The Imams’ Congresscritters

If there was ever a topic calling for a Congressional investigation, it is not the eight U.S. Attorneys whom President Bush dismissed at the end of their terms of office but the six Minnesota Moslem preachers who alarmed passengers on a U.S. Airways flight last November by acting like about-to-be highjackers. For those who haven’t been following the story:

Muslim religious leaders removed from a Minneapolis flight last week exhibited behavior associated with a security probe by terrorists and were not merely engaged in prayers, according to witnesses, police reports and aviation security officials.

Witnesses said three of the imams were praying loudly in the concourse and repeatedly shouted “Allah” when passengers were called for boarding US Airways Flight 300 to Phoenix. . . .

Passengers and flight attendants told law-enforcement officials the imams switched from their assigned seats to a pattern associated with the September 11 terrorist attacks and also found in probes of U.S. security since the attacks – two in the front row first-class, two in the middle of the plane on the exit aisle and two in the rear of the cabin.

“That would alarm me,” said a federal air marshal who asked to remain anonymous. “They now control all of the entry and exit routes to the plane.”

A pilot from another airline said: “That behavior has been identified as a terrorist probe in the airline industry.” . . .

Three of the men asked for seat-belt extenders [which can function as weapons], although two flight attendants told police the men were not oversized. One flight attendant told police she “found this unsettling, as crew knew about the six [passengers] on board and where they were sitting.” Rather than attach the extensions, the men placed the straps and buckles on the cabin floor, the flight attendant said. . . .

A flight attendant said one of the men [who had taken a first class seat] made two trips to the rear of the plane to talk to the imam during boarding, and again when the flight was delayed because of their behavior. Aviation officials, including air marshals and pilots, said these actions alone would not warrant a second look, but the combination is suspicious.

“There are certain behaviors that raise the bar, and not sitting in your assigned seat raises the bar substantially,” the pilot [from another airline] said. “Especially since we know that this behavior has been evident in suspicious probes in the past.”

The imams insist that they are the innocent victims of religious bigotry and have filed suit – not just against the airline but also against the passengers who reported their strange conduct to the airplane crew.

Since passengers are the first line of defense against future 9/11’s, discouraging them from telling flight attendants and pilots about suspicious activity is obviously a very bad idea. To head it off at the earliest possible moment, House Republicans have proposed legislation to protect informants against lawsuits. Yesterday, they won a procedural vote by a 304–121 margin. What’s interesting about that lopsided total is the party breakdown: Republicans: 199 yeas, zero nays; Democrats: 105 yeas, 121 nays.

In other words, a majority of Congressional Democrats, having balanced the risk of terrorism against the risk that other flying imams will be inconvenienced by fellow passengers’ erroneous statements, think that the latter is the more serious concern.

This is an issue that has nothing to do with Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, Guantanamo Bay, wiretapping, torture or any of the other favorite Democratic shibboleths. It is a simple matter of taking elementary precautions at a time when terrorism remains an active menace. Do we have a glimpse of Nancy Pelosi’s way of fighting a “smarter” War on Terror?

Further reading: Debra Burlingame, “Libs: Lawsuits 1st, Safety 2nd”