Slashdot Mirror
Overzealous AirTran Boots 9 Passengers Off
An anonymous readerwrites "On Friday the wonderfully customer centric AirTran decided to remove a family of 9 US born Muslims after a comment between two family members regarding how close to the Jet engine they had been seated. The wonderful part is that after the FBI cleared the family 2 hours later, AirTran refused to fly the family, and refused to rebook them on their way from Washington to Orlando, Florida. The family purchased additional tickets on US Airways later that day, after AirTran requested that the irate father be escorted from their booking podiums by security. This whole story highlights the pathetic customer service we are getting from the Airlines these days — they actually treat us like criminals first and ask questions later. Just don't get me started on Delta." It's nice to see that stupidity still knows no bounds.
Apparently, they have now received a refund:
Linky
AT&ROFLMAO
I'm glad the summary specifies that they were born in the US. Because otherwise it would be okay to treat them like dirt, right?
The only reason not wanting to fly next to the engine is a "security issue" is BECAUSE they were Muslim. If anyone else brought it up, the attendant would have sold them earplugs for $5.
Laissez-faire types will hate me for suggesting this, but this is exactly the sort of thing that should lead to anti-discrimination lawsuits. We make a big deal out of prohibiting racial discrimination in employment and housing, so why not in transportation? It's because Muslims are all terrorists... innit?
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
..that the "real terrorists" didn't succeed in their plots to "terrorize" Americans.
The passengers were at fault for being racists and reporting a non-issue. The airline was not at fault for handing the matter over to the FBI when the issue was reported. The FBI did the right thing by clearing the family. However, the airline WAS at fault for refusing to let the family fly on any future flight even after they had been cleared by the FBI. There's no legitimate (non-discriminatory) reason to do that given the circumstances.
These people likely had their whole vacation planned, and this incident screwed up their plans. One article said they were going to a religious conference, and it's unlikely that conference was delayed while they tried to make other travel arrangements. On top of all of that, they were made to feel like second-class citizens simply because they were brown and Muslim.
They have good cause for a lawsuit against the airline, and I think they should file one. I'm not talking millions of dollars here, but the airline needs to get slapped in court to make them think twice next time a situation like this crops up.
The fact that incidents like this keep happening show that bin Laden and his cohorts succeeded beyond their wildest dreams on 9/11.
Not always. In many cities, it is illegal to carry firearms into certain places by city ordinance even if you would otherwise be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. Typically these are places such as hospitals, schools and bars.
On a more on-topic note, I think AirTran deserves a hefty lawsuit. This was very clear cut racism. There was no indication any one of the 9 persons were a threat to anyone. Just a refund doesn't seem to fully compensate them for the harm done.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Minnesota Public Radio's "The Story" show with Dick Gordon did a piece on Mohamed Fikry, an almost 5 million mile customer with American Airlines... and they pulled the SAME CRAP. Twice! Once because a customer heard him speaking "a foreign language on the phone" (it was Spanish) and once because a flight attendant thought she'd seen him "backstage". 5 Million Miles! with the same airline... And to top it off, they had the FBI pull him from the plane AFTER they flew to the destination! If he were such a threat, why let him fly at ALL... Gotta love airline customer service. Link to the story http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_669_Business_Class_Terrorist.mp3/view
These are law-abiding citizens.
Except that they enter private property in direct violation of the posted conditions for entry. IANAL, but I think that makes 'em trespassers.
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
Our intervention in the middle east over the past 200 years has bread suicide bombers who want us the fuck out of their lives. Not the religion.
Got a reference, bub?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_violence
There are many terrorist organizations which are not religious.
In fact, one could argue that a majority of the religious terrorism in the middle east is actually nationalist terrorism disguised as religious extremism. If you look at the causes which drive people to the al-qaida bootcamps: oppression (by US forces or otherwise - AQ was not active in Iraq before we had a military presence there), lower standards of living, and so forth. People turn to religion when times get tough. Other people use that to twist the religion. They convince people at the end of their rope that the only thing that will make things better for them, their family, and their country is to go blow up the people fucking them over.
