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

That's exactly the thing!
They don't look like suicide bombers, they look like Middle Easterns.And it's the racism that makes people think that.

Well to me Middle Easterners look like terrorists. (Don't worry I know how bad that sounded so don't remind me) So I can why other people would think that the Saudi Arabians were terrorists... And it's ignorance not racism btw.

Why should they bow to racism and change themselves just because some people think a certain ethnic group is comprised entirely of terrorists?

The Saudi Arabians should bow into racism and change themselves because it would be easier for everyone, if they just got clean shaven, wore different clothing, and speak English since they can do that. That way they wouldn't be prosecuted against and no one would be fear ful and everyone can get on with their lives normally. This way it's easier for everyone involved that they don't look like crazy terrorists.

It's foolish. They should be allowed to look how they want to, without being discriminated against because of it.

I agree it's foolish and they should but that's not the way it'll ever be any time soon. So they should just look like every day people for everyone to be able to go about there every day life.

No, but that's different. A teenage kid loitering around is legitimately suspicious...

How long ago has it been since you were a teenage kid? I know that teenagers loiter around alot and often don't do anything to bad, but people are still suspicious of them even though they don't do anything wrong. So it's not different at all. Same with the diplomats they didn't do anything wrong at the time but still look suspicious in there language and clothing as do the teenagers loitering around. The diplomats could do something dangerous same as the teenagers in the future so people are still suspicious against the teenagers shop lifting or the Saudi Arabians hijacking the plane.

Why would you put the staff on watch for all people from the Middle East when your tip was on that one guy? Why not just put him on the no-fly list, or have them watch that one guy, or question him, or something like that?

You misunderstood me completely. I meant if you actually do get a tip you call in for the CIA but if you don't have a tip and everything is going about as normal until Saudi Arabians show up and look suspicious that's when you start discreetly watching them. Because it's only natural to watch people who look suspicious and to watch people who looked like the men from 9/11 right?

No, it doesn't.
The chances of being the victim of a terrorist attack are 1 in 10,408,947.
The odds of being struck by lightning in your lifetime are 1 in 6,250.
The odds of fatally slipping in the shower are 1 to 2,232
The odds of being in a lethal motor vehicle accident this year are 1 to 100.
So, go ahead, if you want. Be racist just to be safe. But that also means that you should never shower again, because you might slip and hit your head and die. You should also never go outside in a rainstorm, because you might get hit by lightning. You should also never drive, because you might be involved in a lethal vehicular accident. The chances for all of these things are far, far better than the chances of being the victim of a terrorist attack on an airplane. I'm afraid the Bush administration fear mongering has gotten into your head.

I'll say this again I'VE NEVER READ THE Bush Administration OR HEARD OF IT TIL TODAY. So it hasn't gotten to my head.

And what you said is totally different. In this I'd be wanting to be safe by watching out for that PARTICULARLY SUSPICIOUS guy. (He's particularly suspiciously because he was acting like the guys from 9/11). I wouldn't be on the safeside with the lightning storm thing, and bathtub thing unless there was something extremely odd about it or suspicious about it. I wouldn't be afraid of drving a car, or being hit with lightning on a regular day because nothing would be out of place. But when I'm on a plane and a guy acts like the terrorists did on 9/11 then I'd try to be on the safe side.

So, if you REALLY want to be on the safe side, stop showering, stop driving, stop going outside, just hole up in a bomb shelter eating fresh foods(but not packaged, canned, or raw foods because those can be dangerous!) wearing your little tinfoil hat until the aliens come and enslave mankind.
You see my point?

*Laughs* Your right that would be acting on the REALLY safe side but as I said above when guys act like terrorist from 9/11 then I'd be on the suspicious side.

I see the point you made but it's incorrect and flawed.

'Oh, I don't see anything that's actually legitimately incriminating, so I should just find someone who looks Middle Eastern and kick them off the plane!'
That makes PERFECT logical sense.

lol.. No but you should discreetly watch them and then when they threaten the business some money by other passengers leaving that's when you boot them to Timbucktoo.

So if you don't see anyone dangerous on that plane, that means you should kick off the diplomats who look Middle Eastern?

