posted on July 21, 2007 02:33:00 PM new
To have a bunch of Demo bed wetters, pillow biting gutless wonders allow you to be sued because you really thought you noticed something suspicious and said something because you wanted to save a life is pathetic.
-----
Disarmed by the Dems
Congressional leaders fail to protect terror tipsters from insane lawsuits
By DEBRA BURLINGAME
Friday, July 20th 2007, 4:00 AM
Be Our Guest
He's your son, riding a commuter train to work. Your daughter, taking the subway to go shopping downtown. Your grandparent, boarding an airplane at JFK en route to a family reunion. Your husband or wife, working anywhere in America.
John Doe is you. Me. All of us. And he's in trouble.
Yesterday, members of Congress met in conference to finalize provisions of the 9/11 security bill, which implements the final recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. But as of press time, the Democratic majority was using a technicality to block the so-called John Doe amendment from being included in the bill.
The amendment, which protects citizen whistleblowers who report suspicious activity from being sued, was sponsored by Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) after six imams who were removed from a U.S. Airways flight in November filed a lawsuit against the passengers who reported their behavior to flight crews.
Their lawsuit charges that the imams were victims of an "intentional" and "malicious" . . . "conspiracy to discriminate" and seeks compensatory and punitive damages from the airline and "John Doe" passengers - including an elderly couple who, according to legal papers, "purposely turned around to watch them" in the boarding area and then "made a cellular phone call."
The John Doe legislation, called the Protecting Americans Fighting Terrorism Act, passed in the House in April with overwhelming bipartisan support, by a vote of 304-121 - including 105 Democrats. Now, King wants to include it in the 9/11 security legislation as a stand-alone measure to assure its passage apart from the larger bill. It is up to the majority leadership, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, whether they will allow the provision to be added to the bill. Reached by telephone yesterday, a senior Pelosi staffer refused several times to say whether Pelosi supports the John Doe legislation in principle.
Why? What could prevent any member of Congress from supporting no-brainer, bipartisan legislation that protects Good Samaritans from frivolous lawsuits? One possible motive: According to key Democrat leaders, John Doe protection will encourage "racial profiling."
Let's put this in perspective. The alleged conspiracy to kill U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix was foiled by a Circuit City store clerk who alerted law enforcement after the suspects brought a video to the store for reformatting on DVD.
An FBI spokesman called the 23-year-old tipster an "unsung hero" and acknowledged that the plot would have gone undiscovered if he hadn't stepped forward. The hero clerk later told reporters that after seeing several Middle Eastern-looking men shouting "Allah Akbar" while firing assault rifles and engaging in military-type maneuvers on the video, he discussed overnight with his family whether or not to call authorities. Lucky for us, he made the right decision.
But would he have made that call if he thought getting it wrong might require defending himself against a multimillion-dollar lawsuit? Would you? "An overwhelmingly bipartisan majority of Congress supports protecting vigilant citizens who are our first and sometimes last resource in the War on Terror," said Steve Pearce (R-N.M.), co-author of the John Doe bill. "But unfortunately they're not going to get the support of the new majority leadership in Congress."
It has been nearly six years since 19 ordinary-looking men boarded four commercial airliners, killed all the pilots and then flew the planes into buildings and the ground.
One of those most haunted by that day is the airline employee who checked in two of the hijackers that morning. He told the 9/11 commission that the pair, traveling on first class, one-way, e-tickets, "didn't act right." Though he selected them for secondary screening, he didn't request a more thorough search because "I was worried about being accused of being 'racist' and letting 'prejudice' get in the way."
We disarm ourselves when we succumb to political correctness - which encourages us to second guess our common sense and look the other way. It is an outrage that Pelosi and Reid would allow individuals to be punished when they come forward to protect us all.
Burlingame, a director of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, is the sister of Charles Burlingame 3rd, the pilot of American Airlines flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on July 21, 2007 03:05:49 PM new
How do these nitwits get elected? As I've posted over and over....liberals/dems cannot be trusted to defend America...they enable our ENEMIES every chance they get. This is just ANOTHER time they've done so.
Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson is the one who started this nonsense. He should be IMPEACHED/RECALLED, imo. I can't BELIEVE he's the chairman of our HS. S-C-A-R-Y......
He's protecting the dems supporters - groups like CAIR.
We can't upset the muslims....much better to just deal with a city that's been BLOW UP after it happens. That's their mindset.
Most knowledgeable people KNOW that all the terrorists activities that have been PREVENTED were reported by Americans who saw and reported something suspicious. Now the idiots want to be sure they don't do THAT anymore. brother.....just unbelievable.
And the yo-yo's here say Ann Coulter is off base. She's had them pegged for a long, long time.
"Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason," she begins this book. "You could be talking about Scrabble and they would instantly leap to the anti-American position. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No they don't. Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence."
And especially in this case, the dems have proven Ann correct.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jul 21, 2007 03:08 PM ]
posted on July 21, 2007 03:07:07 PM new
Yep, insanity. And this is the time to post a statement that I made on another thread. Fits this one too.
Yep, good thing they didn't live under the president, King Franklin D. Roosevelt during WWII. My wife (God rest her soul) grew up in Charleston, SC, where her father worked in the navy yard. Their next door neighbor was arrested and never seen again because he was German and an amateur radio operator. You didn't mess with the leader during that war, or bad mouth the government.
Same goes for the political correctness of today and the coddling of criminals and supposed terrorists.
Keep this up and it won't be long before another attack.
posted on July 21, 2007 03:15:25 PM new
Yes, that's true. But just TRY to convince any liberal here that the five attacks the US suffered under the clinton administration LED to 9-11. We showed weakness and they continued to get braver.
We'll be repeating that same cycle should a liberal get in the WH.
Since JFK....there hasn't been a democratic President that had ANY guts to take necessary action to defend our Nation. He was the last.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on July 21, 2007 03:29:57 PM new
Yep, I don't know how the lib democants reached the coddling point where they are today.
The greatest Democratic president of my lifetime, Harry S. Truman, had only been in office for a few days, when he found that we had the atomic bomb. I can hear him now. "We have what kind of bomb? Well drop em".
We did on August 6th and 9th. Japan surrendered on the 15th.
Back then the democratic party was a party of action and didn't care what others thought or said. Where did they go wrong??
posted on July 21, 2007 04:04:02 PM new
"I don't know how the lib democants reached the coddling point where they are today."
Imo, it's from the indoctrination our children have received in our liberal school systems. Especially in colleges and universities, but even as of today, what they indoctrinate our kindergarters thru 12th grade with.
The students pretty much only get the propaganda from the liberal mind think. Some will graduate...start on a successful career and then will choose to leave the dem party....finally realizing that they ALWAYS have their hands in their pockets.
That in order to support all their gov. run social programs...they must redistribute the income of those who have done well.
But most high school graduates won't go on to college...and remain in low paying/semi-low paying, unsatisfactory jobs and expect the gov. to take care of their every need. The liberal/dem party promotes dependence on our gov...so they have never been taught to be self-sufficient and take care of their own needs. Imo, that's why we continue to see more and more socialistic gov. programs. It's almost a guarantee that the voters will want them in office....since they'll get taken care of by the gov. then. And that just promotes more wanting of the same.
The other issue, imo, is their 'ownership' of most print press and MSM news networks. We've all read how out of balance the liberals have control of the news. And since they're mostly liberal journalists....that's the agenda Americans hear most. That's why we don't see much support for our efforts in ANY war since JFK's time. Why we don't see front page support for the successes we ARE experiencing. I can easily see the difference between how it was then to how it is now.
It's all fixed. The schools, the MSM, the paper print....with few exceptions they control it all. Thus the change and lack of support for Americas side of anything. And more bad mouthing our Nation - the blame America first wackos. Things just the total opposite of what they were during WWII and prior to that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
