Diplomatic Immunity?

@laglen (19759)
United States
April 8, 2010 5:05pm CST
The Qatari diplomat who caused a midair security scare when he tried to sneak a cigarette and then joked about it was on his way to Colorado to meet with a jailed Al Qaeda operative, officials told Fox News on Thursday. The Qatar embassy said the prison visit wasn't the only purpose of the trip -- diplomat Mohammed Al-Madadi was also planning visits with college students from Qatar. The embassy, responding to questions from Fox News, said the trip was approved in advance and that such consular visits have been held monthly with the prisoner since mid-2009. Consular officials frequently visit foreigners held in the United States to make sure they are being treated well. But the revelation about this particular meeting with Al-Marri only raised more questions about Al-Madadi's behavior Wednesday night on board the United Airlines flight from Washington, D.C.. En route to meet with a notorious terror inmate, the diplomat flouted the rules routine flyers know well are in place because of the threats posed by such terror suspects. The diplomat's behavior caused a full-blown law enforcement response. After Al-Madadi tried to sneak a cigarette on the flight and then joked that he was trying to light his shoes on fire, two F-16s were called to escort the airplane to the Denver airport. The incident lasted another hour while the plane was held on the tarmac. related links * Qatari Diplomat's Midair Scare Cost Taxpayers Thousands * Qatari Diplomat Who Caused Security Scare Expected to Be Sent Home, Official Says * Diplomatic Impunity? Qatari Official Not the First to Stir Trouble on Assignment The young diplomat flew back to Washington, D.C., on Thursday and the State Department made clear he would not be staying long. One senior official said he'd probably be catching the next flight back to Doha. "His ability to function effectively has been compromised," the official said, adding that the diplomat will probably not be returning to the United States after the incident. It's unknown whether the scheduled visit with Al-Marri added to the tension with the State Department. Al-Marri was first arrested after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, accused of being a sleeper agent researching poisonous gasses and plotting a cyberattack. But by the morning after the airline incident, officials were already calling for Al-Madadi to either be recalled or expelled for doing just about "everything wrong" on board the United Airlines flight. Though no explosives were found on the flight and the envoy is not expected to be criminally charged, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., ranking Republican on the House intelligence committee, said the diplomat should be out of the country. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/08/diplomat-touched-bomb-scare-way-visit-jailed-terrorist-1790072623/ Wow Do you think he should be immune to the consequences in this situation. I do not. I think he should have to foot the bill and publicly apologize. But I dont see that happening. Chances are, Obama will apologize to him for our airlines having rules. What do you think?
2 people like this
8 responses
• United States
8 Apr 10
I think we will probably agree across the board. I think he should be recalled, his sarcastic answer was in poor taste, especially since our airline security is one of the more important things we are working on right now. I wouldn't be so quick to try to hypothesize any guilt by association. I was watching the news last night when this broke, and they did say the details were sketchy. Chances are, the diplomat was taking a gnarly one and lit a cig to cover the odor, or something really bizarre. His response may have been because he felt people were stereotyping him, and it may have offended him, thus causing such a flippant response. When I was watching, the reports only said one of the airline marshalls had asked him what he was doing, and he responded, "Lighting a shoe bomb, what do you think?" Later, in his holding cell, while trying to determine who he was, he may have explained that he was scheduled to meet with a jailed Al-Qaeda operative, but I don't believe he said it all at once, which would make the situation sound slightly scarier than it already was. The only good that came of this was that we saw our scramblers respond appropriately, which somehow went MIA on 9/11 when actual hijacks took place.
3 people like this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
Thats true, but I wouldnt be so quick to defend the guy. He was very disrespectful through the whole flight. Regarding guilt by association, not at all, he has visited this prisoner monthly.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
I agree and I am happy with him being sent out of the country.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
8 Apr 10
I heard on the news that he is being recalled to his country, so that is the consequence of his actions. As far as diplomatic immunity, this standard protects our diplomats stationed in foreign countries as well as foreign diplomats stationed here. I wouldn't want the safety of ours threatened because of any nicks in the standard.
