying imam suit, specifically the passengers who pointed out the (apparently deliberately) suspicious behavior to US Airways, Awad refused. Awad plainly want to intimidate others from protecting their airways and their fellow passengers from reporting suspicious behavior. It is litigation jihad.

As a human being, Awad deserves no respect. That only good he has done is to bring CAIR into greater public dislike, which CAIR greatly deserves.

Into the Wild Blue Yonder

Just when you think CAIR could sink no lower, it is supporting the six lying flying imams have now filed suit against Northwest Airlines.

As a reminder, the lying flying imams behaved in an extremely suspicious manner in the Minneapolis, Minnesota airport, chanting anti-American slogans, asking for seatbelt extenders (without being obese), and strategically positioning themselves in a manner of terrorists. Clearly these people were intending to provoke a reaction. They succeeded.

I feel the slime just writing about it.

Update: Northwest Airlines Unsafe Capitulation

A commenter politely pointed out the following from the Seattle Times, and I have taken a couple of days to further reflect on the situation:

Northwest originally said the pilgrims arrived only 20 minutes before the flight was scheduled to depart, which is outside airline and international rules regarding overseas flights. The pilgrims held a news conference Tuesday in Dearborn where they refuted the airline's claim, saying they had arrived at least 90 minutes before departure — well within the regulations.

The original report was that Northwest airlines said that the Muslims had failed to check-in within 20 minutes of departure, a violation of the rules adopted in response to terrorism. Clearly we have an apples and oranges situation.

The Muslims claim that they arrived somewhere (At the gate? At the terminal?) 90 minutes before departure. Apples. That is not the same thing as saying that they checked in 90 minutes before departure. Oranges. Why didn't they check in?

If they made a mistake in failing to check in, why didn't they just say we made a mistake, please help us? No, instead they held a news conference claiming discrimination against Muslims, because they had "arrived" 90 minutes before departure.

Is this taqqya by half-truth? It is certainly not a "refutation."

With the Northwest Airlines capitulation, I'm certain that no further details will be forthcoming. Northwest blames, "a series of mistakes involving a German travel agency, the baggage handlers for the previous chartered flight from Saudi Arabia and misleading information on a printed ticket that the passengers had received." So who made mistakes? What were the mistakes?

Perhaps the Muslims were totally blameless. But if they were not checked in 20 minutes before departure, the Northwest gate agents were blameless as well.

Without more details, flying Northwest Airlines continues to make me uncomfortable, and I will avoid it.

Northwest Airlines: Unsafe?

On September 11, 2001 extremist Muslim jihadists hijacked four jet airliners and flew them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon buildings. Ever since, America has been less safe and flying on passenger airliners has been less safe. In response and to enhance safety, the airline industry enacted many new safeguards including an obligation to arrive at least 20 minutes before boarding to be permitted to board an aircraft.

Now Northwest Airlines has made flying Northwest less safe. Northwest Airlines has caved in to Muslim demands. After appropriately denying boarding to a group of Muslims who arrived late under airline rules, Northwest Airlines has now "apologized" and offered compensation. Why? Because CAIR protested.

What message does that send to Northwest Airlines employees who enforce the rules?

What message does that send to Northwest Airlines passengers who follow the rules?

Without Northwest Airlines caving in to this kind of mild pressure, will Northwest employees be reluctant to deny boarding to suspicious Muslim characters in the future?

Debbie Schlussel has revealed the name of the individual responsible for the cave-in: Andrea Fischer-Newman, Vice President of Government Relations for Northwest Airlines. We all have Ms. Fischer-Newman to thank for making Northwest airlines less safe.

As long as Ms. Fischer-Newman is on board at Northwest, I will not be.