So pilots can kick anyone they want off a plane?

[clairobscur]

*Originally posted by Hail Ants *
[And had the situation been reversed, Americans in the Middle East would be stoned to death.
**

Any evidence supporting this claim?

[AbbySthrnAccent]

Below is the text of an email from an online friend who had to fly to Dulles and was understandably apprehensive about the trip. It doesn’t really address the OP’s question or the issue of “inflight racism”, but it’s an interesting take on one flight crews attempt to deal with the sort of fear (their own and the passengers) that caused the removal of the passengers mentioned in the OP.

I just wanted to drop you all a note and let you know that I arrived safe and sound into Dulles Airport tonight. It was an interesting flight. The airport in was almost spooky, it was so empty and quiet.

No one was in line for the security check point when I got there so that went fairly quickly, just x-ray of my bags and then a chemical test to be sure nothing explosive was on them. Then I waited 2 1/2 hours to board the plane. What happened after we boarded was interesting and thought I would share it with you.

The pilot/captain came on the loudspeaker after the doors were closed. His speech went like this: First I want to thank you for being brave enough to fly today. The doors are now closed and we have no help from the outside for any problems that might occur inside this plane.

As you could tell when you checked in, the government has made some changes to increase security in the airports. They have not, however, made any rules about what happens after those doors close. Until they do that, we have made our own rules and I want to share them with you.

Once those doors close, we only have each other. The
security has taken care of a threat like guns with all of the increased scanning, etc. Then we have the supposed bomb. If you have a bomb, there is no need to tell me about it, or anyone else on this plane; you are already in
control. So, for this flight, there are no bombs that exist on this plane.

The threats that remain are things like plastics, wood, knives, and other weapons that can be made or things like that which can be used as weapons.

Here is our plan and our rules. If someone or several people stand up and say they are hijacking this plane, I want you all to stand up together. Then take whatever you have available to you and throw it at them. Throw it at
their faces and heads so they will have to raise their hands to protect themselves. The very best protection you have against knives are the pillows and blankets. Whoever is close to these people should then try to get a blanket over their head–then they won’t be able to see. Once that is done, get them down and keep them there. Do not let them up. I will then land the plane at the closest place and we WILL take care of them. After all, there are usually only a few of them and we are 200+ strong! We will not allow
them to take over this plane.

With that, the passengers on the plane all began to applaud, people had tears in their eyes, and we began the trip toward the runway.

The flight attendant then began the safety speech. One of the things she said is that we are all so busy and live our lives at such a fast pace. She asked that everyone turn to their neighbors on either side and introduce themselves, tell each other something about your families and children,
show pictures, whatever. She said “for today, we consider you family. We will treat you as such and ask that you do the same with us.”

Throughout the flight we learned that for the crew, this was their first flight since Tuesday’s tragedies. It was a day that everyone leaned on each other and together everyone was stronger than any one person alone.

It was quite an experience. You can imagine the feeling when that plane touched down at Dulles and we heard “Welcome to Washington Dulles Airport, where the local time is 5:40”. Again, the cabin was filled with applause.

Sailor remarks,

Anthracite, it is the people who are irrationally afraid the ones who should stay off the airplane and not force others off. If I have a fear of Blacks, Arabs, Gays or whatever, I am not entitled to have them removed from an airplane. I have the right to stay off the airplane though. If two hundred persons have a fear of someone on the only account that he is Arab, they can all get off the airplane but the other person has a right to fly. He cannot and should not be denied this right on account of race or ethnicity.

If those two hundred people got up and got off the airplane rather than take a flight with someone they feared, I seriously doubt the plane would go with only the one passenger. Too many flights are already going with below profitability passenger counts. Additionally, it is a routine enough pratice enough to cancel such low count flights that it would be difficult to prove the airline was discriminating, since it would have been the other passengers refusal to fly that caused the cancellation.

If the flight crew refuses to fly, the plane in most cases can’t go and the flight gets cancelled.

Sailor also states,

AFAIK denying someone their civil rights on account solely of their race or ethnicity is against the law and these guys probably have a good case against the airlines.

Other passengers dont like to travel with people who look Arab and so the pilot decides to please the majority by ejecting the Arab looking guys? And that is acceptable? I don’t think so. Would it be the same if instead of Arab they were black?

I agree that what is happening to the passengers in the OP and others like them is morally wrong. At the same time, what happened to the passengers on the hijacked flights the morning of September 11th was morally wrong too. Which is worse?

Anthracite’s question remains, “What would you have them do?”

[Tamerlane]

AbbySthrnAccent, Anthracite: Comes a time even the most wishy-washy moral relativist becomes a moral absolutist ( and vice-versa, I suppose ). For this occasionally wishy-washy person, this is one of those times .

