Posted on 12/03/2009 8:38:00 AM PST by jazminerose
Read in the context of Doug Hagmann’s explanation of al battar, is this a simple misunderstanding or something more sinister?
From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating what led to the two-and-a-half hour delay of a Tuesday flight from Atlanta to Houston, an agency spokeswoman said Wednesday morning.
An AirTran spokesman said a man traveling with a group Tuesday afternoon refused to turn his cell phone off before takeoff. But the woman sitting behind the man said it wasn’t a phone at all, and feels the entire incident was the result of poor communication.
“He was not talking on a cell phone, it was a camera,’ said Nancy Deveikis of Marietta. ‘He was looking at pictures.’
A flight attendant asked the man twice to turn off the device, Deveikis said. But it was clear the man did not speak English, she said. Although the man was traveling with others, the rest of the group was seated throughout the plane.
When the man did not respond to the flight attendant, she took the camera from him, Deveikis said. Deveikis, who presented ajc.com with her boarding pass for the flight, said she watched the exchange from directly behind the man in seat 28A and the female flight attendant.
(Excerpt) Read more at joytiz.com ...
Terrorist dry run? Fishing for a lawsuit/settlement?
How about BOTH!
There are a number of postings about this on the internet if you google it. Some seem like very reliable sources to me. One is by the by Dr. Keith A. Robinson Corps Commander of the Houston Regional Community Chaplain Corps who was on the flight
http://espositosmusings.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/air-tran-flight-297-incident1.pdf
Sure. Whatever. I can’t seem to find a Houstan Chaplin Corp and the only guy by that name I see is a dentist who doubles as a humorist/TV producer/hired speaker.
Upon the first reading the mess from the AJC quisling {spit} it said, "An AirTran spokesman said a man traveling with a group Tuesday afternoon refused to turn his cell phone off before takeoff."
First thing that came to mind was, "A man? What kind of man..." Otherwise, there as nothing insofar as real information. Alright?
Then I read further, see what others might've said.
Came to Uncle Miltie's (thanks, Uncle) post at #5: "11 Muslim men got on the plane in full attire." and then I knew what kind of men. Everything else made perfect sense after that. ;^)
To see some on this thread DEFENDING this crap is unconscionable.
Thanks for the ping, my friend.
Sending out the call for others to read, because I can.
Hear me, *stormer* {spit}, you pathetic creep.
Whatever. Save your spit - it sounds as if you’re already dehydrated.
Not only a large number of passangers but also the entire crew of the flight refused to fly.
They left and were replaced by another full crew.
fu creep
My my. Testy, are we?
fu creep
fu creep
Perhaps, but my contact with a Senior FAA official in DC bears out most of the facts, that the group WAS acting out of order and intentionally causing disruption.
>>Bear in mind, the event took place weeks ago. In the modern political and news climate, you don’t think a story like this (given he facts as you accept them) would not have been more widely reported?<<
Given the political and news climate is precisely why the incident was not more widely, and loudly, reported.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.