Apology Sought of Northwest for Forcing Headscarf Remomal

[Richard Cranium]

L I N T H I C U M, Md., Jan. 8 — A civil rights organization is demanding Northwest Airlines apologize for allegedly forcing a Muslim high school student to remove her head scarf at an airport security checkpoint.

In a letter to the Minnesota-based carrier, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said Monday the Dec. 18 incident was an example of religious harassment and an equivalent of a public strip search.

The council is asking the airline to investigate the incident at Baltimore-Washington International Airport and discipline the security guard.

"For a Muslim woman to be forced to take off her headscarf in public is a violation of rights," wrote Hodan Hassan, a spokesman for the civil rights group. "These women believe covering their hair in public — essential to being modest — is a mandate from God."

Northwest spokesman Kurt Ebenhoch said the airline was complying with security directives issued by the Federal Aviation Administration after Sept. 11.

"We regret any inconvenience that recent FAA-mandated procedures have created for any of our customers," Ebenhoch said.

Cranium is thnking;
"boo-dam-hoo, if you don't like it here, I'll tell you where you can go"


http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/u...ont020108.html

[EvilRick]

Ditto!

[storm2k]

things get nice and sticky when religious practces get involved...

[osprey4]

How difficult would it be for the airlines to have a small room near security checkpoints where people could be pulled aside for just such moments? That way, everyone is happy and no one is embarrassed. I'm all for stringent security checks but there's no reason to force people to violate their conscience.

In this case, an apology is cheap. No one is talking about lawsuits.

Jn

[Richard Cranium]

I totally agree that an apology would be cost-free, but in this day of intense legal scrutiny of every little detail I think the admission of any wrong-doing would open the door for future litigation.

My ex-roomate was a local super attorney, prior to his very early demise, I now look at things in a ,, 'different' manner, for lack of a more educated word.

[prttybean]

A room to the side would be good idea. A muslim women explained to me that going about in public without her head scarf is like me going out topless. I wouldn't even think about it. The girl was probably humiliated.

""In God We Trust" is our national motto.
This is true, and it was instituted by the same people who believed Negros were property, and that women could not vote or own property, and that native Americans were ok to slaughter for their lands.

As a nation we have matured since then. As citizens we should recognize that religious freedom, the freedom to believe or not believe in any religion, is one of our basic rights. And we should recognize that the separation of church and state exists for the purpose of the government not imposing upon its citizens any laws or regulations based on a particular religious belief structure.

The suggestion that anyone not having the same opinions, religious beliefs, or language should leave the country is quite intolerant, as is the suggestion that multicultural society served our ancestors well, but is now weakening America.

The concept that all people have rights is the foundation of our freedoms, and our constitution, bill of rights and laws provide a framework for achieving these freedoms. A multicultural society is a society that upholds these freedoms by tolerating and permiting the peaceful coexistence of people regardless of their origin and cultural beliefs. This was a good idea when America was young, and it still is.

If we lose our tolerance for different cultures, religious beliefs, or opinions then we start oppressing people whose beliefs do not match our own. And then as a country we will begin to resemble the Taliban ruled nation which we so vehemently oppose.

Patriotism to me means holding a steadfast belief that the rights, freedoms, and humanitarian ideals expressed by the declaration of independence, the constitution and the bill of rights, and usually upheld by our laws, are the foundation of great nations. If you agree with that definition of patriotism then call me a patriot.

I am embarrassed by the recent trend of labeling people unpatriotic if they do not:
decorate with flags
believe in the Christian God
cover head with turbans/scarfs
blindly believe that anything Washington or the President says or does must be correct and constitutional
discriminate against foreigners
speak english

.

Our military service people are not fighting to uphold English as a language. They are not fighting to uphold Christianity as a religion. They are not fighting because their opponents are not Americans. They are fighting because for thousands of people in NYC one of our country's founding beliefs - the right to life - was violated by terrorists.

Of course by fighting we too are denying some Afghan civilians that same right to life. So some people may hold the belief that two wrongs do not make a right, and that another means of responding to terrorism would be better. It's too late to change this time, but the fact that Washington decided on this course of action does not diminish the duality of war, nor the importance of people debating the wisdom of that decision. One could be quite patriotic and still be unsure that war is the best solution. I suggest that it is not unpatriotic to apply a constitutional yardstick to government actions. In fact it would be unpatriotic if we did not do so, thereby lowering our expectations of what America can achieve.

And the right-to-leave? Everyone has that right. If you truly believe that the constitution is passe' and zealous oppression is in, you could go join the Taliban, or you could stay here and debate the issue. This country will defend your rights to do so."

[M_Six]

When I was in Germany in the 80's the Germans would pull you into a small booth with a curtain to pat you down or even screen you with a metal detector. That way if they needed to have you remove an item of clothing, you had some privacy.

The last time I flew I had to undo my belt for the security check. I've lost 25lbs in the last few months so my pants don't fit as snugly as they used to. Then, with my belt undone the woman asked me to extend my arms. I thought sure my pants were going to be around my ankles. I don't know how they stayed up.

As far as respecting religious beliefs, yes we should...but only until the religious beliefs start to interfere with security. If we start letting things slip through security unsearched because of religious beliefs, hijackers are sure to notice and take advantage of it.

True. In India, folks who believe in the Sikh Religion wear Turbans and they are known as Sardars (the folks not the turban) and these folks also sport a beard (only the men folk).

But when they go thru airport security, their head/turban is checked with the magic wand for concealed weapons but they are not made to take off the turban.

Just a trivia for those interested.

[MDdan]

I agree shahani. It is very sad that many want to undermine freedom in the name of protecting....uh, freedom.



Having said that, I don't know that I agree with one thing you said:

Quote:

Originally posted by shahani

As a nation we have matured since then.

I think we've changed since then, and there have been many good changes, but I don't think that we've necessarily progressed. I don't know that we've gotten worse either.

I think the primary thing we can say is that there is alot to be learned from History. In WWII the jews were persecuted and killed, and many people held their tongue or even supported it. Were the Germans backward evil people? Not any more than everyone else. It's just that difficult circumstances can bring out the worst in people, as well as the best.

If these attacks continue, we may see anti-Arab/ Anti-muslim racism become even more mainstream.

It is interesting that in August 2001, racial profiling was wrong. But a few weeks later, it was considered an appropriate response by many.