[Rhodes22-list] PIC Authority

[Brad Haslett]

Hat's off to USAir!  This is from the WSJ.  Brad




HOMELAND SECURITY



      On a Wing and a Prayer

      Grievance theater at Minneapolis International Airport .



      BY DEBRA BURLINGAME

      Wednesday, December 6, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

      Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Those are the

      words that started it all. Six bearded imams are said to have shouted
them

      out while offering evening prayers as they and 141 other passengers
waited

      at the gate for their flight out of Minneapolis International Airport
. It

      was three days before Thanksgiving. Allahu Akbar: God is great.

      Initial media reports of the incident did not include the disturbing

      details about what happened after they boarded US Airways flight 300,
but

      the story quickly went national with provocative headlines: "Six
Muslims

      Ejected from US Air Flight for Praying." Yes, they were praying--but
let's

      be clear about this. The very last human sound on the cockpit voice

      recorder of United flight 93 before it screamed into the ground at 580


      miles per hour is the sound of male voices shouting "Allahu Akbar" in
a

      moment of religious ecstasy.

      They, too, were praying. The passengers and crew of flight 93 lost
their

      valiant fight to take back the plane just one hour and 20 minutes
after it

      pushed back from the gate. Until the hijackers stormed the cockpit
door,

      they were just a handful of Middle Eastern-looking men on their way to


      sunny California . So, yes, let's be exceedingly clear about the whole


      matter. Some 3,000 men, women and children are dead because the
unassuming

      people on those airplanes did not look at them and see murderers. Or

      dangerous Arabs. Or fanatical Muslims. They saw a few guys in chinos.



      In five years since the 9/11 attacks, U.S. commercial carriers have

      transported approximately 2.9 billion domestic and international

      passengers. It is a testament to the flying public, but, most of all,
to

      the flight crews who put those planes into the air and who daily
devote

      themselves to the safety and well-being of their passengers, that they


      have refused to succumb to ethnic hatred, religious intolerance or

      irrational fear on those millions of flights. But they have not
forgotten

      the sight of a 200,000-pound aircraft slicing through heavy steel and

      concrete as easily as a knife through butter. They still remember the

      voices of men and women in the prime of their lives saying final
goodbyes,

      people who just moments earlier set down their coffee and looked out
the

      window to a beautiful new morning. Today, when travelers and flight
crews

      arrive at the airport, all the overheated rhetoric of the civil rights


      absolutists, all the empty claims of government career bureaucrats,
all

      the disingenuous promises of the election-focused politicians just
fall

      away. They have families. They have responsibilities. To them, this is
not

      a game or a cause. This is real life.

      Given that Islamic terrorists continue their obsession with turning

      airplanes into weapons of mass destruction, it is nothing short of
obscene

      that these six religious leaders--fresh from attending a conference of
the

      North American Imams Federation, featuring discussions on "Imams and

      Politics" and "Imams and the Media"--chose to turn that airport into a


      stage and that airplane into a prop in the service of their need for

      grievance theater. The reality is, these passengers endured a
frightening

      3 1/2-hour ordeal, which included a front-to-back sweep of the
aircraft

      with a bomb-sniffing dog, in order to advance the provocative agenda
of

      these imams in, of all the inappropriate places after 9/11, U.S.
airports.



      "Allahu Akbar" was just the opening act. After boarding, they did not
take

      their assigned seats but dispersed to seats in the first row of first

      class, in the midcabin exit rows and in the rear--the exact
configuration

      of the 9/11 execution teams. The head of the group, seated closest to
the

      cockpit, and two others asked for a seatbelt extension, kept on board
for

      obese people. A heavy metal buckle at the end of a long strap, it can

      easily be used as a lethal weapon. The three men rolled them up and
placed

      them on the floor under their seats. And lest this entire incident be

      written off as simple cultural ignorance, a frightened Arabic-speaking


      passenger pulled aside a crew member and translated the imams'
suspicious

      conversations, which included angry denunciations of Americans,
furious

      grumblings about U.S. foreign policy, Osama Bin Laden and "killing

      Saddam."

