eta unknown wrote:
Ah ElPistolero, why are you taking this so personally? I'm not defending the gate agent. What I am saying is I don't think the full story is being told based on selective video footage. I'm puzzled re your deflect comments as I have no agenda here versus others (closet snowflakes?) who are hyped up and quick to play the racism card.
FYI the USA cancels your green card when the passport is issued; however, actually surrendering the green card is another matter (US immigration can ask for it, but if you don't have it on you there's nothing they can do except note it as cancelled in their system).
Now as per your question, "is it okay for a company selling products to US citizens to treat two US citizens differently on the basis of their race?" the answer is buyer beware because in this instance your purchase involves transiting a country to which you dont have the right to enter (unless you obtain a Russian visa in advance which would negate the cheap SU ticket savings). I do know of incidents in other countries where pax were forced to sleep on the airport floor due to unforeseen operational issues resulting in not being able to enter the transit country with their particular nationality, but usually countries are happy to let these people linger in limbo until the situation is sorted. It's odd the Russians opted to remove the pax from the transit area- I mean wasn't Eric Snowden at SVO for almost 6 weeks?
I really don't care for obfuscation. It seems bit of a stretch to argue that they could have Indian passports. Accusing people of breaking the law is not something I would treat lightly.
The case here is fairly simple. US citizens were sent to India because a CSR/gate agent/whatever decided that they were Indians. If the simplest explanation is the best one, it's hard not to conclude that their appearance played a role in this. That is racism.
Now we can inject all kinds of random scenarios to deflect from that (passports/OCI/visa), but let's call it what it is. Obfuscation. It adds random hypotheticals to cast doubt on the passengers version of events. We have a video where a gate agent calls US citizens Indians, but even that's not proof. So we start entertaining the notion that they're carrying Indian passports instead of acknowledging that racism is a problem in a country in which African football players routinely endure racist chants and monkey chants. So much so, that western countries pointedly warn dark-skinned citizens about racism in Russia.
Which begs the question: what's more likely - that a gate agent from a country with a relatively high tolerance for racism suffered a bout of racism? Or that the US citizens affected were illegally carrying Indian passports and this confused the innocent gate agent?
As for the green card cancellation, I know for a fact that in Canada, you can't pick up your proof of citizenship till you surrender your visa. You can keep it; it's simply stamped "cancelled", and its required when you apply for a visa to visit your country of origin to check the category under which you immigrated (countries don't like letting former refugees in for fairly obvious reasons). A dangerous game to play with India. As another poster pointed out, they can be quite a tough bunch.
With respect to buyer beware, there is a lesson here: Don't fly SU. They were silly to do that. But that doesn't mean SU is in the clear. It's also true that Indian citizens get stuck in EU airports during IRROPs. Which is why they prefer ME carriers over the US3 TATL JVs (more flight options/shorter delays).