ForumsWEPRSaudi's kicked off plane?!

149 22637
pratchu
offline
pratchu
493 posts
Nomad

If you have heard the story of 2 saudi men travelling on an american plane who got kicked off for speaking arabic then you will think the same as me. Why did they do that? is it just that people are biased about this? also, they were asked to move seats many times till one pulled out his diplomatic pasport. then,they got kicked off.i really dont see why this is happening. it makes no sense to kick off saudi diplomats off a plane because they were speaking arabic. now imagine how i, asa saudi, and many others reacted to this response. next thing you know, you'll be kicked off a plane for wearing a scarf around youre hair(only applies to muslim women)!
I think that this has gone too far. why dont they accept saudi's and muslims as normal people i wouldlike to know?

  • 149 Replies
Squidbears
offline
Squidbears
626 posts
Nomad

if u hadnt gone to afganistan or even on the crusades, none of this would have happened

...... wut.
Squidbears
offline
Squidbears
626 posts
Nomad

sorry for the double post, but i was just kind of amazed by what i saw... like 314d1 said... america wasnt involved in the crusades... also the terrorists attacked america first.. it wasnt like we invaded in Afghanistan and in retaliation they hit us with planes... they hit us with planes and in retaliation we invaded the country they were taking refuge in

Hypermnestra
offline
Hypermnestra
26,390 posts
Nomad

...Since when was America involved in the crusades? This is America, not England. And how are supposed to control what happened in Afghanistan? Use our time machine to go back thirty years?


I think he's talking about America's "White Knight" War on Terror "crusade". That's what a lot of people are calling it.

At what point in time was riding a plane a right? I always thought it was more of a privilege.

It is a privilege, but there are rights that you don't violate that correlate with riding a plane.
For example, if you took a bomb on an airplane with the intention of blowing it up and you were caught, then of course your flying privilege would be revoked.
But if you were an Arabic diplomat and you spoke your own language on an airplane and didn't bother to shave, that is no reason for you to be kicked off of an airplane.
Do you see the difference?
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

also the terrorists attacked america first.. it wasnt like we invaded in Afghanistan and in retaliation they hit us with planes... they hit us with planes and in retaliation we invaded the country they were taking refuge in


Actually, this all really started in 1978 - just another of those "Commies against us" thing, or so it seems from my limited knowledge on the subject. The Soviet Union backed some communist who had risen to power, the U.S backed some others. Bloody Afghan civil war, that America was involved in, or so it seems from the Wikipedia page...
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

I think he's talking about America's "White Knight" War on Terror "crusade". That's what a lot of people are calling it.


No, if he meant that, he would have probably said "and", or included the Afghanistan conflict within it. It seems he is referring to the actual knights invading the Muslim's useless desert land for religious reasons.

It is a privilege, but there are rights that you don't violate that correlate with riding a plane.
For example, if you took a bomb on an airplane with the intention of blowing it up and you were caught, then of course your flying privilege would be revoked.
But if you were an Arabic diplomat and you spoke your own language on an airplane and didn't bother to shave, that is no reason for you to be kicked off of an airplane.
Do you see the difference?


But if literally no one wants to sit by you-So it would seem by their constant moving- or even wants you on the plane, then once again, the company would be forced to do to financial reasons. Once again, lets assume it is a plane that holds about a hundred people, that sounds reasonable. And lets assume at least 1/4 the people didn't want the diplomats on the plane enough to leave it if they were aloud, as shown by the diplomat's constant seat movement. Finally lets assume that the tickets are pretty cheap, only 200$. To refund the 25 other passengers, it would cost $5,000. To kick off and refund the two diplomats, it would cost $400. The company would save $4600, enough a reason to justify it financially.
Hypermnestra
offline
Hypermnestra
26,390 posts
Nomad

But if literally no one wants to sit by you-So it would seem by their constant moving- or even wants you on the plane, then once again, the company would be forced to do to financial reasons. Once again, lets assume it is a plane that holds about a hundred people, that sounds reasonable. And lets assume at least 1/4 the people didn't want the diplomats on the plane enough to leave it if they were aloud, as shown by the diplomat's constant seat movement. Finally lets assume that the tickets are pretty cheap, only 200$. To refund the 25 other passengers, it would cost $5,000. To kick off and refund the two diplomats, it would cost $400. The company would save $4600, enough a reason to justify it financially.

The saving of money does not justify kicking people off just because they're making a few other people uncomfortable.
So, if I walked into a restaurant, brought some music, and started playing it, and it happened to be music that the other customers didn't like, then naturally your first instinct would be to kick me out of the restaurant?
Or what if I walked into a restaurant that allows smoking, and started smoking, but you didn't like smoking, so you would get me kicked out of the restaurant?
My point is, just because one person makes other people uncomfortable, and just because that may lose the company some money, that is not grounds to kick them out. The airline workers could have asked the Arabics to speak in English(which is still kind of dumb, but not as much), they could have told the other passengers to get over it, I mean, come on. Civil rights will trump money every time.
PanzerTank
offline
PanzerTank
1,707 posts
Nomad

If you actually knew anything, that would be discrimination.

