Don't engage this fonzarelli guy. His whole dismissive thing "bzzz, next" is silly, and he is consistently demonstrating a lack of willingness to engage in mature dialogue. He's not a useful contributor to this board. Thankfully, people like him go away if no one pays them any attention.Aardvark154 said:
muslims on a plane......
- Thread starter Scarey
- Start date
The point to sue the airline is to let everyone else know that this Airline does not respect human life. To refuse a muslim family on board after the FBI has cleared them, is unacceptable.
Ofcourse, if you feel suspicious activity, you should report it as a passenger. However, i believe the passengers in this matter also over reacted just because the family was wondering what would be the safest seat on the plane.
As a frequent flyer, I believe that no seat is actually the "safest one" on a plane...
If you are destined to live , you will..
Air Tran or whatever cheap airline it was, should be sued for every single penny so they close down.
Ofcourse, if you feel suspicious activity, you should report it as a passenger. However, i believe the passengers in this matter also over reacted just because the family was wondering what would be the safest seat on the plane.
As a frequent flyer, I believe that no seat is actually the "safest one" on a plane...
If you are destined to live , you will..
Air Tran or whatever cheap airline it was, should be sued for every single penny so they close down.
C
crystalpalace
Saying sorry after the fact and just doing some damage control of course. Anyways, it's easy for you to say this cause you and your family were not humiliated and offended.JEFF247 said: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.
I still think they should bring a civil rights lawsuit against them. The point is not only to get money and make this ignorant institution pay up and get some bad publicity in the wake but rather make sure the airline retrains its personnel, changes policy and perhaps fire whoever idiot denied re booking the family even after the FBI had asked them to do so.
In fact I think this family has been extremely humble and respectful in the interviews. I sure hope they don't let this stupid airline off the hook.
AMERICA AND ISRAEL DUMB F-U-C-K.elmo said:That's the point exactly. Yes it's racial profiling but who the fuck is doing the bombing these days??
C
crystalpalace
Really? Care to post a quote?Aardvark154 said: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.
This is what the TSA has up on their site. They only say they support the pilot for making the initial decision to remove the passengers in question. It does NOT make any suggestions as to whether or not what the airline did after the fact was legal or not nor would I ever imagine a federal agency would comment on legality of events happening outside their own agency anyways.
http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/statement_airtran.shtmTSA Statement on AirTran Flight 175
News & Happenings
January 2, 2009
Security is a shared responsibility and this incident highlights the multiple layers of security that are in place in today's aviation environment.
Alert passengers reported what they believed were inappropriate comments, and flight attendants promptly notified the pilot in command. Federal air marshals onboard escorted the individuals in question off the plane at the pilot's request where they were met by local and federal officials to ensure they posed no threat to the flight. After interviewing the individuals, performing a sweep of the aircraft and rescreening all checked and carry-on baggage, the flight departed. We support the pilot in command in making decisions he or she believes is in the best interest of those onboard the aircraft. TSA counts a vigilant traveling public as an important layer of security and continues to encourage passengers to be alert and report suspicious activity
Yes, I understand that you're a bit slow, that's why I tried to use small words.MLAM said:...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 every 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?
This story has absolutely nothing to do with what these folks said, and even more it has nothing to do with their religion.
It has to do with extra security screening which was properly applied because someone else overheard something which warranted extra screening.
Do you understand yet?
They were screened, likely because of bias in a fellow passenger. Okay, they should screen them despite where the information comes from. That's fair to me, for the sake of security.Anynym said:Yes, I understand that you're a bit slow, that's why I tried to use small words.
This story has absolutely nothing to do with what these folks said, and even more it has nothing to do with their religion.
It has to do with extra security screening which was properly applied because someone else overheard something which warranted extra screening.
Do you understand yet?
However, after they were screened and searched, they still weren't allowed on, likely because of the bias of the pilot or TSA.
This has everything to do with their religion.
Actually, I don't think it has ever been divulged whether or not they were ever cleared by the TSA.
C
crystalpalace
Neither the TSA nor the Pilot had any effect on denying the boarding after they were searched. Most likely the questioning by the FBI took a while and the plane was gone by the time they were cleared. However the airline, and not the TSA or anyone else, is fully responsibly for denying them boarding on another flight.benstt said:They were screened, likely because of bias in a fellow passenger. Okay, they should screen them despite where the information comes from. That's fair to me, for the sake of security.
However, after they were screened and searched, they still weren't allowed on, likely because of the bias of the pilot or TSA.
This has everything to do with their religion.
I completely agree 100% that it has everything to do with them being Muslim Americans and look and fit a typical stereotype. They have in fact shown a lot of grace and respect through this issue.
To those of you who think nothing wrong was done, can you for one second put the religion and their dark skin aside and imagine how YOU would have reacted if you and your family had to go through such a humiliating ordeal?!
C
crystalpalace
From the TSA websites:tboy said:Actually, I don't think it has ever been divulged whether or not they were ever cleared by the TSA.
So obviously since they were on board the plane they were cleared as far as the TSA is concerned just like every other person on that plane.The TSA is solely responsible for carrying out screenings of passengers and their baggage (both checked and carry-on) at 450 airports across the US.
I see...
I was going to say this before, but then I remember the first person who rasied the question was someone who I decided to never respond to or comment on his post again. I'd put him on ignore save for occasionally he post very intelligent and insightful stuff...when he isn't being a total nut job.
ANYONE who boards a U.S. aircraft has already been screened by TSA, to the best of their (questionable) abilities. Screened for weapons. Checked against the no fly list. Subject to a potential random further screening.
These people were no different than anyone else who boarded the plane.
...you beat me to it.crystalpalace said:From the TSA websites:
So obviously since they were on board the plane they were cleared as far as the TSA is concerned just like every other person on that plane.
I was going to say this before, but then I remember the first person who rasied the question was someone who I decided to never respond to or comment on his post again. I'd put him on ignore save for occasionally he post very intelligent and insightful stuff...when he isn't being a total nut job.
ANYONE who boards a U.S. aircraft has already been screened by TSA, to the best of their (questionable) abilities. Screened for weapons. Checked against the no fly list. Subject to a potential random further screening.
These people were no different than anyone else who boarded the plane.
Sorry Crystal, as much as we like to think it's possible, you cannot fully "forget about someone's race or religion". It's impossible. We are who we are.
For eg, it is RETARDED not to be able to focus in on a certain group of people who are prone to terrorist acts simply because it isn't politically correct.
For eg: according to the TPSB, the majority of violent crimes in Toronto are committed by african americans. If we cannot include race in any type of focus, or attention, then how can we ever hope to stop crime? If the majority of crimes are committed by african americans then the police should focus their attention on that group, find out why they commit the crimes and then take steps to change or eradicate the reasons.
And you have to admit, they're doing a pretty good job of NOT committing racial profiling when they body search 85 yr old white great grandmothers in wheelchairs and make blond haired 5 yr old girls take off their shoes.
Now you may say: HECK they were a FAMILY with KIDS....but I bet you forget about the car bombing that happened in Iraq early last year where the soldiers let a car through a checkpoint because they had two kids in the back seat? Well, they used the kids to cover the bomb that killed 45 in a market.
Sorry, but if it is people of middle eastern heritage that are committing acts of terrorism then we should pay particular attention to middle easter peoples.
Now you may say that is wrong, but don't forget millions of WHITE people are not even allowed into the US because 20 yrs ago they were arrested and convicted of a crime.
Frankly, I'd rather the airlines and TSA etc be overly sensitive to comments than not. I'd rather them risk a pissed off family and react to every comment than pull back and miss a comment and have a plane go down.
I fully believe the needs of the many or majority vastly outweigh the needs of the few or the one.
Here's a reverse example: You have 4 african american friends. You go to a club and they meet another group (who happen to be african american) they say to each other "hey my _iggers, what's going on"? You say "hey my _iggers, what's going on"? and I bet you get bitch slapped or get a severe dressing down. Sorry, but some people can say some things and others can't. It's just the way it is......
