Should she sue?

[righteothen]

Should the men sue? No. This situation is entirely different from what happened to the woman. These men were profiled because of an overreacting mother. The airline was not the one to bring the flight back and question them, it was airport security. Not saying the woman has grounds to sue, either. She should get an apology, certainly, but not sue.

Reading that story disgusted me. Because they spoke in another language to each other, and were Arabic, she thought they were terrorists? What does she think of families that speak and are Spanish, or Danish, or Chinese? I'm sorry, but I think what she did was just rude.

 

[Shimmer]

But had they been terrorists, had they been wearing dupont and c4 under their clothes, she would have been lauded as a hero, no? The gentleman making the comment about her 'American child' didn't help the situation at all.

 

[MxAxC-_ATTACK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by righteothen Reading that story disgusted me. Because they spoke in another language to each other, and were Arabic, she thought they were terrorists? What does she think of families that speak and are Spanish, or Danish, or Chinese? I'm sorry, but I think what she did was just rude.

No, it said she saw him go to the restroom and create a racket, then he looked around at the other passengers suspiciously.

 

[righteothen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MxAxC-_ATTACK No, it said she saw him go to the restroom and create a racket, then he looked around at the other passengers suspiciously.

"Robbins said she first expressed her concerns to officials about a group of men who had gathered at the gate and were speaking Arabic to each other."

That was before the they even boarded the airplane. It then goes on about how she wanted people to go and talk to them because she was suspicious, but they just laughed her off.

Besides, who doesn't create some sort of racket in an airplane bathroom? Those things are tiny.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer What exactly did the airline do wrong that would necessitate a lawsuit?

The airline had to make a decision about whether or not to remove the woman from the plane because she demanded to be let off. The problem is that the delay caused the flight to lose its take-off window, meaning everyone scheduled to depart at that time lost their flight.

That the seven men were profiled after the flight was aborted was probably prompted by the airline via the plane's crew, since they took the woman's complaint and demand to be returned to the gate so seriously. I'd rather that the airline make the judgement call rather than the passenger - and I would've thought security checks at the check-in desk, security sensors, and boarding gates would have sufficed.

Like the issue with inappropriate attire, the implications are very grave: that any customer of American Airlines (or Southwest) can determine at the last moment that they want themselves or others off the flight, even if it requires the plane taxi back to the gate, because of another customer's appearance, demeanor or primary spoken language.

The question isn't whether the woman had the right to heed her instincts - of course she should. The question is what happens when her instincts were clearly in error, and what it means to the rest of us who aren't white, obviously or seemingly probably Christian, and primarily English-speaking. In cases like this, I think compensation for the men in question and a public apology from the airline should follow. I do not like that in this case, the airline seems to not mind that Middle-Eastern looking, Arabic speaking people are less entitled than any of their other passengers to customer service and respect.

 

[frocher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratmist The airline had to make a decision about whether or not to remove the woman from the plane because she demanded to be let off. The problem is that the delay caused the flight to lose its take-off window, meaning everyone scheduled to depart at that time lost their flight. That the seven men were profiled after the flight was aborted was probably prompted by the airline via the plane's crew, since they took the woman's complaint and demand to be returned to the gate so seriously. I'd rather that the airline make the judgement call rather than the passenger - and I would've thought security checks at the check-in desk, security sensors, and boarding gates would have sufficed. Like the issue with inappropriate attire, the implications are very grave: that any customer of American Airlines (or Southwest) can determine at the last moment that they want themselves or others off the flight, even if it requires the plane taxi back to the gate, because of another customer's appearance, demeanor or primary spoken language. The question isn't whether the woman had the right to heed her instincts - of course she should. The question is what happens when her instincts were clearly in error, and what it means to the rest of us who aren't white, obviously or seemingly probably Christian, and primarily English-speaking. In cases like this, I think compensation for the men in question and a public apology from the airline should follow. I do not like that in this case, the airline seems to not mind that Middle-Eastern looking, Arabic speaking people are less entitled than any of their other passengers to customer service and respect.

I agree, I find racial profiling of groups of people far more disturbing than the treatment a woman received due to the length of her skirt.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MxAxC-_ATTACK No, it said she saw him go to the restroom and create a racket, then he looked around at the other passengers suspiciously.

