It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
Front Page is your source? An anonymous witness? Is this really how you go about determining the truth?
:-)
That sounds a lot more plausible than her claims. Yet, I'd bet money a lot of posters jumped right in, expressing outrage and dismay over the claimed discrimination. Now to see if I am correct.
So what if you are?
The beer isn't relevant, because those are paid for.
originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
Thank you GreenEyes
That post was everything I'd hoped it would be
Good job
:-)
The other passenger gave a lot of details, on where she sat, when she was served, and a much more believable description of events.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
The other passenger gave a lot of details, on where she sat, when she was served, and a much more believable description of events.
Missed this.
How can you possibly know what she said was correct??
Seems you just want to take this account as fact.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
What evidence out side of that one 'passenger' do you have?
originally posted by: Sremmos80
What proof do you have that her claim is correct when you are asking for so much evidence on the contrary??
originally posted by: Sremmos80
When the claim is that unopened cans can be used as weapons, it is absolutely relevant.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
Seems you just want to discount one side while not applying the same standards to the other side your are taking as fact.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
And I am going need to see pictures and video and a notarized statement to back up your claim of the incident in the grocery store that you seem to want to use to generalize.
Very nice.
You'd have to assume her claim was correct to consider the beer relevant.
The burden of proof rests with the accuser, not with the accused.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
And she presented her side with her name and face for everyone to see.[/quote]
So? She''s an activist. In her case, presenting a face means nothing as far as credibility is concerned.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
Very different from some that is so 'fed up' that they need to tell their side but not who they are so their account can be checked.
Gee, maybe that passenger doesn't want ISIS threatening to behead him?
originally posted by: Sremmos80
How can we check the story if we have no name?
We can check on HER seat, since we have HER name, and see if what he says is correct, or close. His seat wasn't named. Duh?
originally posted by: Sremmos80
And you would have to assume it wasn't to think it was irrelevant... see how that works?
Yes, but apparently you don't. The assumption is of innocence till proven guilty. She hasn't proven a thing. Hence, my assumption rests with those she accuses, till I see proof.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
And I don't believe your story happened the way it did. Your account of it sounds concocted to fit an agenda.
Pics and videos, because everyone videos everything, will be needed to prove other wise.
You can choose not to believe it if you like. Won't change a thing. What agenda, in my case? I demanded nothing of the mall, or the store I was in, or the rude women blocking the aisle. Where is the agenda? Oh, t hat's right, I don't have one. I shared something I experienced, to show one reason I don't believe this woman. Think what you like.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
Which, as I just asked Anne, why do we not need video from this new passenger to show that her claim of the event is how things went down?
You and some others assumed she was being honest, and that this was discrimination, with no proof. Now you want proof from a dissenting source. I see how that works. How convenient.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
Again, holding one side of the story to a higher standard than the other.
That's what you and some others have done.
Innocent till proven guilty is the standard not guilty if accused, and you have to prove otherwise. I don't support that sort of regime.
originally posted by: Thunderheart
a reply to: reldra
hey! that happened to me also!!!
it didn't but how would you know right? we're just taking her word for it. how many others have lied about something happening horrible to them only to find out the atrocity was self inflicted?
pics or it didn't happen
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
Front Page is your source? An anonymous witness? Is this really how you go about determining the truth?
:-)
That sounds a lot more plausible than her claims. Yet, I'd bet money a lot of posters jumped right in, expressing outrage and dismay over the claimed discrimination. Now to see if I am correct.
So what if you are?
Well, I was correct, as it happens. No evidence, no proof, but many assumed she was being honest, and blasted the FA, the airline, and the supposed yelling passenger, anyway.
That source is as good as any. I searched for a passenger comment, and located that one. As for determining the truth, I did that upon reading her BS claim. She's a propaganda spreader, with ties to terrorist groups, and her story didn't ring true. I thought that before reading about who she actually is.
Think about it, though; how likely is it that such a confrontation as she reported happened, and no one recorded it? These days, people record just about everything. The beer isn't relevant, because those are paid for. The claim she made about what her supposed verbal attacker said isn't anything close to how people actually talk. The airline has no policy about cans as weapons, and I flat don't believe the FA told her she couldn't have it for that reason. The other passenger gave a lot of details, on where she sat, when she was served, and a much more believable description of events.
I have flown as well, and never encountered a rude flight attendant. Ever. I have seen rude passengers. I have seen very rude Muslims, too. When I have to back out of a narrow store aisle with a baby in a stroller, because a group of 8-10 women and children deliberately blocks me in and won't look at me or move when I say, "Excuse me", loudly several times, I don't want to hear how polite they are from anyone, either. Seen that on a smaller scale a couple of times, too. So, I know who I believe, and it isn't the activist.
She made this up to get people to believe there is some widespread discrimination against Muslims. It's a political game. She rejects an apology. Well, let them boycott the airlines.
originally posted by: neformore
So, some people here are saying we shouldn't believe the muslim womans claims, because she's muslim.
I suggest people read this in case you've missed it.
*** ALL MEMBERS *** Ending Rudeness, Hate, Bigotry: Getting Back to Basics
Its relevant to that notion.
But if you don't believe her because there is proof that she is lying from clearly attainable and accessible sources, then fair enough.
Otherwise, think about it.