[untitled]
6 comments
[deleted]
I flew Air Canada last year and the service was shockingly bad, both ways. The worst I have experienced. So it is no big surprise to see this.
What's odd is the article contradicts itself on who exactly was aggressively questioning/profiling him. At one point they are described as "Air Canada officials" and another "by immigration control."
And foreign countries do commonly have immigration officials/security services questioning passengers boarding aircraft to their respective countries. For example I've had extra screening by US officials when boarding an aircraft to the US in London (not claiming to the same degree or for the same reason as what occurred in the article).
And foreign countries do commonly have immigration officials/security services questioning passengers boarding aircraft to their respective countries. For example I've had extra screening by US officials when boarding an aircraft to the US in London (not claiming to the same degree or for the same reason as what occurred in the article).
The title seems to contradict the content. Halfway through the article it's made clear that he was still able to travel as planned. Being pulled aside for an additional security check and then allowed to board is not "stopped from boarding flight".
Is selection for additional screening normally refered to as being “stopped from boarding”?
Title is false. He was selected for additional screening and he doesn't have any proof that it was because of his name. Also he wasn't stopped from boarding the flight, he was just screened more exhaustively than others.
I was expecting better from the BBC... oh wait I wasn't.
I was expecting better from the BBC... oh wait I wasn't.
The article says that he was told directly it was because of his name.
I was stopped from boarding plane because I was a male! We really need a framework for suing for discrimination like that!