Better every single flight in the country is grounded rather than tolerate that sort of racism. No exceptions. Security concerns are one thing, baseless dread is quite another. I’d seriously rather cripple the entire country’s flight network, with all the rampant chaos and economic damage that would cause, rather than compromise an inch on this issue. I agree with Sailor here, I think - If the passengers are “uneasy” just because of someone’s race - Too bad. If the flight crews are “uneasy” just because of someone’s race - Well, that’s too bad, too. The planes can just sit on the tarmack until someone has the balls to fly again.

Like I said - Legitimate security concerns, even slightly amorphous ones ( and I agree it might be easy to fake such things ) are fine. No I.D. or suspicious behavior, for example. But simple ethnicity? Nope.

And I frankly don’t see the need to bring up Sept. 11th in this context. Of course it is a lot worse to get blown up, than to have to rescedule a flight. So what? Neither is acceptable in my book. Emotions running high from those tragic events do not grant carte blanche to bad behavior.

IMHO, anyway .

• Tamerlane

[Una_Persson]

So the answer is “ground all planes where the crew feels uneasy because just a few days after a crisis of unimaginable horror the crew has a bit of irrational fear.” Interesting. Of course, the anecdotes we are hearing are not telling us what exactly it was that made the passengers and/or crew nervous. We have no idea if it was the “simmering hatred and racism” that I am often told all whites possess deep down towards anyone of color (insert rolleyes smilie), or if there was something about the passenger’s actiions that caused concern. I’ve been on enough flights to see plenty of WASP-looking people say or do things that should have caused concern with the flight crew, so it is very possible that there was a combination of events that was simply too much.

Discrimination against someone based on their appearance is low and terrible. But people are people, and they react in different ways to tragic events they cannot really fathom. So don’t start putting the proverbial Klan hoods on the flight crew just yet. Some people may be able to supress all irrational emotion after an event like this, but others need a little time, OK?

And note I keep saying “irrational”. I’m not in any way trying to justify the fear, only understand it.

[Chupacabra]

*Originally posted by snermy *
**As far as I know, the actual legal source for this authority (in the US) is federal airline regulations, specifically FAR 91.3, **

Small nitpick, it is FARs 121.533 and 121.535 that deal with captain’s authority on scheduled commercial flight in the US not the part 91 regs. The reason captains are given such discretion on these issues is that once in the air if a problem arises there is very little recourse. Better to hash out the problems on the ground with an airline customer service representative. Even though it seems harsh, it is a result of the unique circumstances of airborne travel.

Also, airlines try to be very careful about how they approach these issues because wholesale denied boardings based on appearance can get them sued.

[AbbySthrnAccent]

*Originally posted by Tamerlane *
I’d seriously rather cripple the entire country’s flight network, with all the rampant chaos and economic damage that would cause, rather than compromise an inch on this issue. I agree with Sailor here, I think - If the passengers are “uneasy” just because of someone’s race - Too bad. If the flight crews are “uneasy” just because of someone’s race - Well, that’s too bad, too. The planes can just sit on the tarmack until someone has the balls to fly again.

Very easy to say if your familys livlihood (or the life of a mate)is not at stake.

*Originally posted by Tamerlane *
And I frankly don’t see the need to bring up Sept. 11th in this context. Of course it is a lot worse to get blown up, than to have to rescedule a flight. So what? Neither is acceptable in my book. Emotions running high from those tragic events do not grant carte blanche to bad behavior.

The events of Sept. 11th are precisely why the events described in the OP are happening. The emotions to which you refer wouldn’t be there were it not for those tragedies, that makes it revelant in this context.

If I have understood what I read correctly, neither Anthracite or I suggested that anyone “grant carte blanche to bad behavior”. In fact, I believe we agreed that what is happening is deeply and fundamentally wrong and should not be happening.

[Tamerlane]

Anthracite: Hope I’m not coming off as insensitive. I understand the shock and fear that motivates these feelings. And I full understand that for most this racism ( if that’s truly what it is ), is only a millimeter deep and very temporary and situational. So I’ve been cutting some slack for angry words. But I do feel one must draw the line at actions.

Still, you’re quite right we have no information what actually happened ( maybe those were suspicious acting characters )and this whole thing culd be completely overblown. Also, I think folks are starting to heal and return to a more even keel, just a little bit. So hopefully ( probably ) this is a lot of hot air over nothing . It’s just the concept that bothered me.

• Tamerlane

[Tamerlane]

*Originally posted by AbbySthrnAccent *
Very easy to say if your familys livlihood (or the life of a mate)is not at stake.

