NationStates Jolt Archive

what law requires flight personnel to be complete buttholes?

It's America, what do you expect....:rolleyes:

They were doing what the Department of Homeland Security had enforced and talked about - the public alerting any suspicious activity. If they had ignored the passengers claim completely, then they would get sued by the passengers or something, since they could be so paranoid that they'd get off the plane. And, what if the airlines declines to investigate a suspicious claim and it was indeed true, where the "suspicious Muslims" or whoever actually did hijack the plane and fly it into a building? Then you get mega-sued by like every single family who suffered a loss in that, comapanies who suffered losses, and the US Government. Better a few Muslims suing your ass then a whole country, eh?

I hope you turn yourself into the Department of Homeland Security, Abdul.

Now there's a magic trick you don't see much anymore, the classic 'turning-oneself-into-a-branch-of-government' trick. It's one of my favourites, right up there with the 'levitating-disappearing-lady' trick.

You rock, Doug Henning.

You can't choose your ethnicity. You can choose your ideology. If the jews want to be treated good, they should drop their train wreck of a religion.

Hey, lookie here. I only had to change ONE word for your statement to sound like a Nazi manifesto. And, before anyone yells "Godwin", this comparison is perfectly sound. Because you know as much about Islam as the Nazis knew about Judaism: Jack shit.

You can't choose your ethnicity. You can choose your ideology. If they want to be treated good, they should drop their train wreck of a religion.

I am troll, hear me spout bullshit.

I am troll, hear me spout bullshit.

Is all you do flame?

Is all you do flame?

Nah.

You can't choose your ethnicity. You can choose your ideology. If they want to be treated good, they should drop their train wreck of a religion.

Like you dropped trying to be an intarweb German?

You can't choose your ethnicity. You can choose your ideology. If they want to be treated good, they should drop their train wreck of a religion.

Ah, yes. I'll go right out and convince my brother and (hopefully) sister in law to stop being Muslim. I'll let them know what you said, and I'm sure that they'll take the word of a total stranger and run to the nearest church and jump in the holy water. Because your word carries so much weight with the entire known universe. :rolleyes:

Seriously, saying all Muslims should stop being Muslims because some Muslims are asshats (eg bin Laden, Farrakhan, etc) is like saying all Christians should stop being Christians because some Christians are asshats (eg Pat Robertson, that guy who got caught with the call boy and the meth, and Fred Phelps). The comparison kinda breaks down when you apply it to dogma you agree with, doesn't it?

Remember folks, looking Muslim is suspicious behavior. Please report yourself to airport security immediately.

Is all you do flame?

There's a difference between flaming and calling a spade a shovel.

I'm curious about something. In the situation that they had been terrorists, what could they have actually done?
Used the seat belt extenders as flails?
Bitch slapped people into submission with their korans?

I mean realistically they would have to have gone through metal detectors, i'm sure they had to pass they're shoes/sandals through the metal detector. no powders allowed, or any remotely sharp objects allowed. So what could they have done?

Also I find this quite telling on what some passengers think of the level of security that is currently found at airports, if they think such obviously suspicious (in their eyes) passengers were able to get through the security checks.

I'm curious about something. In the situation that they had been terrorists, what could they have actually done?
Used the seat belt extenders as flails?

Never heard of the Imam Feat that allows them to Craft +3, American Slaying seatbelt extenders? :p (Sarcasm)

There's a difference between flaming and calling a spade a shovel.

Isn't that vaguely racist. Or at least an aphorism that should be dropped because of its wording?

In any case, disagree with the argument, don't insult the person offering it.

As far as I know that used to be the rules around here.

Never heard of the Imam Feat that allows them to Craft +3, American Slaying seatbelt extenders? :p (Sarcasm)

I thought that ability was only available to Buddist Monks?

Isn't that vaguely racist. Or at least an aphorism that should be dropped because of its wording?

In any case, disagree with the argument, don't insult the person offering it.

