Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Man Denied Boarding Qantas Jet Because Of T Shirt  
User currently offlineKevin From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 1140 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22779 times:

A man was denied boarding a Qantas jet from MEL bound for LHR, because he was wearing a T shirt saying that George W Bush was world's #1 terrorist.

245 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBPS3458 From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22769 times:

You beat me with this thread by about 2 minutes. Just heard the same news on a local radio station here in Brisbane.

Any body have further info ? Can this cause problems for QF if the reason was really the t-shirt. Apparently t-shirt had a G.W. Bush pictures with the slogan "No. 1 international terrorist" or similar.

Cheers,

Peter


User currently offlineFermarta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22720 times:

Oneworld intranet says that when you are non reving with QF the following is not acceptable:

Any extremes of leisurewear - including sweatshirts or T-shirts with questionable graphics or language.

Probably this applies also to paying customers.


User currently offlineTravellin'man From United States of America, joined May 2001, 530 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22670 times:

I am guessing that airlines can reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, and so can legally protect themselves against lawsuits or accusations of discrimination, even if their decisions are asinine.


It is not enough to be rude; one must also be incorrect.
User currently offlineDSMflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22672 times:

Didn't this happen to some woman in the US a few months back? I wanna say it was on Southwest and involved the "f word," but I can't remember for sure.

User currently offlineFlyMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 278 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22630 times:

Quoting Travellin'man (Reply 3):
am guessing that airlines can reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, and so can legally protect themselves against lawsuits or accusations of discrimination, even if their decisions are asinine.

Is that true?. An airline can refuse a passenger for any reason at all? I can't imagine that is the case. A ticket represents a contract between the airline and the purchasing customer. Maybe I should read it more closely. Or maybe I will show up for my next flight naked (although that would probably get me denied boarding as well, oh well what to do?)  wink 



Fly the friendly skies of life!. Enjoy every minute.
User currently offlineManni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22583 times:

Quoting Kevin (Thread starter):
A man was denied boarding a Qantas jet from MEL bound for LHR, because he was wearing a T shirt saying that George W Bush was world's #1 terrorist.


That's silly. They could have requested him to wear a jacket, jumper (it's winter in the UK so he must have had either a jacket or a jumper in his carry on) or wear his t-shirt inside out. Failing all this they could have asked him to buy a new shirt in one of shops. Looks like the boarding agent had a bad day and that passenger had to take the consequences of the boarding agent's bad day.



SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2670 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22562 times:

Quoting FlyMD (Reply 5):
maybe I will show up for my next flight naked

At least it will be easy for the TSA to search you. Big grin


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22553 times:

Quoting BPS3458 (Reply 1):
You beat me with this thread by about 2 minutes. Just heard the same news on a local radio station here in Brisbane.

Any body have further info ? Can this cause problems for QF if the reason was really the t-shirt. Apparently t-shirt had a G.W. Bush pictures with the slogan "No. 1 international terrorist" or similar.

I'm wondering if QF will try to settle this quietly out of court... anyone know how the Australian justice system works??



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineJacks757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22540 times:

Quoting DSMflyer (Reply 4):
Didn't this happen to some woman in the US a few months back? I wanna say it was on Southwest and involved the "f word," but I can't remember for sure.

Yeah. The shirt said "Meet the F...ers" with a pic of George Bush and Dick Chaney on it. I think it was Southwest but im not sure.


User currently offlineSilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2050 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22523 times:

Bad policy to deny someone just for the text on their shirt. On the other hand it's absolutely moronic to feel the need to make a statement like that while traveling. I believe the proper term is "attention whore."

User currently offlineDSMflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22478 times:

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411319/966048

Quote:

Jasson said he cleared international security checks and arrived at the departure lounge in Melbourne for the flight home when he approached the gate manager, congratulated him over Qantas allowing him to wear the shirt and demanded an apology for his earlier treatment.

"I concede that I raised the issue, but I wanted primarily to thank Qantas for relenting when (the gate manager) told me: 'I'm surprised you got this far, the staff should have stopped you'," Jasson said.

Sounds like the guy was being an obnoxious asshat, and that doesn't usually help your case at the airport.


User currently offlineManni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 22454 times:

I couldn't find anything on QF's condition of carriage that prohibit wearing clothes as the person did who's been denied boarding.


10.1 Refusal of Carriage
Even if you have a ticket and a confirmed reservation, we may refuse to carry you and your baggage if any of the following circumstances have occurred or we reasonably believe will occur:

* if carrying you or your baggage may put the safety of the aircraft or the safety or health or any person in the aircraft in danger or at risk
* if carrying you or your baggage may materially affect the comfort of any person in the aircraft
* if carrying you will break government laws, regulations, orders or an immigration direction from a country to which you are travelling or are to depart from
* because you have refused to allow a security check to be carried out on you or your baggage
* because you do not appear to have all necessary documents (see 8.1)
* if you fail to comply with any applicable law, rule, regulation or order or these Conditions of Carriage
* if you fail to complete the check-in process by the check-in deadline or fail to arrive at the boarding gate on time
* because you have not obeyed the instructions of our ground staff or a member of the crew of the aircraft relating to safety or security
* because you have not complied with our medical requirements (see 3.5)
* because you require special assistance and you have not made prior arrangements with us for this (see 4.8)
* if you are drunk or under the influence of alcohol or drugs
* if you are, or we reasonably believe you are, in unlawful possession of drugs
* if your mental or physical state is a danger or risk to you, the aircraft or any person in it
* if you have used threatening, abusive or insulting words towards our ground staff or a member of the crew of the aircraft or otherwise behaved in a threatening manner
* if you have committed a criminal offence during the check-in or boarding processes or on board the aircraft
* if you have deliberately interfered with a member of our ground staff or the crew of the aircraft carrying out their duties
* if you have put the safety of either the aircraft or any person in it in danger
* if you have made a threat
* because you have committed misconduct on a previous flight and we have reason to believe that such conduct may be repeated
* because you cannot prove you are the person specified on the ticket on which you wish to travel
* because you are trying to use a flight coupon out of sequence without our agreement (see 6.11)
* if you destroy your travel documents during the flight
* if you have refused to allow us to photocopy your travel documents
* if you have refused to give your travel documents to a member of our ground staff or the crew of the aircraft when we have asked you to do so
* if you ask the relevant government authorities for permission to enter a country in which you have landed as a transit passenger
* because your ticket:
- is not paid for
- has been reported lost or stolen
- has been transferred
- has been acquired unlawfully
- has been acquired from someone other than us or an Authorised Agent
- contains an alteration which has not been made by us or an Authorised Agent
- is spoiled, torn or damaged or has otherwise been tampered with, or
- is counterfeit or otherwise invalid

