Already under discussion in this thread:
Don't read books about airplanes while on an airplane.

I am really surprised how many of usually reasonable posters make it a point to condemn WN and the F/A for their action. Does no one remember, why all of us are in this horrible security situation in the U.S? Who caused all of this? Which group of people did this to us?
No need to flame me, but I feel targeted by TSA because I am old and walk with a cane, Mrs. EX is targeted TSA/CBP because she is Asian as are our kids, mother in law is targeted by TSA because she wears a medical device after fighting cancer, then certainly other people should be targeted as well especially if there is a good reason, and be without recourse just like me. On the ground and in the air.

Get back to me when this is being spearheaded by a non-terrorist group.





http://www.redstate.com/jeffdunetz/2...errorist-ties/

Absolutely disgusting behavior, and something that has become far too prevalent. At some point, the FAA needs to step in and start fining carriers heavily for such incidents. While private enforcement is a great remedy, there needs to be some regulatory action here.

Interestingly, two groups often at odds, religious Moslems and Orthodox Jews, are largely the victims in these incidents. Honestly, this should inspire some cooperation and understanding.

Yep

Get back to us when you can find a little better source.

as reported in the new yesterday, a kill commision formed to make a list of to be killed, without a jury trial

Here you go:
http://www.investigativeproject.org/...s/misc/360.pdf

Department of Justice good enough?

Sorry, it wasn't brown people sitting peacefully in their seats.

hmm. That crazy guy in Norway, the fellow with the blond hair and blue eyes who shot and killed all those young people a few weeks back... I would hate to have a knock on my door in the middle of the night for a warrantless search just because I was in *his* group.....Or get felt up more when I got on my flight because of those kind of genetics...

I remember quite well. I believe it was the neoconservatives under the Bush dynasty with the support and cooperation of the cowardly sheeple that now seem to make up the majority in this country. The blame can also be extended to Obama who never saw a civil rights violation that he didn't like. In the past liberals had usually been more supportive of civil rights. Obama is the start of a new trend where both parties in our two party dictatorship are equally enthusiastic about our new police state. When these people say 'anything to stop the terrorists' they really mean anything.

A crime was committed. A mass murder. But it was not a sufficient reason to change our form of government. It was just a convenient excuse for our government to seize power and that is exactly what they have done. But human rights are a zero sum game. The more rights our government has the fewer we have. The government and their police enforcers now have more freedom and we have less.

Mohamed Atta did not force us to change our system of government. We did it to ourselves. And if we are that cowardly it was inevitable. It would have happened eventually even if that merry band of suicide bombers hadn't taken out the world trade center.

Before you place all the blame on the neoconservatives, you should remember that our sitting liberal president just ordered the assassination of a US Citizen without any judicial oversight.

Yes, a US citizen vacationing in Yemen. Power corrupts. Absolute power, which is close to what POTUS has, will corrupt anyone who gets it.

Did you read my post? I don't see how it could be interpreted as placing all the blame on the neoconservatives.

But let's be fair. They are the ones who started this nonsense with the patriot act and the new millennium police state with more of a focus on internal threats, on domestic extremists, than on any external foe. The war on terror is like the war on drugs. It is really a war against Americans, a war against ourselves.

I am no fan of Obama and summary executions of US citizens without a trial is not something to take lightly. Obama is just carrying the torch, allowing the police state to move forward. Soon summary executions without a trial, or with a farce trial where guilt is presumed, will become more common. You can see the future in people's attitudes toward anyone accused of terrorism. No proof or even any real evidence is necessary. To be accused is to be guilty.

To be fair, we've had the guilty until proven innocent and then still suspected for some time. I point you to the Duke Lacrosse and many other rape or child porn cases.

That was an unusual situation with a rogue prosecutor, rogue police investigators, vengful community, intrigued media, pitiful and untruthful 'victim' and Nancy Grace; it is not really a fair paradigm for the US justice system. The closest thing to the Duke Lacrosse case in recent history is Amanda Knox.

