[Mamzelle]

So it is your contention that the trees had nothing to do with the Rabbi's lawsuit? There was no "you've got trees, therefore you have to allow me to put a menorah and have a menorah-lighting party, and I don't want to hear about how you're concerned about airport security...If you allow trees, you also have to give me what I want"--none of that?

I guess we'd have to see the exact nature of what the Rabbi demanded, and if there was any mention of the trees, direct or indirect.

Because implicit in such an argument as suggested above would be "if you don't allow my menorah party, you can't allow trees."

[daviscupper]

Exactly. Without the trees there is no basis for a lawsuit.

People just cannot face the fact that what the Rabbi did was reprehensible and mean-spirited. The SEATAC airport has had Christmas trees displays for 25 years until this Rabbi threatened with a Federal lawsuit.

As others have stated the Rabbi may not have gotten what he wanted but he got what he threatened.