Jcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 36
Reply 1, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3299 times:
D? I really dont see what is wrong with this question, it is legitimate, especially after 9/11. You dont want the ticket agent passing him over, nor do you want to overreact. I mean, lets face it, nearly all of the 9/11 hijackers had this same profile.
DIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3217 times:
Aside from the sarcastic answers, it is not out of line during these times. Any hint of something that may suggest getting a second, or third opinion, is encouraged. Where to draw the line? That's debatable. But one cannot be too careful these days.
And, those answers I refered to as "sarcastic". . .I would tend to think they are "red flags" that Virgin is trying to implant into the minds of their employees who complete this exam. Nothing wrong with that. . .just teaching them what to be aware of.
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
GuyBetsy1 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 845 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3187 times:
What if the passenger is a 22 year old WHITE American doing the same thing?
What if the same passenger HAS an 'arabic' sounding name?
What if the passenger is Arabic looking but is a woman?
What if the passenger is an African-American?
What if the passenger is asian and is wearing a mask?
What if the passenger is asian, looks sick, is wearing a "MaoTseTung" T-shirt?
What if the passenger is .... etc etc
ZSSNC From Germany, joined Feb 2003, 428 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3156 times:
Sorry folks, but a man or woman of American, Asian, European, or Australian origin can be just as dangerous as a person of Arabic origin (let me just throw the name Timothy McVeigh in this discussion). I've seen people before that I found freaky. Yet, do not judge people because they happen to fit into your stereotype of a terrorist. I can absolutely understand if a VS employee of Arabic origin used such training material in an employment discrimination suit against VS if the "correct" answer is indeed supposed to be d.
It is the responsibility of airport security to screen you correctly but not the responsibility of a check-in agent that comes to silly conclusions if he sees that a passenger holds a SOTO ticket paid for by cash. And it is the obligation to of airport security to check every passenger equally thoroughly. No matter how suspicious or unsuspicious a person might look.
Do not judge individuals by the color of their skin. This is where all the problems start. We are all human beings. Really no difference.
Airbus A340-600 - the longest temptation in the sky
777guy From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3026 times:
"It is the responsibility of airport security to screen you correctly but not the responsibility of a check-in agent that comes to silly conclusions if he sees that a passenger holds a SOTO ticket paid for by cash."
Actually in the US it is the responsibility of check-in to inform regardless of race people who pay with cash and fly one-way.
As for the question of this quiz being racist, I do not feel it is. The 1st three questions are silly but "D" is right.
VC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3720 posts, RR: 32
Reply 14, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3007 times:
Now if you replaced the word "Arabic" with the word "American" there are certain individuals here who would shout that VAA are anti-american. In other words, whatever ethnic group was used as a example, someone would find it objectionable.
DoorsToManual From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (12 years 7 months 5 days ago) and read 2951 times:
Well, I see nothing wrong here people. As said, in light of today's issues, it is unfortunately those of Arabic origin who will be under more scrutiny than those of none Arabic origin; America has had many dealings with the middle east region, and they seem to be very unpopular in this part of the world; armed resistance against American or British interests is probably more likely to be undertaken by people from that part of the world, these are of course people who are "Arabic". That is my guess.
Oh, I agree that the potential to carry out terrorist activities is not limited to any one people, but because of world events, the probability is higher of people from certain regions. To me, it makes sense, and I am no racist.
Also be aware that silly questions are asked in some tests; many driving test questions in Britain ask what you do when you seen an old lady cross the road, possible answers include "run her over at suitable speed" and "slow down whilst simoultaneously hurling appropriate verbal abuse"........yes, true, I took my test in Britain....
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6955 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2877 times:
Well Airworthy, before or after 9-11, it doesn't matter. Sure it was after the 1971 hijackings (which you according to your profile don't remember).
...blind people who also took offense to the quiz
If people take offence to security messures - performed for their own safety - then they should stay at least ten miles away from any airport.
If I happened to be an Arab, knowing that millions of fellow Arabic people jumped up and down with joy on 9-11, then I wouldn't feel safe if I wasn't seached especially carefully when boarding a plane.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
Pmcdonald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2798 times:
This is not a racist question. We cannot and should not be blind to the fact that there IS INDEED a profile of a potential terrorist. Why not use this fact to our advantage and implement that in the security screening process. Let's face it folks: there aren't any white, American men taking over commercial airliners and flying them into buildings to kill thousands. Does this mean that it won't happen? Of course not; in this day and age, I think most would agree that ANYTHING is possible.
It would be negligent of an airline to avoid covering such volatile issues with gate agents. In fact I would imagine that an airline would be making itself vulnerable to a lawsuit in this increasingly litigious society we live in if they had no such training and suffered a terrorist incident. The afore-mentioned passenger in question 7 should indeed raise a red flag and if an agent is not trained to recognize that fact than there is a problem.
Will this policy offend some people? I would imagine, and that is indeed unfortunate. But these are strange times we are living in. I would rather somebody's feelings get hurt at check-in than risk another 9/11.
Strickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (12 years 7 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2635 times:
I agree that, while question #7 may be racist, it is necessary to prevent another easily avoidable terrorist attack. I think Pmcdonald said it best: I would rather somebody's feelings get hurt at check-in than risk another 9/11. Unfortunately, hurt feelings are the least of the airline's concern. This is a case of being damned if you do and damned if you don't. According to the original post, Virgin Atlantic is being sued for racism. But on the other hand, if gate agents were not prepared for this scenario, and an individual matching this description committed a terrorist attack on a flight, the airline would be sued for negligence in granting that person a boarding pass.