I frequently fly long-haul flights on the cheapest seats I can find. These are the ones at the very back of the plane, against the customer toilets. I heard every person entering, moving around, running the sink vacuum, and even sneezing. This woman heard what she wanted to hear, and saw what she wanted to see. She had been suspicious of the men before the flight, and alerted security before boarding. Airline security cleared the men again prior to boarding, but she was still afraid. Instead of heeding her instincts at the gate and choosing not to board, she waited until the plane was minutes from takeoff, heading towards the runway.

I do not think it is possible to defend her actions by questioning whether she would've been considered a hero if the men really had been dangerous. These men went through at least four security checks, three of which occurred as normal security at an airport, and one of which occurred at her urging. This wasn't enough for her because she was paranoid and frightened. That isn't enough to defend her actions. It's only enough to understand them, pity them, and ask whether the airline acted appropriately. In my opinion they had no choice but to let her off the plane, but that doesn't mean it's not appropriate to claim compensation from the airline for hotel bills, inconvenience, and in the case of the seven men, no less than a public apology and reassurance that racism is not tolerated on American Airline flights.

 

[Shimmer]

As I said, had the woman's suspicions been correct, she would have been hailed as a hero. Unfortunately, this is going to happen.

She does owe the men an apology. She needs to not react viscerally about the situation and instead take ALL situations underhand. They, when faced with a situation similar, would do well to avoid making derogatory comments about small children while in the presence of the children's parents.
Of course the men deserve an apology from the air port.

 

[Beauty Mark]

Quote:

I agree, I find racial profiling of groups of people far more disturbing than the treatment a woman received due to the length of her skirt.

But clothes can used to profile people. Why should you be allowed to profile women for wearing pretty standard clothes if you shouldn't profile other people for the clothes they wear? What if they decide because some guy wears baggy jeans and a huge jersey that he must be a gang member? People are clever enough to make up some bs excuse about clothes instead of addressing the real issue at hand.

That's what concerns me.

 

[frocher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark What if they decide because some guy wears baggy jeans and a huge jersey that he must be a gang member? People are clever enough to make up some bs excuse about clothes instead of addressing the real issue at hand. That's what concerns me.

If we are talking about clothes being used to profile people, I think clothes are used as an excuse. If a group of black kids are hanging around wearing baggy pants and huge jerseys, they are far more likely to be thought of as gang bangers than a group of white kids. They are also far more likely to be hassled.

Take Columbine for instance, are you telling me that any minority group could walk around a school wearing black trench coats, threatening to kill teachers, and calling themselves The Trench Coat Mafia and have gotten away with it? They wouldn't have where I grew up.

I agree with you, I think that it is bs to focus on the clothes instead of the real issue at hand. However I think we disagree on what that issue is.

 

[Raerae]

As far as the clothes topic...

<shrug>

Again... If the shoe fits...

Everyone knows that when you put on a uniform, certain assumptions go alone with that uniform. Everyone, and no one can deny it, profiles people by appearance. Especially if it's the only form of contact u have with someone, being their visual appearance.

Every black kid knows that if you wear traditional black "gang" attire, and hang in a group of like dressed blacks, chances are, most people looking at you are going to assume, gang-member. I live in Long Beach on the edge of the ghetto. Is every black man who talks to me who is dressed that way in a gang? No. Are some of them? Yes. But when I see men dressed like that time after again being put into police cars, or being arrested (my whole block was police taped off while they did their man hunt) for holding women up at gun point for their purse (happened across the street from my house a few months ago). I'm going to trust my expierence, and be wary of men dressed this way, UNTIL i know more information about them. Same thing with like the mexicans with the white socks pulled up to the knees with the white shoes with the khaki shorts that sag low, the cholo style thats all over long beach. Simply put, if you dont want people to think your a certain way, dont dress that way. Or, if you choose to dress that way, understand the REPUTATION that, that style of clothes has. And dont get upset if someone who doesn't know you, but knows what that style means, thinks your associated with it.