No my point above tells you what I think you should do to people looking Middle Eastern. And they were Middle Eastern by the way. So say &quoteople who are Middle Eastern, not look Middle Eastern", the way you say it makes it seem like they weren't Saudi Arabian in my opion.

Just because they are Middle Eastern does NOT make them a terrorist.

I know but to be on the safe and logical side you would watch them discreetly and when they threaten your business you make them leave.

Here's an experiment: what if the next time I got on a plane, I wore a burqa and started speaking with a Middle Eastern accent? I'm not even remotely Middle Eastern, but I would look it! Does that mean they should kick me off?

No they shouldn't kick you off right away but I think you know what I think the airline should do.

So, if I started speaking German, or Spanish, or French on an airplane, I would get kicked off for speaking a language that other people don't understand?
Because you never know, I might be plotting a terrorist attack! You never know! How can you be sure I wasn't? I was speaking another language, that means I must be a foreigner, that means I must be plotting a terrorist attack! Right?! RIGHT!?! I mean, why else would you speak your own language instead of your second language? *facepalm*
English was their second language, and obviously, they would feel more comfortable speaking their own native language. I don't see why that would be such a big deal.

No you shouldn't be suspicious at those languages because there widely known, and it is fairly likely someone would understand you, and it's unlikely you would be speaking about about a terrorist attack in those languages so openly. But if your speaking Arabian (when you can speak English), and look like a terrorist in most peoples eyes, that's when the eye brows start being raised.

So you're saying that they should speak English so everyone knows what they're saying?

If you can fluently yes so no one is nervous, we know your not planning any crazy Al Queda things, and such.

So, if I started speaking another language, the default assumption is that I'm planning a terrorist attack, just because you don't know what I AM saying?
THAT makes sense...

No if you appear like those 9/11 terrorist guys, and talk like them, that's when my default assumption is your up to no good when you can choose to speak English if you want or get shaven, or change clothing.

It wasn't sense at all, it was paranoia and stupidity.

It don't think we'll ever agree on that. I'll think it's being senseful and rational but you'll think it's paranoia and stupidity.

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.

Panzertank, they didn't look like suicid bombers. they looked like ordinary middle easterns. plus, they should know theyre own language.if they want to talk arabic in a plane, about private stuff, they should be allowed to. on my flight to england, there was a lady typing french on her blackberry. should i discriminate her because she is typing french? no. this applies to all people. and it isn't against the law not to talk in ur own language

and it isn't against the law not to talk in ur own language

it isnt illegal... but it can make others nervous... i dont know about you.. but i try to avoid making other people nervous

Well to me Middle Easterners look like terrorists. (Don't worry I know how bad that sounded so don't remind me) So I can why other people would think that the Saudi Arabians were terrorists... And it's ignorance not racism btw.

So what if you think that Middle Easterns look like terrorists, we can't just bow to that sort of thing.
So, for now I'll use Bob and Co. for this argument.
There is a man named Bob. Bob thinks that Jews are thieves. Does that mean every time Bob sees a Jew wearing a kippah and sporting a traditional beard, he can complain because they look like they're thieves, and that makes him uncomfortable?
And Bob's cousin Jim thinks that Mexicans all look like illegal immigrants. So, if Jim saw someone near the border who had brown skin and was wearing traditional Mexican clothes and speaking Spanish, does that mean that Jim can complain because they look like illegal immigrants, and that makes him uncomfortable?

The Saudi Arabians should bow into racism and change themselves because it would be easier for everyone, if they just got clean shaven, wore different clothing, and speak English since they can do that. That way they wouldn't be prosecuted against and no one would be fear ful and everyone can get on with their lives normally. This way it's easier for everyone involved that they don't look like crazy terrorists.

But they don't look like terrorists, they look like Middle Easterns. There is a bleeding difference.
And no, they should NOT bow to racism. The racists should bow to common sense. If the bigots educated themselves and realized that just because someone is Middle Eastern, that does not make them a terrorist, then everyone would be happy, and civil rights would not get slapped in the face and thrown off a ten-story building.

How long ago has it been since you were a teenage kid?

Err....five seconds? Oblivion?
I AM a teenage kid...

