Flying Imams vs. John Doe

Remember those 5 Imams who made a big scene by praying publicly in the terminal at the Minneapolis airport recently? And during the flight they continued to pray loudly and moved about in the passenger cabin. Clearly trying to incite negative attention in order to use politically correct laws against those who reported their suspicious behavior, they've now sued both USAirways and the unknown passengers who reported their shenanigans, named in the complaints as certain "John Does."

Tired of this nonsense? Join up. Rep. Stevan Pearce (R-NM) drafted a bill to protect such John Does from liability. Here is Rep. Pearce's press release:

Today, United States Congressman Steve Pearce introduced H.R. 1640 the "Protecting Americans Fighting Terrorism Act of 2007." If passed, this legislation would protect individuals from being sued for reporting suspicious activities to law enforcement and security personnel.

The language of the Act comes as a direct response to a recent incident in Minneapolis. As reported in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the imams engaged in a variety of suspicious behaviors while boarding a US Airways flight, according to the airport police report. Some prayed loudly in the gate area, spoke angrily about the United States and Saddam, switched seats and sat in the 9/11 hijackers' configuration, and unnecessarily requested seatbelt extenders that could be used as weapons, according to witness reports and US Airways spokeswoman Andrea Rader.

As a result of the aforementioned behavior, citizens contacted airline authorities and the pilot informed law enforcement to have the suspicious parties removed from the aircraft. The original incident occurred in November of 2006; now the group has filed suit against US Airways and the
Minneapolis - St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission on 17 different charges. Included in the lawsuit as defendants, are "John Does" described as citizens who called authorities to report the suspicious behavior of the Imams.

Rep. Pearce commented on introducing the bill: "It is a sad day in America when our own institutions of freedom are being used against us in the battle against terrorism. When I first heard about the lawsuit brought by the 'imams' in Minnesota, it was clear to me that this was an injustice against Americans who were simply trying to protect themselves. These brave citizens should be recognized as heroes for their efforts to report suspicious activity, particularly activity that has been associated with previous terror attacks.

"As Americans, we must not allow ourselves to be bullied by individuals who seek to disrupt our way of life. We can not allow the sympathizers of terrorism to make Americans wonder if they could be sued before reporting possible terrorist activity. Whether it is an intimidation tactic or a full scale attack, Americans have the right and responsibility to protect themselves and their fellow citizens. I introduced this legislation to protect Americans and keep all citizens alert and vocal as they serve on the front line in our battle against terrorism here in America."

Finally some sanity. Terrorism, by definition, includes low-conflict situations like e-coli in our produce, rat poison in Rover's dog food, and certainly intimidation tactics like this ridiculous suit. And any judge who is worth his robes should immediately dismiss this suit - with extreme prejudice.

Some folks I've talked to have a better solution. They call it SOS. It's not a call for help, however. It means Shoot On Sight.

Have a nice day.

Hattip to Michele Malkin and the guys at Powerline