In any of the situations in this 10.1, we may remove you from a flight, even after you have boarded, without any liability on our part, and cancel any subsequent flights on the ticket.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying...reYouTravel/conditionsCarriageLong



SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22421 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 8):
I'm wondering if QF will try to settle this quietly out of court

What's to settle" The guy is an attention seeking a$%#hole and was deliberatly provoking an incident.
He was also prevented from travelling from MEL-ADL on Virgin Blue wearing the Tshirt.
The rules about mentioning terrorism around airports, even in jest are quite clear.
QF should be suing him!

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineMaidensGator From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22424 times:

Quoting DSMflyer (Reply 11):
Quote:

Jasson said he cleared international security checks and arrived at the departure lounge in Melbourne for the flight home when he approached the gate manager, congratulated him over Qantas allowing him to wear the shirt and demanded an apology for his earlier treatment.

"I concede that I raised the issue, but I wanted primarily to thank Qantas for relenting when (the gate manager) told me: 'I'm surprised you got this far, the staff should have stopped you'," Jasson said.

Sounds like the guy was being an obnoxious asshat, and that doesn't usually help your case at the airport.

This guy says he's protected by freedom of speech, but those protections are from the government, not private business. I think the airline is more worried about offending other passengers than any security issue. Somebody mentioned the "F*** You" t-shirt. From the airline's point of view, it's better to upset the passenger wearing it than dozens of other passengers who might be offended. It's pretty obvious this guy is trying to cause a scene; he didn't just show up having no idea the shirt would be a problem.



The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2918 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22302 times:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21097420-2,00.html

This guy just sounds like an idiot if you ask me.

Quoting Manni (Reply 6):
That's silly. They could have requested him to wear a jacket, jumper (it's winter in the UK so he must have had either a jacket or a jumper in his carry on) or wear his t-shirt inside out. Failing all this they could have asked him to buy a new shirt in one of shops. Looks like the boarding agent had a bad day and that passenger had to take the consequences of the boarding agent's bad day.

They did ask him to buy a new one etc. He refused. I agree with the decision because the last thing you want at 30,000 feet is an argument/fight with another passenger which may cause an incident. Imagine if this guy had got into a flight with a George W supporter and had to be restrained etc. In those circumstances the plane would have had to do divert.

Quoting Manni (Reply 12):
* if carrying you or your baggage may put the safety of the aircraft or the safety or health or any person in the aircraft in danger or at risk
* if carrying you or your baggage may materially affect the comfort of any person in the aircraft

I would have thought that covered it. If you allow him to wear his shirt then you have to allow the pro lobby to wear theirs as well. The potential for conflict if the 2 were ever in the same aircraft around one another is obvious. Again, Qantas made the right call. If the guy wasn't so pigheaded he'd be in London.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 8):
'm wondering if QF will try to settle this quietly out of court... anyone know how the Australian justice system works??

Why would they want to settle out of court?? This guy's an idiot and he doesn't deserve a cent. If he goes to sue Qantas any judge will see that and will act conservatively in their decision making lest they open a loophole.


User currently offlineManni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 22254 times:

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
They did ask him to buy a new one etc. He refused.

I wasn't aware of that, there was no link in the starter.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
If the guy wasn't so pigheaded he'd be in London.

That's probably it. From the articles it appaers that he was looking for conflict. If he was just someone wearing that T-shirt without knowing he'd offend or breach 'unwritten' dress code rules of QF, he'd probably made it ti London and he'd definitely not refuse to wear his T-shirt inside out, buy a new one etc.

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
Again, Qantas made the right call.

The additional information we have now, favors QF's decision. Agreed, QF made the right call, after he refused to get changed.



SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 22199 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 13):
What's to settle" The guy is an attention seeking a$%#hole and was deliberately provoking an incident.
He was also prevented from travelling from MEL-ADL on Virgin Blue wearing the Tshirt.
The rules about mentioning terrorism around airports, even in jest are quite clear.
QF should be suing him!

Granted, I don't know Australian Law or British Law, but I would argue that the airlines would be liable for damages... under the contract of carriage posted, there is nothing that cites this particular instance... and well here in the US, it's not illegal to have an unpopular opinion... I'm not saying he's right I'm just saying I would really like to see one of these cases play out in the justice system as a Free Speech issue here in the US...

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
I would have thought that covered it. If you allow him to wear his shirt then you have to allow the pro lobby to wear theirs as well. The potential for conflict if the 2 were ever in the same aircraft around one another is obvious. Again, Qantas made the right call. If the guy wasn't so pigheaded he'd be in London.

Would QF have denied boarding to someone that was wearing a Pro G.B. Shirt???

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 15):
Why would they want to settle out of court?? This guy's an idiot and he doesn't deserve a cent. If he goes to sue Qantas any judge will see that and will act conservatively in their decision making lest they open a loophole.

Idiot, yes, out of court, depending on what happens, in the US often cases are settled out of court to avoid admitting fault, thus preventing precedent from being set... you can still be an idiot and have a point...



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineBaron95 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1335 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 22147 times:

* if your mental or physical state is a danger or risk to you, the aircraft or any person in it

Any one that feels the need to wear an overtely abused T-shirt aboard an international flight, is by (my) definition is a mental state that can put the flight at risk. He will not be boarding my plane.



Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3204 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 22068 times:

Okay I think Qantas has done the right thing here simply because all
this is, really is just a dress code.