The fact that you ignorant asshats refuse to wake up from your delusional world of hate and bigotry, and perhaps read why people hate the US instead of believing the line "because we're not muslim" is why we've had muslim terrorist attacks on this country and its consulates. Look up the term blowback.
1) A white family of nine people get on a plane.
Well, I tossed an exception right there. White family of nine . . . that's actually really funny!
Wait,
PolygamousRanchKid doesn't know about Mormons?
This is a US born family.
US Born Muslims have been terrorists less frequently than Michigan rednecks. They're a middle class immigrant group very similar to Indians and Koreans. The only thing they're fanatical about is sending Ali Jr. to an Ivy and getting a Benz.
And this is also, coincidentally, the solution to terrorism. If we lifted the sanctions on Palestine and ended the prison-like occupation of the state, it would take 15 years tops for them to start caring more about cars and TVs than God and Jews. Has anyone heard from the IRA since the Irish GDP shot up?
Terrorism is for bored poor third worlders. Fix the third world and we fix terrorism.
Or we could just keep killing people and maybe they'll get less desperate and angry.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Blowing up a crowded security checkpoint at an airport would have a nice irony to it, in addition to the overreaction as all other airports shut down causing massive travel problems.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Kaffiyeh. They're fairly fashionable at the moment round where I am (Manchester UK).
And I wore a shemagh (same thing) I got from an SAS guy for two years in Afghanistan as a soldier in the US Army. I also sported a full beard and mustache* while there. You can bet your ass I shaved, got a haircut, and put that head-rag in my bag before flying home on commercial airliners. Everyone has the right to practice whatever damn fool religion they want, but the rest of the world should be under no obligation to ignore your chosen flavor of irrational belief in a magic sky man. It ain't Buddhists or Methodists strapping dynamite to their waists and blowing up people in crowded markets. If you want to avoid being seen as a threat, it might behoove you to not dress like one. Granted, it's idiotic to think a real terrorist would dress the part to get on an airplane (rather than showing up in a button-up shirt and slacks) but steadfastly sticking to your dang fool religious costume in the face of known public perception is asking for trouble.
Perhaps it's just my firm belief that organized religion is a dangerous habit that by all logic should be treated with the same disdain as any other self-indulgent delusion; that getting your lessons on morality and ethics from a 2000 year old book is as wise as getting your chemistry knowledge from writings of the same era; that the "bathwater" of religious dogma has long since drowned the "baby" of spiritual fulfillment. But whatever the reason, I think "tolerance" of religion is as silly a demand as tolerance of a belief that RED means GO and GREEN means STOP in traffic.
It'll be interesting to see how the mods go on this post. Most people here seem to agree that religion is bad when it says schoolbooks should contain christian fairy tales, but from the look of the mods so far here, it appears Islam is seen as some sort of underdog against the forces of ChimpyBUSHitler**.
* Locals don't take you seriously if you shave. Lack of facial hair symbolizes ignorance due to being young or female. Says a lot about their level of cultural sophistication, really. Most of those folks are the local equivalent of backwoods hillbillies.
** I won't pass on my full opinion of my former commander-in-chief, but I will say "not my favorite president"...
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
You have such a damn easier time than I do at airports even being a born Canadian. I avoid US travel and airlines now, except when absolutely necessary. One time in Chicago I got thrown in a windowless room for "observation" for four hours because they believed I was on a no fly list. Needless to say I missed my flight, and the connection I was to make after that, and I lost 36 hours in the process. Naturally they acted like releasing me for having done no wrong was equal to doing me a huge favour, which left compensation as a distant dream. It's a shitty time to be young, male and Muslim. Even a liberal, clean-shaven one. My full sympathy is with this family, and if I were them, I'd take advantage of the good ol all-'merican tort system and slap those people with a lawsuit.
