Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Okay, tell me why this is unfair:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That is not a law.
Want to try again?
what is it? a suggestion?
As i keep telling you...Delta HAS set policy of which the pilots followed. The pilot can boot anyone they want for just about any reason. Again, read my link on contract of carriage.
When I was in hotels and I saw a car pull up, empty out 7 'kids' the oldest being 21, and reeking of potsmoke, I often refused them service. Wouldn't let them past the lobby.Yes, they reserve the right on certain rational grounds... Simply being Muslim or "looking" Muslim is not one of them.
They essentially reserve the right to not fly anyone they don't want for any reason they want.
Was I discriminating? Damn right I was. I knew what they were looking for. A party room to trash.
If I saw a group of4 mexicans get out of a commercial looking van, I often rented to them, despite only having a Matricular Consilar card for ID because they'd be sleeping and leaving early. The biggest issue being used toilet paper in the bathroom corner (WTF is up with that???) and my breakfast bar being emptied.
I wouldn't rent to anyone drunk, stoned or acting 'weird' either because I would not feel safe with them in the hotel or fearing for the damage they would cause.
This is called using good judgement. If that pilot thought in HIS JUDGMENT that it was unsafe to haul these 2 men, then that was over right there. 300 other lives took precident.
They essentially reserve the right to not fly anyone they don't want for any reason they want.
The discretion is indeed broad but the FAA rules maintain an anti-discrimination provision...
The FAA includes an anti-discrimination provision, section 44902(b) of the Act
grants air carriers broad discretion to refuse transportation to any passenger a
carrier decides is, or might be inimical to safety.2
http://www.law.suffolk.edu/highlights/stuorgs/lawreview/documents/Gallagher_Comment_WDFF.pdf
2. See 49 U.S.C. § 40127(a) (2000) (prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, national origin,
religion, sex or ancestry); 49 U.S.C. § 44902(b) (2000) (granting air carriers permissive refusal of passengers
and property if adverse to safety); see also 8A AM. JUR. 2D Aviation § 73 (2008) (describing air carriers
discretion to remove passengers for perceived security threats). Under 14 C.F.R. § 91.3, the pilot in
command is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft, and according to 49 U.S.C. § 44902(b),
may decide to remove passengers from the plane. See 14 C.F.R. § 91.3(a) (2008); 49 U.S.C. § 44902(b)
(2000).
https://litigation-essentials.lexis...cid=3B15&key=fb76830c45e0da3420f49f74783bbd83
The First Circuit held that the plaintiff passenger must show the air carrier's decision to refuse transportation and rebooking is arbitrary or capricious based on the information known to the decision-maker at the time of the refusal. 5
You do realize that just because we don't condone discrimination in this country, that does no mean that any and all actions taken against a minority are discrimination, don't you?
I SERIOUSLY doubt this pilot had these men removed just because. For one thing pilots aren't even aware of their passengers identities UNLESS a flight attendant makes them aware of a particular person due to problems. These two yahoos did SOMETHING to get on the pilot's radar to begin with. Bet that.
Something I do not think anyone else has mentioned in this thread.
One of these guys was a part of the group of six imams kicked off a flight last year because they refused to follow the instructions of the flight crew to turn off all electronic devices and prepare for takeoff. Even though I have heard nothing else about this incident that little detail makes me even more suspicious that something else happened
Assumes facts not in evidence - which is ignorantSee the difference between me and 99% of the people who are scared to death of muslims is I actually interact with them pretty consistently.
I've seen every version of bigotry and the reason behind them has been consistent in every case, ignorance.
Even many Muslims are afraid of Jihad
I started another thread asking muslim-haters about the personal experiences they had with muslims, thread went hundreds of posts and I didn't get one single account of an experience. Even on a message board where it's easy to lie and not get caught no one would even offer up a story.
It was very eye opening and showed my assessment to still not be proven incorrect.
Assumes facts not in evidence - which is ignorant
Even many Muslims are afraid of Jihad
I started another thread asking muslim-haters about the personal experiences they had with muslims, thread went hundreds of posts and I didn't get one single account of an experience. Even on a message board where it's easy to lie and not get caught no one would even offer up a story.
It was very eye opening and showed my assessment to still not be proven incorrect.