Now i'd say this is nothing more then some aging hippie with a chip on his shoulder. Sooooo, if i were Qantas, i'd fix him. I'd let him fly, but I'd make sure he was allocated a windowseat, and two very large and very fat (im thinking some mauri football players wouldn't go astray here...) should be sitting next to him and 'lock' him so to speak in a window seat in the 744 making it as difficult as possible for him to move around the cabin or be seen by other passengers at any time.

Losing this guy's business isn't going to hurt. If this is the sort of thing he carrys on with everybody who knows him will realise he's a twat and a 'difficult' person and probably will take his negative opinions with a grain of salt anyway. And there is no way in hell i could see the likes of Singapore Airlines permitting anything on board that say the F word in huge letters.

Yes, a nut looking for attention. He's got a right to free speech and to protest... just not on somebody elses private property.


User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2918 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 22058 times:

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
but I would argue that the airlines would be liable for damages

On what basis?? The guy cannot say Qantas were unreasonable in any of their demands and, in the end, it was his own refusal to change shirts that led to him not boarding the flight. He had already gotten into trouble on both DJ and QF before so he knew what he was doing was not acceptable to them yet he did it anyway. Under those circumstances you can't say he didn't know or wasn't aware of the policy and it comes down to him being pigheaded.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
and well here in the US, it's not illegal to have an unpopular opinion

So you should be allowed to wear an "Osama for President T-shirt" on a plane in the US?? Would that get through security?? If it did do you think your fellow passengers would be comfortable seeing you sit there?? Would the air crew be comfortable?? If you're going to make a rule for this you need to consider all of the potential implications of it.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
Would QF have denied boarding to someone that was wearing a Pro G.B. Shirt???

Probably not as long as the word terrorist wasn't on it in reference to anyone else.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
Idiot, yes, out of court, depending on what happens, in the US often cases are settled out of court to avoid admitting fault, thus preventing precedent from being set... you can still be an idiot and have a point...

It wouldn't matter if the decision went against QF because if it did both them and DJ would lobby hard for the law to be changed and they would probably get it. So the guys point would be moot at best. However in this case I disagree with you. This has nothing to do with someone's freedom of expression and everything to do with the safety of the plane. Again, the last thing you want is a pro-GB person to see this and start an argument when the plane is in the air. QF did the right thing by taking into account the potential for conflict amongst passengers and the potential for disruption on the flight. There is a time and a place for everything and making a political point on an airline is neither.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 22025 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 13):
The rules about mentioning terrorism around airports, even in jest are quite clear.

That's the key.

It was likely the word "terrorist" and not the political message itself that was at issue.

What kind of moron wears a shirt with the word terrorist on it to an airport?

Obviously, this kind of moron, and he was rightfully denied boarding. But he seemed to WANT to be denied, so that he could make a political statement.

Genius.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineJasond From Australia, joined Jul 2009, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 21834 times:

Quoting Manni (Reply 12):
I couldn't find anything on QF's condition of carriage that prohibit wearing clothes as the person did who's been denied boarding.

It's a tough call, beyond the 'legalise' though I think QF made the correct call here. Regardless of whether I personally agree with the gentleman's sentiments or not the statement on his shirt is potentially libellious and frankly I would not want to sit next to anyone wearing this or a shirt with the word "F@#$" on it. There are better and more mature ways to get your point across. Write a letter to the newspaper, get on talkback radio, rant on a blog or forum. I just don't want to see it on an aircraft. I have paid a fare as well which means I also have rights. Mr Jasson has evidently not taken that into consideration. For all we know he could have been allowed to fly and then decided to rant at a few passengers on route and then what, he would be removed, either way same result, would he also consider sueing under those circumstances.

I'm sorry, but this guy is a moron, period.

[Edited 2007-01-22 08:25:34]

User currently offlinePilotdude09 From Australia, joined May 2005, 1777 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 21799 times:

Send him back to the UK one less dickwad in this country. What an idiot, sounds like he was trying to make a deal out of it.


Qantas, Still calling Australia Home.........
User currently offlineVHXLR8 From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 500 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 21675 times:

Quoting Manni (Reply 6):
That's silly. They could have requested him to wear a jacket, jumper (it's winter in the UK so he must have had either a jacket or a jumper in his carry on) or wear his t-shirt inside out. Failing all this they could have asked him to buy a new shirt in one of shops. Looks like the boarding agent had a bad day and that passenger had to take the consequences of the boarding agent's bad day.

He was offered a Qantas t-shirt to change into; as well being asked if he had a jacket in his bag to cover it, then failing that, he was told he could happily be rescheduled to the next day if he returned in more appropriate clothing.
Your comments regarding the gate agent are highly unfounded, unfair, and just downright immature.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
Granted, I don't know Australian Law or British Law, but I would argue that the airlines would be liable for damages... under the contract of carriage posted, there is nothing that cites this particular instance... and well here in the US, it's not illegal to have an unpopular opinion

Yes, the conditions of carriage do allow for situations such as these.
It's not illegal in Australia to have an unpopular opinion either; however this is not about opinion or political views. It's about the fact that he was wearing a t-shirt with the word "terrorist"; a word highly likely to cause concern or distress to fellow passengers - passenegers who don't deserve such a situation.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 17):
Would QF have denied boarding to someone that was wearing a Pro G.B. Shirt???

Most likely not; if it was not an offensive shirt.


25 Alaskaqantas : this is stupid of the man to do what he did... but still, I wonder where he got the T-shirt, I wouldn't mind picking one up just to show to friends, n
26 Simes : To be brutally honest, we don't goto court over this sorta thing. They interviewed the guy on SBS news, apparently it was suggested to him that he re
27 Edoca : I'm not going to disagree with you, this may indeed well be the reason. But what is the world coming to? How can any reasonable person be offended by
28 Post contains images Eoinnz :
29 VHXLR8 : I highly doubt anyone would think a person wearing such a t-shirt is indeed a terrorist, but that is not the issue. There are a lot of nervous flyers
30 Elite : They did the right thing, as it would cause some unwanted attention and might even cause heated debates/fights aboard.
31 CX777Fan : So what happens if I board a flight with a hardback book that puts forward basically the same argument as the T-shirt?? Or if someone peers over my sh
32 777236ER : Ridiculous. There's nothing in the conditions of carriage about inappropriate text on the tshirt, and Qantas can't explain why the tshirt was a safety
33 LHRBlueSkies : Bang on! Whether you agree with his statement or not, this is political censorship by an airline. Exactly! Yes, maybe he should have toned it down, b
34 YLWbased : i ware a t-shirt that saids "I'm a boom technician, if you see me running , try to keep up" at the back. and AC ask me to put a jacket on during the e
35 Chris133 : Its not as silly as you may think. Most people that wear things like that want to be seen and refuse to cover up so its not like you can just have th
36 OHLHD : Why on earth I would wear such a t-shirt. Obviously his only change to express himself. Got nothing to talk at home.... We have to belive it or not t
37 Manni : From what was posted in the opening post it appeared that the passenger was refused boarding straight away for wearing that T-shirt. That would indee
38 777236ER : So not only are words banned on aircraft, but any sort of political views? If I strike up a political discussion with my neighbour, am I liable to be
39 OHLHD : Why do you need to express yourself on an aircraft. Why can´t this guy just behave as 100000 others? Who the hell is interesting in that. Me as a pa
40 MEA-707 : If he just wore the T shirt I probably wouldn't care if I were QF, but his whole attitude around the issue would make me suspect he will cause trouble
41 LTBEWR : What if that shirt had a picture of OBL instead of GWB with the same #1 Terrorist reference? I would bet he still would have been asked to not wear or
42 CX747 : The man was just looking to cause trouble. He had already been denied boarding when wearing this t-shirt on an earlier trip. When are people going to
43 Elite : Correct; the staff probably thought he was going to be troublesome.
44 Post contains links NAV20 : The guy has been hawking himself around talkback radio today and threatening 'legal action.' My impression is that he's an 'attention-seeker,' his stu
45 777236ER : Why should you ban it? Airlines shouldn't discriminate on IQ, either. Well, 'offence' is subjective, and isn't mentioned in their terms and condition
46 Post contains images Analog : Huh? The t-shirt guy is an annoying attention whore, but people should not have to conform to the majority opinion to fly. His t-shirt may have been
47 OHLHD : It was never allowed.[Edited 2007-01-22 14:57:42]
48 Post contains images OHLHD : I agree, but it might become a threat. I did not mention that IF there was a political discussion I would tell him that. If you have a guy with this
49 NAV20 : Yes they can, 777236ER. Suppose another passenger got angry and took a swing at him, the cabin crew had to intervene, and the Captain had to come bac
50 Analog : Verbal comments with the potential to offend?!? People are offended when the Lord's name is used in vain: "God damn it" offends many people. A verbal
51 777236ER : Now you're not making sense. According to Qantas's rules, the guy was within his rights to fly with that tshirt on. The problem with the tshirt was t
52 Post contains images Analog : Exactly. Using the excuse that some people might get violent because they get offended is a bit odd and can be carried to its logical and absurd extr
53 OHLHD : I agree not to discriminate people, but obviously the whole thing led to a point where QF had no other choice than offloading this guy. We could stre
54 PanAmOldDC8 : Wish we would go back to wearing suits and ties the way it used to be, then all of this nonsense would stop
55 Dazeflight : You people being offended need to get a life. It's a f***ing t-shirt. Great to see what has happened to the idea of free expression during the past fe
56 OHLHD : I am not offended but I think:
57 777236ER : So it's wrong for an airline to discriminate based on sex, race or religion, but OK based on political views?
58 Post contains images OHLHD : Certainly not was meant for ALL aspects, including political views.
59 Post contains images NAV20 : To quote more of that story I linked to:- "The airline earlier had prevented him from flying to Melbourne for Christmas with relatives on December 2 u
60 Jabar : So this guy walks on a plane with a T-shirt saying "Ossama Bin-Laden, Wanted, #1 Terrorist" and a big fat American flag on it.... Does he get thrown o
61 Post contains images OlegShv : So, what if the T-shirt had Bin Laden's picture on it instead of GWB? Would he be denied boarding as well, or...
62 TeamAmerica : Spare me. This incident has no relation to "1984". You are taking a silly and inconsequential event like this and equating it to totalitarianism. Tha
63 Travellin'man : I'm surprised by how many people on this thread think discrimination is OK against someone simply for being a non-conformist, that people think a poli
64 Baroque : Which (if any) of the following potential T shirts should be met with refusal? 1. Copy of the CNN ad with a picture of Osama but captioned Obama 2. Pi
65 Post contains images Coal : I've heard that FCUK apparel might prevent you from boarding flights, hence I never wear my "fcuk in Miami" tshirt when I travel Cheers, Coal
66 Post contains images Analog : This thread makes me think of the guy I sat next to last year (WN MDW-ISP) who was speaking rap lyrics while listening to his CD player. Of course he
67 OHLHD : Maybe you should " re-read" 1984 and than give us a hint what QF has to do with this book? Very interesting to know. Because of such passengers it wi
68 Richierich : Its not the same thing. A book is a personal thing... if people are reading it over your shoulder, then so be it. But a T-shirt is out there for ever
69 Travellin'man : What a hassle, people within their full rights. Isn't the real hassle people walking on pins and needles to the point of not being able to know their
70 TeamAmerica : Agreed. People who choose to wear political t-shirts often have an agenda, and clearly want to share. I am more of the "Have a nice cup of STFU" vari
71 Adria : No they cannot! The man obviously bought the ticket so they are in a legal relationship with each other. The only way they could turn down a customer
72 Post contains images OHLHD : What is the message that he wants to bring us? I do not believe that this guy is innocent. Thinking of myself I do not give a damn about other passen
73 Baroque : Interesting, thank you for the answer Rr. The don't know is interesting too. Kelly is the UK scientist who was found dead during the great hunt for W
74 PHLBOS : It was WN; the incident in question occurred nearly a year ago; the archived thread covering that incident lasted about 3 weeks IIRC.
75 Richierich : Ah - thanks for enlightening me on Dr. Kelly and David Hicks. They are just not well-recognized, at least not to me on my CNN-fed diet of bad news. J
76 Boeing747_600 : By denying him boarding, QF managed to stoop down to the level of this silly man and ironically granted him far more publicity that he'd perhaps origi
77 PanAmOldDC8 : This is not an aviation thread and I think it should be deleted, the whole thread has no relevance to aviation, it is to do with a stupid tee shirt,
78 Ikramerica : People wearing such a shirt on an airplane might be considered unstable, especially after you ask him to put on something else, including a free shir
79 SATX : It's easy for airlines to get away with this. 1. Airline demands pax remove/cover clothing 2. Pax refuses 3. Refusal is used as evidence of hostile pa
80 PHLBOS : The Mods will probably disagree w/you on this one. In their (the Mods) eyes: Since the incident involves someone boarding a plane at an airport and a
81 Post contains images Manu : Hmmm... I hope they supply a parachute at least. Although I hear you can descend somewhat safely using an inflated life raft (Thanks Mythbusters!)
82 HPAEAA : but that's the beauty of public places... we can do whatever we want... granted, usualy moral beliefs or our upbrining limit us in what we do, along
83 AerLingusA330 : When flying aboard an airline, you're agreeing to abide by their rules. This isn't public transit like a subway, it's an airline. It's a business. Rem
84 Incitatus : That list does not say I cannot board a Qantas flight wearing only my underwear. Can I?
85 Post contains links Zeke : from http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying...ouTravel/conditionsCarriage#jump11 "11. Right to Refuse Carriage Qantas reserves the right to refuse carri
86 Mortyman : The point is people, that by refusing this man to fly with such a T-Shirt, we bow our heads to the terrorists. We allow them to play with our lives an
87 Post contains images OHLHD : I do not get... So if a terrorist wants to travel with a GWB T shirt and an airline won´t let him fly we give them what they want???
88 DSMflyer : What? To accuse Bush of being a terrorist?
89 Richierich : Sorry to disagree with you, Mortyman. I don't see how denying this knucklehead from boarding a flight has anything at all to do with cowtowing to ter
90 Analog : You better not be taking medication if you want to fly QF, since they reserve the right not to carry you. There is no qualification for illegal, etc.
91 777236ER : That is a blanket statement that doesn't apply in this case. How does wearing that tshirt affect the comfort of other passengers? If the argument is
92 AerospaceFan : I'm sorry to say that I have not read the whole thread, but I wish to say only this as a matter of my opinion: Anyone who wears a T-shirt with words o
93 OHLHD : The thing is that QF ( as all other carriers) protect themselves with those blanket statements in such cases. This is why I said a stupid comment whi
94 Zeke : Terrorism is not lawful under Australian law, nor is "George W Bush was world's #1 terrorist" a registered political party. Under CAR 1988 the captai
95 Post contains images OHLHD : How long does it take by boat to Britain?
96 Post contains images TeamAmerica : No, sir, that simply is not true. I can't go to the park and fire my shotgun into the sky...or at least I really, really ought not to. There are limi
97 Post contains images Buckieboy : Yet you posted. Twice. Black. Kettle. Calling. Pot. The. I welcome this thread. I'm thinking of going to Oz soon and whilst I don't have many OneWorl
98 Travellin'man : I don't think his shirt was offensive. People may disagree with the assertion, but it is not beyond the realm of decorum in my mind.
99 777236ER : This man wasn't a terrorist, nor was he advocating terrorism, nor was he supporting terrorism. Your views don't have to subscribe to 'an official par
100 HPAEAA : Please read the next line of the post that you quoted... I did mentions legislation, and while yes I do conceed that you can't fire a shotgun into th
101 OHLHD : I do not think the pilot can be prosecuted personally. If it is a profesional airline I doubt that. They will defend their employees. Since I do not
102 Ikramerica : The whole "slippery slope" argument that some people seem to cling (though most don't call it by name) to is a theory people. It's not a fact. It's a
103 777236ER : The pilot would be liable under a civil action. To a point. Offload someone because of political views, sex, sexuality, race, religion, age or any nu
104 AerospaceFan : A case might be made for discrimination if Qantas refused to let this man aboard and yet someone else with an anti-Osama T-shirt was able to board it
105 TeamAmerica : Actually it is the same. I can declare that my profound belief in Mars (the god of war) requires me to fire weapons in public places. We can agree on
106 Travellin'man : Not if you look at Nazi Germany. They built their system a bit at a time, slowly making people afraid, resentful, slowly consolidating their powers b
107 PITrules : In the photo Eoinnz supplied (reply #28), the photo on the shirt looks more like the guy wearing it than GWB. Almost as if he is saying "I am the worl
108 AerospaceFan : That's a very good point, but what is the principle behind the idea that an individual has absolute power to impose his rights above the needs of oth
109 Sydscott : If Qantas are sued expect nothing. Any judge will see this guy for the trouble maker he is. He's having his 5 minutes of fame and then he'll disappea
110 OHLHD : Is this Aussie law? Maybe , maybe not. As for the politcal thing: Imagine me beeing a normal man and my political opinion is that 9/11 was a great da
111 Post contains links TeamAmerica : Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner...Godwin's Law is one of the more reliable maxims of internet behavior. Wrong. Hitler's Mein Kampf was published in
112 Travellin'man : The question is, should his t-shirt be dis-allowed, and the answer is that is unlikely. Why? For expressing a political opinion that you disagree str
113 Analog : You talk about actions being banned and then call it censorship of beliefs. Governments [should] ban actions that are likely to and/or do infringe up
