I wouldn't be too surprised if folks IN the Secret Service including perhaps even the protectee at question didn't encourage him to do so. It's reasonable to think that as a professional agent with years of experience he's probably not prone to a hysteric reaction. And since discretion is a BIG part of his job, you have to wonder if there wasn't a nudge or two in a certain proper direction.

Understand, the agent makes an excellent witness to come down hard against over reaction against Arabic individuals by airlines or others. He's the poster child of a loyal american of Arabic descent. And politics is a very strange thing at times. Politicians are certainly willing to use people to make a point. They do it all the time.

Perhaps I'm being too machivellian, but it's something to wonder about. I don't think this was a setup, but I do wonder if some political hay isn't being made.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

Ka-chinggggg!!!

AA has now issued a report/comment:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/003491.html

Actually, being an agent on the Presidential Detail probably gives a person a heightened sense of ego. Protecting the "most powerful man on earth" and being privy to the secrets of the White House.

Then you're at an airport, and a commercial pilot is grilling you for improperly filled out forms and questioning your ID. I don't think it's far fetched at all that this agent could have lost his temper.

Not a big surprise. As a few here suspected, the captain had more than enough legitimate reasons to keep the agent off the plane. And much to the chagrin and dismay of the civil libertarians, it had nothing whatsoever to do with race.

Is it somehow un-American now to retain an attorney?

If you are repeatedly questioned about your credientials (in this case, 5 times by the AA captain), wouldn't you appear nervous and then lose temper too? And how many among us can fill out paperwork to someone else's 100% satisfaction? (based on Caption's version filed in his report)

I still think this whole thing could have been resolved if AA had given an apology and offered a free ticket to the secret service agent. Unfortunately, it has escalated to the point of needless lawsuit. It won't help the racial relations in this country.



[This message has been edited by ChaseTheMiles (edited 01-03-2002).]

Did you even bother to read the captain's statement???

If you are a government employee, packing a piece, and you do this for a living, and you are trying to board a commercial airliner, then the answer should be every single one of them should complete the paperwork to the captain's 100% satisfaction.

So it would help race relations if AA simply buckled under paid this guy off just because he happened to be of Arab descent, even though the AA captain was completely justified in his actions? Give me a break!



[This message has been edited by cactuspete (edited 01-03-2002).]

.

[This message has been edited by Mvic (edited 01-03-2002).]

Thanks doc for link to AA press release.

It seems the SS Agent may have bitten off
a little too much here. If I were the White House I would be concerned about his maturity
/judgment.

The airline industry has to be under alot
of pressure after what has happened. A little
"honey" from the SS Agent rather than vinegar
would have been the ticket. His trying to "intimidate" his way with credentials seems reason enough to me to bounce him.

Watch out all you FF. who have fits when you don't get your upgrade or the service you think you deserve. You will not be boarded if you appear irate.

Actually, it is OK if you are irate and abusive to the gate agent, just be respectful when dealing with the Captain as he isn't used to dealing with customers.

Oh, and if you are of middle eastern ethnicity, or look like you might be, you had better be on your very best behaviour and don't presume to bring any reading material to the airport that is not written using the Roman alphabet or for that matter any material pertaining to the middle east.



[This message has been edited by Mvic (edited 01-03-2002).]

I'm surprised at how many people here are taking AA's side! I saw parts of today's press conference, and while I can't find a transcript online, the Secret Service Agent's side obviously differs from the AA Captain's.

* Regarding the incorrect form: Agent was bumped from a previous flight, AA gate agent claims there were no other forms and simply crossed out the flight number on the form and wrote in the new number.

* Passenger seated next to the agent said he was calm and confident.

* Agent left his coat in his seat when they asked him to leave for questioning.

* FA asked passenger to cover her up while she rifled through his coat and belongings, discovering the book--a Middle Eastern (history?) textbook, in English, purchased from amazon.com.

* Captain refused all attempts to contact White House to verify his credentials; something the BWI staff later did, and took all of 10 minutes.

* Agent supposedly never raised his voice; however, called the Captain "unprofessional" at which point the Captain exploded.

* According to lawyer, all monetary awards (if they decide to proceed with lawsuit) will go to a charity for families of the previous AA flight crashes.

* Currently the agent only wants recognition and an apology that "his civil rights were violated," that AA will train employees on proper procedure, so that this will never happen in the future. (Lawyers cite "dozens" of cases where even after FBI clear pax, pax were denied boarding by AA.)

The AA release doesn't "prove" anything; it's just as self-serving as any statement the agent might choose to put out. The real question regarding this incident is whether the pilot, or any pilot, would have treated a white secret service agent the same way.

