Dispatches from the Creation Wars

I'm conflicted. Tefillin are definitely large enough to hide explosives in. On the other hand, many things are large enough to hide explosives in. I'm not surprised people are paranoia so soon after an attempted terrorist attack.

Posted by: Brandon | January 29, 2010 9:17 AM

I can see this is going to have some knock-on effects. There are going to be a lot of claims of anti-semitism coming at the passengers and flight crew.

But really it comes down to this: did the kid have the tefillin on when he walked through airport security? If so, it might seem harsh, but the security guards would have been forgiven for searching the boxes just in case, just as they're forgiven for checking any box one might want to take onto a plane. Once there was deemed to be no threat from this kid and his boxes at airport security, there should be no reason to ground a flight and the pilot should know that.

If, however, the kid got on the plane and began strapping boxes to himself, as the report suggests he did, then the fact that it's a Jewish ritual probably wouldn't stop anyone from freaking out, even if they knew about it. What were they gonna do, ask him to open the box and give them a peek? If that's the case, the pilot was entirely justified in landing the plane.

Posted by: Mill | January 29, 2010 9:28 AM

the fact that it's a Jewish ritual probably wouldn't stop anyone from freaking out, even if they knew about it.

I have to disagree someone freaking out about what they know isn't terrorism is not a valid reason to land the flight unless the freakout itself endangers passengers. Anyway on the security angle unless he manufactured the tefillion on the flight they had been through security whether he was wearing them or not, which put them in the same category as everything else in hand luggage. It would have made equal sense to land the plane because a passenger was seen opening a briefcase.

Posted by: Matty | January 29, 2010 9:37 AM

I disagree the flight crew should have been unconcerned. Let's remember they didn't know what this was, that's information we have after the fact.

Also, assuming that because this kid got his tefillin through security is argument enough to remain unconcerned like Mill @ 4 argues has me wondering if Mill is even paying attention.

I'm not making an argument that the process used by this flight crew was the appropriate and wisest course of action; I am arguing ignoring it would be incredibly negligent.

Posted by: Michael Heath | January 29, 2010 9:46 AM

Here's a sketch: http://www.hasofer.com/html/img/tefillin/RoshPos01.jpg

Taz - thanks for a link to the story. Now if this kid has got this stuff strapped on and no one knows what it is, and this kid is noticeably praying; I'm not sure how anyone can reasonably argue doing nothing is appropriate.

Posted by: Michael Heath | January 29, 2010 9:54 AM

Catgirl: Umm, this is exactly what any reasonable person would do.

Certainly seems more reasonable than landing the damn plane over it!

Posted by: Adrienne | January 29, 2010 10:00 AM

Thankfully nobody seems to have tackled the kid and wrestled him to the ground...

Posted by: Adrienne | January 29, 2010 10:02 AM

Mandrake @15:Here you have a guy who is strapping two little boxes (I'd guess about a cubic inch in size) to his body and speaking in a middle East-sounding language. That's pretty much the stereotype of a suicide bomber.

Except he was also wearing a kippah and the box on his head has an obviously Hebrew symbol. Jews aren't known for being suicide bombers.

Posted by: Adrienne | January 29, 2010 10:04 AM

I disagree the flight crew should have been unconcerned.

but I do not blame people for being concerned.

I think there's some massive straw-manning going on in this thread. Who actually suggested that nobody should have been concerned, and that everyone should have just ignored the tefillin? The point is that there was a ridiculous over-reaction. Instead of just questioning the boy about his strange behavior, everyone threw a big tantrum, panicked, and landed the plane. I would give them the same advice I give my two year-old nieces: "Use your words to solve problems". The flight attendants certainly should have investigated, but they didn't need to freak out over it.

Posted by: catgirl | January 29, 2010 10:15 AM

Pre-emptive apology: I apologise unreservedly for the use of the term "retarded". It was a poor choice. "Stupid" will do just fine.

Posted by: Dunc | January 29, 2010 10:23 AM

Dunc @ 17:

What kind of fucking rock do you have to be living under not to recognize tefillin?