114 Post contains images OHLHD : Hell yeah Yes it was published but he no chance to start that early since he was not total power. His ideology was there thats true. But let´s leave
115 AerospaceFan : Perhaps you are right that no harm is being done -- but then again, perhaps you are wrong. The thing to consider is that reasonable people can differ
116 777236ER : 9/11 was directly relevent to aircraft, that tshirt isn't. No, you will not go to Guantanamo bay.
117 Travellin'man : Wrong. Mein Kampf does not explicitly talk about murdering Jews en masse. Hitler talked about Jews as the source of all evil in Germany, and needing
118 Maidensgator : From a lawyer's point of view, it's a very bad case.
119 Post contains images OHLHD : Now that we have an attorney here I must ask: Can I personllay be held liable for doing something like that while at work for my airline?
120 Travellin'man : But you are over-ruling his opinion, which is that it is not offensive. I for one consider it a strong statement, but not at all offensive. This "fea
121 Smashme33 : I can't believe that no one has used the ''kangaroo court'' joke yet! Many may agree that GWB is an international terrorist, but it's not always appr
122 TeamAmerica : Agreed...that was my point, actually. We do ban advocacy. Various countries use different terms, but "hate speech" is often restricted. Most countrie
123 Mortyman : In response to this quote by Sydscott: Rubbish!!! By allowing idiots like this to wear these sorts of t-shirts you're asking for a security event on t
124 Analog : Advocacy of a specific criminal action may be banned, but we do not ban advocacy of its decriminalization, nor do we (in the US, sorry for being nati
125 Post contains images Jabar : "Who wants to do it harm" ??? I know this thread is getting really long, but have we forgotten the intial topic here? A T-SHIRT !!! With a slogan tha
126 Adria : you don't get my point. When you buy a ticket you agree to certain conditions (an airline cannot just ban someone without any solid reason after the
127 Post contains images TeamAmerica : On the national level we don't, but many jurisdictions do. To be clear, I'm not saying I support any of this; I'm just saying there are cases where s
128 Post contains links 3201 : Maybe easier, but they still can't assume you aren't concealing anything
129 Dallasnewark : Why don't you ask a question what would have happened at SVO or DME if a person was wearing a Shamil Bassaev or Johar Dudaev t-shirt? That person wou
130 FlyKev : I'm fully on the QF side with this story. Look, yes fine, it was a t-shirt, but it technically is promoting a political message that would make people
131 Post contains images TheCol : As I said before: Those of us involved the airline industry DO NOT SCREW AROUND. There is just too much riding on the line. Therefore if we have any
132 Jet2Leeds : totally justified in my opinion, what a prat! Wonder if the airline would have refused if it was a picture of Bin Ladin though?!
133 777236ER : Beside the point.
134 Post contains images Analog : No, nor could I tell that about the other pax on that aircraft; I can't tell that about anybody that I don't know very well (without a shadow of a do
135 L410Turbolet : Imagine if some other guy (wearing t-shirt which reads "Airbus #1 airliners in the world") had got into a flight with one of a.net's very own Boeing
136 Post contains images OHLHD : Agreed! Basically it is not the F/A´s decision but the one of the commander. I agree on the first think but disagree with the stupid mistake. But I
137 Travellin'man : Actually it seems that he thought he was within his rights to express himself in a manner that is inoffensive and not harmful. His shirt did not illu
138 Jasond : Two distinct issues being discussed here: 1) What to ban or what not to ban. We can discuss this until the cows come home or the mods pull this threa
139 Dallasnewark : Certain A.netters are a bit confused between the defenitions of democracy/free speech and anarchy. QF did the right thing and I applaude them for doin
140 Analog : Exactly. They should have been smart and not even asked him to take it off. If they did not want him on their aircraft, they should have just used hi
141 777236ER : Allowing someone to board an aircraft with a particular political view is anarchy?
142 Post contains images OHLHD : I do not believe that it is so bad.
143 Dallasnewark : There are certain things were common sense needs to be utilized. You do not scream "Fire" in a movie theater, you do not yell "Bomb" on the aircraft
144 Travellin'man : Here here. Actually all the virtual passengers on the virtual plane of this thread managed to talk this out in a relatively civil manner, agreeing an
145 Post contains images OHLHD : Very well said. A good day for A.Net
146 777236ER : This man did neither. The tshirt didn't even have any relevence to flight, for crying out loud.
147 Richierich : I think the word "terrorist" has some relevance to flight.
148 Travellin'man : Nominally, yes, but in substance his shirt in protesting Bush's policies is protesting the violence associated with them, so I don't think he is inci
149 Post contains images TheCol : No it isn't. You know where I'm going with this don't you? Would you or not? (if you didn't already have a dress code to follow) This guy did it to s
150 777236ER : Why? In the context, that tshirt had nothing, at all, to do with aircraft. What does it matter what I would wear on an aircraft? The point is that th
151 Pkbhx : i was in SZG early 2007 and went through security control and there was some fool wearing an osma bin laden mask.. i mean come on how silly does it ge
152 MaidensGator : Quite a few times you've said that this man was discriminated against. You're only proving you don't understand what discrimination is in a legal sen
153 777236ER : By that rather bizarre logic, if an airline bars ALL black people, then it's not discrimination!
154 MaidensGator : That would be discrimination because it's based on the color of their skin. But as I said, a dress code is acceptable as long as it's applied equally
155 777236ER : This isn't based on dress, it's based on political message. By your logic, airlines can ban Islamic headscarves, or skullcaps, under the guise of 'a
156 Post contains images Jasond : No I think he was doing exactly that. As for Qantas they are a transport carrier (keen to maintain a decent reputation I might add) not a vehicle for
157 Eoinnz : I cannot find it anywhere but know it exists - The Asian man reading a XXX magazine on board - Do you think that this type of material should be allo
158 Travellin'man : I don't think political viewpoints are the same as pornography. The latter is offensive, the former in this case is not, assertive as it might be. Th
159 Post contains images Analog : Agreed. to everyone here. Except those who disagree with me.
160 Baron95 : Personal story... I have a nice T-shirt that I got from this internet site that lets you put your own graphics on it. It is plain gray and nicely fitt