. . . but this has little to do with the OP, so back on topic:

The most important goal of this lawsuit must to be to modify the behaivor of airline crews. A fat check from the carrier everyone LUVs to hate will acomplish nothing-- it will be considered the cost of doing business.

It never ceases to amaze me how fast CAIR shows up after one of these-- they are the ambulance chasers of Muslims in the post-9/11 airline climate. Would it kill them to wait more than 2 hours to come out with a statement of outrage-- being Muhammud on the spot every time makes them look somewhat seedy in my opinion.

I don't particularly trust the FBI when it comes to telling the truth about a special interest group that they decide to target

Well that makes things easy now doesn't it?

Look guys, I am in my seventies. If a pilot of F/A does not fell comfortable with a passenger, regardless of what race, religion, height, weight or whatever criteria you want to throw in, they should have the absolute right to remove this person from that particular flight. Had they removed one of the groups at 9/11 maybe one or two buildings would still stand. Would you have pressed on for suits and damages than as well?
These ( yes these and I mean musliins, which now seems to be politically incorrect because they destroyed the towers but seemingly have nothing to do with it ) people go through TSA without problem. Show me one post by a muslim being targeted and patted down and [B]complaining on FT!!! B[/But look at the cancer stricken people, breast cancer victims, or as in my life, my mother in law with the colostomy bag. And contrary what you guys are wishing for, no money for us:mad:

Surely she must have called. They know, they have the phone number on hand.
It's in their contacts. Everybody is prepared except a white guy. What a country:mad:

I think you have made your position clear: You are ok with racial and/or religious discrimination in the airline sector. I guess some people take the values of our country more seriously than others . . .

By the way, what's your opinion of the Japanese internment camps? Just curious.

Obviously.

First off "our country" means different things to different people. I am a stupid old guy, I have no opinion about discrimination. Religiously, height wise, anything you can think of, just seems to me all these people get a lot of money and I am left behind because I have nothing to go on, because I am a white European.
By the way, what's your opinion of the Japanese internment camps? Just curious.
What would you like to know from a guy who is married to a Japanese woman, consider I wasn't American when I married her? It's Love not a frikking passport. Internment camps? Put all the muslim into it. What would be their reaction?

It is difficult to reply to this concisely as in needed on an internet forum, but I will try. Please excuse my lack of explanatory detail.

After 9/11, if took much to long for me to discern the difference between the following statements:

The perpetrators of 9/11 did this because they were Muslim.

And...

The perpetrators of 9/11 happened to be Muslim.

A lot of people, are still operating on the first. I have chosen to accept the second.

People in general do not understand people that are not like themselves. It is easy to turn this misunderstanding into an irrational fear but thankfully, most do not. When the dissimilarities are based on visual clues such as skin color or religious dress, people allow themselves to see the clues and relate the specific unknown person to the source of their fear or misconception, and personalize the immediate situation. When we are in public situations with a diverse populations, these irrational thoughts and decisions happen among individuals.

The concern that I have is that when these irrational reactions are made known to those who are given responsibility for the safety and security of everyone under their care, they occasionally accept the irrational fear themselves, often without evidence or probable cause (not used in a legal sense). We expect greater discernment and rationality of these responsible people, but it is not always the case.

It is normal to want to reduce all risk to zero if you have been given responsibility for the safety of a group of people. So, if the decision becomes one of which provides that lowest risk, one may to decide to remove the suspected danger, even if the danger is non-existent. It is a decision based on emotion, influenced by the demands of time and schedules and the brain playing games of "what if" with one's reasonable side.

While it is normal to want to reduce the risk to zero, it is unreasonable to think that one can reduce risk to zero. At times, our unreasonable nature takes over our training and knowledge. It is a constant battle in which we will all make mistakes from time to time. The mistakes are still mistakes and wrong.

