Senate Democrats to Concerned Americans: If You See Something, Shut Up or We'll See You in Court
July 21st 2007 17:30
In an astonishing blow to astute American citizens who care about the safety of their fellow countrymen, Senate Democrats voted against the "John Doe Protection Amendment" today. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Peter King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee and Rep. Steve Pearce, New Mexico Republican, in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of Muslim imams against US Airways and unknown "John Doe" passengers after they were removed from Flight 300 from Minneapolis to Phoenix on November 20, 2006, for demonstrating suspicious behavior reminiscent of the 9/11 hijackers.
As if it isn't scary enough that our freeoms are under attack by radical extremists, now because of Democrats, responsible citizens acting in good faith must do so with the risk of a lawsuit hanging over their heads. Sorry, folks, if you see something, shut up or we'll see you in court! That is, if you don't perish in a fiery, terrorist-ordained inferno first.
Well, no one can accuse the Dems of being good statesmen. But when your party is
controlled by far left billionaires like George Soros, and greedy trial lawyers who wouldn't understand the concept of patriotism if it came wrapped up in a nice, hefty settlement, what's to be expected?
For those who may not be aware of the details, these "poor, put-upon imams" demonstrated very unsettling behavior the day of the US Airways flight in question, louding chanting "Allah" when passengers were summoned to the gate, and once on-board, changing their seating assignments to mimick the 9/11 hijackers. Further, three out of the four imams requested seat-belt extenders, though none were "people of girth," to quote liberal Fox News host, Alan Colmes. Alarmingly, rather than using them for their intended purpose, the imams set the buckles and straps down on the cabin floor. Passengers and crew recalled the incident in vivid detail to law enforcement officials, according to the Washington Times. More background information here.
And so goes the dangerous game of political correctness and special interest pandering in the Age of Radical Islamic Terrorism. CAIR throws a hissy fit and the Democrats react by ordering everyday citizens to ignore blatant displays of provocation. Or is it just that the Dems think every American who reports unsettling behavior is a redneck, racist Islamophobe? Oh, wait! There was also an Arabic-speaking person of Middle Eastern descent who expressed the same discomfort to the crew regarding the actions of the imams? That doesn't fit our paradigm, so don't bother enlightening us with facts!
If you think I am overreacting to what has become a deadly cancer of western hypersensitivity, consider the recent attempt this past May by another group of -- you guessed it! -- Muslims -- to blow up Fort Dix in New Jersey. The "John Doe" in question, Brian Morganstern, a clerk who worked at Circuit City, actually hesitated before reporting the men to the police, for fear of being labeled a racist. Fortunately, these would-be bombers were dumb enough to tip their hand by asking Morganstern to convert their videotape into a DVD; when Morganstern saw what was on the tape, he decided to come forward anyway. Here's what he had to say about it on CNN.
Thanks to his bravery, countless soldiers' lives were saved, but how inconceivable is it that good people like Morganstern even have to second-guess themselves when presented with irrefutable evidence? He happens to be a very courageous young man, but what happens when another citizen makes a different decision when faced with the same circumstance? What if he or she gives in to the fear of the very real consequence of losing everything to a bogus CAIR lawsuit, all for doing the right thing?
Courtesy of Democrats, trial lawyers and special interest groups, preserving national security just became that much more difficult. With "leaders" like these, America (and by extension, the free world), sure doesn't need any enemies.
As if it isn't scary enough that our freeoms are under attack by radical extremists, now because of Democrats, responsible citizens acting in good faith must do so with the risk of a lawsuit hanging over their heads. Sorry, folks, if you see something, shut up or we'll see you in court! That is, if you don't perish in a fiery, terrorist-ordained inferno first.
Well, no one can accuse the Dems of being good statesmen. But when your party is
controlled by far left billionaires like George Soros, and greedy trial lawyers who wouldn't understand the concept of patriotism if it came wrapped up in a nice, hefty settlement, what's to be expected?
