Incompetent United Air Lines Physically Drags Passenger Off Plane For Their (Airline) Mistake

[rightwinger]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

No, not at all. How is that United's fault or how does that absolve Dao from his multiple violations of Federal law?

4 days now

Looks like you owe me $25 million

 

[Faun]

Why couldn't they have made other arrangements. Why is this the passengers' problem?

Force Majeure.

What other arrangements? It was an E170 with 71 passengers paying about $220 for their ORD-SDF ticket. Total gross revenue ~$15,620. Losing the morning flight would have cost them about the same plus misconnections.

If it was my call, I'd have depland everyone first, then reboarded minus 4 passengers. If that didn't work, then cancel the flight, refund the $15K+ and ferry the aircraft to SDF with the second crew onboard.

Force majeure belongs to Government, not the private sector. Capital is what the private sector should always be about; especially in public accommodations.

Awesome that you actually believe this. Fine, let's see how it plays out between the lawyers.

Contract of Carriage Document | United Airlines
RULE 21 REFUSAL OF TRANSPORT
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.

--------------------
RULE 24 FLIGHT DELAYS/CANCELLATIONS/AIRCRAFT CHANGES

1. 
   
   
   • General
     1. S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flights originate in the U.S.A., the provisions of this Rule apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight that incurs a Schedule Change, Force Majeure Event or Irregular Operations.
     2. Non-U.S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flight originates outside the U.S.A., the following provisions apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight:
        1. If local or international laws regulate a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will not be applied.
        2. If no local law otherwise regulates a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will be applied.

-----------------------
Definitions - For the purpose of this Rule, the following terms have the meanings below:

1. 
   
   
   • Schedule Change – an advance change in UA’s schedule (including a change in operating carrier or itinerary) that is not a unique event such as Irregular Operations or Force Majeure Event as defined below.
   • Connecting Point – a point to which a Passenger holds or held confirmed space on a flight of one carrier and out of which the Passenger holds or held confirmed space on a flight of the same or another carrier. All airports through which a city is served by any carrier will be deemed to be a single Connecting Point when the receiving carrier has confirmed reservations to the Delivering Carrier.
   • Delivering Carrier – a carrier on whose flight a Passenger holds or held confirmed space to a Connecting Point.
   • Force Majeure Event – any of the following situations:
     1. Any condition beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, meteorological or geological conditions, acts of God, riots, terrorist activities, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, disturbances, or unsettled international conditions, either actual, anticipated, threatened or reported, or any delay, demand, circumstances, or requirement due directly or indirectly to such condition;
     2. Any strike, work stoppage, slowdown, lockout, or any other labor-related dispute involving or affecting UA’s services;
     3. Any governmental regulation, demand or requirement;
     4. Any shortage of labor, fuel, or facilities of UA or others;
     5. Damage to UA’s Aircraft or equipment caused by another party;
     6. Any emergency situation requiring immediate care or protection for a person or property; or
     7. Any event not reasonably foreseen, anticipated or predicted by UA.

So you would accept a movie theater tossing you and your family out just as the movie was about to start just because somewhere in some obscure web link that is not given to you it says they can? What about if it was the 7th game of the World Series? Security shows up as the pitcher is warming up and says sorry, we overbooked your seats, you gotta go.

Damn right they would have to carry me out too.

The man fulfilled all of his obligations and was entitled to fly, his schedule was built around that agreement he had with United.

Ever buy a plane ticket? Yeah, those lawyer words may exist, but you never are made aware of them.

Why do liberals always want to compare guns to driving a car? In this case, it's not a movie theater, it's not an Uber and it's not Burger King. It's an airliner and the same international laws of the seas that apply to ships apply to airliners. Don't take my word for it. The next time you fly, call the flight attendant a ****. Then, when they ask you to leave, tell them "Go fuck yourselves *****!". Please write down what happens. Take video if you can.

Chicago is in international waters now, is it? <smh>

 

[Faun]

Force majeure belongs to Government, not the private sector. Capital is what the private sector should always be about; especially in public accommodations.

Awesome that you actually believe this. Fine, let's see how it plays out between the lawyers.

Contract of Carriage Document | United Airlines
RULE 21 REFUSAL OF TRANSPORT
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.

--------------------
RULE 24 FLIGHT DELAYS/CANCELLATIONS/AIRCRAFT CHANGES

1. 
   
