for Security of American Citizens
Exclusive: 'Flying Imam' Out-of-Court Settlement Has Chilling Implications
We've all been told that falsely yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is not
covered under "free speech."
However, it seems that shouting "Allah Allah Allah!" while playing Musical
Chairs on a crowded airplane is not only free speech, but a matter of "civil
Remember the case of the "flying imams?" (No, it's not a Nancy Drew
mystery.) Back in November of 2006, six Islamic clerics were booked to fly
from Minneapolis to Phoenix on US Airways Flight
600. According to worried passengers, the imams not only prominently prayed
at the gate, cursed U.S. policies in Iraq and discussed Osama bin Laden but
once on board, scattered to various seats throughout the aircraft and even
made a show of trading places. Two asked for seat belt extenders, although
neither was overweight. Passengers also reported hearing them yell, "Allah
Worried for the safety of his plane and its passengers, the pilot ordered
them removed and they were held at the airport until the FBI arrived.
The concern at the time, of course, was whether this was a "dry run,"
testing security procedures for a possible future hijacking - not
inconceivable based upon regrettable past experience.
When the imams filed suit against the passengers, the airline and airport
security, a law was passed by Congress that would protect citizens who, in
good faith, reported such suspicious behavior to law enforcement. The
Department of Transportation ruled that the airline
had acted properly. However, Judge Ann Montgomery of the U.S. District Court
in Minnesota allowed the remaining portion of the lawsuit, backed by CAIR,
to proceed because she ruled that the "John Doe" law did not apply to law
This week, a settlement between airport police and the imams was announced,
although the terms of the settlement were not released.
"The settlement of this case is a clear victory for justice and civil rights
over fear and the phenomenon of 'flying while Muslim' in the post-9/11 era,"
said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. "We thank all those who
supported the imams through the lengthy and difficult legal process."
Civil rights? As the New York
Daily News said
basic rights, such as not being able to shop in any store you please or
being unable to apply for a job for which you are qualified, because of your
color or creed. It was the imams' behavior that concerned passengers and
flight crew, not their appearance.
But there's much more to this story.
It turns out that Omar Shahin, spokesman for the imams, helped raise funds
Land Foundation, a Muslim "charity" that illegally routed
more than $12 million to Hamas. A serious question has been raised
'flying imams' spectacle really an 'orchestrated stunt?'"
Either way, the real losers in this case are airline passengers and,
possibly, passengers on other types of public transit. While airport police
and other officials will certainly do all they can to prevent a terrorist
attack from happening, will they hesitate if the suspects are Muslim, for
fear of yet another lawsuit? Politically correct nonsense gets in the way of
common sense, and Islamists working covertly in the U.S. know it. As I
reported earlier this year
noted Islamic scholar Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch
<http://www.jihadwatch.org/> has their number:
In reality, Spencer says, America faces the same threat that Israel does
from Hamas. But the Muslim Brotherhood working here knows that they won't
get away with lobbing rockets or other violent tactics - thanks to the sharp
focus on Islamist organizations after 9/11 - so they must employ other
means. They work through organizations allied with them and their cause,
including the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Students Association, the
International Institute of Islamic Thought, the Islamic Society of North
, and others - including the now-defunct group Islamic Association for
Palestine, which gave rise to CAIR. According to Brotherhood spokesmen, they
are "working toward this goal of sabotaging Western civilization from
Again, Spencer brings us back to the mainstream media's role in all of this.
"They are working to intimidate the media into being afraid to discuss these
issues. And they have succeeded." Why? "Bigotry and racism are the national
traumas, they are the great sins of American history. And so the worst thing
you can be in America is a bigot or a racist." The Islamists in America use
this to their advantage, decrying every anti-terrorism initiative as
hateful, discriminatory and bigoted and smacking of racial profiling, and
portraying any honest discussion of these issues as such. The result is that
"most Americans have no idea this is going on, and so they have no idea of
what measures can and should be taken to counter it, and so it's able to
It doesn't matter that the imams didn't actually win in court; the
settlement is seen by Islamists as a capitulation and further erosion of
American values and security - especially coming on the heels of a rash of
five separate (homegrown
terror busts <http://www.cnn.com/2009/
the past couple of months. Add to that the recent case of "good ol' boy"
Daniel Patrick Boyd, a Muslim convert who allegedly headed a terror cell
in his native North Carolina
and we have a very serious problem.
Until we take the threat of jihad right here at home seriously, we continue
to put our security and our very way of life at risk.
Pam Meister is the editor of FamilySecurityMatters.org