Forums → WEPR → Saudi's kicked off plane?!

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?

Kicked off a plane and arrested. The "And arrested" part sounds like the bigger problem to me.

The case is still very similar.

Not necessarily, a false - arrest is much bigger than a simple escort.

However, after looking up this case myself do to the lack of any actual information in the OP, they claim to have not received a refund or rescheduled flight. They are attempting to sue, the company's name is Continental Airlines (I say from memory). This may change my position, however the airline's opinion on the subject seems to be impossible to get. My prior arguments have assumed that the diplomats received a full refund, as they should have.

And you're missing the point completely.

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.

Which is still a stupid idea, by the way.

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.

too bad u did.

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?

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?

As you wish.
Six imams who were kicked off of an airplane won a lawsuit, and they are going to be awarded a cash compensation to the tune of $50,000, although no solid numbers have been settled on yet.

The case is still very similar.

However, after looking up this case myself do to the lack of any actual information in the OP, they claim to have not received a refund or rescheduled flight.

I probably am but according to what I saw you mean that if you bring in music that's disrupting other customers they should move and not you? Same as on the plane, you mean that the passengers should move or leave the plane since the Saudi Arabian's were disrupting them by appearance and the sounds they made.

How so? If they spoke English the other passengers would've been content, the Saudi Arabian's could've went on with their discussion. No one would've been kicked off the plane or leave. The company wouldn't of lost money or have been threatened with a lawsuit. The Saudi Arabian's could've went on with their trip peacefully. So how is it a stupid idea except for the fact that it violates the Arabian's rights?

Isn't a settlement when the case is solved by the defendants paying the prosecuters not to goto court or to stop the court case? So if there was a settlement you can't be 100% sure if the judge was going to vote for or against the prosecuters?

It is similar but not very similiar. If they were arrested that's totally different than being refunded and having the next ride out to where they were going.

No, I'm saying they should suck it up, or deal with it a different way than they did.

Also; as for the Saudi Arabians, it's just stupid.

I'm sorry, but if you are disturbed by the way someone looks, then what right have you to make them move?

I love it when people answer their own questions in the question itself

That is what a settlement is, you are correct, and they did reach a settlement, but a settlement must also be approved by the courts before it is acceptable. That is stated clearly in the article I provided.
In addition, they went to the courts first before a settlement was reached, and the judge was ruling in the favor of the imams. The imams were already winning the court case before the airline reached a settlement with them.

They were detained and questioned temporarily. That is not the same thing as being arrested.
And can you please provide a link to the article on this subject before we start assuming that the Arabs were refunded and allowed on another flight? I would like to see the article on this.

Detaining Arabs from a flight is just as wrong as imprisioning the Japanese during WWII. Unless I'm mistaken, freedom of speech IS the first ammendment.

Well that's what I thought you meant. But if your the disruption to other people you should change yourself to make everyone content but you. It'd be for the greater good.

I mean the Saudi Arabians could have changed their appearance and not look like a terrorist in other peoples eyes to make everyone content.

Well... Me personally I wouldn't want someone to look like a terrorist right beside me and speak gibberish when they can speak English.

Ok but what do you think of everything else in the paragraph? It makes sense though eh?

They may have been winning the case but you can't be sure they would've won the case. The company may have thought they could've won but didn't want that sort of publicity and wanted the case done with.

Ok they may not have been refunded or have had a rescheduled flight but it's still quite a bit different if they weren't detained like the others?

And who prays in an airline. That's begging for trouble and acting like a sketch ball. So naturally the security would detain those people.

A previous comment made me lulz a lot.

Of course, by the time it all goes down, you are going to be speeding through the air, several miles above the Earth and when that plane that you are in flies head-first into a mountain because you did't take an initiative against a potential threat to your well being, you are going to be as dead as the rest. Bye-bye, no more you, or your ideals, your hopes for the future, nada. You are DEAD. Get that? Good.

One more thing...

Well... Me personally I wouldn't want someone to look like a terrorist right beside me and speak gibberish when they can speak English.