I firmly believe that the type of people who are recruited to fill the positions in American customs and transport security(both TSA and airline staff) are some of the lowest, least human scum available. None of the other countries I've ever traveled to have so consistently hired such uncouth assholes, and this experience is culled from many tens of thousands of kilometers of travel. As a matter of fact, some of those countries actually had people who were *courteous*, that really surprised me considering the duffers I was used to seeing at US border crossings in NY and Michigan state.
cough cough ... Thirty Years' War... cough cough (and since it was the continuation of a conflict that started in 1546, its more like the 102 years war...but whatever).
The problem is not Islam, the problem is organized religion that encourages fundamentalist teachings and the abandonment of reason. Islam is not really more vulnerable to this than any other religion, it just seems that way because the fundamentalists' cause is buoyed by moderates who resent political persecution of 'the Islamic world' by 'the West'.
A perfect current events example of this is happening right now in Gaza. Before the 'truce' expired Hamas was largely considered a failed govt. by Gazans. A average terrorist group but a failure at running a state. If a new (and fair!) election had been held before the truce expired, Fatah would probably have won. But now, many Palestinians who despise hamas will still support them, because they hate the israelis far more and want to deny them a perceived victory.
I am not talking about morality or what the israelis should be doing, and I don't want this example to become fuel for a flamewar.
I'm just trying to point out a universal human characteristic: nothing brings disparate people together like a common enemy.
The perceived strength of fundamentalist muslims is not a religious phenomenon, it is a political one. This is a distinction that many people miss, IME.
I agree with most of your post in a pragmatic sense, but it does raise some issues in an idealistic sense.
If you want to avoid being seen as a threat, it might behoove you to not dress like one.
This sounds an awful lot like "if a woman doesn't want to be raped, it might behoove her not to dress provocatively". On the surface there is some logic to it: if a potential rapist happens across a woman dressed in particularly attractive or revealing attire he may decide to attack her. So from a purely pragmatic point of view, it does make some sense. On the other hand, there's a good reason why "but she looked really, really hot" has never been considered a valid excuse for rape, and "blame the victim" mentalities in general are considered very poor form.
As you said yourself, it's idiotic to think a real terrorist would dress the part to get on an airplane. Yet for some reason it's okay to expect people to dress differently purely because lots of people have some idiotic notions about "what terrorists look like"?
Perhaps it's just my firm belief that organized religion is a dangerous habit that by all logic should be treated with the same disdain as any other self-indulgent delusion
It probably is. To find out, try a thought experiment: what if this discrimination wasn't occurring against people wearing clothing that implied a particular religious faith, but instead that they supported a particular sports team? Would you then say, "well supporting the Chicago Bulls is a dangerous habit and if you don't want to get kicked off planes you should keep your interest in basketball to yourself"? Or would you say "that's fucking ludicrous and I feel kind of embarrassed to be part of a society that tolerates such ridiculous and obviously ineffectual 'security' measures"?
Also, I think your comment about the mods here being pro-Islam and anti-Christian is a strawman. People aren't being persecuted and treated like terrorists because they wear a cross necklace or are dressed like a nun. Islamists aren't trying to get their religion's creation myth taught alongside evolution in schools. Apples and oranges.
As I understand it, the Irish problem largely went away with 9/11. Suddenly a lot of "well meaning" (?) Irish Americans sympathetic to terrorism discovered that ... um ... terrorism is bad, and funding ceased.
I'm assuming that the specific Irish problem you refer to is the IRA (and others) campaign to reunite Northern Ireland with the rest of Ireland. We do have other issues ...
9/11 had nothing to do with the IRA's cessation of hostilities: they realised a long time ago that violence wasn't going to achieve their objectives and decided to take the democratic route. I am in no way a fan of the IRA or Sinn Fein (their political wing), but I give them credit for realising that democracy and negotiation was the way to go.
UK border installations (watch towers, armoured checkpoints on roads) were being dismantled in the early 1990s. I remember crossing the border in 1987 or thereabouts and seeing bunkers and machine gun posts. 5 years later, no installations at all.