On New Year’s Day government officials ordered nine Muslim passengers, including three young children, off an AirTran flight headed to Orlando after two other passengers overheard what they thought was a suspicious remark.
Later, while cleared by the FBI, the nine still weren’t permitted to fly to Orlando on AirTran, and had to incur the expense of last minute tickets to go there on US Airways.
Eventually, AirTran added a refund of the difference between the cost of their flight and US Air’s fare, to the already authorized full refund of their original tickets, and offered to fly the nine back from Orlando free. AirTran also apologized to the nine.
So what went wrong that nine innocent passengers were ordered removed from their vacation flight, interrogated by the FBI at length, and then while cleared of any wrongdoing were still denied boarding a later flight to their destination?
I don’t see a problem with the government here. I do see some problems with Air Tran.
I believe there was a lack of judgment, or an over-reaction on the part of some of the plane’s passengers. But that’s hard to point a finger at since we don’t know exactly what was said, or how.
We do know that two passengers went to a flight attendant and expressed their concern about what some of the nine said. We know that at least two key words were uttered: “security” and “safety.” We know that some of the nine appeared to be Muslim or Arab. We know that all of us constantly hear about Muslim and Arab terrorism, and that the terrorist acts by Muslims in Mubai were fresh in everyone’s minds.
Were the nine profiled by the passengers due to their appearance and did that affect the judgment of the passengers? I think so. Was it understandable? Probably.
Do I think the passengers were trying to discriminate or just looking out for their own safety? Personally I think they were just looking out for themselves.
I can’t even find a handful of incidents like this occurring on all the flights in the US in the last year. Considering the millions who have flown domestically during that time and the many Muslims who have flown, I think that passengers generally use great judgment and don’t discriminate against any group, including Muslims.
Did the nine do anything to deserve any of the treatment they got?
I think they probably did. They didn’t think about the consequences of talking about safety and security, and seating positions on the plane out-loud. I know I don’t talk about those things in an airport or on a plane.
What about the flight crew? Apparently the passengers spoke to the flight attendant, who spoke to the captain, who spoke to the Air Marshals. The captain remained concerned and the Air Marshals were asked to remove the nine. Was the captain right in what he did? I just don’t know, because I don’t know exactly what he was told, but I would have rather had him make a conservative judgment were I a passenger on that plane.
The Air Marshals had no choice at that point but to follow the captain’s order.
Did the FBI do anything wrong? Once called in, they had to interrogate the nine. The group said they were impressed with the FBI’s demeanor and professionalism, so they did their part well.
Here’s where the real problems occurred. Once the interrogations were complete, the FBI told the nine they were cleared, but apparently the FBI took their time to formally tell AirTran, as they said they hadn’t received word from the FBI, hence AirTran initially refused their rebooking.
Then AirTran personnel made their big blunder. Even after FBI representatives told the AirTran agents at the airport they were cleared, AirTran refused to rebook the nine.
Upper-level AirTran personnel clearly realized what happened shortly thereafter, as I don’t thing they would have made their public about face so quickly if they hadn’t.
I don’t see anything sinister here, but I sure do see a lack of training, poor communication, and poor judgment on the part of AirTran. They’ve got some work to do to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
{ 44 comments… read them below or add one }
Personally, I think the captain did the right thing by removing them from the flight since it would have likely created a hostile atmosphere on board that flight. AirTran then apologized and covered their replacement airfare. A nice gesture.
That all being said, Profiling catches terrorists. Ask the Israelis and El Al.
I for one am tired of the ‘average’ Muslim getting a pass for the insane criminal behavior of islamic terrorists. Their religion fosters hatred of non-muslims, is intolerant of other religions, actively permits and encourages stoning of men and women for homosexuality and other sins, and they sit idly by and wonder why other people think that barbarism belongs in the 7th Century.
The ‘average’ muslim needs to stop tolerating the crazies, stop tolerating the imams who preach hate and intolerance, as the result of the ‘civilized’ world needs to show these folks absolutely zero tolerance for stupid remarks made on airplanes.
I APPLAUD Air Tran for kicking them off and refunding their money. Good for Airtran. Maybe next time they hear some local Imam preaching intolerance and hate they’ll stand up for whats right for a change.
