Posted on 11/15/2006 7:11:46 AM PST by bigdcaldavis
Apparently, by definition somewhere.
And freepers agree with that assessment?
Not this one, anyway. "Serious consequences" does not necessarily sound like a physical threat, just a big mouth.
Imo, they should not have offended the other passengers once they found out the other passengers were being offended (which might not take much nowadays).
BTW, are we 'profiling' male muslims 15 to 45 years old yet?
Uh Huh. Thought so.
To me, "serious consequences" was his way of saying "I'll have your punk ass fired"...but there are a lot of people who actually think that even threatening somebody's job/livelyhood is a violation of the Patriot Act. If that were true, Vince McMahon would already be in federal prison for all the wrestlers and announcers he's threatened with dismissal if they didn't give him a BJ.
How do you know "a passenger threatened a flight attendant"? Are you merely going off of the allegations of the flight attendant (which btw is what the governement has built the case on)? What if the flight attendant is making the whole thing up?
Because the passenger admitted he did so.
He now says his threat was directed at the flight attendant's job, not the flight attendant or the aircraft - but his threat was quite vague.
In the future he will probably not make anymore veiled threats at aircraft personnel. But you never know, since he is demonstrably a lecherous idiot.
Ok wideawake, just browsing and stumbled back across your comments. I had forgotten about everything you said until now. Now that the trial is over and I AM ACQUITTED, I will gladly put you in your place. My husband NEVER admitted to threatening Frank McCabe. I don’t know where you got your information but clearly you should work for the Enquirer. Mr. McCabe (SkyGod as he portrays himself on his myspace acct) put his hands on us on three separate occasions. He shook us awake and poked me very hard in my shoulder. Carl did have his face in my lap, BUT he was asleep. He was ill and medical documents show that, but were not allowed to the jury. Another thing not allowed to be viewed or heard by the jury is that the flight attendant was warned, not threatend, warned that we were going to report him to his superiors for his unprofessional behavior. He refused to give us his supervisors names or have them meet us at the airport upon arrival. He had 12 points against him in his personnel file with Southwest airlines and if he got one more, it meant loosing his job. Like I said before, the jury was not allowed to know that. Carl was convicted and there will be an appeal. There is so much more to this then I could ever begin to explain, but just know this, neither of us have ever been in trouble a day in our lives, we are both parents and hold jobs. We are true Americans. Carl fought for our county and is a veteran of foreign war. It is very hard for me to see so many people reach conclusions based on merely what they have seen or heard in the media. Maybe you should learn from this.
LOL!
Carl was convicted
Sounds more like he was put in his place, not I.
The issue wasn’t “speaking out.” The issue here is threatening a crew member on a flight. Extending this incident to Hitlery abusing the Patriot Act to stifle political dissent is pure hyperbole.
You’ll have to look elsewhere to attack the Patriot Act...
the important thing to know here is that the lady in question was not hot at all. I would not say brutal, but nothing close to hot. So the whole thing was a waste of time.
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.