[redmondbarry]

Meh. Passenger demonstrates willingness to a) revisit the incident later and b) use the word 'terrorist' on the plane.

They don't have to actually think he'll blow up the plane; it only takes one closet nut case to overhear this and cause a ruckus mid flight. In a small confined space at 30k feet that's a very real safety issue. Consider that an irrational fear of flying isn't that uncommon, and this is a route where there isn't much of an alternative.

Finally, they're under no obligation to tell a passenger the real reason for booting him off the plane; if it was the above, doing so could only make it worse for themselves.

[l33tbro]

Still unacceptable on behalf of United. Using the word "terrorist" was unnecessary and downright unwise, but the fact remains that, regardless of post 9/11 context, it's just a damn word. May it heighten the senses of a potential fear-of-flying person? Perhaps. But by that logic, you would also say that anybody wearing a turban would have to remove it, for fear of triggering one of these people.

And, yes, United are under obligation to tell this passenger the real reason for booting them off. They are a business. He is their a loyal customer with almost 1,000,000 ffms. He conducted himself, according to his entry, calmly and in a very transparent manner. The behavior of the stuff was disgusting, humiliating and unprofessional.

If this seems okay to you; fine. But this is not the world I want to live in.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

The actions of "one closet nut case" are always the responsibility of the closet nutcase.

> this is a route where there isn't much of an alternative

You make a case that people shouldn't be allowed to fly while black/muslim/wearing a t-shirt with a picture of a gun on it/etc in case some "sensitive soul" kicks up a fuss, and that it is not that sensitive soul's fault. I disagree.