It certainly makes his actions seem less selfless.

 

Did the captain that landed the plane in the Hudson River charge for his interviews?

 

The pilot was doing his job and getting paid to do it well, the passenger is just asking for the same. Would you rather him sue the airline or tsa? Because I'm sure he very likely could.

Because I'm sure he very likely could.

Well, stay tuned.

The pilot was doing his job and getting paid to do it well, the passenger is just asking for the same. Would you rather him sue the airline or tsa? Because I'm sure he very likely could.

 

I'm confused. He, like other pilots, do get paid by the airlines. We're not talking about that. We're talking about selling your story after the fact.

 

What could he sue the airline or TSA for?

 

I'm not saying that I blame either the passenger or Captain Sullenberger (the other incident) for choosing to profit from their situation. I'm just saying it takes away a little of the heroic association for me.

This kid is taking the wrong route if he's looking to cash in. Selfishly, he should be getting onto as many news shows and talk shows as he can. Tell his heroic story enough times and maybe a book deal or a cable channel comes along wanting to re-tell your story. $3k to $5k for these interviews might be chump chance compared to what he could potentially earn for his story.

 

CNN made a poor decision paying this guy.

 

I agree that it's unbecoming, but I can't blame him. If there is money to be made, I can't fault someone for taking the opportunity. Not necessarily my style, but I have a hard time faulting someone for doing it.

 

My problem lies with the network, publisher, etc. who offers this type of money immediately. They'll buy the story, embellish & manipulate it, and make millions off of it when they present it to an audience with the preface "Based on a true story."

On a side note, the pilot of the plane lives in Henderson (at least my wife told me he does).

Let me help save the government a lot of time and money.

 

I'll stand at the top of the security line and pick and choose who to search. It will be swift and efficient. I will have pre-screened the passenger list and done background work. There will be no long lines or shakedowns of old ladies and innocent citizens, and you won't have to dump your mouthwash. I will be every bit as accurate as the present security force with a whole lot less headaches.

 

I think that 99% of you could join my team. We could be amazing and make air travel enjoyable again. Right now, it's not. Political correctness be (sent to haties).

 

This was discussed on GMA today. Is it racial profiling if 100% of the terrorists so far have been Muslim? On one hand, this is unfair to the entire Muslim community, most of which are decent law abiding citizens. On the other hand, shouldnt ethnic background be part of the profiling if evidence proves it? Interesting debate.

 

The terrorist's father went to the US Embassy to warn them that his son was dangerous. Why was this ignored?

This was discussed on GMA today. Is it racial profiling if 100% of the terrorists so far have been Muslim? On one hand, this is unfair to the entire Muslim community, most of which are decent law abiding citizens. On the other hand, shouldnt ethnic background be part of the profiling if evidence proves it? Interesting debate.

 

The terrorist's father went to the US Embassy to warn them that his son was dangerous. Why was this ignored?

 

Oh, how quickly we forget about Timothy McVeigh.

Oh, how quickly we forget about Timothy McVeigh.

 

I was referring to airline terrorists, and screening procedures. That was the topic on GMA, as is this thread. I was also quoting Steve Emerson, who made the 100% remark. No one has forgotton Timothy McVeigh. He particular brand of terrorism isnt the topic.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/christmas-day-terrorist-attack-sparks-racial-profiling-debate/story?id=9438459

I only know of one type of terrorism, so please enlighten me.

I only know of one type of terrorism, so please enlighten me.

The McVeigh situation doesn't really enter into it. There are always going to be isolated loonies that act alone to pull something off.

 

I don't think anyone is saying people should be "profiled" solely based on how they look. They should, however, be held to a higher standard of scrutiny based on their country of origin and other aspects of their history.

This was discussed on GMA today. Is it racial profiling if 100% of the terrorists so far have been Muslim? On one hand, this is unfair to the entire Muslim community, most of which are decent law abiding citizens. On the other hand, shouldnt ethnic background be part of the profiling if evidence proves it? Interesting debate.

 

The terrorist's father went to the US Embassy to warn them that his son was dangerous. Why was this ignored?

 

He didn't have anything concrete enough to prove his son was a serious threat.

He didn't have anything concrete enough to prove his son was a serious threat.

 

True. However, long before 9/11, my husband was flying from Germany to the US. Someone he knew gave him a wrapped gift for a co worker. He voluntarily told the agent that he had a wrapped item and did not know the contents. Obviously, they unwapped it and he got his name on a list for a couple of years that made him a "traveler of interest".

 

Seems that is small potatoes compared to a worried father warning the US embassy. His name should have been put on a similar list at the very least.

The McVeigh situation doesn't really enter into it. There are always going to be isolated loonies that act alone to pull something off.

 

I don't think anyone is saying people should be "profiled" solely based on how they look. They should, however, be held to a higher standard of scrutiny based on their country of origin and other aspects of their history.

 

Homegrown terrorism is as much of a concern for me as that which has other countries of origins. Since all of our attention is focused one way right now, it's going to make the homegrown kind easier to pull off. To me, that's a scary thought.

Edited December 29, 200916 yr by True blue (and gold)
typo

True. However, long before 9/11, my husband was flying from Germany to the US. Someone he knew gave him a wrapped gift for a co worker. He voluntarily told the agent that he had a wrapped item and did not know the contents. Obviously, they unwapped it and he got his name on a list for a couple of years that made him a "traveler of interest".

 

Seems that is small potatoes compared to a worried father warning the US embassy. His name should have been put on a similar list at the very least.

 

His name was on a list of about 550,000 people long.

His name was on a list of about 550,000 people long.

 

True, but every time he flew for a couple of years he was flagged and asked more questions. With today's computer systems you should be able to put a million people on a list and have them flagged every time they travel.