It's like when I was out clubbing in San Fran last Monday. I didn't get pissed off at my girl friend who said we need to keep walking while we decide where to go next (even though my feet hurt and i didn't wanna walk until we knew what one we were going too), instead of just standing on the corner. Since we looked like 2 hookers in our club clothes on a street corner at 12am. I laughed at her, and we started walking to the next bar down the street.

As far as the 6 or 7 arab guys and the plane, yah racial profiling sucks. But c'mon. Lets use a little common sense here. When your in an American airport in the United States, and considering the current post 9-11 political and social climate, it's probably NOT A GOOD IDEA to isolate yourself and start chatting it up in Arabic. Is it fair? No, it's not. But if you CHOOSE to look like what your average American thinks as your "steriotypical terrorist" is it really that suprising that someone thought you were one? You know why everyone else got let off the plane? No one looking like them crashed 2 planes into the Trade Towers. As much as profiling sucks, people have the right to be afraid for their lives too, considering the patterns of what men who share that appearance have done in the past.

We all deal with the sins of our fathers, no matter color/race we are.

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae Everyone knows that when you put on a uniform, certain assumptions go alone with that uniform. Everyone, and no one can deny it, profiles people by appearance. Especially if it's the only form of contact u have with someone, being their visual appearance.

This is true, but both women in question engaged in conversation too. The mother had a conversation with one of the Iraqi-Americans, and the girl with the short skirt had a conversation with the airline steward. Either way, you can get a good measure of someone by having a chat with them. In the case of the mother, she still felt scared out of what had to be sheer ignorance and paranoia. She was looking for anything that may have flagged 'terrorist!' in her head. As for the girl with the short skirt, the airline attendant may have had a complaint that lead to his needing to take issue with her attire. After speaking with her and getting an agreement to cover up as best as she could, he let her fly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae Every black kid knows that if you wear traditional black "gang" attire, and hang in a group of like dressed blacks, chances are, most people looking at you are going to assume, gang-member. I live in Long Beach on the edge of the ghetto. Is every black man who talks to me who is dressed that way in a gang? No. Are some of them? Yes. But when I see men dressed like that time after again being put into police cars, or being arrested (my whole block was police taped off while they did their man hunt) for holding women up at gun point for their purse (happened across the street from my house a few months ago). I'm going to trust my expierence, and be wary of men dressed this way, UNTIL i know more information about them.

While I don't disagree with your logic, if I'm a female walking around any area alone, especially at night, I'm aware and potentially suspicious of anyone and anything. It's not really about what people are wearing around me - it's about whether I feel safe or feel like a potential target. I've lived in very rough areas of Texas where the most likely person to kill you, rape you, or otherwise harm you were white-collar, white men, and areas where the most gentlemanly men were Crips living in my brother's apartment complex in Austin. Unfortunately, few people live in areas where they know every neighbour and feel safe. I don't think this is just down to the appearances of their neighbours alone - certainly not in the description of where you live.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae As far as the 6 or 7 arab guys and the plane, yah racial profiling sucks. But c'mon. Lets use a little common sense here. When your in an American airport in the United States, and considering the current post 9-11 political and social climate, it's probably NOT A GOOD IDEA to isolate yourself and start chatting it up in Arabic. Is it fair? No, it's not. But if you CHOOSE to look like what your average American thinks as your "steriotypical terrorist" is it really that suprising that someone thought you were one? You know why everyone else got let off the plane? No one looking like them crashed 2 planes into the Trade Towers. As much as profiling sucks, people have the right to be afraid for their lives too, considering the patterns of what men who share that appearance have done in the past.

I still think this kind of emotional argument is a poor justifcation for the response of the airline and the actions of the woman involved. These men went through four security checks - one of which was non-invasive but instigated at the request of the woman - before boarding the plane. Then, on the plane's runway, she decided to finally completely lose it and demand to be let off, because in her mind, one of the men "looked scary" when emerging from the toilet. Maybe he was pissed off the plane hadn't been re-stocked with toilet paper - that happened to me at the beginning of a long haul flight once. Either way, she was wrong. Where I'm from, when you're wrong and you effectively accuse someone of being a potential murderer in front of scores of people, you own up to the mistake (which she has) and learn from it (which I don't believe she has, given her interviews). Where I'm from, when you make a mistake you don't persist in living in fear and ignorance afterwards in a misgotten attempt at surviving. You learn and move on, and teach your children how to handle such huge mistakes with humbleness and remorse.

