Posted on 08/23/2007 6:19:51 AM PDT by WBL 1952
In the case of the Flying Imams against US Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, brought to you by CAIR, the Flying Imams have dismissed their claims against the John Doe defendants who alerted the airline to their suspicious behavior. Minneapolis attorney Gerard Nolting, who volunteered his services to any John Doe defendant ultimately named by the Flying Imams, writes:
The Flying Imams just filed a dismissal against all John Doe passengers. Total surrender before any discovery is even taken.
In the most recent order entered in the case (as I noted here and here), Judge Montgomery denied the Flying Imams' motion to close the proceedings to the public. In the lawsuit, at least, the Flying Imams are flying nowhere fast.
(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...
Interesting how it all seems to come together - continued...
Gerald Nolting deserves a pat on the back for volunteering to represent.
Legal Freepers: Is this significant?
The real bullies have backed down.
The Muslims should be countersued for filing a frivolous lawsuit.
“The real bullies have backed down.”
_________________________________________________________
This time.
Legal Freepers: Is this significant?
Yes, very.
It means that CAIR is afraid of what the discovery process might uncover.
Under modern "notice pleading" in civil actions, once you file a lawsuit the other side is entitled under the civil practice rules to get ANY documents you have which have any potential relevance to the lawsuit, or which are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant information.
CAIR filed this lawsuit purely for the intimidation factor. I don't think they can stand the light of day shone on their files.
Of course the airline can still get after them, if they want to, but they have public relations issues that the private citizens did not. My own attitude would be d--n the torpedoes, and start filing notices to produce and interrogatories. Then notice the depositions of all the officers and members of the board of directors, and confront them with their writings (all in a very low key and affable way, of course.) Make them rue the day!
I'm sure that Mr. Nolting had done something of the sort right off the bat.
Discovery would have disclosed to the public & DHS the backgrounds of the Flying Imams.
Simply put, it's a political statement and a repudiation of everything that our nation stands for, it is the so-called moderate's way of instinctively showing their fraternal support for their violent co-religionists. Inadvertently, Mrs. Rehan Seyam makes it quite clear that the hijab for her is a symbol of Islamic self-assertion and ethnic chauvinism, it is a reactive revolutionary response and a rejection to assimilation and integration. You might notice that many of these displays of Islamic self-assertion and ethnic chauvinism only became popular after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
“Discovery would have disclosed to the public & DHS the backgrounds of the Flying Imams.” AND:
“Judge Montgomery denied the Flying Imams’ motion to close the proceedings to the public.”
If they had been granted a trial that was closed to the public, ie:secret, they may well have NOT dropped the suit.
"Where the hell were all these Muslims prior to 9/11?"
Didn't want to reveal "methods and tactics" doncha know...
==> “ Didn’t want to reveal “methods and tactics” doncha know...” <==
Bingo! There is nothing moderate about these “moderates”. Their mission was an act of espionage and conspiracy, attempting to discover defensive tactics and methods in order to develop a successful plan of attack.
“Interesting how it all seems to come together - continued”...(then from your blog)...
“Simply put, it’s a political statement and a repudiation of everything that our nation stands for, it is the so-called moderate’s way of instinctively showing their fraternal support for their violent co-religionists. Inadvertently, Mrs. Rehan Seyam makes it quite clear that the hijab for her is a symbol of Islamic self-assertion and ethnic chauvinism, it is a reactive revolutionary response and a rejection to assimilation and integration. You might notice that many of these displays of Islamic self-assertion and ethnic chauvinism only became popular after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Prior to September 11th it was a rare occurrence to find someone asking if they can pray before a flight departure or insisting to wear a hijab. You’d be hard pressed to find a cabdriver who would refuse a passenger simply because he was carrying a bottle of wine and you can rest assured that no one would have the audacity to demand that you finance and build “foot basins” for them to wash their feet.”
...OUTSTANDING!
...speaking of “moderate”, a MUST READ here...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017872.php#comments
Thanks to you and thanks to Robert Spencer.
Thanks for posting. More discussion here...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017880.php#comments
...thanks to Robert Spencer and all of the oustanding posters at jihadwatch.
Wasn’t there an old movie with Barbara Stanwyck and I believe Gary Cooper called “Meet John Doe”? It was a great movie - we don’t have the actors like those in the early days where they didn’t have props and special effects to cover up for their lack of talent.
I don’t recall the movie but The Flying Imams sure “acted” aggrieved. Mohammedans rated that “show” 5 crescents. /sarcasm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.