muslims on a plane......

[Anynym]

After so much misdirected energy, let's consider another story, from the mid 1990's:

Two friends were passing through security at Heathrow, and after been screened and cleared, one fellow jokes with his buddy that "I guess they didn't find the bomb, then".

Some random passerby overhears this remark, and reports it to authorities.

The authorities must have taken some time to react, because these two have boarded their flight when they are pulled off for questioning. All baggage and all passengers on the flight gets pulled for re-screening.

The fellow who made the private joke is charged with a criminal utterance. Because of the time to do the rescreening, British Airways misses its departure window and sues the fellow for the fee applied by BAA, about 10,000 Pounds. The criminal charge leads to a loss of security clearance for the bloke, a security clearance he required for his job. So he loses his job.

All this because someone else happened to overhear something and reacted to it.

Now I ask: everyone who believes the individuals in the current case should be given a "free ride" on their remarks because he is apparently Muslim, where were you in sticking up for a native Brit in Britain over a private remark said in jest?

The fact is, the individual in the current case should be glad that at the end of the day he and his family are able to fly on another airline and get on with their lives. He wasn't charged with anything criminal, and can even fly with that same airline another day. As far as we know, he was not billed (and is unlikely to be sued) for the additional fees which the airline incurred in processing this matter.

 

[Aardvark154]

Let me put this another way...

You and your family are going on a bus trip to New York, with a predominantly non-caucasian passenger list. None of you have said anything about terrorist activities, maybe just talking about how slippery the roads are during the winter are, and one of your family asks, "I wonder where the safest part of the bus is?" You are kicked off the bus and brought to government officials for questioning. You explain the situation and the government does all kinds of background checks on you and your family. All apprears ok, and you are offered an apology. The bus STILL does not let you on. The government, (read group who perhaps might have the largest amount at stake here), asks to let you get back on the bus but your family is still denied.

And you do not think this is worthy of a law suit? This is a case of a violation of racism if I have ever seen one. As far as I can tell, the only reason the passengers were denied was because of their heritage and the fact that the same might upset other passengers.

And the Bus Company refunded the price of your bus tickets, and there was a law that addressed the issue of the other passengers reporting your conversation

 

[Aardvark154]

Over in Somalia's where they are hijacking those tankers of oil, the media calls them pirates ...if they were muslims, it be terrorist.

Joe, I hate to break this to you - they are Moslems.

 

[a 1 player]

And the Bus Company refunded the price of your bus tickets, and there was a law that addressed the issue of the other passengers reporting your conversation

Yes, but once they were cleared they were still not allowed to use the airline, that is the issue I have, not the checking of, or the reporting of the conversation.

 

[RTRD]

Shh.....

What about that Asian guy who shot and killed 32 students at that school in the USA a few winters ago...if he was a muslim the media would have called that act a terrorist act.

What about all this fraud on Wall Street that cost many of us lots of cash...if those bankers were muslims, it be a "terrorist" act.

When a muslim breaks the law it is a "terrorist" act but when others do harm to many people, its just a normal crime.

...you are making sense. Not allowed.

Never mind that no actual crime was committed here. These people were tossed off the plane for being Muslim. Period.

 

[Aardvark154]

And your point is??

My point is that if you are going to find people "guilty" of something they didn't do because they share appearance / race / religion with someone who DID do something, the list of those eligible is really damn long.

That all may be "true." However, if Russian terriorists were blowing up aircraft and you overheard a Polish family discussing something what sounded suspicious to you. Would the Airline not be justified in saying please fly another carrier today?

 

[RTRD]

If...

That all may be "true." However, if Russian terriorists were blowing up aircraft and you overheard a Polish family discussing something what sounded suspicious to you. Would the Airline not be justified in saying please fly another carrier today?

...an AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE overheard something the sounded suspicious, I'd expect them to investigate. And if the fucking FBI said there were no issues, then I'd expect the airline to let the middle aged guy, his wife and his 6 fucking kids, all U.S CITIZENS, back on the airplane.

If some xenophopic nut jobs said they overheard something, I'd expect the AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE to ask what was over heard, and if it was something as innocuous as "which part of the airplane is safest", I'd expect the AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE to use some damn common fucking sense and go forward with business as usual.

THAT is why they should be sued...because they exercised very poor judgment. They should have more intelligent people making these sort of decisions, and have existing protocols.

 

[RTRD]

So....

After so much misdirected energy, let's consider another story, from the mid 1990's:

Two friends were passing through security at Heathrow, and after been screened and cleared, one fellow jokes with his buddy that "I guess they didn't find the bomb, then".

Some random passerby overhears this remark, and reports it to authorities.

The authorities must have taken some time to react, because these two have boarded their flight when they are pulled off for questioning. All baggage and all passengers on the flight gets pulled for re-screening.

The fellow who made the private joke is charged with a criminal utterance. Because of the time to do the rescreening, British Airways misses its departure window and sues the fellow for the fee applied by BAA, about 10,000 Pounds. The criminal charge leads to a loss of security clearance for the bloke, a security clearance he required for his job. So he loses his job.

All this because someone else happened to overhear something and reacted to it.

Now I ask: everyone who believes the individuals in the current case should be given a "free ride" on their remarks because he is apparently Muslim, where were you in sticking up for a native Brit in Britain over a private remark said in jest?

The fact is, the individual in the current case should be glad that at the end of the day he and his family are able to fly on another airline and get on with their lives. He wasn't charged with anything criminal, and can even fly with that same airline another day. As far as we know, he was not billed (and is unlikely to be sued) for the additional fees which the airline incurred in processing this matter.

...do we have another case of someone who didn't read the article, or are you just as xenophobic as some others...or maybe you are just "slow".

Let's be clear - everyone pay attention. These people said NOTHING ABOUT A BOMB.

ARE WE ALL CLEAR ON THAT NOW???

They, in conversation with themselves, wondered aloud which part of plane is safest in the event of an accident. A conversation I have heard MANY times on airplanes...a conversation that was utterly and completely irrelevant since seats are ASSIGNED (HELLO!!!) and last time I checked, no one blows up a plane hoping to survive (and accordingly is concerned about which part of the plane is safest in the event of a crash). I also haven't heard any stories of terrorist traveling with their wives and children, but I know some of you think Muslims all over the world would do such a thing.

Oh, and did I mention that the only act of terrorism ever carry out by an American citizen was executed by a white guy? Have we bared white guys from renting trucks yet? What about from buying fertilizer?

 

[S.C. Joe]

What about down in Mexico, all those police and others being killed by the drug runners. Do we hear them being called terrorists, I haven't.

 

[SilentLeviathan]

Sure. Now how long does it take TSA to process those updates from the FBI? Do they have an agent review the changes? Do they update that data on a daily basis? Or is it an overnight thing?

The open question remains--at what point did the TSA clear these people for travel?

If it was not in time for the later flight then their complaint boils down to "the governments processes are slow and inefficient" rather than an accusation of racism.

It would not shock me to learn that TSA processes are slow and inefficient, or that they lack competence, after having those goons destroy the contents of my bags... I know they are not the most competent agency in the USA.

The FBI agent cleared the people and told the airline that it was safe for them to fly and there were no problems but the airline refused to allow them back onto the plane. The family's complaint is not directed at the government but rather at the airline.

 

[Kyra.Graves]

It's unfortunate that the person that overheard their conversation jumped to such conclusions that their conversation was threatening however as it's been reported it appears to be a very common conversation, especially with those that have children or nervous passengers.

"The conversation, as we were walking through the plane trying to find our seats, was just about where the safest place in an airplane is," Sahin said. "We were (discussing whether it was safest to sit near) the wing, or the engine or the back or the front, but that's it. We didn't say anything else that would raise any suspicion."

On my flight to Vancouver I had the misfortune to be seated next to a woman and her child a first time flyer. Of course the entire flight he had questions about just about everything including how safe was it to fly and this exact conversation came up, he asked her where was the safest place to sit on the plane and she reassured him time and time again that we were sitting in the safest seats on the plane.
When I read the article this was the first thing that came to mind as I remembered this experience, how could I not, what I had planned on being some good reading time turned into babysitting time.
I can see that not everyone would immediately think of this as a normal conversation however those that have children might want to reassure them that they are sitting in the 'safe areas'.

In addition I could easily see my friends and I having this same conversation as shows like Mythbusters have covered the topic of safer areas to sit in the plane should it crash, and of course I wouldn't really think twice about discussing the show with my friend. I'd probably just start talking and saying "oh do you remember when..." and talking about how they said to sit near the rear in case xyz should occur.
Perhaps I should learn to be more sensitive to the needs of other passengers but to be honest it wouldn't occur to me at the time, I would just be talking about a favorite TV show.

No matter what our race, colour or creed I'm sure if we look at it objectively we'd find that we could all have easily found ourselves in the same situation.

 

[S.C. Joe]

What about from buying fertilizer?

There is...where the farmers buy mass quantities, they need a permit now.

Try driving a cube truck near a US government building today, you will be stop and question.

 

[crystalpalace]

...an AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE overheard something the sounded suspicious, I'd expect them to investigate. And if the fucking FBI said there were no issues, then I'd expect the airline to let the middle aged guy, his wife and his 6 fucking kids, all U.S CITIZENS, back on the airplane.

If some xenophopic nut jobs said they overheard something, I'd expect the AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE to ask what was over heard, and if it was something as innocuous as "which part of the airplane is safest", I'd expect the AIRLINE REPRESENTATIVE to use some damn common fucking sense and good forward with business as usual.