By the standard you describe, a 'stereotypical' terrorist in the mind of an American is someone's genetically determined, physical appearance - something one cannot easily alter by choosing shorter socks or not wearing red plaid. (I'll admit this argument is more problematic for Muslim women adhering to strict forms of dress.) Regardless, I absolutely reject the argument that someone shouldn't speak Arabic if they want to be considered 'safe' at an American airport. The woman noted in her interview that the man spoke perfect English to her, without a hint of an accent. He was clearly an Iraqi-American.

Freedom of speech applies to all Americans irrespective of whatever language they speak, including (and maybe especially, given the arguments of the White House espousing a crusade of freedom delivered by the continued presence of American troops in Iraq) Iraqi-Americans.

 

[Shimmer]

It likely would have alleviated her paranoia had he NOT insulted her "spoiled American boy".
Parents take offense to that.
The fact he took the time to identify the boy's nationality as well as comment on him being spoiled (particularly after he apparently shared gum with the man) is alarming to any parent.

 

[user79]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raerae it's probably NOT A GOOD IDEA to isolate yourself and start chatting it up in Arabic. Is it fair? No, it's not. But if you CHOOSE to look like what your average American thinks as your "steriotypical terrorist" is it really that suprising that someone thought you were one?

What an absurd argument. By that rationale, any groups of persons speaking German could be potential neo-nazis, people speaking Hindu could be fundamentalist extremists, and people speaking Russian could be Chechen rebels. Do you get what I'm saying?

You'd have to be one hell of a stupid terrorist if you rock up at an airport dressed in traditional Arab clothes, have a long beard, dodge around suspiciously and mumble "Allah Akbar" under your breath. The terrorists of 9/11, from what I read in news reports, were dressed in smart casual business attire and spoke very good English, meaning a potential terrorist would likely look just like everybody else.


People shouldn't be so darn ignorant. (not meant at you, more at people who follow that judgemental attitude.)

 

[ratmist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer It likely would have alleviated her paranoia had he NOT insulted her "spoiled American boy". Parents take offense to that. The fact he took the time to identify the boy's nationality as well as comment on him being spoiled (particularly after he apparently shared gum with the man) is alarming to any parent.

Fair enough, but I'm not sure what happened there, and the interview didn't elaborate on the context of that remark. I've often had chats with people in queue at an airport where cheeky comments were bantered about without offense intended or taken. I'm not defending his statement, but I think more information about the context in which it was stated - in particular, his side of the story - would probably help a lot.

 

[Shimmer]

I definitely agree.

 

[lipstickandhate]

Racial profiling exists and will continue to exist forever. Academics and anyone else can argue all they want about its benefits, deteriments, etc etc but law enforcement officials will continue to do it anyway. Everyone knows this, especially individuals from minority populations or less than savory neighborhoods. It's not fair, but its real.

So- what can you do? Shriek and cry how "unfair" it is that certain groups are targeted in certain neighborhoods? Assume that everyone is actually breaking the law in equal numbers but minorities and individuals from low income populations are the ones most targeted by law enforcement? Fine, assume and cry away, you may be entirely right, I really don't know.

It seems, however, that the more rational lesson to take from knowing about racial profiling and its prevalence in certain communities is TO MAKE SURE WHEN A POLICE OFFICER ENGAGES IN AN ENCOUNTER WITH YOU YOU DON'T HAVE CONTRABAND ON YOU. Really. Also, act calmly (yes, hard to do, I know even I am pissed when I have to deal with a police officer). Don't wear red, don't wear blue, don't have a huge "13" tattooed on your forehead.

Don't run- you will never win this and anything that the police find during the chase, even if they had no reasonable suspician to initially engage in it, can be used against you, to justify your arrest. And above all, don't have crack in your socks or a gun in your belt. Don't beat your wife or abuse your children. Don't lead police on a chase through high grass while throwing dime-bags out of your pocket. Don't have a bag of coke in plain view in your cupholder when you get pulled over.

