man kept off United flight because of book
 

This is getting a bit spooky, and well beyond the kind of "security" offered by underwire bra checks -- now you can be kept off the planes for reading a book people don't like!

But I guess this is a warning for our next trips -- be careful what reading material you bring along, and don't forget that we're at war with Eastasia -- we're friends with Westasia.

He proceeded through the security checkpoint and sat down to read near his boarding gate. About 10 minutes had passed when a National Guardsman approached Godfrey.

"He told me to step aside," Godfrey says. "Then he took my book and asked me why I was reading it."

Within minutes, Godfrey says, Philadelphia Police officers, Pennsylvania State Troopers and airport security officials joined the National Guardsman. About 10 to 12 people examined the novel for 45 minutes, scratching out notes the entire time. They also questioned Godfrey about the purpose of his trip to Phoenix.

http://www.citypaper.net/articles/10....godfrey.shtml

Ok, so just what kind of book was this?

Here's a quote from the Philadelphia City Paper article referenced in the original post:

###BEGIN EXCERPT###

On the cover of the book, Hayduke Lives! by Edward Abbey, is an illustration of a man’s hand holding several sticks of dynamite. The 1991 novel is about a radical environmentalist, George Washington Hayduke III, who blows up bridges, burns tractors and sabotages other projects he believes are destroying the beautiful Southwest landscape.

###END EXCERPT###

Abbey wrote another novel, "The Monkey Wrench Gang," with a similar theme and "monkey-wrenching" has become jargon used by some of the more radical environmental protectors for their efforts to disrupt such things as logging or development projects.

And if you read the article, it says that the second time he tried to board, four security people leafed through his Harry Potter book for 20 minutes!

(He was ultimately refused boarding...)

This is nuts! Dude was told he couldn't fly for reading Harry Potter! That is one of the craziest stories I have ever read. What a perfect example of stupid security. Then after search after search, rescheduled to another flight, another search and then told he's banned from United? Things are out of hand.

This belongs under Sports Illustrated's "This week's sign of the apocalypse"

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited 10-19-2001).]

I hear that "Harry Potter" can actually be pretty scary! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Things like this make me want to buy a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook to bring on my next (non-business-trip) flight...

Pure insanity and harassment. Wonder how long before the lawyers get involved...

Why do I think there's a whole lot more to this story than hit the papers?

Mike

This is what happens when idiots are responsible for security.

The people involved seem concerned about whether they would be allowed to fly United again.

If it had been me, I'd never want to fly United again.

Let's see...

What other books could be construed as a security risk?

"1984" George Orwell
"Atlas Shrugged" Ayn Rand
"Fahrenhite 451" Ray Bradbury
"Word of Honor" Tom Clancy (depcition of 747 crashing into Capitol)
The Koran
Air charts
Flight Manual
Anything written in a language whose characters are little squiggles.

... and hundreds of others, I'm sure.

All this stuff wants me to get up and start yelling "GET A GRIP, AMERICA!" What a bunch of idiots we are becoming.

You could get pulled off an airplane for reading Edward Abbey? Geez. I guess I better leave my Dave Foreman books at home then too.

For some background ... Abbey's The Monkey Wrench Gang is generally credited with spawning Earth First!, which pretty much has its roots in Arizona.

[This message has been edited by letiole (edited 10-19-2001).]

Because you're more optimistic than I? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

isn't it weird that the article only used a single source? That's not very good journalism is it? Don't you think some pertinent facts might have been left out? Perhaps the fellow was making a show of the book to tweak people and be cute? I recall some previous articles written with an eye towards demonizing those who ejected suspicious passengers, omitting key facts revealed in other articles that made the ejections seem much more sensible. The couple who opened the exit door? The guy who asked to leave the plane (after cabin door shut) to "get some papers" after other unusual behavior...


What we know is the guy wanted to board a plane with a book featuring a terrorist on the cover holding dynamite. The book itself was about a person whose primary activity consisted of bombing various things. That is a valid reason for arousing suspicion and extra attention no? Can you sympathise with the employees who were not comfortable boarding with him? I can. I don't know whether that means he should be denied boarding, but the employees are fully within their rights to make that call...

I think that airport and airline personnel were right to act on their suspicions. I would rather they stop people and ask questions than give every passenger the benefit of the doubt. Given that the kid's ticket showed a purchase date of September 11, that he had a book about ecoterrorism bombings, that he was unemployed and a recent college dropout, why not take the extra time and make sure that this kid isn't trying to pull a copycat incident or a copycat hoax?

And I do agree with Mike that there probably was more to the story. The article admits that the 22-year-old involved is the brother of an employee of the alternative paper that wrote the article. The whole article is the kid's recollection of the events; there's nothing from the national guardsmen or security officers involved. I would suspect that the kid showed some rudeness towards the security personnel that didn't help his case.


[This message has been edited by bry99 (edited 10-19-2001).]

Does anyone remember the signs in restaurants and bars?

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SERVE ANYONE

or something to that effect!

Sounds like something posting from "The Onion"

Does anyone remember the Kinky Friedman song, "We reserve the right to refuse service to YOU"?

The article clearly states that they spoke to:

1) Philadelphia Police department spokesman Cpl. Jim Pauley
2) Burt Zastera, supervisor of airport operations for United
3) United Airlines spokesman Chris Bradwig
4) A supervisor with Aviation Safeguard (the company United contracts to man security checkpoints in Philadelphia)
5) Philadelphia International spokesman Mark Pesce
6) FAA spokeswoman Arlene Salac

Whoe else should be inteviewed? God?

