Aviation President Allegedly Attacks Muslim Cabbie (and Iraqi War Veteran) At Country Club

edcnn_nr_salim_130501a-230x105Mohamed A. Salim, 39, served this country in Iraq in intelligence and as a linguist. He served at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. Yet, he allegedly still suffered a beating and a broken jaw in his own country because of his Somali ethnicity and religion. Salim is a cab driver who picked up Emerald Aviation President Ed Dahlberg at the Country Club in Fairfax, Virginia. Dahlberg proceeded to accuse him of being a jihadist and allegedly attacked him. Emerald Aviation’s website is down for “scheduled maintenance” in the aftermath of Dahlberg’s arrest.

According to Salim, he picked up Dahlberg around 2 am but Dahlberg insisted that he wait while he finished his beer. Salim recorded what transpired on his cell phone. Dahlberg demanded that Salim define “jihad” and accusing him of being one of the “radical fucking Muslims blowing people up all over the world.” He demands that Salim “Denounce those motherfuckers now!” while adding “If you’re a fucking Muslim flying jets into the fucking World Trade Center then fuck you. I will slice your fucking throat right now.” On the tape, Salim is heard asking “Why are you punching me? Sir, why are you punching me?” The passenger replies: “You’re a [expletive] Muslim.”

Dahlberg is accused of trying to grab the cell phone and then leaving — only to return to break Salim’s jaw and then running into the forest.

What is astonishing is that Dahlberg is only charged with misdemeanor assault while police determine if charges should be elevated to a felony hate crime. Many civil libertarians are leery of hate crime charges. However, I fail to see why such a serious assault would need the hate crime element to be elevated to a felony. However, here is the provision:

18.2-57. Assault and battery.
A. Any person who commits a simple assault or assault and battery shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor, and if the person intentionally selects the person against whom a simple assault is committed because of his race,religious conviction, color or national origin, the penalty upon conviction shall include a term of confinement of at least six months, 30 days of which shall be a mandatory minimum term of confinement.
B. However, if a person intentionally selects the person against whom an assault and battery resulting in bodily injury is committed because of his race, religious conviction, color or national origin, the person shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, and the penalty upon conviction shall include a term of confinement of at least six months, 30 days of which shall be a mandatory minimum term of confinement.

Dahlberg’s attorney, Demetry Pikrallidas, insists that there was no assault. Of course, even if this is accepted in court, there remains the appearance of this corporate president as an unhinged bigot. Then there is the added likelihood of a tort lawsuit for assault, battery, and infliction of emotional distress. There might also be potential liability for the country club depending on its reaction to the incident as it was unfolding.

Source: Washington Post

104 thoughts on “Aviation President Allegedly Attacks Muslim Cabbie (and Iraqi War Veteran) At Country Club”

  1. Gene, are you really such a dense ultrasubmoron? I have explained to you countless times, that what you call the left and what you call the right are really the same thing. There are no substantial differences. Thus, Nazis, Communists, Muslims, are the same. They each support exactly the same agenda. And their methods are the same. For convenience, however, I refer to ALL of them as “Leftists.” The reason for that is that today, the Left has effectively hijacked what used to be the province of what used to be called the right wing. Thus, an old-schooler would call a Nazi a right-winger. But that is nonsense today. A Nazi should be called a Leftists today, because other Leftists agree with that Nazi ideology.

    For a simple illustration, and to satisfy Bron’s request, I will first post a video of David Duke–who was formerly a Ku Klux Klanner and has ties to the Nazis. He is THEIR guy today.

    Then, I will post a video of Dennis Kucinich, who would be considered by the mainstream to be a Leftist.

    Sure they, look different, and they have different styles. But ignore that and pay strict attention the real messages of each. THEY ARE VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL.

  2. Dahlberg is damm punk for attacking Salim who did nothing wrong (other than picking up this neocon in his cab). The excuse he uses is F-ing pathetic too, yea alot of people are still pretty pissed over 9/11 but it still doesn’t give him or any self righteous douche to attack a innocent man because he belongs to the same religion.

    FYI: I dont support hate-crime legislation, I view is as a thought-crime. Dahlberg should be charged with Assault and Battery

  3. ralph:

    would you kindly explain to me how Duke and Kucinich are the same?

  4. That’s pretty funny coming from the guy who hurls “leftist” like an epithet.

    So, do you consider yourself irrelevant all the time Ralph or is this a special occasion?

  5. The left/right paradigm Is an outmoded, irrelevant concept- if you’re talking about reality. You would say that David Duke is a right-winger. And you would also say that Dennis Kucinich is a left-winger. Yet their beliefs are actually quite similar In material respects. It’s a Coke/Pepsi kind of thing.

  6. Ralph:

    Calm down. You are very angry and to what end. I am beginning to think you are a crazy lefty doing this to make people think the right is crazy. Although many here would say the right has enough champions of crazy without any help from the left.

  7. Ultrasubmoron Darren,

    Obviously you’re too stupid to understand anything, no matter how simple it is, or how clearly it is explained for you, but I will try for the last time in this particular case, demonstrating the same patience that I would exhibit with a 5 year old–although I’ve known many a five year old more intelligent than you.

    Dredd tried to badmouth me by quoting two definitions from the Urban Dictionary, which is just a website that posts whatever crap people submit, just as long as there are enough people to vote in favor of it. But I pointed out that there was a definition ranked higher on the Urban Dictionary site than the other two that he quoted that presented a more favorable definition of “Ralph.”

    My point was that, as a Leftist, he LIED by omission. In your case, you are too stunod to even understand what either of us were saying. I could get very angry with you, because you are an adult, not a five year old, but that would be pointless for a pointhead like you. I realize that in life, unfortunately, sometimes you wash your own car, a bird can come along shortly thereafter and take a crap on your windows. As they say, shit happens, or, in your case, we might say that Darren happens.

    Have a nice weekend.

  8. Yes Ralph, once again you have quoted a non credible source to justify your position, and in this case your vainglorious self.

    From your tome the Urban Dictionary:

    “Intolerant of thoes that try and hurt his life or family, faithful dedicated to one woman! Prefers to step back and Analyse things first, very pratical, Little badass.”

    How many spelling errors, fragments and improper capitalizations does a dictionary have to have before it becomes a credible source of definition Ralph? It is just like how you quote fringe blog authors’ jibberish as true facts.

    Just as some rather self indulgent author probably entered this definition of the name Ralph in the urban dictionary (probably also named Ralph) it is the current modus operandi of your sources of false evidence you claim to be the truth.

    Garbage in, garbage out.

  9. And as for style? I didn’t know hatred was a style. You’re a pioneer in the English language! Who’d have thunk it.

    And here I thought he was just admitting to being a boring troll who was needlessly insulting just to get a rise from people.

    Well, I guess I can’t be right all the time.

  10. Like a typical Leftist, Dredd, you lie or slant by omission or distortion of facts. In this case, you omit the FIRST Urban Dictionary definition of “Ralph”–which I quote below verbatim:

    “The name Ralph was derived from the Ancient Viking name “Radulf” who was a Viking King or Lord also pronounced (Rah-thool-fr). To decribe Ralph, he is a gentleman, dashing, Loyal, masculine, charming, rugged strong, very protective over his love’s of his life. Compassionate, romantic, cheeky silly, comical, attentive, focused head strong.Very sentimental only to thoes he trusts, does not let his guard down to outsiders. Intolerant of thoes that try and hurt his life or family, faithful dedicated to one woman! Prefers to step back and Analyse things first, very pratical, Little badass.”

    Have a good weekend.

  11. Now I understand why “ralph” in the urban dictionary means “to throw up” and “a thug for life”.

  12. Ralph,

    “There is no meaningful difference between Communists and Nazis or another other brand of fascism.”

    Really. Thanks for illustrating that you don’t what fascism is either. That may be one of the ignorant things you’ve said to date.

    Actually I have read some Sutton, but it is manifest that even if you have you clearly didn’t understand it. Here’s a hint: when you see a poli sci term you don’t know the meaning of, don’t make up one yourself.

    As for sounding dumb, well at least I know the meanings of the words I use so I’ll bow to your expertise in the sounding dumb department.

    And as for style? I didn’t know hatred was a style. You’re a pioneer in the English language! Who’d have thunk it.

  13. Bron, I’m not angry. It’s just part of my style. Thanks for those interesting posts. And have a good weekend.

    And that includes you too, Gene, Mike, Darren, et al.

  14. Gyges:

    I agree.

    But I will say this, the people at Fairfax Country Club probably dont have the stones to busta chops. They may rant and rave and channel their inner Haka but that is about it.

    If the guy did break the poor man’s jaw, jail and a loss of his license to fly would be good punishment.

  15. Ralph Adamo:

    why are you so angry? You need to embrace your inner liberal. Dont fight it, just embrace it.

  16. When Dahlberg asks the Muslim if he condemns the murders of Americans on 911, the Muslim does not do so.

    Well, why should he? I mean, acting as if every member of a religion should be answerable to what every other member of the religion does is bigotry plain and simple. The kind of bigotry that leads to defending someone who broke a war vet’s jaw.

    The only people in this situation that deserve condemnation are the man who assaulted somebody and the people so blinded by ignorant hatred that they feel the need to defend them.

Comments are closed.