Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pilot at fault used Profiling against SS Agent
CNN - Crossfire Transscript 1/4/2 ^ | 1/4/02 | Self

Posted on 01/04/2002 9:34:45 PM PST by ImphClinton

Edited on 04/29/2004 1:59:53 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Here's one from Karen who's from upstate, New York. Big territory. "Bill, I almost always agree with you, but you are really wrong on this one. The pilot did exactly the right thing. And anyone who believes a government ID cannot be forged is living in a fantasy."


(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-484 next last
To: Cultural Jihad
I'm glad someone else gets it.

Aside from his alleged behavior aboard the aircraft, the action the he took afterward disturbs me even more. What's the the deal with all the attorneys? It is clear that the agent is looking out for #1, which in my mind disqualifies him from the honor and dignity of his post.

41 posted on 01/04/2002 10:14:42 PM PST by pubmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pubmom
the=that (sorry)
42 posted on 01/04/2002 10:15:42 PM PST by pubmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
Had this flight been hijacked. The agent would not have been able to prevent it.

You make a good point. IMO from what I've read, the pilot knew he was SS. After denying boarding, he let the agent, an Arab, deplane, with a gun? If the pilot had a real doubt, we'd be reading about the agent's arguement with the National Guard & Dallas police, not the pilot.

43 posted on 01/04/2002 10:18:14 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
America cannot be and surely should never be a country which stubbornly asks, "your papahs pleez" and when they aren't totally right shouts, "verbotten!!!" Common sense should rule and it sure didn't here....

That's ridiculous. The "Your papers please" citation is when the Gestapo demands that of ordinary citizens, which is the opposite of what happened here. Now that there is a caste system in America where some people "lords" get to carry guns on planes, etc, when the rest of us "peasants" do not. In this case it is reasonable to require the lords to prove they are lords, and not peasants, or worse, terrorists, faking lordship.

44 posted on 01/04/2002 10:20:48 PM PST by coloradan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: The Westerner
That reasoning makes me uncomfortable.
Sure, the agent is only human, but considering the seriousness of his post he should be sober and in control when in public, even when not physically protecting the President.

Anything else would reflect poorly upon his character.

45 posted on 01/04/2002 10:20:49 PM PST by pubmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: pubmom
Aside from his alleged behavior aboard the aircraft, the action the he took afterward disturbs me even more. What's the the deal with all the attorneys? It is clear that the agent is looking out for #1, which in my mind disqualifies him from the honor and dignity of his post.

Exactly. If he wants to act no better than a Teamsters Union shop steward, then let him work at the Post Office or get a job in the private sector.

46 posted on 01/04/2002 10:21:46 PM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
He never let him board in the first place, and he left him with a policeman who was still checking out his ID.
47 posted on 01/04/2002 10:23:11 PM PST by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Have you heard of reasonable doubt? The same thing they apply to murder trial etc... Well the pilot has to be 100% certain the guy he's letting on that plane with a gun is authentic. The pilot has to be certain beyond an absolute doubt that the guy is a LEO. The pilot probably felt that the guy was more than likely an agent but didn't want to take that .001% chance that he isn't one.

I'm fairly certain that if a similar situation did happen and a terrorist did take down the plane you along with everyone else would be screaming that they should have refused him passage.

48 posted on 01/04/2002 10:23:17 PM PST by Bogey78O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
I was going to respond but when I saw the "Press" name I just hit abuse instead! Heh heh heh. Folks, no matter which side you come down on this issue, Bill Press is not the guy you want on your side. Peeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwww!
49 posted on 01/04/2002 10:25:04 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
The airline captain and the Secret Service agent should bury the hatchet and join forces to cancel Press's reservation!
50 posted on 01/04/2002 10:26:22 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999
If someone claiming to be a member of the Presidential Detail failed to fill out a form properly THREE times and then lost his temper because someone was insisting on checking out his credentials, I'd be awfully suspicious too.