As far as I know that used to be the rules around here.

I'm not a native speaker, but isn't "spade" and "shovel" merely the object you use to dig? o_O

Regardless, I do think TPF is trolling.

I thought that ability was only available to Buddist Monks?

No, they get Self-Immolation at 8th level.

I'm not a native speaker, but isn'r "spade" and "shovel" merely the object you use to dig? o_O

Regardless, I do think TPF is trolling.

I can't speak to TPF trolling, I don't know him or her.

But the expression calling "a spade a shovel" obviously goes back to the expression "I call a spade a spade". Which was probably fine originally, until it was used by people who also called black people "spades" as a racist joke.

But the expression calling "a spade a shovel" obviously goes back to the expression "I call a spade a spade". Which was probably fine originally, until it was used by people who also called black people "spades" as a racist joke.

Okay, I rephrase: "Calling a shovel a shovel." :p

No, they get Self-Immolation at 8th level.

:p funny

so

Rabbi's get jewelcrafting at 20th level?

:p funny

so

Rabbi's get jewelcrafting at 20th level?

Eh, I dunno, I'm not good at Religion-Charting for nutjobs that think seatbelts can become weapons. :p

Eh, I dunno, I'm not good at Religion-Charting for nutjobs that think seatbelts can become weapons. :p

well i think its a fair point. How exactly were these people a threat? forgetting whether they were thought of as suspicious or not, where was the threat?

well i think its a fair point. How exactly were these people a threat? forgetting whether they were thought of as suspicious or not, where was the threat?

I think it was asking for seatbelt extenders when they didn't need them.

I think it was asking for seatbelt extenders when they didn't need them.

Because... they could use the seatbelt extenders as - as Siempre Ciego said - flails? Quosque tandem abutere patientia nostra?

Because... they could use the seatbelt extenders as - as Siempre Ciego said - flails? Quosque tandem abutere patientia nostra?

or maybe as a garrote...

Because... they could use the seatbelt extenders as - as Siempre Ciego said - flails? Quosque tandem abutere patientia nostra?

Seat belt extenders have a heavy metal bit on the end apparently. That's how they extend the seatbelt. It's not just a piece of cloth.

All this will come out in the trial in any case. If there is a trial.

(I think you are missing a U).

I think it was asking for seatbelt extenders when they didn't need them.

Are you advising the terrorists to eat unhealthily?

Are you advising the terrorists to eat unhealthily?

Absolutely not. The one thing I respect about them is their modesty in consumption.

It's a praiseworthy attribute, and something americans could learn from.

Seat belt extenders have a heavy metal bit on the end apparently. That's how they extend the seatbelt. It's not just a piece of cloth.

All this will come out in the trial in any case. If there is a trial.

(I think you are missing a U).

My bad: Quo usque tandem...

Still, I'm pretty sure their fists are easier to handle than the extenders.

Still, I'm pretty sure their fists are easier to handle than the extenders.

As far as I know, seat belt extenders have both a male, and a heavy female clasp on either end, joined by nylon webbing. The webbing can be extended out to about two feet. Obviously that can be use as a weapon to cosh people with. (And more easily than with fists).

And, according to the passengers, they didn't even fit the extenders when given to them (despite not needing them) but rather just put them under the seat for later.

I wasn't on the plane, so I can't say what actually happened. But if you consider for a second that the other passengers weren't lying and a bunch of people who didn't need extenders asked for them, didn't even try and fit them, and then spent time up and down the aisles conferring with each other, you can see where the suspicion came from. No?

Of course the other passengers may have been lying, in which case it will come out.

As far as I know, seat belt extenders have both a male, and a heavy female clasp on either end, joined by nylon webbing. The webbing can be extended out to about two feet. Obviously that can be use as a weapon to cosh people with. (And more easily than with fists).

And, according to the passengers, they didn't even fit the extenders when given to them (despite not needing them) but rather just put them under the seat for later.