For those who may not be aware of the details, these "poor, put-upon imams" demonstrated very unsettling behavior the day of the US Airways flight in question, louding chanting "Allah" when passengers were summoned to the gate, and once on-board, changing their seating assignments to mimick the 9/11 hijackers. Further, three out of the four imams requested seat-belt extenders, though none were "people of girth," to quote liberal Fox News host, Alan Colmes. Alarmingly, rather than using them for their intended purpose, the imams set the buckles and straps down on the cabin floor. Passengers and crew recalled the incident in vivid detail to law enforcement officials, according to the Washington Times. More background information here.
And so goes the dangerous game of political correctness and special interest pandering in the Age of Radical Islamic Terrorism. CAIR throws a hissy fit and the Democrats react by ordering everyday citizens to ignore blatant displays of provocation. Or is it just that the Dems think every American who reports unsettling behavior is a redneck, racist Islamophobe? Oh, wait! There was also an Arabic-speaking person of Middle Eastern descent who expressed the same discomfort to the crew regarding the actions of the imams? That doesn't fit our paradigm, so don't bother enlightening us with facts!
If you think I am overreacting to what has become a deadly cancer of western hypersensitivity, consider the recent attempt this past May by another group of -- you guessed it! -- Muslims -- to blow up Fort Dix in New Jersey. The "John Doe" in question, Brian Morganstern, a clerk who worked at Circuit City, actually hesitated before reporting the men to the police, for fear of being labeled a racist. Fortunately, these would-be bombers were dumb enough to tip their hand by asking Morganstern to convert their videotape into a DVD; when Morganstern saw what was on the tape, he decided to come forward anyway. Here's what he had to say about it on CNN.
Thanks to his bravery, countless soldiers' lives were saved, but how inconceivable is it that good people like Morganstern even have to second-guess themselves when presented with irrefutable evidence? He happens to be a very courageous young man, but what happens when another citizen makes a different decision when faced with the same circumstance? What if he or she gives in to the fear of the very real consequence of losing everything to a bogus CAIR lawsuit, all for doing the right thing?
Courtesy of Democrats, trial lawyers and special interest groups, preserving national security just became that much more difficult. With "leaders" like these, America (and by extension, the free world), sure doesn't need any enemies.
| 48 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Wanted to let you know that I've responded to one part of the comment you added to the end of my post on the Writer's Forum. Thought maybe I could give you a few hints that might help you out with your link problems. While you're waiting to hear back from the Orble techs on the various questions you asked, perhaps my tips will be of some help.
Good luck!
Jeanne
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
It's a pity how well-meaning people get get sucked into this fascist crap.
Comment by Jim Stillman
Opinions of a curmudgeon
Political Certainty
If I were on an airplane and a bunch of strange looking folks were acting in a weird fashion, I sure as hell would report it to the crew without hesitation. And I would agree that a person making that report, with reasonable cause (as determined by a court), and without malice, should not be forced to compensate the people who appeared to pose a threat. Please note, however, the reasonableness of that person must not be merely assumed but should be adjudicated. This is not what Rep. King proposed!
Part of the reluctance in adopting the King amendment may be because of the beliefs of Congressman King. This gentleman is well known for shooting from the hip. He had some weird opinions as to being safer in Manhattan than in Baghdad. As to terrorists, Mr. King had always been a strong supporter of the I.R.A. On the other hand, he was one of the few Republicans to vote against the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Be that as it may, there already laws on the books protecting reporters of suspicious activity from civil liability. Bankers are under the duty to report financial suspicious activity regarding large cash transactions, money laundering, etc. The bankers are protected from lawsuits because they are obligated to report suspicions.
The King amendment to HR 1401 was, in my opinion deficient in several respects. First and foremost, it provided that it would apply “to a statement or disclosure by a person that, at the time it is made, is known by the person to be false.” This would exempt all of the passengers on the airplane that started this affair.
Compare this with the well-written legislation introduced by Representative Steven Pearce (Rep-NM), which has been co-sponsored by 22 other Members of Congress, as HR 1640. In this proposal, the criteria for protection from suit are that the report “is made in good faith and with the reasonable belief that such behavior is suspicious”
The Pearce proposal is now before the Congress and I would anticipate its eventual adoption.
In short, the King amendment was poorly drafted and did not protect those who acted in good faith and reasonably.
