I personally think that rule is asinine. The rule "don't fuck with the airplanes" was intended to handle TERRORISM. Not bad behavior or someone demanding extra peanuts.
Could their actions EVER be misinterpreted as TERRORISM? The very fact that so few people care about what I consider a true loss of freedom, that you all think that giving up basic freedoms in the name of security is perfectly sensible, does truly scare me. We seem to have lost "common sense" in all of this. That is what frightens me. There is no rationality left in all of this. And no, how they get punished is NOT up to their lawyers. With the very heavy handed rules and laws now in place against TERRORISM, which we were assured before they passed them would NEVER get used for things not TERRORIST related, they have very few options. On 11/16/06, Erika L. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How they get punished is up to their lawyers who no doubtedly will get > them the appropriate punishment. I mostly agree that they GET punished. > That's all. You know as well as I do that initial news coverage is never > the total facts. > > Everyone's jumping up and down as if this has gone to court already and > forgotten the fact that they disrupted and airplane. > > IN THIS DAY AND AGE, don't fuck with the airplanes. > > Simple. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:220842 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
