It shouldn’t be any surprise to people that we are ringing in 2009 with another one of these stories. (via RaceWire)
Nine Muslim passengers on a New Year’s Day flight on AirTran were kicked off a flight after others flying reportedly heard remarks about airport security. Because of the confusion, that was eventually cleared up, no one was able to fly.[RaceWire]
What could these “dangerous” remarks be? Did they say one of the handful of words that as brown people we are not allowed to say within a ten mile radius of an airport, including but apparently not exclusively, the following words: bomb, terrorist, Bin Laden, explode, die, Bush, fire, shoe, fertilizer, Allahu Akbar?
Mr. Irfan turned to his wife…wondered aloud where the safest place to sit on the airplane would be — the front? The rear? Over the wing?But passengers sitting behind them evidently overheard the remark, saw Mr. Irfan’s beard and his wife’s head scarf, and grew concerned…The worried passengers contacted flight attendants, who contacted Transportation Security Administration officials, and soon, Mr. Irfan and his wife were off the plane and being questioned in the jetway.[NYT]
Oh! The trigger word was ‘safest.’ How ironic.
Before long…the F.B.I. concluded that the incident was obviously just a misunderstanding, and told AirTran officials that the family was cleared to travel. But he said AirTran still refused to rebook them, offering only to refund their tickets. The F.B.I. agents helped the family get on a later USAirways flight to Orlando, but those seats cost them twice as much.[NYT]
It took me a while to get to posting this up because frankly, this is a dime a dozen story. In 2008 alone, the Transportation Department reported 87 cases of complaints alleging discrimination by airlines and only four were security related. Flying while brown stories happen all the time. I’m tired of blogging about stories like this and that these incidences are still happening. These stories are a part of our lives on the margin and being brown. I’m not implying that we should stand by the wayside and merely accept the injustice. Which is exactly what Mr. Irfan didn’t do. Instead he got organized. AirTran issued an apology but it seems really weak.
Security is a shared responsibility and this incident highlights the multiple layers of security that are in place in today’s aviation environment. While ultimately this issue proved to be a misunderstanding, the steps taken were necessary.[AirTran]
D.C. delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton is asking for a congressional hearing on the incident.
She said that reports of similar incidents among other airlines show that personnel are confused about how to judge security risks and respond to them. Norton said airlines are allowing “amateurs” to make serious decisions, and that Congress has an obligation to address the incidents.[USAToday]
I for one never flew AirTran because of their cramped seats. But now I have even more reason not to.
I am visiting my parents for the holidays, in Westchester County, NY–you drive by the bus-stops, you see African-Americans, Latinos, pretty much exclusively. Why am I supposed to buy into this desi-as-oppressed BS? Frankly, when I can’t take my parents any more, I go back to Manhattan, where nobody is treating me poorly b/c I’m desi. My goodness, the task is to get the Desh up to snuff, not cry into our beer here about our allegedly poor treatment, when we’re actually cleaning up!
18 · zazou said
Why decry the dehumanization of an other, but then propagate a similar message? Where did your reference of rape come from and what does it have to do with this? I googled your claim and found that in the US in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man. Page 30: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus0502.pdf
Getting hysterical and hateful over an unjust incident is counterproductive. Start a blog if you have an ax to grind!
I admire your ability to go on, without the support of Semitic sky-god v.1.0, v.2.0, or v.3.0 😉
Hi Nc-L
Hmmm…irony, a difficult concept sometimes…
Nice job on the stats. I’ll take a look, I promise. What are the stats for White, Brown women raped by a white guy? Oh, and btw, I do have a blog where I have been happily ranting and raving for some time now. Check it out. Most of it is in English, too.
My tickets usually have seat numbers already assigned per passenger before I get inside the plane. So, were they going to usurp the seats on ‘the safest place to sit on the airplane’?? Even if that place wasn’t assigned to them? What were they trying to do in saying that, in the first place?
Saying ‘the safest place to sit on the airplane’ is at least mischievous. The airline’s (re)action may not be completely without basis. How much of it though, that’s open to debate.
