Layitontheline From Canada, joined Jan 2002, 85 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2102 times:
Air Canada refuses to carry Rushdie
OTTAWA (CP) - Author Salman Rushdie may be free to enter Canada, but not on the country’s biggest airline.
Air Canada refuses to carry him, saying security measures necessary to protect him from assassins would cause unacceptable inconvenience to passengers.
Rushdie is under a death sentence imposed by Iranian religious leaders for his book Satanic Verses, which they claim blasphemes Islam.
An Air Canada e-mail to travel agencies and airport ticket counters this month, obtained by The Canadian Press, states that Rushdie is not to be carried as a passenger.
“Should author Salman Rushdie attempt a reservation or present himself at an airport he is not - repeat not - to be accepted for carriage,” says the memo.
It also says any attempt by Rushdie to travel on the airline is to be immediately reported to Air Canada’s legal department.
Air Canada says a U.S. Federal Aviation Administration directive requires certain security measures be in place if Rushdie is on an airline entering the U.S.
Air Canada spokeswoman Laura Cook said Friday that the airline concluded the same measures would be required on flights within Canada and elected not to carry him as a passenger either domestically or internationally.
“We are following an FAA directive and generally presume that if there is a security risk in the U.S. there is one domestically for us,” Cook said.
She said the measures, which she would not divulge, could delay flights by up to three hours.
“We have chosen to follow the directive in Canada rather than inconvenience our passengers,” she said.
Cook suggested other Canadian airlines would also refuse to carry Rushdie, but at least one said that’s not the case.
“At this time we have no reason not to fly him,” said WestJet spokeswoman Siobhan Vinish.
She said the airline, which only operates domestically, likely wouldn’t bar Rushdie unless there was a ruling from Transport Canada.
A spokesman for Air Transat said he hadn’t heard of any security issue involving Rushdie but would look into the matter.
Rushdie, who is promoting a new book, was supposed to speak in Toronto in September but cancelled after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in the U.S. It’s not clear if he intends to return soon.
The FAA directive was issued before Sept. 11.
Squigee From Canada, joined May 2001, 652 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1979 times:
I think it was a wise move. I am a little dissapointed with Westjet, though. I am a huge fan of theirs, but when they said they would carry him (where would he fly to with them anyway) it showed a kind of risky, daring attitude for them to take.
Someday, we'll look back at this, laugh nervously, and then change the subject.
OA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1954 times:
Unfortunately, AC, like BA before them, are bowing to extremism by not allowing Salman Rushdie to travel aboard their aircraft. However, it is true that the security risk incurred by carrying Mr. Rushdie is quite high. It's your basic Catch 22: carry him and face the risk, don't carry him and bow to extremists.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16473 posts, RR: 55
Reply 9, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1935 times:
Seriously, this is wrong. This is a victory to the Iranian govt (who still have an active fatwa against Rushdie). If AC has confidence in its flight & ground security, then it should be able to safely carry Rushdie.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
Geotrash From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 326 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1845 times:
This is unfortunate. Mr. Rushdie has the same right to travel as the rest of us. He is not a criminal. A risk? Perhaps. Criminal? No. Last I checked, the law forbids anyone to be denied their freedoms unless they are convicted of a crime. Provisions need to be made to ensure that the risk is mitigated, and that Rushdie can travel safely and without discrimination. It is possible to do this. That may mean an inconvenience or cost, but much greater prices have been paid in the past to ensure that we all have certain rights and freedoms.
Perhaps it would not be in Mr. Rushdie's own best interests to travel commercially. Rather, a private charter might be better for his own safety. However, if he chooses to take the risk of flying commercially, he must be given that option. It scares me the way some people think it's no big deal to trample on a person's right to travel (or any other right), simply because it is "inconvenient" to do otherwise. He has as much right to a ticket than the rest of us. If AC can't guarantee the safety of the flight, then there are other problems that need to be addressed.
Johnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1804 times:
would anyone mind to enlighten me about the person of Salmon Rushdie??????
who he is and what he´s done?
he´s a book author and the Iranian government doesn´t like him, ok, ... but i´ve never heard of him.
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
Because of this book a FATWA was issued, sentancing him to death. Basically he's a target of assasination because he wrote something that offended the religion of Islam.
"I inform the proud Muslim people of the world that the author of the Satanic Verses book which is against Islam, the Prophet and the Koran, and all involved in its publication who were aware of its content, are sentenced to death."
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
FATWA issued February, 1989
against Salman Rushdie
ContinentalFan From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1796 times:
That's the problem, in Islam, any cleric can pronounce a fatwa against anybody (pretty much for any reason), not like there's any official chain of command like the catholic church. Anybody can then choose to follow it or not. Since Khomeini is dead, it's gonna be in effect forever, since only Khomeini can revoke it. The situation is analogous to Jerry Falwell (well known televangelist in the US) pronouncing a fatwah on Britney. Rushdie didn't even write anything a normal person zould consider offensive, Khomeini just didn't like it. What a total crock.
Acidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1880 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1730 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Maybe Salman Rushdie and Britney Spears should travel together on the same airplanes. Or even better, Rushdie could headline on the Britney Spears tour.
Salman Rushdie actually appeared at a U2 concert once, I don't remember where it was though. In the middle of the song, Bono whips out a cell phone and is like, "yeah man, come on out here" and out walks Salman Rushdie for a couple seconds. Bono introduces him to the crowd and Rushdie quickly left the stadium after that.
"Satanic Verses" is actually about an aircraft being blown up by terrorists and details the stories of the two main characters while they are falling to the earth. Rushdie was inspired by the events of an Air India 747 being blown up off the coast of Ireland en route to Canada in 1985, as well as the 1985 TWA hijacking that ended up in Beirut. Shortly after publishing, Pan Am 103 was blown up over Scotland by Libyan terrorists. Look at http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/anglophone/satanic_verses/index.html for more details. Perhaps this could have something to do with an airline not wanting to transport Mr. Rushdie. Unfortunately, it's not his fault, he is not the terrorist, he just writes about them.
Lymanm From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 1140 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1726 times:
I think many of you are missing the point. AC is not refusing to carry Rushdie because they fear terrorist actions against him. They are refusing to fly him because any flight he flied on would incurr a lengthy security delay. Laura Cooke for AC said it could be up to 3 hours. From that point of view, of course it makes sense not to carry Rushdie. Is one paying passenger worth all that extra cost?
It's easy for WJ to say they'd carry him...they don't even fly to the US.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1703 times:
Air Canada are a disgrace.
I assume that since Mr. Rushdie travels all over the world, there are some airlines that allow him onboard, unless he is flying his very own Falcon Jet (unlikely).
So what next? If some nutcase fundamentalist cleric decides to impose a hit order against journalists who expose them, or gays, or Pentagon officials, or feminists, will Air Canada decide to ban them all from their flights???
I guess an airline that is a monopoly (and a loss making one to boot), can say or do anything it pretty much pleases. Thank goodness for the facsimile of free competition we have here in the States !!!