   
   • General
     1. S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flights originate in the U.S.A., the provisions of this Rule apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight that incurs a Schedule Change, Force Majeure Event or Irregular Operations.
     2. Non-U.S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flight originates outside the U.S.A., the following provisions apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight:
        1. If local or international laws regulate a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will not be applied.
        2. If no local law otherwise regulates a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will be applied.

-----------------------
Definitions - For the purpose of this Rule, the following terms have the meanings below:

1. 
   
   
   • Schedule Change – an advance change in UA’s schedule (including a change in operating carrier or itinerary) that is not a unique event such as Irregular Operations or Force Majeure Event as defined below.
   • Connecting Point – a point to which a Passenger holds or held confirmed space on a flight of one carrier and out of which the Passenger holds or held confirmed space on a flight of the same or another carrier. All airports through which a city is served by any carrier will be deemed to be a single Connecting Point when the receiving carrier has confirmed reservations to the Delivering Carrier.
   • Delivering Carrier – a carrier on whose flight a Passenger holds or held confirmed space to a Connecting Point.
   • Force Majeure Event – any of the following situations:
     1. Any condition beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, meteorological or geological conditions, acts of God, riots, terrorist activities, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, disturbances, or unsettled international conditions, either actual, anticipated, threatened or reported, or any delay, demand, circumstances, or requirement due directly or indirectly to such condition;
     2. Any strike, work stoppage, slowdown, lockout, or any other labor-related dispute involving or affecting UA’s services;
     3. Any governmental regulation, demand or requirement;
     4. Any shortage of labor, fuel, or facilities of UA or others;
     5. Damage to UA’s Aircraft or equipment caused by another party;
     6. Any emergency situation requiring immediate care or protection for a person or property; or
     7. Any event not reasonably foreseen, anticipated or predicted by UA.

Great, none of those apply to Dao. Thanks for playing.

Indirectly, they do. You said Force Majeure doesn't apply here. I just proved to you it does. When it did, the airline was right to deplane an appropriate number of passengers to fix the problem. Dao was one of them. Dao's problems came up when he thought he as sitting at Burger King instead of an airliner covered by multiple Federal and State laws.

You proved no such thing.

You posted a list of reasons where force majeure could potentially apply -- but none of them actually apply in Dao's case. Let's review them...

• Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
  
  
  This would require Dao to have been in non-compliance leading up to the point he was asked to deplane. Up to that point, he was apparently in complete compliance. He apparently had a legally purchased ticket, was welcomed by the airline to board their plane, took a seat, and was not being belligerent, abusive, or threatening to any of the other passengers or crew.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
  
  
  The decision to remove Dao from that flight was not based on any governmental request, regulation, or directive. It was made by the airline itself for convenience purposes. There was no emergency. There was no threat to national defense.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
  
  
  Weather played no part in seeking to remove Dao from the flight. There was no strike, no civil commotion (as the reason for him to lose his seat), no embargo, war, hostility or terrorist activity.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
  
  U.S.A. Origin Flights - Where the UA flights originate in the U.S.A., the provisions of this Rule apply to a Passenger who has a Ticket and a confirmed reservation on a flight that incurs a Schedule Change, Force Majeure Event or Irregular Operations.

• If local or international laws regulate a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will not be applied.
  
  
  There was no schedule change due to international regulations.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• If no local law otherwise regulates a Schedule Change, Force Majeure or Irregular Operations, then the procedures in Rule 24 will be applied.
  
  
  There was no schedule change for any other reasons.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
  
  RULE 24 FLIGHT DELAYS/CANCELLATIONS/AIRCRAFT CHANGES

• Any condition beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, meteorological or geological conditions, acts of God, riots, terrorist activities, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, disturbances, or unsettled international conditions, either actual, anticipated, threatened or reported, or any delay, demand, circumstances, or requirement due directly or indirectly to such condition;
  
  
  There were no acts of G-d. There were no riots. There were no international conditions affecting that flight. UA simply wanted Dao's seat to transport someone else of their choosing.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Any strike, work stoppage, slowdown, lockout, or any other labor-related dispute involving or affecting UA’s services;
  
  
  There was no strike, work stoppage, lockout, or any other labor-related dispute.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Any governmental regulation, demand or requirement; any level of government.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao[/indent]
  
  
  This was solely UA's decision and had nothing to do with any level of government.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Any shortage of labor, fuel, or facilities of UA or others;
  
  
  There was no shortage of labor affecting that flight. No issues of fuel or facilities affecting that flight.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Damage to UA’s Aircraft or equipment caused by another party;
  
  
  There was no reported damage to the plane.
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
• Any emergency situation requiring immediate care or protection for a person or property; or
  
  There was no emergency situation requiring immediate care or protection. The reason cited by UA was simply to transfer several employees.
  
