![]() |
It could happen to you.
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 14:37:46 -0400, Eisboch wrote:
I don't trust the planes and the people that operate and maintain them, even though I realize that US based airlines have an excellent safety record. Yeah, but will it continue with maintenance being outsourced. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...intenance.html |
It could happen to you.
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Well, then, I need to get a tee-shirt that says: F*ck the F*cking Republicans Free speech or not, how do you possibly justify wearing something like that in mixed company including young children old enough to read and senior citizens who may be deeply disturbed by it. No wonder the country is going to hell in a hand basket. It's being led there by selfish "adults" who care for nothing but their own agenda. Whew, it stinks! Eisboch |
It could happen to you.
"JIMinFL" wrote in message hlink.net... In a public place, the woman should be allowed to wear whatever she wants to wear. Jim Does that include nothing? Technically, that should be the case. Simple nudity should be considered as nothing special, but there's no such thing as simple nudity. So the practical answer should be no. Personally, I don't want to see most of us naked in public; but that's just me. |
It could happen to you.
"thunder" wrote in message ... On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 09:55:58 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote: Your freedon of speech ends when you move from your property or public property to someone's private property. The airline is private property, being that it is not owned by the/a government, and the airline can make the rules and regulations regarding how its customers present themselves and conduct themselves while on the airline's private property. A airline is considered a "public accommodation", not "private property", and they are limited in the rules they can set. If you think not, think if an airline can refuse boarding because of race. The question is one of obscenity. My guess is, as obnoxious as she may have been, it *is* probably protected speech. Not all speech is protected under all circumstances. |
It could happen to you.
It is very common for babies to have trouble equalizing when flying.
"Bryan" wrote in message ... "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... JIMinFL wrote: Bush basher kicked off plane. http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/5066135/detail.html The woman was right; the airline was wrong. Nope. Airlines have the right to refuse service to anyone who, in their judgment, is inappropriately dressed, intoxicated or otherwise in violation of their policies. The problem here was not the images. It was the "word". Good for them! The woman can complain all she wants but airlines can set their own standards. Eisboch Airline? Standards? Surely you jest. On my flight back from Hawai'i to San Francisco, two rows in front of me, there was a couple incapable of controlling their crying, screaming brats. The two kids whined all the way back to the mainland, for four and a half hours. without letup. I asked one of the flight attendants to ask the couple to either control their brats or to move them to a less-occupied part of the plane. She refused. At least 20 other passengers complained. Those brats were more offense than anyone's shirt. Crying kids are part of our world Harry and, although annoying to you, are not unique. I've flew many miles in my working days and crying babies and bratty kids where often part of the experience. On occasion I even had my own crying baby along. Your standards for travel are too high for commercial airlines. Buy your own jet. Eisboch Hey, I'm not talking about a half hour of crying and screaming; these two brats would not shut up the entire trip. Then, Harry, the most likely explanation is that they were in pain. |
It could happen to you.
Harry,
Since babies do have trouble equalizing and can be in pain when flying, it appears you are doing a bit of projecting. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... JIMinFL wrote: Bush basher kicked off plane. http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/5066135/detail.html The woman was right; the airline was wrong. Nope. Airlines have the right to refuse service to anyone who, in their judgment, is inappropriately dressed, intoxicated or otherwise in violation of their policies. The problem here was not the images. It was the "word". Good for them! The woman can complain all she wants but airlines can set their own standards. Eisboch Airline? Standards? Surely you jest. On my flight back from Hawai'i to San Francisco, two rows in front of me, there was a couple incapable of controlling their crying, screaming brats. The two kids whined all the way back to the mainland, for four and a half hours. without letup. I asked one of the flight attendants to ask the couple to either control their brats or to move them to a less-occupied part of the plane. She refused. At least 20 other passengers complained. Those brats were more offense than anyone's shirt. Crying kids are part of our world Harry and, although annoying to you, are not unique. I've flew many miles in my working days and crying babies and bratty kids where often part of the experience. On occasion I even had my own crying baby along. Your standards for travel are too high for commercial airlines. Buy your own jet. Eisboch Hey, I'm not talking about a half hour of crying and screaming; these two brats would not shut up the entire trip. Then, Harry, the most likely explanation is that they were in pain. No, the most likely explanation is that they have incompetent parents. |
It could happen to you.