THAT is why they should be sued...because they exercised very poor judgment. They should have more intelligent people making these sort of decisions, and have existing protocols.

I agree with you. The FBI is the ultimate source for domestic federal policing. If they say these guys are clear that should be good enough for the airline. It's funny how this shitty airline actually tried to turn the tables in their statement claiming they had "no discretion" over the issue!

I had never flown them and I definitely make sure I never will as they just don't seem like a professionally run outlet.

 

[S.C. Joe]

AirTran apologizes for removing Muslim passengers

WASHINGTON (AP) -- AirTran Airways apologized Friday to nine Muslims kicked off a New Year's Day flight to Florida after other passengers reported hearing a suspicious remark about airplane security. One of the passengers said the confusion started at Reagan National Airport just outside Washington, D.C., when he talked about the safest place to sit on an airplane.

Orlando, Fla.-based AirTran said in a statement that it refunded the passengers' air fare and planned to reimburse them for replacement tickets they bought on US Airways. AirTran also offered to take the passengers back to Washington free of charge.

"We apologize to all of the passengers - to the nine who had to undergo extensive interviews from the authorities and to the 95 who ultimately made the flight," the statement said. "Nobody on Flight 175 reached their destination on time on New Year's Day, and we regret it."

AirTran said the incident was a misunderstanding, but the steps taken were necessary.

Two U.S. Muslim advocacy groups, however, were critical of the airline's actions. The Muslim Public Affairs Council called on federal officials Friday to open an investigation. And the Council for American-Islamic Relations filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Transportation, saying "It is incumbent on any airline to ensure that members of the traveling public are not singled out or mistreated based on their perceived race, religion or national origin."

Bill Adams, a DOT spokesperson, said the department thoroughly investigates discrimination complaints but would not comment further.

 

[RTRD]

Ta....

AirTran apologizes for removing Muslim passengers

WASHINGTON (AP) -- AirTran Airways apologized Friday to nine Muslims kicked off a New Year's Day flight to Florida after other passengers reported hearing a suspicious remark about airplane security. One of the passengers said the confusion started at Reagan National Airport just outside Washington, D.C., when he talked about the safest place to sit on an airplane.

Orlando, Fla.-based AirTran said in a statement that it refunded the passengers' air fare and planned to reimburse them for replacement tickets they bought on US Airways. AirTran also offered to take the passengers back to Washington free of charge.

"We apologize to all of the passengers - to the nine who had to undergo extensive interviews from the authorities and to the 95 who ultimately made the flight," the statement said. "Nobody on Flight 175 reached their destination on time on New Year's Day, and we regret it."

AirTran said the incident was a misunderstanding, but the steps taken were necessary.

Two U.S. Muslim advocacy groups, however, were critical of the airline's actions. The Muslim Public Affairs Council called on federal officials Friday to open an investigation. And the Council for American-Islamic Relations filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Transportation, saying "It is incumbent on any airline to ensure that members of the traveling public are not singled out or mistreated based on their perceived race, religion or national origin."

Bill Adams, a DOT spokesperson, said the department thoroughly investigates discrimination complaints but would not comment further.

...da.

They were wrong, and they (well...at least those people high enough in the company that a triple digit IQ is a prerequisite for the job) knew it. Now they are trying to make nice nice.

So...free trip...plus you get to pocket whatever you paid U.S. Airways (Airtran said then reimburse them for their ultimate travel costs on U.S. Airways). Considering we are talking airfare for nine problem, that ain't peanuts. Fair enough.

 

[JEFF247]

The airlines now says they are sorry and will give them a free trip back. If this family does the right thing, they will accept the apology, forgive the airlines and try to rise above the lawsuit card.

 

[tboy]

Kyra: sorry, this is profiling, but a child asking a question is totally different than someone else asking the same question.

As for the FBI being the ultimate authority on policing the airlines, I don't think that's true. They are not all powerful. I believe Fuji is right: the TSA is.

As shown in the article regarding the airline's response: the muslim organizations shouldn't be going after anyone about this other than their members who support, endorse and otherwise applaud the extremists who created this situation......

 

[ig-88]

The airlines now says they are sorry and will give them a free trip back. If this family does the right thing, they will accept the apology, forgive the airlines and try to rise above the lawsuit card.

That would be very noble of them.

But one can't help but assume that they'll be screaming "Show me the money!"

 

[Aardvark154]

Yes it is nice and the fitting thing for the Airline to do. But the TSA has repeatedly said that the airline's actions were entirely legal and proper.

 

[Aardvark154]

"As for the FBI being the ultimate authority on policing the airlines, I don't think that's true. They are not all powerful. I believe Fuji is right: the TSA is."
bzzzz Wrong.

Then please save the rest of us from researching the issue, what is your source for this statement e.g. Congressional Act, U.S. Code section etc. . .