I know that teenagers loiter around alot and often don't do anything to bad, but people are still suspicious of them even though they don't do anything wrong.

This I know as well.

So it's not different at all. Same with the diplomats they didn't do anything wrong at the time but still look suspicious in there language and clothing as do the teenagers loitering around.

No, because the diplomats only look suspicious because they are acting Middle Eastern! Middle Eastern =/= Terrorist the same way that Teenager =/= Gangster.

The diplomats could do something dangerous same as the teenagers in the future so people are still suspicious against the teenagers shop lifting or the Saudi Arabians hijacking the plane.

They COULD.
But they DIDN'T.
At any point in time, anyone who wanted COULD buy a rifle, drive down to a school, and start shooting. Does that mean we watch everyone 24/7? Maybe we should ban driving, because at any point in time, someone COULD drink and drive!
Just because someone COULD do something, doesn't mean they WILL.

I'll say this again I'VE NEVER READ THE Bush Administration OR HEARD OF IT TIL TODAY. So it hasn't gotten to my head.

Lol.
I'm sorry, but you are very misinformed.
The Bush administration isn't a book. It's a political era.
And you do not have to have heard of it to have been affected by it. Have you turned on your TV in the last, oh, 10 years and watched the news? How about read the newspaper, or a government report or pamphlet, anything like that? Then you've been affected by the Bush administration.
Rofl.

And what you said is totally different. In this I'd be wanting to be safe by watching out for that PARTICULARLY SUSPICIOUS guy. (He's particularly suspiciously because he was acting like the guys from 9/11).

But he wasn't acting like the guys from 9/11, he was acting Middle Eastern, and looking Middle Eastern! There's a difference! Suspicious would be if you were acting nervous and kept glancing at the security guards, or if you kept asking when the plane would reach a certain point, or something like that! Not looking Middle Eastern!

I wouldn't be on the safeside with the lightning storm thing, and bathtub thing unless there was something extremely odd about it or suspicious about it. I wouldn't be afraid of drving a car, or being hit with lightning on a regular day because nothing would be out of place. But when I'm on a plane and a guy acts like the terrorists did on 9/11 then I'd try to be on the safe side.

They weren't acting like the people did on 9/11, they were looking like Middle Easterns, which they were. And just because they're Middle Eastern doesn't mean they're any more likely to commit a terrorist act.
Let me just put it this way...Terrorists aren't what you think they are, demographically.

*Laughs* Your right that would be acting on the REALLY safe side but as I said above when guys act like terrorist from 9/11 then I'd be on the suspicious side.

Once again, they weren't acting like terrorists. They were looking like Middle Easterns. There is a difference.

lol.. No but you should discreetly watch them and then when they threaten the business some money by other passengers leaving that's when you boot them to Timbucktoo.

If the passengers are stupid, then let them leave. Once again, you will lose far more money by kicking off the people than you will by letting the other passengers leave. Lawsuit, remember?

No my point above tells you what I think you should do to people looking Middle Eastern. And they were Middle Eastern by the way. So say &quoteople who are Middle Eastern, not look Middle Eastern", the way you say it makes it seem like they weren't Saudi Arabian in my opion.

Well then, your "opion" is flawed, you're getting the wrong idea.
Just because they are Middle Eastern, or just because they look Middle Eastern, that doesn't mean they're terrorists. You're saying they are suspicious because they are acting like the people from 9/11, which isn't true. They are just looking Middle Eastern, and that's what you're judging them by. So really, it's irrelevant whether they actually are Middle Eastern or not, because you're judging by whether or not they look it: that's the whole point of your argument, that they should change the way they look, correct? So what I'm saying is, if I looked Middle Eastern, would I be accused of being a terrorist?

I know but to be on the safe and logical side you would watch them discreetly and when they threaten your business you make them leave.

That's not "safe and logical", that's &quotaranoid and racist". And they are not threatening your business. I have already said it before, the money angle doesn't work. If you kick them off, they can sue, and then you'll lose a hell of a lot more money than you would have if the other passengers left because of them.

No they shouldn't kick you off right away but I think you know what I think the airline should do.