I hope I would say the same thing under such circumstances ( actually, I do know one commercial pilot, but I don’t think this has come up with him at all ). But of course, I can’t really sure unless it happens.

If I have understood what I read correctly, neither Anthracite or I suggested that anyone “grant carte blanche to bad behavior”. In fact, I believe we agreed that what is happening is deeply and fundamentally wrong and should not be happening.

And I never said you said that, either . I was speaking in generalities at that point. But I do apologize for any lack of clarity or seeming antagonism. Wasn’t my intention - I’m not even remotely upset. Actually, I’m pretty cheery, just now .

I do feel a little dogmatic on this issue, yes. But like I just to said to Anthracite, it’s quite likely this won’t end up being a big deal.

• Tamerlane

[readonly]

*Originally posted by Anthracite *
**Regardless of what is “right” - if the pilot and crew are afraid, irrationally or otherwise, what would you have them do? Fly the plane in an uneasy state of mind, cancel the flight, or remove the passenger? Regardless of whether it is discriminatory or not, I don’t want a flight crew that is uneasy flying the plane that I am on. They should either cancel it, get a new crew (hard to do nowadays), or remove the suspicious passenger. Which is the right choice, among these options - the one that causes the least disruption?

If the World was perfect, this wouldn’t be an issue. **

Of course, if the crew is fearing passengers because of their ethnicity only, the crew should be grounded, and they should undergo counciling. Flying a commercial plane is no easy task and requires a very healthy mentality. Fearing someone just because they look Arab is not healthy. I certainly don’t want to fly in a plane piloted by some person who jumps at every shadow.

Besides, be careful what you wish for, you might get it. Today they kick out Arab Americans (sic), tomorrow they might kick you out because you happen to be the co-pilot’s friend’s ex and the crew fears all ex’s because they might storm the cabin looking for revenge. Or they’ll kick you out because you smell like the guy who mugged the pilot the night before…

So, Anthracite, should the pilot also be able to kick you out based on your marriage history or your smell, or just based on the special case of your ethnicity?

[sailor]

Making a passenger get off the plane because other passengers demand it based on race is just plain illegal as the law does not provide for such exceptions. The rule of law should prevail over the rule of mobs.

OTOH, this makes me think it may be OK for a group of passengers to demand they get a wailing baby off the plane and I might even join such a demand.

There was a case of an old, Alzheimer’s demented, woman in an old folks home who had an uncontrollable fear of blacks because she had been attacked by a black man in the past. There was a lawsuit to force her to accept care by black personnel. Now this seems kind of silly to me.

[gobear]

I don’t see why it is considered irrational to be especially cautious of Arab airline passengers right now. The hijackers were all Arabs, and we know there are more Arab terrorists in the US waiting for a new mission. I do not mean that we should have blanket discrimination against olive-skinned folks. After all, a Lebanese-American underwear salesman is no more likely a hijacker than anyone else. However, if an Arab man holding a Tongan passport arrives late without luggage and pays for a one-way ticket in cash, the airline security staff would be irresponsible not to detain him.

Had the hijackers been Swedish, we’d be giving really hot blue-eyed blondes the third degree right now.(and I’d volunteer to do the cavity searches!)

[Monty]

If the airline pilots in question had any cojones, then what they should’ve done is eject the passengers who want to rule by mobocracy. As for the flight attendants: their job is to ensure the safety of all passengers. If they decide they’re not going to do that based on an individual’s perceived race, then the flight attendants need to get fired, get sued, and get named in the press.

I say “perceived race” given the fact that one individual was murdered because the killer thought the victim was an Arab Muslim, when in fact the victim was an Indian Sikh.

[bordelond]

*Originally posted by gobear *
I don’t see why it is considered irrational to be especially cautious of Arab airline passengers right now. The hijackers were all Arabs, and we know there are more Arab terrorists in the US waiting for a new mission. I do not mean that we should have blanket discrimination against olive-skinned folks. After all, a Lebanese-American underwear salesman is no more likely a hijacker than anyone else. However, if an Arab man holding a Tongan passport arrives late without luggage and pays for a one-way ticket in cash, the airline security staff would be irresponsible not to detain him.

People can argue rights and wrongs all day – Arab pasengers ARE being heavily profiled right now. Probably will be for the foreseeable future. And it’s probably de facto legal right now.

I’ll be interested to see if a U.S. judge ever holds anyone liable for the results of such profiling of Arabs – at least within the next 2 years.

