Article

2009-01-02 -Short Attention Span Theater-

'Safest' seat remarks gets Muslim family kicked off plane

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by gorb 2009-01-02 01:12|| || Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top

#1 wah, wah, wah.

Posted by Shalet and Tenille1168 2009-01-02 02:30|| 2009-01-02 02:30|| Front Page Top

#2 "Safest from what? Being glanced at?"
Safest in case someting should happen, obviously. Nothing strange with that conversation.

"What? They didn't offer you a full refund? How rude!" Full refund? What are are you talking about? They were refused to be booked on a later flight.

"Uh oh, the curtains are starting to be pulled back . . ." What curtains? Has anyone tried to hide this fact?

"Heh heh! Now they'll have something to confer about!" You are a comedian. It is so funny.

"The safest is in the back, where you'll be the last to hit the ground when the plane crashes. After the bomb goes off." You may be right, I don't know. But a bomb is almost never the reason for dangerous situations in air travelling.

"How about "triangulation"?" What about it? Why are you bringing this word into this? No one said that, and even if they did..is this also a no-word on airplanes. Maybe it is time for a dictionary on allowed words?

"I mean, doesn't everyone talk about explosive compounds, delay timers, cell phone detonators, and the where it is safest to sit in an aluminum tube when it crashes into the ground at 400mph?"
No. Neither did these people.

"Heading to the same conference, I presume? Man, these guys take their conferences seriously!"
You presume a lot. More people should take more things seriously.

"Go! Go! Ditch 'em! Get outta here before their remarks are found to be innocent?" Huh?

"Lucky for you, Irfan, that one doesn't have to apologize for being stupid, be it by genetics, choice, or culture. Or all three, in some cases. Wink wink." Very subtile. Still, you should make the case he is stupid first. I can't see any signs he is.

"Don't act like one." How did they act like one?

"Good. Now go enlist in the marines. And stop talking like a terrorist. And stop trying to get everyone to act all politically correct around terrorist talk." When did they talk like terrorists? Should all proud americans join the military?

Your "analysis" of this story is not very impressive. You sat down and tried to look for clues supporting the view you already had. Couldn't find anything, so this is what you ended up with. Just sad..

Posted by Tommy81 2009-01-02 06:33|| 2009-01-02 06:33|| Front Page Top

#3 "Is it safe?"

Posted by Spike Uniter 2009-01-02 07:30|| 2009-01-02 07:30|| Front Page Top

#4 They were flying with children, Tommy81. I have frequently done so myself, mostly without an adult companion. It is really, really, really stupid to say anything in the presence of children who are about to be in a situation that they cannot escape that would make them nervous about that situation. Hysterical children in an enclosed airplane in flight are not only an annoyance to other passengers and crew, but are likely to become physically dangerous to themselves and others, not to mention triggering group hysteria in the susceptible, of which there always are some on an airplane. Were I in charge, I would have pulled the family just for having what was clearly a loud conversation about the safest place to sit as they walked through the airport, regardless of apparent or actual religious beliefs, just to give any nervous members a chance to calm down before boarding. Why "clearly loud"? Because a number of people overheard them and were alarmed enough to report it.

Given the behaviour of those who claim by implication to be sophisticated travellers, ie those who should have known better than to talk loudly about such things where it would -- not could, but would -- trigger hysteria in the nervous, a thinking person is forced to conclude either extreme stupidity, not likely in a group of worldly attorneys, or deliberate provocation. Do remember that Florida for some reason has hosted a remarkable number of jihadi wannabees and open supporters of jihad, making travel there for a Muslim religious convention suspicious on its face, even before the deliberately provocative conversations. On reflection, in fact, this behaviour is much like that of those religious idiots testing the system as they attempted to fly out from a religious convention in Minneapolis -- I think -- a year or so ago.

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-01-02 08:00|| 2009-01-02 08:00|| Front Page Top

Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.

Posted by James Staley">James Staley 2009-01-02 08:02|| 2009-01-02 08:02|| Front Page Top

#6 Is it safe

That's addressing the root causes,Spike Uniter.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2009-01-02 08:02|| 2009-01-02 08:02|| Front Page Top

#7 The previous was a quote from "The Marathin Man".

Tommy81, you seem to have an acute case of snarkorectomy.

That being said, you also don't seem to understand the stupidity of the described behavior. There have been incidents like this and they would generally fall under a "dry run" category, or a "behavioral study", e.g. how people react. It is not that far from a remark like "I hope that my gun in my suitcase won't get off during the flight". It does not matter that you don't have a gun in your suitcase, your ass would be hauled out and you'll have some 'splainin to do. Being an asshat is not a crime, but actions have consequences. And one should be no refund, I am sure that the delay cost a pretty penny or rather a bunch of'em.