So you're saying I should be watched, because I LOOK Middle Eastern?
Well, THAT makes sense...
If security went by what you're saying, then if you really were a terrorist, then all you would have to do is shave your beard, bleach your skin, and lose your accent and the security guards would never pay attention to you because they're too busy staring at the person who LOOKS Middle Eastern instead of the actual threat...

No you shouldn't be suspicious at those languages because there widely known, and it is fairly likely someone would understand you, and it's unlikely you would be speaking about about a terrorist attack in those languages so openly. But if your speaking Arabian (when you can speak English), and look like a terrorist in most peoples eyes, that's when the eye brows start being raised.

So, what if I started speaking a more obscure language like Farsi, or Swahili? Does that mean you'd automatically brand me a terrorist?

If you can fluently yes so no one is nervous, we know your not planning any crazy Al Queda things, and such.

What if English is my second language, and I can barely speak it at all? What if I feel far more comfortable in my native tongue than in English? Is it really okay for you to force me to either speak English or kick me off the plane, just because you automatically assume I'm plotting an attack because you don't know what I AM saying?

It don't think we'll ever agree on that. I'll think it's being senseful and rational but you'll think it's paranoia and stupidity.

Just so you know, there is no such word as "senseful".
And it IS being racist. At least agree to that. Judging someone by the language they are speaking and the manner in which they appear, and kicking them off of an airplane based solely on that and nothing else...well, what else would you call it? I guess you might call it sensitivity and intelligence, but....

There is a man named Bob. Bob thinks that Jews are thieves. Does that mean every time Bob sees a Jew wearing a kippah and sporting a traditional beard, he can complain because they look like they're thieves, and that makes him uncomfortable?
And Bob's cousin Jim thinks that Mexicans all look like illegal immigrants. So, if Jim saw someone near the border who had brown skin and was wearing traditional Mexican clothes and speaking Spanish, does that mean that Jim can complain because they look like illegal immigrants, and that makes him uncomfortable?

Let me rephrase that.
There is a man named Bob. Bob thinks that Jews are thieves. Does that mean every time Bob sees a Jew wearing a kippah and sporting a traditional beard on the bus, he can make the bus driver kick the Jew off the bus, because that makes him uncomfortable?
And Bob's cousin Jim thinks that Mexicans all look like illegal immigrants. So, if Jim saw someone near the border who had brown skin and was speaking Spanish, does that mean that Jim can make the bus driver kick the person off the bus because that makes him uncomfortable?

There is a man named Bob. Bob thinks that Jews are thieves. Does that mean every time Bob sees a Jew wearing a kippah and sporting a traditional beard on the bus, he can make the bus driver kick the Jew off the bus, because that makes him uncomfortable?
And Bob's cousin Jim thinks that Mexicans all look like illegal immigrants. So, if Jim saw someone near the border who had brown skin and was speaking Spanish, does that mean that Jim can make the bus driver kick the person off the bus because that makes him uncomfortable?

No, but that does warrant asking the bus driver to move them, as what happened on the plane. Though the first one only makes since if there is a Jewish crime syndicate in the nearby aria making the fears at least somewhat valid. If they cannot find a spot on the bus were people are at least reasonably comfortable with them, then you could give them a refund and kick them off, though less money would be involved and you probably don't want to mess with a crime syndicate anyway.

No, but that does warrant asking the bus driver to move them, as what happened on the plane. Though the first one only makes since if there is a Jewish crime syndicate in the nearby aria making the fears at least somewhat valid. If they cannot find a spot on the bus were people are at least reasonably comfortable with them, then you could give them a refund and kick them off, though less money would be involved and you probably don't want to mess with a crime syndicate anyway.

No, the Arabs were kicked off of the plane and they did not receive a refund.

No, the Arabs were kicked off of the plane and they did not receive a refund.

I know. I am the one who discovered that fact. I was speaking of the ideal solution, not the one the company gave.

I know. I am the one who discovered that fact. I was speaking of the ideal solution, not the one the company gave.

I was under the impression we were debating this particular situation.
And that is not the ideal solution in my mind.

really? on september 11 we got attacked THREE times... almost 4

9/11 is generally grouped in as one event. We were attacked once, and that one attack was carried out by three different planes. It doesn't matter how you define it, we still waged war over a significantly insignificant event.

really? if we hadn't invaded afghanistan Al Qaeda wouldnt have kept training more and more terrorists? you really think we wouldnt have had more attacks on the united states??