I wasn't on the plane, so I can't say what actually happened. But if you consider for a second that the other passengers weren't lying and a bunch of people who didn't need extenders asked for them, didn't even try and fit them, and then spent time up and down the aisles conferring with each other, you can see where the suspicion came from. No?

Of course the other passengers may have been lying, in which case it will come out.

Still not a very good method of fighting. Plus, the question is, would that happen to, say, priests that did the same thing?

Still not a very good method of fighting. Plus, the question is, would that happen to, say, priests that did the same thing?

I'm not an expert in unarmed combat, so I can't opine as to whether or not is actually a good method. But from my non-expert point of view I would view that as threatening.

And again, I don't care about the religion. It is all never no mind to me. All the same. If indeed a bunch of priest were hiding seat belt extenders under their seats - and didn't need them, or try them for size - I would have exactly the same concerns.

But it isn't about me anyway. It's about whether or not a reasonable person could see a threat in their behavior. Which, assuming for the sake of argument the other passengers story is true, is reasonable.

This relates to this story in a sense that it shows near 0 tolerance for BS on a flight getting ready to take off. This pilot found out the hard way.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/07/swearing.pilot/index.html

This relates to this story in a sense that it shows near 0 tolerance for BS on a flight getting ready to take off. This pilot found out the hard way.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/07/swearing.pilot/index.html

I'll assume you know the difference between cursing at passengers and praying.

This relates to this story in a sense that it shows near 0 tolerance for BS on a flight getting ready to take off. This pilot found out the hard way.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/07/swearing.pilot/index.htmlAnd? Does a pilot not have the right to bitching on the phone? And if those jerks wanted to be home for easter, they just should have let the pilot alone.
And this incident has nothing to do with removing passengers from a flight on ideological grounds.

And? Does a pilot not have the right to bitching on the phone? And if those jerks wanted to be home for easter, they just should have let the pilot alone.
And this incident has nothing to do with removing passengers from a flight on ideological grounds.

I maintain that the Imams were not removed on ideological grounds however their odd behavior. Some of you keep insisting and assuming it was because of Ideology. Keep in mind I am also a Muslim too.
The pilot was also removed for odd behavior. My whole point earlier is that a flight has a no BS rule. If you cause a disturbance that the crew deems worthy enough to boot you then they can. The pilot in the story started in on the passengers when they told him to knock it off. I would have told this guy to knock it off myself. They did the right thing in removing him.

And? Does a pilot not have the right to bitching on the phone? And if those jerks wanted to be home for easter, they just should have let the pilot alone.
And this incident has nothing to do with removing passengers from a flight on ideological grounds.

You don't fly very much do you? In fact I am willing to bet you've only been on a plane once or twice in your life.

I maintain that the Imams were not removed on ideological grounds however their odd behavior. Some of you keep insisting and assuming it was because of Ideology. Keep in mind I am also a Muslim too.
The pilot was also removed for odd behavior. My whole point earlier is that a flight has a no BS rule. If you cause a disturbance that the crew deems worthy enough to boot you then they can. The pilot in the story started in on the passengers when they told him to knock it off. I would have told this guy to knock it off myself. They did the right thing in removing him.So what was the Imams' odd behavior again? Praying in Arabic? In uberchristian America?
And why would you care about someone else's telephone conversations? It's just nobody's business but of those on the phone. And if you drop the pilot you must not bitch if you are going nowhere.

So what was the Imams' odd behavior again? Praying in Arabic? In uberchristian America?
And why would you care about someone else's telephone conversations? It's just nobody's business but of those on the phone. And if you drop the pilot you must not bitch if you are going nowhere.

Actually, I agree with dropping the pilot, but the company should keep extra personnel to ALLOW the passengers to go places in cases like this. If I lost, say, a job interview because of this pilot's behavior, I'd sue the company. Or sell the pilot's organs to make up for the money.