Outright Disgusting

You probably remember the case of the "Flying Imams" in Minneapolis in November. Six Imams, during the boarding of a US Airways flight, passengers observed them making suspecious movements, including asking for seatbelt extenders when they obviously didn't need them, changing seats, and making anti-American statements. The Imams were removed from the flight, and proceeded to sue the "John Does"--the passengers who reported the movements to flight authorities.

This led Rep. Peter King (R-NY) to bring forth a legislation in the House that would prevent passengers from being sued for reporting suspicious activities. In effect, it would be a Good Samaritan law, like those which protect people from trying to render aid to another person. King rightly saw that the threat of suing those who speak up would be used to quiet the public and thus put transportation passengers in much greater risk.

The amendment passed the House overwhelmingly--by a vote of 304-21. Case closed, right?

Wrong. Today, House Democrats left out the amendment in the Homeland Security Bill. The Democrat Congress voted for legislation that protects US citizens from litigation for alerting authorities to suspicious activity, and then found a convenient technicality to throw it out. It's exactly as John Hinderaker at Powerline Blog says, Democrats can go home and say they voted for this and be technically correct. However, if there is no outrage from those who voted for this, then the voters need to be reminded of it. This move does nothing to increase our national security. In effect, it diminishes it. If American citizens are too worried about being sued to report suspicious activity, that gives terrorist a free hand to do what they please.

This is pathetic and outright disgusting. Democrats are trying to portray themselves as strong on defense, but you can't take them seriously after this stunt.

The Washington Times story reports that Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) has said she will try to insert a similiar amendment to an education bill pending in the Senate, and that Rep. King is in talks with Sen. Joe Lieberman to get the amendment slipped into the conference bill. Keep your fingers crossed.

More commentary and/or links at The Corner, and Captain's Quarters, and Powerline.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin reports that Sen. Collins move tonight just failed, 57-39, missing cloture by 3 votes thanks to some last minute Democrat arm twisting. The link includes a lot of coverage on the topic, including the roll call of tonights vote. Grassley voted for it , HARKIN VOTED AGAINST IT. As for the presidential candidates--voting "Yes" was Clinton and McCain. Voting "No" was Dodd and Biden. Those who did not vote were Brownback and Obama.

As Malkin points out, we still have the conference report.

UPDATE #2: Andy McCarthy at The Corner has more coverage on the event. He makes a good point with this: "If the state subpoenas you for information, you are compelled to provide it to the authorities whether you want to or not; but if you want to provide it voluntarily in order to protect your community, the Democrats say, 'prepare to be sued.'"

Debra Berlingame has an opinion piece up at DailyNews.net on the story.

Also, Audrey Hudson at the Washington Times, who first reported this story, is now reporting that a parliamentarian ruled that the amendment can be added to the legislation as it fits into the scope of it. Democrats are only allowing 3-4 amendments to be added, so it remains to be seen if King's amendment will be one of those.
-----------------------------------------
Stay Awake
Pay Attention
Always Vote