muslims on a plane......

[fuji]

it is interesting that people are putting forth as a rational position that TSA would have denied the family boarding on to one plane, but allow them to board another going to the same destination within minutes on another airline.

The speculation is that TSA gave AirTran specific instructions not to let them fly but did not put them on the general watch list, and then took too long to rescind that instruction.

Given the long list of TSA fuckups in the past it also wouldn't surprise me that someone could be denied on one flight and then cleared minutes later on another to the same destination.

Go do some research on the results of experiments people have done testing the competence of the TSA. They are simply not the sharpest US government employees around. They rarely do their jobs properly it seems.

 

[tboy]

Not really, it doesn't take a lot of wits to argue your whole dismissive argument based on the "needs of many outweigh the needs of one", which reeks of communism BTW, but oh well Canada is a socialist country after all.

AH OK, so the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many? So with this argument then everyone ELSE should have been thrown off the plane and the family in question should have stayed on? So which ONE is supposedly the special case? Who decides? YOU?

Give your head a shake dude....really....

 

[hickorysticks]

Your lack of awareness of the world around you doesn't make you an expert in what is or is not correct: that has been delegated to the group being represented, by consensus (not by individual).

As for the current thread, let me try a third time: it doesn't matter a whit what these people said. They could have been talking about how nice a day it was to be going home. They could have said that they hoped everything went well. It doesn't matter. (Some have claimed an inability to grasp this; that's unfortunate, but that's not anyone's problem but their own.)

What matters is that a third party overheard something which they regarded with suspicion, reported it, and correctly triggered additional screening. This family was (apparently correctly) cleared during that additional screening.

The airline would likely have held the flight pending the outcome of that additional screening, in case further actions were required on their part to remove additional passengers or luggage. But whether the airline then permitted this family to reboard this flight, or declined them travel that day (based on the costs the airline incurred in delaying the flight) is up to the airline. Apparently the airline chose to refund the fares paid, and sent the family to another airline (inviting them back in the future, according to reports).

Was the comment suspicious? We really don't know. We have the family's report (are they really going to say now that they said something suspicious?), but beyond that all we have is that it was suspicious enough to someone that it was reported. And being reported, it appears to have been correctly acted upon.

Note that none of the above had anything to do with the family's religion. Only after the fact are people asking if this family was singled out for their religion and making religion an issue. Was the person who reported the suspicious remark affected by the family's religion? There is nothing in the story to substantiate that claim - just the apparent xenophobic reaction trying to create a bigger problem than previously existed by claiming that they were singled out because they were Muslim.

Darlin' do you honestly believe a white family would have been questioned had they had the same conversation? Your argument is eloquent on many levels, but it negates to explain the essence of the very reason this family was reported as saying something "suspicious". Which is race. Perhaps religion comes into play, but first and foremost was the colour of their skin, and the culture they represented.

And I totally disagree with TBoy's argument that they shouldn't have the same right to be able to think aloud about a common concern when flying aboard a plane. That sort of logic is what prevents us as a society to move forward in our prejudices of individual choice. Just because someone dresses a certain way, or has a preference to a type of music, etc, does not relegate them into a box we feel comfortable with. On any given day, my clothing style changes... from hippy skirts, to running gear to professional wear. Does that mean those who don't know me have the right to make an irrational judgment? For heaven's sake, I understand first impressions matter. But we have to keep coming back to the fundamental point of the whole issue. This was a family, whom asked themselves a question. The were interrogated and denied access to a flight which was to take them on their family vacation. It may be the perrogative of the individual airline to deny whomever they want access on their plane... but it doesn't make it right.

This reminds me of the apartheid and how black people were not allowed to live/walk/eat/be in the same parts of town as the Africaans. And it's bloody sad.

 

[Aardvark154]

It may be the perrogative of the individual airline to deny whomever they want access on their plane... but it doesn't make it right.

That's the entire story in a nutshell!

