Michelle Malkin » Attention, (F)lying Imams: Put up or shut up

Attention, (F)lying Imams: Put up or shut up

By Michelle Malkin • August 14, 2007 10:19 AM

The non-profit Becket Fund is putting pressure on the flying imams to drop John Doe whistleblowers from their discrimination lawsuit. Contrary to MSM reports (the Associated Press reported “Imams not suing flight passengers“), the citizen John Does are not off the hook. The Becket Fund has filed an amicus brief urging the court to dismiss the charges against the John Does:

Two weeks have passed since the attorney for the six imams removed from a US Airways flight in November 2006 stated on the record in court that the imams were not planning on suing any private passengers for reporting their suspicious activity in boarding that flight. However, the so called “John Does” remain in the imams’ proposed second amended complaint. Today The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty blasted that inclusion. Becket Fund President Kevin J. Hasson sent the imams’ attorney, Frederick J. Goetz, a draft notice of dismissal to release the John Does from the case. Hasson urged him to sign it, threatening further legal pressure if he did not.

On July 31, 2007, the Associated Press published an article with headline, “Imams not suing flight passengers”. In court that day, the Imams’ attorney was reported as saying “We don’t contemplate naming any private passenger as a defendant.” Yet the John Does still appear on page 6, named as defendants:

“Defendants ‘John Does’ were passengers at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport who contacted U.S. Airways to report the alleged ‘suspicious’ behavior of Plaintiffs’ performing their prayer at the airport terminal on November 20, 2006.”

On August 1, the Becket Fund filed an amicus brief urging the court to dismiss the charges against the Does. The Becket Fund has also publicly offered to represent any John Does named in the complaint for free. Today’s letter is cc’d to the judge presiding over the case, as well as all lawyers involved in it, and calls for the imams to immediately dismiss all charges against the Does. “Now we’re making it easy for them; if they truly mean not to sue the passengers, all they have to do is sign on the dotted line,” said Hasson. “If, on the other hand, they refuse to formally drop the Does, it will be another sign that what they’re really up to is trying to intimidate future airline passengers from coming forward with their suspicions. That is outrageous and has nothing to do with religious liberty. And we will continue to fight them every step of the way.”

Here’s the text of the letter and dismissal notice.

Posted in: John Doe

Send to a Friend
Printer Friendly

comments (24)

trackbacks (3)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

#1

On August 14th, 2007 at 10:35 am, Kevin from Ohio in Virginia said:

I’m glad someone is finally making these guys put up or shut up.
#2

On August 14th, 2007 at 10:49 am, PBoilermaker said:

You know, the supposedly forthcoming backlash against this kind of stuff can’t come soon enough.

We need some trial reform to penalize frivolous, agenda-driven lawsuits, too.
#3

On August 14th, 2007 at 10:53 am, zyzzyg said:

I want to see this thing go to court, so that the flying Imams will be laughed out of court. What are the flying Imams waiting for? I want them to state their case publicly and under oath, and in doing so, will establish precedent for what the passengers and crew did. I want them to be cross examined and explain exactly what their intentions were.
#4

On August 14th, 2007 at 11:19 am, ajmontana said:

Intentions were clear. Positioning themselves for lawsuits just like the Brain Donor with the Islamic Tee Shirt(we wont be silent) They knew it would upset people and cry foul win it did.
#5

On August 14th, 2007 at 11:30 am, nfbailey said:

I’m still trying to understand why these clowns weren’t arrested immediately for terrorism. They deliberately terrorized an entire plane full of Americans who have had some pretty ugly experience with their ilk.

Am I alone in my thinking??
#6

On August 14th, 2007 at 11:49 am, RhymesWithRight said:

I guess that they are not merely “flying imams”, but also “lying imams”.
#7

On August 14th, 2007 at 11:58 am, allrsn said:

Why haven’t they been charged with ‘public disruption’ yet? Why is our legal system refusing to protect us?

O wait that is the norm.
#8

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:02 pm, labwrs said:

I am so grateful there are good guys on OUR side! It so often seems the other side has the upper hand. Fight them in the trenches, fight then in the Courts..just FIGHT THEM!
As MM says”I WILL NOT SUBMIT”!
#9

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:25 pm, Dandapani said:

I want to see this thing go to court, so that the flying Imams will be laughed out of court. What are the flying Imams waiting for? I want them to state their case publicly and under oath, and in doing so, will establish precedent for what the passengers and crew did. I want them to be cross examined and explain exactly what their intentions were.

Islam sanctions lying to “infidels” and “unbelievers”. They won’t tell the truth in court.
#10

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:31 pm, swj719AWG said:

Islam sanctions lying to “infidels” and “unbelievers”. They won’t tell the truth in court.

Get a muslim prosecutor…
#11

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:32 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

It is a secret plot to have toilet bowls that rotate installed on planes. Yeah, yeah – that’s it. And then they will need a compass installed too so they know where to point while sitting. That darn Rove is still working his magic!

I know sarcasm is not always a good thing but how can these guys be taken seriously. It just seems that the prisons that installed toilet bowls in the proper direction to appease prisoners somehow fit along with this crap. (Geeeez, now I have resorted to puns)
#12

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:39 pm, bear1909 said:

Take it to trial. WHUP their collective posteriors. Make their mosques pay court costs and restitution to every John Doe and Jane Doe who were/are on the hook.

