Australian women on Qatar flight internally examined

[Lynda2475]

Well, its pretty much what happens on the North American route.

Because we have an open skies agreement (and US are a Five Eyes ally).

We don't have such an agreement with Qatar.
<redacted>

 

[Quickstatus]

No reasonable juror could find that QR acted appropriately

hmm who knows. That's why there are proceedings afoot.

 

[RooFlyer]

Because we have an open skies agreement (and US are a Five Eyes ally).

We don't have such an agreement with Qatar.

Five Eyes? Isn't that a bit of a stretch, even as a distraction?

Yeah - like I said, make the Middle East route like the Nth American route. Just let people get on with what they want. You get to fly to and with who you want, and we get to do what we want. Just what's your problem with that?

BTW, are you still going to use SYD, with its Qatari interest, and all that?

 

[Human]

I must admit to being personally unconvinced by the arguments of @Lynda2475 and @justinbrett . But their arguments are intelligent, well thought-through, well-written and, although strongly put, respectful. I disagree with them but nevertheless they’re an asset to this website. I don’t want this to be yet another internet silo where everyone agrees with each other, and it’s essential to be able to meaningfully engage with those we disagree with — it’s extremely rare that one person is ever totally wrong or totally right, after all!

 

[Lynda2475]

...
Also the lawyers for the victim's of QRs crimes against spoke out against the [capacity] increase, which will hopefully never be granted.
...

 

[anat0l]

Also the lawyers for the victim's of QRs crimes against spoke out against the increase, which will hopefully never be granted.

As many on this thread have said, it appears to be pointless to base this decision on giving weight to this incident, lest we reframe how we do business with other countries.

I don't know if that means that we should forget about the incident, human rights have no bearing on business or simply those women should have just put up with it (their country, their rules).... but it seems time and money forgives all sins.
...

 

[Danger]

...

Also the lawyers for the victim's of QRs crimes against spoke out against the increase, which will hopefully never be granted.

...

Please remind me: What "crimes" did Qatar Airways commit?

 

[Lynda2475]

Not quite. The argument is that QR and the airport are all owned by the Qatari government, or an organ of it. So the airline shares responsibility for the incident.

Its actually far more specific than that if you look at the court filing. The named parties are: Qatar Civil Aviation Authority (QCAA), Qatar Airways and Qatar Company for Airport Operation and Management (MATAR). MATAR is a corporate subsidiary of Qatar Airways and had been contracted by QCAA to manage Hamad Airport in Doha.

All the staff involved in removing the women from the flight at gunpoint and committing the assaults worked for MATAR, so QR. QRs hands are in no way clean.

 

[RooFlyer]

Its actually far more specific than that if you look at the court filing. The named parties are: Qatar Civil Aviation Authority (QCAA), Qatar Airways and Qatar Company for Airport Operation and Management (MATAR).

Yeah parties to a court filing are sort of like those accused. In no way reflects actual involvement at this stage.

BTW do any of the organisations you mentioned fail to come under the description I gave as the “Qatari government, or an organ of it”?

But I shall respect your expertise in everything to do with Qatar including of course part ownership of Sydney Airport.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

A lot seems to have. changed in the intervening time since Qatar's application for expansion into the Australian market was denied:

At Qantas (who on paper should support an expansion given Qatar's membership in the same alliance):

• The CEO of Qantas, Alan Joyce resigned
• The Chairman of Qantas, Dick Goyder has announced he will resign soon
• The CEO of Qantas Loyalty (and current CEO of Qantas if you ask the Chairman) has announced she will resign soon

On the Qatari side:

• Qatar's friend, the terrorist organization, Hamas, committed genocide in Israel
• It is now well known that Qatar is hosting the leader of Hamas in their country for some time
• The Qatari government and by extension Qatar Airways has been shown to violate the human rights of women including Australian women some of which was recently revealed in court which I cannot discuss here as it would result in my ban for how graphic and inappropriate it is

On the side of Australian public at large there has been:

• outrage that Qantas allegedly interfered with Qatar's expansion in an effort to stifle competition in the Australian international aviation market something that likely will cause airfares to remain high
• outrage by Virgin Australia that their key partner, Qatar cannot expand thereby limiting the international route network Virgin can provide its customers

Overall it seems like the revised decision could go a number of ways, and I don't have an answer on this, either but merely suggest some possibilities:

• The Australian government revokes Qatar's ability to fly to Australia since it was always a one side deal and the Australian government doesn't want to be seen to be supporting a terrorist state (Qantas & human rights very happy, public not at all happy)
• The Australian government maintains the status quo (Qantas happy, human rights meh, public less happy)
• The Australian government approves some if not all of the expansions (Qantas & human rights angry, public very happy)

It will be interesting seeing how this situation pans out.

-RooFlyer88

 

[Lynda2475]

LOL ridiculous to imply that all of the Australian public would be happy if QR was given greater access. Gross over simplification and not factually correct.

I am a member of the public and would not be happy, any benefit is highly questionable given their high prices and tendency to over sell services.

The family, friends and legal council for the Women who were assaulted by QR employees would not all be happy, nor obviously would all the Women victims themselves.

The people who have had friends and loved ones killed due to the actions of Hamas in Israel would not all happily support a company who supports such a terrorist organization.

The members of the public who would be happy for this to happen are those prepared to ignore abhorrent behaviour to get more flight choices via the ME with no guarantee they will be actually be any cheaper.

 

[Pushka]

I didn't see the word All mentioned.

 

[Lynda2475]

I didn't see the word All mentioned.

The use of the word public without a qualifier such as "some" or "subset" means all.

 

[Pushka]

The use of the word public without a qualifier such as "some" or "subset" means all.

Now there's a new rule for me it seems.

 

[Lynda2475]

Basic grammar. If you use a plural term without a qualifier it means all things covered by that term.

 

[RooFlyer]

assaulted by QR employees

You know very well that they weren’t Qatar airlines employees. You are very fond of using the word 'incorrect' etc. applying to others' posts, how about this one?
.

the actions of Hamas in Israel would not happily support a company who supports such a terrorist organization.

Come on, then, show us how Qatar airlines ( the 'company' in question) are supporting a terrorist organisation. Show us very clearly and precisely, please.

A little less emotion in this delicate time, I think would be helpful.

Qatar seem to be operating one if the charter flights bringing Aussies home from Israel.

yes, the first flight back to Australia from the Middle East is going to be Qatar Airways bringing over 200 Australians home. I’m sure Minister King will be there to welcome them at the airport.

 

[RooFlyer]

Disgusting if true, our government should not be chartering services from known supporters of terrorism.

The repartiations are urgent, and its "all hands to the pumps". If the pax didn't want to fly on a free QR flight, no-one was making them. Perhaps their perspective is more realistic than yours? Anyway, you use Sydney Airport, which is part owned by the Qatari government. How do you justify that?

 

[RooFlyer]

The Oz reports:

On Tuesday afternoon, minister for Transport Catherine King released a statement confirming Qatar Airways was helping to evacuate passengers.

“We thank all partner airlines and operators who have stepped up to help Australians and their families wanting to come home,” said a spokesperson for Ms King in a statement.

Can't find the statement on-line ... but if reported correctly "partner airlines" ? So the Australian Government is partnering with Qatar Airways? Good to see.

 

[Daver6]

The people who have had friends and loved ones killed due to the actions of Hamas in Israel would not happily support a company who supports such a terrorist organization.

You do realise your sweeping statement is easily proven to be false with just a single person who falls into that category? Your arguments are incredibly weak when they're all emotion and not based on fact.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

LOL ridiculous to imply that all of the Australian public would be happy if QR was given greater access. Gross over simplification and not factually correct.

If Australian media are to be believed the public would be happy on account of fares being lower and there being more options to Europe from Australia. Whether that is correct remains to be seen. Now in terms of human rights (which I classify separately) then you are right, it would be a bad day for human rights for the Australian government to support a government whose human rights are questionable at best.

I am a member of the public and would not be happy, any benefit is highly questionable given their high prices and tendency to over sell services.

I suppose the real question is, if those slots weren't given to Qatar who else would they be given to? If these slots were to be created out of thin air, then in theory that is a net increase in the supply of air traffic. If, on the other hand, these slots have to be taken from another international carrier, then yes it would be questionable.

The family, friends and legal council for the Women who were assaulted by QR employees would not be happy, nor obviously would the Women victims themselves.

Perhaps that's one of the strings the Australian government can do to get the Qatar's to do what they want. In other words, unless and until you waive diplomatic immunity on this civil action in Australian court, we will not permit you to fly to our country.

The people who have had friends and loved ones killed due to the actions of Hamas in Israel would not happily support a company who supports such a terrorist organization.

Neither would I, but I would argue that this came to light recently. Before last week, I would argue most Australians had a favourable view of the Qataris (especially those who didn't hear of the fiasco at Doha airport).

The members of the public who would be happy for this to happen are those prepared to ignore abhorrent behaviour to get more flight choices via the ME with no guarantee they will be actually be any cheaper.

Generally if the supply of flights goes up the prices will come down, one way or another. I mean more flights on Qatar means fewer people will fly QF to Europe which in turn means more chances of scoring an upgrade to J using points. None of this in any way suggests that what the Qataris are doing is right.This is simply looking at things from a competitive mindset.