AirTran has policies and just because a local DCA based FBI agent tells a gate agent they are cleared, does not mean that they are indeed cleared. The FBI does not pay AirTran salaries.
As the owner of the plane, AirTran can decide who flies and who does not–and they (like most carriers) allow their pilots to make the decision. Allowing them back on the SAME flight is inviting trouble–are they going to look for those who “told” on them? Will the rest of the passengers be staring at them? What animosity is existing between the flight crew and the people removed from the plane?
But I am sure there are procedures that are required to “clear” these people and most likely it involves a direct communication from the US Gov’t and AirTran HQ in Atlanta. One received, AirTran could notify the local DCA desk. I am sure it was procedural.
I was stuck in MSP for 2 hours while a flight plan was sent to Atlanta and approved and entered into the system and returned to MSP. Sucked? You bet. But that is policy and to be honest, if it is flight plans, maintenance, or security, I am all for erring on the side of caution.
Wow, I won’t add to the bigotry/ignorance of the first two comments.
I have talked about a plane’s engine before. I have talked about seating and exit procedures before. Hell, don’t the flight attendants ask everyone to listen to them while they do their safety spiel. Are we saying no one is allowed to comment on that? Oh, but I’m a blonde Scandanavian-appearing woman so no one will think anything of it if I say something…
This clearly was an issue of some bigoted teenagers who didn’t want to fly with some people wearing head scarves. This incident had nothing to do with safety–only the continued “theater” known as bogus airline security.
@Allison: Bigotry? Please point it out. Please point out, specifically, where the first two commenters were biggoted. The first poster said that, given their assesment of the response (or lack thereof) of outrage by Muslims, to extremism, and the overall problem of Islamic terrorism, that not all Muslims should be given a “pass”. That is to say, he argued for some profiling, as is done in Israel, and argued that some limited profiling is warranted. This isn’t biggoted, and it’s the individuals opinion. If the best you can do to someone is name call, because you have a different point of view, you need to check your attitude, and be quiet. The poster didn’t say all Muslims are evil, or call them names, etc., and if they did, then you most likely would have a point. They didn’t, and so you don’t. Also you either intentionally, or “ignorantly” yourself, mischaracterized the supposed comments of the passengers in question. While no one except those on board can say for sure what was said, media reports indicate that it wasn’t about seating and exit “procedure” and it wasn’t about the engines. It was, apparently, about the “safest seat on the plane”. Presumably, in the result of a crash. While such idle speculation (if that is all it was) may be innocent enough, in these times, in certain context, it is liable to raise other passengers concerns. As the author above noted, this is not common conversation, for the majority of passengers. Most people stear clear of any topic that even may be *perceived* as not-appropriate. At best, these passangers were guilty of a lack of common sense. Spare us your biggotry accusations please. So madam, when you say “this clearly is”, you most certainly were NOT there, and are in no position to say anything with certainty. Your opinion is just that, opinion.
Why is everyone calling these people “Muslims”? Tripso’s article was written by a Jew and the AirTran Captain was almost certainly a Christian Republican (I’m married to an MD-11 FO so I know most pilots are conservative, former military , Christian white guys!), but like the AirTran passengers they are all (or almost all) U.S. citizens, just as I am (I’m a UU by the way).
Living in AK, I fly a lot. No, I don’t talk about bombs when I’m on planes or in the airport. But I do talk about safety — a big issue in a state with such a high fatal accident rate — and as a citizen I reserve my First Amendment right to talk about anything I want! Talking about the safest area of the plane is a natural topic of interest to those who might be afraid of flying. The fact you are wearing a head covering, be it a Jewish kippa, a Muslim headscarf, or a Sikh turban, should not affect your right to talk with your family about something like this.
We’re about to have an African American President for the first time. Can’t we get past making snap judgements about others based on appearance? It’s been 7.5 years since some terrorists who happened to be Muslim committed the 9/11 atrocities. That does not make all Muslims — especially U.S. citizens — likely terrorists any more than Israel’s current campaign against Gaza makes Mr. Levi a baby-killer, or the conflict in Ireland makes all Christians violent bigots.
I hope the passengers who reported the conversation get some lessons in multi-cultural understanding. After eight years of attacking those who don’t see things exactly the same way we do, it’s high time for our country to work on improving our attitude about differences. I don’t think many of us want to live in a place where our thoughts or words are policed by our fellow citizens, and where our ability to move freely within our own country can be abridged by others based on how we look or others’ fear of us. Stop and think, folks!