I am with AmsterdamGuy on this. With the exception of the NYC-DC shuttle, every airplane ride ( i fly 200K miles annually) has had assigned seating. I would be puzzled if some passengers came in and started scoping out other seating. Likely or not, someone heard the word “safety”- and the attire didnt help (not justifying the reaction…, let me just say the demographics of the typical Airtran passenger are such that I am not surprised).
Regards the horrified statements on racial and religious profiling, let me point out thats one (but only one) of the criteria used when you exit Tel Aviv airport, and so far they have a 100% safety record. Not saying its pretty, but hard to argue with the results.
The two are related. In the first case they leave innocents in jail. They do this to cover their ass. If they release someone innocent and by some chance that person then commits a heinous act then heads would roll at the top of government. In the case of the airline they are making a thoughtful decision to be bigots. They know that the cost associated with being sued by this family as well as the bad press will still be less than a plane that blows up (lawsuits from surviving family, brand tarnished, etc.). They are making a calculated business decision to be bigots. But make no mistake, this is bigotry.
Personally, I find the constant exhortations of “See something, say something” beyond spooky. it should be more like “see” something as reflected by this incident, since what certain people “see” as worthy of reporting is highly dependent on several subjective perceptions.
If AirTran did not respond to the concerns of the passengers and heaven forbid, these brown folks were indeed Jihadists, what then i cannot blame airtran initially for handing over the matter to the FBI – even if the passengers who reported the “matter” were racist in jumping to conclusions, an airline has to cover itself and at least have the matter investigated. but if the airline refused to board them even AFTER the FBI cleared them, that is the main issue, isn’t it. because at that point, it is no longer a security issue.
I really don’t understand why airport security is still so high 8 years after 9/11. As if there aren’t a million other ways that a terrorist could blow up America. i’ve been wondering this for some time. esp., e,g., when the national security team appears (could just be that, though) to increase their focus on certain elements – liquids, shoes etc – so much more after real threats involving them occur. to me, it seems like this relatively heightened focus on such things after the fact is useless – no terrorist is going to bother with the same elements after they know airport officials are on such high alert for them. of course, i hope that this is just the appearance and not the reality, and that the officials are really focusing on all possible threats.
The two are related. they are also related to the extent that the same passport seems to gives your rights that are determined based on your colour/race/religious background, rather than the simple fact of being a U.S. citizen (i won’t even go into the distinction of natural-born vs. naturalized). to suspend certain legal rights on these bases is to clearly make a distinction based upon race and other such factors. it was done by internments to the japanese-americans in WWII – i guess we should not be surprised that the U.S. government was saving this tactic for another such rainy day
I’m not Muslim, I am brown and I have also, within the confines of an airplane and in my assigned seat, speculated about the safest seat in an airplane. It doesn’t mean that I’m going to try to grab it from someone else. It just means that I’m wondering out loud with my companions—which is what humans do on a fairly regular basis. One of the aspects associated with air travel is the “unlikely event of a crash” scenario and it gets you to musing. Sometimes you muse out loud to your travel companions. I do not see this as the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theatre (I would be more persuaded if for example, the group had speculated about the number of souls on board and then calculated how what percentage a bomb in the cargo hold would take out). When it comes down to it, why would a suicide bomber give a shit about the safest seat in an airplane? The irony of this is that if they’d been speaking in Arabic, they probably wouldn’t have gotten kicked off for the speculation (they’d have been kicked off for some other reason!).
Unlike some others, I do believe there is something to be said for exhorting all citizens to be on alert for suspicious activities (not just for terrorists but yea, pedophiles and fashion crimes). I believe that awareness is a significant defensive tactic. However, I also believe there is something to be said for asking decision makers to use rational criteria to filter out wheat from the chaff. Without it, things do devolve into prejudice and discrimination very quickly (and women have free rein to mace all potential rapists, I mean men, in elevators. Safety first ;)). Regardless, if someone is suspected of engaging in a suspicious activity and it is later shown that they are “clean” then the person should not be made to suffer further. The taint of somebody else”s suspicion should not be taken as carte blanche to impose whatever consequences one wants.
