Has probably happened. And probably will in the future. From my experiences on US carriers, I wouldn't trust the FAs to use much common sense.

Got it. So, if a PIC were to decide to have the FA's ask, as people boarded, "do you own a firearm," and turn away everybody who said yes, on the grounds that "firearm owners are inherently violent people, since a much larger percentage of firearm owners have committed murder with their weapons than the percentage of Muslim passengers who have attempted to hijack airplanes," you'd be 100% fine with that. Is that correct?

Can the PIC reject anyone for any reason, on a given day? Sure, in the very near term. Does the PIC have to be accountable for that decision? Absolutely.

Honestly, I'm 100% fine with any form of discrimination, no matter how blatant or damaging, against both marching bands and people from Stanford. ;)

Actually, I'd prefer just the opposite. I'd want as many law abiding firearm owners on the aircraft as possible -- as they are "sheep dogs" of society. :p

I'd say it's time to consider whether that "training related to behavioral analysis and evaluation of passengers" is effective, or even necessary. This may be one of many examples when it resulted only in a waste of resources, and the time, of hundreds of people.

A BIG +1 here.

And you will sometimes be wrong.

The earlier comment about you're being 'new here' was, I think, alluding to your likely being unfamiliar with several bone-headed decisions by cabin- and flight-crews and airlines in general. Such incidents were discussed in this forum at the time.

I can't remember a single time when the crews' security[sic] concerns did in fact turn out to be reasonable and valid. That might just be my faulty memory however; correction(s) welcome.

Yep, I'd sure feel safer knowing there was a good chance of a firefight breaking out in the cabin.

Better to be wrong than the alternative.

There are specific rules in the FARs about a PIC's responsibility. Since 10mmAutoFan claims to fly "professionally" (are you an Airline pilot?) I wanted to hear his take on my question in response to what he had posted regarding a PIC's authority. My guess is that the PIC can exercise this authority provided he does not break other laws. In the specific example I quoted he probably can kick non-white people off the plane and later be open to being prosecuted for that decision.

On a private flight the PIC has much more leeway I suspect than on a commercial flight. And yes since 9/11 security has been improved for all pilots (eg the AOPA's airport watch program) but regardless pilots are not security experts. My guess is that once a pax/FA reports suspicious behavior the pilot is going to call security in order not be to one to blame in the event something happens.

In situaitons like this I think people who report suspicious behaviour (such as it seems like the paranoid passenger) should be held accountable in the event it turns out to be a false alarm and fined or prosecuted for wasting people's time.

^^^^^^
as in the recent Shoshana Hebshi case where three people were handcuffed and strip searched and interrogated for hours because they were brown skinned and used the bathroom, except for Hebshi, a young mother of two, who merely happened to be seated in the wrong row and paid for it by being sexually humiliated in a highly illegal strip search. It looks like these clowns learned their lesson in this current incident because they didn't pull the same trick.

Sorry, but the flight crew and the PIC don't get a pass on this stuff. There had better be a clearly articulable reason, ala Terry frisk justification or else they should be subject to being sued by those they accuse.

Behavior analysis is a joke that has been discussed here ad nauseum.

Bolding mine: This.

This incident is increasingly looking like a case of FWB.

Based on what 10mm has written, he/she seems to believe the answer is "yes."

Mike

And you would be wrong in your assumption.

To answer the other question posed: Yes, I fly for an air carrier -- as well as a Federal government agency (but yet I disapprove of the TSA and their screening methods completely).

The race baiters here can try all they want to turn this into something other than what it is... People acting oddly or suspiciously on an aircraft -- who have the same background, beliefs, or appearance as the 9/11 terrorists -- will be looked at with a different filter than other passengers for some time to come. To believe otherwise would simply be naive.

You yourself have said it! What is this race-baiting discussion when you have pretty well said that those who are Muslim or Middle Eastern should be treated with suspicion!

You are constantly referring the people who committed 9/11 and then have the audacity to say others are race-baiting? Seriously? How about the example that nachtnebel used - Soshana Hebshi, female, half Jewish half-Arab, but sadly because of her complexion she is under suspicion and strip searched. Is this the abundance of caution you aviation security types advocate?