The flight crew did not recognize what it was. For about fourteen years I flew from 50,000 to 200,000 miles a year and I've never seen or heard of anything like this until encountering this blog post. My mileage included a heavy dose of miles in Europe.

Get a grip, this issue has nothing to be with ethnocentrism or the stereotypical ugly American once again behaving poorly; it has everything to do with a young man strapping a box to his head attached to something on his body with straps between the two, and possibly noticeably praying; all in an era of suicide bombers.

Posted by: Michael Heath | January 29, 2010 10:28 AM

I've never seen someone wearing tefillin IRL. Only in movies or pictures. I think I was in college the first time I even heard of such a thing.

I don't think it's anything scandalous that nobody on that flight had seen tefillin before or that seeing them for the first time while on an airline flight made them jumpy. I'd have been weirded out by seeing a kid strapping little black boxes on himself too if I had no idea what they were.

And what's with all the American bashing on this thread, btw?

Catgirl got it just right in #18 when she said:

I think there's some massive straw-manning going on in this thread. Who actually suggested that nobody should have been concerned, and that everyone should have just ignored the tefillin? The point is that there was a ridiculous over-reaction.

Posted by: Adrienne | January 29, 2010 10:38 AM

Everyone knows that Jews don't commit terrorism, or any other crime. They are always the victims of such acts, and never ever in the history of the world are the criminals. That's why it is so foolish that this episode occured.

(heavy sarcasm here)

Posted by: jws | January 29, 2010 10:43 AM

Shorter #27: Reactionary cowardice is totally reasonable.

Posted by: jws | January 29, 2010 10:48 AM

jws @ 28,

Reacting to a perceived possible threat is the antithesis of cowardice.

Posted by: Michael Heath | January 29, 2010 10:57 AM

MH @28: Seeing almost everything as a possible threat, and over-reacting to it, is cowardice.

Posted by: jws | January 29, 2010 11:00 AM

An excuse to tell about one of my more embarassing moments. Many years ago, like most goyim, I didn't know what a teffilin was, and I asked a Jewish friend about it. At least I thought he was my friend.
"You know about circumcision, don't you?"
Yes
"So you know how the sacrifice of the foreskin symbolizes God's covenant with the Jewish people through Abraham?"
Yes
"Have you ever wondered what we did with the foreskins afterward?"
Can't say I'd ever thought about it, but now that you mention it....
"We put them in the little box, so when you strap the teffilin on your head to pray, you're reminded of the covenant."
Made sense to me, and I left rather pleased with myself in my possession of this arcane bit of religious knowledge. Some time later, as my "friend" must have anticipated, I mentioned this "fact" in mixed company -- with predictable results.
I probably should have known better, because even then I had heard the joke about the retired mohel whose congregation gave him a wallet. I should have been able to connect the dots, but I didn't.

Posted by: CJColucci | January 29, 2010 11:04 AM

Religious fundies chanting and strapping boxes to their heads at an airport. What, me worry?

Posted by: 386sx | January 29, 2010 11:07 AM

I love wheatdogg's and dunc's perspective. I know what these are, therefore it is common knowledge and everyone else is stupid, isolated, and otherwise pathetic. Just for the record people, your worldview and/or experiences may not be the norm or most common.

Posted by: Lorax | January 29, 2010 11:13 AM

Taz has it right: the responsible parties are trying to cover their asses. It's just like all those other "zero tolerance" policies on drugs or teenagers touching each other or whatever: they may be absolutely sure there's nothing really wrong, but they have to act on it (and hope someone else sticks his neck out by using sound judgement) 'cause ya never know (and any appearance of less than 100% vigilance will look bad on the next annual review). People in the lower ranks don't have the authority (and may not have the competence) to make judgement calls; and people in the upper ranks have too much vibility and too much to lose by making judgement calls, bending "the rules," and looking "inconsistent."