Peace . . .
@AKAFlyer: If that isn’t a baited statement, I don’t know what is. They’re being refered to by their religion/ethnicity because it is relavent as to why their was a perceived potential threat. It is relavent to the context of the discussion. Or is that to rational and logical a response for you ? Next Q & A session we can discuss your choice of airline carriers. Honestly….
By the way…your list of assumptions as to the passengers motivation is laughable. Speculation as to what a legitimate reason might be to discuss seating position, in relation to safety, after the fact, is just that, speculation.
You seem more than happy to manufacture reasons to give the passengers removed the benefit of the doubt. You apparently don’t seem to be able to do this for the passengers who notified the flight crew. Spare me please…
Also having a right to discuss something, and your being aware of the appropirateness of such discussion, are two different things.
It’s been 7.5 years since some terrorists who happened to be Muslim..
DO you REALLY want to make yourself appear so foolish? There is a long, storied history of actual and or attempted airline highjacking decades prior to the incidents of 9/11/01. You act as the 9/11 attacks occured in a bubble. There is good reason to have reasonable suspicion. You make a good point. It’s been 7 and 1/2 years, and yet in all this time, very few incidents have occured, based on media reports, of open discrimination. In fact, this is one of a HANDFUL of cases since 9/11. So to make this out as some attempt to smear all Muslims, is a straw man (false) attack.
That does not make all Muslims — especially U.S. citizens — likely terrorists any more than Israel’s current campaign against Gaza makes Mr. Levi a baby-killer
Are you actually comparing the legitimate military campaign against a confirmed terrorist group (Hamas) to the open terrorist attack on civilians that were the 9/11 attacks? This isn’t likely to win you any fast friends. Maybe you should try and justify this disgusting assertion in your next “right to say anything I want” session at the airport. I’m sure no one will bat an eye…LOL.
Basing a decision or action on a person’s race makes that act a racist act. I know there are many who react violently and vociferously when being labeled “racist” but hey, don’t shoot the messenger. What about all the hijackings that happened in America since the 1970s? Remember, the ones who diverted aircraft to Havana Cuba? Were they Muslims?
I would quickly and easily bet my a** and my pension that the people who reported the “suspicious comments” were of the Caucasian persuasion, and I would double down on the removed passengers being of Middle Eastern extraction, or at least appearing so. And I would let it ride that if a cute blond teenage girl had made the exact same remarks, like Tina Fey repeated Sarah Palin’s remarks to the letter for comic effect, that absolutely nothing would have been done.
At the very least here, Air Tran had the class to own up to its mistake and refund the monies used for all the tickets. Any business can make a huge mistake; it takes one with a serious commitment to customer service from the top down to apologize and make retribution.
To those who insist that its the Muslims who are the terrorists, I would ask them if they have ever heard of a group called Earth First! or Tre Arrow or Timothy McVeigh.
@Skip: Do you know what the definiton of a forum “flame-bait” is. Look it up.
“Basing a decision or action on a person’s race makes that act a racist act”.
INCORRECT.
According to the dictionary I used:
. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
Using race as one determining factor amoung many, including their own statements, or profiling as it is known, is not by definition racist. Even if it were, WHICH IT ISN’T, the definition of a word and what makes someone a racist are two different things.
Your definition , and by extension, your opinion, really can’t be taken seriously.
What about all the hijackings that happened in America since the 1970s? Remember, the ones who diverted aircraft to Havana Cuba? Were they Muslims?
Still trying to muddy the waters are we? This isn’t the 1970′s, etc,. etc,. I’m not going to waste my time convincing you however. Your mind is made up, and frankly, the facts,and the historical record, speak for themselves. I have yet to see A SINGLE person assert in this forum, that “All Muslims are terrorists” or anything to that effect. You and AKflyer however, seem to be very good at creating straw men to attack, and putting words into people’s mouths. At great length however, misunderstanding or not, no one on board that plane, or the airline, has been shown to have been involved in anything greater than that. A misunderstanding. Which is good. The airline took proper action.Which is also good. No one, I think, here is trying to say that profiling people soley on race, or religion is good. The first poster simply brought up the incident, in relation to airline profiling. That’s it. The rest is your imagination. If you must press the point however, I have heard of non-Islamic terrorists. I have not heard of the majority of them being involved, time and time again, in highjacking or attempted highjacking of airliners. Again, if your point is to try and say people have no good reason to put facts together, and voice concerns, or suspicions, history has already proven otherwise. Pretending a problem doesn’t exist, isn’t going to help.