3 people like this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
I agree and you have a point. I am happy he has been recalled. I would like to see an apology.
1 person likes this
• Canada
9 Apr 10
My husband and I don't believe in diplomatic immunity. Diplomats are human beings just like the rest of us, and should be held accountable for their actions jut the same way as we are. And there is nothing diplomatic about some of the behaviour they get away with because of their immunity. When my husband lived in Washington, the saying was that if he saw a car with DPL licence places on them, RUN LIKE HELL!!!
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
Good point Danish, but I do understand the need for immunity, I just think it gets out of hand. If they have no respect for our laws, they need to not come.
• United States
9 Apr 10
This is a little off topic, but do you know what an MFG license plate is?
1 person likes this
@shellback (864)
• Philippines
8 Apr 10
Well, diplomatic immunity must prevail, because its a law, your government knows what are the better things to apply it even in rough situations, for me, Al-Madadi have to make public apology but due to his beliefs as Muslim, it will not happen.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
I agree, it was in very poor taste and hopefully he will leave and not return
1 person likes this
• Canada
8 Apr 10
My question is, how come he was allowed to fly into the US to begin with since he was found to have something to do with explosives? I think these people abuse their power to do as they want and ridicule law enforcement agencies in the process.
2 people like this
• United States
8 Apr 10
I think the guy in question was absolved of having any explosives. He was a diplomat and made a really bad response in very poor taste.
2 people like this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
He was a diplomat that was located in Washington and was flying to Denver to visit a terror suspect and some students. He behaved VERY badly. This is all in the link.
1 person likes this
• United States
9 Apr 10
Laglen - You are not giving this a fair portrayal by the way you are wording things. You are saying things as if this diplomat was chums with the prisoner and stopping by to shoot the breeze. You are neglecting to offer three pertinent facts: 1. His job as a diplomat entails him checking in on foreign prisoners and making sure they are treated well. (You remember those who had photos with leashes or their boxers gagging their faces - you remember that whole scandal? And, they also have to make sure no torture is occuring, etc). 2. This visit was approved by the Qatar embassy. 3. He openly volunteered this information to us. You are presuming him guilty of potential terrorism, when he was absolved of having any explosives, and the only two things he did were smoking illegally on a plane, and using very poor judgment in making a remark to an air marshall.
2 people like this
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
9 Apr 10
I just read through the entire string of conversations... Wasn't that fun? :}
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
10 Apr 10
Oh Hofferp, I am so sorry. That must have been awful. I didnt even want to open the stinkin thread again! I know that dumb discussion about flippin Ronald McDonald got WAY out of hand. I made myself stay off of mylot for HOURS today because I was gettin down right pi55ed! Not just this discussion but also another where a lady is trying to explain why it is our right to health care and that the government is supposed to take care of us.... OMG I feel my blood pressure rising again! I think I am going to go read a book... have a good evening!
@laglen (19759)
• United States
10 Apr 10
lmao it was going good for a bit..... now it is ever so painfull to open...
• United States
10 Apr 10
Hey - the Ronald McDonald thread is one of my proudest moments.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
9 Apr 10
Diplomatic Immunity has to stand. What the government should do is send a team to question him and make Qatar jump through all the hoops to prove who he is and in the mean time let the word leak out that this man is talking about terrorist cells in this country. The first terrorist plot that we break give him credit. The terrorist will take care of him for us. It will also give other Diplomats who are thinking of flaunting our laws something to think about.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
9 Apr 10
I am terribly sorry to say this but..... I DO NOT CARE HOW HE "FELT" I don't like that cashier at walmart, can I shoot him because of how I "feel" good God what have we come to? Let me off this ride!
• United States
9 Apr 10
It is a matter of treaty, and therefore Constitutional law, that he has diplomatic immunity.
1 person likes this