What I suspected, I understand why the airline reacted, but they were wrong, and compounded the error later.
Incidentally the American Muslim is wrong, being clean shaved and quiet fits the profile of the 9/11 hijackers.
Ahhh! But it does not fit the profile expected by paranoid idiots, which is what the typical traveler of Middle Eastern ethnicity must face, these days.
Just as he is free to advise his co-religionists on how to try to avoid unwarranted persecution, I figure I should be free to condemn the idiocy of those who would persecute them.
His claim is that it arouses the paranoia of some non Muslim Americans. He didn’t say it fit the 9/11 profile did he?
But speaking of the 9/11 hijackers , you said the sat in first class. Where did you get that information?
Yup, and every black man in the 60s South knew that it was asking for trouble to be walking with a white woman. Doesn’t make it right though, although it could get you killed.
My rightwing, religious nut of a BIL, told me in all seriousness how ironic it was that a black Muslim check him (white) at an airport security and expected me to be as outraged as he was. There’s a segment of the popluation that doesn’t want to recognize others’ rights.
As much as it pains to agree with Monty on anything, he’s right.
and of course you are free to do so. I find his opinion {thats all it is} interesting in light of the Imams claim to take extra precautions.
I found an article about them being at the airport for that interfaith thing but I lost it and can’t find it again. dam it. There was even a picture.
Ever read a cross-section of commentary by black members of C.O.R.E., S.N.C.C., the NAACP, the Urban League, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, or the Black Panther Party in the 1960s?
While persecution can bring people together, it still does not give them unanimity of opinion.
Oh my…what the hell are you talking about? Did I imply erratic behavior or direct threats were not considered? No I didn’t. You use the word arrest but I don’t see that they were ever arrested. They were detained and questioned and that is a very significant difference. There are a series of small events that make up this entire incident and you have to be able to see the small events as related but separate in considering motives.
I never said ignore it. I find this consistent misuse of language and misrepresentations of my statements disturbing. I have assumed up to now that it isn’t on purpose but sheesh.
Um no. I clearly said the fact that authorities released them should be considered in whether to fly them or not but may not the only factor. I also said barring other factors the airline should have done something to make amends, but since we hadn’t heard from the airline we don’t know if other factors existed or not.
I definitely care about what I’m saying. Sorry you can’t follow it.
Yes, I was naive about the WT and quickly admitted it.
If their reliability is questionable that means we don’t accept what they say without confirmation. It doesn’t have to mean we immediately dismiss all of it. I’ve said several times I’d like to see interviews with the other passengers and crews. Don’t you think thats reasonable?
I know Tom I didn’t find his editorial very compelling. I just wanted to point out to the “You’re being unreasonable” crowd that reasonable is sometimes in the eye of the beholder.
I checked the 9/11 report, I got one item wrong here: in two planes all hijackers got first class seats, in one plane they got seats in first class and business, but those seats were next to the first-class ones, IOW the hijackers were bunched together, that was the basic plan.
There was only one exception: Flight 77 had a couple in first class and the other 2 were in coach, but even there the idea was the same: they all got seats as close to the cabin as possible, And in all cases the hijacker teams got first class seats, it is clear that after the dry runs they did they figure out that getting first class seats made them if not less likely to be screened, then the ones a screener had less incentive to slow down.
:rolleyes:
The complaint was for excluding other things authorities consider for arresting or preventing someone from continuing.
Once again it is the misleading opinion pieces and you the ones that insist they should be separated.
Need to remind you here that you are only proposing ideas that are not well supported still.
Since the other factors showed to be baloney, it is clear why those right wing and bigoted cites are making an effort to ignore the interrogation, release and then the refusal of service. Talking only about the items before the interrogation remains a misleading effort.
:dubious:
Besides then indirectly supporting misleading opinion pieces, I see many others say that they can not follow you, even you conceded to them you constantly have an issue making yourself clear. OTOH I don’t see many complaints coming my way. But as a Latino whose English is his second language, many in this board already know my shortcomings, and yet they can follow.
Then you should wait until you get them, I don’t have that problem because my main beef is based on the fact that the Imams were denied service after being interrogated.
Thats not an answer.
Whose complaint? Yours? Mine? Seriously, I’m not following you. My complaint has been that you don’t seem to separate the police and FBI and their purpose from the airline personnel.
Prejudice or bigotry might be called motivations. Was the motive of a certain action bigotry in part? In order to get to the truth of what happened I think we need to separate the events and the people involved. The boarding area, the actions of the Imams and the other passengers. Ignoring any possibility of trolling by the Imams you could say the passenger who passed the note was moved by paranoid bigotry.
Then there’s the plane and the flight crew. There’s the event of asking them to get off the plane. If they refused the authorities had to respond. Thats an unfortunate escalation of the events but not bigotry. Then there’s the questioning for several hours. How angry and confrontational did it get? Finally the thing that disturbs you is someones decision not let them fly US air. Looking at that singular event we have nothing to explain that decision from the airlines. I’ve pointed out that the fact that the FBI and police let them go is a separate decision.