Oh, so if all of a sudden people were freaked out by people with blond hair, does that mean everybody with blond hair should dye it black because the majority is bothered by it?
Or if people were suddenly bothered by people with dark skin, should everyone with dark skin bleach their skin just to appease other peoples' stupid, irrational fears?

If they want to look that way, they can. The other passengers can feel as uncomfortable as they want to, and it would be their own fault for being racist, paranoid idiots.

No. Giving yourself up for the greater good is a stupid thing to do when the so-called "greater good" is a bunch of paranoid bigots.

Just stop acting like they were refunded if they weren't. If they were not refunded, then it's even more unfair and retarded

Just because YOU don't speak the language doesn't make it gibberish. Arabic, or whatever language they were speaking, is a perfectly viable linguistic option and they can speak it if they so choose.

That was a pretty good response but when I said change yourself I meant wear different clothing, shave your beard, don't speak a language that makes people think your a suicide bomber or hijacker. When I said change yourself I meant reasonably so. Not bleaching your skin lol.

You know if the hijackers on the day of 9/11 were kicked out of a plane for this reason we would be having this same discussion and you would still call the people that got them escorted off the plane raciast, paranoid idiots. So I think it's safe act this way to people who appear suspicious and may be terrorist.

That's rediculous, if what you would do would make everyone in a plane ride happy and not get you escorted off a plane that's obviously a better choice for the cost of different clothing and a shaved beard.

True but you shouldn't speak Arabic in a American air line if you can speak English

Still, changing yourself to fit what the public wants to see is just wrong, no matter how extreme or moderate it is.

So you're saying we should judge people on looks alone?

You know the underwear bomber, Umar Abdulmutallab, his father actually warned the CIA that his son was a radical and that he was going to do something. They did not do anything to stop him. Meanwhile, here we are detaining people from flights simply because they look Middle Eastern? It's ridiculous.

We need to focus less on how people look and more on actual proof. If people weren't so busy looking for people with brown skin whose beards weren't cut with a buzz saw, and instead looking for people who were actually suspicious with solid evidence to back those suspicions up, maybe they could actually catch real terrorists instead of kicking innocent people off of planes who just happen to look a little different.

We're not being safe by being paranoid and racist, we're being less safe, because we're taking innocents off the planes, and that means we're leaving the people who are actually dangerous on.

I'm not talking about the cost, I'm saying that they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't actually endanger anyone. And if it makes the other passengers uncomfortable, too bad

Why not? Once again, it's because people are racist and paranoid. The media is fear-mongering, making people terrified of an entire ethnic group, and it's not going to pan out well.

They can speak whatever language they please, because it's a free country and the right to free speech is protected, in any language.

Well I don't think changing yourself not to look like a suicide bomber is just wrong, especially if it only takes a shaven beard and a change of languages especially if you know the language you should switch to.

Not judge but discreetly watch just to be on the safe side. Depending on the circumstances. If it looks like there are some teenage kids up to no good lingering in front of a store or some elderly ladies passing by on the other side of the street with their grand children your saying we should watch both of them equally the same if you were a cop?

No I didn't know of the underwear bomber but I just googled it and your right that is rediculous. What I would've done is put some special agaents on his case and put some of the airline staff on discreet watch of the Middle Easterners in the airline.

To be on the safe side. Makes sense?

Yes you right about that except for the fact that at that time on that airline the security found no solid evidence of any terrorist like things anywhere in that airport.
So if you were the security and saw no incriminating items anywhere on anybody wouldn't you watch out for the people who stand out and look like terrorists?

You know I would have to agree with that if that were actual true. But there was no one actually dangerous on that plane at all. So it's only being less safe if someone actually dangerous was on that plane right?

How do you know that they weren't actually talking about doing a terrorist bombing or hijacking the plane? The security could've escorted them off to be sure they weren't talking about hijacking the plane. But if the diplomats spoke English no one would've felt so uneasy or afraid.

They should speak English so the airline crew and other passengers know there not planning to hijack the plan. So it's not because people are racist or paranoid, or that the media is fear-mongering, making people terrified of an entire ethnic group. What the pilot did in my opion was completely rational.

Theoretically they can speak what ever language they want, and that America is a free country and the right to free speach is protected in any language but as you can see on that particular airline sense beat free speech right?