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 Freedom_for_sum
Some of you guys are so "anti-Patriot Act" that you are blinded to the facts.
Persing's lawyer William Peregoy said his client was not feeling well when he placed his head on his companion's lap, and that he only threatened the flight attendant with reporting him to his superiors on landing.
All the facts of this case still have yet to be made fully public; but there are a few things we do know: This couple was engaged in behavior that made the other passengers feel uncomfortable.
Flight attendants are required to respond when that happens. The FA asked the couple to stop the behavior they were engaged in.
At this point, if the couple had simply complied with the FA's instructions, this thread would not exist today.
Apparently, the male half of the couple bacame verbally obstinant and abusive. At this point, they are "interfering with a crew member", and deserve whatever punishment comes their way.
Iskander's hyperbolic and meaningless diatribe aside; previous charges of this nature rarely led to anything more than a slap on the wrist. I, for one, welcome any punitive measure that puts teeth into charges levied against "self-loading baggage!!
"Ladies and Gentlemen; we'll be cruising at 35,000 feet. Now; Sit down; shut up; and enjoy your in-flight magazine!!"
THANK YOU PATRIOT ACT!!!
How intelligent you are to equate the natural and beautiful act of a woman feeeding her child to......the erotic behavior of this couple on the aircraft.
All the facts of this case still have yet to be made fully public
The flight attendants I know would simply explain to the "offended passengers" that this mother has the right to feed her child and offer an empty seat elsewhere (excluding first class of course) on the aircraft.
Failing that; the "offended passenger" would have the right to complain upon landing. Simple....Solved.....No Patriot Act required here--unless the offended passenger became obsitnant!!
I suggest that if you don't like the "nazi regime" (interesting you're comparing a brutal regime responsible for the murder of 6 million people to flight attendents who are simply trying to keep order) that you take the train next time.
THREAD HIJACK ALERT!!!! These drugs were illegal long before the Patriot Act.
Another artist of hyperbole. Funny thing: When left-wingers lose the ability to make logical arguments they lose all sense of reason and resort to extreme exageration that is both irrelevent and meaningless.
If you're going to argue about generalities of the Patriot Act; find or create the thread where you can do that. This thread is about this couple's behavior on the airplane (interfering with a crew member--not the "erotic" behavior they were doing).
While on an aircraft, unless you're asking for a beverage or the like YOU DON'T QUESTION AUTHORITY.
Passengers in general have no clue about the sorts of things that can put their, and others', safety at risk.
I'd like to emphasize that while flying, you're moving along in an alluminum tube at approximately 500 MPH at an altitude where you would pass out in less than 30 seconds if exposed; and the only thing separating you from this kinetic mayhem is a few micrometers of sheetmetal and /or plastic.
While many believe flight attendants are only there to serve you drinks, they have been specifically trained for the purpose of maintaining safety in the cabin. As a crew member OR a passenger my hope is that any obstinant/abusive passenger would be removed from the flight and charged.
I'd like to add to this discussion a couple rhetorical questions: What would you do if I and my girlfriend came over to your house and started engaging in erotic/sexual behavior, in front of your family and friends, in your living room floor?
Just because you paid for that seat, for that flight, doesn't mean it's yours to do anything you want while sitting in it; especially argue with crew members!!
Defend themselves from what, exactly? A flight attendant asking them to stop their behavior?
It isn't. Interfering with a crew member is. And just so we're on the same page: Here is an article that describes the man's behavior toward the flight attendant
Whatever they were doing the other passengers were uncomfortable with it. Flight crews don't want passengers/customers uncomfortable. A relaxed/comfortable environment in the aircraft is what crewmebers strive to achieve.
They were asked once, apparently politely, because they complied with the attendant's request to stop. Despite the request, they continued their behavior and resumed their inappropriate behavior.
....or else what?!?---is the question that's begging to be asked. If I heard a passenger utter these words, I would be very concerned!!
This man threatened the flight attendant which is utterly unacceptable!!! He should consider himself lucky he didn't get bound for the remainder of the flight. It's my hope that they get punished severely for it.
You're not even properly interpretting the "external source" your quoting. So I will do that for you:
"A federal complaint says the couple was "embracing kissing and acting in a manner that made other passengers uncomfortable.""
Bold added for emphasis. What you're not acknowledging here is this man was either attempting to perform or simulating performing, oral sex on his girl friend. Can you, at the very least, acknowledge that this behavior is inappropriate on an airliner?
In any case; this is NOT about what the couple was doing. If it were, they would have been in trouble from the begining. They got in trouble AFTER defying and threatening a flight crewmember. In your world that may be acceptable. In mine--it's not.
And you still refuse to acknowledge that oral sex in the public's view, whether real or simulated, is inappropriate behavior. This is precisely what they were "doing". Go do your own research. Saying that he was "napping" in her lap is simply a lawyer talking to save his client!!
Let's see: Yes your honor; we were embracing and kissing when I suddenly felt the urge to take a nap and place my head between her legs!!!
Persing was seen nuzzling or kissing Sewell on the neck and 'elsewhere' and was seen to be smiling, according to an indictment filed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
www.news.com.au...
I mean if enough people start complaining about a person's suspected sex act during a plane ride...then action should be taken. It's disgusting and against the law.