I am curious as to where my post was bigoted.
Skip, I am not so sure AT admitted a mistake at all. Yes the people are entitled to their money back for a product undelivered. Maybe they are entitled to a little more for their troubles.
You are right that a cute blonde teen may not have drawn the attention ans scrutiny, but, like it or not, this was a group of 9 traveling together (which will draw attention on its own) and apparently attired in traditional Muslim garb.
This is so similar to the US Air and the Imam deal in MSP a year or so ago. Yes it is unfortunate. Yes they were profiled. Yes it is different than what we have been used to in the past.
But don;t tell me for a minute that once you leave the US that YOU are not profiled in every airport in the world because you are a white American male (assuming on my part).
A few years ago, I traveled to the Orient with my son, my office manager and her husband. Her hubby is the most straight laced guy there is–never drank, never did drugs, likes his C&W music and working on his hobby race car. He was profiled, pulled aside and hand searched in EVERY airport we transited (there were 6) because he had a pony tail. The grey haired fat guy with a kid (me)–just wave him on through. We were not even asked to present our Passports in Hong Kong.
In other words, there is a documented history of Islamic terrorists highjacking planes, specifically. The history exists. This doesn’t mean Muslims don’t enjoy a good flying experience, free of basless suspicion. This also doesn’t mean that if a misunderstanding occurs, one can’t trace down the reasons for it, whithout casting blame. You can. The airline apologized, life goes on, and no one got blown out of the sky. Ironically, many Muslims would understand greater scrutiny while flying these days, especially in light of the history of airlines and Islamic terrorism. It’s only the PC-ideolouges who seem to be having a problem.
I am sickened by this whole thing. It is racial/ethnic profiling at its worst. If I, a white, bareheaded woman, said the same things, I would never ever be targeted. This sort of thing must stop-and Air Tran (and all airlines) need to train personnel for today’s real world-a world of pluralistic people. And by the way, all too many pilots are bigoted and very poor at IPRs. So sensitivity training is in order for the flight leaders!
As I wrote on another website/article on the same subject, I sure would like to see pictures of, or interviews with, those who brought the alert to the attention of the flight crew. For all I know it was the same girls who got booted off the SWA flight for having their skirts too short or the guy who got booted off for having some unacceptable slogan on his T-shirt( <–, yes, that was intentionally inflammatory and goading; I admit it)
I do like the point made early on that these events are so rare, given the number of people who fly. Why is the press, including the author of this column, making such a deal of it?
Hi John, I’m not white :^) and have traveled across the western world since the 1960s. The only place I have ever had anything resembling trouble with airport security is in the USA. In fact, now that I think of it, the only place in all the 29 countries I have visited where any cop stopped me for any reason at all is in the USA. They don’t charge me or arrest me, just stop and delay me.
Deb the pilot’s wife, thank you.
@Skip: Sorry you’ve been inconvenienced so much (one stop in 40 plus years of travel) because a few (over 3,000) Americans got blown up, or melted to death. My apologies (rolls eyes). It’s not like America has ever done anything good either (sarcasm, continued eye rolling, general disgust).
Ed F, you asked, “I do like the point made early on that these events are so rare, given the number of people who fly. Why is the press, including the author of this column, making such a deal of it?”
I’d like to answer that question.
Personally, I don’t think any new source has made a big deal out of the story, but I, along with others, certainly did report it. The fact that this kind of incident doesn’t happen very often, the fact that it’s pretty rare is why it’s news. Something that happens over and over again or regularly in the normal course of things, generally isn’t considered news, as people aren’t generally interested in the normal or the routine.
When you hear about something like this, you wonder why did it happen this time. You wonder what was different about this flight, about what people said, and about what people thought they heard.
When first learning about the story I heard that the nine couldn’t rebook on AirTran that day, but AirTran’s representative said they could fly on the airline in the future. I wanted to know why and what happened because that didn’t make sense to me.