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​

• Any event not reasonably foreseen, anticipated or predicted by UA.
  
  
  There were no events not reasonably foreseen requiring the delay, cancellation, or change of plane
  
  This reason does not apply to Dao​
  
  So no, force majeure, which by definition is an major enforceable event beyond the control of United Airlines; does not apply to Dao.
  
  UA was not only in control of that situation, it was their choice to give away Dao's seat, which he already occupied, to another person of their choice. You know, the polar opposite of force majeure.

Awesome. Let's see what happens in court.

Again, this ain't going to court.

One would think you'd wisen up when ....

... not only did the officers involved get put on administrative leave...

... not only did UA's CEO bend over and apologize profusely because they royally screwed up...

... not only did UA reimburse the fare of every passenger on that flight because they were wrong...

... but on this forum, both Liberals and conservatives agree that UA was wrong. And we can't even agree on what color the sky is.

That alone should clue you in.

 

[Faun]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

No, not at all. How is that United's fault or how does that absolve Dao from his multiple violations of Federal law?

Holyfuckingshit!

• "He was a paying passenger sitting in our seat in our aircraft and no one should be traded that way. To remove a booked, paid, seating passenger... we can't do that." ~ Oscar Muñoz, CEO of United Airlines

• "Probably the word, 'ashamed,' comes to mind. This can never -- will never happen again on a United Airlines flight. That's my premise and that's my promise." ~ Oscar Muñoz, CEO of United Airlines

 

[MikeK]

Fucking Liberals always hate the police.

And power-worshipping neo-Nazis always love people with superimposed official authority who exploit every opportunity to brutalize anyone they can. Too bad they don't realize this tendency is rooted in a subliminal sado/masochistic sexual perversion.

 

[Divine Wind]

....None of this needed to go down. United Airlines crew on the scene created the entire thing. And you want to go all snowflake on 'em. Spineless wimp.

And you know who agrees that United Airlines created this situation?
---- United Airlines. Hence the apologies, and the begging bribes moaning "please don't sue us" to everybody who was on that flight and witnessed what they did.

LOL. Excitable ain'tcha? You are not the person I'd want backing me in a tense situation.

What the ignorant here don't understand is that there are multiple parties/authorities involved here. Those who are trainable will learn, those who are not, won't.

 

[EverCurious]

I thought I read somewhere that the passenger was already sueing?

 

[Divine Wind]

I thought I read somewhere that the passenger was already sueing?

He is. Well, at least his well-heeled lawyers are suing. What's interesting is that they say they have two years to bring suit. Not a lawyer, but sounds more like dangling bait than seeking justice. United will probably make an offer just to shut him up.

I'm looking forward to city, state and especially Federal charges against Dao. If the Feds don't press charges for all the crimes Dao committed, then they are ringing the bell for other passengers to do the same thing. It should be interesting. Maybe another passenger will get shot as happened before with nutjobs.

 

[ChrisL]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

 

[ChrisL]

More than likely, the guy was pissed because they were throwing him off the plane AFTER he purchased a seat on said plane!

 

[Divine Wind]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

 

[Divine Wind]

More than likely, the guy was pissed because they were throwing him off the plane AFTER he purchased a seat on said plane!

Yes, he was pissed, but he was too stupid to realize:
1) He had agreed to the Contract of Carriage
2) It's not a bus, it's not an Uber and it's not Burger King. It's a Part 121 airliner covered by multiple Federal laws.

 

[ChrisL]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

Lol. Even the airline admits it did wrong. Everyone except you. How long will you carry on with this charade?

 

[ChrisL]

More than likely, the guy was pissed because they were throwing him off the plane AFTER he purchased a seat on said plane!

Yes, he was pissed, but he was too stupid to realize:
1) He had agreed to the Contract of Carriage
2) It's not a bus, it's not an Uber and it's not Burger King. It's a Part 121 airliner covered by multiple Federal laws.

You must be really bored, eh?

 

[Divine Wind]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

Lol. Even the airline admits it did wrong. Everyone except you. How long will you carry on with this charade?

What did the airline do wrong? What does that have to do with Dao's breaking multiple Federal laws?

As it is, I think the interest factor in this summer's airline flying just went up. If, as I suspect they will, more nutjobs "stand up for their rights" thus causing multiple cancellations, the tide of public opinion will turn against "the Rosa Parks of Airlines". LOL.

