"Investors Business Daily" published an excellent article on Friday, about this action. The article is in their Editorial/Opinion Section (Keeping The Flying Imams Airborne) and is a worthwhile read. The incident at the Minneapolis Airport in November 2006 shows why the John Doe provision is needed.
Last November, six Muslim imams leaving an Islamic conference were removed from U.S. Airways Flight 300 in Minneapolis when passengers reported that the imams had acted in suspicious ways. Both U.S. Airways and the passengers soon became targets of legal action charging discrimination and racial profiling.What was the suspicious activity of these six Muslim imams? Here are some of the activities which alarmed passengers and crew.
While at the gate, according to police reports and witnesses, the six made anti-American comments and provocatively chanted "Allah, Allah, Allah." On the plane, they asked for seat-belt extenders with heavy metal buckles, even though none was obviously in need of them, and then dropped them at their feet.These actions, especially in light of the 9/11 events, is certainly well within the limits of suspicious behavior. I would not be surprised if everyone, except the 6 imams, were suspicious. When the imams threatened to take Court action, the House took the reasonable action of adding "John Doe" protection to legislation.
Last time we checked, there was no tenet of Islam that required them to leave their assigned seats shortly before takeoff, a violation of federal rules, and occupy the exit and entry rows of a jet aircraft, a pattern associated with the 9/11 attacks. All six moved — two to front-row first class, two in the middle on an exit row and two in the rear of the cabin. [Emphasis mine]
So last March, the House of Representatives passed by a 304-121 vote the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007, with language protecting from such lawsuits airline passengers who might report suspicious activity.But what transpired last week in the Senate defies reason. Supposedly the Democratic Senators were trying to protect the Muslim imams from discrimination and racial profiling. Racial Profiling, Discrimination my ass. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's probably a duck. That's not discrimination or Racial Profiling, it's common sense. Apparently common sense is not the long suit of the Senate Democrats.
But last week, as Republicans tried to have the "John Doe" protection included in final homeland security legislation crafted by a House-Senate conference committee to implement the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, they found Democratic conferees blocking its inclusion.What about my right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness? Remember the Democrats the next time they say they are strong on security. Remember too what one Democrat said during the 2004 Republican National Convention. Democrat Zell Miller said this then.
"Democrats are trying to find any technical excuse to keep immunity out of the language of the bill to protect citizens, who in good faith, report suspicious activity to police," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. "I don't see how you can have a homeland security bill without protecting people who come forward to report suspicious activity."
Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who you really are deep inside.Remember this when you vote. Senator Miller was talking about John Kerry then, but it applies to the Senate Democrats now.
More at Wizbang