CAIR Lies About First Decision In "Flying Imams" Case
By WILLIAM MAYER and BEILA RABINOWITZ
July 27, 2009 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Though the unindicted terror co-conspirators at CAIR were quick to claim in their newsletter that Friday's decision [see, Civ. No. 07-1513 ADM/AJB] in the case of Ahmed Shqeirat, Mohamed Ibrahim, Didmar Faja, Omar Shahin, Mahmoud Sulaiman, and Marwan Sadeddin vs. U.S. Airways Group, Inc., et al., was a, "Major Victory," a simple reading of judge Ann D. Montgomery's [Clinton appointee, 1995] decision indicates otherwise.
The controversy involves charges by 6 Muslim clerics that their civil rights were violated when they were removed from a 2006 U.S. Airways flight [originating in Minneapolis] when passengers complained about their suspicious actions [loud praying while prostrate, chanting of Allah Akhbar (God is great, a traditional Islamic battle cry) accompanied by anti-American, pro Saddam Hussein statements loud enough to be overheard] which seemed to indicate that they might be preparing for a terrorist attack of some kind.
The instant case involved a motion to dismiss the action by the defendants, which was, despite CAIR's pontificating to the contrary, at least partially successful.
For example, the imams' only motion was denied and the charges against U.S. Airways and its holding group were summarily dismissed.
Additionally the charges against Michael Cannizzaro, an FBI Special Agent, were partially dismissed, leaving Mr. Cannizzaro and four airport police officers collectively known as the "MAC Employees," still in potential jeopardy.
Interviewed this morning by PipeLineNews, airport spokesman Patrick Hogan stated that no decision has yet been made as to whether an appeal will be pursued or if they will instead move directly to the trial phase.
As noted on these pages in a December 2006 piece Imam's Minneapolis Airport Stunt - Cultural Jihad, "The November 20 action by 6 Imams on a U.S. Airways flight was a pre-conceived exercise in cultural jihad."
At that time we wrote:
"The Muslim preachers had just returned from the North American Imam Federation conference and were merely putting into practice the media manipulation techniques which they had studied and discussed at the 2 day event.
It is no coincidence that the event took place in Minneapolis where Muslim voters had just elected Keith Ellison, a Wahhabist Muslim [who, incidentally is insisting on taking the oath of office by swearing on the Quran rather than the Bible].
The Minneapolis/St. Paul airport was also the site of a controversy that we reported on in September [Muslim Taxi Drivers At Minneapolis International Airport Subjecting Fares To Sharia] when Muslim taxi drivers, working with radical Islamist groups refused to transport passengers whom they believed to be carrying alcohol. A follow-up piece [Are Minneapolis Taxi Fares Going To Support Al-Qaeda?] explored the ties to terror that exist among the mostly Somali immigrant taxi drivers.
The imam's actions were the culminating event in a carefully executed plan that was preceded by a series of smaller incidents in which Muslims tested the tolerance level of the airlines and passengers by wearing T shirts to the airport reading "I am not a Terrorist." As part of this ramp-up in provocation, an Islamist activist goaded airport security personnel into preventing him from entering a plane because he was wearing a T shirt emblazoned with possibly threatening Arabic text.
Following this same template, the imams intentionally pushed all the right buttons to arouse the suspicions of airport security, Federal air marshals and passengers alike.
Specifically, some of the Imams had one way tickets and checked no baggage, they had prayed loudly and very publicly before entering the plane, shouting Allahu Akhbar ["God is great," an Arabic chant often used by terrorists as a war cry] they refused to take their assigned seats instead occupying seats strategically chosen to control all entrances and exits of the airliner. Passengers overheard them making anti-American remarks, statements strongly against the war in Iraq and mentions of al-Qaeda and bin-Laden. Two of the Imams demanded seat belt extenders [which could be used as weapons] when neither of them were overweight and thus realistically in need of making their seat belts longer. When confronted for their bizarre behavior and asked to voluntarily leave the plane for questioning, they refused and were then forcibly removed.
Their actions were thus consistent with either a terrorist probe - a dry run - or the real thing, the prelude to a hijacking attempt."
In the two years which have ensued since this controversy came into being, nothing has changed our take on this matter, "by their actions these imams were waging psychological terrorism - cultural jihad - on America and therefore this event has to be considered a political act designed to degrade airport security by linking reasonable precautions with anti-Muslim bigotry." http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=imams7.27.09%2Ehtm