Man Forced to remove Arabic t-shirt

[wooley]

Nice to see freedom of expression is alive and well in the west

link

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by wooley
Nice to see freedom of expression is alive and well in the west

link

Try wearing a t-shirt that says "Hijack!" on a domestic flight and see what happens.

[1K3]

that's ****ed up at all levels

Mission complete:  Anything Middle Eastern related is automatically offensive in tha West

[1K3]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Try wearing a t-shirt that says "Hijack!" on a domestic flight and see what happens.

too obvious and you'll be removed faster than the blink of the eye.

On the article, his shirt says "We will not be silent", refering to the current mid-east hard core regimes such as Saddam and that hardliner from Iran (his last name starts with letter A...)

[Shifty]

The passenger expressed his views with his shirt.
The airline expressed their views not allowing it on their plane.

What's the problem?

[BlueJ1]

The first paragraph says it all.

An architect of Iraqi descent has said he was forced to remove a T-shirt that bore the words "We will not be silent" before boarding a flight at New York.

[Birddogg]

Another fine example of US freedom.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Shifty
The passenger expressed his views with his shirt.
The airline expressed their views not allowing it on their plane.

What's the problem?

Exactly.

And why didn't this get wooley's attention 3 days ago?

A devout Christian was banned from flying with the budget airline Easyjet after she asked staff to "stop blaspheming".

Fiz Thomson, 55, was returning from a trip to Israel where she had been helping war victims, when she heard boarding staff at Stansted airport repeatedly exclaiming "Oh, my God" after a child fell and hurt herself.

She said she politely asked them to stop taking God's name in vain. She was then approached by a security official and she claims she was called a "racist" for remarking that her complaint would have been taken more seriously had she been Islamic.

As a result of the altercation on Tuesday, her boarding card was withheld, her luggage was taken off the Edinburgh-bound flight and she was barred from flying with the airline for 24 hours.

The grandmother, from Burntisland, Fife, who worships at the independent Vine Church in Dunfermline, said: "There was absolutely nothing at all that I said to the airport staff which could have been interpreted as racist. "I was very polite and non aggressive, but one of the ladies angrily asked me if I expected everyone to follow my religion and do as I did.

"A member of the security staff then appeared and started arguing with me."

Mrs Thomson, a registered foster carer with Fife Council, added: "All the other flights to Edinburgh that evening were with Easyjet. I ended up having to hire a car and drive to my daughter's home in Bolton. "I stayed the night there before driving home the following day. It cost me more than £200, including petrol."

According to Easyjet, Mrs Thomson was "ranting at female gate staff of Indian origin" who had had no intention to be blasphemous.

A spokesman said her remarks appeared to be racist and a view was taken that she needed to calm down and would not be allowed to fly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/26/ngod26.xml

So much for freedom of speech in England!

[Shifty]

Originally posted by Birddogg
Another fine example of US freedom.

Actually it was. There needs to be more examples like it. There are many people who want  freedom from all the militant  PC thug crap that they are assaulted with regularly.

[Sandman]

What a surprise... The 1st Amendment doesn't apply at airports or airplanes.

Hell... the 4th doesn't apply either.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Sandman
What a surprise... The 1st Amendment doesn't apply at airports or airplanes.

Hell... the 4th doesn't apply either.

Try the 2nd and see where that gets ya.



Bronk

[indy007]

This has alot less to do with freedom of speech than it does with smart business.

He doesn't have a constitutionally protected right to cost your business money by upsetting other customers. If it were a government operated airline, he'd have a valid complaint. Since it's a privately (or even publically traded, because public does not equal state) owned company, they can treat their customers as they see fit. If it's bad treatment, you'll lose customers. That simple.

If you come to my office, and upset my customers, you'll get one chance to apolgize and conform, or you'll get shown the door. If you come back, you'll get shown the inside of a police cruiser.

In the great state of Texas, we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

[Skuzzy]

Dunno what the big deal is.  A corporation exercises its right to serve who it choses.  No biggy.

If you think this is a big deal, then you really do not understand how things work in the U.S. as it pertains to corporations.

[Shifty]

Originally posted by Sandman
What a surprise... The 1st Amendment doesn't apply at airports or airplanes.

Hell... the 4th doesn't apply either.

The man freely expressed himself.

 Freedom of expression,  means you are free from persecution .

A persons dress is freedom of expression.

A company drawing the line on how it's customers are dressed is also freedom of expression.

The US Government didn't keep him from boarding the plane. The airline did. To post this as a lack of freedom of expression in the US is just lame.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Shifty

The US Government didn't keep him from boarding the plane. The airline did. To post this as a lack of freedom of expression in the US is just lame.

Please point to the part in the article that states this.