Apparently I’m not the only one who’s considered this news. There are forums all over the Internet, and news reports with long lists of comments about this incident. This is clearly a story which has grabbed people’s attention, with some who support AirTran and the Federal Government’s handling of the situation and some who see “big brother” in their actions. There are some who feel the passengers were justified and some who think their actions reprehensible.
If this wasn’t news, I submit this story would have quickly died.
I wrote the story because I think there are lessons to be learned from it, and to open up a dialog about it, so we can discuss what happened, and perhaps learn from our varied points of view.
Thanks for your question.
The water is always best when drawn straight from the well. Thanks for chiming in here, Ned.
Thanks Skip.
I don’t often take part in the discussion of my articles, but I always read every comment.
Every once in a while I will make a comment, to answer a question like Ed F.’s which I thought was important to answer, or to make a clarification if there’s some confusion about what I’ve said.
A few times I’ve amplified an article when I thought additional information might be helpful.
Mostly though, I prefer to stay out of the discussion here, as I think the comment area really belongs to the readers.
Where I regularly participate in travel discussion is in our forums at Talking Travelers, and I invite all our readers to join our forums. The discussion is lively there, and it’s a great source to get travel questions answered.
A safety issue was brought to the attention of the FLIGHT CREW on the ground in WASHINGTON, DC. I applaud them for taking precautions and leaving it on the GROUND in DCA.
A MUSLIM ATTORNEY? Boarding a flight in Washington, DC? Sounds, eerily similar to a group of Imans boarding a flight, praying OUTLOUD, asking for seatbelt extensions and changing seats.
And, what happened to THEIR LAWSUIT???? THROWN OUT!!!
In November, 2001, I traveled to Israel from the US to see my newborn grandson. I had a bulkhead seat in coach, just behind first class. A young man sat down beside me, in what I thought was his seat, and asked me in Hebrew if I spoke Hebrew. I answered, “lo, Anglit.” So he started talking to me in English. He was very personable. He told me he was returning to Israel after visiting the US. He asked me if this was my first trip. In about 10 minutes, before we even left the jetway, he had ascertained that I was traveling to see my new grandson and that my son-in-law had just started a three-year assignment in Rechovot.
Then the flight attendant appeared and he begged her to upgrade him. She seemed to be familiar with him. The FA left, then came back and told him he could sit in first class. He thanked her and went up front. I thought this rather strange, as I had tried to be upgraded with miles, but there was no room. A few minutes later, it hit me. I was a woman traveling alone to Israel, which is somewhat unusual, even today, and I had just been deftly “grilled” by an air marshal. I didn’t know what hit me, but they knew I wasn’t there to hit them.
Carrie—what airline and airport? Interesting story! You should sue!
Of course you know that was ElAl….. Back to the first commentor actually. To reduce ElAl’s screening process to racial profiling is to simplify it down to the level of pre-school. They screen EVERYONE, even Israeli Jews – but they do it in a way that is rather different than you might expect as the writer above tells us.
As fir the writer above who comments (or at least hints) that is would be odd for a Muslim Lawyer (I believe the man is actually a gov’t employee) to board a plane in DC – how naive can you possibly be? Speaking of my home-town, DC, you can’t take 10 steps without falling over a Muslim attorney, doctor, CPA, etc. These people are Americans who happen to be Muslims. They are, like every ethnic grop in the US, a mixture of those who are fully integrated into our society and those who are not. They are educated professionals and they are uneducated blue collar workers just like Christians and Jews and Hindus all over the US.
I applaud AirTran for this courageous act. We SHOULD profile EVERYONE who is remotely like ANYONE who has EVER committed a terrorist act.
I, for example, don’t know why so many rednecks and hillbillies are allowed to fly.
Have we already forgotten Oklahoma City? Cowardly despicable terrorist acts committed by rednecks and hillbillies who wanted to kill innocent children. Have we forgotten Reconstruction and the Ku Klux Klan — domestic terrorists?
What’s needed is a lot more screening of ANYONE with a southern accent, cowboy boots, a flannel shirt, or a NASCAR jacket. These are OBVIOUS signs of redneckitude and should be a clear signal to our front-line Transportation Security Officers that a terrorist threat is present.
Of course, the good commenters of tripso.com will completely support me on this, as they have concluded that profiling those who have “obvious” connections to the same groups that have committed acts of terror in the past is an acceptable procedure.