I don”t know whether Mr. Irfan or the airline are speaking the truth here but if Mr. Irfan IS more accurate, then this was simply unacceptable behaviour on the part of the airline. And I would like to ensure that the “rule book” the airline uses is not “if the passenger is not-white or is identifiably Muslim, then any claims of suspicions should be given 100% credibility. If they don’t meet those criteria, then just give the complainer a free drink and send them on their way.” That’s for two reasons—first the prejudice and discrimination aspect are unacceptable. Secondly, it’s a giant loophole that can be exploited by the next person intending to do harm who deliberately appears “safe”.
The Irfan family should consider some options – how about the men having a shave and getting rid of those beards, and the women dressing up normally like PLUS and giving up the hijab? Why this need to stand out? Hindu women (as well as the many Christian Indian women who share the custom) give up wearing their bindi and and at times their mangalsutra when they move out of India – in the West to “blend in” and in some Islamic theocracies to avoid adverse attention and violence.
To all those who complain about flying while brown etc., here’s the quote from Det.Keith Frazier, “Ever tried catching a cab at night?”
But then again Muslims aren’t the only ones to sport beards and hijab like dresses. Orthodox Jewish men are bearded, and nuns have their their traditional habit.
60 · ente said
If the plane is already in the air, all seats would be equally ‘safe’. No?
Its not the scoping of the seats in itself that’s alarming, its the combination of being in an airplane, in a US airport, in a post 911 world and saying ‘safest’ that is. Not to forget many US airports do say, joking about terrorism, bombs etc will be taken seriously. (I saw a signboard like that at Dulles)
Musing, if my plane has a piece of the fuselage missing… I will not be bemused.
Pretty sure this is a beard issue brahs… no need to make a huge fuss about this, it happens. Regrettable when an innocent gets accused, but he didn’t go to Guantanamo or anything, just had to catch another flight. Big deal.
AmsterdamGuy, yes, if the plane is in the air all seats will be equally safe. If the plane CRASHES, seating position may be relevant in survivability depending on the nature of the crash (watch a few episodes of Mayday and you’ll see what I mean). If discussing crashes is verboten so be it. Make it a rule and apply it universally, including to any white or non-Muslim people who may happen to speculate (sorry, padre, you’ll have to catch the next plane to Rome). Even on flights within the U.S. in the last three years I have heard others who would not fall into Mr. Irfan’s appearance demographic have similar discussions amongst themselves amongst themselves and not be taken to task. So, it doesn’t appear that the rule exists regarding such comments, as opposed to jokes about bombs, where notice of the rule is given and it is universally applied.
There was no such rule in this case. There was “suspicious activity”. Moreover, and this is crucial, if the suspicious passenger is cleared by authorities, they should not be made to suffer additional pecuniary losses because of someone else’s suspicion.
More to the point, some were wondering why people would speculate, imputing some sort of sinister motive (if they weren’t terrorists, then they wanted to take somebody else’s seat). I offered an explanation (the sometimes a cigar is just a cigar). I also submit that I am not the only person who has done this and that I have witnessed others of the “non-target demographic” indulge in similar behaviour, in a plane, in a post 9/11 world, without suffering any consequences, except possibly exhortations from nervous companion fliers to please stop talking about crashes (and such exhortations also occurred in a pre 9/11 world).
Again, if you feel that discussing airplane crashes should be expressly forbidden and anyone who indulges in such talk, whether in an airport, or on a plane, should be denied the right to board or remain on a plane, that’s one thing (and that’s not something that occurred here). But if such a law did exist, violations would be a clear contravention of the law, not “suspicious activity”.
However, if your post 9/11 understanding of the world means that the laws of the United States should be selectively applied to different individuals depending on their race or creed, then I submit that is unjustifiably discriminatory and b) probably unconstitutional (but I’d need someone who knows U.S. constitutional law to confirm my understanding).
I would ask the person who complained to pick out Iraq or Afghanistan on a map.
This kind of thing is sad.
