I assume you mean Flight 93, and those passengers confronted an obvious threat not suspicious behavior. It’s unfortunate that the people on Flight 93 aren’t better remembered so that they wouldn’t be confused with Flight 63. On 9-11 once the hijackers went through security they probably did nothing to cause anyone to suspect anything. When they got on-board they still had to worry about possible US Marshalls. The legal definition of “suspicious behavior” in our society would have to be board, so board as to be meaningless in terms of security. If you get on a plane the people who aren’t suspicious are the people you should probably worry about.

You do that by talking to the authorities and if it goes so far, by proving your case in court. It DOES NOT mean that you try to use the courts as a punitive means to intimidate witnesses.

Or, put another way. If there was a false complaint made intentionally (guess he missed the pre-huddle “let’s get ’em” speech given on the plane to the many witnesses who’d never interacted during the entire ordeal), then the police with deal with those individuals in a criminal sense.

As FM has mentioned, and I mentioned in an earlier thread, it’s a typical CAIR tactic to bully the witnesses whenever and wherever they can.

http://www.slapps.org/

I am sure that Todd Beamer’s family appreciates your gesture.