Make them pay. Make the consequence of their every action something they don’t even want to think about.

Treat them like the unruly Islamic Rage Boys that they are.
#13

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:49 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

On August 14th, 2007 at 12:39 pm, bear1909 said:

LOL bear, and I thought what I said had some humor to it.

I pray in public, even at airports and I have never had camera crews clamoring around me. These guys should have been arrested. They caused a disturbance on purpose. It is like yelling fire in a movie theater. When you happen to be a Muslim, you have privileges.

That being said, I agree with you 100% but know nothing will ever be done and these guys will be around for a long time like a bad case of Jesse Jackson.
#14

On August 14th, 2007 at 1:04 pm, swj719AWG said:

these guys will be around for a long time like a bad case of Jesse Jackson.

That’s one of the scariest ideas I have heard today.

Only one worse was the suggestions of an Obama/Edwards ticket in 2008.
#15

On August 14th, 2007 at 1:35 pm, DesertLover said:

Since the Imams are so in love with flying I think we should immediately fly them to Iraq or Afghanistan on a one-way ticket and put them on the no-fly terror list so they can’t come back …
#16

On August 14th, 2007 at 2:23 pm, Sergeant Tim said:

In my opinion, CAIR is actually a front group for Islamic terrorist organizations. Not just Hamas; all Islamic terrorists organizations. In addition, I believe CAIR is working towards sediously overthrowing the government of the United States by replacing our Constitution with sharia law.

If CAIR does not like what I just wrote, my name is ‘John Doe,’ so sue me.
#17

On August 14th, 2007 at 3:40 pm, leepro said:

Here’s what I don’t understand…

The lawsuit states:

“Defendants ‘John Does’ were passengers at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport who contacted U.S. Airways to report the alleged ‘suspicious’ behavior of Plaintiffs’ performing their prayer at the airport terminal on November 20, 2006.”

In all the stories of this, I have yet to see any reference to the fact that the charge itself is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. To my knowledge and recollection, no one, no one reported the airport terminal praying as suspicious. It was the imams’ suspicious activity after boarding the plane that drew attention.
Why, then, have the Becket Fund and the John Doe lawyers not attached themselves to that little nugget. This seems so obvious to me, is there something I’m missing here?
#18

On August 14th, 2007 at 4:01 pm, reine.de.tout said:

On August 14th, 2007 at 3:40 pm, leepro said: To my knowledge and recollection, no one, no one reported the airport terminal praying as suspicious. It was the imams’ suspicious activity after boarding the plane that drew attention.

LEEPRO - good point!
And has the AP issued a correction to their “Imams Not Suing Flight Passengers” headline?
#19

On August 14th, 2007 at 4:31 pm, gunslingerpatriot said:

My name is Paul and I am a friend of John D.
There are many John and Jane D’s, we are:
the American Airlines pilot (Captain X)that refused to allow a muslim to board who couldn’t fill out the correct paperwork to carry a loaded gun on his aircraft

the average citizen watching your protest marches and mosques

the Sailor,Soldier,Airman, Marine, Coastguardsman and every vet that has seen the face of terror in more ways than mere mortals can ever imagine

we are the bloggers who are tracking these lowlifes and shining the light on the hyporcracy of islam

we are the students on university campuses that aren’t afraid to speak up or burn an islamic holy book (koran)in defiance of political correctness

we are the sheepdogs that are willing to defend our fellow human beings with every ounce of our guts and tactical superiority against the wolves (both foreign and domestic)

we are your worst nightmare, and will not go quietly into the night as dhimis

we are the John and Jane D’s who will not accept the religious pluralism that ignores the dangers that we face

So to MM-thanks for what you do…
AD/vets/military families-mere words can’t thank you enough
Captain X-You have not been forgotten
Bloggers-kick butt and may your keyboard not fry while working on the web
and to all the John and Jane Does in Minneapolis-St. Paul continue to fight and know that your service has not been in vain or forgotten by us. You have shown the true cost of integrity and its inspiring to us that have followed this case.

My name is Paul, and I am a friend of John D.
#20

On August 14th, 2007 at 5:37 pm, duff65 said:

Why do we even give these “nutcases” access to US courts?
#21

On August 14th, 2007 at 5:50 pm, bdfaith said:

Why do we even give these “nutcases” access to US courts?

Duff65, you just wasted a perfectly good set of scare quotes.
#22

On August 14th, 2007 at 6:05 pm, calamityville said:

It ain’t over ’til it’s over.
#23

On August 14th, 2007 at 6:32 pm, JWS said:

We really need the John Doe legislation passed but quick. These islamic idiots are using every PC trick and, more importantly, stooge, our country offers to slowly inch sharia law into OUR books. Most of our country just doesn’t get it and the ones who should-our mighty, courageous, country-lovin’ politicians-are quickly assuming the position. Thank God for people like MM and others who continue to fight back…
#24

On August 14th, 2007 at 10:33 pm, swj719AWG said:

Look, it comes down to this…

Either the Imams deal with doing stupid, provacitive stuff like this and getting reported, or the passangers gang up and beat them down to be on the safe side…

I would honestly suggest the former. The latter would just get messy…