For eg, it is RETARDED not to be able to focus in on a certain group of people who are prone to terrorist acts simply because it isn't politically correct.
For eg: according to the TPSB, the majority of violent crimes in Toronto are committed by african americans. If we cannot include race in any type of focus, or attention, then how can we ever hope to stop crime? If the majority of crimes are committed by african americans then the police should focus their attention on that group, find out why they commit the crimes and then take steps to change or eradicate the reasons.
And you have to admit, they're doing a pretty good job of NOT committing racial profiling when they body search 85 yr old white great grandmothers in wheelchairs and make blond haired 5 yr old girls take off their shoes.
Now you may say: HECK they were a FAMILY with KIDS....but I bet you forget about the car bombing that happened in Iraq early last year where the soldiers let a car through a checkpoint because they had two kids in the back seat? Well, they used the kids to cover the bomb that killed 45 in a market.
Sorry, but if it is people of middle eastern heritage that are committing acts of terrorism then we should pay particular attention to middle easter peoples.
Now you may say that is wrong, but don't forget millions of WHITE people are not even allowed into the US because 20 yrs ago they were arrested and convicted of a crime.
Frankly, I'd rather the airlines and TSA etc be overly sensitive to comments than not. I'd rather them risk a pissed off family and react to every comment than pull back and miss a comment and have a plane go down.
I fully believe the needs of the many or majority vastly outweigh the needs of the few or the one.
Here's a reverse example: You have 4 african american friends. You go to a club and they meet another group (who happen to be african american) they say to each other "hey my _iggers, what's going on"? You say "hey my _iggers, what's going on"? and I bet you get bitch slapped or get a severe dressing down. Sorry, but some people can say some things and others can't. It's just the way it is......
Ok...
...it helps you position if you actually know what you are talking about.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2390850#post2390850
See, everyone is screened - and any "extra" screening takes place BEFORE you board the plane, based on what we are told is some "random" selection protocol.
"This story has absolutely nothing to do with what these folks said"
"It has to do with extra security screening which was properly applied because someone else overheard something"
Hmmm....I must be confused by those big words, because I don`t know how an issue could be raised because someone overheard something, but it not be a result of something that was said. Did the story mention a ticking time bomb, because I missed it.
Now...several people (self included) have stated that we have heard other say the very same things that were "overheard...which warranted extra screening" from others who weren`t Islamic / Arabic in appearance with no consequences. And...Airtran has already apologized and offered compensation for the errors of their ways. I`m guessing that this "extra screening"...which BTW..these people passed without issue but were STILL denied boarding...was NOT in fact part of a standard protocol, was not "properly applied" and accordingly should have never taken place.
Now, I`m not going to ask if you understand, because I know you don`t. That is ok...the people who are relevant...Airtran executives and the family in question, have come to an understanding. And hopefully today the world is just that less intolerant and less xenophobic.
Anynym said:Yes, I understand that you`re a bit slow, that`s why I tried to use small words.
This story has absolutely nothing to do with what these folks said, and even more it has nothing to do with their religion.
It has to do with extra security screening which was properly applied because someone else overheard something which warranted extra screening.
Do you understand yet?
...it helps you position if you actually know what you are talking about.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2390850#post2390850
See, everyone is screened - and any "extra" screening takes place BEFORE you board the plane, based on what we are told is some "random" selection protocol.
"This story has absolutely nothing to do with what these folks said"
"It has to do with extra security screening which was properly applied because someone else overheard something"
Hmmm....I must be confused by those big words, because I don`t know how an issue could be raised because someone overheard something, but it not be a result of something that was said. Did the story mention a ticking time bomb, because I missed it.
