Letters from Fly-Over Country

 

Mr. Doug Parker, CEO

US Airways

Dear Mr. Parker,

The Muslim imams your employees booted off of the Nov. 20, 2006 U.S. Air flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix aren’t going away are they? They are kicking and screaming, claiming you and U.S. Airways harass and discriminate. From this frequent flier, keep up the good work.

Before boarding the flight in dispute, witnesses said the imams were praying loudly, shouting the name of “Allah” over and over. If I had seen a bunch of people hollering like that and—as reports tell us—talking about Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden, I would have been changing my ticket.

Oh, and two imams wanted upgrades to first class but were told there were none available. When finally escorted off of the plane, they were found in first class. The other four apparently couldn’t find their assigned seats either, two choosing the middle of the plane and two the rear.

An air marshal—asking for anonymity (guess he didn’t want to get sued like you) told reporters, “They now control all of the entry and exit routes to the plane.” Not on my plane brother. I would have been outta there.

Next, three of these guys wanted seat belt extensions, though none of the three was large enough to need one. When given the extensions they put them on the floor. If this behavior didn’t give passengers the heebie jeebies, I can’t imagine what would. A Muslim imam with a strangling device, sitting on my airplane?

I noticed that the distinguished Congresswoman from Texas—Democrat Sheila Jackson-Lee—griped, saying “Understandably, the imams felt profiled, humiliated, and discriminated against by their treatment.”

Apparently Ms. Jackson-Lee believes that yelling in the terminal, taking over first-class seats, delaying a flight by tromping all over the plane and asking for potential killing devices is normal behavior for most passengers. I admit I get frustrated when I can’t get an entire can of Coke, but I stop short of looking for strangling material. I usually simply read a book instead.

I’m not in your shoes, but if I were I might consider three simple steps:

First, give each employee on that flight a raise and I run a national advertisement to commemorate the event.

Second, while your lawyer will likely give birth to a cow the moment you do it, explain the imams’ behavior and say that the next time your employees see the same they are instructed to boot these idiots right on over to Northwest Airlines as they did in November.

Third, hold a press conference and announce that you are acutely aware that some radical Muslim groups plan to boycott your airline because of your policies. Respond by saying that any group supporting the terrorizing of passengers is not welcome on U.S. Airways.

The civil libertarians and congressional Democrats like Ms. Lee will shriek in horror. And regular Americans will stand up and applaud.

 

We are in a war, Mr. Parker. These imams wanted to see how far they could go, and thank God there were some U.S. Airways employees who drew a line and held fast. U.S. Airlines took a valuable piece of ground on November 20 and the American people—normal ones, anyway—are on your side.

 

Newt Gingrich got it right when he laid out a plan for the 2008 presidential debates. Instead of the stilted Q&A's we get from network anchors--where the only question at the end of the "debate" is "who gaffed?"--Gingrich wants candidates in front of the people for true debate.

Let's stop treating our candidates like children who need a list of rules. Without a 4000-page rule book, we might find out which candidate behaves like a gentleman (or gentle woman), and who can put together a flowing argument on a subject.

But we don't need to stop there. Today we face a host of issues that deserve debate: Illegal Immigration, Global Warming, Iraq and more.

Why can't we--in the name of common sense--allow the two sides to genuinely debate these issues?

Oh sure, we get five minutes between commercials where we have two invited guests and two hosts carry on with each other, but there is no debate. Instead we get a lot of action and no one dares to answer the question asked by the other side.

For instance, if Al Gore is so sure Global Warming is fact and the debate is "over," why can't he humor us for an hour and talk about the topic with a well-spoken scientist or perhaps Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK). With nothing but a moderator to keep both from taking too much time, Fox News would have a bonanza of ratings (as if it doesn't already) if they gave an hour a week to this--or other--key issues.

When it comes to Iraq, I'd love to watch John Murtha (D-IL) sweat it out against any one of a dozen Republicans.

By creating true platforms for reasoned debates, we would find out quickly who is dependant on sound bites and who can truly make a case.

We would see which spokespersons are forced to fall back on name-calling and cheap one-liners, and which ones can stand tall on the facts.

Reasoned debates favor conservatives, but also force conservatives to go beyond rhetoric. For liberals, a debate of more than five minutes is scary indeed. Some liberals--and this would be fun--would refuse to go on air for an hour.

So what about it, Fox News? Why not give us an hour a week to watch a true debate? We'll give you the other four nights for Hannity & Colmes and more. But once a week, let's see the real thing.