As far as the whole dog analogy, I suspected people were above their primal instincts if you are not then perhaps you do belong in jail or belong in a cave with a pack of wolves, because this is a civilized society we live in.
Apparently this is the real crime that has threatened the security of our very nation.
Throw these terrorists into prison forever and make sure that they are tortured until they admit that kissing and smiling are acts of terror upon the state. Were at war dammit.
Originally posted by laiguana
Sex in public is against the law, public exposure is also against the law.
If you let 'hormones and testosterone' get in the way of civilized behavior than you DO belong in jail because that's the same excuse rapists use.
Originally posted by laiguana
iskander or whatever, to assume I'm a minor simply because I disagree with the public conduct of a person is absurd. What I find even more absurd is that people do not question the mental maturity of this couple. They're in their 40s and acting like a couple of teenagers that just 'don't care' what other people think of them.
Sex in public is against the law, public exposure is also against the law.
If you let 'hormones and testosterone' get in the way of civilized behavior than you DO belong in jail because that's the same excuse rapists use.
The airport did a fantastic job with these ill-behaved people, they should learn some manners when in public. And I highly doubt they'll spend more than a couple hours in jail if at all.
iskander or whatever, to assume I'm a minor simply because I disagree with the public conduct of a person is absurd.
What I find even more absurd is that people do not question the mental maturity of this couple.
They're in their 40s and acting like a couple of teenagers that just 'don't care' what other people think of them.
Sex in public is against the law, public exposure is also against the law.
If you let 'hormones and testosterone' get in the way of civilized behavior than you DO belong in jail because that's the same excuse rapists use.
The airport did a fantastic job with these ill-behaved people, they should learn some manners when in public. And I highly doubt they'll spend more than a couple hours in jail if at all.
The problem is that they denied having sex, just because somebody felt uncomfortable for their overly display of affection, that is where the complain was made.
But right now this is getting out of control. First people get targeted by the way the look, how they do their prayers and how ydress, this needs to stop.
We need rules that will put the patriot act under the guides of what it was made for, not for anybody else with some given authority to misuse it at will.
BTW the fight attendant was a male.
You're kidding me! If some guy (and I don't care who he is) comes up to me and tells me to stop kissing my wife because it bothers some neurotic people, I will tell him to take a hike if he wants to keep his nose on straight.
Originally posted by laiguana
... fit to be considered human.
Maybe the homeland security folks could just screen for people who are likely to show public affection and lock them up before they have a chance to kiss in public and terrorize us with thier disgusting open displays of love.
If you cannot control your hormones then you are not mentally fit to be considered human.
There are laws against such things and maybe you should all read up on them.
Second, it's an airport, this isn't the place to become overly affectionate to the point people suspect you of engaging in sex acts.
Why were they so intent on their public display rather than waiting until they were out of the airport to resume their antics?
Spoken like a true virgin. Girls are just icky, aren't they?
And frankly it's the witnesses words against the couples, so there's no way on saying who's wrong or right at this point.
Third the couple should have stopped immediatley after being told by the flight attendant. The Patriot Act came into play naturally after they failed to comply and threatened the flight attendant.
LOL! Here's something one of my friends shared with me for a laugh. She said that there's only one thing worse then finding out that the guy in her bed is a closet case, and that's when a man stops a moment of intimacy to pick up a call from his mother.
laiguana, what does all this mean to you I wonder?
And from what I see here some of you can't even argue decently and have to resort to personal attacks about my own life and sexuality, but it humors me.
Naturally, as soon as the obvious is stated, it must be a personal attack, how quaint. Good to know that we're both in good humor though! Carry on.
A lizardman who supports Israel is telling us how to be human.
That's the best laugh I had all day.
No kidding. The irony of that has just arrived, all aboard!
originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
All the facts of this case still have yet to be made fully public; but there are a few things we do know: This couple was engaged in behavior that made the other passengers feel uncomfortable.
originally posted by iskander
Indeed. Stupidity makes me uncomfortable for example, specifically because at one point in our countries history, in stead of it being considered to be embarrassing, it became the norm.
originally posted by iskander
osram, watch this
First; if you're going to quote someone it's good protocol to include emphasis items as well; such as bold and italics. Secondly; Identify whom your quoting.
The simple difference here is that a couple engaging in inappropriate behavior is doing so deliberately and of their own volition.
You, on the other hand, are uncomfortable around some people for reasons over which they may have little or no control.
The rest of your post is indicative of an emasculated man seemingly stuck within the mental prison of perpetual victimhood; always angry; always sniping; and deriving pleasure by passively, and aggressively, twisting the words and contexts of others' to fulfill your mental masturbatory needs. You need help. And after responding in this post, I see no need to continue deliberating with you. You are way out there beyond any sense of reasonableness and logic!!!
Well I understand that people may disagree with me all the time, but when they resort to these childish antics that's when you have to use the ignore feature. I've tried to stay on topic the whole time, which is -why a couple were charged under the patriot act. However it seems iskander and perhaps another are aiming their attacks at me personally. So debating them would be futile.
And I agree with what you said freedom_for_sum. My suggestion is that when people can't focus on the topic, it's just better to ignore them.