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

1. Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian Breaking: (F)lying imams finally dismiss John Does from lawsuit «
2. Tel-Chai Nation
3. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Eh: Flying imams finally drop suit against “John Doe” passengers
4. Imams Drop Lawsuit Againt Passengers : The American Pundit | News and Opinion With A Conservative View
5. Flying Fascist Imams Drop John Does from Suit « TMQ2
6. Pajamas Media
7. Blue Collar Republican » Blog Archive » Blog Burst - August 23, 2007
8. Wizbang
9. Overlawyered

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 2:59 pm, PBoilermaker said:

   Good to go.

2. #2
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:11 pm, jrlingreenbay said:

   Now as soon as they drop the suit against the rest, we can truly cheer.

3. #3
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:27 pm, zyzzyg said:

   And, what about US Airways and the Airport Commission? The flying Imams are still playing games. Of course, the other defendants will call the John Does to testify as their witnesses.

   Nope. This thing has to go to trial to have the Flying Imams thoroughly and unequivocally slapped down and have precedent set.

   The flying Imams should be careful of what they ask for, because they will get a decision that they will not like.

4. #4
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:35 pm, reine.de.tout said:

   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:27 pm, zyzzyg said: This thing has to go to trial to have the Flying Imams thoroughly and unequivocally slapped down and have precedent set.

   If we could be certain the proper precedent would be set, I’d be with you. I’d love to see this thing to to trial and get a full airing. The scary part is…there are so many “sensitive” judges out there, the precedent set could be one I wouldn’t want.

5. #5
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:48 pm, Sergeant Tim said:

   CAIR must be planning a new membership drive strategy. It seems their representing accused terrorists in court, suing on behalf of those who just acted like terrorists on airplanes, and making prejudicial statements towards non-Muslims wasn’t working. Go figure.

6. #6
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:56 pm, 24Klady said:

   The flying imams have created their own image as being troublemakers, and proven once again they are unable to conduct themselves civilly and without court protection to back up their bizarre behavior. For that they want compensation. As a member of the flying public I’d be on the other side of that suit had the airline and airport authorities failed to protect me from a situation that I felt was threatening. The flying public are entitled to some peace of mind while trapped within the confines of an airport. Drop what’s left of this insane lawsuit. Or prove once and for all why it’s been -you- that’s created and nurtured islamophobia, not the other way around. Stop being the victim and grow up.

7. #7
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 3:59 pm, ajmontana said:

   Please have some translators lined up to assist in tearing shreds out of their testimony. This group of scabs had one mission in mind while at that airport, they did it and are backed by groups whom side with terrorists. Let them have their day in Court, I predict a jury see’s right through the charade and laughs them out the door.

8. #8
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:09 pm, 24Klady said:

   aj - how many goofy rulings have you seen the past few years to make you very afraid to let anything like this come before a judge, much less a jury. We didn’t think the border patrol agents had anything to worry about either.

9. #9
   On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:20 pm, trinitytim said:

   The actions of the “Lying Imams”, oops, “Flying Imams” in that airport consituted Probable Cause by any reading of the definition. They created that situation by their own actions.

   As a police officer, I would have taken action to prevent that flight. If I was wrong at least I’d still be alive to defend myself. If I was right I would have saved a bunch of lives.

   I hope the correct precedent is set but I have seen a lot of crazy decisions in courts over the past 30 years and I have to tell you, I’m worried. I can easily envision some moonbat judge ruling for the Imams preventing us from ever using common sense again.

   Hope I’m wrong. Only time will tell.

10. #10
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:25 pm, publiuswarmac9999 said:

    Maybe one of the John Doe passengers ought to countersue the imams - claim of stress related illness brought on by the incident.

11. #11
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:32 pm, ajmontana said:

    I hear ya 24k, but I think, times they are a changin…. (hopefully)

12. #12
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:34 pm, 24Klady said:

    How about all of the passengers joining in a class action? That flight had to be delayed, connecting flights missed, limos/vans or relatives waiting around at destination while the silly mess was sorted out at origin….and why, because activists were bent on proving a point and perhaps gaining a settlement. Better yet, a court approved nod to exhibit threatening behavior and for passengers to never report another situation.