Against popular belief I can actually know something and I do discriminate.

You just classified yourself as racist.

I don't believe I did.

What if you went to a foreign country and did not comply with a country's customs? Would you want to be kicked out of a restaurant, a hotel, or a plane?

Well if I went to a foreign country that had bad blood with the country I came from I'd have the sense to look like I belong and speak what ever language they are.

Yeah, they shouldn't, panzer.

*Laughs* I knew someone would say that.

It doesn't matter. Fear does not outweigh an individual's rights.

Oh I disagree with that. I think safety should outweigh an individual's rights. It'd be for the greater good in my opion. So to be on the safe side I'd watch out for the people from the Middle East.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those words define freedom, and they are clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence.

Other than for Americans, I don't personally know anyone who would agree with that. And even though that is in the Declaration of Independence you should know that's not how America is.

Should we be afraid of white people, because they commit more crimes than any other race in the United States, and have murdered more people than Middle Easterners in the United States. I can easily bring up statistics to prove it, if you want me to.

I would actually like to see those statistics and those statistics references.

Also I'm talking about on planes who to watch out for. And since white people aren't particularly known for hijacking planes and running into buildings with them I'd still watch out for the people that look like there from the Middle East.

They shouldn't be. Why should one group be under surveillance more than another group when all people are equal under the law?

Well in my opion depending on the circumstances and what one group is particularly know for I think they should be put under careful scrutinization.

If a white man bombs a plane, does he deserve a smaller sentence than a Middle Eastern man who bombed a plane?

No, they would desere the same punishment, and I don't think if you strapped on a bomb and ran into a building you could be punished.

Anyway, the don't make sense. If I grow a beard, get some colour, and then learn Arabic, does that mean I should be isolated? Does that isolation make sense when I am law abiding, just like everyone else in that plane?

What do you mean the don't make sense? Anyways I think you know my answer to that question. I don't believe you should be isolated. I believe you should be under a discreet watch. Anyways why would you do that unless your planning on going to Saudi Arabia?

Mountains are several miles high. Mount Everest is almost six miles above sea level. Planes only fly about four miles above earth. He was right. He was also talking about mountains. He explicitly said mountains

Ah well never mind about that paragraph. I must've been confused with something else.

Well, let's see. How many people are there on Earth? 6.3 billion. How many people bombed the Twin Towers? No more than 10 people. I can give you links, but I think it is pretty self explanatory.

Ah well maybe the chances of hitting a building in a plane are those odds but I thought he meant the chances of being hijacked, or being killed with a suicide bomb were 5 out of 6.3 billion.

The Bush Administration has all poisoned your minds

I've never read the Bush Administration or really anything about Bush.

Only a handful of people bombed the World Trade Center.

Only a handful of people did that but they were part of a larger group.

More Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor than Middle Easterners bombed WTC

The reason we don't need to scrutinize the Japanese in my opion is because they don't dress like every day people and attack places or bomb places. The military did that. If Japanese civilians started attacking places strapped with bombs it'd be a different story. But since it was the army that did it (in my opion) you don't need to watch out for those Japanese.

The American airplane security has just reached a new level of stupidity. First we start patting people down and using nude scanners, then we kick people off for looking a little different and speaking their own language? Pathetic. People are so paranoid, it's breaching new levels of ridiculousness. This is a violation of basic rights and even if someone is scaring the other passengers for having a beard and a tan, that's no reason to kick them off the plane.

Ah yes, of course your right about that we should just let people on without searching them for weapons of any sort or patting them down or searching the bags. God forbid the airlines should get rid of safety procedures that reduces the chance of the planes being hijacked.

How can you be half of a religion?

Of course you can't truly be half a religion but it can be like your half Christian. You believe in most of the Christian concepts about the commandments like "Thou Shall not Steal" (I'm not quoting word for word), but you may not believe in that God. Like myself. I believe in most of the commandments but not that particular God. So I'm sort of half Christian.

I don't know if that confused anyone but if it did oops

The saving of money does not justify kicking people off just because they're making a few other people uncomfortable.

Oh yes it does. The saving of $4600 or the losing of $400, the company has to think financially not morally. It's a company after all.

So, if I walked into a restaurant, brought some music, and started playing it, and it happened to be music that the other customers didn't like, then naturally your first instinct would be to kick me out of the restaurant?

Yes I think you would be kicked out if you brought in blaring music that threatened the business to lose some cash. And why wouldn't you have brought head phones?

The airline workers could have asked the Arabics to speak in English

That's precisely what they should have done.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

The saving of money does not justify kicking people off just because they're making a few other people uncomfortable.


Yes, actually, it does.

So, if I walked into a restaurant, brought some music, and started playing it, and it happened to be music that the other customers didn't like, then naturally your first instinct would be to kick me out of the restaurant?


I would probably ask you to turn it down, then move you if the restaurant was large enough, then kick you out. But what are you supposed to ask? "Excuse me sir, could you quit looking so Arab? Some of the other passengers are starting to get uncomfortable"?

