Freedom Eclipsed

[Malik Shabazz]

fallout, your reading comprehension is worse than I had feared.

Mr. Jarrar's harassment by the TSA started before he got to the JetBlue gate. He was approached by TSA agents before the JetBlue agent came.

If you would like to believe that the US government works for JetBlue Airlines, go ahead. Don't let me disabuse you of your fantasy.

[fallout]

Originally Posted by Malik Shabazz

fallout, your reading comprehension is worse than I had feared.

Mr. Jarrar's harassment by the TSA started before he got to the JetBlue gate. He was approached by TSA agents before the JetBlue agent came.

If you would like to believe that the US government works for JetBlue Airlines, go ahead. Don't let me disabuse you of your fantasy.

This is not how I read it. Jet Blue got complaints. They called the TSA over to help is how I read it. This is why he has the numbers for Jet Blue on his blog and not the TSA.

Reasons I think this is Jet bLue doing this: from his blog:

"So based on the fact that Jet Blue doesn't have a translator, anything in Arabic is suspicious because maybe it'll mean something bad!"

"We walked some few steps and stood in front of the boarding counter where I found out that they were accompanied by another person, a woman from Jet Blue." If the TSA had a problem with the shirt, why involve the Jet Blue lady at all?

"Many people called and complained about your t-shirt. Jetblue customers were calling before you reached the checkpoint, and costumers called when you were waiting here in the boarding area"." Jet Blue customers made calls. You assume they called the TSA?

This part is funny but not related to why I think this way: "it was then that I realized that my t-shirt was the reason why I had been taken to the secondary checking" If you change "realized" to "pulled out of my ass", he would be correct.

"I asked the four people again to let me talk to any supervisor, and they refused." Supervisor? TSA or Jet Blue? We know for sure one of the involved is Jet Blue. The others are unknown according to his blog.

"The Jet Blue woman was asking me again to end this problem by just putting on a new t-shirt," Hmm. Not one mention of TSA so far, many of jet blue...

" I asked the Jet Blue woman to buy me a t-shirt" Jet blue bought him a t-short. Interesting. The TSA gets complaints, wants him to change his shirt and Jet Blue buys the shirt? This is logical to you?

"At 8:50 I was called again by a fourth young man, standing with the same jetblue woman. He asked for my boarding pass, so I gave it to him, and stood in front of the boarding counter. I asked the woman: "is everything okay?", she responded: "Yes, sure. We just have to change your seat"" Jet blue changed his seat. The TSA can do this? I doubt it.

Of course, the fact that he told us it was Jet Blue with the problem at the end of his blog: "If you want to call Jet Blue and ask about their regulations against Arabic script, you can use the following numbers:" Really should have tipped you off.

I apologize if in this thread I came across as snarky, but I have been drinking tonight.

Maybe you can explain to me now the basis for thinking the US government was behind this?

[Eimon Gnome]

Originally Posted by fallout

You are funny.

A private company made a rule regarding a shirt it did not want on one if it's planes, and you call this "Freedom eclipsed"?

I consider this freedom exercised.

Very telling.
How do you equate a company (an abstraction) with a person? As far as I know, corporations and businesses are not blessed with inalienable rights. They do not speak, no one prays for their souls, they have no conscience, they are not even corporeal. In short, companies do not have rights, in the same sense as human beings. They are, themselves, legal constructs for conducting business and trade. They cannot "excercise freedom".

[Gandalf]

fallout,

Do you think Inspector Harris worked for Jet Blue or for the US government?

Originally Posted by Inspector Harris

you can't wear a t-shirt with Arabic script and come to an airport. It is like wearing a t-shirt that reads "I am a robber" and going to a bank

Whether it's right or wrong .. why must people try and make political statements on t-shirts while trying to board a plane?
Right or wrong, of course it will make some people uncomfortable. That's just a fact of life in North America right now.

[Malik Shabazz]

Originally Posted by fallout

I apologize if in this thread I came across as snarky, but I have been drinking tonight.

Maybe you can explain to me now the basis for thinking the US government was behind this?

I'm sorry that I was so nasty.

Here's why I think it was the government:

• The second search by the TSA
• Inspector Harris and his official-sounding title
• Inspector Harris and his badge
• [The second man in his greenish suit, which I read (mistakenly late at night) as a uniform]

I find your argument about the JetBlue woman buying the t-shirt completely unconvincing, because she was trying to mediate between the official-seeming men and Mr. Jarrar.

So the woman interfered and said "let's reach a compromise. I will buy you a new t-shirt and you can put it on on top of this one". ... I asked the Jet Blue woman to buy me a t-shirt and I said "I don't want to miss my flight."

I also don't buy your (or Inspector Harris's argument that people were offended by his t-shirt. Law enforcement often tries to blame others for their own actions. "We received noise complaints from the neighbors. Do you mind if we come in and have a look around?" Yeah, right.

[Malik Shabazz]

Originally Posted by mexx

Whether it's right or wrong .. why must people try and make political statements on t-shirts while trying to board a plane?
Right or wrong, of course it will make some people uncomfortable. That's just a fact of life in North America right now.

It sounds like Mr. Jarrar was trying to make a point, and was "looking for trouble."

In other instances, passengers have not been permitted to board airplanes because they were carrying books whose titles were in Arabic (or perhaps Farsi or Pashto; most Americans [myself included] can't tell the difference).

Should people stop reading things, or stop speaking among themselves, in their native languages? At some point, people have got to start standing up to the stupidity and prejudice, even if that "makes some people uncomfortable."

[Gandalf]

Originally Posted by Malik Shabazz

I also don't buy your (or Inspector Harris's argument) that people were offended by his t-shirt. Law enforcement often tries to blame others for their own actions. "We received noise complaints from the neighbors. Do you mind if we come in and have a look around?" Yeah, right.

I find it plausible - not definite of course - that people were offended and complained. That doesn't mean that the law enforcement should take action just because people complained. Law enforcement should enforce the law.

Originally Posted by Malik Shabazz

It sounds like Mr. Jarrar was trying to make a point, and was "looking for trouble."

In other instances, passengers have not been permitted to board airplanes because they were carrying books whose titles were in Arabic (or perhaps Farsi or Pashto; most Americans [myself included] can't tell the difference).

Should people stop reading things, or stop speaking among themselves, in their native languages? At some point, people have got to start standing up to the stupidity and prejudice, even if that "makes some people uncomfortable."

Yes, you're right - at somepoint people have to start standing up.
However, maybe I just pay more attention when choosing my clothing, but I try to wear what I think the "audience" at my destination will find appropriate. When I travel to Pakistan, as an example, I don't wear jeans or pants, and definitely not skirts. Not because it's unheard of, or wrong or anything .. just because some people may not appreciate it.
(and might I add - I practically live in jeans and capris, and everything else is ridiculously uncomfortable for me)

When it comes to books - they're for your personal reading/entertainment. But wearing words across your chest is asking people to look.


I don't think the t-shirt should have offended anybody .. but the point is that I can see it made people uncomfortable. That's lack of information/education about the topic by those people .. but in my view the authorities have a responsibility to diffuse situations in the quickest/best ways possible. Asking someone to change their t-shirt sounds like a reasonable option, especially when they were willing to actually buy the person a new one.

(though maybe if this happened to me, I may not be so understanding)

[fallout]

Originally Posted by Eimon Gnome

Very telling.
How do you equate a company (an abstraction) with a person? As far as I know, corporations and businesses are not blessed with inalienable rights. They do not speak, no one prays for their souls, they have no conscience, they are not even corporeal. In short, companies do not have rights, in the same sense as human beings. They are, themselves, legal constructs for conducting business and trade. They cannot "excercise freedom".

I disagree with you. Especially your last statement.

It is very telling.