If the airline allows a white armed federal agent on after filling out a form incompletely, but does not allow an agent of arab decent on in the same situation that is discrimination. I'm not making a judgement, that just the law. The pilot cannot make up separate rules for arab passengers. The "authority" of the pilot over the plane does not give him the right to violate an individual's constitutional rights.

I have to say, it is an interesting assumption that the incident is based on race and racism, and not a healthy fear for the safety of a flight. I admire people's psychic abilities to read the captains mind, understand his reasoning and motivations, and see exactly how the event transpired in all its detail.

Sort of like the assumption people are making that the pilot knowingly booted an SS agent, when the whole question revolved around whether the passenger with a gun on board really was an SS agent at all! Isn't it *really* dumb for people to say how great SS agents are, and how they trust SS agents more, and how SS agents belong on planes, when the whole issue was a lack of certainty about his being a real SS agent at all? Maybe the captain loves SS agents and feels safer with them around, but as is claimed, something was quite wrong with his paperwork and reaction to valid questioning.

I'm not saying I believe the captain, I won't make that assumption. But it is equally bogus to assume the agent was right here.

This thread has been an interesting showcase of people's eagerness to assume and cry racism, and unfairly demonize AA.

What is the end result of these arguments? Could it be... forcing a pilot to fly when he fears for the safety of himself, his crew, and hundreds of passengers, for the sake of avoiding racial controversy when the suspicious passenger is a minority? Or removing the discretion of the pilot to not fly altogether? Subjecting pilots discretion to tribunals tilted towards an assumption of racism? Of course we don't hear similar outrage that the shoe bomber might have been stopped in paris twice partly because of his race. Or that the border agent who stopped the car filled with explosives intended to blow up seattle on the millenium, might have used race as a factor in deciding to search.

Political correctness can be lethal

[This message has been edited by benoit (edited 01-03-2002).]

I've been following this thread for some time. Is it just me or are we missing the bigger issue here.

This agent would have flown on this flight without the captain reviewing his paperwork at all if he had never left the plane to retrieve something. If you want to point the finger at the agent then do so for being foolish and forgetting something at the gate.

The pilots comments on the carbon copy of the form being unreadable could have been easily resolved had he taken the time to get the original. Instead he chose to interrogate the agent to the point of making him complete the form not once but twice.

Bottom line is this captain erred in not proactively reviewing the forms of an armed passenger on his plane. A captain should know who is armed on his flights and know what they look like before they board the plane. For this captain to only know his armed passengers by a seat # is unacceptable. What if they booked the same seat to another passenger and the agent volunteered to take any empty seat somewhere else on the plane. It is really unfortunate that only when he realized that his armed passenger was the same one the FA “profiled” did he even get involved.

There are two sides to every story. AA has
released the written statemetns of the Capt
and their SOC Mgr. It seems that perhaps
the SS agent needs to crank-up his
professionalism.