On January 6th, 2009 at 11:12 am mindy said
As for the writer above who comments (or at least hints) that is would be odd for a Muslim Lawyer (I believe the man is actually a gov’t employee) to board a plane in DC – how naive can you possibly be?
=======================================================
Reread my COMMENTS. NEVER did I say, it was odd. Those are YOUR words! I find it very arrogant and/or ignorant that a LAWYER who is Muslim would require Police to be called because of an inappropriate comment he made “AFTER” he was pulled from the flight and tried to get back on. In both incidences, they SCREAM: LAWSUIT.
In the case of the Imans from PHX, it wasnt WHO THEY WERE that caused them from being BOOTED, it was their suspicious BEHAVIOR. Either way, whether it was miscommunication or not, PROCEDURE TAKES OVER and everyone does their job, the Captain, the flight attendants, the airport police, airline operations, and the FBI.
It looks like the airlines are either wising up after dumbing down, or the courts are. Skip says to check this out:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090106/ts_alt_afp/ustransportairsecuritymuslimsrights_090106002219
Read the inside the parenthesis. AND if you go back to the original reporting you will note that the Muslim lawyer never actually said anything – he was a friend of one or more of the family members.
John, the airline was Continental and the airport was Newark. Israel does’nt only concern itself with El Al. The experience I later realized I had did not make me feel in any way uncomfortable or intruded upon. They are very aware of all flights that enter and/or fly within the country. Everyone is scrutinized in some way.
In ’82, when I first went there on a sightseeing trip, each person was taken into a private cubicle to be frisked/wanded. Today each person leaving Israel receives at least one formal questioning and another informal chit-chat before luggage is screened, with the owner standing by for further questions. They are thorough without being obnoxious. It’s amazing to see.
On January 6th, 2009 at 2:34 pm mindy said Read the inside the parenthesis. AND if you go back to the original reporting you will note that the Muslim lawyer never actually said anything
=================================================
NOT ACCORDING to the NEW YORK TIMES: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/us/03muslims.html?_r=1
Mr. Irfan, a lawyer from Alexandria, said, “Whenever we get on a plane, because of the color of our skin, people tend to look at us with a wary eye anyway.”
Upon boarding the plane, Flight 175, Atif Irfan and his wife and sister-in-law (the women were wearing traditional head scarves) were talking about which section of the plane would be safer. Mr. Irfan said he and his wife saw that two passengers behind them had seemed to take note of their conversation.
Hey ‘Skip’ – Muslim is not a race, its a religion. Get a clue.
Alison – where did you come up with the fact of teenagers making the accusation? I have not seen that anywhere? You can not make up facts to make a point for you.
AKFLyer – because they SAID they were all Muslims. Do we have to now pretend they are not to make us ‘feel better.’
Terrorists are ALL Islamic – there are no Basque, Christian, or Kurd terrorists threatening to blow up, hijack or otherwise terrorize the air transportation system.
1999 – tried to blow up airliners over the Pacific
2000 – attempted plot to blow up LAX
2001 – the obvious
2002 – Shoe bomber
2006 – British liquid explosives plot
NONE of these were done by little old ladies in London or single moms in Los Angeles. They were done by men of the Islamic faith between 17 and 40. Who should we be examining then? Old women in wheelchairs? Little children? Sure, cause anyone could be a threat, but the use of resources needs to be focused on the more likely threats.
Doctor Hemlock – nope – I have not forgotten OKC – however – Tim McVeigh was never a threat to aviation. So, stop the intellectual diarrhea and make sense – the corollary argument you make is completely specious and lacking in logic.
Opinions are great – everyone gets one – you also have to make no sense except emotional sense to you. You are not responsible for anything, and the scary part is that political leaders pay attention to the uninformed, ignorant and illogical when they make policy. God loves the ignorant, uninformed and wishful thinkers, he made so many of them.
But he may be onto something with the NASCAR folks…. :)
Reading most of these comments, I am no longer surprized that Bush and his henchmen got away with their fascist incursions on our Constitution. Seems that most of you like it that way. Of course, most of you are white male Christians and are unlikely to be the target of discriminatory practices that result in major inconvenience if not illegal restrictions of you right to travel within our country . . .
