The point is Mr Gaul and any other passenger do not have any knowledge of what is being a disruptive passenger. How and what determines a disruptive passenger and by whom? How is it that when a man speaks for his right he is determined a disruptive passenger?

Obviously, two lawyers as I heard on Capital News said that Mr Gaul was not in any way being a disruptive passenger. Why did the captain take the story to the stewards and pronounce a decision, instead of having someone else investigate the matter and then followed it by appropriate action?

I support the fact that Mr Gaul had the right to ask a simple question as to why is it that he had to board from the back when he was allotted a seat in the front. I travelled, and on my return from Barbados (this is another matter) I boarded from the front and was seated at the very last seat in the rear. Mind you I had to struggle with my hand piece to get through the passengers in the aisle.

These airlines have been operating for decades and they are not interested in putting practices into place. I travelled for over a decade and every airline has different policies and worst yet every employee has different versions of the policies. Referring to September 11, 2001, I have never heard a Guyanese who wants to perform terrorist acts on any airline.

Mr Gouveia clearly states that Mr Gaul was wrong (zero tolerance) if the poor fellow had any rights at all, in Mr Gouviea’s eyes, they are wrong. This leads me to wonder what happened to Mr Gaul’s little child during this unnecessary horrible assault.

As for force used, the Barbados Police had every right to assault and choke Gaul according to Mr Gouveia. What a poor excuse. “I am not defending the Barbados Police Force”, you are not among the many Guyanese I have seen being harassed by the Barbados Authorities. As for BWIA, we had enough; its time the Government bring competition in Guyana for them as well as GPL and GT&T.
CONCERNED PASSENGER