If we hadn't given them a headstart, we could've gotten them in less than a year, that's if the CIA was more like the Mossad.

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

Discrimination is caused by intolerance, and intolerance is caused by ignorance. I would say you're about one of the dumbest people I know.

I don't believe I did.

You discriminate against other races, but you're not a racist? How does that make sense?

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.

What if you don't know the language or can't grow a full beard in a week?

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.

What if fear caused you to be a pariah? You had to live in camps where you get very little food, you don't sleep well, and you are only confined to that camp?

Okay, that is an exaggeration, but what if the only thing you can do is go to the grocery store to get food. Even then, they don't have to let you in.

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.

I would say France, England, and just about every 1st world country that is democratic and capitalistic. Also, how are you going to say that we should not follow any of the things stated in one of our two most important documents in the US?

Either you live under a rock, or you do not know anything. In some countries, you have to own a gun to be able to bring water from the river, or else you might get shot. That is not life, liberty, or happiness. What would you define life, liberty, and the happiness?

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

[url]http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004896.html[/url]

As you can see, more Caucasians are arrested than any other race in the US. I doubt it would completely flip flop in four years. Of course you would be likely to contest that since you clearly have no understanding of how anything works, and I doubt you would understand this chart or how a trend works.

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.

How many Middle Easterners have hijacked planes in the past ten years? Less than ten. How many white people have crashed cars? At least one million. Should I be afraid of white people crashing cars because they crash cars more than any other race?

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.

You're in the age 12-21 group. Should be put you under surveillance because some kids vandalize things?

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?

So basically, you think that being kicked off a plane is not isolation? What is your definition of isolation since you seem to make things up?

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.

They are. The chances of a plane being hijacked by Middle Easterners are 5 out of 1.5 billion. I don't know about you, but I like those odds. I wouldn't mind being in a plane with a 100 million Middle Easterners, if a plane could hold that many people.

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

I doubt you would come upon your conclusion without some sort of influence.

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.

Tell me again, how many Middle Easterners have bombed buildings?

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

Even if that group has a million followers, it is extremely small compared to the amount of people we have in the US and how many people there are the in the Middle Eastern world.

I was under the impression we were debating this particular situation.
And that is not the ideal solution in my mind.

I thought we are debating what they should have done? And what would be your ideal solution?

It doesn't matter how you define it, we still waged war over a significantly insignificant event.

9/11.. insignificant?? 2800 people died... and we realized that we werent as safe as we thought... 9/11 was very significant

9/11.. insignificant?? 2800 people died... and we realized that we werent as safe as we thought... 9/11 was very significant

Excuse me. I just now realized I have disgraced thousands of people's dead relatives, and just now feel horrible. I will not defend that specific statement, but modify it. 9/11, was terrible, but it was only one event.

Panzertank, they didn't look like suicid bombers. they looked like ordinary middle easterns.

As did the people who hijacked those planes on the day of 9/11 (I think), therefore I believe Middle Easterners look like terrorists. Makes sense?

plus, they should know theyre own language.

I agree they should but you mean &quotlus, they should be aloud to speak their own language if they want to". I think you mean that anyways.

.if they want to talk arabic in a plane, about private stuff, they should be allowed to.

Yes they should be allowed to speak Arabic on a plan about private things without people judging you are being nervous or racist, but obviously as you can tell that's not the way it is. People get nervous, and what you think is racist. They ask them to move and then to leave the plane. But seeing as how those diplomats could speak English fluently they should have. I'll read you a quote I read from somewhere or heard of; "The needs of the many overweigh the needs of the few." Obviously making many people happy is better than making two diplomats happy. It's only right.

on my flight to england, there was a lady typing french on her blackberry. should i discriminate her because she is typing french? no. this applies to all people.and it isn't against the law not to talk in ur own language

Your right you shouldn't discriminate against the French people but I think you should be weary of the Saudi Arabians speaking Arabic. Like the passengers should've done on the day of 9/11. In my opion I think you should be weary weary of all strangers, who speak a very strange language to you. Especially if there Middle Easterners who looked like the terrorists from 9/11 who looked like any ordinary Middle Easterner too.