161 CX777Fan : Hear Hear. It seems that the guy's insistence and beligerent behaviour is ultimately what got him refused from boarding, but the point remains that a
162 Australia1 : Think the passenger should ahve stood his ground & involved the airport police if necessary. The T-shirt in question, said nothing wrong, it was just
163 777236ER : Poronography is different from a political opinion. Why? There's no flaming. I doubt it. There are people in the world who would be offended at Che G
164 Australia1 : couldn't agree more !!! How much compensation will this guy get ? Ironically, it actually makes Qantas the terrorist, denying rights which they have
165 Post contains images CX777Fan : While i'm in hearty agreement with most of your sentiments, 777236ER, I think QF would have had a right to deny boarding IF this guy's behaviour beca
166 Jasond : Simple question then: Would you wear that T-Shirt on an international flight? And if not, why not?[Edited 2007-01-23 13:10:09]
167 NAV20 : On the facts that I know, I would reckon nothing. One of the things the court will expect you to do in ANY disagreement is 'damage limitation'. Qanta
168 OkAY : I once had a situation on board where I was approached by a male pax with darker pigment. He seemed furious, and said to me that he refuses to sit whe
169 Australia1 : hell yeh, especially if going to the HQ of the World Police !!!!
170 Post contains images TeamAmerica : We'll be waiting for you.
171 777236ER : Well, it depends. If Qantas approached him in the first place, the question has to be asked why. If other passengers complained, it's sensible for Qa
172 Eoinnz : Viewpoints can still offend people. I've noticed in most of the news report on the TV that Qantas seems to be in the spotlight - Didn't Virgin Blue a
173 Maverick623 : Because he's an attention whore, and he knows how to do it. Think about it, if he started to spew crap about Virgin Blue, more and more people would
174 Dallasnewark : As a test, why don't you buy a ticket to DBX on Emirates, and on the day of the flight, wear an insulting t-shirt to muslims, such as "muhammad is a
175 Richierich : I disagree. If it said the word "hijack", then he wouldn't have been allowed to fly - heck, he probably would have been arrested. As it is, "terroris
176 Maverick623 : Exactly correct. The issue here is intent. The intent here obviously was to disrupt and cause a scene, a direct violation of Quantas' Conditions of C
177 777236ER : So you consider it right for newspapers to not publish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, to prevent offence? If any airline prevents a passeng
178 Richierich : Not true. It is pretty common knowledge that you can't 'joke' about bombs or hijackings with security personnel at the airport, and it is much the sa
179 Post contains images OHLHD : Very well done! Turn it or kick him out! Crazy stuff happenin in Austria Please, guess why we all write QF. Because that we do not do that mistake It
180 Maverick623 : Bugger those businesses that trash proper grammar!
181 Australia1 : Will bring you some t-shirts on condition you wear them !!! What sizes ? Similar to a story here 2 days ago ... A big 1 day concert doing Australia c
182 Jasond : You are absolutely right, he should have worn cotton instead, what was he thinking!!! Not exactly the answer I was looking for although I wasn't very
183 Australia1 : SERIOUSLY, when the QF moron asked pax to remove t shirt, he could have turned it inside out & then later on, turned it right side out. What r they go
184 Dallasnewark : For those of you living in a DFW Metroplex, a few years ago, the owners of "TEXAS is bigger than France" t-shirts were made to wear it inside out on c
185 Australia1 : made by who ? Those bloody WORLD POLICE again !!!
186 Dallasnewark : I don't remember the exact details, but they did have to wear them inside out.
187 Travellin'man : Another example that shows how arbitrary and wrong-headed the airlines are in enforcing standards of "decorum" or whatever you want to call it. It's
188 Australia1 : sounds like the only problem with pax is they get upset when asked to remove clothing (u can understand why they would get upset, but doesn't pay to
189 MaidensGator : I have to disagree with you again. The right of free speech doesn't give you right to say anything, anywhere, anytime. I'm probably as much a propone
190 Travellin'man : Companies are however also bound by the rules which they themselves write. They form the contract that they make with customers who purchase tickets
191 MaidensGator : If your theory of liability is breach of contract, you have a duty to mitigate damages. e.g. change the shirt when offered the opportunity.
192 Australia1 : r u a dodgy lawyer ? This is not dodgy lawyer land (USA) it's UK & Australia.
193 Post contains links TheCol : Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 176): I agree, this guy did it to make a scene. Quoting Australia1 (Reply 183): What r they going to do, arrest him for wea
194 Travellin\'man : If you do not feel you are in breach of contract, then you do not feel you have to do anything, and that anything you do is purely voluntary, not at
195 MaidensGator : All three legal systems are based on British common law... but you know that...
196 NAV20 : Agree, Maidensgator, except that strictly speaking it's 'English' Common Law. Interesting to see what sort of remedy he sues for - if it ever comes t
197 Travellin'man : Actually he thought he was within his rights as a passenger and a citizen. Many of us on this long thread have argued that, just because the airline
198 Jasond : Dumb it down even more than that. As soon as this guy was spotted walking into the terminal anyone who works at the airport or the airlines (people w
199 Post contains images OHLHD : It was a joke...... this is why I put smiles....
200 Baron95 : Maybe most are missing the point. Nobody cared what was on the guy's shirt. He went trhough check-in, security, etc. The fool was in need of attentio
201 StarGoldLHR : I would argue his mental state was provocative and could lead to conflict. His t-shirt was highly noticeable and distracted employees from carrying o
202 Zeke : Yep I agree with you. Same with a person that has been drinking, if it observed that they are going to be of no concern in flight 99% of the are allo
203 Bongodog1964 : I cannot really believe that a picture and slogan on a readily available t shirt could cause such a rumpus. Here in the UK until recently it was consi
204 777236ER : But in this case no one's rights were infringed. The man wasn't a security risk, he wasn't a safety risk, no other passenger has a right not to be of
205 Jasond : Absolute complete rubbish!!! They can easily justify his appearance and behaviour as the reason. No, he walked the walk, he talked the talk and the r
206 NAV20 : What law did Qantas break?