I don’t know why people are getting so upset. It is a great move forward for brown civil rights that brown people, far from being expected to sit at the back of the plane, are actually expected not to!
20 · Nizam of Sarakki said
Thank you for this. Accurate and succinct. Can you guys start deleting the more idiotic comments already? Start with mine if you want.
49 · rob said
An affront to Kamal Hassan is an affront to all of us!
67 · dr amonymous said
O com on, dr a! u know as well as i that this joint is a lot more hopping than that cricketfest you call pass the roti. you could pass the kouchie on the left hand side over there and no one would know it.
i was once standing at jfk on the security line with a father and his two sons (all white american) behind me. they were discussing bombs in an airport and the related security and must have said the word bomb at least 40 times collectively in the span of 5 minutes. i was just about to tell them not to say the word ‘bomb’ and then thought better of it – with my “luck” the one time i said it to shut them would prob. have been enough for security to take me aside. i wonder how the same conversation would have gone had the family looked like the irfans. it seems that even when there are regulations in place, they are not necessarily policed objectively, esp. in a post-9/11 world.
from what i can recall, this may be a gray area. if the law itself is objective on its face (i.e. does not single out a particular group) and it has a reasonable rationale behind it, some courts might not even get so far as to decide on how it is being applied. can anybody else speak to this?
69 · Manju said
Sorry, I’m not biting.
45 · rob said
I beg to differ. My dad was traveling with a Tamil friend back in ’90. His wife was one of those paranoid type, so immediately after landing he went to the nearest payphone and called her and his rapid Tamil caused some of the Heathrow officers to suspect him of being a Sri Lankan terrorist. He was stuck in Heathrow for 2 days.
Uhhh–how to put this delicately–please don’t ignore the different–ummm—SES and ideological profiles of Tamils in the US vs. in UK/Canada. You are confirming my point, not refuting it. Obviously there are Tamil terrorists.
“As for the “safety” issue- most racial incidents and hate crimes are perpetrated by White Men, not to mention rape. “
What did you pull that factoid out of? Your head, or the other end? bizarro world? A law office with interesting specialities?
But I admit that my area of expertise is confined to traditional black/white relations, so I guess I really don’t know what you’re talking about. If you have complaints about whites threatening you or other Indians, the FBI has personnel on hand to take your call. They also specialize in something called statistics. The DOJ, my old home, can advise on legalities galore. This is a country with a black/white president-elect, after all. What are you waiting for? Evidence?
As far as flyer-profiling, I’m against it generally, though it has occasionally been helpful to the FBI in apprehending known criminals. It almost never works in catching people planning crimes and is hopeless with families traveling together. You invariably violate somebody’s rights in such a case. Anyway, U.S. profiling is useless with Indians. “South Asians” are too varied a category. Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Jains differ vastly in each profile even while sharing a lot of cultural traits. Then there’s our on-going IT job-exchange program–what the hell does this government expect? We have open borders and an open IT job market. Why bother to profile anybody. The Brits do seem to understand the differences among nationalities, but most Americans never learn anything from history or other countries. Which brings me back to the serious part of the discussion at hand:
Most of your contributors make good points about “flying while brown.” I’ve not flown with Indians in recent years, but I have flown with Lebanese, Israelis and Iranians. Not sure if all of them qualify as “brown” but most are Muslim, all are “middle-eastern”, and I have been upset by the way some were singled out, as it seemed they had sufficient proofs of innocuousness for them to be let through, whatever their origins. At other times, however, I’ve seen airport security let people go through who probably should have been questioned more. U.S. airlines seem to have no clear rationale. The most ruthless flyer-profilers were the Israelis. Whew. If your passport was ever stamped in an Arab country, you will never get into Israel. But at least their actions were consistent and their rationale spelled out. You knew what to expect. When I did fly in India, it was a breeze but that was in the 80s. As an American, I’ve been the object of some nasty attention in various foreign airports, especially during Bush II, so I can commiserate. I was very nearly thrown in jail myself due to misundertandings about a valise I for which I had no key, but that’s another story.
I now work as a research consultant for a govt. agcy., am of no rank, but one likes to think one makes a difference. I have been remonstrating with certain powers-that-be for years about the fine points of cultural/racial/ethnic recognition. However, beards and robes do affect the overall picture since 01. We need to look at similar cases where the people were dressed in a more “western” way. We need to examine whether persons of Indian background, but born and raised in America, are similarly scrutinized, because that would be a violation of citizens’ rights. I am putting together an initial summary. Again, I’m a researcher, not a policy maker. But if certain essential facts would be scrutinized beforehand, than security wouldn’t incline to scrutinize harmless families just trying to get home.
the way you phrased it (selectively applied) would probably be unconstitutional (equal protection clause, 14th amendment) but there are exceptions.
the standard for an exception would be a “compelling governmental interest” which has been used to bypass the equal protection clause in order to remedy past racial discrimination (affirmative action) for example.
what we are talking about here is probably racial profiling which would get an exception if its done in the context of a national emergency or to protect national security. but there is a high barrier here, a strict means test that ensures the program is narrowly tailored. i don’t know exactly what that test entails.
one infamous decision is the Japanese internment during wwII, but that decision is generally considered wrong and since then the test has become more stringent, even in affirmative action cases.
but as they say, the constitution is not a suicide pact, so national security would be a reason to apply for an exception.
I appreciate the information, Manoj. Many thanks.
Sorry, clearly my blood sugar is crashing. I appreciate the information, Manju.
atif’s a punk. he had this coming. after chauncey left, it’s become a dangerous world for michigan muslims.
30 · rob said
<
blockquote>
You shouldn’t, especially if they are young boys.
This is not a brown issue. It’s a religious issue. So, perhaps we should argue that they were discriminated against because of their religion. If these were black/African muslims with the same dress code (long beards, hijabs, etc, etc) they probably would have experienced the same treatment.
I have Somali friends who are constantly subjected to this kind of treatment. I blame Bin Laden for giving all Muslims a bad name.
Raed Jarrar got $240,000 from Jet blue and the TSA for a lot less. Maybe making the the parties financial responsible for going overboard will adjust this kind of behavior. Americans tend to be more careful of over reacting when there is a threat of financial retributions and the Airlines and the TSA will adjust their behavior accordingly.
(As others might have said already), the truly amazing thing about this was that the FBI came over, checked them out, cleared them and asked AirTran to board them. And the still refused. I would like to know what the reasoning was there. If the FBI can’t be your reference, who can?
Hadji: Sim Sim Sala Bim Stewie: Yea I’d try to cut back on that
48 · zazou said
That is utterly irrelevant.
Well, at least the family gets to sue and live as millionaires happily ever after. Which, ironically, could only happen in the evil infidel Christian West. Who would even thinking of suing in Saudi Arabia or, god forbid, Pakistan – rape requires 4 witnesses… god forbid the number required for “airport discrimination”!
55 · AmsterdamGuy said
Its funny you bring that up; I’ve only flown AirTran on the Chicago-Boston route. They are the only airline on which I got to pick my seats everytime (maybe its specific to our route). Twice in a row, I ended up picking a seat that turned out to be next to a sizeable person. Now usually, I’m not a sizeist (?) but when it comes to getting squished for two hours …YES I CAN!(hmm that logic extrapolates well.) The second time, I threw a Ben-Stiller-from-Meet-The-Parents sized fit, and instead of kicking me off the plane for being agitated-while-brown, they gave me the last available seat and gave me a bunch of goodies. I’m pretty sure that neither my skin color nor my copy of National Review had anything to do with their reaction.
Rahul D
ps: 84 · Sheetal:Who would even thinking of suing in Saudi Arabia or, god forbid, Pakistan – rape requires 4 witnesses… god forbid the number required for “airport discrimination”!
That is even more utterly irrelevant.
Manju, we watched this during a conference and it was so hilarious that we got drunk and watched it again.
Hope ya like it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9hG8gmnmNM
RahulD
Yes Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is the standard we should all measure ourselves by, I mean we should be just grateful we are allowed to fly at all.
The most missed feature of this story about “safety” and “AirTran” is that AirTran is named AirTran because under their old name, Valujet, they had really high profile crashes, and so had a terrible reputation. This may explain the culture of safety paranoia that their airline has, but it doesn’t explain why it’s directed at Muslims/brown people.
87 · mumbaikar said
My experiences “having discussions” with members of Indian “civil” society on the Internets has had the effect of making me wish there were more Pakistani and Pakistani-Americans people around…they’re not even CLOSE to as annoying 😉
“here’s a thought-in the last 150 years how many Arab or Muslim nations have invaded and occupied Europe? I’m sorry- was the answer ZERO?”
-That is utterly irrelevant.
Really? Why? Colonial mentalities, etc. contribute to this type of “othering.”
73 · rob said
rob,
have they stopped celebrating Maaveerar Naal in the Toronto suburbs? that’s news to me.
By the by, I thought this was an interesting tidbit in light of all the FWB incidents. Sorry if someone already posted this and I missed it.
Later in the day, six of the nine detained passengers approached the customer service counter and asked to be rebooked to Orlando. At the time, the airline had not been notified by the authorities that the passengers were cleared to fly and would not rebook them until receiving said clearance. One passenger in the party became irate and made inappropriate comments. The local law enforcement officials came over and escorted the passengers away from the gate podium
Agreed that this is ethnic profiling incident why didn’t the passengers contact the relevant authorities for getting the clearance to travel since FBI did help them to get flights later on ?
from the news article –
.
Did these teenage girls complain ? I think more than AirTran or flight-attendants or TSA or air marshals, those passengers who complain are to blame for ethnic profiling.
One the lighter side, what about this “flying while brown” incident. Thakkar/Raman, anybody?
To #90: “here’s a thought-in the last 150 years how many Arab or Muslim nations have invaded and occupied Europe? I’m sorry- was the answer ZERO?”
— Invasion is rather a hardwork; and you don’t need to do it while you can simply enter a country, and then slowly cleanse out the place of ‘other religious groups’ by some sort of continued violent means. That’s why this is utterly irrelevant.
On the topic- it’s a legal and/or religious-profiling issue, and doesn’t seem to be a brown issue. In any case, I hope the passengers get to sue the airlines if they have been wrongfully denied any privilege. On the other hand, if the statement made by the airlines authority turns out right, I guess they only acted based on other passengers’ safety concerns and their own rules. As a service provider you walk on the thin line between client satisfaction and security issues. You can’t really blame them.
96 · bongo
Yeah they’re pretty blameless unless you actually bother to read the articles, see that the FBI(!) cleared these people before the arlines did, see that the airline itself offered an apology belatedly, etc. Other than that, you can’t really blame them.
sure. it’s well known that a family that sponsors vandals and butchers together… ??? i thought holidays were supposed to bring out the charitable spirit in us. surely another hindu organization exists that could do some good with your money. many neighborhood mandirs in desh have dispensaries and clinics that provide highly subsidized care, usually for the elderly. perhaps you’re enjoying just getting a rise out of some on sepia — but it only makes you look very-very naive. your degree of denial is up there with “nobody is gay in iran.” meanwhile, your extra-patriotic friends, MNS and Shiv Sena (whose brand of politics is actually affirmed when organizations like the VHP are encouraged; one can imagine who a VHP member is likely to vote for) are threatening bookstores to throw out pakistani books. the US constitution is probably sacred to you (originalist? i wouldn’t be surprised). meanwhile, you’re quite happy to pay for ring-side seats as india’s constitution being shredded by goons you’re cheering for. with PIOs like these, who needs enemies? you and the splendid academies at muridke have divided the labor for eviscerating akhand bharat quite efficiently.
87 · mumbaikar said
I suppose after this family gets their six-figure paycheck, they’ll be flying quite a bit more (most likely on their own jet, as opposed to an evil infidel second-rate Western airlines). Someone really needs to add suing to the immigrant experience. Whether the issue be a turban, airline hassle, or just plain body odor…
And the Godwin award of the day is
drumroll
Comment 98!!!