| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Never mind that carrying liquids onto planes is still banned in the aftermath of the foiled trans-Atlantic bombing plot. Never mind that one-way tickets come under automatic suspicion nowadays. Never mind that two tests came up positive for explosives.
And never mind that the canine team got a positive hit: Rover is racist, you see, and needs sensitivity training. From AP: Woman says she suspects Pakistani heritage was reason for US airport’s security alarm
CEREDO, West Virginia -,A Pakistani woman whose daughter’s carry-on luggage caused an airport to shut down for 9 ½ hours says it was her ethnic background, not a few bottles of suspicious liquids, that set off security officials.
Initial laboratory testing by the FBI turned up no evidence of explosive materials in the bottles carried at Tri-State Airport in West Virginia by Rima Qayyum, a 28-year-old Pakistani woman dressed in the traditional Islamic headcover.
The presence or absence of the hijab is completely irrelevant, as the same events would have unfolded if she wore nothing on her head.
No charges were filed against the woman, who was never detained and was cooperative when interviewed by the FBI.
Qayyum’s mother, Mian Qayyum of Jackson, Michigan, told The Associated Press that her daughter is four months pregnant, lives in Barboursville and is innocent.
It was not only a false alarm, it was racial discrimination because there was nothing,’ Mian Qayyum said. They should clear her name and apologize on national TV.’
This is the height of silliness: Because it was a false alarm (though tests are still ongoing), the whole thing was racially motivated.
The FBI did not return messages Thursday night seeking comment on the allegations.
A screener noticed a bottle in Rima Qayyum’s carry-on bag as she was going through security before her 9:15 a.m. flight Thursday to Charlotte, North Carolina, airport authority president Jim Booton said.
The terminal was evacuated at 11:25 a.m. after two bottles of liquid in the bag initially tested positive for explosives residue twice, and a canine team also got a positive hit. Chemical tests of the bottles’ contents later turned up no explosives, said Capt. Jack Chambers, head of the State Police Special Operations unit.
The woman had purchased a one-way ticket to Detroit by way of Charlotte on Wednesday. The flight eventually left for Charlotte without her.
Rima Qayyum planned to return to the airport Friday to take another flight, her mother said.
She just had water to drink because she is pregnant and she had a face wash that had a drop of bleach on it,’ Mian Qayyum said.
The FBI plans to perform additional tests on the bottles Friday, Killeen said.
US authorities banned the carrying of liquids onto flights last week after British officials made arrests in an alleged plot to blow up U.S.-bound planes using explosives disguised as drinks and other common products.
Posted by Marisol at August 18, 2006 1:27 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Ah yes, the ever popular claims that islam is a race and a religion. It's two! Two! Two cults in one! Of course the dogs were probably prejudiced because they are really Jews who were turned into dogs by a merciful and benevolent allah.........
Posted by: Bohemond_1069![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at August 18, 2006 1:48 PM
i'm going to let my conspiracy tendicies loose:
maybe there were residues that triggered the two positives and the canine positive but the contents of the bottle was indeed water.
now why would anyone do this? get a Pakistani woman with residue coming up as a false alarm?
PROFILING! maybe this is an attempt by the CAIR/ACLU crowd to create a false positive in order to declare racial discrimination against muslims?
just thinking out loud, it's probably nothing.
Posted by: viahj at August 18, 2006 1:48 PM
i'm going to let my conspiracy tendicies loose:
maybe there were residues that triggered the two positives and the canine positive but the contents of the bottle was indeed water.
now why would anyone do this? get a Pakistani woman with residue coming up as a false alarm?
PROFILING! maybe this is an attempt by the CAIR/ACLU crowd to create a false positive in order to declare racial discrimination against muslims?
just thinking out loud, it's probably nothing.
Posted by: viahj at August 18, 2006 1:48 PM
I like dogs that work for us. They do not lie and are loyal. Evidently the items had a trace of something the dog is trained to sniff. Maybe the woman had handled something that transferred the scent to the bottle? HMMMM.
Better safe than sorry.
Apologize to the woman if nothing is found. The world is an unsafe place now and security checks rule the day. Until Islam stops killing everyone , the security checks will continue and some people may experience some minor inconveniences.
We should be looking harder than we do.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 18, 2006 1:48 PM
Boy, those mutts are total DOGS!! Can you believe that even canines know Islam is bad news?!?!! What's more, even Muslims are now admitting that DOGS have it in for them too! What is the world coming to?? And, whoda' thunk Muslims would credit dogs,something they hold in great revulsion, with possessing such intelligence?
In this case, I'd say that these dogs have definitely earned the title "man's best friend!"
