Courtesy of Power Line comes coverage of the Flying Imams’ tricks. The latest is a staged prayer protest at Reagan Washington National Airport, with the token Dhimmis in tow (a Rabbi and a minister). (A doff of the hat to Dr. Frank Zavisca for keeping me in the loop). These are the gentlemen who were led off a US-Airways flight after acting suspiciously.

How suspiciously?

1) They requested seat belt extenders, but were not overweight. Then, “Rather than attach the extensions, the men placed the straps and buckles on the cabin floor.”
2) They moved, without permission, from their assigned seats to first class. After the self-initiated shuffle, “the six imams were positioned on the plane from front to back,” covering all exits, in a configuration “associated with the September 11 terrorist attacks.”

Before boarding, the six had prayed loudly, shouting “Allah,” like You Know Who. Quoting a man of impeccable pinko credentials (“former Minnesota Senator and U.S. Ambassador to the UN Commission on Human Rights Rudy Boschwitz,), Scott of Power Line asks:

There you are at the gate about to kiss your wife and kids goodbye and the imams begin praying. Would you walk away and let the family go forward? Or would you be much relieved if the airline said: hold on, we ought to check these guys out. Give me a break and not this liberal bullshit. The airline acted prudently just as it should have.

What all these pinkos collectively ‘and conveniently’ choose to forget is that federal anti-discrimination laws make it practically impossible for airlines to get away with the type of vigilance US Airways demonstrated. The federal government doesn’t really want airlines to be free to protect the flying customers, because this would invariably mean angering the noisy minorities they prize.

For their efforts on behalf of their customers after 9/11, four airlines were made to pay hefty sums to the federal goons because of so-called discrimination based on race or ethnic background. With airlines being only nominally private, they have fewer and fewer incentives to offer the kind of security service flyers desperately want–and need.

Meantime, the Muslim Public Affairs Council has not wasted any time. According the Washington Post, it has already complained to the Transportation Department. “The Homeland Security Department’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties said last week that it was investigating the incident.” This is the intrusive apparatus that ought to be the focus of complaints from “conservative” screechers.

Robert Spencer explains, vis-Ã -vis my complaint about the documentary “Obsession,” why the directors needed to be so, well, politically correct:

“I agree with Mercer that it doesn’t go far enough in identifying the source of that challenge — which I think must be done if anything is ultimately going to be done to meet the challenge effectively. So along with, but not instead of, Obsession, I recommend the less flashy but more informative Islam: What the West Needs to Know.

Now, I am in Islam: What the West Needs to Know, but not in Obsession, as Mercer points out, but that is not why I am recommending the other film along with Obsession: while I appreciate Mercer’s kind words, certainly the Obsession producers could have told the full truth about the jihad ideology without featuring my mug in their movie. If they had told those truths, however, they almost certainly would not have gotten their film onto Fox News. So it’s a trade-off. A lot of people are waking up to what we’re up against because of Obsession, and so my hat is off to Wayne Kopping and Rafael Shore.”

I think the wise Mr. Spencer is suggesting — implicitly, at least — that I be less impolitic.

Robert Spencer explains, vis-Ã -vis my complaint about the documentary “Obsession,” why the directors needed to be so, well, politically correct:

“I agree with Mercer that it doesn’t go far enough in identifying the source of that challenge — which I think must be done if anything is ultimately going to be done to meet the challenge effectively. So along with, but not instead of, Obsession, I recommend the less flashy but more informative Islam: What the West Needs to Know.

Now, I am in Islam: What the West Needs to Know, but not in Obsession, as Mercer points out, but that is not why I am recommending the other film along with Obsession: while I appreciate Mercer’s kind words, certainly the Obsession producers could have told the full truth about the jihad ideology without featuring my mug in their movie. If they had told those truths, however, they almost certainly would not have gotten their film onto Fox News. So it’s a trade-off. A lot of people are waking up to what we’re up against because of Obsession, and so my hat is off to Wayne Kopping and Rafael Shore.”

I think the wise Mr. Spencer is suggesting — implicitly, at least — that I be less impolitic.