December 6, 2006

Prepare To Be Angry

I've kept a cool head and cautioned others to not succumb to hatred of Muslims. I have a few Muslim friends, one very devout, one regular guy who goes to Mosque now and then, and one who'll share his ham sandwich with you. None would hurt a fly I keep all three in mind when my fellow travelers claim it is us against them.

I've paid moderate attention to the Minneapolis Airport contretemps. I thought the behavior of the imams was shameful and the obligatory media lizarding from the folks at CAIR was typically reprehensible. I considered that this was a softening blow to relax rules and set up another attack. Disconcerting, but life goes on.

Debra Burlingame lost her brother, Chic Burlingame III on 9/11; he was the pilot of AA 77 which was crashed into the Pentagon. She has a guest editorial in the Wall Street Journal (free link) today. Her piece tells the unvarnished truth and is beautifully written.

Here's what the flying public needs to know about airplanes and civil rights: Once your foot traverses the entranceway of a commercial airliner, you are no longer in a democracy in which everyone gets a vote and minority rights are affirmatively protected in furtherance of fuzzy, ever-shifting social policy. Ultimately, the responsibility for your personal safety and security rests on the shoulders of one person, the pilot in command. His primary job is to safely transport you and your belongings from one place to another. Period.

This is the doctrine of "captain's authority." It has a longstanding history and a statutory mandate, further strengthened after 9/11, which recognizes that flight crews are our last line of defense between the kernel of a terrorist plot and its lethal execution. The day we tell the captain of a commercial airliner that he cannot remove a problem passenger unless he divines beyond question what is in that passenger's head and heart is the day our commercial aviation system begins to crumble. When a passenger's conduct is so disturbing and disruptive that reasonable, ordinary people fear for their lives, the captain must have the discretionary authority to respond without having to consider equal protection or First Amendment standards about which even trained lawyers with the clarity of hindsight might strongly disagree. The pilot in command can't get it wrong. At 35,000 feet, when multiple events are rapidly unfolding in real time, there is no room for error.


It is clear we must have the stomach to turn off our "Minnesota Nice" for the likes of these people. Me, I'm about ready for internment camps. Korematsu vs. United States is still on the books.

Byurhan, Mohammed and Hossein. Good guys. Calm down.

Jihad Posted by jk at December 6, 2006 11:30 AM

Suppose for a moment that six white women conspired to perform the exact behaviors at the six Muslim men:

- Shout Allahu Akbar! repeatedly in the boarding area.
- Ignore seat assignments and sit in the front, middle, and rear rows.
- Request seat belt extensions and neatly store them under the seat.
- Converse in arabic about "angry denunciations of Americans, furious grumblings about U.S. foreign policy, Osama Bin Laden and "killing Saddam."

Would these white women be allowed to remain on board?

"Oppressed minority status" is no license to behave like a dickhead. Particularly when it's of a piece with homicidal religious zealots willing to "go to whatever measures necessary to obey all the tenets set out in the Koran."

Posted by: johngalt at December 6, 2006 2:40 PM

Here's what we can look forward to if reason does not prevail: http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000992.html

Posted by: johngalt at December 6, 2006 2:46 PM

One last thing: Internment camps? What's that about?

Posted by: johngalt at December 6, 2006 2:46 PM

I saw that C&F cartoon yesterday -- great stuff!

I was suggesting that the Burlingame piece made me mad enough to suggest repeating one of our nation's darkest moments when Japanese Americans were rounded up and forced into internment camps during WWII.

In Korematsu, the Supreme Court basically said that was okay. We could test Senator Specter's commitment to long held precedent if a challenge case came up.

Posted by: jk at December 6, 2006 4:04 PM

I'm going to wade into this mess and say "Maybe we oughta start thinking about interment camps,..."

Why?

You put a part of it square on the head, JK: some Muslims are the nicest people in the world. And yes, I worked with a Muslim paramedic from Chad many years ago - nicest medic I've known in years, great empathy w/ patients.

Unfortunately, while a majority of Muslims seem to be of the benevolent, peaceful type apparently espoused by Mohammed, they're also the quietest.

If you think fascists are perverting your religion, speak up! If not, get lumped in with the rest and deal with the consequences (such as interment camps).

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 6, 2006 8:04 PM

BTW - cross-posted for effect!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 6, 2006 8:15 PM

I must admit I was using it more as a rhetorical device to show how angry I was after reading the editorial. Not sure I want to go too far down this road.

It strikes me that every time a CAIR representative goes on TV, probably ten people who were ambivalent turn against Muslims. I'm not sure that organization is achieving its stated cause.

While we're beating up, though, it alarms me that these people are Islamic religious leaders. It's one thing to have wackos who claim religious grounds -- this is like a bishop blowing up an abortion center.

Posted by: jk at December 7, 2006 10:14 AM

Ah,..JK,..once again, you and I are thinking the same thing, just from different angles!

Cool!

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at December 7, 2006 8:14 PM | What do you think? [8]