If anything related to this case deserves to appear on national TV, it would be a staging of these dogs biting this Muslim battle-axe on her derriere!!
at August 18, 2006 1:57 PM
OMG what the #^%& was in those bottles anyway?
I think this was some kind of Jihad test.
I am so tired of these muslims! They probably want to stone the dog I bet!
Posted by: Bilas at August 18, 2006 2:03 PM
LOL Islamophobic dogs.. picking on her because she is a muslim.. or maybe it is the smell of Pakistan that was about her.
Well I refuse to be cowed when called an Islamophobe.
Islamophobe: Noun
A RATIONAL aversion, fear or concern about Islam and Islamics..
Any concern at all about Islam and Islamics is rational, unlike other phobia's (e.g. homophobia) which are irrational.. I also have a phobia about black widow spiders, coral snakes, rattle snakes, masked men (or women) with weapons, cars careening towards me in my lane of travel.etc.
at August 18, 2006 2:04 PM
OMG what the #^%& was in those bottles anyway?
I think this was some kind of Jihad test.
I am so tired of these muslims! They probably want to stone the dog I bet!
Posted by: Bilas at August 18, 2006 2:04 PM
Boy, those mutts are total DOGS!! Can you believe that even canines know Islam is bad news?!?!! What's more, even Muslims are now admitting that DOGS have it in for them too! What is the world coming to?? And, whoda' thunk Muslims would credit dogs,something they hold in great revulsion, with possessing such intelligence?
In this case, I'd say that these dogs have definitely earned the title "man's best friend!"
If anything related to this case deserves to appear on national TV, it would be a staging of these dogs biting this Muslim battle-axe on her derriere!!
at August 18, 2006 2:04 PM
OMG what the #^%& was in those bottles anyway?
I think this was some kind of Jihad test.
I am so tired of these muslims! They probably want to stone the dog I bet!
Posted by: Bilas at August 18, 2006 2:04 PM
Call me islamophobic, but I'll trust a dog before I'll trust a muslim any day.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 2:10 PM
It is not a case of profiling, rather their reputation/religion precedes them.
muslims are the only people in the world who hate dogs. There is something inherently wrong with that. We're talking about man's best friend here--come on!
After 2 scan positives and a canine team positive authorites should be investigating the possible bomb factory this woman lives in!
Posted by: GreatShaitan at August 18, 2006 2:10 PM
call me islamophobic, but I'll trust a dog before I'll trust a muslim any day.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 2:28 PM
Call me islamophobic, but I'll trust a dog before I'll trust a muslim any day of the week.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 2:33 PM
Call me islamophobic, but I'll trust a dog before I'll trust a muslim any day of the week.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 2:33 PM
BTW, the multiple-posting is getting out of control either because the site is overburdened or people really want to get a point across =)
Posted by: GreatShaitan at August 18, 2006 2:33 PM
Call me islamophobic, but I'll trust a dog before I'll trust a muslim any day of the week.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 2:35 PM
Sorry, it wasn't loading so I hit the "Post" button again. Please delete all extraneous posts.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 4:22 PM
As I'm sure the readers here know, dogs are "unclean" in Islam (like pigs, or non-Halal meat). Islamic troops regularly kill all dogs in an area they control. How dare an unclean thing accuse god's chosen!
As for the dogs, a common error in their training is to forget they're dogs, not humans. Is the dog alerting to a scent because it smells it, or because it's looking for snacks and approval from its master?
Posted by: aynrandgirl at August 18, 2006 4:25 PM
The premise of our criticisms above obscures a very important point: we cannot completely rely on race-blind methodologies, such as canines able to sniff explosives, for the simple reason that there are many deadly ways to mass-murder whose components are not detectible, or whose detection is an imperfect process.
What if these explosives could not be detected by canines? What if in the near future there could be any number of components of a deadly attack that cannot be detected?
The answer is, we must profile Muslims and all whom we think are Muslims, independent of whether we also might utilize race-blind tools.
Being a Muslim, and looking (to educated profiling personnel) like a Muslim, should by itself be grounds for suspicion sufficient to warrant searches and questioning (and, if further incriminating evidence is discovered, to detention, etc.).
We should utilize the race-blind tools in our profiling, of course. However, they will not be sufficient, and gaping cracks will remain in our profiling system until we start profiling Muslims.
So go ahead, fellow Jihad Watchers, and cackle with glee at the asinine responses of the Muslims and Leftists: they deserve to be laughed at. But we shouldn't exult under their terms, by assuring them that racial factors never are, never will be, and never should be, a part of any sane, rational profiling methodology.