13. #13
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:38 pm, josetheguerilla said:

    Couldn’t hack it, had to pack it!!!!!!!!!

    Sharia 0

    John Doe 1

    My name is John Doe, sue me!!!!!!!!!!

14. #14
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:53 pm, P. Jeffrey Black said:

    Airline Passengers = 1
    Muslim Imam “Pacifists” = 0
    Terrorists Probing Aircraft = 0

    The blindfolds and gags have now been removed from the passengers, but the fight isn’t over yet. Airline employees and flight crews also need to be protected from frivolous lawsuits such as this, for just doing their jobs. The most effective deterrent to terrorist incidents aboard planes today is the proactive eyes and ears of the flight crews –– and most importantly the passengers.

15. #15
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:53 pm, HeatherRadish said:

    24Klady–not a bad idea.

    I’m kind of looking forward to the discovery process on the rest of the lawsuits. There should be a lot of stuff the defense is legally entitled to know about CAIR and the plaintiffs that they don’t want made public.

16. #16
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:09 pm, 24Klady said:

    The bill that Pres. Bush recently signed regarding the issue of reporting behavior you found suspicious and “John Does” would be reimbursed for attorney fees. If the lawsuit is dropped, and the defendants had hired legal representation, would it apply? Or does the suit have to be thrown out or dismissed by a judge? Filing suit naming the John Does was intimidation, pure and simple.

17. #17
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:20 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    On August 22nd, 2007 at 4:38 pm, josetheguerilla My name is John Doe, sue me!!!!!!!!!!

    I said it yesterday - call me John Doe. If I see something on an aircraft I am on - let’s roll. I am not PC and I profile - sue me.

18. #18
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:28 pm, ajmontana said:

    soap, with ya big time…..

19. #19
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:30 pm, Uplander said:

    Were there six or seven involved? Some of the videos had 7 ‘Imams’. Or am I Cross Eyed & Dyslexic?

20. #20
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:31 pm, Uplander said:

    There are only two resolutions to war. Victory and Surrender.

21. #21
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 5:39 pm, Uplander said:

    I just counted 8 ‘Imams’ in the sidebar picture. Have ‘ALL’ John Does been dropped from ‘ALL’ Legal actions, or are we being suckered? Are we trusting the MSM to report ‘Truth’?

22. #22
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 6:07 pm, USMCgramma said:

    This is a test of our judicial system that the Imans should not be allowed to win. Should they get a jury of their peers? Heaven forbid! The little Egyptian girls will be purified soon by mutilating their sexual organs…barbarians.

23. #23
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 7:00 pm, walterc said:

    As has been happening more and more of late, I think the rest of the case will be dropped when the discovery starts.

    For instance, 1: “name any and all times places and instances where you laid your prayer rug out in a public place. Also name all persons known to you that were present at said public prayer and whether or not they participated or observed.”

    2: Name all other cases (citing case number)involving yourself or related persons or entities containing allegations of “islamaphobia” or other religious discrimination over the past ten years. Specify your role (i.e. Plaintif, defendant, witness etc), provide the name, address and counsel of opposing parties and the resolution of the case.”

    I’m not a lawyer, but I have been involved with discovery in my past life as a government agent. It can be very daunting.

24. #24
    On August 22nd, 2007 at 9:49 pm, gunslingerpatriot said:

    My name is John D. and I am NOT afraid of cair.

    Long live the John and Jane Does!

    I agree that the next step is to protect the flight crews and personnel for doing their jobs. Captain X this standing ovation is for you and all flight personnel that are defending us while doing your jobs professionally.

    My name is John Doe and I am watching you!

25. #25
    On August 23rd, 2007 at 10:24 am, Tantor said:

    It doesn’t matter if the case is dropped later on. The intimidation tactic can still be effective if reporting suspicious behavior costs you your savings in lawyer fees.

    Basically, CAIR is acting as a terrorist union would to ensure better working conditions for their members pursuing their terrorist trade.