An innocent pilot suing BA for wrongful dismissal has been identified as Surrey-born Samir Jamaluddin. This case has all the tones of a witch hunt as far as I'm concerned and has echos of the Lotfi Raissi case. He is an Algerian-born British resident, was arrested in the UK shortly after the 9/11 attacks amid claims that he was a key member of the plot. He was held in custody for nearly five months before being released when a judge found there was no evidence to link him to any form of terrorism. He has been awarded a multi million pound compensation package.
Samir Jamaluddin was judged a security risk after his arrest by Scotland Yard counter-terrorism detectives in 2007, and the airline decided it was in the national interest to ensure he never flew again. He was eventually dismissed three years later.
Come on, let's have the whole story! If you are going to raise this horrifying (horrifying because of the implications if this man wins) story, then please put up more information about what it's about instead of peddling just the liberal, human rights side of your story!
Quote:
....The pilot’s brother, Yakoob Jamaluddin, an active member of the Islamist extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, was questioned over the same offences but never charged. Mr Steeds first became aware of the alleged plot on October 9, 2007, when he was briefed under the Official Secrets Act. He was told how two men – Adam Mohamed, 32, of Chessington, Surrey, and Imad Shoubaki, 35, of Merton, South London – had ‘sought flying lessons in order to achieve a private pilot’s licence as quickly as possible’. Mr Steeds said police ‘disrupted that activity’ because of fears about what they might be planning. BA documents relating to 747 aircraft were discovered in Mr Shoubaki’s home after his arrest. Mr Steeds said he was told at the briefing that ‘information suggested these documents had been passed at a dinner party in Chessington. I was asked for details of BA pilots who might live in that area’. The airline came up with Mr Jamaluddin. Not only did he live a mile away, he had also been the subject of an informal inquiry a year earlier after allegedly expressing support for the September 11 attacks while on a flight deck – a claim he denies. Police then established the first of several links between Mr Jamaluddin and the two men. The first was that his brother Yakoob was in business with Mr Mohamed. The pilot and his brother were arrested on October 23. Mr Steeds said police told him it ‘seemed as if Samir had been expecting to be arrested’ as they found the name and number of a prominent human rights lawyer who specialises in race discrimination issues punched into his mobile phone.
‘They also informed me that copies of the flight documents previously shown to BA had been found in Samir’s flight bag....’
I'm afraid in this day and age when it is becoming almost impossible to convict anybody of anything and get it to stand, in this case, the company had severe doubts as to the loyalties and motivation of this individual. An airline cannot have anybody fly its planes and potentially cause a holocaust in a city committing a weird suicide act (and taking thousands of innocent people with them!). I would not put any of my family on board an aeroplane flown by someone with links like this person has, and that is why this case is in court. Thanks to lawyers, we have this absurd case for re-instatement. Quite simply, the risk cannot be taken. With a brother a member of that odious organisation, how can he be entrusted. I had to go through all sorts of checks, most of which I knew nothing of, to fly jets- if this man slides through using law, what was all that for? I would feel extremely concerned knowing this person with the associations he has would have complete licence to potentially cause the catastrophe his religion and teachings amongst certain branches of it espouses. That he allegedly expressed support for 911 is beyond belief. You obviously have no respect for the damage 911 did- to quote your own words:
Quote:
The world has gone mad. Let's face it,if you are a terrorist and want to create havoc in New York,London etc just detonate something on the subway.Given the reaction to 9/11 and Richard Read the effect would create ten times more hassle which is the objective. OBL must be laughing in his cave
You appear to have no idea of the effect 911 had or the damage or loss of life that occurred. Well the resulting security checks have thrown up more than enough suspicion for me, a former colleague of this person. But looking at your personal posting style, you appear to be an 'opinion loudhailer' rather than a communicator. You know how everything in the world should be run! We did not need you peddling this propaganda of yours here, twice in 3 posts!
Last edited by Notso Fantastic; 5th Feb 2012 at 09:53.
My reading of it is that BA were left between the proverbial rock & a hard place... The Govt essentially said they were concerns, had the ability to deny an airside pass, but left the airline to do the dirty work. WW said as much with respect to his career. IIRC the previous article said BA offered him opportunities to work elsewhere in the airline?