It's one thing to complain that life's not fair but everyone already knows this. Perhaps the smarter thing for people to do is to avoid drawing suspician to themselves and knowing that certain things will always draw suspician, make sure that when the police officer comes over to see what you're doing, you don't give him any reason to arrest you.

You can also do your part to discourage police from patrolling your neighborhoods by encouraging individuals within them to help solve crimes that occur there. They love witnesses and tight-knit communities always seem to know more about what's going on than they do. It seems strange to simultaeneously complain about crime and about the police questioning people in the neighborhood or cruising the streets at 2 AM.

 

[Shimmer]

YAY!!! common sense!

 

[lipstickandhate]

What an absurd argument. By that rationale, any groups of persons speaking German could be potential neo-nazis, people speaking Hindu could be fundamentalist extremists, and people speaking Russian could be Chechen rebels. Do you get what I'm saying?

QUOTE]

Yes. But Americans aren't really concerned about neo-Nazis, fundamentalist Hindus, or Chechen rebels in airports b.c they didn't fly planes into the World Trade Center.

I don't know what else to say. It may be stupid, stereotypical or ignorant but all of that is moot, it's a very real concern here and its not going away anytime soon. The best way to avoid coming into contact with Homeland Security is not to be suspicious. And now, a group of men speaking Arabic in an airport is considered suspicious. Add into the mix questionable comments about an American toddler and get ready to be reported.

Consider taking seperate flights or prepare to be potentially hassled. Same with standing on the corner with a group of 5 other black men @ 3 AM in Brownsville in blue shirts. Or with a gaggle of Vietnamese in Roxbury @ 10 o'clock. Be black in Howard Beach.

Its fine to argue there shouldn't be unpleasant possible consequences just by virtue of being a certain nationality in a certain location at a certain time, but in reality, there are. And they aren't going to change anytime soon.

 

[Raerae]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissChievous What an absurd argument. By that rationale, any groups of persons speaking German could be potential neo-nazis, people speaking Hindu could be fundamentalist extremists, and people speaking Russian could be Chechen rebels. Do you get what I'm saying?

It's not really that absurd when you think about the CURRENT political and social climate in AMERICA Your Average american isn't worried about neo-nazi's, hundu fundamentalists, or Chechen rebels. People speaking German, didn't fly planes into the trade towers. People speaking hindu, didn't fly a plane into the pentagon. People speaking Russian didn't crash a plane in a field. Arab Muslim Extremists caused 9/11, not any of those groups. So no one has reason to have paranoia in America, when in an airport about to get on a plane, with groups of those people.

Are those same groups capable of doing such a terrible deed? YES.

Did they do it? NO.

If they did, would people look at them with suspicion? YES.

So when people are in an airport, there not going to look at the group of indian men speaking hindu, because that isn't going to set off an alarm in their head. Just like BEFORE 9/11, groups of Arabic men, speaking arabic, would not have been looked at suspiciously. Post 9/11 changed how EVERYONE in the United States looks at People who look eigther Muslim, or Arab. ESPECIALLY in area's of public transportation.

Quote:

The terrorists of 9/11, from what I read in news reports, were dressed in smart casual business attire and spoke very good English, meaning a potential terrorist would likely look just like everybody else.

It sounds like thats what these men looked like. The men in the article, at least one of them spoke perfect English. They were probably dressed well. These guys looked like everybody else. EXCEPT. They grouped up in a isolated area and started speaking Arabic. No there is nothing illegal about speaking Arabic in an Airport. But had they choose to speak ENGLISH in AMERICA, and everyone around them could hear them talking about the football game in English, instead of dreaming up terrorists plots in Arabic because they can't understand, they probably would have put a lot of people's fear's to rest.

No offense to bi-lingual people living or traveling in America, but when you start in English, and then switch to another language when someone comes near, that person automatically thinks your taking bad things. Why else the need to speak in a different language? If it's nothing you needed to HIDE, then there wouldn't be a problem speaking English.

Quote:

People shouldn't be so darn ignorant. (not meant at you, more at people who follow that judgemental attitude.)

Everyone steriotypes though. Even you. We simply don't have enough time to try to get to know everyone personally to not do it.