United Airlines is being sued by two passengers over an incident that occurred on a flight several weeks back, as reported by Live and Let’s Fly. I’m not sure what to make of this, because the claims are pretty wild.
In this post:
United accused of anti-Semitism in constipation debacle
This incident happened on January 28, 2025, on United flight UA1601, the 829-mile journey from Tulum (TQO) to Houston (IAH).
The two plaintiffs are Yisroel Liebb and Jacob Sebbag, and they claim that the occurrences of that flight have caused them to “undergo significant unwarranted delay in their travel plans, physical injuries, great discomfort, extreme emotional distress, public embarrassment, and anxiety associated with publicly wearing their religious garb,” plus one of the plaintiffs feels “sexually violated and embarrassed after having been publicly exposed in the nude.”
Wait, how on earth did all of this happen during an inflight incident?! Let’s cover the basics, according to the plaintiffs:
- Soon after takeoff, Liebb went to the lavatory at the back of the aircraft
- Around 20 minutes later, one of the flight attendants woke up Sebbag, his travel companion who was at his seat (next to him), and asked him if everything was okay with Liebb
- Sebbag went to the back of the plane and asked Liebb through the lavatory door if everything was okay; he said everything was fine, but he was constipated, and needed some more time
- About 10 minutes later, Sebbag was reportedly approached by a pilot, and asked to approach the lavatory once again, and get Liebb to exit the lavatory
- The pilot began yelling loudly at Liebb, demanding he leave the bathroom immediately; Liebb responded by saying he was just finishing up, and would be out momentarily
- The pilot “became visibly enraged, broke the lock on the door and forced the door to the bathroom open, pulling Liebb out of the bathroom with his pants still around his ankles, exposing his genitalia to Sebbag, several flight attendants, and the nearby passengers on the plane”
- With Sebbag leading Liebb, the pilot proceeded to repeatedly push the plaintiffs back to their seats, while making threats of getting the plaintiffs arrested, and making “scathing remarks about their Judaism, and how ‘Jews act'”
- Upon landing in Houston, five to seven agents from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) boarded the aircraft, approached Liebb, pulled him from his seat with his arms behind his back, cuffed him, and began escorting him to the front of the plane
- Sebbag was asked if he knew Liebb, and when he said that he did, he was also escorted off the plane, and later handcuffed
- While being escorted off the plane, Liebb stated he had a legal right to know why they were being detained, and the officer responded by saying “this isn’t county or state, we are homeland, you have no rights here,” and then further tightened his handcuffs
Liebb claims to have suffered injuries to his head and legs from being forcefully pulled into the bathroom door frame, as he was being ejected from the bathroom. He also claims to have had severe wrist pain from being handcuffed too tightly.
The lawsuit also states that the injuries were further worsened by the anti-Semitic remarks. It’s also mentioned how Sebbag was only associated with this because they were both “obviously Jewish, having been dressed in their traditional Jewish garb.”
My take on this strange United lavatory incident
Airlines get sued all the time, though this has to be one of the most bizarre airline lawsuits we’ve seen in a long while.
To start, let me state that if there was in fact commentary from a United employee about how “Jews act,” that’s completely unacceptable, and that person should be reprimanded (to be clear, that commentary isn’t appropriate from anyone, but this is a lawsuit targeted at a company, while individual speech can’t be restricted in the same way).
Furthermore, if facts are as presented, it’s absurd that the friend was taken off the plane and ultimately handcuffed, because I don’t see what he supposedly did wrong. That does indeed seem anti-Semitic, since he was basically being punished by association (not unlike that Lufthansa incident a while back).
All that being said, to what extent did the crew cross the line in terms of trying to get the passenger out of the lavatory? While airlines don’t have any formal restrictions on the amount of time for which you can use a lavatory, crew members are supposed to be vigilant and address any suspicious activity. I think it’s safe to say that spending 30+ minutes in a lavatory is a little suspicious, especially when you’re told to leave, and then don’t comply.
Passengers are supposed to comply with crew member instructions, though admittedly that’s for things related to safety. That’s to say that if a flight attendant tells you to do a handstand, you don’t have to cooperate. However, I think it could reasonably be concluded that they had a legitimate reason to have a safety concern.
If you’re warned after 20 minutes that you need to get out of the bathroom ASAP, and if you then take another 10 minutes, and then still don’t leave when you’re told to, then I think it’s safe to say you’re not cooperating with the crew.
Now, just a couple more observations:
- I know there’s a claim that a pilot “broke the lock on the door,” but keep in mind there’s nothing to break; airplane lavatories open from both sides, and there’s a simple latch that just needs to be slid over
- I’m curious about the claim of a pilot being involved here; I can’t imagine one of the two on duty pilots would go to the back of the aircraft inflight on a US carrier, so was this an off-duty pilot, a flight attendant who was mistaken for a pilot, or what?
As far as the CBP’s behavior goes, I mean, I can’t say I’m surprised. They’re often kind of thug-like, and I don’t think there’s anything new there.
Bottom line
A man is suing United Airlines after a flight that he took several weeks back, while constipated. Long story short, he spent 30 or more minutes in the lavatory, and despite repeated requests to leave, he continued to say he needed more time. He was eventually dragged out of the bathroom. Upon landing, CBP was called, and took him off the plane.
If any anti-Semitic remarks were made, that’s of course completely unacceptable. That being said, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for the crew to have concerns if someone spends so much in the lavatory, and isn’t willing to leave.
What do you make of this United lavatory incident?
Zionists trying to claim complete ownership of something that is not theirs. And claiming antisemitism when challenged.
How unsurprising.
The lavatory was promised to them 3000 years ago
There must have been about 20 different articles about this incident on the "Boarding Area". All starting with "anti semitism". You get all the Gary Leff's & Cohen's riled up as soon as you mention Jewish passengers. Are there any Bloggers that are not Jewish? Sam Chui ? Maybe closet? Must be a lot of $$$$$$$$ in Blogging Business like Diamonds & Gold.
From an efficiency standpoint, this is a remarkable comment. In one little comment you managed to
1. Stereotype Jews as overly tribal / sensitive (the "riled up" bit)
2. Reference the 'jews control the media' slur and extend it to blogs
3. Imply that "closet" Jews are influential in the travel blogging space
4. Invoke the slur that Jews are obsessed with money ("Diamonds & Gold" + Diamonds & Gold")
Antisemitism is not a good look.
Toilet visits on planes should be limited to 5 minutes. It is beyond selfish to hog the loo.
Make no allowance for medical necessity. Would you prefer the passenger defecate in their seat?
Makes absolutely no sense. They may have been doing something else inside the bathroom. They think being Jew allows them to make up stories and be believed, sure, pass the popcorn
This speculation lacks any basis in the article. You cannot determine the passengers' motives from the available information, and your assertion that "being Jewish allows them to make up stories and be believed" is plainly antisemitic.
Why isn't anyone asking the most important question? Was he hung?
I think it's easy to forget the pilots have full authority on their planes and it's a safety concern to not be able to observe any one passenger's activities for such an extended time. No matter what you claim you suffer from, after a reasonable time which was given and a first injunction to come out, it is demonstrating bad faith not to pull up your undies and show you're not doing anything reprehensible and...
I think it's easy to forget the pilots have full authority on their planes and it's a safety concern to not be able to observe any one passenger's activities for such an extended time. No matter what you claim you suffer from, after a reasonable time which was given and a first injunction to come out, it is demonstrating bad faith not to pull up your undies and show you're not doing anything reprehensible and kindly request more time in the bathroom.
This passenger decided to ignore crew instructions, esp. instructions from pilot who is the authority in charge of the safety of the airplane and its dozens of souls. For all they knew this passenger could have faked their identity and health problems and could have been preparing something much worse than what they were trying to... brew.
So from that end the crew reaction is justified and the passenger was not acting in good faith and faces the typical issues anyone interfering with air crew instructions.
The claims of discrimination will be a game of he said he said however there should be dozens of witnesses to clarify exactly what was said.
As for the second passenger it's not clear from their record what owed them to be arrested too. I could imagine that if that person had tried to prevent the crew from opening the toilets to preserve their acquaintance's privacy they would have been obstructing an air crew from performing safety related duties which is the same violation as the first passenger.
Considering harsh handling proportionate use of force will have to be demonstrated again the story here is one sided.
As usual with this kind of public outrage there is a lot of exaggeration to better the initial case. As usual we will probably never know the end game.
Security cameras are now standard in modern trains. Comsidering the increases in theft in premium classes and the amount of those incidents one has to wonder why this is not becoming a standard in aviation too ? Airports are full of them too. Why not planes ?
Your argument fails on multiple fronts: pilot authority is legally limited, no bad faith by the passenger has been established, and your speculation reveals bias against the two passengers in question.
1. While 14 CFR 91.3 and 121.533 grant pilots authority, judicial precedent limits this power to "reasonable exercise" - forcibly exposing a passenger's genitals is clearly unreasonable.
2. No bad faith is proven here - the passenger communicated their medical situation and remained responsive...
Your argument fails on multiple fronts: pilot authority is legally limited, no bad faith by the passenger has been established, and your speculation reveals bias against the two passengers in question.
1. While 14 CFR 91.3 and 121.533 grant pilots authority, judicial precedent limits this power to "reasonable exercise" - forcibly exposing a passenger's genitals is clearly unreasonable.
2. No bad faith is proven here - the passenger communicated their medical situation and remained responsive throughout.
3. Your speculation about "something worse" being prepared lacks any evidentiary basis.
4. The companion's detention is indefensible - even the airline notes no infractions by this passenger.
5. The public humiliation through forced exposure is documented by multiple witnesses.
Your willingness to fabricate scenarios while extending unquestioning deference to airline personnel and authorities reflects clear bias rather than reasoned analysis.
1. The alleged exposure of genitals is a consequence of the passenger failing to cloth themselves despite being warned the door would be open. The airline employees acted in good faith and their actions opening the door to remove the recalcitrant passenger is part of reasonable exercise, but you are apparently somehow financially interesting in clogging the us judicial system with yet another litigation on the subject.
2. Communication is not sufficient to ensure...
1. The alleged exposure of genitals is a consequence of the passenger failing to cloth themselves despite being warned the door would be open. The airline employees acted in good faith and their actions opening the door to remove the recalcitrant passenger is part of reasonable exercise, but you are apparently somehow financially interesting in clogging the us judicial system with yet another litigation on the subject.
2. Communication is not sufficient to ensure safety the crew needs to be able to see you. Nothing in this passenger condition prevented them from pulling up their undies except bad faith and the will to make a scandal out of this. Which they obviously did.
3. The fact the passenger insisted on staying hidden for extended period of time does not allow excluding other motives compared to visually inspecting the premises. This is a simple principle of precaution. The safety of the dozens of the other passengers, the airlines' assets and the people going about their lives in the flight path predates the right of this person to be allegedly naked for as long as they seem necessary.
4. The airline had not released a statement at time of my writing comment. Please provide evidence of the airline substantiating your claim
5. The humiliation can be a result of a condition created by the passenger. The fact that the situation is humiliating is not in itself attributable to the airline.
Your willingness to only consider the one sided perspective and your urge to fabricate unsubstantiated facts and to try to out me in an adversary position seems to indicate you intend to profit directly or indirectly from this kind of situation being litigated in favour of that person rather than really being interested in a smoothly functionning safe air transport system. Everyone has to eat, but there are more honorable ways to earns one's daily bread than others.
Barb, your response continues making unsubstantiated assumptions:
1. Courts have consistently ruled that "reasonable exercise" of authority doesn't include forcibly exposing passengers. Constipation is a legitimate medical condition, not "recalcitrance."
2. The passenger maintained verbal communication throughout - they weren't hidden or unresponsive. Your assumption of "bad faith" contradicts basic medical understanding of constipation, which can genuinely prevent immediate compliance.
3. Your "other motives" speculation lacks any evidential basis. The legal standard requires demonstrable threats,...
Barb, your response continues making unsubstantiated assumptions:
1. Courts have consistently ruled that "reasonable exercise" of authority doesn't include forcibly exposing passengers. Constipation is a legitimate medical condition, not "recalcitrance."
2. The passenger maintained verbal communication throughout - they weren't hidden or unresponsive. Your assumption of "bad faith" contradicts basic medical understanding of constipation, which can genuinely prevent immediate compliance.
3. Your "other motives" speculation lacks any evidential basis. The legal standard requires demonstrable threats, not hypothetical scenarios.
4. The article clearly states both passengers were detained despite the companion having committed no infractions.
5. Blaming the victim for humiliation caused by forced removal with pants down is textbook victim-blaming.
Your unfounded accusation that I have financial interest in litigation, rather than genuine concern about proportional response and civil rights, suggests you've run out of substantive arguments.
Aviation safety is crucial, but it doesn't require humiliating passengers with medical conditions. Both can be accommodated through reasonable protocols.
The accusations are so wild that even if only partially true that's really bad.
I think the only thing we can be sure of so far is that CBP is full of asshole high-school dropouts who get off on harassing people.
It’s called Depends. Passages needs to do better
Depends are used for incontinence, not constipation.
Concur with Dan. June, your comments do not apply to these passengers.
Simple.
Crew are meant to monitor the lavatory in particular for two main reasons - one, passengers often get up to no good in there (smoking, sex etc).
- two, someone unwell will often go to the toilet and may subsequently pass out.
If you are in the lav for over twenty minutes (which is excessive) and a crew member is knocking on the door either shout through the door or pull your pants...
Simple.
Crew are meant to monitor the lavatory in particular for two main reasons - one, passengers often get up to no good in there (smoking, sex etc).
- two, someone unwell will often go to the toilet and may subsequently pass out.
If you are in the lav for over twenty minutes (which is excessive) and a crew member is knocking on the door either shout through the door or pull your pants up for a sec, crack it open and say that you are constipated/not very well etc etc.
Where has people's common sense gone??
Why can no one just do something 'normal' and say 'yes I am alive I am just feeling unwell so will be a while longer'.
Jeez.
He did reply exactly the way you described. The question is why we once again see a US crew escalating an issue (or in this case a non-issue) rather than de-escalating and defusing the situation. Even if they felt compelled to open the door, which let's say would be borderline okay, there's no need to violently pull a naked person out of the bathroom. Not to mention CBS handcuffing the guy for apparently no reason...
He did reply exactly the way you described. The question is why we once again see a US crew escalating an issue (or in this case a non-issue) rather than de-escalating and defusing the situation. Even if they felt compelled to open the door, which let's say would be borderline okay, there's no need to violently pull a naked person out of the bathroom. Not to mention CBS handcuffing the guy for apparently no reason and then his travel companion too. There's no justification for either of those actions, this is not how civilised society work. Spending too much time on a toilet doesn't make you a criminal.
Samo is correct. More of this strange obsession with control and dominance no matter what. Lotta that going on around here in this country lately...
Two basic rules of life: 1. Don't ever book flights on US carriers. 2. If at all possible, avoid travel to the US.
This is some soviet Russia level of crazy, forcefully pulling naked people out of the toilet, and handcuffing clearly non-threatening public while claiming they have no rights.
The one sounding crazy here is you. And if you think the US is 'soviet Russia level of crazy', do enjoy traveling to the ~10% of the world that meets your ideological expectations.
Let's not make conclusions based on one side of the story. While I do not doubt that there is truth to their story, I would be interested to find out more. I am sure that those who sat near them and the lavatory will be interviewed. They have information that could provide another perspective.
I have noticed throughout life, that when people make grand statements, many times it is to paint a picture that would otherwise be ...... bland.
That looks good overall, but there are a few small issues to fix:
Classic deflection - both sides-ing whilst not taking into account documented patterns of abuse at CBP. 211 officers under investigation as of 2024. A recent study showing 173 corruption cases across 69 locations. Evidence that 58 of 60 agents who posted violent and racist content kept their jobs.
These passengers have alleged this behavior in a time of rising antisemitism. ADL...
That looks good overall, but there are a few small issues to fix:
Classic deflection - both sides-ing whilst not taking into account documented patterns of abuse at CBP. 211 officers under investigation as of 2024. A recent study showing 173 corruption cases across 69 locations. Evidence that 58 of 60 agents who posted violent and racist content kept their jobs.
These passengers have alleged this behavior in a time of rising antisemitism. ADL reported in early 2025 that 46% of adults globally hold antisemitic beliefs - the highest level on record. Whether it's the Lufthansa incident, the Kenya Airways incident, or the JetBlue incident in 2023, we've seen this pattern repeatedly.
All this combined gives more benefit of the doubt to the passengers than the airline or CBP.
@Both Sides Argument -- Although we cannot ignore the facts you have stated, we cannot use them to convict those accused either. Because if we do, making a predetermination of a human being based on the assigned label we give them, would make us just as guilty as those we condemn for doing so.
@ Don -- No intent to convict anyone. Merely a response to your anecdotal characterization "I have noticed throughout life, that when people make grand statements, many times it is to paint a picture that would otherwise be ...... bland."
My intent was to demonstrate reasons to be skeptical of airline and crew claims, and to indicate that antisemitism and broader abuse of authority by airline personnel and authorities are broadly and recently documented.
"I know there’s a claim that a pilot “broke the lock on the door,” but keep in mind there’s nothing to break"
The fact that this claim was made and we know it's almost certainly false makes me discount everything else claimed as grossly distorted or embellished. Everyone sounds right when they tell their side of the story, I'd bet new details come out from FAs or passengers that contradict the claims, that show the...
"I know there’s a claim that a pilot “broke the lock on the door,” but keep in mind there’s nothing to break"
The fact that this claim was made and we know it's almost certainly false makes me discount everything else claimed as grossly distorted or embellished. Everyone sounds right when they tell their side of the story, I'd bet new details come out from FAs or passengers that contradict the claims, that show the men were belligerent, there was some other aggravating factor here.
They didn't "break down the door". They have the ability to unlock and open the door from the outside, for obvious reasons (someone passes out, or truly a bad actor is up to no good). Who knows what happened. The bottom line is, they were told to get out and they didn't comply. So they play the victim card hoping to get some money. As far as CBP, they are aggressive but they were correct...
They didn't "break down the door". They have the ability to unlock and open the door from the outside, for obvious reasons (someone passes out, or truly a bad actor is up to no good). Who knows what happened. The bottom line is, they were told to get out and they didn't comply. So they play the victim card hoping to get some money. As far as CBP, they are aggressive but they were correct in saying "you dont have rights". Most people do not realize that at a point of entry, even for citizens, you can be detained and questions, and they do not have to tell you why at first. You have zero rights upon entry, you can be searched and detailed , without case and they don't have to tell you why.
@Chad @Fed UP The fixation on "broke the lock" terminology is a distraction - airplane lavatory doors can be forcibly opened, potentially damaging components. More importantly, a passenger was removed with pants down, exposing them publicly.
Rejecting all claims based on perceived inaccuracy in one detail reveals clear bias. If this standard applied equally, any airline inaccuracy would invalidate their entire account.
While CBP has extensive border authority, "you have no rights here" is legally...
@Chad @Fed UP The fixation on "broke the lock" terminology is a distraction - airplane lavatory doors can be forcibly opened, potentially damaging components. More importantly, a passenger was removed with pants down, exposing them publicly.
Rejecting all claims based on perceived inaccuracy in one detail reveals clear bias. If this standard applied equally, any airline inaccuracy would invalidate their entire account.
While CBP has extensive border authority, "you have no rights here" is legally false.
Constitutional protections against excessive force and discrimination apply even at entry points.
The rush to label victims as "playing a card" when multiple witnesses confirmed public humiliation shows the same prejudice as the original assumptions about the passengers' motives.
Personally, I usually have the complete opposite problem each time I visit Mexico, despite being very cautious there (not drinking anything with ice, avoiding fresh veggies, etc.).
Yes, and many are aware of prescription drugs that stop the "complete other problem" to an extent that it may become constipation. I travel with such drugs but have been instructed to avoid use.
Most tourists returning from Mexico rarely have a problem with constipation. Often they are making a beeline to the lav and asking to move the cart so they can get by quickly before something worse occurs.
I wonder why he didn't use the toilets at the airport - I've travelled throughout Mexico and always find the toilets in the airports to be spotless.
This must have been a "What a Dump".
You dummy, constipation is the opposite of diarrhea
This is most likely what went down.
Passenger occupied the lav for excessive amounts of time. Pilot needed to urgently use the restroom. Dude still wouldn't come out. Pilot got angry and then opened up the bathroom, which resulted in this altercation
Pilots don’t go to the back of the plane to use the lav.
Frequent fliers know that.
Not a credible theory.
For a second there I thought I was reading View from the Wing
Before I settled into something I was actually decent at, I worked frontline in healthcare for several years. Constipation, like priapism, might seem funny on face value but a severe episode (for various reasons: poor diet, underlying disease, medication, etc.) is a very distressing and difficult experience for the sufferer.
There should be a little more consideration in flights that when we all have to share bathrooms, we all have to share the difficulties...
Before I settled into something I was actually decent at, I worked frontline in healthcare for several years. Constipation, like priapism, might seem funny on face value but a severe episode (for various reasons: poor diet, underlying disease, medication, etc.) is a very distressing and difficult experience for the sufferer.
There should be a little more consideration in flights that when we all have to share bathrooms, we all have to share the difficulties some of us might have in the bathroom. All that said, the crew invoking the religion or ethnicity into this conflict is wild. I hope that's a significant distortion of what really occurred.
I can tell you are flushed for story lines and something like this article is not important and would send anyone around the S bend. Why is this even covered here?
.. because its Ben's blog .. and I think he may be plumbing the depths of ridiculous and strained behaviour. :-)
I never understood why some people like to travel in cult uniform. Surely better to pack it in your luggage, wear something more comfortable for travel, then enjoy your traditions with fellow cultists once at your destination ?
What uniform?
I don't think one person wore 2nd amendment shirt, MAGA hat, and a Tesla pin.
The other wore a rainbow color pro-choice shirt, climate change hat and some flag pin.
Hey Henry Young. First, it's not a cult. Second, it's an article of faith to dress modestly, with subtle differences in attire signaling membership in different Hasidic subgroups. It's an important element of faith and culture. Three, did your mother teach you to behave this rudely?
Don't be silly - all organized religion is a cult. Some are bigger and more long standing then others, but they are ALL mind control cults.
Your comments are clearly bigoted. How narrow-minded and dunderheaded of you to assert that your worldview is the only correct one. Strong Dunning–Kruger vibes here.
Bro, genuinely, are you out of your mind? Or are you so insecure that you feel that opening your mouth about something you know nothing about will finally give you some form of identity?
Speaking of identity, jewish people have been dressing in a certain way for thousands of years. It's a beautiful tradition. The saddest part is you will not get to smell or taste that beauty because with your head this far up your ass all you'll smell is shit.
I think everyone on the plane got to "smell" the tradition this time ;)
Certainly nothing wrong with the first part - FA having companion go back and check. People could pass out, have a heart attack etc. so worth checking. Beyond that - bizarre.
I don't think the issue was the welfare check part. It's being caught with your pants down part that is the issue here.
I wonder what would happen if these 2 were to go to an onsen in Japan.
There are generally only 2 WCs for economy passengers. What about the other passengers who have to Go Now but can't because of a guy who Can't Go? And maybe seat belt signs were on and you were told to go back to your seats?
No worries ... the other pax were 'constipated' as well , so no problem !
Lol..... Your last sentence sounds like the opening for a (maybe tasteless ? .lol) joke ! ....
Oats, whole-grain bread, fruits and vegetables, beans - all high fiber, and all kosher, all delicious.
And drink lots of water
It is also likely that he previously had a travelers stomach issue and then took a drug which slowed down his system.
Fiber is actually the problem. Fiber causes constipation.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3435786/
@NE, that is not what the article says. It says additional fiber doesn't cure constipation, which they speculate is because adding bulky mass to the colon makes it harder to move the bowels, not easier. But literally centuries of experience and medical knowledge tell us that sufficient fiber *prevents* constipation to begin with, given the absence of some medical cause that fiber is insufficient to interfere with.
@Lucky Unfortunately extreme constipation, particularly caused by medication, can make it difficult to “finish up”. The feeling that it is right there at the end but not out can be horribly uncomfortable and difficult to move. It’s lalmost like saying “well if you have bad diarrhea, just hold it”. Not controllable that easily.
You are trying to give us a lecture about a problem that is as common as it can be. Why attempting to go sitting in a toilet box of an 800 mile flight -which should be available to the other pax, what about their distress if they get urgency and its occupied btw- and not wait for the arrival, setting yourself up for
‘extreme emotional distress’? Not only this case should be tossed immediately,...
You are trying to give us a lecture about a problem that is as common as it can be. Why attempting to go sitting in a toilet box of an 800 mile flight -which should be available to the other pax, what about their distress if they get urgency and its occupied btw- and not wait for the arrival, setting yourself up for
‘extreme emotional distress’? Not only this case should be tossed immediately, but the greedy malicious lawyer who helped bring this one more frivolous case forward, wasting the public resources associated with a court of law, should be disbarred. The law should be a serious matter not a pathetic attempt at money grub by frustrated adults
@lasdiner - Your comments reflect someone who has no functional knowledge of the law and a strong affinity for sucking up to authority figures even at the expense of common sense.
KRAMER: But now I have a big problem, buddy.
JERRY: What is it?
KRAMER: Well, I waited so long I-- I missed my chance.
JERRY: You didn't go?
KRAMER: No. And now I can't get it back.
(George gives back the sandwich to Jerry and immediately runs to the bathroom.)
JERRY: The best thing to do is just not think about it.
KRAMER: How could you not think about it?
Not shocked by the Stasi-like CPB behavior. Also speaks to a broader problem with much of US policing. There's far too much of that "warrior" or "command and control" approach to civilian interactions. Emphasizing establishment of immediate dominance and gaining compliance through shows of force instead of approaching nonthreatening members of the public in a manner focused on deescalation is not productive.
Police and CPB are far too quick to escalate quickly when the person...
Not shocked by the Stasi-like CPB behavior. Also speaks to a broader problem with much of US policing. There's far too much of that "warrior" or "command and control" approach to civilian interactions. Emphasizing establishment of immediate dominance and gaining compliance through shows of force instead of approaching nonthreatening members of the public in a manner focused on deescalation is not productive.
Police and CPB are far too quick to escalate quickly when the person they're dealing with poses no immediate threat. If you're not compliant to the point of subservience, you can get mistreated very badly, even when you're just trying to get through a moment of misunderstanding.
Tl;dr - we shouldn't live in fear of official interaction, and its starting to get that way more and more.
Coming from Mexico, there could have been a suspicion that they were hiding drugs.
What documented injury did they sustain? The lawsuit has 2 claims, injury and delay. Their delay resulted in a free hotel room.
They are suing in the administrative law courts of the Department of Homeland Security, which is tough. I do not think, based on the caption of their complaint, that they are suing in federal district court, Southern District of NY.
You can guarantee that the crew never made any anti semitic remarks. Americans add discrimination with the hope they will get more compensation. There’s also more to this story than they are claiming. What if there was no response and they thought he had fainted ?
Apt name for someone who's flown too close to the sun on this one:
You cannot reasonably "guarantee" the crew never made anti-semitic remarks - you weren't there
There's no evidence supporting your claim that Americans routinely fabricate discrimination allegations for compensation
Most discrimination claims face significant hurdles and scrutiny in the legal system, not easy paydays
Ironically, you admit "there's more to this story" while simultaneously claiming absolute certainty about what didn't happen
Apt name for someone who's flown too close to the sun on this one:
You cannot reasonably "guarantee" the crew never made anti-semitic remarks - you weren't there
There's no evidence supporting your claim that Americans routinely fabricate discrimination allegations for compensation
Most discrimination claims face significant hurdles and scrutiny in the legal system, not easy paydays
Ironically, you admit "there's more to this story" while simultaneously claiming absolute certainty about what didn't happen
If someone claimed Icarus was a defective moron, I would not argue.
Your knee-jerk comments about Americans aren't just obsessive, they're not the flexes you think they are. But you seem to lack self-awareness and decorum, unlike the vast majority of your fellow Brits.
Let me say NOT ONLY Americans
Everyone adds discrimination hoping to score a settlement
There's no validity to your assertion here Lasdiner. It may feel correct to you. That doesn't make it correct.
DansDeals will have a field day over this.
Hasid Dan, the rainmaker of anti-semitism trips.
Actually, Dan usually stays hands off until there is more concrete information. It is too easy to get jumped on by those calling him Hasid.
But he brings us great deals everyday, maybe except on Shabbat.
Not to get too graphic but constipation also means slow bowel movement which could lead to needing more time!
Very unfortunate story - there’s just a lack of general kindness going around :/
I strongly concur with this sentiment. Lots of assumptions and overall rudeness going around,
A bunch of grifters looking for a quick settlement. I guess this moron didn't think anyone else might need to use the lav.
Two things George:
1) Fascinating to see you've jumped to the conclusion that these passengers are grifters when there is clearly more going on here
2) Equally if not more fascinating that you seem to have carved out a significant part of your identity from issuing hot takes on frequent flyer sites like this one and View from the Wing. I've only been looking at these sites recently and you are very, very present
haha George is just another troll and there's no use reasoning with him/her/whatever
Evidence suggests George is a coward as well.
Yup! That's George! Lobbing an accusation he know he can't back up and then scampering away with his tail between his leg.
Their conduct is generally reprehensible.
Whose conduct? The passengers? The crew? The security team?
Everyone who actively chose to fly United…
lol fair