U.S. Dept. of Transportation rules U.S. Airways didn't discriminate against Flying Imams

Imams lose complaint: The U.S. Department of Transportation said an airline didn’t discriminate against six imams when it removed them from a flight at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in 2006. Read more ...

Source: Grand Forks Herald
H/T: Jihad Watch

2008 MASH Awards

First Place (4 points):
Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser

Second Place (3 points):
Robert Spencer

Fourth Place (2 points):
Brigitte Gabriel / Clarion Fund / Rep. Frank Wolf / Irshad Manji / Paul J. Ruff / Sadiq Khan / Rep. Sue Myrick / Supna Zaidi / Tarek Heggy / United American Committee / US Airways

Source: Muslims Against Sharia Blog

No need to change imam's lawsuit, Metropolitan Airports Commission says

By David Hanners

The Metropolitan Airports Commission has told a judge that six Muslim imams who sued after being kicked off a flight almost two years ago shouldn't be allowed to add an FBI agent as a defendant in the case.

Lawyers for the imams claimed last week that they should be allowed to amend their suit because the FBI agent's involvement in the incident was "new evidence," but lawyers for the airports commission said that wasn't the case.

"The FBI's specific role was disclosed in the police report and in court filings, well before the deadline to amend passed," the commission argued in a document filed earlier this week.

Attorneys for both sides will argue their positions in a hearing Tuesday in U.S. District Court in St. Paul.

The airports commission's co-defendant, US Airways, said in a motion this week it wasn't taking a position on the imams' request to add the FBI agent as a defendant.

The imams were kicked off a US Airways flight at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in November 2006 after a passenger passed a note to a flight attendant saying the men had prayed loudly in Arabic and made "anti-U.S." statements.

The pilot of the Phoenix-bound flight had them removed from the plane. But attorneys for the imams are trying to determine who had the men detained, handcuffed and questioned. Five airport police officers also are named as defendants in the case.

The imams claim they were discriminated against because of their religion and because they are Middle Eastern.

Last week, the imams filed a motion to amend their pleading to add FBI Special Agent Michael N. Cannizzaro Jr. as a defendant. They said that in pretrial depositions, an airport police officer testified that Cannizzaro determined there was probable cause to detain the men.

The imams' lawyers argued that the airports commission was trying to shift the blame for the men's detentions to the FBI, and therefore the agent should be a defendant in the case.

Five imams were from Arizona and one was from California. They had been attending a conference in Minneapolis.

After they were removed from the flight and taken to the airport police station, agents with the FBI and U.S. Secret Service questioned them, determined they posed no threat and let them go.

Source: Pioneer PressUS Airways
Latest recipient of The MASH Award

Flying Imams ask magistrate for 10 years of bias complaints against US Airways

By David Hanners

Lawyers for six Muslim prayer leaders removed from a US Airways jet at Twin Cities International Airport in 2006 told a federal magistrate Monday that they want the airline to divulge 10 years' worth of discrimination complaints so they could compare the airline's behavior before and after the September 2001 terrorist attacks.

Attorneys representing the airline argued they should have to turn over just three years' worth of such data. The reason, said one: 9/11 changed everything.

"The bottom line is we're in a post-9/11 world," US Airways attorney Dane Jaques told U.S. Magistrate Arthur Boylan. "Procedures changed. The world changed. So much changed after 9/11."

But Omar Mohammedi, a lawyer representing the six imams, argued that the information was crucial to the plaintiffs' claim that they were victims of racial profiling, discriminated against because they were Muslims of Middle Eastern descent.

"We know with 9/11 came discrimination," he told the judge. "We want to see what the situation was before 9/11, compared to after 9/11." Read more ...

Source: St. Paul Pioneer Press


US Airways
Latest recipient of The MASH Award

Flying Imams - Well In Excess Of $100,000 Each For Hurt Feelings

By Douglas

The pretrial conference in the Flying Imams case took place by telephone on February 5. Again, I'm not legally literate, but I grasp that the purpose of the pretrial conference is set up ground rules for the damages involved, the amount and scope of discovery, the rummaging of each side through the other side's business, and the time frame for when discovery finishes and when the actual trial starts.

It seemed pretty much like boiler-plate until it got to the alleged damages. It started with Ahmed Shqeirat:

Ahmed Shqeirat: Plaintiff Shqeirat has suffered intangible losses including pain, suffering, loss of liberty, loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress, humiliation, and the like. Because the damages are intangible, it is difficult to itemize the dollar amount of each element of the alleged damages. Plaintiff estimates the dollar amount of his damages to be well in excess of $100,000.

