Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Muslims removed from plane because flight attendant was uncomfortable

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:23 PM
Original message
Muslims removed from plane because flight attendant was uncomfortable
Article Last Updated: 03/18/2006 4:29 AM PST

Muslims allege flight discrimination
Hayward father, son say they were kicked off plane because of their attire
By Matt O'Brien, STAFF WRITER


snip...
Fazal Khan, 59, and his son, Mohammed Khan, 28, boarded a United Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Oakland on Jan. 31 wearing traditional South Asian tunics, white skullcaps and loose trousers. Both men also have long beards.

Before takeoff, attendants asked the Khans to vacate their seats and escorted them back to the terminal, said their lawyer, Shirin Sinnar of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights in San Francisco.

"They were essentially told, 'You can't take this flight because the flight attendant is uncomfortable,'" Sinnar said.

snip...
An airline customer service representative walked onto the plane and asked the Khans to bring their carry-on handbags with them and return to the airport terminal, Sinnar said.

After escorting them out, the representative was "sympathetic" but said they could not return because the flight attendant was not comfortable with them on board, Sinnar said. With their check-in luggage still in the aircraft's cargo hold, the Khans were booked on a separate flight going to San Francisco International Airport a few hours later.

"The strange thing is no one took the bags off the first flight," Sinnar said. "If there was any thought they were a security risk, certainly their bags should have been removed."

more...
http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_3616093?source=rss

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. what a bunch of crap K&N n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. One note about luggage--
while it makes sense that the luggage should have been removed, their bags would not have necessarily even been on the same flight. It is a fairly common practice for luggage to be shipped separately from its owners, depending on the availability of cargo space and space available on other flights to the same destination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsIt1984Yet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
16. But, if a passenger exits a flight, the luggage should go with them?
I was on a flight once... years ago (mid-80's) on which Louis Farrakhan was on board. One passenger who saw him after boarding plane got pissed off and walked off plane, stating that he refused to fly in a plane on which Farrakhan was boarded. His luggage had been placed in cargo already and our flight was delayed significantly so that they could find the luggage of the pissed off passenger who walked and remove it.

Maybe it's different if a passenger leaves flight on their own will and accord vs. the will of the airline?? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. That's just plain weird. If the security concerns were legit, why not...
...remove the bags?

Lord, with all the innocent people on the no-fly lists, if these guys had ANYTHING in their background that was shady, they would have showed up there...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
4. O, um, Miss/Sir...?
Edited on Sat Mar-18-06 11:33 PM by Drum
GTFOI: get the f$&# over it (your "discomfort.") None of you are final barometers, ultimate tests of airline security. Your biases are not even optional. Of course eyes-open for real dangerous activities IS part of the job, but if you are not comfortable around the clientele, perhaps you should stick with regional flights of pursue something else more insular and homogeneous.


(edit for speeling)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. couldn't the FLIGHT ATTENDANT have gotten a different flight?
i mean, geez. the flight attendant was clearly the one with the problem, here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. They weren't even trying to 'blend in" for pity sakes
Recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Exactly.
If you've seen the 9/11 security tapes, the hijackers were dressed in regular American clothing with no headscarves on or any other noticeable attire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juliana24 Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. Yeah, what's wrong with "those people" anyway? K&N
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. The flight attendant should lose their job after this...
Eject the passengers but not their stowed luggage? "Safety concerns" my ass, fucking bigot. :thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Recommended.
I can't wait to hear the freepers at work try to justify this.:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Heck, back in my bad ol' days posting on Free Republic....
...I got in a flame war because I thought ALL Muslims in the US shouldn't be shipped away to detention camps. Their reasoning was that the religion teaches jihad, so no Muslim could be anything except a terrorist, so they ALL belonged in camps. My reasoning was the obvious.

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I'm glad you made it to the other side safely.
They don't care too much for defectors.

I realize that many people still base their worldviews on archaic religious dogma, but that doesn't make it any more palatable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeattleGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-18-06 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
10. Hmmmm, guilty by reason of apparel
These people made it through security, their luggage made it through (and was left on the plane), yet because the flight attendant was "uncomfortable" with them because of how they were dressed, they were REMOVED from the flight?

What's next? Men with visible tatoos removed because they might be a gang member?

Women with long fingernails wearing red polish removed because they might be high priced call girls?

Stupid questions, yes. Quite fitting for the stupidity of what the flight attendant did to those two men.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. anyone not wearing a crucifix and an American Flag - clear signs of terror
Bastards. But, I repeate myself all too often these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. You can fly only if you're a religious virgin.
I'm not sure if you need to have been savagely raped and sodomized.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
17. Yet no one was uncomfortable with the bomb materials that got
through last week. This is what brainwashing looks like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. DING DING DING we have our winner!
Is it possible this story is just a media changing the subject from what really does matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. I missed that particular story
more info please?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. It was in the news the other night, here's the link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11863165/

few paragraphs;

Lisa Myers
Senior investigative correspondent

WASHINGTON - Imagine an explosion strong enough to blow a car's trunk apart, caused by a bomb inside a passenger plane. Government sources tell NBC News that federal investigators recently were able to carry materials needed to make a similar homemade bomb through security screening at 21 airports.

In all 21 airports tested, no machine, no swab, no screener anywhere stopped the bomb materials from getting through. Even when investigators deliberately triggered extra screening of bags, no one discovered the materials.
...
Investigators for the Government Accountability Office conducted the tests between October and January, at the request of Congress. The goal was to determine how vulnerable U.S. airlines are to a suicide bomber using cheap, readily available materials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. yikes... thanks.
Does rather point to the inane tendency for folks to be more concerned about things that are less worrisome and somehow be unfazed/aware of the things that should make the ears prick up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
18. Unreal.. n/t
Edited on Sun Mar-19-06 10:21 AM by converted_democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kittenpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
21. that makes me so sick--clearly the flight attendant had the problem,
not them!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Glimmer of Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
22. How does a flight attendant have this kind of power?
Does United have a policy that allows flight attendants to kick off passengers because they are "uncomfortable?" United needs to fire the flight attendant and/or change their policy. This is unacceptable. I feel so bad for those passengers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
23. Good thing we have gw telling us not to be anti-islam....
... by getting that Dubai Ports deal thru...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ice4Clark Donating Member (466 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
24. Guess the attendant better find another line of work as
once Pakistan owns one of our airlines, they may be flying the planes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
25. Democracy 101 bites the dust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
28. Can we remove anyone in a suit reading "Wall Street Journal"?
I never do feel "comfortable" with such people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. That flight attendent and her boss are going to cost..
their airline losts of money. Law suit time from the travelers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-19-06 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Does a muslim have rights in Bush's America?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC