Muslim Kicked Of Aircraft Due To Toilet Trip

777ER · Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:14 pm

Human rights advocates say a New Zealand Muslim was publicly humiliated by an airline, after he was escorted from an aircraft when staff tagged him a security risk.

Mr Adam missed his flight and the overseas conference he was to address, despite having his passport cleared before the plane took off.

His case was highlighted in a report - 10 Human Rights Cases that Made a Difference - released by the Human Rights Commission today.

The report did not name the airline, but it was understood to be Freedom Air, the newspaper reported.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3894768a11,00.html

Stealthz · Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:29 pm

Not a lot to go on from the story but sounds like he left his seat prior to take off(was the aircraft moving or about to) and likely put up some objection when asked to return to his seat.
IMHO Yet another beat up of the "religious intolerance" shown towards those that have less of it than most!
People get escorted from planes all the time for similar infractions, just doesn't always get blown up in to a Human Rights travesty!
He has been compansated more than most in this situation yet it is still beaten up into an anti islam thing, he was travelling from NZ but not using his NZ passport..WTF

[Edited 2006-12-09 06:41:27]

baron95 · Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:38 pm

I'm sorry but these days, one of the added job responsibilities of an Airline crew is SECURITY OF THE AIRCRAFT. If, for any reason, the crew feels concerned about security THEY MUST ACT.

The place to sort out if the security concern is valid or not is on the ground outside the airplane, not in flight

I don't know the details of this, but if, before take off, a muslim dressed in religious attire, carry some objects (aperently a stack of relegius books) and spends over 10 minutes in the bathroom, while the crew probably detects movements and sounds inconsistent with normal toilet use, I think the flight crew is justified in having it checked out.

Again, where should they check it out? On the plane? During taxi? During take-off? Of course not. Outside the plane, on the ground, by trained security investigators.

Crew acted properly. YOU CANNOT SECOND GUESS A CREW THAT FEELS CONCERNED. PERIOD.

777236ER · Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:48 pm

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
Crew acted properly.

Not if it's shown they were racist.

4Left · Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:37 pm

OK, I've been quiet on all the profiling and extremist issues, but here is my two cents.

All this extra eyeballing is due to OBL and those nut jobs out there who think that their way of life is better. Those sh*t heads won. They've forced us all to suffer delays, beefed up security and a loss of freedom while we travel. and don't forget the cost factor due to these zealots.

So if we get a little testy when it comes to a certain look or religious statement, we should not be the "bad-guys". I sya look into the mirror and ask yourselves the question. "Did my brother's cause this?" " Should my lif be forever altered by the actions of a few?"

You don't see rabbi's or Priest's dispensing this level of Bull sh*t to their followers. It's purley the clerics who have twisted a peaceful book (the Koran) and focused on the un-educated with tall tale of wonderment if "they" purge the world of the unbelievers.

what's this got to do with air travel? Everything. We can't get anywhere without a camera, dog, human giving us the once over. Hell all i want to do is to get to my destination. We don't desrve this, the world doesnt deserve this.

These clerics now do this to inflame their flock and at the same time the worlds liberals. It's time we al push back and stop this craziness.

Sorry if I took off here, but it just sickens me how we pussy foot around.

TeamAmerica · Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:08 am

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 1):
People get escorted from planes all the time for similar infractions, just doesn't always get blown up in to a Human Rights travesty!

Agreed. People get booted from aircraft every day, but we only debate the issues when a special interest is involved.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
Crew acted properly. YOU CANNOT SECOND GUESS A CREW THAT FEELS CONCERNED. PERIOD.

Emphatically agreed. The man in question was inconvenienced, but not injured. No trial need be held on board an aircraft.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 3):
Not if it's shown they were racist.

Actually, they could be members of a neo-Nazi group and still have acted properly. Any investigation of the incident should be restricted to the facts and most specificially should not attempt to judge people's character.

According to the article:

Quote:
Mr Adam, dressed in religious attire, had planned to read religious texts on the flight and had gone to the toilet to perform ritual ablutions before takeoff. He spent about 10 minutes in the toilet.

Issues of cultural tolerance work both ways. Mr.Adam should have the good sense to perform his ablutions in private prior to his travels. His cultural needs can bend to the common good just as well as the rest of us modify our behavior to accommodate others.

baroque · Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:02 am

Quoting 4Left (Reply 4):
All this extra eyeballing is due to OBL and those nut jobs out there who think that their way of life is better. Those sh*t heads won.

Correct, but largely because many of our reactions have not been all that bright. That bugger has every right to sit there in his cave (except he is more likely in a mansion in a Pakistan city) and hug himself for joy at how we have taken the bait hook line and sinker. I cannot imagine he ever thought he would be as successful as he is being.

TaromA380 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:24 am

In the civilized world, planes takes off following a schedule. If Mr Muslim has other things to do that interferes with the schedule, he better might stay home.

I begin to be pissed off by Muslims and their victimisation & paranoia.

ShakeZulaNJ · Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:30 am

The article is not very clear on the exact details of what went down. Was the plane still at the gate? Was it taxing to the runway? What exactly was said to the man? Before everyone runs around crying about bigotry, or how the airline crew was right on, let's find out what exactly happened on this flight.

If the plane was taxing to the runway, then he should have been in his seat with his seat belt on. That's a safety measure that EVERYONE needs to follow, regardless of your religious beliefs. If the plane was still at the gate with the doors open, then I don't see what the concern is. Plenty of people use the lav before the flight for whatever reason. He probably chose the lav for prayer because it was private and wouldn't disturb other passengers. Guess that didn't work so well for him though.

N766UA · Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:34 am

He was removed because of suspicious behavior, not because he was a muslim. I'm sick of these freakin' human rights groups. What about the right of everyone else on that plane to not be blown up because we're not allowed to boot muslims, no matter how they act, for fear of being sued? Same thing with those imams here in the states. I'm really sick and tired of it.

supa7E7 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:49 am

Religion is not a license to violate the law.

abrelosojos · Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting TaromA380 (Reply 7):
I begin to be pissed off by Muslims and their victimisation & paranoia.

= Wow. Speak of gross generalizations.

Quoting 777ER (Thread starter):
Human rights advocates say a New Zealand Muslim was publicly humiliated by an airline, after he was escorted from an aircraft when staff tagged him a security risk.

Mr Adam missed his flight and the overseas conference he was to address, despite having his passport cleared before the plane took off.

His case was highlighted in a report - 10 Human Rights Cases that Made a Difference - released by the Human Rights Commission today.

The report did not name the airline, but it was understood to be Freedom Air, the newspaper reported.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,....html

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 1):
Not a lot to go on from the story but sounds like he left his seat prior to take off(was the aircraft moving or about to) and likely put up some objection when asked to return to his seat.
IMHO Yet another beat up of the "religious intolerance" shown towards those that have less of it than most!
People get escorted from planes all the time for similar infractions, just doesn't always get blown up in to a Human Rights travesty!
He has been compansated more than most in this situation yet it is still beaten up into an anti islam thing, he was travelling from NZ but not using his NZ passport..WTF

= I personally think its great that the NZ HR Commision is being proactive. Thank you for sharing this incident as it affirms my positive impressions about NZ. Interesting reaction from members of the larger country up north ... typical of the deep issues present perhaps in that land?

Cheers,
A.

Thomson735 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 3):
Not if it's shown they were racist.

Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

jacobin777 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:50 am

According to the article:

"After Mr Adam laid a complaint, the airline replaced his ticket, provided financial compensation and a written apology, held staff training on cultural practices and reviewed how it dealt with security threats."

These things will happen from time to time, especially given current situations...making mistakes is human..but the fact NZ took the time to address the issue and apologise as well as offer compensation goes a long way....

..certainly better than inane comments as the one below...

Quoting TaromA380 (Reply 7):

I begin to be pissed off by Muslims and their victimisation & paranoia.

Keep your "brilliant" comments to yourself... sarcastic

jetbluefan1 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:01 am

The article seems extremely one-sided. It's definitely not the best source for what actually happened.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
I don't know the details of this, but if, before take off, a muslim dressed in religious attire, carry some objects (aperently a stack of relegius books) and spends over 10 minutes in the bathroom, while the crew probably detects movements and sounds inconsistent with normal toilet use, I think the flight crew is justified in having it checked out.

I completely agree.

JetBluefan1

MEACEDAR · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:10 am

Umm..... so, what's new?

jamesjimlb · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:19 am

to answer stealth z's question,

i believe it said the flight was grounded so the answer to your question is most likely "about to".

i think it was ridiculous that some who was Muslim went to the bathroom and got kicked off the plane!

,James

SJCRRPAX · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:19 am

They should lock the LAV's before take off and tell people to use the lavs in the terminal. I was on a WN flight from SEA-SJC, when someone went in the LAV and set off the smoke alarm (he said he twisted the air vent and suddenly smoke came out of it). They didn't kick him off the flight, but the flight was delayed for like an hour while the mechanic came in to make sure their was not something wrong with the plane.

EXMEMWIDGET · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 3):
Not if it's shown they were racist

Muslim is not a race...it is a religion. If I were a Muslim, I wouldn't do anything on an aircraft that would in any way attract attention to myself (for obvious reasons). Muslims shouldn't blame non Muslims for their perceived paranoia; but instead, blame the Muslim extremists for the warranted security concerns.

EXMEMWIDGET · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting Thomson735 (Reply 12):
Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

Exactly.....Quite simple and quite accurate.

AY104 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:54 am

Another example of how different religious groups and ethnic minorities use the work "discrimination" when ever it pleases so that they can have life bigger and better than anyone else. Usually they who blow the "discrimination" whistle are the biggest hippocrites. I guess the term would be "reverse discrimination" and I, and the rest of the world, are getting pretty damn tired of it.
Cheers,
Carl (AY104)

dutchjet · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:02 am

Quoting N766UA (Reply 9):
He was removed because of suspicious behavior, not because he was a muslim.

Isnt this the entire story in a nutshell?

B707Stu · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:10 am

If the comments below are an indicator of where we're going in this world, it's a sorry state indeed.

As somone who was at the WTC on 9/11, ran for my life and witnessed UA175 hit the second building, I know what it means to be terror-filled and have spent a decent amount of time getting over the experience. I say this only to qualify what I'm about to say next.

These next series of comments indicate people who's fear is greater than their faith in humanity. 99.999999% of muslims are not interested in duplicating the acts of 19 guys with switchblades and a plan. People need to stop reacting to the initial terror, from Bush on down. This has all played into the hands of a sub-cult of a sub-cult.

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
Crew acted properly. YOU CANNOT SECOND GUESS A CREW THAT FEELS CONCERNED. PERIOD.

Apparently you can. The investigation found the crew were wrong, as evidenced by the apology, the compensation to the passenger and the training they subsequently received.

Quoting 4Left (Reply 4):
So if we get a little testy when it comes to a certain look or religious statement, we should not be the "bad-guys". I say look into the mirror and ask yourselves the question. "Did my brother's cause this?" " Should my life be forever altered by the actions of a few?"

Depends on how you define 'brothers.' 99.99999% of muslim brothers didn't do it either. If you think of brothers as human beings that doesn't change that equation.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 5):
Issues of cultural tolerance work both ways. Mr. Adam should have the good sense to perform his ablutions in private prior to his travels. His cultural needs can bend to the common good just as well as the rest of us modify our behavior to accommodate others.

I think a locked door in a bathroom is as private as one can be on an aircraft. If you're saying no bathroom usage by anyone prior to take-off that's a different argument. That would be fair.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 9):
He was removed because of suspicious behavior, not because he was a muslim. I'm sick of these freakin' human rights groups. What about the right of everyone else on that plane to not be blown up because we're not allowed to boot muslims, no matter how they act, for fear of being sued? Same thing with those imams here in the states. I'm really sick and tired of it.

Suspicious behavior being that he was in the bathroom for 10 minutes? Hardly suspicious behavior.

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 10):
Religion is not a license to violate the law.

What law was violated?

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 11):
I personally think its great that the NZ HR Commision is being proactive. Thank you for sharing this incident as it affirms my positive impressions about NZ. Interesting reaction from members of the larger country up north ... typical of the deep issues present perhaps in that land?

I think you got it right and tapped into the half-of-the-argument many aren't interested in hearing.

Quoting Thomson735 (Reply 12):
Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

What made him a security risk? Going to the bathroom for 10 minutes?

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 13):
"After Mr Adam laid a complaint, the airline replaced his ticket, provided financial compensation and a written apology, held staff training on cultural practices and reviewed how it dealt with security threats."

Exactly.

Quoting EXMEMWIDGET (Reply 18):
Muslim is not a race...it is a religion. If I were a Muslim, I wouldn't do anything on an aircraft that would in any way attract attention to myself (for obvious reasons). Muslims shouldn't blame non Muslims for their perceived paranoia; but instead, blame the Muslim extremists for the warranted security concerns.

With this logic I should be considered a criminal because of all the criminals that share my religion? Very strange argument.

axio · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:45 am

Questions: Why couldn't he go to the loo in the terminal building? Isn't it very unusual for someone to use an aircraft toilet before take-off?

And yes, 10 minutes in the loo, the crew could certainly have used the excuse that they were worried he was sick... 'cause that seems like a long time.

ANNOYEDFA · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:48 am

I am just so SICK and tired of hearing about this subject. When the gay couple was threatened on the AA FLT everyone was up in arms saying how they were to publically affectionate. What is the difference in this case? I don't wear my religion on my sleeve like most muslim people do. If they choose to do so this is what may happen when they act suspicious. I had this happen before on a flight of mine. Middle Eastern guy acting weird and doing weird things. I noticed and so did the other PAX. We went back to the gate and he was detained checked out and allowed back on the flight no harm done.

I'm sick of reading the paper and first thing you read is take for instance Muslim taxi cab drivers won't carry liquor because it's against their religion.. Are you kidding me? It's not your business what people carry in their luggage or choose to do. If they stop drawing so much attention to themselves maybe we'll see less of this only to be replaced by something else. If your so religious and holy what are you doing here in America? The un-holy land? Moving on!

supa7E7 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:51 am

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 22):
What law was violated?

No law was violated. The laws I am aware of state that pax can be inspected, questioned, and searched at any time, for any reason. To violate that law (deny a search) thanks to religious rights would in my opinion be unfortunate.

mariner · Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:57 am

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
I don't know the details of this, but if, before take off, a muslim dressed in religious attire

How did the crew know he was a Muslim? The article says he was wearing "reilgious attire" - but what does that mean?

Was he wearing a turban? He might have been a Sikh - a fair few of those here.

Many New Zealanders have never met a Muslim, or would not know if they had.

As I remember from the video footage, very few of the 9/11 villains were wearing turbans or "religious attire", for the simplest reason - they had no desire to draw attention to themselves.

It is not the enemy who looks different that we should worry about - it is the enemy who looks like everyone else.

And if the crew is always right, were they right in the the old days, not so long ago, when (flamboyant) males were sometimes kicked off planes because they "might" have AIDS?

mariner

777ER · Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:26 am

One thing we have to take into consideration, is the fact that he could have been praying, and didn't want to pray in front of the other pax incase he caused them to get scared, so decided on the toilet

baron95 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:51 am

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 22):
Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
Crew acted properly. YOU CANNOT SECOND GUESS A CREW THAT FEELS CONCERNED. PERIOD.

Apparently you can. The investigation found the crew were wrong, as evidenced by the apology, the compensation to the passenger and the training they subsequently received.

Let me rephrase that - You cannot second guess a crew on the airplane. A plane can have only onde captain and people aiding him in doing his job. Yeah, after the problem is off the plane and on the ground, second guess, debate, suck-up to special interest groups, do whatever you want. So long as it is not on the airplane against a crew's decision.

jacobin777 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:03 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 27):
One thing we have to take into consideration, is the fact that he could have been praying, and didn't want to pray in front of the other pax incase he caused them to get scared, so decided on the toilet

Muslims aren't allowed to pray in the restroom... Wink

10 minutes in the loo isn't a lot, I've seen that happen with others from time to time....

wingnut767 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:13 am

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 28):
Apparently you can. The investigation found the crew were wrong, as evidenced by the apology, the compensation to the passenger and the training they subsequently received.

No the crew was right. The problem is here in the U.S. we have to play games because of the special interest group, the PC A-holes and lawyers who are happy to sue to make a buck. Even when you are right they say you are wrong and the Companies bow to them because of the PR.

In this day and age people should know how to act on an aircraft. There are rules and if you do not like them then do not fly. Flying on an Airline is not a right, It is a privilege. Obey the rules or get tossed off.

But wait a minute if you are of a different background it is racism and sue

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 11):
= I personally think its great that the NZ HR Commission is being proactive. Thank you for sharing this incident as it affirms my positive impressions about NZ. Interesting reaction from members of the larger country up north ... typical of the deep issues present perhaps in that land?

How come the NZ HR commission is not Investigating the abuses against all of the Indigenous populations in South America???

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 22):
I think a locked door in a bathroom is as private as one can be on an aircraft. If you're saying no bathroom usage by anyone prior to take-off that's a different argument. That would be fair.

That is the whole point. You are suppossed to be seated, with seat belt fastedned during taxi, Takeoff and landing. It does not matter what religion or color yuo are. Those are the rules for your safety and the safety of your fellow passengers.

Thomson735 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:20 am

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 22):
What made him a security risk? Going to the bathroom for 10 minutes?

Im not going to say it, but ill give you two guesses what makes him suspicious and i can tell ya it aint going ot the bathroom

SJCRRPAX · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:25 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 29):

Muslims aren't allowed to pray in the restroom...

I think you are splitting hairs here. The article says he went into the lav for ritual ablutions, which I am pretty sure means washing yourself before praying. What if everybody on the plane was Muslim and needed to wash up, would that mean the plane would be like 4 hours late for departure?

I don't think this was a religious thing. I'd just chalk it up to the guy was just weird, or a cultural thing. On my last flight there was what I'd call a peasant from Russia on board right behind me, truly didn't know how to behave, constantly kicking my chair, places drinks in the Isle, standing up every five minutes and bumping my chair, I guess If I found out his religion I should draw some universal conclusions about him?

777236ER · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:28 am

Quoting Thomson735 (Reply 12):
Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

Nonsense. Racial profiling is racism.

dallasnewark · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:33 am

To B707stu and Jacobin 777;

If you'd lost a child or a parent on 9/11 you'd be singing a different tune now instead of being all apologetic to the people that made their own bed.
Muslims should blame their own extremists for what is happening to them, but it is so much easier to blame the Western lifestyle

dallasnewark · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:38 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
Nonsense. Racial profiling is racism

Wrong... It's a necessity.

Thomson735 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:50 am

I dont see any American or British Terrorists (Except the media)

jacobin777 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:11 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 32):
I think you are splitting hairs here. The article says he went into the lav for ritual ablutions, which I am pretty sure means washing yourself before praying. What if everybody on the plane was Muslim and needed to wash up, would that mean the plane would be like 4 hours late for departure?

Actually I'm not splitting hairs...doing abulation and the physical act of praying are two different and separate things.....Muslims can't do their prayers in the loo..its really as simple as that..

..but you are correct its washing before praying... Wink

If everyone on the plane was Muslim, then the flight would have been cancelled... Wink

Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 34):
If you'd lost a child or a parent on 9/11 you'd be singing a different tune now instead of being all apologetic to the people that made their own bed.

we could agrgue about this point day and night..especially given the recent bush fiasco in Iraq....where he has succeeded in creating generations of enemies...not to mention, is responsible for the ruin of civilisation which is thousands of years old...

Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 34):
Muslims should blame their own extremists for what is happening to them, but it is so much easier to blame the Western lifestyle

-They do..people don't listen...the media (and our this particluar govt.)enoys on the fear of paranoia of people..it keeps ratings higher

Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 35):
Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
Nonsense. Racial profiling is racism

Wrong... It's a necessity.

I hope people like you never run this country.. sarcastic

mariner · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:11 am

Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 30):
How come the NZ HR commission is not Investigating the abuses against all of the Indigenous populations in South America???

Because the incident happened in New Zealand. How hard is that?

mariner

luv2fly · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:22 am

Quoting Mariner (Reply 26):
It is not the enemy who looks different that we should worry about - it is the enemy who looks like everyone else.

The voice of reason, like always.

allstarflyer · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:31 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 3):
Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
Crew acted properly.

Not if it's shown they were racist.

Glad your heart still bleeds red.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 13):
making mistakes is human..but the fact NZ took the time to address the issue and apologise as well as offer compensation goes a long way....

Yeah, so what's the issue, then? This is going to keep happening, anyway. Muslims who are readily identified as such - just by their attire - are going to be stereotyped whether you, me or anybody likes it.

Quoting B707Stu (Reply 22):
Quoting Thomson735 (Reply 12):
Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

What made him a security risk? Going to the bathroom for 10 minutes?

. . . in case you missed it . . .