If the only thing the airline and security people were willing to say was "we don't comment on security," then there's not a whole lot of ways to use that critical information in the article.

As it says in the article -- and we all KNOW that it is 100% correct -- if this guy had made any clear, overt or even joking threat in any way, shape or form, he would have been handcuffed and arrested on the spot.

I agree that I'd love to hear the other side of the story, but there's no way this guy made a bomb threat and walked out of the airport under his own power. If anyone really believed he was a "potential" threat, he'd be in an interrogation room for the next 48 hours.

Seeing as all they did was make him leave the airport, he clearly didn't do ANYTHING that they could nail him for, which in today's climate isn't exactly a high bar.

benoit wrote:
I'm counting more than one source:

1) Neil Godfrey
2) Burt Zastera, airport ops sup for UA - who seems to admit something happened, but that he can't say more
3) several other folks saying they can't comment on security matters
4) Airport PR guy who says airlines can decide who does and doesn't fly and that stories like this may become more common

The paper appears to have contacted all the appropriate sources, but some have chosen not to comment.

Benoit asked:

"isn't it weird that the article only used a single source? That's not very good journalism is it?"

It appears that the City Paper reporter tried to get comments from other sources, such as United and the airport authority, all of whom would only say some variation of "no comment".

And one of the things they teach in PR101 is that if you don't give a reporter your side of the story, the reporter's going to write a one-sided story.

Hey artboy you beat me by a minute!

Hey, ask all the questions you like -- he's not complaining about questions. He's complaining about not being allowed to fly. And then being told that he could fly, showing up at the airport, and being told that he isn't allowed to fly AGAIN. And not being told why he's not allowed to fly.

I cannot confirm anything re the author or re the story. I can confirm the nice "newspaper" is a fluff freebie, is obtained from the rusty white kiosks on many flthy Philly street corners, and the latter half of it is exclusively ads for 900 numbers, out call lovelies, porno joints, 50 kinds of kinky massages etc........well you get the message. A NYT it aint in case you are interested in subscribing. I picked up a copy about 2 weeks ago. The price was right, and FWIT, I did not purchase any services advertised in it. Info at: http://www.citypaper.net/aboutus.shtml

MisterNice

What type of publication is City Paper?


Oops, I guess I was a minute tool ate with that question. Thank you, MisterNice, for confirming my suspicions.

[This message has been edited by cactuspete (edited 10-19-2001).]

LOL -- it's 4:15 on a Friday! What else do I have to occupy my time till we go drinking? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

So I guess that means no more mystery or crime novels, since they are about people murdering people, and that could be dangerous and uncomfortable.

No more political novels, since there will always be someone in airport security or airline staff with opposite political views, and that could be dangerous and uncomfortable.

No more historical novels, since they describe awful events of war and terror, and that could be dangerous and uncomfortable.

The list can be made very long. I guess we all have to buy a romance book if we want something to read on the plane in the future.

Cactus Pete asked what kind of newspaper the City Paper is...

It's a free "alternative" paper, with separate and independent editions published in (at least) Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, DC. Editorially, I'd compare it to the Village Voice.

They're also known as a launching pad for talented young journalists, with several City Paper alumni going on to major media outlets.

None of these people were witnesses or participants in the incident.

Four of those people are the ones whose JOB it is to talk to the press.

The other two are people whose JOB it is to supervise the security people who participated in the incident.

Where I work an employee can get fired (or reprimanded) for speaking to the press about official job activities -- you're supposed to refer them to the PR people, or a supervisor. I can only imagine a security job would be a MORE strict about this kind of thing, especially in the current climate.

Zastera was directly involved.

I don't know the full story, so I cannot judge any of the people involved. But, if the only reason he was denied flying was on the basis of what book he was carrying, then I think America is in very bad shape http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

I do not ever condone censorship of books, even ones in bad taste.

I hope more details will be forthcoming over the next few days.

George...

The guy in Toronto who made a bomb joke got a couple of months in jail. Why was this guy allowed to leave?

Just once, when a company or law enforcement
official says "I can't comment" (because they already look stupid enough), I'd like to hear a reporter ask them for the name of a person who can. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I wonder if Godfrey was wearing a turban?

Hmm, I guess the upside of this story is that the profiling there isn't just looking Middle Eastern!

On a recent flight, as we were deplaning, another passenger made a mild joke on the reading material of a third passenger. I don't recall the exact title or author, but it was a Clancy type thriller depicting a picture of a plane crashing into something. I guess this person kept it in his carry-on luggage until after boarding. Or maybe it was ignored because he was a pilot himself.

I think that he should have been allowed to fly.

In any event...I think there's more here than meets the eye however, and I don't fault the airport security.

After all....a thorough luggage search, followed by a strip and body cavity search would pretty much reveal any weaponry. Stick him in the last row as well...it's a long way to the cockpit from there.

I think there are going to be a few opportunists who try to file lawsuits after setting themselves up for this kind of treatment. It's the American way....don't ya know !!!

No offence to the Americans here....the rest of the world has a very jaded view of your legal system...some tort reform is BADLY needed.



[This message has been edited by Carioca Canuck (edited 10-21-2001).]

No offense taken, it's true http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

George...

[This message has been edited by fixthed*mnthing.com (edited 10-21-2001).]