Text of Captain's Statement

Armed passenger * flight 363 BWI/DFW.
Flight was scheduled to leave at 1715.
I was notified that due to a mechanical
at the next gate - they would hold our
push for approximately 30-40 minutes to
try to accommodate those pax going to
DFW. A few moments later the *1 flt
attendant brought to my attention that
she and other flt att were concerned
about the actions of one of the pax.
This pax left the aircraft with carryon
bags still in his seat. He told the flt
att. Please don't leave without him.
While the pax was away a flt att
observed books in the individuals seat
which were written in what she assessed
was Arabic style print. Upon further
investigation - when the individual came
back it was determined that he was in
fact our 'armed passenger'. I then
decided to stop my pre-flt and review
the AA E2. The form was unreadable
because it was a carbon-copy and there
were missing items. I then had the
agent come back and recheck his
credentials and give me a new AA E2.
Again this form was filled out
improperly. I left my seat to speak to
the individual. He appeared nervous and
anxious. With all the forms that I
received in error I determined that the
most prudent course of action was to
call dispatch to phone patch me to the
SOC. I asked them to fax me a copy of
what the Secret Service credentials
looks like. He advised me that BWI
should have this information. BWI in
fact does not. We still were
accommodating the connecting passengers
and had time to further determine the
proper credentials of this person.
While all this was going on the
individual approached me in front of the
lead agent and asked why he was being
denied boarding for so long. I
disclosed to him that the paper work was
not correct and that I needed to have
this fixed before he would be
accommodated. This was an AA issue and
none of his concern. At this time the
individual became very hostile with me.
Upon all the information that I had up
to this point - I had doubt as to his
actual representation as a Special Agent
for the Secret Service. 1. *Two
improperly filled out AA Form E2. 2.
*Flt atts bringing to my attention what
appeared to be strange behavior. 3.
*Hostility toward me for trying to
correct my required paper work. I then
had the Maryland Airport Authority
police determine his proper ID by
calling the Secret Service as to his
legitimate status. This took about ten
minutes to complete. In the interim I
was given a third improperly filled out
AA Form E2. This had no signature of
the LEO. No initial as to the traveling
status of the officer. No phone number.
While the police were determining the
proper status of this individual this
person came up to me with loud abusive
comments as to his being denied
boarding. That he has the powers of the
White House behind him and that this is
not of [sic] the end of this matter.
The police agreed with me that there was
a legitimate concern because of his
unprofessional behavior. This was all
in full view of every passenger boarding
the flight. He then said he would not
board the flt. As it turned out he was
an actual LEO. After the events of 9/11
and another of our fls targeted with
explosives and causing injury to a flt
att I absolutely felt correct in having
this individuals [sic] identification
validated. After three improper AA Form
E2s [sic] and the behavior of this
individual, I needed to be 100% sure of
his credentials. If he just let us do
our job of getting the paper work in
order, he would have been boarded, and
it would have been a pleasure to carry
an 'armed passenger'. With the lives of
the entire passengers and crew, I was
uncomfortable with his actions and did
what a Captain should do and edge toward
the side of safety and not move the
aircraft until I'm confident that all
issues are satisfied before taking off.
As a note, I am filling [sic] a
misconduct report with the Secret
Services Internal Affairs division. I
would suggest that AA Security follow up
on this matter because this individual
made the entire crew uncomfortable with
his actions and absolutely with his
confrontational behavior toward me. The
police officer who was very helpful was
officer (redacted). The case # was
(redacted). The Secret Service Agent's
name was (redacted). Passports and
fraudulent IDs can easily be altered to
look passable. With all the items to
this event not adding up, I absolutely
believe I acted in the best interest of
my crew, pax and AA.

Text of SOC Manager's Statement:

I was working as Center Manager on
Christmas and received a call from
Captain (employee number ) flying flight
363 from BWI/DFW. The Captain had a
concern about a passenger onboard his
flight. The Captain first requested a
fax containing all wanted terrorist
photos that American had available. I
explained that this was not possible and
asked exactly what problem he was
encountering. He said that he received
paperwork for a passenger that stated he
was a Secret Service Agent and would be
traveling armed. The Captain said that
the paperwork contained scratched out
flight numbers and may have been
altered. I then suggested that the
Captain request new paperwork. The
Captain called back again and stated the
he was still questioning the validity of
this passenger working for the Secret
Service because the secret service agent
had failed to fill the paperwork out
properly again. I asked if he had
looked at the agent credentials. He
said you work for the airline, you know
how easy it would be to get fake I.D. I
suggested that I could call the Secret
Service and verify that this passenger
was in fact an agent. I asked the
Captain to request the agent's superiors
[sic] name and number. The Captain said
that we should not use his information
because he could have a friend answering
the phone when we called. I then
suggested get the local police to verify
the I.D. since, being located at BWI,
they would have exposure to Secret
Service I.D.'s and contact phone
numbers. The next phone call I received
was from the AA ticket agent at BWI. He
said that the Secret Service agent had
verbally abused the Captain and that the
Captain was denying him boarding. I
asked to speak to the police officer
that was witness to this, who then
verified what the ticket agent had
stated. Based on this, I then decided
to end boarding to this passenger on
future AA flights. Later, I received a
call from the AA ticket agent at BWI and
was asked to talk to this Secret Service
Agent. I then heard the Secret Service
Agent's side of the story. He admitted
to not properly filling out the
paperwork for carrying a weapon; not
once, but twice. He also admitted to
losing his temper with the Captain
because he was asked for his ID five
separate times. When he asked why he
was denied future boarding, I explained
that I could not expose AA crews or
passengers to abuse. He said he was
being discriminated against, wanted my
bosses [sic] name, and threatened that
he would have my job. He was going to
take this to the highest authority. I
asked for his superior's name and
contacted him. I explained the
situation to the superior. He confirmed
that this man did work for the Secret
Service, and would contact him. A short
time later the agent's superior called
back and said that he was sorry for
losing his temper and would like to
travel out of DCA the next day. He then
stated that the agent was of Middle
Eastern descent. I explained to the
superior that I did not know this and
that there was no discrimination in the
denied boarding process with SOC. I was
1,000 miles away from the situation and
handled it as we would for any unruly
passenger. We agreed the agent could
travel the next day.