The Real Target of the 6 Imams "Discrimination" Suit

Making America safe for hijackers and terrorists

In this story from Katherine Kersten of the Star Tribune, we find that members of "The Religion of Peace" are suing people for the crime of wanting to be safe from Islamic hijackers. You may remember that not too long ago 6 Islamic "clerics" were removed from a US Airways flight for engaging in suspicious behavior and failing to obey the orders of the flight crew. We know that prior to 9-11 several of the terrorists that later hijacked those planes, engaged in test runs on flights to evaluate the security on board as well as to test their procedures. It does not take much imagination to see that these "clerics" were performing much the same function by testing the limits of what the flight crews and non-muslim passengers would tolerate.

Of course, they are now suing the airline for "discrimination". Apparently if you belong to a permanently aggrieved group from which have come virtually all of the terrorist attacks on the civilized world, you get to show your displeasure that other people might have noticed that there is a problem. But what is more troubling is that the 5th column "clerics" and their agitation lobby, CAIR, are now going to sue the passengers as well for having noticed the suspicious behavior and reporting it to the proper authorities. I guess that if you are a Muslim follower of the pederast prophet, it is just peachy to slit the throats of flight attendants and crash planes full of civilians into buildings, but if you object to that kind of treatment, well you must be some kind of racist criminal who deserves to be hauled into court by the ACLU.

But the most alarming aspect of the imams’ suit is buried in paragraph 21 of their complaint. It describes “John Doe” defendants whose identity the imams’ attorneys are still investigating. It reads: “Defendants ‘John Does’ were passengers ... who contacted U.S. Airways to report the alleged ‘suspicious’ behavior of Plaintiffs’ performing their prayer at the airport terminal.”

Paragraph 22 adds: “Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this Complaint to allege true names, capacities, and circumstances supporting [these defendants’] liability ... at such time as Plaintiffs ascertain the same.”

In plain English, the imams plan to sue the “John Does,” too.

Who are these unnamed culprits? The complaint describes them as “an older couple who was sitting [near the imams] and purposely turn[ed] around to watch” as they prayed. “The gentleman (’John Doe’) in the couple ... picked up his cellular phone and made a phone call while watching the Plaintiffs pray,” then “moved to a corner” and “kept talking into his cellular phone.”

In retribution for this action, the unnamed couple probably will be dragged into court soon and face the prospect of hiring a lawyer, enduring hostile questioning and paying huge legal bills. The same fate could await other as-yet-unnamed passengers on the US Airways flight who came forward as witnesses.