Post #16,900
11/6/01 3:17:51 PM
|
See above: thus far it is ALL 'formalized' hearsay of
CONTRADICTORY VERSIONS of what happened.
And you, slave that you are to applying binary logic to every manifestation of real life*, indiscriminately are Laughably consistent in your choosing of a 0 over a 1:
* hint: real life is never logical, let alone Boolean. Only machines are 'logical'. logical. logical. EOF.
SHE must be GUILTY because the other side is AUTHORITY: your unerring choice in every case where the information is inadequate to fairly assessing [in FACT..] WHO LIED.
(Have you a statue of Geo. Boole in your secret closet, along with your first engraving of Adam Smith? With candle drippings, perhaps?)
A.
|
Post #16,903
11/6/01 3:20:41 PM
|
There are 2 accounts...
...the airports and the newspapers.
Airport says she refused...news guy said she insisted on not being touched...either way...she balked at a security measure at the airport. They then have an obligation to the remaining passengers in the facility to deny her access.
No grandiose >authority< play here.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #16,912
11/6/01 3:31:21 PM
|
Bill, you are telling a lie.
"Airport says she refused..."
No. Not in EITHER story was it EVER said that she REFUSED.
Like I said, you didn't know what "detain" meant.
You don't know what "refused" means.
|
Post #16,935
11/6/01 4:13:08 PM
|
Keep nit-picking...
...it proves your case so sound when you do.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #16,943
11/6/01 4:21:31 PM
|
"detained"
"popular use"
Again, go to your local airport and try to pass security without being screened.
"nit-picking"?
Well, maybe in your mind.
But we've already established the condition of your mind.
"detained"
|
Post #16,937
11/6/01 4:15:04 PM
|
You need to do a little reading:
Airport says: "Ms. Oden was refused boarding after she failed to cooperate with required passenger screening protocols."
OK, maybe you think "failed to cooperate" doesn't mean a refusal to cooperate -- or maybe you're on another planet.
Tony
|
Post #16,941
11/6/01 4:19:38 PM
|
Read my other posts.
This is getting so old.
"Oden said that while she asked security staff not to touch her with the wand, she did allow them to complete their search of both her person and her baggage. "
There, quoted and referenced.
SHE DID NOT REFUSE TO BE SCREENED.
Maybe you should do a little reading.
I've only posted this about a dozen times.
|
Post #16,948
11/6/01 4:25:31 PM
|
She did not...
...submit herself to be screened in the manner they require.
I believe I posted a rediculous statement about hanging her upside down afterwards to make a point that you still are missing.
IT DOESN'T MATTER what she let them do...what matters it what she did NOT let them do...and that denial of a required screening protocol denied her access to the secure area of the airport.
You turn to come up with some more rediculous justifications for your very weak case.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #16,972
11/6/01 4:47:47 PM
|
Which was my point.
"...what matters it what she did NOT let them do..."
Kowtow to the authorities.
Again, my challenge still stands.
And your refusal to take it tells the truth.
|
Post #16,981
11/6/01 5:01:11 PM
|
No it wasn't.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