It is the reason that given the luxury of time in a place devoid of the pressure of the moment, the obvious nature of the irrational decision becomes apparent. In these cases, most organizations will try to mitigate the damage thorough the only means they have, apologies and financial incentives. In cases of great hurt and distress, these will almost always seem trivial and possibly insulting.

The knowledge, intelligence and experience of the decision makers only makes the likelihood of error smaller.

I would be more surprised if they never happened.

The 9/11 perpetrators did it primarily because of their view of their religion, warped as it may have been, to consider themselves martyrs. I do agree about no profiling at screening checkpoints.

The 9/11 perpetrators did it primarily because of their view of US politics, warped as it may have been. Their view of their religion was actually not fundamentally uniform. Their view of their politics and of US politics was actually fundamentally uniform.

Some of those not in favor of bigoted (including racist) profiling at the airport screening checkpoints may be fine with bigoted profiling beyond the airport screening checkpoint. That one or both such groups may have trouble dealing with that distinction isn't a surprise.

Profiling those persons whom haven't committed a crime based on such targeted person's ethnicity and/or religion just creates more, bigger haystacks in which to loose needles -- that or it creates more needles. :eek:

The reason it is called "discrimination" is that it is a standard applied to members certain groups and not members of other groups. For example, even if you had been there said "it's a go" on the phone (and aparently, that's not what the lady in this case actually said), you most likely would not have arroused the FA's suspicions because you are white.

When white people are discriminated against, there is money there too (google "Ricci v. DeStefano" if you don't believe me). It just so happens that non-whites are discriminated against more than whites are in this country, so most plaintiffs in discrimination lawsuits are non-white.

Do you feel that you are discriminated against and can't make a case because you are white? Or are you upset that you aren't discriminated against, so you are unable to chance upon a profitable lawsuit? Or do you feel that whenever non-white people are wronged for any reason, they can sue and get money whereas whites can't? (If you believe this, it isn't really true at all as lawsuits are tossed out left and right because a nexus between a discriminatory motive and an adverse action cannot be established). Or do you mean something else by "I have nothing to go on, because I am a white European"?

Wow, complicated subject.

"I've got to go"
 

Yup, another "flying when brown" incident

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Its-phone.html

Even after being searched by TSA staff she wasn't allowed back on the flight - presumably because of "an abundance of caution" but was allowed on a later flight - which is nonsensical as if she wasn't "fit" to fly on one flight, why should she be any safer on a later flight?

Oh, I know I'm discriminated against. However discriminating against me is seen as a good thing.
http://www.ronbrown.org/Apply/Eligib...uirements.aspx

The current state of security theatre in this county is a case of bipartisan FAIL.
Do you remember "Federalize to Professionalize"? I'm still waiting for the second part of that to happen. Paging Tom Daschle...

You need to work on your math skills. The question you are implicitly asking is, "What percentage of terrorists traveling on airplanes are Muslim?" The question you should be asking is, "What percentage of Muslims traveling on airplanes are terrorists?" I believe that you will find the latter to be a wee bit lower.

As for what happens to your wife and mother, that is also disgusting and you have every right to be pissed.

Mike

Mike,

While we're talking math (sometimes not the easiest subject for those TSA-types), here's another question that's worth asking... "What percentage of travelers are terrorists?"

Or, put another way: "How many non-terrorist travelers are there per terrorist traveler?" Of course, answering this question would produce a divide-by-zero error. :)

I suppose that the DHS would tell you that there is indeed some non-zero number of terrorists that travel.

However, they might also tell you that upon going through the rigorous screening of the TSA and observing the near-impenetrable layers of security they will decide that the risk of detection is so very high and the penalties for said detection being cruel and draconian, that they will retreat back to their super-secret planning to develop even more devious nefarious plans to which DHS must respond with greater levels of security provided by contractors with lucrative contracts thanks to enterprising former high level employees.

BTW, division by zero is undefined (and as such must cause an error in electronic calculations) which is oddly the same as many TSA procedures.