[wheezer]

I do believe you two are holding out for a statement from CAIR.

Maybe the Israeli diplomat's characterization of the events is as exaggerated and emotionaly dishonest as your characterization of my comments?

What I said was that I'd like to hear the pilot's version of the events.

What exactly, is your problem with that?

[Cachelot]

Maybe the Israeli diplomat's characterization of the events is as exaggerated and emotionaly dishonest

What an odd claim - "emotionally dishonest". No, I really do think that you're waiting for something like one of those fatwas that CAIR pops out in their need to meddle in American affairs. Like over that Secret Service agent that was automagically suddenly represented by CAIR.

As for "emotionally dishonest", I don't think I've ever hidden the fact that I loathe you and your fellow-travelling jihad sympathizers. Not that I tend to become overly emotional about it, of course ;).

[KineticKitty]

Although it looks like the pilot used bad judgment, it's still his judgment that reigns in the end, if the airlines don't agree with their own pilot, and side with the Israeli, then this means they also must question his judgment? (which I am not defending), but I keep thinking at this point, If they do not agree or value their own pilots judgment about a passenger, then how can they be comfortable about any of the other "judgments" he will be making as their pilot, and why are they allowing someone they have not much faith in to remain flying for their company?

But I do agree, I would love to hear the pilots side of the story first.

[Lent]

What I said was that I'd like to hear the pilot's version of the events.

Yeah, I'd like to hear the version of a guy who was going spastic, about to have a nervous breakdown, and balling his head off. We can then conduct some interviews at the local mental hospital to find out their opinion as well.