Rosa Parks' Niece Outraged by Disgraceful Comparison to Dr. David Dao (VIDEO)

 

[ChrisL]

The man is near 70 years old and he suffered a concussion, three lost teeth, a broken nose . . . WTH? Was it necessary to beat the crap out of the man too?

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

Lol. Even the airline admits it did wrong. Everyone except you. How long will you carry on with this charade?

What did the airline do wrong? What does that have to do with Dao's breaking multiple Federal laws?

As it is, I think the interest factor in this summer's airline flying just went up. If, as I suspect they will, more nutjobs "stand up for their rights" thus causing multiple cancellations, the tide of public opinion will turn against "the Rosa Parks of Airlines". LOL.

Rosa Parks' Niece Outraged by Disgraceful Comparison to Dr. David Dao (VIDEO)

If you have to ask, then you are probably a lost cause, unfortunately.

 

[Divine Wind]

More than likely, the guy was pissed because they were throwing him off the plane AFTER he purchased a seat on said plane!

Yes, he was pissed, but he was too stupid to realize:
1) He had agreed to the Contract of Carriage
2) It's not a bus, it's not an Uber and it's not Burger King. It's a Part 121 airliner covered by multiple Federal laws.

You must be really bored, eh?

No, in fact I'm very interested in this case as part of my job. Much more interesting than nuking North Korea, Russiagate and dropping MOABs on fucking ISIS.

 

[ChrisL]

More than likely, the guy was pissed because they were throwing him off the plane AFTER he purchased a seat on said plane!

Yes, he was pissed, but he was too stupid to realize:
1) He had agreed to the Contract of Carriage
2) It's not a bus, it's not an Uber and it's not Burger King. It's a Part 121 airliner covered by multiple Federal laws.

You must be really bored, eh?

No, in fact I'm very interested in this case as part of my job. Much more interesting than nuking North Korea, Russiagate and dropping MOABs on fucking ISIS.

I don't know what your problem is, but if you can't see what the airline did wrong, then there is definitely a problem.

 

[Divine Wind]

So they say........


Scam artist in progress, I would bet. Acting on lawyer advice. Opportunist. Criminal history reported in this thread. I don't want USA children forced to pay higher so he can scam the legal system. He caused any real injuries on purpose.

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

Lol. Even the airline admits it did wrong. Everyone except you. How long will you carry on with this charade?

What did the airline do wrong? What does that have to do with Dao's breaking multiple Federal laws?

As it is, I think the interest factor in this summer's airline flying just went up. If, as I suspect they will, more nutjobs "stand up for their rights" thus causing multiple cancellations, the tide of public opinion will turn against "the Rosa Parks of Airlines". LOL.

Rosa Parks' Niece Outraged by Disgraceful Comparison to Dr. David Dao (VIDEO)

If you have to ask, then you are probably a lost cause, unfortunately.

I feel likewise with all of the people on this forum who don't understand federal law regarding airliners.

 

[ChrisL]

Oh, so he planned this whole thing, huh? Come on.

He certainly threw the race card down very quickly even though three other people already as asked.

The entire flight was canceled and all the other 70 passengers were inconvenienced by Dao's actions. Add to this, since the aircraft had to be preserved as "evidence" of a Federal crime, I'm guessing the next day's flight from SDF to ORD was also canceled or delayed for several hours so those 70ish passengers were also inconvenienced plus missed their connections. Why? Because Dao broke his "Contract of Carriage", claimed he was more special than anyone else and violated several State and Federal laws in the process.

As the hot summer travel season literally heats up, I expect a lot more incidents like this resulting on more cancellations. Good time to check out Amtrak!!

Lol. Even the airline admits it did wrong. Everyone except you. How long will you carry on with this charade?

What did the airline do wrong? What does that have to do with Dao's breaking multiple Federal laws?

As it is, I think the interest factor in this summer's airline flying just went up. If, as I suspect they will, more nutjobs "stand up for their rights" thus causing multiple cancellations, the tide of public opinion will turn against "the Rosa Parks of Airlines". LOL.

Rosa Parks' Niece Outraged by Disgraceful Comparison to Dr. David Dao (VIDEO)

If you have to ask, then you are probably a lost cause, unfortunately.

I feel likewise with all of the people on this forum who don't understand federal law regarding airliners.

What law is that, that they can throw paying customers off the plane on a whim? Because it would inconvenience them and screw the paying customers?