Nice, moral, ethical it may be none of them, but it is legal.

Further most people and the courts in an issue like this would rather error on the side of safety than political correctness - especially when the passengers who were denied passage were reimbursed the cost of their tickets (and "you can't fly with us and by the way we are keeping your money" was never an issue).

 

[ig-88]

It is illegal for the airline to deny service on the basis of race.

But to prove this, you would need to bring a class action lawsuit, demonstrating a pattern of discrimination against members of a particular race. Not just an isolated incident, even if it involved an entire family in this one instance.

And even then, you can only target one airline, not the airline industry in general.

IIRC, there was potential to do this in the case of Denny's and Abercrombie & Fitch.

With an airline, with the safety concerns, with the compensation they offered, I don't see this taking off p ), unless this one incident gets lumped in with many other similar incidents.

 

[crystalpalace]

Because the TSA ordered AirTran not to let them fly and did not convey that same order to US Airways? Or maybe because TSA updated their status to "cleared" between the time they talked to AirTran and the time they talked to US Airways?

I put a question mark there because it's unknown. I expect you are ignorant of the answer. Given your ignorance you should not go around making grand claims of racism.

I won't respond to you anymore. It becomes repetitive and tiresome trying to reason with you. AirTran never said the TSA told them to not to book the family. The TSA never says they told AirTran not to book the family. In all of the news reports from dozen different sources they common theme is that AirTran refused booking them on another flight on their own discretion.

BTW, I've got no chips on my shoulder. I can proudly say I have served my country's armed forces because I am a patriotic American. Can you say the same about yourself? Don't call on people you have no clue about...

 

[crystalpalace]

AH OK, so the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many? So with this argument then everyone ELSE should have been thrown off the plane and the family in question should have stayed on? So which ONE is supposedly the special case? Who decides? YOU?

Give your head a shake dude....really....

No I never said or implied that. You're the one who brought up the whole concept of "needs of many outweigh the needs of the few". I'm saying the majority cannot dictate what they consider to be normal/rationale/proper to every member of the society. The price we have paid for individual freedom has been extremely high to risk having it taken away for ANY reason.

 

[Twinklegirl]

I thought this was a joke

Three muslims get on a plane....

 

[tboy]

No I never said or implied that. You're the one who brought up the whole concept of "needs of many outweigh the needs of the few". I'm saying the majority cannot dictate what they consider to be normal/rationale/proper to every member of the society. The price we have paid for individual freedom has been extremely high to risk having it taken away for ANY reason.

Hate to break it to you, but that's democracy. The majority rules.

As for bringing it up, yes I did but you argued the point and insinuated it "reeked of communism"......

As for giving up our freedoms, take a look around, we've given up a hell of a LOT of our freedoms in order to have a semi-decent society.

Applying this to the topic at hand, a middle eastern family who got kicked off a flight, just don't forget: flying isn't a "right", it's a privilege.....I think what happens is too many people forget that.

As my last post in this thread (as it's going no where fast) is that: It is truly unfortunate that we live in a world where people can't just say an innocent comment without others becoming suspicious. But hey, if a white person was overheard saying "I'm gonna get bombed on the plane" he'd probably be tossed off too.......

 

[crystalpalace]

Hate to break it to you, but that's democracy. The majority rules.

As for bringing it up, yes I did but you argued the point and insinuated it "reeked of communism"......

As for giving up our freedoms, take a look around, we've given up a hell of a LOT of our freedoms in order to have a semi-decent society.

Applying this to the topic at hand, a middle eastern family who got kicked off a flight, just don't forget: flying isn't a "right", it's a privilege.....I think what happens is too many people forget that.

As my last post in this thread (as it's going no where fast) is that: It is truly unfortunate that we live in a world where people can't just say an innocent comment without others becoming suspicious. But hey, if a white person was overheard saying "I'm gonna get bombed on the plane" he'd probably be tossed off too.......

Agreed tboy. It looks like we weren't that far apart after all.