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 14):
Quoting Baron95 (Reply 2):
I don't know the details of this, but if, before take off, a muslim dressed in religious attire, carry some objects (aperently a stack of relegius books) and spends over 10 minutes in the bathroom, while the crew probably detects movements and sounds inconsistent with normal toilet use, I think the flight crew is justified in having it checked out.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
Quoting Thomson735 (Reply 12):
Its called Common sense, he is a security risk

Nonsense. Racial profiling is racism.

. . . in case you missed it, Islam . . .

Quoting EXMEMWIDGET (Reply 18):
is not a race...it is a religion.

-R

CaptainCanuck · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:45 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 37):
Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 35):
Quoting 777236ER (Reply 33):
Nonsense. Racial profiling is racism

Wrong... It's a necessity.

I hope people like you never run this country.. sarcastic

So lets say you're a cop. Your town has a drug problem. Drugs sold by, lets say, white Canadians. How do you solve the problem? Well, according to some people's logic, you take the PC approach and dont put any special emphasis on the white Canadians in the town. Just treat everyone equal.

But realistically, if you want to get rid of the biggest drug problem, you target the biggest source. Profiling (not just racial) works.

You dont see as many non-muslims walking onto buses, into crowded markets or driving into busy streets and blowing themselves up as you do muslim extremists. And because muslim extremists dont wear special flashing beanies with big sirens on them, its going to require you looking harder at all muslims.

Unfortunately the actions of a small few have soured the experience for all the peaceful and law-abiding muslims on the planet.

wingnut767 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:48 am

Quoting Mariner (Reply 38):
Because the incident happened in New Zealand. How hard is that?

Was he not a New Zealander flying in the U.S??

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 37):
we could agrgue about this point day and night..especially given the recent bush fiasco in Iraq....where he has succeeded in creating generations of enemies...not to mention, is responsible for the ruin of civilisation which is thousands of years old...

You have got to be kidding?? You actually think a thousand year old civilization was ruined!!LOL
boggled

I think Saddam already did that. And I think that the Muslims have hated Christians and Jews for say about 1400 years.???

ABQopsHP · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:48 am

Asking my fellow airline employees this.........How many times before departure did a pax go into the lav right before departure, and cause you (me) to go into a slight panic because this was going to cause a small delay. Is it possible that this crew over reacted because in the back of their mind they thought this guy would cause a delay and they would have heard about it from their supervisor/manager if they hadnt gotten the man out? For you non airline types....we get an earfull all the time from a sup. over even a 1 minute delay. We dont know the full story in this case, and the report does not state how the pax behaved. Also, is it me or is it common courtesy that when there are a limited amount of public toilets, you go in get your business done and get out. This isnt exactly your own private bathroom at home or hotel.

mariner · Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:58 am

Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 42):
Was he not a New Zealander flying in the U.S??

I can't imagine that the New Zealand Human Rights Commission has any jurisdiction over anything that happens in the US, and if he was on a US airline and not using a NZ passport, they would have even less than nothing. Why would they even be involved?

The article does not state his origin or his destination, but since the incident was reported in a New Zealand paper and involves a New Zealand airline - Freedom Air - I would assume that some aspect of New Zealand law was at issue. .

I am happy to be proven wrong, but the point remains. The NZ HRC has no jurisdiction over anything that happens in South America.

mariner

[Edited 2006-12-10 00:06:12]

jacobin777 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:04 am

Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 42):

You have got to be kidding?? You actually think a thousand year old civilization was ruined!!LOL

Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 42):
I think Saddam already did that. And I think that the Muslims have hated Christians and Jews for say about 1400 years.???

You need to learn some history.. sarcastic

vanguard737 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:20 am

Quoting TaromA380 (Reply 7):
I begin to be pissed off by Muslims and their victimisation & paranoia.

ABQopsHP · Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:21 am

Me too

riyadhnurse · Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:27 am

Quoting 4Left (Reply 4):

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 5):

Well stated and I totally agree! If you can't conduct yourself in a manner that is compliant with all instructions from the air crew,and have some compassion for the rest of the pax,stay the hell home! Hire yourself private transportation,and do what ever you like. You haven't any right to disturb the peace of anyone else,on the ground or in the air! flamed

FlyDeltaJets87 · Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:27 am

Quoting 777ER (Thread starter):
Muslim Kicked Of Aircraft Due To Toilet Trip

Yea, answering the question "Sir, what are you doing in there?" with "Dropping some bombs" probably wasn't the best answer. wink

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net