Now...several people (self included) have stated that we have heard other say the very same things that were "overheard...which warranted extra screening" from others who weren`t Islamic / Arabic in appearance with no consequences. And...Airtran has already apologized and offered compensation for the errors of their ways. I`m guessing that this "extra screening"...which BTW..these people passed without issue but were STILL denied boarding...was NOT in fact part of a standard protocol, was not "properly applied" and accordingly should have never taken place.
Now, I`m not going to ask if you understand, because I know you don`t. That is ok...the people who are relevant...Airtran executives and the family in question, have come to an understanding. And hopefully today the world is just that less intolerant and less xenophobic.
I'm guessing...
..the majority of crimes committed in Toronto are not by Black people born in the United States. I am extremely confident of this in fact.tboy said:For eg: according to the TPSB, the majority of violent crimes in Toronto are committed by african americans. If we cannot include race in any type of focus, or attention, then how can we ever hope to stop crime? If the majority of crimes are committed by african americans then the police should focus their attention on that group, find out why they commit the crimes and then take steps to change or eradicate the reasons.
Hey....
....you must not understand small words either.
"This has everything to do with their religion."
...and race. As anybody with a triple digit IQ who isn't a xenophobic right wing nut job can see.
And it wasn't TSA bias either...if TSA had an issue with them, they wouldn't have been boarded in the first place.
No, this was all about the overreaction of some simple and narrow minded individuals, compounded by the poor decision making of persons who clearly aren't really smart.
Here is something else for you "Muslims are trying to take over the world" types....you do remember that the LAST person who tried to blow up a plane was a British bi-raical guy (not Arabic), right? English mother...Jamaican father, born in London?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber)
benstt said:They were screened, likely because of bias in a fellow passenger. Okay, they should screen them despite where the information comes from. That's fair to me, for the sake of security.
However, after they were screened and searched, they still weren't allowed on, likely because of the bias of the pilot or TSA.
This has everything to do with their religion.
....you must not understand small words either.
"This has everything to do with their religion."
...and race. As anybody with a triple digit IQ who isn't a xenophobic right wing nut job can see.
And it wasn't TSA bias either...if TSA had an issue with them, they wouldn't have been boarded in the first place.
No, this was all about the overreaction of some simple and narrow minded individuals, compounded by the poor decision making of persons who clearly aren't really smart.
Here is something else for you "Muslims are trying to take over the world" types....you do remember that the LAST person who tried to blow up a plane was a British bi-raical guy (not Arabic), right? English mother...Jamaican father, born in London?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber)
With respect, kindly fuck right off and leave me out of the personal shit.MLAM said:....you must not understand small words either.
They travelled later on US Airways, so they actually got cleared twice by the TSA.tboy said:Actually, I don't think it has ever been divulged whether or not they were ever cleared by the TSA.
With respect in kind...
...fuck you too, but get yourself a sense of humor first.
benstt said:With respect, kindly fuck right off and leave me out of the personal shit.
...fuck you too, but get yourself a sense of humor first.
I believe you will find that Pub.L. 107-71 (The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001) 49 USC 449 gives the Department of Homeland Security authority over such incidents, not the FBI which is the investigative arm of the Department of Justice. Regardless of the fact that the FBI maintains the Terrorist Screening Center.arthurfonzerelli said:As I already posted:
"The Terrorist Screening Center, which is part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, maintains the U.S. government's Consolidated Terrorist Watchlist."
"TSA is a major customer of the Terrorist Screening Center, using their information to determine Selectees, people who are subject to extra screening, and No Fly individuals, who are not permitted to board a plane under any circumstances."
Anything else?
Sorry I consistently shoot you down, Capital Guy. It must be annoying for you.
Specificly look at 49 USC 44902(b) which refers to DHS not the DOJ.
Again look at 49 USC 44902(b), good, bad, or indifferent the Airline was indeed compliant with the law.arthurfonzerelli said:You've missed the point.
The FBI maintains the TSC. The TSA relies on the TSC to determine who flies and who does not. So, when the FBI clears passengers, this is, in usual practice, good enough for the TSA. Why it wasn't this time has made people question their motives.
That is an entirely different question than whether the decision was wise.