What the fuck does THIS have to do with ANYTHING. I have had a good experience with black people to, that doesn't mean all black people are trustworthy. Some will egads commit crimes against you even if you're nice to them. Sheesh, so will white people. I would assume that if that we ever meet green aliens from outer space some of them will be nice and some not so nice as well. Doesn't change the FACT that in THIS instance Muslims are the most likely culprits when it comes to airline terrorism.
Something I do not think anyone else has mentioned in this thread.
One of these guys was a part of the group of six imams kicked off a flight last year because they refused to follow the instructions of the flight crew to turn off all electronic devices and prepare for takeoff. Even though I have heard nothing else about this incident that little detail makes me even more suspicious that something else happened
You know what? If they did something wrong, I would have no problem with the actions of the pilot. You can be "suspicious" all you want, but I didn't see anything written (YET) about any wrongdoing on the part of the Imams.
Besides, if they DID something wrong, why would they have been given another flight?
They were given another flight the first time, screamed discrimination, and everyone on the left defended their right to fly. Maybe the stewardess remembered the guy and told the pilot, and he wanted him off the plane. Perfectly reasonable, if you ask me.
You are the one that actually has to prove it was discrimination on the part of the pilot it you want your position to fly. That is going to be very hard since, at the time the pilot turned the plane around, he never saw them. He was locked in the cockpit taxiing the plane for takeoff.
Did he get up and take a walk through the plane looking for Muslims to toss off the plane? Highly unlikely, and that would have violated FAA regulations. How did he become aware of them if they did not cause a problem? See, the problem here is not with me saying that he was probably justified in what he did, it is with you insisting that he was wrong. You have to prove it, I just have to wait for you to provide evidence, which you have not.
If you ever do I will be happy to admit he should have let them stay on the plane. Until then, what do you have?
As i keep telling you...Delta HAS set policy of which the pilots followed. The pilot can boot anyone they want for just about any reason. Again, read my link on contract of carriage.
Perhaps YOU should read the policy yourself. I saw no mention of "for just about any reason" There are distinct criteria that need to be met to be kicked off a plane. I ask again... what did these people do to get kicked off the plane?
They were given another flight the first time, screamed discrimination, and everyone on the left defended their right to fly. Maybe the stewardess remembered the guy and told the pilot, and he wanted him off the plane. Perfectly reasonable, if you ask me.
You are the one that actually has to prove it was discrimination on the part of the pilot it you want your position to fly. That is going to be very hard since, at the time the pilot turned the plane around, he never saw them. He was locked in the cockpit taxiing the plane for takeoff.
Did he get up and take a walk through the plane looking for Muslims to toss off the plane? Highly unlikely, and that would have violated FAA regulations. How did he become aware of them if they did not cause a problem? See, the problem here is not with me saying that he was probably justified in what he did, it is with you insisting that he was wrong. You have to prove it, I just have to wait for you to provide evidence, which you have not.
If you ever do I will be happy to admit he should have let them stay on the plane. Until then, what do you have?
What do I have? I have Delta's Policy that's been displayed here numerous times... Which doesn't say... "We reserve the right to boot you from our aircraft for whatever reason we want".
So, I am saying that if these guys were peaceable and just wanted to get to where they were going(and thus far, I've read nothing to the contrary)... that's exactly the action that the pilot took.... For whatever reason he wanted.
They were given another flight the first time, screamed discrimination, and everyone on the left defended their right to fly. Maybe the stewardess remembered the guy and told the pilot, and he wanted him off the plane. Perfectly reasonable, if you ask me.
You are the one that actually has to prove it was discrimination on the part of the pilot it you want your position to fly. That is going to be very hard since, at the time the pilot turned the plane around, he never saw them. He was locked in the cockpit taxiing the plane for takeoff.
Did he get up and take a walk through the plane looking for Muslims to toss off the plane? Highly unlikely, and that would have violated FAA regulations. How did he become aware of them if they did not cause a problem? See, the problem here is not with me saying that he was probably justified in what he did, it is with you insisting that he was wrong. You have to prove it, I just have to wait for you to provide evidence, which you have not.
If you ever do I will be happy to admit he should have let them stay on the plane. Until then, what do you have?
What do I have? I have Delta's Policy that's been displayed here numerous times... Which doesn't say... "We reserve the right to boot you from our aircraft for whatever reason we want".
