theworld

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35528196

Section 107

so far he has received the first half of his demands - a public apology. Statement from the airline:

“Aeromexico is a global airline that has operations in countries around the world, which recognizes and is proud of the diversity of its passengers,” the statement said. “Every day we work to ensure strict compliance with the highest safety standards , while we respect and value the culture and beliefs of our customers.”

“We apologize to Mr. Waris Ahluwalia for the bad experience he had with one of our security elements while boarding his flight to New York in the Mexico City International Airport. This case motivates us to ensure that security personnel strengthen its care protocols, always respecting the cultural and religious values ​​of customers.”

now, will they also meet with him to discuss their future training strategy?

GUWonder

Last I met him he was residing in NYC and I assumed he was a US citizen.

I'd be surprised if he were barred from flying to the US for very long -- as he is relatively well-connected, including with some major donors to some major present and prior governmental figures. That is if he even were barred from flying to the US. Rather this seems a case of the airline and/or the airline security contractor acting to deny him transport as ticketed because of the airline/security screener's paranoia about a harmless turban.

If I'm not mistaken he was in Tulum several weeks ago.

Yoshi212

The thread title seems to be a bit misleading. He isn't barred from traveling to the USA but is rather being harassed by employees of an airline that stopped him from boarding the plane. I don't agree with their actions and it's discrimination plain & simple but this isn't the US gov't putting him on a no-fly list.
The actor portrayed a Sikh in a movie with Denzel Washington where he was treated as a muslim terrorist by the NYPD and pretty simply explained why he wears a turban

Yoshi212

Update is he is back in NY

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/11/wo...xico-city.html

sw3

Judging from the news reports I've read, I don't think there was any discrimination anywhere. Reports seem to agree that as part of a security check, most likely because he had SSSS on his boarding pass, this individual was asked to remove the turban and he refused.

Baseball fans aren't asked to remove their caps, ranchers aren't asked to remove their cowboy hats and people wearing fur coats aren't asked to take them off because they're discriminated against by soccer fans, urban guys or animal rights activists. They're asked to remove them just to see that they're not hiding things like weapons, drugs or explosives, and if they refuse to comply they will be denied boarding as well.

TheTakeOffRush

Great examples, but none of those fit someone who holds a strong belief that they shouldn't remove their headgear. If I was of that persuasion, I'd ask 2 questions: can't you screen me without violating my person/religious belief, and doesn't the airline have a plan for personal/religious differences to their standard practices?

GUWonder

HaraSSSSment flags on boarding passes for US-bound flights are part and parcel of discrimination.

Removal of religious head covering isn't necessary to effectively interdict contraband weapons, explosives and incendiaries which may compromise a flight "security".

mre5765

Is removal of baseball caps necessary to effectively interdict contraband?

sw3

The thing is that anybody can wear any headgear or any kind of bulky clothing, conceal anything in it including weapons or explosives that can't be detected by metal detectors, and argue that they can't remove it because it violates the beliefs of (insert religion here) and both them and their god will be deeply offended if they take it off. It doesn't matter if they actually believe in that religion. Maybe they do, but it's also possible that they don't and they're only making up an excuse to get through security with dangerous items that could be used to blow up a plane or take hostages on board. The security of the airport, the aircraft, the crew and the passengers should trump every kind of personal belief, religious or not. Yes, airlines and airports should accomodate requests to be screened in private, for religious and other reasons, but this should never mean that any passengers are let through without proper screening.

porphyra

And this was the main issue. The sikh person in this case was not given an option to do it privately, and a public removal of a turban is beyond humiliating! In this case, the entire blame rests with Mexico's equivalent of TSA for not accommodating for a diverse population and lack of training on how to deal with different cultural/religious backgrounds.

Section 107

And therein lies the real crux of the problem: poorly trained (or performing if trained) airline/security staff did not know how to handle a) this type of religious situation and b) his request to be screened in private (he was willing to remove the headgear for screening - just not in public).

Section 107

Not always, but clothing can be used to mask or hide certain items. Removal is one method for ensuring proper screening. Another method, and more typically used for items such as turbans is to swab them for the ETD which is what was correctly done on his subsequent flight.

chollie

Looks like Mexico's airport security embraces 'discreción del evaluador' (screener's discretion), just like their counterparts in the US.

Want to know the rules? You will find out when you show up at the checkpoint.

GUWonder

Contraband WEIs that pose a risk to flight security and justify this approach? Not really.

And some male Sikh Americans wear baseball caps to cover a thin cloth holding the long head hair and/or if bald as part of their version of religious observance. This picked up to try to minimize a risk of being targeted by anti-Muslim and/or anti-Sikh and/or anti-Indian bigots.

And some female Muslims choose to wear baseball caps in lieu of a headscarf as their version of religious observance that minimized some risk of being targeted by anti-Muslim bigots.

If the baseball cap has no metal and shouldn't otherwise alarm the machines, prohibiting baseball caps as headwear for passengers is ridiculous. I used to wear a baseball cap through airport security a lot and it never caused me problems until around the time of the TSA or when dealing with airport security in markets where male Sikh passengers were more or less a daily sight. The irony of that.