Posted by: remote_control at August 18, 2006 4:27 PM
I will trust the dog before i trust the word of a wacko Muslim woman.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 18, 2006 4:39 PM
Good doggie!! Good boy!!!
I find it hard to believe it was cosmetics that caused this. Unless of course, she wears explosives for makeup. I've had several women friends go through the sniffer at the airport and have NEVER had a problem.
She shouldn't be upset that she got pulled aside. I've been pulled aside. She should just blame muslims that created this mess. I do.
Posted by: freewoman at August 18, 2006 4:58 PM
I hope those dog's get steak for dinner every night for a year.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 5:05 PM
I second the above opinions about dogs. But given the way Islam thinks of most animals, including dogs, these dogs would have been even more hostile towards the Muslims had they known how Muslims think of them.
I'm not a pet person myself, but I'd certainly toss these dogs their bones.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 18, 2006 5:05 PM
August 18, 2006
W. Virginia airport's bomb-sniffing dogs accused of Islamophobia
Oh that's funny!
But watch how fast this disappears from the news, along with the 1,000 cell phone stories. All the terrorism (oops..Alleged terrorism) suddenly becomes a false report.
at August 18, 2006 5:19 PM
Dogs made to sniff muslims? Isnt that cruelty to animals?
Posted by: 72_goats at August 18, 2006 5:29 PM
Congratuations security dog. Keep up the good work and God Bless you and your human companion. I hope he/she gives you more treats.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at August 18, 2006 5:33 PM
Now there is a threat to blow up the Taj Mahal in Lucknow, India. (Thye'll need more than luck, now.) I thought the Taj Mahal was a muslim shrine???
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060818/ap_on_re_as/india_taj_mahal_security
at August 18, 2006 5:33 PM
Bohemond
Taj Mahal is in Agra. But this is one terror plot, if true, I hope they do successfully pull off (with minimal human casualities, but with the mosque being destroyed.)
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 18, 2006 5:36 PM
Infidel Pride, I've never been there (regretably) so I'm just quoting from the news story. Was the report filed from Lucknow?
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 5:48 PM
My dog has the same problem, very Un-PC behavior. She only barks at the creepy nervous types.
Posted by: amana39 at August 18, 2006 6:17 PM
obviously this seems to be a test run, ..just checking how official channels have been tuned after the liquid scare, and then at a small airport, looking if they have updated there as well.
now they know more, at no loss, pak lady innocent,
airport security ridiculous.
at August 18, 2006 6:42 PM
Yep, the report was filed from Lucknow, the capital of the state in which Agra is located.
If you do ever go to India, there are lots of places you could visit - avoid the Muslim monuments, including the Taj.
I see this has already been posted, so I'll continue any further comments on this in those places.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at August 18, 2006 7:02 PM
If I had to guess, I'd say General Pershing would have employed bomb-sniffing pigs. That would really shake the mohammedans up.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35310
Posted by: Kreuzueber Halbmond at August 18, 2006 7:14 PM
IP, while dealing with a computer service I found I was talking to an agent for the company in Kashmir. He invited me to come see his state someday. I asked if it was predominately muslim, and when he said yes, I politely declined, but I offered to let him see Texas.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at August 18, 2006 7:27 PM
Well, everyone seems to have this topic covered pretty well, but I just want to say, blaming a dog for its behavior, when that behavior has been trained into the dog TO KEEP YOU AND YOUR FELLOW PASSENGERS ALIVE, is ASSININE.
Lastly, a trained bomb-sniffing dog is only effective for a very few hours at a time. And, unfortunately, there are only a limited number of dogs trained in this art. We should have trained dogs at every airport checkpoint, 24/7, in America and the world. Therefore, a posititve step toward increased security would include the govenment stepping up and funding more trained dogs.
Posted by: ryoga at August 18, 2006 7:55 PM
Therefore, a positive step toward increased security would include the government stepping up and funding more trained dogs.
Never drink and comment
Posted by: ryoga at August 18, 2006 7:58 PM
Trained pigs to sniff out Muslims at airports, what a great idea. :)
Posted by: abad at August 18, 2006 8:45 PM
Pigs have an excellent sense of smell (ie truffles); I'm certain that Alarmed Pig Farmer could comment on the extent of their abilities and trainability.
We daily take our BLACK (the WORST of dogs to muslims) dog to the park to let her scare the Somalis. The mothers just freak right out! There's also a grill there and we're thinking of putting a hogs head with eyes facing out on it and letting the cooking odor waft over the muslim area.
Posted by: CGW at August 19, 2006 9:21 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)