BA could of course throw this back at the Govt if the Tribunal find in Jamaluddin's favour. They just go back to HMG and say "one of your Depts says he is a hazard, the other we are supposed to let him fly our aircraft - please make up your mind?". And unlike last time, now all in the public gaze
Assuming the Mail article is essentially correct (it seems a balanced writeup, which is surprising for the Mail), I do not think it reflects badly on BA in any way... it does on HMG
It's difficult to think of any position that holds more potential for chaos and destruction than an airline pilot guiding a few hundred tons of aircraft carrying several hundred people over a major city... I don't think that we can condemn the security services for pointing out the risk of a pilot who has known contacts with suspected fundamentalist factions. As for the pilot... he has to appreciate that if you lie with dogs you'll rise with fleas.
Yes, the treatment by BA management and UK authorities certainly made him a security risk!
Quote:
Good old BA selection again for you huh!
How many years did he fly BA planes safely?
Quote:
I don't think that we can condemn the security services for pointing out the risk of a pilot who has known contacts with suspected fundamentalist factions.
But why didn't they dare to put that in writing? And government scored zero terrorism convictions out of four suspects in this case. Made several lives miserable though.
Last edited by MathFox; 5th Feb 2012 at 12:16.
Reason: made lives miserable
One of the biggest potential terrorist threats to aircraft is from the crew. You'd have to be a very brave manager to gloss over security concerns related to pilots.
If someone is proved to be falsely accused and receives a huge unfair dismissal payout, then that is all part of the cost of security. Any pilot better make sure they are squeaky clean when it comes to any connection with organisations known for their threats to airliners. Sad but true.
Airlines should have the freedom to choose whom they continue to employ to fly their aircraft. Piloting an aircraft carrying 100s is an earned priviledge, not a right. This is what our passengers expect.
And by that logic if I don't like you, you are not a member of the correct lodge, church, squadron or school, would you be happy for me to fire you?
Sure, it is not a right, but an employee under a contract of employment in a country operating to the rule of law has the right to be fairly treated and to be dismissed according to the terms of any agreed contract.
Would you be happy to regress to arbitrary behaviour by the state where you have no idea where you stand from day to day?
You have a point. Employment contracts for pilots maybe should be wider, with clauses relating to a pilots associations, motivations, mental state, etc.
In this case we are really only talking about the possible tenuous connections to organisations which are known to threaten aircraft.
At the end of the day, if it were my airline I would want the ultimate say in who sat in the flightdeck. You could say pilots are a special case. Normal rules don't apply. Sorry if it sounds harsh.
It is very true that all authorities involved are damned if they do and damned if they dont. BA must think very highly of themselves to decide for the greater good that some should never fly again. This Man must have his day in court and face his accusers. The powers that be are going to have to produce evidence to justify their actions. In the end evidence in court has to win the day one way or another.
Regardless of this hypothetical, I will concede that entering into such a discussion in the environment of a flight deck is foolish and naive in the extreme, and surely if something along such lines were discussed, the chap in question would surely expect some form of investigation to occur?
No .. no expecting investigation will occur I discuss the same many time .. on forum .. in public places .. with friends and strangers and I don't expect any investigations (and was never subject of one) Who think it will be subject to investigations concerning this mater must thinking he is living in the EX USSR or East Germany .. Can we think that actually UK is EX USSR or East Germany like ? Maybe .. after what I read here
The reality is if the guy is totally innocent then he will be able to get another job.
You are being nieve.
He is now tainted as a "potential" threat and even if no evidence is ever produced you will find people will believe that somehow he must be involved because a secret govt report said he was.
A guy who was in the public eye was "alledged" to be involved in funding an act of terrorism involving attempting to overthrow a Govt.............would you then ensure by the same logic that this persons family should not be able to have any contact with members of Govt in the country they live and the family should be treated as Pariahs because the actions of a wayward member ?
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a religious organization, whose views don't come even close to, lets say, Jerry Falwell's and Pat Robertson's - do you think that BA would go after anyone who is a member of Falwell's Liberty Christian Academy? Won't happen.
It is simply mind boggling how people are prepared to throw away their human rights in the name of 'safety'. Goodbye constitution, hello Orwell!
It is simply mind boggling how people are prepared to throw away their human rights in the name of 'safety'. Goodbye constitution, hello Orwell!