207 Travellin'man : His appearance is subjective. Who is to judge? On what grounds? Qantas made an arbitrary call that impinged on his rights. Who's next? Anyone who dis
208 PanAmOldDC8 : Enough of this thread, it has been beaten to death and has no life left in it. Get a life people and move on to something more revelant to airlines
209 Post contains images OHLHD : Great you are still posting! I am on your side here and I think that we can agree that is not agrreeing with the QF - action and most of us think it
210 PanAmOldDC8 : Thanks for your reply. I hope to be on for awhile as long as my health holds, give advice where i see I need too, try to keep a level head, but that
211 Post contains images Jasond : Absolutely, I have enjoyed this one
212 Post contains images Electech6299 : You always were a glutton for punishment... For all those who agree with 777236ER, what do you think would have happened if this ...um..... man? ...p
213 Post contains images Jasond : That's what makes it fun and no matter how the thread ends up I enjoy a good round of healthy debate otherwise what's the point of it all. Anyway I'm
214 Travellin'man : If a passenger does not present a danger, affront or inconvenience to his fellow passengers, what he is wearing is frankly his business. If you think
215 PanAmOldDC8 : Give it up people this thread has gone beyond boooooring ti is now becoming a dead horse. Let's get on with something more constructive. The man has h
216 Travellin'man : Sir, no one said you had to open the thread, or comment on it. There seems to be plenty else to look at on the forum if your interests lie elsewhere.
217 PanAmOldDC8 : You are all talking about rights, that statement basically says that I have no right to post my feelings. So you are defeating the very thing you are
218 NASCARAirforce : Where can I get that shirt? - its awesome. I guess we should all just not wear shirts with anything on them because some poor wimp will get offended.
219 Abrelosojos : I have a question ... semi-serious ... if I wear a T-Shirt (that I recently bought) ... and it says ... "Condi Rice is NOT attractive" ... would/shoul
220 NASCARAirforce : You shouldn't, but you probably would because some guy that still drives with Bush Cheney 2004 stickers on his car in 2007 would start whining.
221 Abrelosojos : = Haha. Though, I would be even more worried if people in Australia drive with a Bush Cheney sticker ... oh wait, they have their own interesting per
222 PanAmOldDC8 : I have a tee shirt that says Hilliary sucks, do you think I should wear it, that seemed to be Bills favourite sport
223 NAV20 : May be relevant that the guy concerned has not been heard of since the original story, which came out over the weekend. My guess is that he consulted
224 NASCARAirforce : I got in trouble back in highschool for wearing a shirt with a picture of Bill smoking a joint that says "Bill doesn't inhale, he just sucks"
225 Abrelosojos : = Go for it. My issue with this whole debate is that it seems one-sided. If I were to a t-shirt which says "Osama: Terrorist" than it would be fine .
226 NASCARAirforce : Agreed It is time to move on. It is time that the cops stop using the line "because of 9-11" that I can't take pictures too. Homeland Security etc ha
227 PanAmOldDC8 : Hi Guys Although I do not agree with plastering leaders pictures all over tee shirts, regardless of what it says, I fought in Nam to give people the
228 NASCARAirforce : Agreed. The point is, a terrorist wanting to hijack a QF plane or do some other harm though probably wouldn't wear a shirt with a political statement
229 PanAmOldDC8 : I think that when they decide to go in, it was the right thing. However the managers have bungled the job very badly and I think that it is time as t
230 NASCARAirforce : I actually somewhat agree. I am not saying that Saddam was a saint by any means, but everything was kept in line over there for the most part because
231 Post contains images Electech6299 : You have completely ignored every intelligent post on this thread. Try reading my post #212. This situation has nothing to do with politics. The mess
232 NASCARAirforce : As long as the guy wasn't yelling up and down the hall in the MEL terminal shouting "BUSH IS A TERRORIST" and having some sort of big political hoopl
233 Qantas787 : Watch which direction you are going in comrade!
234 TheCol : What aren't you people getting here? Why do you ignore the fact that this guy deliberately made a scene over it? I don't think some people realize ho
235 NASCARAirforce : Yes he refused to have to put on another shirt. I don't know the whole story about how big of a fuss or how much yelling and screaming he did. The po
236 PanAmOldDC8 : All leaders are likely to have fun poked at them, it is part of being a democracy. Whether a leader is liked or not does not make any difference, the
237 Md80fanatic : About the "slippery slope"..... In hindsight, the past is littered with examples of societies that were indeed on that slippery slope, but as is alway
238 NASCARAirforce : I poke fun of em all. Not sure what this has to do with the post originally, other than the possibility that "because someone decides to wear a shirt
239 NAV20 : I think part of the problem is that we all consider air travel to be 'safe.' Statistically, it is - but only because of the skill of the designers and
240 Electech6299 : If you're going to bother posting in a thread, at least read the thread and the articles referenced. This guy approached the gate agents and drew att
241 NASCARAirforce : With Bush's 28% approval rating in USA, they probably would have said "Hey nice shirt, where can I get one?" I read the same story in a different art
242 Electech6299 : I guess you didn't make it to reply #11...
243 PanAmOldDC8 : He had his 5 minutes of fame
244 UN_B732 : What if the T-Shirt said the same thing about Bin Laden? Would he have been denied boarding? -A
245 PanAmOldDC8 : I think that it was his attitude rather than the shirt. I have kicked people out of Hotels I managed for bad behaviour as is my right to do. Includin
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Denied Boarding Because No Meal? posted Wed Feb 9 2005 23:08:51 by Venezuela747
Airport Shut Because Of 1 Man... Responsibility?!? posted Mon Jan 6 2003 09:17:51 by Godbless
Man Thrown Off Airline Because Of Kiss posted Fri Nov 24 2000 19:21:27 by Thom@s
BA Contacts 33,000 Passengers Because Of Radiation posted Thu Nov 30 2006 23:07:36 by Pizzaandplanes
RUMOR: 737RS Development Slows Because Of 787 posted Fri Sep 8 2006 23:54:47 by Zone1
Pratt & Whitney Sued Because Of Engine Failure posted Tue Aug 22 2006 21:01:09 by RoseFlyer
Seattle Mariners' Plane Evacuated Because Of Fire posted Tue Jul 18 2006 06:00:39 by Clickhappy
Debarking Because Of MX Issue posted Wed Jun 7 2006 01:44:26 by Aileron11
Go JET Airways Of NYC? posted Tue Apr 11 2006 13:24:43 by Simpilicity
TG Flight Return To ARN Because Of Aggresive Pax posted Sun Jan 22 2006 01:44:37 by Flyboy_se