Try go to theater and ostentatiously discuss with your friend which seats are safer. I bet it would work the same, albeit your ticket cost would not be as high. It is not as bad screaming "Fire!", which would be an offence likely landing you in jail and with hefty fine attached to boot, but it is near as bad, and if you got a kick into your ass as a result from one or more visitors you'd deserve it in spades--hopefully that would prevent you from repeating it, since you don't get it naturally due to your handicap--being obtuse.

Posted by Spike Uniter 2009-01-02 08:16|| 2009-01-02 08:16|| Front Page Top

#8 Now you are just making up excuses for AirTran. Even after the FBI cleared them and talked to AirTran, AirTran still refused to let the family reschedule another flight. How is that fair in any way, shape, or form?

Posted by milo 2009-01-02 09:00|| 2009-01-02 09:00|| Front Page Top

#9 When I was a kid, a teenager with too much time and too little ambition, we used to go to public places and say things which, while not exactly wrong,were designed to upset the adults. Faked a kidnapping once, too. Just for shins and grits.
I recall the mullahs who were arrested for "praying while flying" or however it was explained.
Is this a bunch of Muslims trying to desensitize the TSA and the airlines? Annoy the infidels for fun?
Seek comfortable, temporary martyrdoom?
Being just plain stupid?
The idea that nobody should have reacted to the situation comes way down on the list.
Given our uncertain times, courtesy of....

Posted by Richard Aubrey">Richard Aubrey 2009-01-02 09:37|| 2009-01-02 09:37|| Front Page Top

#10 What exactly did the FBI clear them of, milo dear? The Irfan family did do what they were hauled off the flight for, acting in such a way that might have created a panic. It's not like anyone pointed at them and shrieked, "Jihadi terrorists! Get them!!!!"

On December 18th I was not permitted to board the 8:00 a.m. flight I'd booked to Buffalo, NY to visit my mother who'd just gone to the emergency room for the third time in a month. I was given no apology, but was permitted to rebook the next day at 7:30 p.m., almost thirty-six hours later. It was the day the snowstorm swept through, you see, and the several flights that day and the next were already fully booked. As it was, several passengers on the flight I finally took were not allowed to board because the flight had been overbooked. Was that fair? In a word, yes. Our wishes must make way for the exigencies of reality, you see.

Bottom line, there is a natural and automatic penalty for choosing to act stupidly. Were you or I to act as the Irfans did, we would have been hauled off and questioned by the FBI, too. Where is the unfairness of holding those who choose to be Muslim to the same standard as the rest of us?

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-01-02 09:52|| 2009-01-02 09:52|| Front Page Top

#11 The two girls and the airline look kinda like idiots. Their may be an explanation, but to an intelligent person they look at least a little bad regardless.

The conversation that the family had is one that many people have on airplanes. I think I've used or heard that conversation at least one out of every three times I've flown. If the family had been white I am betting the two girls who made an incident of it would not of said anything. They most probably are ignorant little girls who allowed their stereotyped ideas and fearful little brains to run wild. They're just young and dumb. They probably hadn't flown before and weren't experienced enough to realize that that conversation is common on airplanes.

As to the airline - There is no excuse to not allow the family back on after the FBI had cleared them. I would hope that the beauracracy was what kept the family off the second time and once the proper notification(s) were made the airline was able to fix the glitch. If this was not the case and the airline attempted to keep the family off until the media got a hold of the story, then they (the airline) are just wrong.

Posted by LibertySeeker 2009-01-02 09:54|| 2009-01-02 09:54|| Front Page Top

#12 Perhaps we should wait for the facts instead of leaping to the assumtion that they wouldn't seat them. Perhaps they couldn't seat them on the next flight.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-02 10:00|| 2009-01-02 10:00|| Front Page Top

#13 Always thought the safest place on an airplane was at the bar with a Bloody Mary when the plane took off :) Other than that one spot is as good as another (sure there may be situations where being on the wing is better than the tail, and being next to an exit always helps but face it - if something bad happens ya can't just pick what the bad is - so I have another, crack my book, and trust the pros in the cockpit).

The conversation was at best stupid and I can understand with ski DIA why it would be a topic. Friend of mine did the same thing at an airport lounge and I flat told him to STFU. I was studying my firefighting manual on a flight when I realized the cover picture may not have been comforting so made it a point to leave the book open to a page without pictures. Their conversation was as inappropriate for the situation as talking about what a great time at the bar you had last night around a recovering alcoholic, and of course nobody knew they were alright until after being questioned. Its the holidays of course the next flights are booked with people who know how to behave themselves in public.

Posted by swksvolFF 2009-01-02 10:33|| 2009-01-02 10:33|| Front Page Top

#14 It's really quite difficult to judge this sort of thing without being there to see body language and hear voice tone. Which of course is how those who ARE testing the security responses &/or just trying really hard to annoy infidels get away with it.

Or not. People are maybe losing patience with this sort of thing. And given that the family was headed to a Muslim retreat, it's quite possible they were flexing their conversational / annoying muscles in the face of those around them.

As TW noted, their conversation was attracted attention from others. That may have been due to their dress, but it might also be intentional.

Earlier this year I was in a European airport waiting lounge. An older, hard-core Islamic woman (full burqa) insisted on doing her prayers and prostrations right in the seating area. Specifically, right in the small walking area in front of the seats occupied by her family and a lot of luggage.

It was very clear she had no intention of finding a quieter place or avoiding the incovenience imposed on others who wanted to find seats or manage children there. It was a particularly snotty kind of passive aggression that works well in Europe and that conveyed contempt for everyone not like her.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-02 11:22|| 2009-01-02 11:22|| Front Page Top

#15 who said life was fair ? let them book another flight on anoher airline. last time i checked air tran wasn't the only one

Posted by rabid whitetail 2009-01-02 11:35|| 2009-01-02 11:35|| Front Page Top

#16 Yes LOTP. But this comment thread is interesting for another reason. It shows the contrast between two world views: 1) Recognition of the fact that past performance is the best predictor of future performance, and 2) The belief that one cannot be suspicious of anyone until they give proof of evil intent. Of course the flaw in that approach is that if evil intent is proven, the passengers are all dead.

Posted by SR-71 2009-01-02 11:40|| 2009-01-02 11:40|| Front Page Top

#17 I don't know why I'm going to try to reason with Trolls, but here goes:

The Irfans CLAIM AirTran refused them. AirTran DENIES this. Personally I'm more inclined to believe AirTran than the Irfans, but a court should be able to winkle out the truth.

Posted by Scooter McGruder 2009-01-02 12:01|| 2009-01-02 12:01|| Front Page Top

#18 I'm inclined to agree with you Scooter, but it's not as clear cut as that IMO. Also at stake is the question of to whom past performance should be extrapolated.

For instance, right now there is an hysteria about men with children. The past performance is that a small number of very disturbed men have sexually assaulted kids. The extrapolation is that all men are suspect if they approach kids or are interested in being with them, except (possibly) for their own kids.

The result is that a whole lot of kids are missing out on the critical experience of interacting with men. And a lot of men are missing out on the opportunity to enjoy and contribute to kids, living instead with totally unfounded suspicion and the threat of losing jobs, being arrested or sued for innocent acts.

I know there are RB regulars whose response is that there are no innocent Muslims. I disagree. I think behavior is a good place to draw the line. Not skin color, gender, first language etc. but what people do and how they do it.

In this case the family *did* something that warranted investigation.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-02 12:16|| 2009-01-02 12:16|| Front Page Top

#19 The Air Marshalls should have called in an ARCLIGHT on the terminal.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-02 12:34|| 2009-01-02 12:34|| Front Page Top

#20 I dunno, Mike - it's true that the fluorescents in those places are frustratingly dim to read by but travellers can always bring a book light. The glare that arc lights give off is pretty annoying indoors unless it's a garage workshop or such.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-02 12:39|| 2009-01-02 12:39|| Front Page Top

#21 They may not all be guilty, but far too few take steps to condemn those who are, and fewer still take steps to restrain them. Some have, undoubtedly. But even in the US it must be done secretly because they are so fearful of the condemnation of their fellow travelers. Were there Christians who acted this way what would happen? Fortunately we have that example, Serbia in Kosovo.

Islam demonstrates around the globe that it will not live at peace with the rest of the world and has shown no interest in learning to do so. It needs a whupping but is not likely to get it. So it will keep festering at the borders of civilization. And it will infect us from within as Ifran and family have.

The loss of freedom of association was the beginning of the anti-assimilationist multi-culturalism that we threaten ourselves with. It is time that freedom was restored so that those who don't want to assimilate and meet minimum social, as opposed to legal, standards can be ostracized within the law.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-01-02 12:47|| 2009-01-02 12:47|| Front Page Top

#22 The glare that arc lights give off is pretty annoying indoors unless it's a garage workshop or such.

I can't count the times I would have rather called one in than complete a project. 'Course, If I had that option, no transverse V6 GM would have survived a trip to my garage.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-02 12:50|| 2009-01-02 12:50|| Front Page Top

#23 The conversation that the family had is one that many people have on airplanes. I think I've used or heard that conversation at least one out of every three times I've flown.

LibertySeeker, I can see that occuring on, say, Air Sudan or some other airline with an abysmal safety record. But this former airline brat has yet to hear those kind of conversations on any US carrier, or even international ones, for that matter.

It simply isn't normal flying behavior, especially while parking your butt in the gate area while waiting to board. I wouldn't even try that while BS'ing in the airport bar.

BTW, please advise as to on which carrier you have heard these kind of discussions, so the rest of us can go accumulate frequent flyer miles elsewhere.

Posted by Cornsilk Blondie 2009-01-02 14:29|| 2009-01-02 14:29|| Front Page Top

#24 Update from AP

One of the Muslim passengers, Kashif Irfan, told The Washington Post the confusion began when his brother was talking about the safest place to sit on an airplane. "My brother and his wife were discussing some aspect of airport security," Irfan said. "The only thing my brother said was, 'Wow, the jets are right next to my window.'"

Irfan told the newspaper he thought he and the others were profiled because of their appearance. The men had beards and the women wore headscarves, traditional Muslim attire. Irfan, 34, is an anesthesiologist and his brother is a lawyer. Both live in Alexandria, Va., with their families, and were born in Detroit. They were traveling with their wives, Irfan's sister-in-law and Irfan's three sons, ages 7, 4 and 2. A family friend also was traveling with the group to a religious retreat in Florida.

Federal officials ordered the rest of the passengers from the plane and re-screened them before allowing the flight to depart about two hours behind schedule. The family and friend eventually made it to their destination on a US Airways flight.

Hutcheson said AirTran initially refused to rebook the family because the airline had not been notified the investigation was complete. He said the passengers were offered full refunds and are now welcome to fly on AirTran after being cleared by authorities.

"At the end of the day, people got on and made comments they shouldn't have made on the airplane, and other people heard them," Hutcheson said.

the pilot, after being informed of the remarks, requested that two federal air marshals on board remove the individuals. TSA then alerted authorities, including the FBI, which conducted an investigation. Once authorities determined there was no threat, it was up to the airline whether to allow the family to reboard. "If the pilot is uncomfortable with someone flying on their plane, that's their decision," White said.

To sum up, these idiots/provocateurs got on the airplane, talked loudly enough about security on the plane for several others to overhear, and spooked the pilot badly enough that he had them removed... as is his duty. The rest of the passengers were pulled off the flight and rescreened before being allowed back on board. How many of them missed connections because of the delay that caused, I wonder? Would they have a case against the Irfans for deliberately acting so? (It had to be deliberate. Everybody knows you do nothing to set off the suspicions of airport security if you wish to continue your travels.)

And they did this with no concern that the young children they brought with them might become alarmed and hysterical. The Irfans are a menace to the travelling public, and ought to be blacklisted for at least a year as a learning experience.

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-01-02 16:48|| 2009-01-02 16:48|| Front Page Top

#25 They thought they were on Air Iran.

Posted by Poison Reverse 2009-01-02 17:37|| 2009-01-02 17:37|| Front Page Top

#26 No, they intended to assert their Allah given right to harass the dhimmis. Dhimmis pushed back.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-02 19:11|| 2009-01-02 19:11|| Front Page Top

#27 Tommy81: Why are you reading this site?

Posted by gorb 2009-01-02 20:57|| 2009-01-02 20:57|| Front Page Top

#28 Tommy81 appears to be from Switzerland.

Enough said.

Posted by Pappy 2009-01-02 21:52|| 2009-01-02 21:52|| Front Page Top

23:42 JosephMendiola
23:34 JosephMendiola
23:31 PJ
23:29 JosephMendiola
23:22 Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division
23:22 JosephMendiola
23:18 JosephMendiola
23:12 JosephMendiola
23:08 JosephMendiola
23:08 crosspatch
22:48 Beavis
22:32 Chris in Fort Worth
22:25 Chris in Fort Worth
22:19 Muggsy Glink
22:07 Secret Master
22:04 Secret Master
21:58 Grunter
21:57 Frank G
21:54 SR-71
21:52 Pappy
21:48 3dc
21:39 Frank G
21:31 Barbara Skolaut
21:27 Pappy