Whilst that is quite true, its also mind boggling how many people expect that they have a human 'right' to act in whatever manner they please regarldess of the effects to society at large. Whilst there is a huge "rights of the individual vs rights of the society" argument, I beleive that people need to take their position in society seriously. If you want to fly an aircraft and have the security clearance to do so, then you must accept that will place certain restrictions on your life, on what you can say, on whom you can associate with, on which clubs, groups or relgions you can subscribe to.
I'm sure many can argue that this guy (or indeed anyone else) has a right to be a member of whatever organisation he wants, and I'll agree with that, but then he does not have a right to fly an aircraft and / or have whatever job he chooses.
It may be interesting to compare commercial aviation terrorist threats to that of train drivers and pharmacists. The risk profile is different and therefore the security procedures should be managed differently.
It does not follow that because pilots are subjected to security checks then also train drivers and pharmacists should face the same procedures. The logic does not follow.
If terrorists change their tactics in the future, then the security profile will change accordingly.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that there are Organisations who want to target aviation. The nature of air travel and the active threat makes aviation a special case.
If you have family with links to radical Islamic politics, then don't make commercial pilot your career choice.
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 1,925
Quote:
How many years did he fly BA planes safely?
This may not be relelvant. There are at least two crashes involving a commercial aircraft where the cause has been deemed to be the suicide of one or other of the pilots. (Silk Air 185 and Egyptair 990). I have tried to find information regarding the length of time these pilots had been flying for the particular airline but haven't succeeded. Simply because someone has flown for an airline for years does not automatically mean he or she will never resort to deliberate, lethal behaviour when flying.
I'm sure many can argue that this guy (or indeed anyone else) has a right to be a member of whatever organisation he wants, and I'll agree with that, but then he does not have a right to fly an aircraft and / or have whatever job he chooses.
Then make it a law: 'You are not allowed to be a pilot, if you are a member of a religious organization.' Good luck on figuring out the difference between a Sunday school religious organization and a fundamentalist one. On the other hand, in today's society 'whatever' organisation should be read as Muslim organization, since no one has beef with pilots being members of Arian brotherhood, Jerry Falwell's Liberty Christian Academy, KKK etc.
Quote:
its also mind boggling how many people expect that they have a human 'right' to act in whatever manner they please regarldess of the effects to society at large.
I cannot agree with that. Look were we have come since 9.11. - you get stripped, searched about a dozen of times, liquids are of limits, if you had been to tanning saloon you will 'randomly' be picked at every single sec. checkpoint etc. People have been convinced that there is just a matter of days to another attack and if you will not comply with everything the Big Brother throws at you, well, you must have something to hide. How can you have an effect on society if you or your friends are members of an organization?
Good luck on figuring out the difference between a Sunday school religious organization and a fundamentalist one.
No luck needed. Just common sense and experience. Any organisation which has a history of targeting/threatening commercial aviation with terrorist acts. Islamic or otherwise.
A commercial pilot should not have any links to any organisation which has a history of threats to aviation. At the very least the pilot should be completely open to scrutiny.
In the case of Mr. Jamaluddin, he was not a member of a terrorist organization. His brother was a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir which is not a terrorist organization, but a religious one and it certainly doesn't pose a threat to aviation. So why was he prosecuted? And should a pilot be prosecuted if he is a member of late Jerry Falwell's congregation (Falwell said, that 9.11. was 'probably deserved' - Yasser Arafat on the other hand condemned the attacks)?
No luck needed. Just common sense and experience. Any organisation which has a history of targeting/threatening commercial aviation with terrorist acts. Islamic or otherwise.
A commercial pilot should not have any links to any organisation which has a history of threats to aviation. At the very least the pilot should be completely open to scrutiny.
You really sure you want to go with that one ?
Given your location how do you know that the guy you speak to every day on way into work and chat about English premiership is not a member of Al Qaeda.
Your conversations with him where you mention you support Arsenal and him Chelsea and you discuss previous weeks results goes on for months all the while he never mentions that a cousin was a hijacker United Flight 175 on 9/11. You kindly offer to bring him back some Chelsea stuff on next visit to London.
You bring it back and a week later get arrested for being part of a cell..........
Thats how easy it is for security services to assume you are part of it.
All fiction but unless you know the background of every single person you ever come in contact with you can never know.
How many years did he fly BA planes safely?