No, but that does warrant asking the bus driver to move them, as what happened on the plane. Though the first one only makes since if there is a Jewish crime syndicate in the nearby aria making the fears at least somewhat valid.

I agree with that. So your arguement is flawed about the Jewish crime syndicate.

And Bob's cousin Jim thinks that Mexicans all look like illegal immigrants. So, if Jim saw someone near the border who had brown skin and was wearing traditional Mexican clothes and speaking Spanish, does that mean that Jim can complain because they look like illegal immigrants, and that makes him uncomfortable?

Yes Jim could complain and request that the police or the government do an I.D. check to see if he really is an illegal immigrant. Although I think this is different because Saudi Arabian, Arabic speaking, Middle Eastern people are particularly known for being terrorist. If you ask the average person what a Saudi Arabian, Arabic
speaking, Middle Eastern person reminds you of, I'd bet you a pretty penny they'd say a terrorist or something simular. And dark skinned, people speaking spanish doesn't make you really think of a illegal immigrant.

But they don't look like terrorists, they look like Middle Easterns. There is a bleeding difference.

No there isn't, terrorists dress as Middle Easterners right? (At least the ones from the Middle East I think)

And no, they should NOT bow to racism. The racists should bow to common sense. If the bigots educated themselves and realized that just because someone is Middle Eastern, that does not make them a terrorist, then everyone would be happy, and civil rights would not get slapped in the face and thrown off a ten-story building.

How likely do you think bigots and idiots and racists will bow to common sense and realize that just because someone is Middle Eastern that doesn't make them a terrorist? So until pigs fly I don't think that'll happen. And if that doesn't happen the Middle Easterners should bow to what you think is racism.

Err....five seconds? Oblivion?
I AM a teenage kid...

Then you should know teenagers loiter around all the time, often just chilling and talking. Which you think is suspicious, and what I think isn't suspicious just like the Saudi Arabians, you think they weren't suspicious and I do.

This I know as well.

You don't make it seem like it, you make it seem like the cops should watch the teenagers instead of the old ladies right? And according to your arguements the cops should watch every one equally right? Until there is solid proof other wise.

No, because the diplomats only look suspicious because they are acting Middle Eastern! Middle Eastern =/= Terrorist the same way that Teenager =/= Gangster.

I'm a little confused. Are you being sarcastic? I don't know what your getting at here.

They COULD.
But they DIDN'T.

That's because they were kicked off the plane before they could right?

At any point in time, anyone who wanted COULD buy a rifle, drive down to a school, and start shooting. Does that mean we watch everyone 24/7? Maybe we should ban driving, because at any point in time, someone COULD drink and drive!
Just because someone COULD do something, doesn't mean they WILL.

True but theres nothing you could do to prevent those things really. I'm talking about preventing a possible terrorist plot by asking the people to speak a language there fluent in.

Lol.
I'm sorry, but you are very misinformed.
The Bush administration isn't a book. It's a political era.
And you do not have to have heard of it to have been affected by it. Have you turned on your TV in the last, oh, 10 years and watched the news? How about read the newspaper, or a government report or pamphlet, anything like that? Then you've been affected by the Bush administration.
Rofl.

Not an American news station, newspaper, government report etc... I don't pay all that much attention to U.S.A. things, because I don't care.

But he wasn't acting like the guys from 9/11, he was acting Middle Eastern, and looking Middle Eastern! There's a difference! Suspicious would be if you were acting nervous and kept glancing at the security guards, or if you kept asking when the plane would reach a certain point, or something like that! Not looking Middle Eastern!

But the guys from 9/11 were acting Middle Eastern and looking MIddle Eastern! So there isn't a difference, those hijackers acted normal enough enough or they would've been put under lock down and would've been handcuffed. So as I was saying they were acting the same. The diplomats and the terrorists.

They weren't acting like the people did on 9/11, they were looking like Middle Easterns, which they were. And just because they're Middle Eastern doesn't mean they're any more likely to commit a terrorist act.
Let me just put it this way...Terrorists aren't what you think they are, demographically.