He denied he filled out the paperwork wrong. He denied he ever acted in the least unprofessional. I have seen SS Agents they are stone cold. They never do anything but their job. They never have fun. This pilot is a liar. Go read yesterdays transcript for the Agents side.

Interview with John Relman, Chuck Vance

Aired January 3, 2002 - 19:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN RELMAN, ATTORNEY: Pure and simple, this is a case of discrimination.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BILL PRESS, CO-HOST: Was it discrimination or did an American Airlines pilot have good reason to boot an Arab-American Secret Service agent? Plus, a heated debate over new ads that take on the Catholic church's policy on condoms.

ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Tucker Carlson. In the CROSSFIRE, John Relman, attorney for the ejected Secret Service agent and former agent Chuck Vance, president of Vance International. And later, Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, and in New York, William Donohue, president of the Catholic league.

PRESS: Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

As you know at airports today, security is tight. So tight, a lot of people are getting extra scrutiny, but when one of President Bush's personal Secret Service agents by the name of Wahlid Shater (ph) got bounced off a plane last week, it created quite a stir.

American Airlines said he was booted because his paperwork was not in order. And besides, he appeared to be carrying a book that was believed to be written in Arabic. But his attorneys charge discrimination, insisting he was ejected only because he was Arab- American and that the book, in fact, was a history of the Middle East written in English.

Is this a case of racial discrimination? Have the airlines gone too far? Or are they just doing their job? We'll debate it. And then you might see a billboard like this one popping up in your neighborhood, condemning Catholic bishops for opposing the use of condoms. Fair play or Catholic bashing? That's next. But first, a Secret Service agent flunks airport security.

Tucker?

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Mr. Relman, here's the story, as I understand it. A man with a loaded gun boards an airplane. His papers are not in order. He admits they're not in order. He's asked to clarify them. He becomes belligerent and angry, He gets tossed off the plane. It makes total sense. I don't see a hint of discrimination in that. Where's the discrimination?

JOHN RELMAN, ATTORNEY FOR EJECTED SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Well that's American Airlines story, but it's actually not accurate at all. What happened was that there was nothing out of order with his papers. And he was not belligerent.

The only facts that are relevant here are whether American Airlines made a legitimate good faith effort to verify that he was a Secret Service agent, as he claimed to be. He was on his way to protect the President.

If that is the case, they need go no further. He gave them the numbers. He was prepared to cooperate in any way for them to call and verify who he was. The pilot refused to do it and he never made any good faith effort to do that.

In fact, the American Airlines statement that came out today says as much, that he said well, the number could have been a phony one. It could have been a fake one.

CARLSON: This good faith effort, well, let me ask you this. Now you haven't used his name on television. His name is Wahlid Shater (ph), apparently. You treat him like he's in the witness protection program. And my understanding is you acted that way because of fears for his safety concerns, that somehow safety will be jeopardized if we know his name.

And yet, you appear to have no understanding of the position of the pilot, who's in charge of this entire plane. A guy gets on with a loaded gun, gets mad, and all of a sudden, your position is that he didn't try hard enough to verify this guy's a Secret Service agent?

RELMAN: Well, first, let's say it. I mean, he didn't get mad. And second of all, the agent had requested that his name not be used. And we're respecting that request. But the fact of the matter is, the procedure is he shows his identification.

It's a badge. It's a photo ID. It's not something that can easily be faked. I think Chuck will address that. Again the only question is, we don't object to him being asked further questions. If they want to ask further questions, if they want to try and verify that he is who he says he is, that's perfectly appropriate. Let them do that. The point is he was there.

CARLSON: Well, quickly...

RELMAN: He gave numbers, but they didn't do it.

CARLSON: ...your position is American Airlines is lying about him being angry? That's what you seem to be saying?

RELMAN: That's correct. We say that our agent has said he was not angry. He did not act in any way that should have indicated there was a problem with him getting on the plane. He was not unprofessional in anyway.

