High five!
Posted on 01/09/2002 3:39:27 AM PST by Byron_the_Aussie
US President George W. Bush is sceptical about American Airlines' claim that it removed an Arab-American agent in Bush's security team from a plane for being "hostile".
"I know the man, I am most appreciative of his service to me and my wife. He is an honorable fellow," Bush said.
"I would be surprised if he was hostile."
The US Secret Service, which is responsible for presidential security, said in late December it had launched an inquiry into why the agent, headed to Texas to protect a holidaying Bush, was removed from the aircraft.
The agent, speaking through his lawyers, said he was barred from the Baltimore (Maryland) to Dallas (Texas) flight because of his ethnicity, amid fears sparked by the September 11 terrorist strikes.
"If he was mistreated because of his ethnicity, I'm going to be plenty hot. That means angry," Bush said.
But he added: "I wasn't there, so it's hard for me to comment on something which I did not see."
(Keep those med's close at hand, it's gonna be a long year.)
It's a "he said, they said", but when it comes to a federal agent's culpability, eyewitnesses are always "unreliable".
Let's see... Bush knows him, you don't... Yeah, I'll be putting a lot of stock in your assessment. _Not!_
You have to realize there are many, many thousands of Federal law enforcement agents watching to see if Bush supports the government employee (right or wrong). Maybe Mr. Bush is trying to win over some Klintoon holdovers in some of these agencies (?).
Free Republic, Defenders of the Second Amendment
Haven't you heard, Byron? That Constitution stuff only applies to us white citizens. I reckon them there 'ragheads' don't have no rights on FR.
No limitation of a law-abiding citizen's access to guns is in 'complete conformity' with the 2nd Amendment. Let's face it, some of the same Freepers who get all up in arms when there's an article about Joe Blow having his gun taken away (after defending himself with it or whatever), suddenly turn into pants-wetting Million Moron Mom types when the guy keeping and bearing happens to have a swarthy complexion and a name like 'Wallid'.
You can fly 'n' die with the disarmed sheep if you want -- I'd rather be sitting next to an 'abusive' Secret Service agent with a gun.
If we all could carry then I would be outraged that this agent was not allowed to. But seeing that we all cannot carry on the plane then I want to be certain that those who do are who they say they are and are not emotionally unstable.
If you can only win a discussion about this debate by making it an ethnic issue than I and the readers of this should conclude you have no better argument than one based on fallacy.
If this guy worked for private industry he would have been fired once his employer learned of the law suit.
Who the heck wants as a bodyguard someone this 'sensitive' and using such poor judgment? Congressman Dingle laughed off his strip search and this character goes to freaking court?
I like my President but he must learn to be tougher with the morons.
Literally LOL. Yeah, then after we're done, we can discuss slavery without bringing up any of those messy 'ethnic issues.'
I am merely disappointed in FR's general response to this, because it betrays any claims of fairness or objectivity we as a group might lay claim to.
Racial profiling is EXCELLENT. I really mean that. The fact is, the terrorists that are involved in the present situation pretty much look like we think they do. They're young men of Middle Eastern origin. So it is mind-numbingly obvious that you hold such people up to greater scrutiny. When that Arab-American SS guy showed up with a gun, it made sense to look at his paperwork more closely than that of some Irish guy.
American Airlines DENIES that. They claim that they are treating everyone the same regardless of ethnicity -- that this agent would have had exactly the same experience if he was some blond-haired blue-eyed Ken doll. Now, I assume you would acknowledge that AA's claim on this issue is either FALSE or it is TRUE.
If it is FALSE, then the Freepers expressing support for American Airlines are, at best, going to bat for liars who toe the PC line about ethnic profiling.
If it is TRUE, then the Freepers expressing support for American Airlines are, at best, supporting an airline security policy which is ineffective and ridiculous (i.e., treat the 80-year-old white lady with a walker the same as the 28-year-old Saudi man who keeps looking at his watch.)
Therefore, AA is in the wrong either way, and those who support them are similarly wrong.
In this specific case, the agent, however hostile he got after being asked for his ID 5 times, was obviously successful in establishing his identity as a Secret Service man. The pilot, probably contrary and stubborn by this time, decided to ignore this, so he's a sorry excuse for a decision-maker, and nobody I'd want to fly with. Personally, I don't think that the men protecting the President should be doormats or pushovers who sheepishly acquiesce when confronted. This is a man who puts his life on the line for the President & we want to urinate in his corn flakes because he complains about bad service at an airport. Sheesh.
High five!
Which is what I believe about the pilot. If the pilot were a bigot and had made up his mind at the outset based on racial profiling alone he wouldn't have stopped his pre-flight checklist. He would have just thrown the guy off. He had every right to because the rules also require at least a one hour lead time. This pilot had less than 45 minutes. I think the pilot was trying to take the well founded fears of his flight crew into consideration. Why does someone acting so nervous deboard the plane and leave their luggage behind when thats a clear violation of saftey rules? Then they discover he is their weapon carrying passenger ? Profile ? Hello ? We have a nervous passenger who violates safety rules who happens to be carrying a gun who just happened to claim he was bumped from another flight ? Ok, he has my attention on those facts and he doesn't have to be an Arab.
Therefore, AA is in the wrong either way, and those who support them are similarly wrong.
You know I have heard it said many times how inept AA is. If I worked as a pilot for an organization as inept as AA is supposed to be do I trust their ability to screen gun toting LEO's ? In this specific case, the agent, however hostile he got after being asked for his ID 5 times, was obviously successful in establishing his identity as a Secret Service man. The pilot, probably contrary and stubborn by this time, decided to ignore this, so he's a sorry excuse for a decision-maker, and nobody I'd want to fly with.
Assuming you are correct then why did the SS agent give him an out by losing it publicly ? Personally, I don't think that the men protecting the President should be doormats or pushovers who sheepishly acquiesce when confronted.
But they should be calm under pressure. This is a man who puts his life on the line for the President & we want to urinate in his corn flakes because he complains about bad service at an airport. Sheesh.
No we don't. We just want him to take a time-out when he gets angry before boarding a plane armed.
No, I thought I'd start with circular reasoning, throw in a 'have you stopped beating your wife?', then work my way up to an uncalled-for ad hominem directed at you personally.
If what I presented was a false dilemma, tell me, what is the other possibility I ignored? The airline was joking? The entire incident exists only in my fevered brain?
I addressed the other possibility in my answer. The agent was profiled. You limited the ways of profiling to Arab vs non-Arab
Incorrect. Profiling on a non-ethnic basis falls exactly under my 'true' option.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.