On a related note: how will such profiling affect Arab terrorist cells in the U.S. right now? Can terrorist cells even get American WASPs or African-Americans to join their cells and do their dirty work? Can these terrorist cells TRUST an American non-Muslim to join them? Profiling is very ugly, but I’ll bet it will put a huge crimp in any immediate terrorist plans within the U.S.

[katerina]

*Originally posted by bordelond *
On a related note: how will such profiling affect Arab terrorist cells in the U.S. right now? Can terrorist cells even get American WASPs or African-Americans to join their cells and do their dirty work? Can these terrorist cells TRUST an American non-Muslim to join them? Profiling is very ugly, but I’ll bet it will put a huge crimp in any immediate terrorist plans within the U.S.

Precisely. It’s time to keep a sharp lookout on Swedes.

[tracer]

sailor wrote:

Making a passenger get off the plane because other passengers demand it based on race is just plain illegal as the law does not provide for such exceptions. The rule of law should prevail over the rule of mobs.

Actually, no, it’s not illegal.

It’s illegal for a company to base its hiring practices on race (c.f. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended). It’s not illegal for a company to choose its customers based on race.

There was a case of an old, Alzheimer’s demented, woman in an old folks home who had an uncontrollable fear of blacks because she had been attacked by a black man in the past. There was a lawsuit to force her to accept care by black personnel. Now this seems kind of silly to me.

Cite, please? This sounds rather absurd. You can’t force people to accept care of any kind.

[tracer]

I take that back. You can force someone to accept care, whether they want it or not, if you can get that person declared “incompetent.”

The lady’s Alzheimer’s-induced dementia may have resulted in her being declared incompetent, hence the forced care.

[readonly]

*Originally posted by bordelond *
**

People can argue rights and wrongs all day – Arab pasengers ARE being heavily profiled right now. Probably will be for the foreseeable future. And it’s probably de facto legal right now.

**

I have a Middle-Eastern ethnic background and I would like to say this: Arabs and Middle-Easterns have always been more heavily profiled. And this profiling becomes super-intense during crises such as the hostage-taking in Iran, the Gulf War, and the present crisis. Those of us from that area know this, and realize the reasons for this, and put up with it.

BUT that was profiling by trained security personnel who act in a professional and rational manner (at least, one hopes they’re trained and professional). The incidents with which the OP is concerned, they relate to profiling by untrained regular folks. There is a huge difference between the two.

[bordelond]

Originally posted by readonly
BUT that was profiling by trained security personnel who act in a professional and rational manner (at least, one hopes they’re trained and professional). The incidents with which the OP is concerned, they relate to profiling by untrained regular folks. There is a huge difference between the two. **

Good point. If an Arab-American is on a plane now, with the heightened security, you can just about bet the house that that passenger is no threat.

[Intrinsic]

I’ve seen several versions of this alleged inspirational announcement… did this (or an approximation) really happen? Or is it most likely internet glurge?

I just wanted to drop you all a note and let you know that I arrived safe and sound into Dulles Airport tonight. It was an interesting flight. The airport in was almost spooky, it was so empty and quiet. No one was in line for the security check point when I got there so that went fairly quickly, just x-ray of my bags and then a chemical test to be sure nothing explosive was on them. Then I waited 2 1/2 hours to board the plane. What happened after we boarded was interesting and thought I would share it with you.

The pilot/captain came on the loudspeaker after the doors were closed. His speech went like this: First I want to thank you for being brave enough to fly today. The doors are now closed and we have no help from the outside for any problems that might occur inside this plane.

As you could tell when you checked in, the government has made some changes to increase security in the airports. They have not, however, made any rules about what happens after those doors close. Until they do that, we have made our own rules and I want to share them with you.
…

[sailor]

Actually, no, it’s not illegal. It’s illegal for a company to base its hiring practices on race (c.f. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended). It’s not illegal for a company to choose its customers based on race.

Tracer, please, gimme a break. Can you say “public accommodation”? I am not a lawyer and even I know you cannot choose your customers based on race.

The old lady case was in the news two or three years ago and I don’t have the details. I believe she was in some government-sponsored place and that was part of the deal. In that case i believe common sense should prevail and it is just mean and stupid to impose a black caretaker on a demented old lady who is terrified. The old lady is demented and does not have a choice about it.

The flying passengers OTOH can stay home if they feel threatened by people who look foreign. If the news is as reported I am sure the ejected passengers have been made rich. Hire Getem & Screwem, Attorneys, and you may have already won the jackpot.

I am not saying the security personnel do not have a right to screen anyone as much as they wish, but once they have let you on the plane the passengers have no right to demand you get off on account they do not like your looks. Or can I get up and demand a vote on whether we should ask the fat lady to get off too?

And yes, that “inspirational” piece seems like chicken shit for the soul.