skofarrell

I've had to work on a few posts on this thread. Keep in mind that we're here to discuss the topic, not other FTers. Editorial commentary on other posters intelligence (or lack thereof) is best suited for PM or email.

Thanks

Sean
Moderator - AC/Aeroplan

fly-yul

Many non-Asians go to Asia all the time.

dodo

After the war, there have been some Jewish immigrations to Vienna- those from Central and Eastern Europe who decided to stay put in Vienna instead of proceeding further west after WWII, then the Hungarian Jews during 1956 and in the 80's/90's those from Russia and former Soviet Union republics.

LeSabre74

Did I miss something, I thought all we had were assmods?

skofarrell

Not sure if you missed anything. Assistant Moderators will become "full" Moderators once trained. Since I was a moderator in OMNI and American Express for quite a while, my "Assistant" tenure was shorter. Randy is out of town and somewhat offline for a while and he asked me to take over in his absence.

As far as "AssMod" is concerned, I don't particularly care for the term and connotations it inspires. I'd sure appreciate it if you'd refrain from using it in the future. AsstMod is just as easy to type, and a bit less inflammatory don't you think?

Thanks


Sean
Moderator - AC/Aeroplan

Wally Bird

Don't think 'lurching' would improve your chances much though.

ogmios

The only problem is that AsstMod is a bit asymetrical, just doesn't flow as well... ;-)

fromYYZ_flyer

Two possible reasons: 1) The Simon Wiesenthal Centre is based in Vienna. 2) He was flying YYZ-VIE-TLV

You see plenty of Indians on Aeroflot to SVO (for cnx to Southest Asia)

bannock

Its suspicious behavior that has been banned---whatever form that may come in

wsommerv

One man's suspicious is another's normal.

If something is really suspicious it should obviously be reported, but there is a very specific list of things that has been banned and something as vauge as "suspicious" behaviour isn't on it.

Sometimes I think people just need to pay more attention to the world around them. A lot less things would apear "suspicious".

fly-yul

So white Christian behavior is normal. And any other culture / religion is suspicious?

ypqRD

Everyone seems to have been focusing on the silliness of not recognizing his behaviour as prayer. I think that's a red herring. Imagine you were on a plane and someone in front of you started to fervently pray aloud, and you knew it was a prayer, and a standard one at that. Perhaps The Lord's Prayer, which I once had to do in school every morning, or a Hail Mary, which most people at least know from the movies. You knew for sure this person was praying. And let's further say the person was being pretty fervent about it: bright eyes, rocking back and forth, quite emotional. You might well freak out. I think a lot of us associate praying "out of church", especially praying out loud, with danger, and would start to wonder "what does this person know that I don't know?" I can imagine a current of worry moving through a group under those circumstances.

Should you be taken off a plane for freaking people out? No way. If only you could be taken off a plane for putting your feet on armrests or leaning back too far. But it's possible to be freaked-out by someone praying without being racist or ignorant, just because you have your nerves set on "frazzled."

abasanti

What does that have to do with anything?

ALW

I believe it was reinforcing the "connecting in VIE for TLV" possibility. It seemed appropriate to me.

=aw

robsawatsky

The above quote was with reference to the "yelling Bloody Murder" comparison. And CUR is quite correct that there is a considerable difference between what is a social issue of some type of prayer causing another to be "uncomfortable" (suck it up, you don't have a right to comfort) and "creating a disturbance". There are specific criminal code provisions applicable to "creating a disturbance" under the "DISORDERLY CONDUCT" and possibly the "NUISANCE" categories. None of the definitions would be applicable to the situation described here. However the definition "by fighting, screaming, shouting, swearing, singing or using insulting or obscene language," would certainly apply to "yelling Bloody Murder".

Yes, the airline may choose to remove someone because their actions are mildly disturbing in a less than criminal way, but the airline is leaving themselves open to liability. I'd even go so far as to say it is the complainants that should be removed in this case, as they are the ones that truly caused the disruption.