PRESS: Chuck Vance, President Bush himself, because this is one of his agents, was asked last Friday actually his opinion on this case. Just had a quick statement on that. I'd like you to listen to please, if you will.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There's an inquiry going on specifically what took place, but if he was treated that way because of his ethnicity, that's -- that will make me madder than heck.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PRESS: Now I'd like to suggest to you why the President should be madder than heck. Mr. Relman just said he's a Secret Service agent. He's assigned to the President. In fact today, he was on his way to Crawford, Texas. Today, he was on duty in Crawford, Texas, guarding the President.

He had his badge. He had his credentials. He was carrying a gun. He had a government-issued ticket. There were three different law enforcement officials at the airport who checked his papers and verified that he was, in fact, a Secret Service agent, who he said he was. And yet the pilot, also the pilot was offered a Secret Service number or the White House number, refused to call.

Now wouldn't you have to say that maybe with the best of intentions, this pilot made a mistake? And American Airlines ought to just admit it and then it'd be all over?

CHUCK VANCE, FMR. SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Well, Bill, let me go on record real quick to say having been a Secret Service agent for 14 years, I certainly respect and admire the agent. And I know what it's like on Christmas Eve Day to go down to a place like Crawford, Texas.

On the other hand, we have to realize the circumstances here. We have -- you know, we lost two American Airlines jumbo jets September 11. We've had also had high alerts put out by the FBI and the Justice Department. We've got a man who has a set of credentials. And I'll disagree with John on that, is that I've seen Secret Service credentials. I've worked cases myself, that have been counterfeited. And there have, in fact, been federal agents or alleged federal agents who have gotten on board aircraft with false credentials and guns.

So consequently, that pilot was put in position to make a determination at that point. And not that I necessarily agree with him, but I think he had was justified somewhat in making it.

PRESS: Chuck, let me tell you something. (202) 456-1414, OK? It's the White House number.

VANCE: Right. PRESS: I mean, it's not hard to get. Why didn't he call the White House? Why didn't he call the number given him by the agent to say, is this one of your agents? And it's over with?

VANCE: OK. My answer is because he's not a security expert. He's a pilot. He's worried about getting that plane off the ground. He's worried about getting the passengers on. And he shouldn't be the one that makes the determination of whether or not that guy is valid or not valid.

RELMAN: And that's exactly the point. That's precisely the point of what this is all about. When you have untrained pilots, who are given unfettered discretion, you get what we saw this past week, which is Richard Reid walks on a plane, wires coming out of his sneakers. He's paying with cash. He has a newly minted passport, the whole works.

American Airlines defends the pilot's decision to keep him on the plane. On the other hand, they keep a Secret Service agent off the plane and they defend that as well.

VANCE: That's totally false.

RELMAN: And that's what happened...

(CROSS TALK)

CARLSON: Actually, Richard Reid was stopped in Paris, as you know, and kept off the plane, made to spend the night in Paris because of concerns...

PRESS: But he got on the plane the next day.

CARLSON: That's exactly right, but that's exactly my point. Your client was kept off a plane. He wasn't thrown in prison. You're claiming that his civil rights were violated here. The guy tries to gets on a plane with a loaded gun and his papers aren't in order, and he's not again, incarcerated, but just asked to get off the plane. How were his civil rights violated?

RELMAN: That's not true. If American Airlines could demonstrate why they didn't make the call to verify, that's all they had to do. This is not Richard Reid. All you need to get is one supervisor who says he is a Secret Service of the President. And you know what? I'd be happy to have him fly. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CARLSON: As you know, Mr. Relman, they've already answered that question in, I think, in a satisfactory way. They've said how do we know? He could provide the phone number of his brother-in-law or some fellow terrorist?

RELMAN: All...

CARLSON: My question to you is, hold on, American Airlines has come out with I think a pretty cogent story. You don't believe it, but it's still a story for why they kept him off the plane. No signature no phone number, they didn't know the Secret Service number. You have not provided a countervailing story for why this discrimination. There's no evidence.

RELMAN: The countervailing story, Tucker, is -- and you're just wrong about that because the countervailing story is that the discrepancy they talk about in the papers is that when he was moved from the first plane, which was mechanical failure to the second plane, the American Airlines agent crossed out the flight number because there are no new forms available at the gate, writes them in.

She was there, she was available, she could have provided the explanation. But instead, the pilot somehow uses that as an excuse after the fact to say this is why I didn't call the number. It all doesn't matter. If he is who he says he is, chuck would agree, everybody would agree, we want him on the plane. You know, this is like having an extra air marshall on the plane.

CARLSON: Sure, who he said he was. He had a loaded gun.

VANCE: The fact of the matter is that how do you determine? There needs to be a better system of determining that the man is an agent. If you've got a guy in these circumstances, coming on an aircraft with an gun.

Now when you talk about discrimination, I'm not sure you've got it, because how many other people were on that plane with guns that they didn't kick off?

RELMAN: But Chuck, here's why you've got it. You've got it because there's no other explanation why he doesn't call. He has a feeling about this guy. He sees him, he's Arabic-American.

Then a report comes from a flight attendant who rifled his possessions, found some books. She says it's Arabic material. And suddenly now, this is the reason why they say they're keeping him off the plane.

In fact, that's false. It was a book in English. It was a standard college text in English about Middle Eastern history. This is hysteria we are dealing with.

(CROSS TALK)

VANCE: We're dealing with hysteria, and that's exactly correct.

PRESS: Thank you. We are dealing with hysteria. And that's my point as well. So Chuck, you'd have to say, I mean from what -- I think you would agree, that whether the pilot acted rightly or wrongly, this is clearly a case of racial discrimination?

VANCE: Well no, I would agree that it's a case of racial discrimination. My point was, how many other people that were coming on board with a gun did they eject from the aircraft? There was only one man. And he just happened to be an Arab-American.

PRESS: Well, I don't know how many of those had guns, but let me ask you this.

(CROSS TALK)

VANCE: There was nobody else on that plane.

PRESS: Put it this way, if this guy were an Anglo agent named John Smith, he would have been in Crawford, Texas. He would've been on that plane. And you know that's true.

VANCE: You know what I think, Bill? I think these pilots, and I've seen it before because I've seen it in my experience, they're very concerned about anybody going on those aircraft with a gun. So they'll look. And particularly in these circumstances, they'll look for a reason.

(CROSS TALK)

CARLSON: Now (UNINTELLIGIBLE), just the moment we have left here. I sense a payoff here. You've said that you're not going to be asking for monetary damages. You're not seeking any money. I expect that's subject to change. Will you pledge here that you're not going to take money from American Airlines for the supposed civil rights violation?

RELMAN: We represent our client. Our client has said that if there were money in a settlement, that it would go to the victims.

CARLSON: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) or not?

RELMAN: Right now, there's no lawsuit. Right now, we're trying to engage...

CARLSON: Are you planning to ask for money in a lawsuit is the question?

RELMAN: What we want from American Airlines is we want American Airlines to implement procedures and policies and training for these pilots because there's...

CARLSON: Do you want money is my simple question. Are you going to ask for money?

RELMAN: The answer is no, we are not going to ask for money. We are asking American Airlines to changes the procedures and policies or to implement new procedures and policies, so that these pilots don't go untrained. Because you know, any kind of profiling like this is bad security. It's bad security because you overlook people who should be examined. And you focus only on certain types of people.

CARLSON: Mr. Relman, Mr. Vance, thank you both very much for joining us. We appreciate it.

test
51 posted on 01/04/2002 10:27:46 PM PST by ImphClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
I seriously doubt Bill Press would have reversed himself without very compeling evidence...

Bill Press does not take a position based on any evidence, no matter what the evidence is. He is a nut.

52 posted on 01/04/2002 10:27:55 PM PST by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
IMO from what I've read, the pilot knew he was SS. After denying boarding, he let the agent, an Arab, deplane, with a gun? If the pilot had a real doubt, we'd be reading about the agent's arguement with the National Guard & Dallas police, not the pilot.

Hmm, this is worth further conjecture (and that's all it is): Say the pilot was satisfied that the guy was a SS agent. But, due to the agent's behavior, the pilot decided the agent was not stable enough to be allowed on the flight, particularly with a weapon. It's still the pilot's call. That would explain why there was no report made of an imposter SS agent. Before the pilot could get around to filing a report for unprofessional conduct, the agent already had a lawyer and a camera crew.


Socialists in Congress? Click on the zeppelin, Grasshopper.

53 posted on 01/04/2002 10:28:19 PM PST by EdZep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Put yourself in the pilot's shoes for one minute. Does the name 'Reid' mean anything to you? Of the four highjacked planes on 9-11, how many were owned by American Airlines? What about the plane that crashed in New York one month later when the tail 'fell off'. My husband was sitting on the tarmac during this incident, wondering why his flight was delayed for one hour, when the pilot informed the passengers of what had happened and offered to let anyone who felt uncomfortable with the situation to deplane. He said that about six people got off.
54 posted on 01/04/2002 10:32:07 PM PST by fellowpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
Forget the paperwork...who fills out paper work exactly right anyway?

In this situation, if it's not filled out exactly right, then there are problems. The agent has admitted to not properly filling out the paperwork for carrying a weapon; not once, but twice. He also admitted to losing his temper with the Captain because he was asked for his ID five separate times.

55 posted on 01/04/2002 10:37:26 PM PST by Tennessee_Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
CHUCK VANCE, FMR. SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Well, Bill, let me go on record real quick to say having been a Secret Service agent for 14 years, I certainly respect and admire the agent. And I know what it's like on Christmas Eve Day to go down to a place like Crawford, Texas.

On the other hand, we have to realize the circumstances here. We have -- you know, we lost two American Airlines jumbo jets September 11. We've had also had high alerts put out by the FBI and the Justice Department. We've got a man who has a set of credentials. And I'll disagree with John on that, is that I've seen Secret Service credentials. I've worked cases myself, that have been counterfeited. And there have, in fact, been federal agents or alleged federal agents who have gotten on board aircraft with false credentials and guns. So consequently, that pilot was put in position to make a determination at that point. And not that I necessarily agree with him, but I think he had was justified somewhat in making it.

This says it all. BTW, just how long would you hold up a couple hundred passengers while you made phone calls to check this guy out? After waiting for him to try THREE times to fill out the forms?

56 posted on 01/04/2002 10:38:17 PM PST by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: fellowpatriot
I did. The first thing I would have done is call the White House. I would have done this before saying anything to the agent. The number is not exactly hard to find as it is in every phone book in the United States and many foreign countries. Then had the guy been a fruad he would have gone straight to jail not on through the airport sith a loaded gun.
57 posted on 01/04/2002 10:42:34 PM PST by ImphClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O
Check Your Facts.

See Post 51. This is the other side you seem to be ignoring. This pilot is as big a liar as Bill Clintoon. Probably as big a Democrat as well.

I believe he did this on purpose to cause Bush problems then made sure the situation got reported in the news.

58 posted on 01/04/2002 10:42:41 PM PST by ImphClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
The president ordered this man on to this flight to protect the President.
The President has very limited control of the actions of Secret Service Agents!!

This Captain had no right to refuse passage without even bothering to call a local number.
Yes, he did!!

None of the terroist managed to get a gun through security.
But one asshole got a pair of plastic-explosive shoes through!

Did this Captain check with the Agents supervisor.
No, he didn't have to!.

Did he make any attempt to verify the agents identy.
No, he didn't have to!.

Worse of ass as Bill said he never reported the incident to authorities until he was called on the carpte.
This one I don't know what you mean!

Your attitude is best displayed by your own quote,"What good are Air Marshals if stupid Pilots will not even allow SS Agents on planes."

59 posted on 01/04/2002 10:45:15 PM PST by Nitro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
What the hell are you talking about? What fact am I getting wrong?
60 posted on 01/04/2002 10:45:19 PM PST by Bogey78O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-484 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson