I didn't know about this British intercepted plot... You sure he did?

I think it's kind of a cool shirt... I think he likely wore the shirt a lot. I don't think random (if you can't read it) Arabic writing should get anybody worried. It's a t-shirt. You think if he actually was going to do something on the plane that he'd do anything that even had a chance of drawing attention to himself?

Gimme a break. I can be on this guys side, and still hate ambulance chasers.

 

The whole British intelligence thing was a huge news story at the time. And I think the airline had every right to diffuse the situation before other passengers became too concerned about a middle eastern man trying to make a statement on a plane with a shirt that says "we will not be silent." I doubt the airline was worried about hijackng or bombing, but they were definitely worried about this man intimidating other passengers or creating tension during the flight. The man acted in his own selfish interests and the airline paid for it.

You cant scream "fire" in a crowded movie theatre and claim freedom of speech. The question is whether or not this fits into that category. If the answer is not obviously no, then this guy should grow up and get over it, not call a lawyer and sue. This guy was looking for attention, he was looking to be controversial, and he got rewarded for it.

 

^+1

I think this guy chose to wear the shirt knowing that he would most likely get hassled by the airline. I think he provoked it knowing and planning to get discriminated against. then he gets a big fat settlement in a lawsuit. (people sure over anything and everything) maybe its just my thinking but i think the guy wanted the attention to try to score money from the airline.

 

It seems that every so often the Brits foil a supposedly plot to hijack plane(s) that head toward the US... No longer than last year for two days the news were full of what "happens/ed" to Heathrow...
And it always happened especially in times when you couldn't hear one more damn thing about the ... concocted famous "orange" color associated with so called "terrorist threats" level...
"Divide et Impera" is an old Latin proverb which best describes Bush/Cheney's political endeavors... Fear mongering...So what this has anything to do with the "Arab" guy?
Well, everything is intertwined.
Did the guy REALLy WANTED to PROVOKE the airline?
Well, did the student female some months back wanted to provoke the airline travelling in a skimpy outfit? Oh, I know....short memory. She was white, a blonde, an "indecent threat" to other passengers...., yet not an arab.
She got a settlement as well... why is this guy's lawsuit any different than hers?
Yeah, she wanted as well attention, and she figured ahead of time that her outfit would have her thrown out of the plane...blah, blah....It is so easy to pretend to know everything...sheesh

As someone said, if one would wear an NRA t-shirt or even some arteries attacked by big, juicy, plumpy hamburgers and followed by the "we will not be silent" words, while boarding the plane nobody would give a rat's behind. And as many more pointed out, nobody in the plane even knew how to read Arabic, Hebrew, or whatever other semitic language the inscription was written in.
Assuming you know what the guy was thinking, either deliberately or unpremeditated, it's just so...arrogant.

 

maybe when white people wearing NRA t-shirts start hijacking planes your argument will make sense. Yes and the woman wearing the slutty outfit did get a setlement, doesnt mean its right or that the airline is wrong in this case. Maybe airlines should be able to decide what is appropriate on THEIR airlines. And if you dont like it, sue them ... all of the cool people do.

And I am not assuming that I know what this guy is thinking, I am providing justification for the airlines actions. The airline made it clear to him that they thought his shirt was inappropriate. Its not the end of the world, change your damn shirt and get on the plane and quit trying to make a political statement. The problem with these lawsuits are that they are completely one sided. The airline cannot win and the passenger cannot lose. If thats what you consider justice then we will have to agree to disagree.

The fact that there was not one single terrorist attack in this country since 9/11 seems to be lost on most of the liberal minded. They call Bush a fear mongerer and they call terrorists victims. God bless this country.

 

I was giving an opinion. I didn't compare him to the woman because i don't think thats the same issue. Honestly, if he lives in America, he should know that something like that is likely to cause problems. The nation, and especially airlines are so damn paranoid, doing something like that is kind of like yelling fire in a crowded building. It was unneccessary and could have been easily avoided. I don't condone the airline for what they did. why the **** would you not think about what to wear during a flight. you have to pack and everything else. hey, I gotta pack my **** and go to an airline with huge security measures, in one of the scariest times in American history. I think i'll wear my Arabic statement shirt today. yea, genius.

 

Indeed, same as yours. Let's ban all the Arab-looking people altogether from traveling on a plane beacuse we are highly suspicious...

Indeed, wonderful dichotomy; although the refutal was in your own previous posts/statements:

As a matter of fact, you're right. You were not "assuming" what the guy was thinking/doing.
Leaving aside the (more) dichotomous statements, you obviously boldly pretended to exactly know what the guy was thinking/acting like. Even more arrogant than just assuming.
You need to make up your mind whether the guy was acting in a selfish way, or not in a vacuum situation... Beware of the terrorists...They're everywhere...



I think is better to just do so.

God Bless this country indeed. United we stand ... as long as our hamburgers and oversized sodas flow, and the racist peasants can boldly still hunt deer while spitting tobacco chew. Amen

 

I will respond to each point you have made. This will keep things in context and prevent me from ignoring some statements, as you have decided to ignore most of what I have said and focused on issues that have little to do with the topic.

1) the NRA shirt wearing hillbilly, hambuger eating, soda drinking, waste of life you speak of - seeing him walk on a plane will not alarm anybody, just a normal guy.

If an arab man walks onto a plane will likely cause a few people to turn their heads. an arab man boarding a plane a few days after a terrorists scare with a message on his shirt which you cannot read may upset some people. The point being that there is potential for conflict once the flight has taken off which is a security risk for the airline. I am not justifying the conflict or alarm that may be created, but the possibilty is very real. The fact that this man also seems to be upset with the airline will increase the possibilty.

2) sorry if I posted earlier that I assume I know what this mans intentions were, my common sense tells me that he was fully aware of what he was wearing and how it would be perceived as a "staement" - metalmmaniac explains this nicely. Also, I wasnt aiming for perfect dichotomy so find a new word - the point is that the man is responsible for his own actions and whatever his intentions were, he acted selfishly with no concern for others feelings.

3) You say that i am now not assuming what he was doing (contradictory to what you just said) but that I "boldly pretend" (or assume) to know exactly what he was thinking. I never said anywhere that this man was thinking exactly anything. What I am saying is that he did not want to change his shirt. This is a selfish act. He beleived that wearing the shirt was more important than the airlines concerns. I dont assume this, his actions tell me this. He could have easily changed his shirt and gotten on the plane but he didnt. Therefore, his actions prove that he was embracing the controversy - no assumptions necessary.

4) your view of justice is much different than mine, its easy to sympathize with an individual especially a minority but much more difficult to sympathize with a corporation, your sympathy is natural and undertandable but does not constitute legal liability

5) once again a liberal bashes the country, or atleast the people who live in it, in the same breath that they praise it. The comment is ignorant and inflammatory, and undermines your credibility.

 

You can't compare screaming fire in a movie theatre to wearing a shirt with Arabic writing scrawled on it.

What kind of statement is made when nobody even understands what the hell the shirt says? OoOoOOh people fear the unknown... it's so ignorant. I cannot imagine being frightened by some dude because I couldn't understand the writing on his t-shirt. And I can't imagine drawing the conclusion that, since the shirt had Arabic writing, he might be a terrorist.

Acted in his own selfish interests? Hell, if I felt that people of my culture were being oppressed, I would wear a shirt with the same message. Why the hell not? It's a free country... I think? Or are you arguing that by allowing this man his freedom to wear such a shirt, we're infringing on the freedom of others? That'll be a farce of an argument if you try and push it.

And yes, he could have easily changed his shirt... but here, we take a step out onto that slippery slope. Make him change his shirt, and what else doesn't fly (literally) at this airline? Maybe I'm wearing an anti-Bush/Obama shirt... very political, might **** some people off on the plane. Should I have to cover it up? No. Now, I hate the idea of such a shirt... but I believe in freedom.

Embracing controversy? Sometimes you should. If you feel that you've been wronged, hell yes, embrace it. I've been in situations riddled in controversy, and I look back on them with a sense of pride, knowing that I didn't back down. It would have been easier to... but it'd have meant bending my beliefs. Integrity is all we really have. This guy stood for what he believed in... his right to wear his shirt.

I honestly don't think he wore it to start a fuss. I say this, because I can't imagine putting on a shirt like that and thinking that it would CAUSE a fuss! I'd never have thought it would happen... until I read this article. Some dude could wear a shirt on a plane with Japanese scrawled on his shirt, proclaiming "Bomb Pearl Harbor again" or some random ****... he'd get on the plane without a problem, I'm sure.

It's just ridiculous that every Arab in the country needs to put up with this **** because of a (relatively) minuscule number of extremists.

 

Ok, I will use your format since you pretend I used some of YOUR OWN STATEMENTS out of context. Therefore I leave the entire post quoted...
Moreover, I haven't ignored "most" of what you have said, but focused EXACTLY ON ISSUEs that were the most focal points of the topic.

1) I don't know who talked about or introduced the "waste of life" concept anywhere, but I DO SEE now that you have a predilection for interpreting matters in your own biased (to say the very least) way. It fits the pattern of assuming/knowing exactly what other people may never have intention of saying, using, acting like, etc...
I didn't speak of any "waste of life", so your reference to something that purportedly "I spoke of" is borderless malicious or ill intended.

And let's clear this "shirt" dilemma once and for all. A t-shirt is just an object of wardrobe, doesn't matter if it is imprinted with "Fudge You"; "I'll kill you"; "Ford urinates on Chevrolet" or vice-versa; "Beavis and Butt Head" - they are too bless by God; "Allah Akbar"; "Buddha"; "Confucius", etc, etc.
If an airline (AS YOU SAY) considers that the possibility of having on board A ARAB-looking person would translate into a POTENTIAL for CONFLICT, then they should make the statement publicly that people belonging to that particular group are not allowed on board in any of the company's flights.
If that possibility for conflict or melodrama/verklemptness/etc is real - AS YOU SAY, and the airline sees it as a security risk - AS YOU SAY, then they should interdict ARAB-looking people from even purchasing tickets, let alone trying to board the plane.

2) Your common sense is not translating into what "that man" had in mind, thought, sought, etc.
Moreover, the man was indeed responsible for his own actions: he tried to board a plane dressed up, and not naked. That doesn't equate to selfishness.
As I pointed in the previous paragraph: if xenophobia reached a such great point to where certain Americans shiver at simply seeing semitic writing, then we ought to make laws that ban anything and everything non-English in this great country. I'm not sure if it would be ok in the eyes of the God that presumably blesses the country, but if that's what it takes to correct the problem, or a few people's xenophobia so be it. We should even change the expression from "For the Greater good", to "For the Lesser good"...

3) Yeah, my apology. I was a bit ironical by changing from "assuming" to "knowing"... But that's not really important, since you didn't really perceive it so.
The more important thing is that you got your facts wrong, because the individual DID CHANGE the t-shirt and WAS ABLE TO FLY.
You don't have to take my word for it. Please READ AGAIN the article we discuss in this topic:
So actually there's no fact pointing out that he "embraced" a purported controversy... It is solely your making, like it or not.

4) Indeed, my view of justice is very different than yours, thank God...oh, not the same God that presumably should only "bless" one country. Nevermind though, religion is a totally different subject and may have nothing to do with this topic. Or maybe does....? hmmmmm. We will never know, will we?
Anyway, any talk about LEGAL LIABILITY should be directed at point number one. If the company.... etc, etc, I will not repeat what I said.

5) Once again you assume or PRETEND TO KNOW something that you have no KNOWLEDGE of. That's very arrogant and it certainly shows that same train of thought from the very first post to the last. Did I hit close to home with the chewing tobacco, or with the peasant word?
Nevertheless, my political affiliation is the least of your concerns.
On top of everything else, since when irony directed at politicians become "bashing the country"?

Take a good look in the mirror and only after that long, good look talk about "ignorant and inflammatory" comments...