|
||||||||
|
« A vengeful goddess? |
Blog Home Page
| In Memoriam: Tashbih Sayyed »
May 29, 2007 Jihad-by-lawsuit fails in Boston
The American system of litigation, allowing anyone to sue anyone for anything, thereby inflicting major costs (for legal counsel and time) on any enemy, is an open invitation to legal thuggery by the wealthy. Proposals to implement the English system, whereby the loser in a lawsuit pays the winner's legal costs, have always run into fatal opposition by those protectors of the rights of the little guy, the tort lawyer lobby and its captive political party, the Democrats.
In this era of deep-pocketed Islamic groups, it was inevitable that this available tool would be exploited by groups seeking to stifle any criticism of Islam or radical Islamists. The phrase "jihad-by-lawsuit" has been invented to cover such instances, the most recent of which is CAIR's notorious lawsuit threatened against passengers on the USAirways flight in Minneapolis who alerted authorities of the suspicious behavior of the Flying Imams. But long before the Imams asked for seat belt extenders for svelte clergy, a particularly troublesome lawsuit was brought in Boston in 2005, by the Islamic Society of Boston, against private groups and individuals as well as selected press outlets, which brought to light embarrassing details of a deal between the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the ISB, handing over land for construction of a new mosque at an extraordinarily cheap price. Solomonia brings us the good news that the ISB has completely dropped the lawsuit. Quoting from a press release of the David Project, one of the groups sued,
While this is a victory, it could be a Pyrrhic one, for immense costs have already been inflicted, and there is not much prospect that they can be recovered. It is not at all uncommon for meretricious litigation to be dropped when discovery looms. If the defendants are tied up and impoverished, the litigant may accomplish its purpose without a courtroom victory. On the other hand, it is always dangerous for financial goliaths to push around a group which models itself on David:
If the BRA is forced to reveal its incompetence or worse, perhaps some meaningful reforms will be possible. The best possible outcome, however, would be for this case to gain publicity, and help press the case for implementing the English rule for lawsuits, as a matter of national security. I wonder how many profiles in courage awards we will see for the Boston Herald and WXNE, the Fox-owed affiliate in Boston, which stood up to the bullies who used lawsuit intimidation to try to silence reporters digging into public corruption? In a world of an unbiased journalistic establishment, there would be Peabody Awards, Pulitizers, and other awards of merit. If, as I expect, the journalistic establishment averts its eyes and moves on, that will be another nail in the coffin of their reputations. Congratulations to all the defendants. May they press on. Let us watch the reaction of the MSM to this case, It is a victory for freedom of the press. |
Recent ArticlesBlog Posts
|
|