**** you quite repetitive about the fact that they weren't acting like the people from 9/11 but just looking like Middle Easterners which they were. And I already knew that about terrorists. I know they can be anyone from anywhere with any level of education but when theres one person that's Saudi Arabian, looks it, and speaks Arabic like the guys from 9/11 then that's when I'd watch them and not watch everyone equally.

If the passengers are stupid, then let them leave. Once again, you will lose far more money by kicking off the people than you will by letting the other passengers leave. Lawsuit, remember?

I think the lawsuit would work only if they weren't refunded and rescheduled (which they weren't). But I doubt the lawsuit would be successful if they would've been refunded, rescheduled and explained that they were threatening the business money and making so many other people uncomfortable. But the airport didn't do that.

So what I'm saying is, if I looked Middle Eastern, would I be accused of being a terrorist?

No if you looked Middle Eastern, speak Arabic, and use an accent when you do that intentionally, that's when I raise my eye brows.

That's not "safe and logical", that's &quotaranoid and racist".

We have a difference of opion then. I think watching people that are Saudi Arabian, have that accent, and speak Arabic is safe and logical and you don't. For this we will have to agree to disagree.

And they are not threatening your business. I have already said it before, the money angle doesn't work. If you kick them off, they can sue, and then you'll lose a hell of a lot more money than you would have if the other passengers left because of them.

Above I have said what I have thought about the lawsuit. And what should have been done so they weren't sued. I disagree with what the airline did about not refunding, rescheduling, explaining and all that.

So you're saying I should be watched, because I LOOK Middle Eastern?
Well, THAT makes sense...

1) Yes (I know your not gonna like that answer)
2) I sense sarcasm

If security went by what you're saying, then if you really were a terrorist, then all you would have to do is shave your beard, bleach your skin, and lose your accent and the security guards would never pay attention to you because they're too busy staring at the person who LOOKS Middle Eastern instead of the actual threat...

Well that's what I think the security should do and the terrorist should. I'm not saying that all the staff should be watching the Middle Easterners, just one of them, or two and the rest of the staff should be watching everyone else as they really would.

What do you mean the actual threat? Your acting like on the plane the diplomats were on theres was a real threat, and the security by passed it with it's racism to the diplomats, when in actuality there was no threats on the plane.

So, what if I started speaking a more obscure language like Farsi, or Swahili? Does that mean you'd automatically brand me a terrorist?

I haven't branded the diplomats as terrorists I'm just saying they should be watched. And if you speak Farsi I would just watch you discreetly if the language was like Arabic and your clothing was Arabic like.

What if English is my second language, and I can barely speak it at all? What if I feel far more comfortable in my native tongue than in English? Is it really okay for you to force me to either speak English or kick me off the plane, just because you automatically assume I'm plotting an attack because you don't know what I AM saying?

No it wouldn't be ok to kick you off then because you can't switch languages to English well, and you don't really understand it. But the diplomats were pretty fluent. And if you can speak English fluently on an American airline, but feel more comfortable with Arabic. To bad for you. It's easier for everyone if you spoke English (if you can fluently).

Just so you know, there is no such word as "senseful".
And it IS being racist. At least agree to that. Judging someone by the language they are speaking and the manner in which they appear, and kicking them off of an airplane based solely on that and nothing else...well, what else would you call it? I guess you might call it sensitivity and intelligence, but....

Since you know precisely what I mean by senseful I'll still use it though. And it is a word. And again I don't find it racist and you do. The business was thinking finacially not morally so it's not racist. What they did afterwards was idiotic though. No refund, reschedule, explanation or anything. I would call it senseful, and rational. Perhaps intelligence, but I'll stick with senseful and rational for now.

http://www.morewords.com/word/senseful/

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

I'll respond to everything later but what I meant was I discriminate against people who I think looks like terrorists. I wouldn't discriminate against the Middle Easterners if they chose to speak English when there fluent in it, and dress as we would til they get back to the Middle East.

Sorry thought to make that clear. When I said I discriminate it was sarcasm that I discriminate against people who in my eye looks like suicide bombers.