According to the OP, they were moved several times before speaking Arabic. There is only so many seats on a plane. They probably didn't have anywhere else to put them, and the speaking Arabic either was the straw that broke the camel's back for one of the passengers they were next to, that they drew attention to themselves by speaking an unfamiliar language, or simply someone complained before they started speaking and it took some time to move them. It is unlikely that the pilot/s heard, unless the diplomat's were in the intimidate front, in witch even that would be unlikely. The Steward/Stewardess could have become unsettled, but that is also unlikely as they would be the ones asking the diplomats to move. So it would be logical to assume a passenger was unsettled. And if the passenger was unsettled by only the Arabic speaking, then it is unlikely that he is going to complain so. Rather than "Those two guys are speaking Arabic, and that bothers me." the complaint would likely say something more to the effect of "Those to guys are making me feel uncomfortable"

Or what if I walked into a restaurant that allows smoking, and started smoking, but you didn't like smoking, so you would get me kicked out of the restaurant?


Then why would I work there if I had a problem with smoking? And besides that, it was probably the other passengers, so if pretty much every customer had a problem with it, then it would make since to. The personal opinion of the employees is not a large factor in this situation, from what I can tell.

Civil rights will trump money every time.


This is a company. Money trumps over all.
Hypermnestra
offline
Hypermnestra
26,390 posts
Nomad

Oh yes it does. The saving of $4600 or the losing of $400, the company has to think financially not morally. It's a company after all.

It does in the eyes of the company, but it's not morally right. I know that the company thinks they are justified, but this could be grounds for a discrimination lawsuit of some sort, and then they'd lose a whole lot more money than $4600.

Yes I think you would be kicked out if you brought in blaring music that threatened the business to lose some cash. And why wouldn't you have brought head phones?

When did I ever say "blaring" music? I said that I brought in some music that maybe the person in the next booth could hear.
And you're missing the point completely.

That's precisely what they should have done.

Which is still a stupid idea, by the way.
pratchu
offline
pratchu
493 posts
Nomad

Oh yes it does. The saving of $4600 or the losing of $400, the company has to think financially not morally. It's a company after all.


dude, its only $400. thats how much a first class ticket costs. the company make more than that and i seriously agree;the bush administration or something has one deep in ur brain and practically poisoned u.

You just classified yourself as racist.


I don't believe I did.


too bad u did.
Squidbears
offline
Squidbears
626 posts
Nomad

Everyone is a little bit racist in their mind. Everyone. Not everybody acts upon what they think though... I was on a plane once and there were 2 middle easterners with big beards etc. i got nervous, sure, i bet a lot of people did.

314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

dude, its only $400. thats how much a first class ticket costs. the company make more than that and i seriously agree;the bush administration or something has one deep in ur brain and practically poisoned u.


Actually, you read it wrong. They kick two people off with tickets at $200 each, they only lose $400, the one that you are referring to. The way the did go. They way they didn't go would make 25 people leave at $200 a ticket, or $5000. So by doing this, they save $5000-400 or $4600,about 12 first class tickets by your description. And that is a lot.

It does in the eyes of the company, but it's not morally right. I know that the company thinks they are justified, but this could be grounds for a discrimination lawsuit of some sort, and then they'd lose a whole lot more money than $4600.


Are we hear to argue the morals or the justification? Companies do not run on morals. They run on money. Could you please describe a discrimination lawsuit that could effect customer complaints?
Hypermnestra
offline
Hypermnestra
26,390 posts
Nomad

Are we hear to argue the morals or the justification? Companies do not run on morals. They run on money. Could you please describe a discrimination lawsuit that could effect customer complaints?

Yes, we are. At least partially.
And okay. I'm not talking about a lawsuit that could "effect customer complaints"(you used the wrong "effect", by the way), I'm talking about a lawsuit that could be filed by the Arabs that were kicked off the plane.
Here is an employment discrimination lawsuit, where two Middle Easterns fired from a cruise line were awarded $485,000.
And here is one where the Sahara hotel and casino in Las Vegas paid a Middle Eastern man $85,000 and was forced to pay a further $15,000 to the Nevada Equal Rights Commission.
Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that $485,000 is more money than $4,600, as is $100,000.
So there went your economic argument.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,817 posts
Nomad

Yes, we are. At least partially.
And okay. I'm not talking about a lawsuit that could "effect customer complaints"(you used the wrong "effect", by the way), I'm talking about a lawsuit that could be filed by the Arabs that were kicked off the plane.
Here is an employment discrimination lawsuit, where two Middle Easterns fired from a cruise line were awarded $485,000.
And here is one where the Sahara hotel and casino in Las Vegas paid a Middle Eastern man $85,000 and was forced to pay a further $15,000 to the Nevada Equal Rights Commission.
Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that $485,000 is more money than $4,600, as is $100,000.
So there went your economic argument.


Those are both job discrimination lawsuits, which you can sue for. These guys got kicked off a plane, do to passengers complaining probably. Could you give me an example closer to that?
pratchu
offline
pratchu
493 posts
Nomad

i think this is out of hand.and when i was talking about the crusaes, i was basically saying that the westerners . and england eventually colonized america so they can be considered both in the same level.

Showing 61-75 of 149