[So that's well in excess $100,000 in intangible damages. We haven't gotten to the tangible damages yet.]

Mr. Shqeirat's tangible damages include expenses incurred as a result of the inconvenience of traveling on airlines other than US Airways.

[It should be noted that Mr. Shqeirat, or any of the other imams, are permitted to fly on US Airways, so the inconvenience is purely manufactured.] Read more ...

Source: Crossword Bebop

Flying imams win round 1

I'm sure most people are aware of the "Flying imams" that were arrested here in Minneapolis last November.

Their actions were aggressive in nature, a reasonable person in a post-9/11 world would come to the conclusion that the authorities should be made aware of these fellows. And that's exactly what happened.

I personally believe these 6 were not a threat. However, I also believe these 6 were out of line, and deliberately provoking the public to see what kind of a reaction they would get. I also believe they were looking for wealth through litigation. I don't believe these 6 are honorable men in any way.

Six Muslim imams arrested on a U.S. Airways jet in Minneapolis last November after a passenger raised suspicions about their pre-flight prayers and boarding activities won an early victory Tuesday in their federal lawsuit against the airline and the Metropolitan Airports Commission.

The full story can be found in the Star Tribune

Six imams kicked off flight win a round in court

A judge rejected a move to dismiss the imams' suit in a case that spurred a national debate about security and religious freedom.

By Dan Browning

Six Muslim imams arrested on a U.S. Airways jet in Minneapolis last November after a passenger raised suspicions about their pre-flight prayers and boarding activities won an early victory Tuesday in their federal lawsuit against the airline and the Metropolitan Airports Commission.

U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery's opinion and order rejected almost all of the defendants' arguments for dismissal. She said the question of whether airport officers had probable cause to arrest the men must be determined by the objective facts they had available at the time.

Over the past year, the case has triggered a firestorm of debate about security concerns vs. religious rights. The imams have argued that they were removed because of religious and ethnic bias. The airline says they were ejected solely because of security concerns raised by passengers and crew members.

Frederick Goetz, one of the imams' attorneys, praised the judge's decision, saying "This has always been a straightforward civil rights case. You had six individuals ... doing absolutely nothing wrong. They prayed in the airport and got arrested. That's unconstitutional, and they deserve redress."

Attorneys for the airport commission could not be reached for comment Tuesday. U.S. Airways said Tuesday evening that it was studying the order. "We continue to stand by the actions of our crew members and employees, but at this point we can't say anything definitive about next steps," said spokeswoman Andrea Rader.

According to a police report, the men were arrested because three had one-way tickets and no checked baggage; most had requested seat belt extensions; a passenger reported that they had prayed "very loudly" before the flight and criticized U.S. involvement with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, and they were seated widely throughout the aircraft.

Montgomery said it is "dubious" that a reasonable person would conclude from those facts that the imams were about to interfere with the crew or aircraft. She said the plaintiffs had stated a plausible claim that MAC officers violated their constitutional rights.

Ahmed Shqeirat, Mohamed Ibrahim, Didmar Faja, Omar Shahin, Mahmoud Sulaiman and Marwan Sadeddin were arrested as they returned home from the North American Conference of Imams. Ibrahim lives in California, the others in Arizona.

Faja, Sadeddin and Shqeirat said they saw an older couple watching the other imams as they prayed. They said the man placed a phone call.

Sulaiman helped Sadeddin, who is blind, board the plane and escorted him to his seat in row 4 before going to his own seat in row 9. Another passenger switched seats with Sadeddin so Sulaiman could assist his friend. Shahin was seated in first class. The others were seated in rows 25 and 21.

Police boarded and asked the imams to exit the plane, which they did. They were later ordered to get their carry-on baggage and were taken to the airport police precinct. After several hours, federal agents interviewed them, cleared them of wrongdoing and said they could leave. U.S. Airways refused to book new flights and they departed on Northwest.

Some of the controversy around the lawsuit was defused in early August when "John Doe passengers" were removed as one of the suit's targets.

Montgomery, considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, said the facts they alleged "support the existence of an unconstitutional custom of arresting individuals without probable cause based on their race."

She rejected the defendants' attacks on a variety of the imams' legal claims, including false arrest, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Montgomery did strike a couple of claims made by the imams, slightly narrowing their case. But Goetz said his clients were happy with the ruling.

"They'll have their day in court on certainly the most significant issues," he said. "You don't arrest people because of their faith. You don't arrest people because of their national origin. That's just fundamentally wrong."

Dan Browning • 612-673-4493

Dan Browning • dbrowning@startribune.com

Source: Star Tribune
H/T: Atlas



Ann Montgomery
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award