The Hill
Monday, October 13, 2008
SEARCH
Home
HillTube
Mobile
White Papers Portal
BLOGS
Pundits Blog
Congress Blog
Blog Briefing Room
NEWS
Leading The News
Business & Lobbying
K Street Insiders
John Breaux
John Engler
Vin Weber
Dave Wenhold
The Executive
Campaign 2008
Endorsements '08
COLUMNISTS
Dick Morris
A.B. Stoddard
Brent Budowsky
Ben Goddard
David Hill
David Keene
Josh Marshall
Mark Mellman
Jim Mills
Markos Moulitsas (Kos)
Byron York
COMMENT
Editorial
Letters
Op-eds
Weyant's World
CAPITAL LIVING
Today's Stories
50 Most Beautiful 2008
Other Features
In The Know
Bookshelf
Food & Drink
Onward and Upward
Hillscape
RESOURCES
Classifieds
Subscribe
Order Reprints
Last Six Issues
Useful Links
RSS


Home arrow Leading The News arrow Common sense vs. political correctness: the illustrative case of the ‘flying imams’
Leading The News PDF Print E-mail
Common sense vs. political correctness: the illustrative case of the ‘flying imams’
Posted: 06/05/07 07:15 PM [ET]

In November 2006, six Islamic leaders were removed from a U.S. Airways flight in Minneapolis after they were observed acting suspiciously — including not sitting in their assigned seats, asking for seatbelt extenders although not needing them, and making anti-American statements. The men were questioned by authorities and then cleared.

This, of course, has become known as the infamous “flying imams” incident. And while the imams did not set out to hijack the plane, it turns out they had a larger attack in mind. In their sights: the common sense of every traveling American.

In March 2007, with the help of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the imams filed suit against the airline and — shockingly — also against the heroic “John Doe” passengers who reported their suspicious behavior. These lawsuits, however, are clearly nothing more than cheap attempts to intimidate everyday Americans from taking action to
help protect our country; and Congress must take action to ensure they do not succeed.

That is why I introduced an amendment, modeled on legislation written by Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.), which will protect passengers and commuters against frivolous lawsuits such as those filed by the imams. The language was overwhelmingly adopted by the House, 304-121, as an amendment to H.R. 1401, the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007.
The bill is now part of conference discussions between the House and Senate, and it is imperative that these common-sense “John Doe” protections are sent to the president for his signature.

The amendment, as adopted, covers threats to transportation systems, passenger safety or security, and possible acts of terrorism, and also shields transportation systems and employees who take reasonable actions to mitigate perceived threats. The amendment is retroactive to activities that took place on or after Nov. 20, 2006 — the date of the Minneapolis incident — to ensure that the “John Doe” passengers aboard that plane in Minneapolis receive these protections.

Just last month, we saw a life-saving example of how important reporting suspicious activity can be. Authorities in New Jersey were able to disrupt an extremist plot to attack the U.S. Army base at Fort Dix, thanks entirely to a tip from a local video store clerk.  The clerk had been asked to make DVD copies of a home video that apparently showed the group shooting assault weapons, discussing jihad and shouting “Allah Akbar!” Recognizing this as extremely dangerous behavior, the clerk rightfully alerted the FBI.  After the arrests were made, the FBI revealed the group was allegedly in the final stages of preparing for an armed assault on Fort Dix, and possibly several other military installations.

If the clerk hadn’t reported his concerns to the proper authorities, chances are we would now be reading headlines of a domestic terrorist attack. But the clerk had both the bravery and common sense to speak up when he saw something suspicious, and America owes him a sincere debt of gratitude for doing so. While CAIR might counsel the terrorist suspects to now turn around and sue the clerk, America understands the essential role reporting suspicious activity plays in the continued security of our homeland. That is why we cannot allow radical activist groups to intimidate American travelers and commuters into keeping silent about something common sense dictates as suspicious.

In a post-9/11 reality, passenger vigilance is essential to our security. It is important to remember that the TSA and the FAA rightfully urge passengers to report anything suspicious. Law enforcement agencies across the country have tip lines to report suspicious activity. And communities and mass transit systems nationwide have adopted “See Something, Say Something” campaigns. Given the variety of threats we face and terrorists’ history of targeting mass transit systems, encouraging passengers to report strange behavior to authorities is really just common sense. Failing to report suspicious behavior could end up costing thousands of lives — and while the “flying imams” don’t seem to understand this, the American people do. We must make certain that brave citizens who stand up and say something are given the protections they deserve. The King amendment does exactly that, and Democratic leaders must make certain it comes out of the conference committee intact.

King is the ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland Security.



SPECIAL SECTION: Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security churns out poorly developed schemes
Legislation would combat terrorism, natural disasters
Defense against extremist use of the Internet
Legislation would modernize and strengthen visa waiver program

 

 
 
 
BLOGS
ADVERTISER
Home | Privacy Policy | Terms And Conditions
The Hill
1625 K Street, NW Suite 900
Washington, DC 20006
202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are © 2008 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.