Posted by: Raging Bee | January 29, 2010 11:28 AM

@#3 Matty:

So someone hides explosives in his underwear not in an obvious box that people could see him carrying and that makes people who are carrying something obvious and not hidden more dangerous? Maybe one day everyone will have to fly naked and anesthetised while undergoing a full cavity search every 20 seconds. Or we could try sanity.

hmmm. what would this airlines' frequent flyer program look like? if it's competitive, count me interested!

Posted by: VikingMoose | January 29, 2010 11:39 AM

The report says that the crew "did not receive a clear response" from the youth about the tefillin.

So this kid starts strapping these boxes onto his body, which look unusual and have scary looking Hebrew lettering on them, and then probably goes into his prayers with the accompanying speaking in a foreign language. Since he was in prayer mode, he probably was unresponsive to the crew, since in many cultures, once a prayer is started, they don't break it until the prayer is done.

So the crew probably saw all of this and freaked out, not knowing if this guy with the boxes on his body was praying because he was just devout, or was praying before he did something bad, like blow up the plane.

If you watch the video on the previously provided link, you can see the guy at the bottom showing people how to put on a tefillin. For the unaware, he looks like a scary Arab and those hebrew words have the hard hooks that sound like he is speaking Arabic

I agree that their response in hindsight was silly, but I don't know how an audience on a plane unfamiliar with Jewish rituals would react differently.

The only sensible way to counter this for people to stop being terrorized by terrorism by realizing that successful terrorist attacks are exceptional, albeit dramatic, events and that one's chance of being killed by terrorism is very low. And second, for people who are not mainstream looking Americans, me included since I am from India, to be cooperative and aware of others people's reactions to his/her actions, especially if they are fairly outlandish can be easily misinterpreted.

I remember one time sitting on a mall bench with my father and we were speaking to each other about some topic. In our South Indian Kannada language, we use the word "allah" to mean "right". So I would ask my father what he thought of this or that and end with "allah". During the course of our conversation, I noticed that I was saying "allah" many, many times and their was this guy sitting on the bench behind us. I could see he was becoming visibly scared (we live in rural Georgia). So I looked at him directly and said "Hi, the mall is crowded today, huh". And immediately his facial expression changed and he seemed relieved. While I cannot be responsible for the reactions of every single person to me and how I look, I can be aware of others reactions especially in situations like on a plane, where my actions could be misinterpreted easily.

If that kid had just spoken to the crew and told them that he was Jewish and that this was his prayer boxes and explained what he was doing, then they probably would have shrugged and walked away.

I know this is not an ideal solution, but this is a cost that I am willing to bear to prevent a plane being diverted and my actions inconviencing many people.

Posted by: pradeep | January 29, 2010 11:44 AM

Isn't it fun to mock white yokels!

Posted by: richardp | January 29, 2010 11:51 AM

What kind of fucking rock do you have to be living under not to recognize tefillin? Seriously? I

I would argue that, in regions of the country where there are few Orthodox Jews, most people are unfamiliar with tefillin. As a Kansan, I admittedly had never heard of it (or seen it) before this story aired a week or so ago. In all fairness, if you're a passenger on a plane and you haven't got a clue what tefillin is or what it looks like, then seeing someone sporting it might look really, really weird, even menacing. I'm not saying that this incident wasn't very unfortunate (and unfair) for the kid in question, but to say that it was just paranoid overreaction isn't totally fair, either. I think this is a case in which we shouldn't ascribe malice in the place of simple ignorance.

Posted by: Sadie Morrison | January 29, 2010 12:38 PM

Okay, there's only one way to definitively settle this, an internet poll!

Posted by: Abby Normal | January 29, 2010 1:13 PM

Yup, if it ain't white, middle-class, and Christian then it must be EEEEEEEEEEVIL!!!

Are you trying to ascribe that thinking to the people on the plane, Tigerwolf? If so you've got them beat when it comes to absurd overreaction.

Posted by: Taz | January 29, 2010 1:47 PM

Adrienne #16

The box has the Hebrew letter "shin" on it, typically raised and is black against a black background. I'm not sure that anyone would even notice it's there or consider it to be obviously Hebrew. The kippah is much more recognizable as a Jewish symbol.

