With that reasoning Rumsfeld should not be allowed in USA either. He supported Saddam as well.. Richard Reed had red flags all over him. He was the member of the cell in London, he was questioned the day before in Paris and denied boarding, he was questioned and, correct me if I am wrong denied entry into Israel rightfully. This certainly wasn't the case in the case for Yusuf Islam.. There are two important flaws in this incidence: 1. A person was put on the no-fly list wrongfully.. As a matter of fact he was NOT on the list according to ABC news that I am watching now. 2. A singer was considered a threat because he was flying into Northeast corridor. So, what's next, welcome red carpet visit by Moammar Qaddafi.. ? God forbid if he writes something in "Arabic kind of language" in the barf bag. :) BAHA Fan of real security.. Fan of me teaching the government a thing or two data matching :) -----Original Message----- From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Russell Ng Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 6:18 PM To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Stupidity of airline "security" and two incidences Dennis The authorities didn't feel that Richard Reed was a dangerous threat either. No red flags appeared next to his name. Not until he tried to light his shoe bomb did people know how dangerous he was. If he had done it in the washroom, that would have been the end of the aircraft and passengers. There is a fine line between who is allowed into the US and who isn't. With his well publicized support for Saddam Hussein, support of the fatwa regarding Salman Rushdie, I think this would have caused some ripples in TSA's pond. TSA decided that they'd rather err on the side of caution in Yusuf Islam's case and order the aircraft to land in Bangor. Russell SIN At 06:21 PM 9/22/04 -0400, Dennis W Zeuch wrote: >I dont think Cat Stevens (whatever his new name is) is a dangerous threat to >the National Security of the United States. Is this the road we want our >country to be taking?