Traveling to a foreign country like Israel and traveling within the USA are two completely different situations from a civil liberties POV. It’s one thing to decide to visit Israel and thus make yourself subject to its intelligence filters. It’s another thing to be a law-abiding citizen who gets pulled off a flight within your own country and told you cannot rebook. I challenge those of you who approve of what AirTran did to use you imagination (assuming you have one) to consider how it would feel if only balding overweight white guys in suits or polo shirts and chinos got pulled off planes and grilled by airline staff and the FBI while the rest of us were free to snicker and point our fingers at you.
And (duh!) I know the AirTran passengers’ religion is Islam. When you start using a US citizen’s non-white, non-Christian ethnicity or religion to refer to them, individually or collectively, instead of addressing them as a fellow citizen (a person), you are pretty much making the case that “they” are “all the same” and that “they” are against “our” red meat Amurrican values. Tyranny of the majority at its finest. And you don’t even understand this point well enough to see how unAmerican you attitudes are.
Of course, most of you are white male Christians and are unlikely to be the target of discriminatory practices…
Accept, from the likes of YOU. You are the judgemental person here.
Get a clue…
@AKflyer: You’re really not worth it. So now, we are supposed to refer to people as “fellow citizen”, even if the citation of their religion, comes from news articles, not our words. Oh, except in the cases where one is white, Christian, or male, in which case it is perfectly acceptable to stereotype. Hypocrite.
Is it really necessary for grown adults to act like they’re on a playground here? Seriously, some of you should read your posts back before posting them. (And why not just make up a name besides “Anonymous?” No one here knows you personally, anyway…)
>>>“Basing a decision or action on a person’s race makes that act a racist act”.
INCORRECT.
According to the dictionary I used:
. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.<<>>The Man who Notices Things said: Terrorists are ALL Islamic – there are no Basque, Christian, or Kurd terrorists threatening to blow up, hijack or otherwise terrorize the air transportation system.<<<
Is terrorism restricted to air travel only? If that’s what you think, then the ground terrorism must have been due to bad plumbing, or electrical wiring. As far as I can tell, Timothy McVeigh and the Unibomber were not Muslims, yet they caused significant terrorist damage here in the U.S. And if you want to stand by your statement, I think you need to prove it, because there are several thwarted attempts you don’t hear about, and those attempts may not all be by Arabs. Take your time, you will need it.
I personally don’t agree with AirTran’s decision not to accommodate the travellers once they were cleared, but it’s also not my decision. If AirTran wants to create a potentially bad PR situation, they can help themselves. I don’t know what I would have done because I don’t have the full facts of the situation – we only have the slivers that were reported to the media. From what I have read, the family should have been rebooked, even if it meant flying them separately. I think the passengers overreacted out of fear and prejudice (that’s right, I said PREJUDICE), but the captain can remove anyone from his plane at any time. I think the treatment of the family was inappropriate, and they should have been rebooked as soon as they were cleared. What happened was disgraceful.
As long as we have races, we will have racism. As long as we have religious differences, we will have conflict. Perhaps it’s just me, but I am not interested in having my life be ruined by prejudice and fear. I understand what the Islamic faith is about and why the extremists act the way they do. I don’t agree with it, but am I going to recreate the Salem Witch Trials based on my suspicions? If I’m ever in that situation, I will take my own ass off the plane. If indeed it was a dangerous situation, then I’m lucky to be alive. If not, I deserve the inconvenience of rebooking caused by my own prejudices.
I don’t know why my post was not correct, but between my two quoted statements, I wanted to say that definition 2 supports the original statement of what makes an act racist. I didn’t mean to imply that “The Man who Notices Things” was racist. Just wanted to clear that up.
The muslims were behaving inapropriately on the plane. If they had concerns about where to sit on the plane for maximum safety, they should have done it before they got on the plane. Once you’re onboard, it is too late to be figuring out stuff like that, and quite frankly, it gets people worried, no matter what religion you are.
As for the Muslims, as long as they are unwilling to cull the bad ones from the herd, allow them to use religious facilities for meetings for terrorist activies, etc, they are always going to be eyed with suspicion. It is not only what you do but what you do not do (stop the bad ones) which gets the attention.
Once they were cleared, they should have been put on another flight. I have seen caucasians put on a different flight when there’s been a problem on the original one they had booked. The “muslims” should stop crying racism and be more mindful of what they discuss on a plane.
I guess next time I get on a plane i should just not talk because these days a muslim girl like me cant even say the word “safety” without gettting searched…………………………………………………………………………………………..:)
Yeah, Bill, and we “Christians” have certainly done an excellent job of keeping other Christians from committing atrocities over the centuries!!
And by the way, “Caucasian” is a race while “Muslim” is a religion. You can be a Muslim from a Caucasian background, just as you can be a Caucasian Buddhist. Your confusion regarding race (which is in itself a subjective human construct) and religion (which is a personal choce all US citizens are guaranteed by our Constitution) makes it clear that your bigotry originates in ignorance. Maybe you need to travel more outside the flyover states.
Lets do a thought experiment. Lets say I am on a plane. I know that Israelis are very unpopular for their human rights violations. I also know that Jews are associated with Israel even though a lot of Jews do not agree with Israeli policies. Now lets say from the safety point of view I say I don’t want to sit next to any Jews. After all if a terrorist started killing Jews he might miss and shoot the person sitting next to him/her. Now if I request the flight attendants to put all the Jews in their own separate section of the plane say section G for Ghetto. Do you think this would be acceptable? Hell no. So why is discrimination against Arabs acceptable? BTW as a Hindu I personally have no skin in this game but the hypocricy sticks in ones craw.
For the man who notices things and thinks all terrorists on planes are Muslims :) go read up your history. The first hijacking in History was carried out by Irgun who hijacked a plane out of London to pressurize the British to release their members who had been arrested for blowing up Arab schools in Palestine. And if you dont even know who the Irgun were they were a group of Zionist terrorists who went on to form Israel . Some of their leaders held cabinet positions later on. The reason the Israelis take terrorism so seriously is that they know it can work. Their own country was founded on that basis. For that matter George Washington used guerilla tactics including sniping of opposing officers. For the moralities of 18th century war based on the proportionality of force sniping was a much worse act then suicide bombing would be for 21st century morality. But so what if terrorism led to American Independence ; it was justified. Remember one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and the victors write the history. So instead of making moral judgements based on religion try to stick to enforcing the law. Racism just makes the Islamist fundamentalists job of recruiting easier. The appropiate response to such a complaint is to detain the passengers for clarification but as the US constitution gives one the right to confront ones accusers the complaining passengers should also have been detained and deposed by the FBI as witnesses. If people know their frivolous actions are going to inconvenience them too they will not use the serious issue of airline safety to act out their racist worldviews or to play pranks. For all we know this was the act of someone in a middle seat who saw an easy way to have some empty seats around him by raising a false alarm.
Prabuddha, your statements bring to mind the quotation, “A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose.”
You might want to check your history better. The first recorded aircraft hijack was on February 21, 1931, in Arequipa, Peru. Byron Rickards flying a Ford Tri-Motor was approached on the ground by armed revolutionaries. He refused to fly them anywhere and after a ten day stand-off Rickards was informed that the revolution was successful and he could go in return for giving one of their number a lift to Lima.
While I think the captain acted judiciously, I think the end result is extremely unfortunately. What if this flight was needed to make a connection? I think we’d be very upset…and not that people aren’t inconvenienced everyday. I personally, like one commenter stated, keep my opinion to myself. Once on board, you are fairly stuck in your seat. There is a way to do everything. The person at the gate would be the first one to contact if you had a concern about your safety not those in your travel party. It’s sad to think a couple of jerks could get a group thrown off the plane simply ’cause they don’t like how they look and what they think they said. If I recall correctly, those attempting and actually hyjacking didn’t have any conversations about seating, safety, etc. I have seen far more suspicious or weird acting folk boarding planes. It’s very possible that some of them may have been dangerous to fellow passengers. We are all in a climate where we have to be careful when traveling, didn’t some guy get held by officials for making a joke about bombs. I think that the airline, along with offering them money back for the tickets should address suspect comments in a better manner. There has to be some security person, even from the FBI, that can tell airlines how to conduct a preliminary investigation from a passenger comment. There is no way I should be able to randomly pick a family I don’t like the looks of, say they were talking about planes and safety, and get them kicked off. Our airlines would do well to take a page from countries that deal with safety and efficiency better than we do.