I don't know what to think about
the recent US Airway incident which took place here in Minnesota.
At first, I was outraged when I heard that six imams were arrested and taken off the plane in handcuffs. Their scary terroristic crime? Praying at the airport. And mentioning the word "Allah." For crying out loud, don't Minnesotans know by now about the Muslim practice of praying five times a day, facing Mecca?
I was even more appalled when I read a recent editorial in the Star Tribune, where a Muslim writer chided the imams for their behavior (don't have the link, sorry), scolding them for alarming nearby passengers. What kind of prejudice must Muslims face every day, I wondered, when even one of their own chides them for following the practices of their faith, for fear of what others will think?
But I read
this recent article in the Washington Times, which adds more details. The imams did not take their assigned seats, but they positioned themselves near the exits, in the same configuration, the flight attendants said, of the hijackers in the September 11 attacks [were they trying to position themselves strategically? the passengers wondered.] Three of the six, who did not appear to be overweight, asked for seatbelt extenders, and then put them on the floor under their seats [handy garrottes, perhaps? the nervous wondered] The imams said that they were praying "quietly." One of the passengers, Omar Shahin, told Newsweek the group did everything it could to avoid suspicion by wearing Western clothes, speaking English and booking seats so they were not together. He said they conducted prayers quietly and separately to avoid attention.
Other witnesses described the prayers as "loud" and said they were "shouting hostile slogans about al Qaeda and the war in Iraq." Apparently one passenger who sent a concerned note to a flight attendant spoke Arabic. Katherine Kersten, our loathsome local conservative columnist,
is of course all over this.
Were the imams trying to be deliberately provocative for some reason? I have absolutely no idea. I wasn't there. There do seem to be conflicting reports between the imams' own descriptions of their behavior and the other witnesses. If they were trying to be "provocative," as some bloggers have accused, why on earth were they doing so? I can't help but think that if al Qaeda planned to use six religious leaders to blow up another airplane, they would know enough not to call such attention to themselves.
See Washington Times editorial,
here.
I gotta think this is a case of people simply panicking unnecessarily.
But then today a new story:
Our brand new Congressman Keith Ellison has said that he plans to take his oath of office with his hand on a copy of the Qur'an. And now some officious dunderheads are tsk tsking at his choice as "unAmerican":
"Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath," radio talk show host and author Dennis Prager wrote in his online column this week. He said that American Jews routinely have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they don't believe in the New Testament, and that if Ellison refuses to do so, "don't serve in Congress."
Good heavens, people. You make me absolutely ashamed to be classified with you as "Christians."
Edited to add: There has been some interesting discussion of the Ellison story over at
cakmpls's journal
here. And as some have pointed out, taking the oath on a Bible is not in any way a Constitutional requirement, but simply a custom that some Congressional representatives follow.