As to any alleged shenanigans by the so-called lamestream media in not giving both sides of the story, the airline refused to disclose the name of the woman who reported Menzio, claiming privacy. Thus, no media organization has been able to find her to ask for her account, and she has chosen not to come forward to give it. You can’t make bricks without straw. :smack:
I suppose doorhinge would suggest that the only responsible thing for the media to do (and thus presumably not be “lame”) if it can’t get both sides is to not report the story at all. :rolleyes:
Then the system worked. According to Obama’s Dept. of Homeland Security, if you see something, say something. The woman saw something and she said something. The authorities investigated and found nothing wrong. Some people on the internet have chosen to attack the woman for have the audacity to speak up. I guess they don’t believe this woman knows her place on an airplane (or maybe in society)?
I sometimes forget that you may have run into trees during your coaching and that could affect your thinking. AFAIK, it’s OK for women say something when they see something. I doubt they are willing to take internet advice to shut up and sit down.
No, I haven’t been implying that at all. I’m saying that all sides of the story has not been made public. Some people seem to believe that hearing one side of a story is enough evidence to jump to the conclusion that this woman must be a moron for speaking out. How dare she!
If there was anything more to the story there is absolutely nothing stopping her from talking about it, is there? He told his side of the story, which was pretty much confirmed by the authorities, and she has stayed mute on the subject. This has nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman(although you keep pushing that false premise in the absence of anything solid)-it’s the fact that she reported a person for doing math, inconveniencing him, the rest of the people on the plane and the authorities that had to check out her stupid claim.
Hahahaha. Maybe you should inform Obama’s Dept. of Homeland Security that their trademarked statement is wrong. It would mean so much more coming directly from you.
Nobody is seriously suggesting that this woman be legally punished for making a false report. She presumably made a report in good faith; one could say “pure heart, empty head”. But just like the First Amendment protects a person from governmental action due to free speech, not criticism or wholly social consequences, the decision to make a “see something, say something” report is not holy, sacred, or otherwise beyond criticism. :rolleyes:
While I can’t speak for anyone else, I do want a person who’s nervous at the thought of dark-skinned people on their plane, train, etc. to weigh the prospect of Internet criticism or mockery into his/her internal calculus of whether there’s actually anything suspicious beyond that to report. Even if I’m on that train with them. Actually, especially if I’m on that train with them.
If I’m wrong, then please respond to the other half of my posting – that the media doesn’t even know the woman’s name and she hasn’t chosen to give her account – in light of your repeated criticism that the media didn’t give both sides.
Translation: It just wasn’t dumbed down enough for her…or for you, apparently.
Does “If You See Bad Thing, Tell Badge Man!” work for you? No multi-syllable words to confuse you, and you won’t waste anyone’s time telling the police about the birds that just flew by.
That’s exactly what it means. If you’re not literally blind, you should be calling TSA or DHS on a regular basis, and after you call you should call them again because you saw the phone you called with, and your hand holding the phone, and the room you’re sitting in, and…
But just like the First Amendment protects a person from governmental action due to free speech, not criticism or wholly social consequences, the decision to make a “see something, say something” report is not holy, sacred, or otherwise beyond criticism. :rolleyes: