Just a warning this is how United Airlines removes you from a plane when they overbook a flight.

@United overbook #flight3411 and decided to force random passengers off the plane. Here's how they did it: pic.twitter.com/QfefM8X2cW

— Jayse D. Anspach (@JayseDavid) April 10, 2017

To repeat, United stmt. to NBC News confirms the flight was overbooked & the passenger refused to leave. Doesn't explain that kind of force. pic.twitter.com/uMeEkrmeOH

— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) April 10, 2017

Courtesy of Raw Story: 

United Airlines is coming under heavy criticism after it had security officers forcibly remove a passenger from an overbooked flight. 

A series of videos posted on social media show security officers asking a passenger who was on a Sunday United flight from Chicago to Louisville to leave the plane. 

When the man refused, the officers reached in and did something to cause the man to shout out in pain. Afterward, the officers dragged the man off the plane as horrified passengers yelled that there was no need to resort to such force. 

In a statement provided to NBC News, United explained that the plane’s crew initially looked for people to leave the flight voluntarily because the flight had been overbooked. When no one volunteered, they chose a passenger to be removed, and he refused to cooperate, which forced the crew to call law enforcement officials. 

The airline apologized for overbooking the flight but did not apologize for having security drag the passenger off the plane.

The man claimed to be a doctor who had to see patients in the morning as his reason for refusing to leave the aircraft, and really who can blame him for refusing?

Ultimately it seems that the man returned to the plane looking disoriented and with a bloody face, which really makes no sense whatsoever.

I have to admit that currently I have no interest in flying anywhere with the TSA acting like the Gestapo and demanding that people give up their laptop and cell phone passwords.

But once I do decide to fly again you can bet it will NOT be on United Airlines.

"She felt she was being forced to perform for this monster." A Rockette breaks her silence about feeling forced to perform at Trump's inauguration.

Courtesy of Marie Claire:  

The dancer next to Mary was crying. Tears streamed down her face through all 90 minutes of their world-famous Christmas Spectacular as they kicked and pirouetted and hit mark after mark on the glittering Radio City Music Hall stage. This was Thursday, three days before Christmas, the day the Rockettes discovered they'd been booked to perform at the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump. 

"She felt she was being forced to perform for this monster," Mary told MarieClaire.com in an exclusive interview. "I wouldn't feel comfortable standing near a man like that in our costumes," said another dancer in an email to her colleagues.

"Mary" is obviously a pseudonym to protect this dancer from losing her job for speaking out, and she has quite a lot to share.

For one, despite what we have heard, the performance was NOT at first considered optional for the full time dancers:

"So it wasn't optional at first. The email from their union said they had to do this job," Mary says of the full-timers. By Friday, after backlash from the dancers and on social media, producers agreed to make participation elective. 

However that does not mean that many of the performers feel they have a choice:  

But dancers are worried that their choice to sit out now means they'll be sitting out for good; it's not as if dancing makes for a stable career, even without hurdles like this one to jump. Mary knows of three full-time dancers who have chosen to decline to perform, and at least one of them is fearful of losing her standing as a result. "It will be interesting to see who doesn't get their job back," Mary says. "But do you really want to work for a company that supports this? I just don't know. It's become a moral issue at this point." 

 "Mary" also says that the performance has caused a split within the usually tight knit group: 

While the performance is now theoretically voluntary, that hasn't dissolved the tension within the usually supportive group of women. "There is a divide in the company now, which saddens me most," Mary says. "The majority of us said no immediately. Then there's the percentage that said yes, for whatever reason—whether it's because they're young and uninformed, or because they want the money, or because they think it's an opportunity to move up in the company when other people turn it down."

Mary says that to her knowledge, no women of color have signed up to perform that day. "It's almost worse to have 18 pretty white girls behind this man who supports so many hate groups," she says. The lack of diversity in the kick line is "embarrassing" on a normal day, she says, and will only be more pointed in January. "They're going to be branded in history as one of those women," Mary says. "How's it going to look?"

So to be clear the man who rode to the presidency on the waves of racism, and with the help of a foreign government, will have performing at his inauguration a group of lily white dancers who secretly despise him but feel pressured to do as they are told for fear of losing their jobs.

Well I guess it could be worse.

At least nobody is rounding them up and taking them away.

At least not yet.