We're looking at this situation from a totally different perspective than those who were on the plane. I'm reasonably comfortable that many of us here wouldn't have felt threatened. I'm also comfortable saying that many people haven't seen, nor heard of, tefillin. With the exception of flying to Israel, I've never seen anyone lay tefillin on an airplane. I've never seen it on the subway or on buses. Those who lay tefillin do so in the mornings either at home or at synagogue. It's just not something that many people are exposed to.

Those of us from areas of the country that has a higher proportion of Jews might have known what was going on. I bet huge swaths of the country would have no clue. These days, with concern running high, I'm not shocked at what happened. I also can't judge whether the action taken by the flight crew was appropriate because I have no first-hand knowledge about the incident, and initial reports are seemingly frequently wrong.

Posted by: Mandrake | January 29, 2010 2:08 PM

Standard TSA training includes information about Jews praying with tefillin. I am, frankly, shocked that a flight crew on a run out of New York City would not have been trained about this practice. BTW, for those who are observant, once one begins to pray and put the tefillin on, one cannot break off (for instance to answer questions) until the prayer is complete. Evidently the sister explaining what was going on wasn't enough for the flight crew, though.

Posted by: nm | January 29, 2010 2:21 PM

The point is that there was a ridiculous over-reaction. Instead of just questioning the boy about his strange behavior, everyone threw a big tantrum, panicked, and landed the plane. --catgirl

The reports I read said the only person who panicked was the stewardess, that she received a simple explanation that naturally made no sense to her, and that she informed the pilots of what was going on to the best of her ability, which was pretty sucky, at which point the pilots followed standard procedure.

However, I don't need to personally encounter a cultural practice to be aware of its existence. --Dunc

Good for you.

Speaking as someone who puts on tefillin daily, I am not in the least surprised that there are millions of Americans who have no idea of the concept.

In India, they are not the least concerned with Sikhs boarding planes with their knives. Here? Does not happen.

Posted by: william e emba | January 29, 2010 2:41 PM

I have degrees in physics and law. I've lived abroad in Scotland and India. I've in San Francisco, Portland, Kansas City and now in Orange County. I've been exposed to myriad cultures and religions. I've traveled throughout Asia and South America. My wife is from the Middle East. I speak three languages and.....

I've never seen tefillin. All the Jews I know are non-practicing. And frankly, there just aren't that many Jews in this huge world of billions of people.

I doubt I'd run for the hills in panic if I saw someone performing an Orthodox Jewish prayer on an airplane, but to call me a rube for being previously unaware of the practice is to ironically be somewhat ethnocentric.

Posted by: maxmarker | January 29, 2010 3:12 PM

Are these orthodox guys devoid of any common sense? I think the one living under a rock is that guy that put a box in his head in an airplane, during these times, thinking that it will be totally normal for everybody else.
How would that guy have reacted if somebody with a turban begins to pray to Allah in the aisle?

Posted by: Cambrico | January 29, 2010 3:54 PM

Has nobody seen a National Geographic with the pictures of these being worn? Used to be a popular motif. Has the concept of knowing other cultures being good been lost? Amazing how narrow, insular, self-absorbed and unaware of anything outside our immediate domain we are as a nation.

Individually each box and straps assembly is known as a phylactery seems a lot of dictionaries include a picture of them being worn. I guess a dictionary wasn't handy on the airliner.

Posted by: Art | January 29, 2010 4:05 PM

I know lots of Americans are ignorant of other ethnic groups' traditions
---
Has the concept of knowing other cultures being good been lost

This was a religious rite. And personally, I don't feel a responsibility to know every sect's superstitious nonsense.

Posted by: Taz | January 29, 2010 4:21 PM

This isn't even about knowing every sect's beliefs; it's about distinguishing dangerous things from non-dangerous things -- in this case, an Orthodox Jewish prayer thingie from a bomb.

During WW-II, civilians -- including kids -- were taught how to recognize German and Japanese planes from a distance. Who's teaching the civilians in this war? Shouldn't there be some sort of famous poster or heavily-advertized public-service Web page titled "Know Your Bombs and Amateur IEDs" or "How to Spot a Hijacker"?

Posted by: Raging Bee | January 29, 2010 4:32 PM

Shouldn't there be some sort of famous poster or heavily-advertized public-service Web page titled "Know Your Bombs and Amateur IEDs" or "How to Spot a Hijacker"?

Posted by: Dave | January 29, 2010 4:40 PM

Okay, when Navajo people start regularly getting access to similar educations as other North American people, and don't live separated from the mainstream populations on resevations, and in grinding poverty, and with a possible language barrier and minimal access to the outside world, I'll believe that's a fair comparison

You realize that more than 60% of Native Americans don't live on the reservation and, we mostly speekum heep good English. So, while battling stereotypes, you might, just maybe, want to avoid stereotypes, okay kemosabe?

----------
My initial comment was potentially a little unfair to the folks on the flight, something I have to admit. I grew up in an area that had a large Jewish population. While the vast majority of them were non-practicing or very private about their faith, I still had a rather extensive introduction to various elements of Jewish culture and faith. My initial reaction was, "really? You saw this kid as a threat?" But then I realized that he struck me as indistinguishable from some of my friends as a kid and some of my students as an early educator.

I can see, to a degree, how inexperience played a role in both sides of this exchange. First you have a young kid who, probably, never really thought about his prayer in a context that didn't involve him in an atmosphere where it would be in any way out of the ordinary. One usually doesn't consider oneself "exotic." On the other hand the crew also overreacted because of their apparent inexperience.

Both cases can be forgiven, but with a very important question. The reports say they tried to talk to the kid but didn't get a satisfactory answer? I have to ask, what is a satisfactory or "clear" answer? How can the kids be "cooperative" but didn't provide a clear answer? That part doesn't make any sense to me. I deal with kids daily, I have a hard time seeing the kid in that picture, who appears to be well dressed and likely affluent, being "cooperative" but not clear. I can see him being uncooperative but clear, but not the reverse. Unless this kid has language issues, I have to go with the overreaction and the idea that they didn't really ask them much by way of questions and are covering for themselves after the fact, or that they screamed at him and the kids froze.

Posted by: dogmeatib | January 29, 2010 4:56 PM

Since when was recognizing dangerous devices or suspicious behavior "profiling?"

Posted by: Raging Bee | January 29, 2010 5:08 PM

Since when was recognizing dangerous devices or suspicious behavior "profiling?"

I would fully consider strapping small black boxes to your head and arm to be "suspicious behavior" if I weren't familiar with that custom. Particularly if the person doing it weren't then responsive to questions about this behavior (as is the Jewish custom per another commenter here).

Posted by: Adrienne | January 29, 2010 5:12 PM

Adrienne @67: It's not my practice. If it were, I would have explained to the folks sitting around me what I was about to do, shown them the tefillin, etc., before I started to pray. But I would also have expected a flight crew making a regular run out of NYC to have been properly trained; at certain times of day, Orthodox Jewish men and some Conservative Jewish men and women are going to do this. So I wouldn't have bothered to explain to the flight attendant. And I consider that between the sister's explanations and the training the attendant should have had diverting the plane was a ridiculous overreaction.

Posted by: nm | January 29, 2010 5:31 PM

Taz at 37:

Republic insisted its crew "did not receive a clear response" from the youth about the tefillin.

This, if true, is all that it takes for me to not consider this incident to be an over-reaction.

Whether or not your average person should recognize a tefillin as something non-hazardous is a different issue. The bottom line is that the air crew didn't recognize it.

The next logical step is for the crew to simply ask what it is. I can't imagine them jumping to the conclusion that anything unusual MUST be a bomb... it was the unusualness combined with the "unclear response" from the passenger that resulted in this reaction.

But the bottom line to me is: What can be done to prevent this in the future?