Which has not one fucking thing to do with the statement you responded to but certainly illustrates the point well.
Sigh… It’s hopeless. You think the decision to let them fly after the interrogation
should be based solely on the FBI finding no illegal activity. I’m saying thats a seperate decision by the airline, which is a private business, and the FBI’s findings are not the only factor in that decision. No factor’s have been shown to be baloney about that decision since the airline hasn’t said anything.
BTW unsubstantiated claims is not the same “showed to be baloney”
:dubious:
Perhaps that explains some of the confusion then.
My point isn’t that complicated. Look at the first page and see how many people also said there was insufficient evidence to really know. Thats basically what I’ve been saying. It bothered me that people were crying bigot on such sketchy evidence and I said so. I should have remained more succinct.
I’ve got no problem with others drawing their own conclusions. I maintain the right to strongly disagree and call it as I see it.
I understand what your issue and we can just agree to disagree.
More clear it can not be, you are being misleading by affirming authorities only look for illegal activities to arrest or stop one, not so with suspect acts that point to terrorism, you really lead a sheltered life if you assume that only by finding actual illegal activities that they can arrest or stop you.
So you just want to be known as a lousy debater? Be my guest, all that is basically irrelevant to me or my basic point, pay attention or bug off, I’m not coming from the angle **tomndebb ** or **Monty ** (though they do make more persuasive arguments) are coming from.
US court decisions and settlements from similar cases in the past show it is only wishful thinking to think one can keep them separated.
Once again it is a huge misleading assumption to categorically say they looked only at illegal activity. I don’t think so, they did not found anything suspicious either after checking the allegations (come to think of it, it does sound ridiculous to say that the suspicious acts were not looked at, how do you think authorities get the bad guys most of the time? Hint: terrorists do not tell authorities who they are, authorities look first for suspicious acts) in this era, suspicious activities are grounds for arresting terrorists, it is more likely these Imams showed or convinced authorities they were not terrorists or unreasonable as the airline thought they were, clearly the suspicions of the airline were considered and found not to be good at all.
:smack: get it inside your thick skull: I agree on that only on what transpired before the interrogation.
You really want to certify your lack of reading comprehension do you? Once again: my main point does not depend on the airline being bigoted, incompetent or fearful.
You are entitled to your opinions but not the facts. In terror cases authorities like the FBI can arrest you even if they only see suspicious activity (AFAICR there are reports of arrests even for weak or unfounded suspicions) it is not true to say they **only look ** for illegal acts.
Well, GIGObuster I’m going to chalk this one up to a language barrier and call it quits. I’ve tried to make my point repeatedly and we don’t agree. You’ve made some statements here that I think are blatantly false but I’m unwilling to start the cycle all over again.
I’ve been looking for more stories on the incident but I haven’t found anymore. Perhaps something will surface in the future and there will be a “Six Imams revisited” thread. For now lets put it to rest. Adios.
Meh.
If the Imams are lying they are involving many witneses that can turn on them, Like the FBI:
From Democracy Now: an interview with the Imams:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/29/1436216
The FBI did not just look for illegal activities, it tried to help too.
Thanks for the link. It’s an interesting article. It sure looks like US air just screwed up and now doesn’t want to face up to it. It’s still one side of the story.
The point I tried to make before is that the decision to release them by the FBI and police was a seperate decision than the one made by US air to not fly them. Separate organizations and seperate criteria. This article shows thats true.
US air’s decision to not fly them after the fact doesn’t make much sense to me. Especially after the article. I agree with you that it’s the most damming of the events. Unfortunately the article doesn’t answer the question as to why.
Oy vey! (a local rabbi group once again launched a complaint against the airline supporting the Imams)
The other point that you continue to miss is that it is irrelevant there are separate organizations, We know that already. Unfortunately your position and the one from the opinion pieces demands that we ignore that a solution makes their decisions to be related, and part of an expected investigation. Insisting they will remain separated is a defense Denny’s and many other private groups in similar cases could not use in court.
And I can not make a judgment on what excuse they will wring, it remains an exercise in navel gazing at this point so I don’t deal with it. Once again it is not important what excuse is used for my position: An eventual solution or amends does not require a private institution to admit bigotry in a settlement.
A prayer room at the airport. In the article it says non sectarian meditation rooms already exist in several airports including here in Nashville.
Seems like a reasonable suggestion to me.
So, how innocent were the imams? According to this report, it might have been done intentionally to raise a stink. According to the police report and statements by people involved, there was enough suspicious activity to fit within the profile of potential terrorist MO.
Everyone seems so eager to scream “racism”, “prejudiced”, “unfair”, etc. Read the reports and think again.
You haven’t read a single word of this thread, have you?
I found the police reports pretty interesting. I tried to get back and read the rest but now the link isn’t working.
The police reports do clear up some of the details. The initial reports and the Washington times were varied but covered most of the details in these reports. It wasn’t just the praying that concerned people and it looks the the Imam spokesman was spinning the details a bit.
That doesn’t explain why they were denied a flight afterwards.