Another example of overzealous security...

[wbs]

This editorial was in yesterday's Washington Post:

Twenty Years For Shaving?

Monday, September 23, 2002; Page A18

"An individual on an aircraft . . . who, by assaulting or intimidating a . . . flight attendant . . . interferes with the performance of the duties of the . . . attendant . . . shall be . . . imprisoned for not more than 20 years."

WE ARE fairly certain that the drafters of this perfectly reasonable federal law did not have the heinous acts of shaving one's face or taking too long in the bathroom in mind when they wrote the word "intimidating." Yet if the Justice Department has its way, a man named Gurdeep Wander could face hard time for disregarding a flight attendant's request to stop shaving and return to his seat on a Northwest Airlines flight from Memphis to Las Vegas on Sept. 11. The incident itself, which caused the flight to make an emergency landing in Arkansas, appears to have been a regrettable example of understandable but excessive vigilance on the anniversary of the attacks. But charging Mr. Wander with interfering with a flight crew is oppressive and absurd.

Mr. Wander and his traveling companion, a man named Harinder Singh -- who was released after paying a $500 civil fine -- are not likely Islamic terrorists. Both men, in fact, are Sikhs, about whom investigators have found "no ties to Al-Qaeda cells and no ties to terrorist groups," as the local U.S. attorney put it. They were on their way to a convention in Las Vegas. But because of a delayed flight the previous day, they missed their connection in Minneapolis, so the airline reportedly gave them shaving kits, and they spent the night in a hotel. The next morning, they traveled to Memphis and boarded the fateful flight carrying only the shaving kits -- their luggage having gone on ahead. They had the misfortune of boarding late, next to a Hispanic man named Carlos Nieves, and the three dark-skinned men apparently aroused the flight crew's suspicions. These suspicions grew when, the government contends, Mr. Singh and Mr. Wander failed to sit in their assigned seats.

Then Mr. Wander crossed the line. The government alleges that with the "fasten seat belt" light still on he "asked flight attendant Deborah Summers if he could use the washroom." She okayed this but told him to hurry. Instead, he began shaving and -- though Ms. Summers knocked on the door several times -- "did not return to his seat as [she] repeatedly requested." Ms. Summers felt "intimidated" by this, particularly after Mr. Wander left the bathroom, and both Mr. Singh and Mr. Nieves sought to use it too. The captain decided to land the plane, and authorities detained the three men -- as well as an Egyptian who happened to be on board.

In a climate of fear, people get suspicious. But it is critical that people be willing to back down when an error becomes clear. Instead, all too often, the scrutiny carries significant costs even for people against whom no charges are brought -- like the three Muslim medical students recently denied a scheduled rotation at a Florida hospital after they were stopped in a terrorism scare. The case of Mr. Wander is particularly ugly, because although he clearly is not a terrorist, he is being charged like one. The grand jury that hears this case would do a great service by refusing to indict. Shaving is not a crime -- not even on an airplane on Sept. 11.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company

-------------------------------------------

(Sigh) With friends like these....

I'd almost rather play the law of averages and take my chances with the terrorists....

[ September 24, 2002, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: wbs ]

[Moon]

Moving this to the General Discussion Forum.