Would better training in cultural differences work? Before today, I wouldn't know the difference between a teffilin and a Tibetan Buddhist prayer wheel! (lol... ref:#23) Perhaps cultural training for the air hosts and hostesses could be useful, but I can't imagine them covering every single religious/cultural artifact that might show up on an airplane anyway, so this would still continue to occur.

The issue that the air staff might have thought that he looked Arab -- and therefore more likely to be a terrorist -- is more troubling though... to me at least. Overcoming such biases and bigotry should definitely be made more of a training priority. Hell, 99.9% of Muslims on airplanes aren't terrorists. When you look at the numbers, you see how absurd it is to assume that the Arab-looking (who's not even necessarily Arab or Muslim) man on the plane is a bad guy!

Here's what I think should happen (and this is open to revision if someone can suggest something better):

In addition to creating a Passenger Bill of Rights (something that is necessary for many reasons not discussed in this thread), there should be a Passenger List of Responsibilities.

Passengers should be aware that the air hosts and hostesses (not to mention other passengers) are going to be weary of any potential threat. They should be told that if they are planning on doing something that might reasonably make others suspicious, that they should let the flight crew know about it in advance. I'm not saying "ask their permission", I'm just saying they should preemptively let them know what is about to happen and reassure them that it isn't anything to worry about.

Now people might reasonably say that the people should know what a teffilin is anyway and not be suspicious. Well, perhaps so. But the teffilin doesn't appear to be the main problem anyway... it seems more likely that it was the uncooperative "unclear response" from the passenger when questioned.

This kid could have easily have taken the initiative and avoided this problem by using this opportunity to teach the air staff (and the passengers around him) about the religious practice he was about to perform.

And to expand on my suggestion outside of this particular situation... I think that, generally speaking, many of these instances could be solved by passengers being more upfront and forthcoming with information when the staff feels the need to question them. I know, this doesn't prevent the staff from over-reacting, but certainly we can all agree that more information will help clarify any misunderstandings.

Posted by: doctorgoo | January 29, 2010 6:35 PM

An excerpt from the New York Times:

He explained that the scare began when the young man was “in the process of praying.” The flight attendant noticed the tefillin and asked what he was doing.
The young man’s response was straightforward, Lieutenant Vanore said: “He gave the explanation he was in prayer.”
But the flight attendant was concerned about the tefillin. She called the cockpit and “described it as best as she’d seen it,” Lieutenant Vanore said, “and there was an item wrapped around his head, straps or wires.” “The straps did appear to be cables or wires to her,” he said. “To the naked eye looking at it, it looked like that. She said it had wires running from it and going up to his fingers. When they notified the pilot of that, he had to follow his protocol. It’s hard to Monday-morning-quarterback it.”
. . .
Some observant Jews said they were not surprised that the ritual had attracted attention — or that people on the plane would have been unfamiliar with it. “When they see a passenger strapping yourself,” said Isaac Abraham, a Satmar who lives in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and campaigned for the Democratic nomination for a City Council seat last year, “you might as well strap yourself with hand grenades. They have no idea.”
“He probably just figured, ‘I have nothing else to do on the plane, I might as well use this time to pray,’ ” he added. “Other people read. They watch a movie. He figured, ‘Let me grab the time.’ But the obvious reality of it is that when we see people carrying explosive material in their shoes and their pants and I am the passenger next to him and see someone strapping, I would panic too.”

Posted by: Taz | January 29, 2010 9:56 PM

It took 36 comments before the gratuitous religio-bashing. This is a world record.

Yeah, nothing at all to do with religious fundies who think this life is but a fleeting inconvenient moment in the grand scheme of their eternal existence of unquestioning slavery to their god.

Posted by: 386sx | January 29, 2010 11:23 PM

The article said that the guy was praying for close to an hour. I think at first everyone would've been fine with it, but than 40 minutes down the track, people started freaking out.

Personally I wouldn't freak out, but it would be annoying, especially if you're sitting beside the guy!

Posted by: Michael | January 30, 2010 2:43 AM

@Dunc: FWIW, despite all the griping people are doing, you're probably right. I'm from the deep southern US: I've never met a Jewish person in my life. Ever. I've never even spoken to one, as far as I'm aware. I know what a tefillin is. If I didn't, I do believe I'd ask before I landed a plane and called in the feds over one. Especially since we haven't seen a whole hell of a lot of Jewish suicide bombers.

"A person that looks vaguely non-Christian praying and holding something that could contain enough explosives to take his own arm off! Everyone freak the fuck out and land the plane!" is not the rational response to the situation. I guess we should be glad they landed the damned thing instead of just crashing it into a field before he could hijack it.

Posted by: JThompson | January 30, 2010 9:05 AM

Well, the tricky part is that once the prayer starts, it can't be interrupted.

So Judaism has rules as effin' ridiculous as Christianity and Islam and Voodoo, etc. Good to know.

You know nothing about Judaism. It is not Christianity but with funny hats and a squiggly language.

But apparently it has a lot of ridiculous and illogical rules, doesn't it?

Posted by: Adrienne | January 30, 2010 1:51 PM

386sx never compared what this kid was doing, which was unknown, to Christianity specifically, but instead to fundamentalists in general.

Let's look at exactly what 386sx said:

Yeah, nothing at all to do with religious fundies who think this life is but a fleeting inconvenient moment in the grand scheme of their eternal existence of unquestioning slavery to their god.

He is clearly referring to Christianity and Islam here, both of which claim that you must be loyal to their respective deity to have good afterlife prospects. Since he apparently believes that all religions are the same, then clearly this must apply to Judaism. But it doesn't. Judaism puts most of its emphasis on life and almost none on the afterlife. Jews go most of their lives without ever thinking about it. And there is no sect of Judaism that believes that specific people go to different afterlives. Anybody who would make this statement clearly doesn't know the difference between Christianity and Judaism. And people shouldn't be shooting their mouths off about things they don't understand.

And I wasn't literally trying to ban him from the blog. I thought you were smarter than this, Michael.

Posted by: Brandon | January 30, 2010 3:28 PM

OK, Brandon, Jews can be fundamentalist slaves to their religion too, they just aren't doing it because they're worried about eternal damnation.

Gretchen (and 386sx) make a good point when they say, if you're chanting and strapping a box to your head in an airplane, it is very easy to mistake you for a fundamentalist who sees life as a mere audition for the afterlife, and therefore it would be reasonable to worry about you. It would be even more reasonable to worry about you if, upon being questioned about matters relating to safety, you refused to stop praying and answer those questions.

If you've never seen tefillim before AND you're not up on your Jewish eschatology, it's easy to see why seeing what the kid on the airplane did would make you uneasy.

So, given that we now know the kid didn't properly explain what tefillim are and why he was strapping them to himself, do we think landing the plane was a reasonable action by the flight crew?

I'm wondering why they couldn't just take the tefillim from the praying teen and examine them for themselves. Yes, it would have involved some force to stop him from praying and to remove his phylacteries for examination. But then the flight crew would have been able to continue the flight when they realized the phylacteries did not contain explosives. But would taking such an action have given grounds for the praying teen's family to sue the airline later for use of force and perhaps even religious discrimination?

Posted by: Adrienne | January 30, 2010 4:28 PM

Gretchen @ 93

It would be even more reasonable to worry about you if, upon being questioned about matters relating to safety, you refused to stop praying and answer those questions.

The flight attendant noticed the tefillin and asked what he was doing.
The young man’s response was straightforward, Lieutenant Vanore said: “He gave the explanation he was in prayer.”

Posted by: David Holland | January 31, 2010 12:04 AM

David,

I wouldn't exactly consider "I'm praying" to be an explanation. It's obvious that he was praying, and there's nothing that precludes a praying person from being a terrorist. What they were concerned about were the tefillin, and it doesn't appear that he explained that.

Posted by: Gretchen | January 31, 2010 10:15 AM

Gretchen,
You're right, "I'm praying" is not an explanation. Where did you find that quote? When Lieutenant Vance said he explained he was praying I assume he actually gave an explanation.

Posted by: David Holland | January 31, 2010 7:59 PM