United Airlines Coach Class Coke Rule is Islamophobic ….. no, seriously

Posted on  by Pamela Geller

A Muslim passenger (and White House insider) charged a United Airlines attendant with Muslim hatemongering on the flight from Chicago to Washington on Friday because she was not given an unopened can of Coke.

Everybody knows that if you want your own can of soda, that’s a first class perk.
But everybody also knows that Muslims want to be treated as a special, superior class in accordance with the supremacist sharia. And they are getting it. They sueharass, taunt, threaten, whine, ululate, and they feign victimhood as they victimize their targets.

But this is Muslim supremacy on steroids.

Robert Spencer said about this:

There is just so much that doesn’t ring true about this latest round of “Flying While Muslim” grievance theater. In the first place, what is this about requesting an unopened can for “hygienic reasons”? The mainstreammedia, of course, never asks Tahera Ahmad what she means by that. What’s unhygienic about getting a can of soda that has just been opened? Could it be that Ahmad found it objectionable to receive a can of soda opened by najis (unclean, cf. Qur’an 9:28) infidel hands?

And then there’s the passenger sitting across the aisle from her and telling her, “You Moslem, you need to shut the F** up.” Where are the passengers corroborating the words of this shouting lout? Someone must have heard him, but he sounds to me as if he was sent over from Islamophobia Central Casting, straight from the fever dreams of Hamas-linked CAIR and the like.

Finally, there is the most unbelievable aspect of her whole story — a part of it that is never mentioned by the mainstream media: “The pilot also apologized for everything that happened and said that as a white male he recognized his privilege…” Come on. Who talks like that, outside of Salon.com’s offices?

This supremacist is empowered by Obama:

Screen Shot 2015-06-01 at 11.58.19 PM

(Screenshot: thanks to JWF)

Anyway, given today’s political climate, Tahera Ahmad will probably get millions out of United, and no flight attendant will ever dare open a Muslim’s can again.

“Muslim Woman Says She Faced Discrimination on Flight,United Airlines Calls It ‘Misunderstanding,’” by Emily Shapiro,ABC News, June 1, 2015:

After a Muslim woman accused the crew of a United Airlines flight of discrimination, the company has apologized for what it called a “misunderstanding.”

The passenger said a United attendant on the flight from Chicago to Washington on Friday refused to give her an unopened can of coke, allegedly telling her it could be used “as a weapon.”

“The flight attendant brought over an open can of diet soda, so I requested, for hygienic reasons, a closed can of diet soda,” Tahera Ahmad, a chaplain at Northwestern University, told ABC’s Chicago station WLS on Sunday. “And so she said, ‘Well, no one has consumed from this can.’ And I said, ‘That’s fine but I would really prefer for hygienic reasons and health concerns.’ … She said, ‘Well, it is against our policy to give people unopened canned beverages.’”

“And then she said, ‘No diet coke for you,’ and she picked up the beverage from my tray table and took it back,” she said.

Ahmad said the same flight attendant then served an unopened can of beer to another passenger.

When she confronted the attendant, “She said it is against our policy to give people unopened can beverages because they may use it as a weapon.”

“So I said, ‘Well I think that’s strange because you’re discriminating against me because clearly you gave the passenger next to me an unopened beverage can.’ And so she looked at that, picked it up, opened it and put it back. And as she was putting it back she said, ‘It’s because you would use it as a weapon.’”

“At that point I was in utter shock,” she told WLS. “I was almost tearing up.”

Ahmad said she then asked the other passengers, “Did you all just witness this discrimination?” and she claims another passenger muttered “you Muslim” and told her to shut up.

“And he said, ‘You know you would use it as a weapon,’” Ahmad recounted.

“I just couldn’t believe what he had said,” Ahmad said. “I was in tears.”

The attendant apologized after the flight, Ahmad said, but she told the attendant that her actions made her feel “very threatened.”

“I was the one who felt very unsafe,” Ahmad said.

United Airlines said today in a statement to ABC News: “United is a company that strongly supports diversity and inclusion, and we and our partners do not discriminate against our employees or customers. Theflight attendant onboard Shuttle America flight 3504 attempted several times to accommodate Ms. Ahmad’s beverage request after a misunderstanding regarding a can of diet soda.”…

Courtesy of Pamela Geller.

Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/06/02/united-airlines-coach-class...

Views: 784

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

RACE BAITERS !
RACE HATERS !
OBAMA'S OWN KIND HELPING TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY !

Well here we go again more BS from the trans planted dog from the 7Th century telling Americans how we must change and except there way of life, when are we going to have some say on who comes to America,  this is America if you want to live free here then become an American and leave your stone age practices and hate for other people that do not believe in your cult,  in America we are free not like that shit hole you came from !

American's don't have to cater to evil Mohammed Islam. What makes you think you can sue because you don't get your way. Almost in tears? Really? She had enough nerve to question the stuardess about the man getting a beer.that's not what you call in tears. Don't let any more of them on a plane, in a restaurant, in a store anywhere if you don't want to get sued. This sounds like the gays who is suing the bakery over a cake.
Yeah amen!!!
What ever happened to the signs that say "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?"
So you have to serve them or get sued?
What's next? I don't like the price? How about you walk away before I kick your a**!!!
It's ok. The idiots will be thinned out by their own stupidity.
Lifted into stature by their own petard (farts).

All be well
Uncle Bobby

Screw ISLAM !!!


*Edited Offensive Word, Please Re-Read the Members Rules*

She should not fly.  She should take the camel train.

She should of considered her special treatment before taking any flight.  If she requires that special treatment then drive or book a private plan and do it yourself.

"Ham" it up?  To a muslim?

She DID, I suspect. She just wanted to make a fuss, and so she did.  She ought to go back to the desert.  Where there are no unopened Cokes, and there is NO REFRIGERATION, either.  She should take our 'president' with her! 

THE MUDSLIDES ALWAYS OVERACT. THEY LIKE TO HAM IT UP..

It's "Mudslimes".

She was the one who felt unsafe, by whose standards?  I bet if you polled the other passengers and they were honest, they would say her presence made them feel unsafe.  Welcome to our world!

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service