« VOA Discusses Financial Ramifications for Iran of UN Resolution 1747 | Main | So Disturbing Beyond All Reason »

March 28, 2007

House GOP Leads Fight To Protect 'John Doe' From Muslim Extremists' Lawsuits

Once in a while, common sense prevails and American politicians make the right (and intelligent) move. This was the case yesterday when House Republicans surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity - the first step by lawmakers to protect "John Doe" airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit:

[...] After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats' Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121.

All 121 of the "no" votes were cast by Democrats, while 199 Republicans and 105 Democrats voted in favor.

Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and "John Does," (link added) passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a "chilling effect" on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.

[...] A Republican memo issued prior to the vote cites the November incident when the men were removed from a US Airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix for suspicious behavior, the details of which were first reported by The Washington Times.

The men prayed loudly before boarding, did not take their assigned seats and formed patterns officials said mirrored the September 11 hijackers, asked for seat-belt extenders not needed, and criticized President Bush and the war in Iraq.

"Earlier this month, the six imams filed suit against the airlines. Shockingly, the imams also filed suit against the passengers who reported the suspicious behavior," the memo said.

"The Republican motion to recommit will ensure that any person that voluntarily reports suspicious activity -- anything that could be a threat to transportation security -- will be granted immunity from civil liability for the disclosure," the memo said.

The amendment is retroactive to activities that took place on or after Nov. 20, 2006 -- the date of the Minneapolis incident, and authorizes courts to award attorneys' fees to defendants with immunity.

"By passing a specific grant of immunity that covers passengers reporting suspicious activity in good faith, we will prevent special-interest lawyers from using 'creative' legal theories to attack the well-meaning passengers who make reports," the memo said.

The above linked Washington Times article mentions that Nihad Awad, executive director of the moderate-pretending but terrorist-supporting - Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), says that "the only individuals against whom suit may be raised in this litigation are those who may have knowingly made false reports against the imams with the intent to discriminate against them." It seems that Awad and CAIR, as is consistant with CAIR's agenda to use our freedoms and legal systems against us, wish to decide the intent of the individuals that reacted in a highly appropriate manner to the highly suspicious behavior of six imams. Up until recently, CAIR has been doing a good job of fooling the American establishment into believing that it is moderate, but as we can see from yesterday's action in the House, even our politicians are waking up to the reality of the Islamist agenda for America.

In the meantime, Dennis Miller has some very good advice for the flying imams:

Posted by Richard at March 28, 2007 8:52 AM