One of the parking signs in New York City used to blare, “Don’t Even THINK of Parking Here.” Another declared, “No Parking. No Standing. No Stopping. No Kidding.” Parking has always been tough in New York, but airline travel has grown increasingly more difficult for everyone since 9/11. If going through airport security hasn’t been difficult enough, the six imams who were removed from U.S. Airways flight 300 in November are attempting to make the thought of boarding a plane even more of a hassle.
According to the police report filed from the Minneapolis—St. Paul Airport, U.S. Airways denied service to six men of Middle Eastern appearance who were acting suspiciously prior to and after boarding the plane. One of the passengers wrote a note to the captain of the plane describing the passengers’ suspicious behavior before boarding. The six loudly prayed together at the gate, and then engaged in a conversation in Arabic in which they invoked Osama Bin Ladin and cursed the U.S. for “killing” the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
A passenger then observed the six board the plane, dividing themselves into pairs and sitting in the front, middle and rear of the aircraft. The flight attendants and passengers also reported that the six switched from their assigned seats to a seating pattern that replicated the positions of the hijackers aboard the 9/11 flights. According to U.S. Airways personnel, most of the imams had requested seat belt extensions, which they placed on the floor. Three of the six had one-way tickets and no checked baggage. As the result of their combined actions, they were removed from the flight, questioned by law enforcement officials and released.
A ubiquitous sign of our times, particularly in airports, is the request from security officials to report suspicious activity – “If you see something, say something.” In the post-9/11 reality, each of us has a stake and a role to play in our own security as well as the security of the larger community.
But the six imams and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) would have none of that. On March 4, the six filed a lawsuit with the assistance of CAIR not just against U.S. Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, but also against all of the John Does, the passengers who alerted the flight crew to the suspicious behavior of the men.
These John Does are heroic passengers who have taken seriously official calls to be vigilant. Will other people follow their example or will they be intimidated by the lawsuit?
Not all Muslims are supporting the lawsuit, however. The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) announced its opposition to the lawsuit and has declared its legal support for the John Does. In a television interview, Zuhdi Jasser, the chairman of AIFD, who also is a U.S. Navy veteran, said, “The front line in the war on terrorism is the airports and the gates and this is not about prayer. I pray regularly, I’ve prayed in public with my family, but we didn’t choose to do it at the gate. It’s the most anxiety-laden area in America right now, and to choose this battle is just wrong for America and it’s wrong for Muslims.” He continued, “Why spend our money as Muslims on litigation like this? They should be spending it on fighting terrorism.”
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a Washington, DC civil rights organization, has also joined on the side of the John Does. The Fund denounced the lawsuit for targeting private citizens, a measure it deemed as “far outside the scope of legitimate civil rights test cases.” In an open letter to CAIR, the Becket Fund’s President Kevin Hasson wrote, “[T]his tactic of threatening suit against ordinary citizens is so far beyond the tradition of civil rights litigation in the United States that we must oppose it to defend the good name of religious liberty itself. In short, we know religious liberty. Religious liberty is a client of ours. And this claim is not about religious liberty.”
Bravo to the John Does and the people who support them.
Yehudit Barsky is Director of AJC’s Division on Middle East and International Terrorism.
Yasher koach on your new blog. I look forward to many insightful pieces.
The lawsuit funded by CAIR against the John Does appears to be an act of intimidation. In our post-9/11 world we encourage U.S. citizens to be vigilant and every John Doe on that plane appears to have done the right thing.
Rep. Peter King sponsored legislation which will serve to protect the John Does, and future citizens from attack if they report suspicious actions. While the legislation passed the House vote, 122 representatives voted against it. Shame on those Representatives who did not support Representative King’s new law.
This John Doe legislation is vitally important. After 9/11, how could anyone remain mute in the face of suspicious actions by passengers? Deliberately calling attention to themselves by praying aloud in Arabic in a crowded airport, they desired to have all eyes upon them. Then, on the plane they consciously acted in ways to make other passengers afraid. When the incident reached the media’s attention, my first reaction was that it was a planned event by CAIR. Premeditation, period.
First, this advocacy group for Muslims has a blemished past as an outgrowth of questionaable Muslim organizations and as four of its founders were connected with terrorism. Yes, I honestly find myself hostile to this group. Second, because I like to be abreast of events both nationally and internationally, I receive information from many sources, among which are CAIR’s daily reports. With 32 chapters nationwide, almost daily CAIR finds many incidents, from the most minor to some truly major, against American Muslims. However, with the extent of their reporting, we would think that they are the most maligned religious group on the face of the earth. Third, CAIR has been extremely loud and vocal about the distress of the imans, attempting to make them the Poster Boys for Religious Bigotry.
Whatever we wish to call the religious/political threat we are facing in America and the West, the bottom line is that we must be vigilant. We must speak up and ignore comments that we are not culturally sensitive. We must use the correct words to describe events and not fear that we will be called bigots.
I applaud the passengers who spoke up and expressed their consternation. I pray the America has thousands and thousands more like them.
Extending the lawsuit to target people who informed airline officers of suspicious activity seems absurd. To uphold such a suit would clearly intimidate freedom of speech, not to mention the perverse effects it would have on citizens’ communications with their government. It seems wildly unlikely that this segment of the suit will go anywhere. The only grounds one might imagine for such a suit would involve a malicious attempt to cause someone to miss a flight by knowingly making false accusations.
That said, the six imams and CAIR may have a case against the airline and the MAC. That depends on specifics of the case which are probably too complex to be summed up in a blog post. I tend to feel that an airline and airport security officials need sufficient latitude to investigate suspicious activity. But it’s possible that the imams’ behavior was quite innocuous, and that prejudice was involved. That question seems best left to the courts to decide.
Editor’s Note: MAC stands for Metropolitian Airports Commission
Actually I wanted to add one thing. It has become extremely difficult for Arab- or South Asian-looking men to travel by air over the past 6 years. This is a legitimate grievance which needs to be addressed. It sounds like this particular suit is a poor choice of a means to express Muslim dissatisfaction at the hassles which racial profiling at airports has introduced into their lives. But if we as a nation and we as a Jewish community are smart, we will move to proactively address Muslim concerns on this issue — by demanding smarter and less bureaucratic handling of the no-fly names list compiled by DHS, for example, or by pushing for better-trained airport security personnel who can handle questioning and inspection of suspicious candidates more quickly. We need to win the Muslim community over on this issue, or at least not let it become an issue that further polarizes Muslim-Jewish relations. There is no downside to letting Muslims know that Jews, of all people, know what it’s like to be singled out for suspicion and discrimination in public settings.
have you americans gone soft in the head? of course these types of people must be targeted.what are they doing in a christian country.if their psychopathic faith including their beliefs therein demand collectively their actions,behaviour and attitude towards westerners as per their demonstrations then they certainly need no quarter given them…is there a church in any moslem country ..and any practising christians…they would kill to subdue ..such pacifist mindsets is what got the west in the position it is in now..prevention is better than cure
Please keep us all apprised of these proceedings. Hopefully Plaintiffs will lose by a motion for summary judgement. Who is plaintiffs attorney? He should be countersued with the plaintiffs for malicious prosecution and hit with sanctions.
If you do that which would call to the attention of others you should not be allowed to go on that flight. Look what happened in 9/11. If you want respect, show respect to others