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... I think it perfectly appropriate to wear clothing that says F*ck Bush, if one feels like doing that. And the mudrats on your plane were simply exercising their right to free speech and expression. So what's the problem? Eisboch |
It could happen to you.
Bryan wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... JIMinFL wrote: Bush basher kicked off plane. http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/5066135/detail.html The woman was right; the airline was wrong. Nope. Airlines have the right to refuse service to anyone who, in their judgment, is inappropriately dressed, intoxicated or otherwise in violation of their policies. The problem here was not the images. It was the "word". Good for them! The woman can complain all she wants but airlines can set their own standards. Eisboch Airline? Standards? Surely you jest. On my flight back from Hawai'i to San Francisco, two rows in front of me, there was a couple incapable of controlling their crying, screaming brats. The two kids whined all the way back to the mainland, for four and a half hours. without letup. I asked one of the flight attendants to ask the couple to either control their brats or to move them to a less-occupied part of the plane. She refused. At least 20 other passengers complained. Those brats were more offense than anyone's shirt. Crying kids are part of our world Harry and, although annoying to you, are not unique. I've flew many miles in my working days and crying babies and bratty kids where often part of the experience. On occasion I even had my own crying baby along. Your standards for travel are too high for commercial airlines. Buy your own jet. Eisboch Hey, I'm not talking about a half hour of crying and screaming; these two brats would not shut up the entire trip. Then, Harry, the most likely explanation is that they were in pain. The parents probably should have given the kids a drink. Swallowing helps equalize the air pressure in the inner ear. |
It could happen to you.
Harry,
Are you encouraging the use of corporal punishment? Sounds very "liberal" of you. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: Bryan wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: Harry Krause wrote in message ... JIMinFL wrote: Bush basher kicked off plane. http://www.wesh.com/irresistible/5066135/detail.html The woman was right; the airline was wrong. Nope. Airlines have the right to refuse service to anyone who, in their judgment, is inappropriately dressed, intoxicated or otherwise in violation of their policies. The problem here was not the images. It was the "word". Good for them! The woman can complain all she wants but airlines can set their own standards. Eisboch Airline? Standards? Surely you jest. On my flight back from Hawai'i to San Francisco, two rows in front of me, there was a couple incapable of controlling their crying, screaming brats. The two kids whined all the way back to the mainland, for four and a half hours. without letup. I asked one of the flight attendants to ask the couple to either control their brats or to move them to a less-occupied part of the plane. She refused. At least 20 other passengers complained. Those brats were more offense than anyone's shirt. Crying kids are part of our world Harry and, although annoying to you, are not unique. I've flew many miles in my working days and crying babies and bratty kids where often part of the experience. On occasion I even had my own crying baby along. Your standards for travel are too high for commercial airlines. Buy your own jet. Eisboch Hey, I'm not talking about a half hour of crying and screaming; these two brats would not shut up the entire trip. Then, Harry, the most likely explanation is that they were in pain. The parents probably should have given the kids a drink. Swallowing helps equalize the air pressure in the inner ear. You're assuming the kids were in pain, and the parents did give them plenty to drink. I'm assuming the parents were obnoxious. In fact, they were on the continuation of the flight to Minneapolis, and the person who was sitting next to them INSISTED that her seat be moved far away from the brats. The mother of the kids said in a snarly voice, "This woman has an issue with my children." At that point, I piped up and said, "You're the issue, mother of the year. Control your kids." If I had carried on like that for as long as those kids did, my father would have threatened to put me into low-earth orbit. My father never hit me, but he was a sturdy fellow and very strong. I took him seriously. These weren't infants, by the way. They were toddlers. And they were whining in the terminal too, before the continuation of the flight. |
It could happen to you.
"thunder" wrote in message ... On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 09:55:58 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote: Your freedon of speech ends when you move from your property or public property to someone's private property. The airline is private property, being that it is not owned by the/a government, and the airline can make the rules and regulations regarding how its customers present themselves and conduct themselves while on the airline's private property. A airline is considered a "public accommodation", not "private property", and they are limited in the rules they can set. If you think not, think if an airline can refuse boarding because of race. The question is one of obscenity. My guess is, as obnoxious as she may have been, it *is* probably protected speech. If everytime someone with purple hair walks into my business he robs me then what I am I to do? Keep letting people with purple hair into my business? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com