Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
Hey, it's not like it's *their* money.
Well, in spite of the fact that I doubt it will really change anything, this is good news:
Transportation Security Administration officials and JetBlue Airways are paying $240,000 to settle (.pdf) a discrimination lawsuit against a District of Columbia man who, as a condition of boarding a domestic flight, was forced to cover his shirt that displayed Arabic writing.
Oh noes! Not evil Arabic writing!! Next thing you know, there'll be evil Arabic numerals, taking over our culture!
According to a civil rights lawsuit, TSA and JetBlue demanded Raed Jarrar to sit at the back of a 2006 flight from New York to Oakland because his shirt read "We Will Not Be Silent" in English and Arabic.
As Jarrar was waiting to board, TSA officials approached him and said he was required to remove his shirt because passengers were not comfortable with it, according to the lawsuit. The suit claimed one TSA official commented that the Arabic lettering was akin to wearing a T-shirt at a bank stating, "I am a robber."
The lawsuit claimed Jarrar, 30, invoked the First Amendment but acquiesced after it became clear to him that he would not be allowed to fly if he did not cover his shirt with one given to him by JetBlue officials.
From Jarrar's blog, this:
"All people in this country have the right to be free of discrimination and to express their own opinions," said Jarrar, who is currently employed with the American Friends Service Committee, an organization committed to peace and social justice. "With this outcome, I am hopeful that TSA and airlines officials will think twice before practicing illegal discrimination and that other travelers will be spared the treatment I endured.”
Nice sentiment. And not a bad settlement - I'm glad to see him get the money. But I am highly skeptical that it will really change anything - it's not, after all, like the people who did this will be paying the money out of their own pockets. The Security Theater will continue, and there will still be instances of absurd behaviour such as we saw last week:
All Things Considered, January 2, 2009 · A Muslim-American passenger, one of nine members of a family detained and questioned at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport after fellow passengers on their AirTran flight reported hearing a suspicious conversation, says the family is trying not to be angry at what happened.
So, yeah, Jarrar's settlement is good news, but only one small bit of good news, and mostly for him.
Jim Downey
(Cross posted to my blog.)
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Umm.
Okay, I'm going to reveal my secret racist, hateful conservative side. It doesn't have much to do with this story, but here's something on the flip side of the subject of Muslims ...
Devout Muslim women in the U.S. can walk into ... oh, a supermarket or bank, for instance ... wearing that all-over covering that amounts to a full-body mask.
But I can't.
It's not terribly important to me, to tell you the truth. I'm actually rather sympathetic to the unfairness of anyone being EXPECTED to wear that damned black tarp in hot weather.
But in one sense, it does smack of yet another special privilege based on religion, when I think about it.
Not the first time airlines have made people dress differently
Remember the incident when Southwest told a woman her clothes were too skimpy to fly? I think there was more than one, but found just one - and when she went on TV to get her 15 minutes of fame, apparently she flashed the audience when she sat down. That kinda undermines any claim of being decently dressed.
Not to mention, it's COLD on those airplanes! And they don't give you blankets anymore.
But yeah, getting back to the original topic, to "DWB" we now have "FWA". ("Driving While Black" and "Flying While Arabic" to those not up on weird abbreviations.)