      Predictably, these imams and their attorneys now suggest that another

      passenger who penned a frantic note of warning and slipped it to a
flight

      attendant was somehow a hysterical Islamophobe. Let us remember that
but

      for their performance at the gate this passenger might never have
noticed

      these men or their behavior on board, much less have the slightest
clue as

      to their religion or political passions. Of course, that was the point
of

      the shouting. According to the police report, yet another alarmed

      passenger who frequently travels to the Middle East described a

      conversation with one of the imams. The 31-year-old Egyptian expressed


      fundamentalist Muslim views, and stated the he would go to whatever

      measures necessary to obey all the tenets set out in the Koran.

      The activist Muslim American Society (MAS) issued a press release
within

      hours of the incident, demanding an apology and announcing a "pray-in"
at

      Reagan National Airport in Washington , D.C. Standing just a short
distance

      from the Pentagon, where five years ago black plumes of smoke from the


      crash of American Airlines flight 77 could be seen for miles, the

      assembled demonstrators complained that African-American Muslims,

      accustomed to "driving while black," must now cope with the injustice
of

      "flying while Muslim." This brazen two-step is racial politics at its

      worst; none of the imams are African-American. MAS, which teaches an

      "Activist Training" program with lessons on "how to talk to the
media,"

      must have been thrilled when one cable news outfit, suckered by the

      rhetoric, compared the imams' conduct to that of civil rights icon
Rosa

      Parks, who refused to give up her bus seat in the face of
institutional

      racism. One wonders what the parents of the three 11-year-olds who
died on

      flight 77--all African-American kids on a National Geographic field

      trip--would make of this stunning comparison.

      Today, MAS Executive Director Mahdi Bray says his organization wants
more

      than an apology. He wants to "hit [US Airways] where it hurts, the

      pocketbook," and, joined by the Council on American-Islamic Relations

      (CAIR), will seek compensation for the imams, civil and federal
monetary

      sanctions, and new, sweeping legislation that will extract even bigger


      penalties for airlines that engage in "racial and religious
profiling." An

      investigation by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Civil


      Rights and Civil Liberties is under way. Not incidentally, it is the

      "fatwa department" of MAS that pushed for segregated taxi lines that
would

      permit Muslim cab drivers at the Minneapolis airport to reject
passengers

      carrying alcohol.



      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.

      We have a new, inviolate aviation standard after 9/11, which requires
that

      the captain cannot take that airplane up so long as there are any

      unresolved issues with respect to the security of his airplane. At

      altitude, the cockpit door is barred and crews are instructed not to
open

      them no matter what is happening in the cabin behind them. This is an

      extremely challenging situation for the men and women who fly those

      planes, one that those who write federal aviation regulations and the

      people who agitate for more restrictions on a captain's authority will


      never have to face themselves.

      Likewise, flight attendants are confined in the back of the plane with


      upwards of 200 people; they must be the eyes and ears, not just for
the

      pilot but for us all. They are not combat specialists, however, and to


      compel them to ignore all but the most unambiguous cases of suspicious


      behavior is to further enable terrorists who act in ways meant to defy


      easy categorization. As the American Airlines flight attendants who

      literally jumped on "shoe bomber" Richard Reid demonstrated, cabin
crews

      are sharply attuned to unusual or abnormal behavior and they must not
be

      second-guessed, or hamstrung by misguided notions of political

      correctness.

      Ultimately, the most despicable aspect about the imams' behavior is
that

      when they pierced the normally quiet hum of a passenger waiting area
with

      shouts of "Allahu Akbar"and deliberately engaged in
terrorist-associated

      behavior that was sure to trigger suspicion, they exploited the fear
that

      began with the Sept. 11 attacks. The imams, experienced travelers all,


      counted on the security system established after 9/11 to kick in, and
now

      they plan not only to benefit financially from the proper operation of


      that system but to substantially weaken it--with help from the

      Saudi-endowed attorneys at CAIR.

      US Airways is right to stand by its flight crew. It will be both
dangerous

      and disgraceful if the Department of Homeland Security, the Department
of

      Transportation and, ultimately, our federal courts allow aviation
security

      measures put in place after 9/11 to be cynically manipulated in the
name

      of civil rights.



      Ms. Burlingame, a director of the World Trade Center Memorial
Foundation,

      is the sister of Charles F. "Chic" Burlingame III, the pilot of
American

      Airlines flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11,
2001.





      Copyright (c) Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.