Comment by Daria
Freedom Bright
Jeanne, I will definitely look into your suggestions. I am away right now for the weekend, so my computer access is limited. Also, I want to check out everyone else's blogs. This is a great site!
And Howard, let me briefly respond to your comments: The 1979 Embassy takeover and hostage crisis in Iran occurred under President Jimmy Carter. The 1993 WTC bombing and the bombing of the USS Cole (just to name two), happened while Clinton was in office. The point is that Muslim extremists are driven by ideology that commands them to kill "infidels" and impose a worldwide Muslim caliphate for Allah. They despise western freedoms and values. It doesn't matter who is the VP or President of the USA. These people wake up everyday with one thought in mind: Killing as many infidels as possible. Read Brigitte Gabriel's book "Because They Hate." Very enlightening!
Also, if you think the good folks on Flight 300 were "paranoid" you should read the many accounts of happened. The imams were deliberately acting out the 9/11 hijackers actions, and in my opinion, it was purposely done as an intimidation tactic. Knowing western sensitivity, they knew this would erupt into a "discrimination" fight. I suppose the clerk at Circuit City was also "paranoid" after he watched the videotape of the terrorists chanting death to America while wielding weapons.
Maybe you should listen to Osama and AQ, if you don't believe me. They are pretty clear on their objectives. I believe them, especially after 9/11.
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
We know that Bush Daddy help set up the Al QueQueQue operation, with the Saudi monarchy. We know that the 9/11 dead bodies were ALL Saudis or Saudi-residents. Now we are finding out about the $2 billion in bribes to the Wash DC account at Riggs bank from the BAE Systems (British Aerospace) to Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the USA for over 20 years. The London Financial Times has noted the $100 billion slush fund for "private ops". Might those private ops have included a false flag attack on the USA? Ever heard of the 1933 Reichstag Fire, that led to the Hitler dictatorship? Do you want that to happen here?
In any case, the Cheney gang will do the same in the USA vs Iran, etc, up to Russia and China. This is the "military industrial complex" aka the New British East India Company. Anyone for a tea party? Bush the Younger has shown at the Kennebunkport "Lobster Summit" with Bush daddy and Pres. Putin of Russia, he is willing to act sane if we get his controller out....
No "anti-tourist" measures will work without political solutions. You are tying the rope on which your liberties and nation will hang.
Comment by Anonymous
Did Cheney make up the intelligence for all of the European nations that also believed that Saddam had WMDs?
Did Saddam's factual failure to comply with UN mandates, which called for verification of dismantling/disposal of WMD's, spring de novo from the squash of the VP?
And what exactly are you talking about with BAE Systems? If we all know it, I must be living in a Wiziristan cave, because I never heard of it. The UN's Oil-for-Food multi-billion dollar scam that kept Saddam's toadies in the west in clover while leaving Saddam in power and Iraqis under his heel? Now that I have heard of - have you?
Iran, your next topic, is another gas! Did Cheney make up the hostage crisis of 1979? The sponsorship of terrorists for the past quarter century? The arming of factions in Iraq in order to decrease stability? Man, that Cheney sure is busy!
The icing on the cake, though, is your invocation of Putin in the same sentence as "willing to act sane". If Cheney acted like Putin, then a lot of dead politicians would have died under mysterious circumstances. Of course, you could make the case that it is wholly rational to defuse your political enemies' power by offing them. Not that you could then conclude by shedding a tear for lost liberties if you condoned such tactics...
Oops, there's the bell, time to get you back to your pre-K class.
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
Really Long Link Saudi Arabia and the BAE Arms Scandal
While allegations that Saudi officials have received handsome bribes from British defense contractors over the past two decades have been circulating in the London press for many years, newly leaked details of an investigation by Britain's anti-corruption agency far surpass the claims of even the most radical anti-arms trade campaigners. An investigation that began three years ago as a probe into million dollar shopping sprees and high class call girls for visiting Saudi officials has uncovered billions of dollars in illicit transfers to the Saudi royal family by Britain's largest arms manufacturer, undertaken with the full knowledge of the British government.
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
Really Long Link