Southwest sees speaking Arabic as a threat - kicks man off flight

Do you concur with United's apology and suspension of their employee?

 

I'm curious what the "rational explanation" is for a stewardess telling a woman she wont give her a coke can because she can "use it as a weapon."

 

Try talking to me instead of being a passive-aggressive snot.

"Rational explanation"--the Muslim must have argued! Anti-Muslim bias cannot exist EVER, especially in a country where the majority of people want to ban all non-citizen Muslims.

Nice, fantastic explanation.

 

I don't agree or disagree, there's not enough evidence available for me to say one way or the other.

Because that's the policy on airplanes. They pour your drinks for you, they won't give you coke cans for exactly that reason. It doesn't mean that they think that individual person is going to do that, it's just policy. Have you never had a drink on a plane before? I've been told the exact same thing while wearing my Army class A's. I'm not a moron so I didn't take it as a racial thing.

 

You are a good example of what I was talking about, but you aren't the only one. Don't be so vain.

A rational explanation for ANYONE being thrown off a flight is that they argued with the flight attendant. It doesn't take a whole lot to get tossed off a flight. If you were an intelligent person who flies as much as you claim to, then you'd know that.

Anyway, feel free to keep playing that violin and waxing your cross. Eventually someone will care.

 

Is there enough evidence for United to make that call? You think? Or is this all one big "CAIR" conspiracy.

Does not explain why another passenger on the flight was privileged.

 

How the f**k are the amounts of flights you're on correlated with your intelligence.

Yeah, well, the Supreme Court and several Federal Appeals Courts have cared several times but you seem to be the type that "loves" the Constitution and its principles in passing.

Nice to see you concede that this was an irrational eviction. United admitted to much the same.

 

I think it's something that idiots like yourself are blowing out of proportion in order to advance a narrative, just like the kid that took a commercially manufactured clock out of it's case, made it look like a stereotypical bomb, and tried to call it an invention after having it go off in class.

 

But the thing about that is, another passenger was given the can.

And actually, I fly United very often. They give me the can every time I ask.

 

If you fly enough, you should know the policies on airplanes and perhaps seen similar incidents, they aren't rare. If you know the policies and have seen incidents, AND are even slightly intelligent, you would have a more reasonable opinion than you do.

Something is lacking, I'm not sure which part though.

 

I don't have to blow anything out of proportion--I've said several times that this is nothing compared to the flagrant and routine violations of civil liberties for Muslims by the American government. I've said this thread topic is a waste of time. Anti-Islamic bias is obvious in so many ways that stopping at this negligible bit is really limiting.

I have a problem with the way you and Cohete think, and our exchange has shown me more and more why. You're the one who wanted to be a smartaleck and chime in on Cohete's incoherence. Now that you're reduced to babbling stories to justify your bias, I have to wonder how strong your commitment to Constitutional principles can be given your inability to look deeper at discrimination.

It worries me because I think there are plenty of people like you that may genuinely think they are preserving Constitutional principles, but who cannot look past their flawed reasoning.

 

I just read the story, in this instance it looks like it really might have been discrimination because the airline says they don't have that policy, but I have been told that before.

 

Yeah--your idea of intelligence.

 

SMH, now you are trying to bring the constitution into people being thrown off flights? Seriously?

 

Then there is the fact that not all Arabic speakers are Muslim, but whatever. . . .

And not all Muslims are terrorists, but whatever. . . .

 

There are several instances where anti-Muslim bias has been killed by the courts. To allege that such bias is "fantastic" or doesn't exist seems to show me that you don't look deeper into what it takes to preserve the Constitution.

Do read into what is happening in America if you think "anti-Muslim" bias is not a factor.

I always thought of this thread topic as a sideshow, but I'm exasperated by how unwilling to think people are. I've given you all the sources you need and spoonfed you examples, and so have others in the thread. Only now are you relenting--but it took a damn while.

 

There was potentially one legitimate example of bias....that doesn't justify your narrative though. I know you think it does, but the fact that the hammer finally found a nail doesn't make up for all of those screws you've been hammering on.

 

Are you even trying to make sense?

If I were a flight crew member, it is not really up to me nor is it my job to assess these kinds of situations beyond whatever training has been provided. I assume that most commercial airlines have somekind of policy as to what their flight crew should do in this circumstance. Like I said, in my case I follow that policy.

All said and done, please answer the question, how would you know it as a fact that this would be a "non-threat". By the way, aren't you the one that brought up the subject of threats?

 

Wow, Bobby, it took one web link to turn you around, now imagine if you used Google on a regular basis.

You seem to be steadfastly avoiding talking about worser cases. If you'd like I can start a new thread so we can waste more time there.