So, I am saying that if these guys were peaceable and just wanted to get to where they were going(and thus far, I've read nothing to the contrary)... that's exactly the action that the pilot took.... For whatever reason he wanted.
In other words, you have nothing. Even the FAA says that the passenger has to prove that, knowing what the pilot knew at the time, he consciously discriminated against them. If these guys were peaceable how did the pilot learn they were on board and decide to kick them off after he left the gate? You are alleging discrimination, prove it.
Something I do not think anyone else has mentioned in this thread.
One of these guys was a part of the group of six imams kicked off a flight last year because they refused to follow the instructions of the flight crew to turn off all electronic devices and prepare for takeoff. Even though I have heard nothing else about this incident that little detail makes me even more suspicious that something else happened
You know what? If they did something wrong, I would have no problem with the actions of the pilot. You can be "suspicious" all you want, but I didn't see anything written (YET) about any wrongdoing on the part of the Imams.
Besides, if they DID something wrong, why would they have been given another flight?
I don't see how its different.
Something I do not think anyone else has mentioned in this thread.
One of these guys was a part of the group of six imams kicked off a flight last year because they refused to follow the instructions of the flight crew to turn off all electronic devices and prepare for takeoff. Even though I have heard nothing else about this incident that little detail makes me even more suspicious that something else happened
You know what? If they did something wrong, I would have no problem with the actions of the pilot. You can be "suspicious" all you want, but I didn't see anything written (YET) about any wrongdoing on the part of the Imams.
Besides, if they DID something wrong, why would they have been given another flight?
Do you REALLY not understand ANYTHING?
Ok, quick example. Last year I was in Vegas, at the airport waiting to come home as I started to give my ticket to the agent at the gate she asked if I was inebriated. I was, they barred me from getting on the flight, but they got me on one two hours later when I was sober enough to be allowed on the flight.
Being booted off one plane does NOT mean you're eternally barred from every flying again.
Although it is my OPINION that two instances of being removed from flights should absolutely preclude you from ever boarding another flight. In fact, I'll go further. It should be a CRIMINAL charge enforced by JAIL TIME to disrupt a flight.
Works for me. Lots of brat kids going to jail now..and hopefully along with their oblivious parents!
You know what? If they did something wrong, I would have no problem with the actions of the pilot. You can be "suspicious" all you want, but I didn't see anything written (YET) about any wrongdoing on the part of the Imams.
Besides, if they DID something wrong, why would they have been given another flight?
Do you REALLY not understand ANYTHING?
Ok, quick example. Last year I was in Vegas, at the airport waiting to come home as I started to give my ticket to the agent at the gate she asked if I was inebriated. I was, they barred me from getting on the flight, but they got me on one two hours later when I was sober enough to be allowed on the flight.
Being booted off one plane does NOT mean you're eternally barred from every flying again.
Although it is my OPINION that two instances of being removed from flights should absolutely preclude you from ever boarding another flight. In fact, I'll go further. It should be a CRIMINAL charge enforced by JAIL TIME to disrupt a flight.
Do you REALLY not understand ANYTHING?
Ok, quick example. Last year I was in Vegas, at the airport waiting to come home as I started to give my ticket to the agent at the gate she asked if I was inebriated. I was, they barred me from getting on the flight, but they got me on one two hours later when I was sober enough to be allowed on the flight.
Being booted off one plane does NOT mean you're eternally barred from every flying again.
Although it is my OPINION that two instances of being removed from flights should absolutely preclude you from ever boarding another flight. In fact, I'll go further. It should be a CRIMINAL charge enforced by JAIL TIME to disrupt a flight.
I'm not talking about throwing crying babies and their mommas in jail sweetheart; even though I do agree they are annoying.
I'm not talking about throwing crying babies and their mommas in jail sweetheart; even though I do agree they are annoying.
Oh come on why not. They are very disruptive!
I know, I know , I know. I just could not resist that one.
And I don't understand the ridiculousness of Choosing not to serve someone for "any reason".
How about if, it turns out these guys did nothing wrong... I, or someone else theoretically start a viral campaign against Delta?
In other words, yeah... I suppose you CAN technically refuse service to anyone... but it really doesn't make much sense.
