Nothing of the sort, unless

Post #17,200 by Ashton 11/7/01 4:38:21 PM 11/7/01 4:47:22 PM Reply	Nothing of the sort, unless it is. My comment stands, and was a reply to Drook. I found the original caricatures of this woman - too predictable to follow from 'analysis of facts', of which there were few. Still. We've seen just summaries of the events by contradictory 'version'. It is still so: whatever her internal opinion, we're just guessing about its transparency. She says she did not 'act out' her opinion of the guard (merely attempted to explain what she thought it was: to us). Was the 'zipper help gesture' sufficient grounds to imagine she was about to detonate some &(%)&* suicidal Bomb? - Sure.. if yer on 100% adrenaline and the 'S' means (to you) that she's likely a moll of an Imam! Imagination Rulez. There and sometimes here. Have you never encountered a person behaving patently officiously and equally predictably: and withheld acting on your er 'insight'? Think she could manage that? And given that she was pre-selected - do you really think it strange that she might associate that with recent criticism of an Administration whose Spokes-puppet recently said on the Tee Vee Watch what you say* !* Only a geek would imagine she'd associate web-purchase with "S"elected. IMO. Sorry, no - whatever her internal dialogue from experience was - we don't know WHICH of those stories is nearer the Rashomon panorama of 'truths' Ashton Whose beard started long before it became a Badge, but then I kept it anyway - just to freak out Puritans before breakfast. Seen Real hippies and beats before that; kinfolk. City Lights bookstore in SF. Met Ferlinghetti; went into the Black Cat (when mostly special gurlz hung out there) yada Credentials? PS: I find much to disagree with re the Green Party. This woman is no more a fount of wisdom than yer average Reactionary masquerading as some sorta 'conservative' euphemism. (I Got Mine - so Fuck You\ufffd Inc.) Whatever happened to the great puppy-dog Murican underdog bias: that one at least had a kernel of instinctive 'truth' in it !? Enjoy your flight :-) Edited by Missing User 70 Nov. 7, 2001, 04:47:22 PM EST Nothing of the sort, unless it is. My comment stands, and was a reply to Drook. I found the original caricatures of this woman - too predictable to follow from 'analysis of facts', of which there were few. Still. We've seen just summaries of the events by contradictory 'version'. It is still so: whatever her internal opinion, we're just guessing about its transparency. She says she did not 'act out' her opinion of the guard (merely attempted to explain what she thought it was: to us). Was the 'zipper help gesture' sufficient grounds to imagine she was about to detonate some &(%)&* suicidal Bomb? - Sure.. if yer on 100% adrenaline and the 'S' means (to you) that she's likely a moll of an Imam! Imagination Rulez. There and sometimes here. Have you never encountered a person behaving patently officiously and equally predictably: and withheld acting on your er 'insight'? Think she could manage that? And given that she was pre-selected - do you really think it strange that she might associate that with recent criticism of an Administration whose Spokes-puppet recently said on the Tee Vee Watch what you say* !* Only a geek would imagine she'd associate web-purchase with "S"elected. IMO. Sorry, no - whatever her internal dialogue from experience was - we don't know WHICH of those stories is nearer the Rashomon panorama of 'truths' Ashton Whose beard started long before it became a Badge, but then I kept it anyway - just to freak out Puritans before breakfast. Seen Real hippies and beats before that; kinfolk. City Lights bookstore in SF. Met Ferlinghetti; went into the Black Cat (when mostly special gurlz hung out there) yada Credentials? Collapse All History
Post #17,202 by Silverlock 11/7/01 4:50:11 PM Reply	Re: Credentials None but the nickname. :) Don Richards, recipient of the ABBA.
Post #17,209 by Ashton 11/7/01 5:02:05 PM Reply	Misspoke here.. Credentials? meant - izzat enough? Not - 'Prove you are You' (!) I'm with Dick Feynman (credentials ~ awards) Awards is epaulets.. (re Nobel and others) OK.. I did win a Silver bugle once ;-) A.
Post #17,208 by Another Scott 11/7/01 4:55:41 PM Reply	Come on, Ashton. Was the 'zipper help gesture' sufficient grounds to imagine she was about to detonate some &(%)& suicidal Bomb? - Sure.. if yer on 100% adrenaline and the 'S' means (to you) that she's likely a moll of an Imam! Have you flown on a commercial flight in the last few years? If so, you may recall signs near the security checkpoints which say things like, [link\|http://www.faa.gov/apa/pr/pr.cfm?id=1184\|this]: \ufffd Do not joke about having a bomb or firearm in your possession. Security personnel are trained to react when they hear these words. Penalties can be severe, and can include time in prison and fines. These rules were in place before 9/11. The security personnel may have over reacted. She apparently wasn't a threat. But that's not the issue. The security personnel have to be able to do their job whether a potential passenger is a threat or not. To apparently claim that her not following instructions (according to one report) was OK (since she wasn't going to immolate the people at the checkpoint or on the plane) and thus should be OK to fly is a bit much. If telling jokes about bombs can get one jail time, then I don't see how not following instructions during a search and missing a flight is such a draconian measure. Being able to fly from a commercial airport isn't a right. Your point about not having impartial observers is good. But your arguments about the inferences we can draw based on what we do know don't work too well, IMHO. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #17,212 by Ashton 11/7/01 5:20:21 PM Reply	Tilt! What are you talking about? There were NO BOMB JOKES or gestures as far as I heard anywhere! I was merely imagining the worst interpretation a guard might have given to, her having reached over to help with a zipper THAT is what she said she did and why (she said) she did it. Have you some new information which can properly attach a more sinister take to the event? Aside from imagining one, that is? He grabbed her arm. I said the above - as justification for maybe why he did so. I (nor you) HAVE NO IDEA what actually transpired in that mini-slice of the overall soap opera. "Not following instructions". That is suitably vague so as to encompass her body stance, her facial expression, the imputation of an S on her gate-pass, the fear of a newbie 'Inspector' -- and ALL the REST. What does it MEAN ?? {Sheesh} My arguments about the inferences we might properly draw, stand: very few. Most HAVE drawn them and embellished deep down into her mindset, ergo: She MUST have also ____! oO0HH.!. Simply, I say - these are projections from fucking Insufficient data. EOF That's my take on what I have read. We'll talk when something comes in from an uninvolved witness or preferably at least three. Ashton It's neither a Green nor a Red thing. It's about character assassination via innuendo.
Post #17,221 by Another Scott 11/7/01 5:53:02 PM Reply	OK, I'll try again. I'll try to be clearer. There were NO BOMB JOKES or gestures as far as I heard anywhere! I was merely imagining the worst interpretation a guard might have given to, her having reached over to help with a zipper THAT is what she said she did and why (she said) she did it. Have you some new information which can properly attach a more sinister take to the event? Aside from imagining one, that is? My attempted point was that things are different at airport security checkpoints than at other places in society. We all know this. One of the differences is that jokes about bombs can result in jail time. I'm not saying that she said anything about a bomb. But along with the restriction about jokes, there are implicit (and maybe explicit, I haven't checked) expectations that potential passengers will cooperate with the security personnel or will be refused passage onto a flight. Thus, to my mind and apparently to the minds of the security people, it doesn't matter what her intent was in helping another person with their zipper. Her actions, and her admitted subsequent actions, indicated to the security personnel that she wasn't being cooperative. The security people aren't there to placate people who have a chip on their shoulder or who want to behave childishly. And I do think she acted childishly, but that's just my inference. It's about character assassination via innuendo. I don't think I've engaged in that. Now we might agree that these comments by [link\|http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&threadm=Pine.LNX.4.10.10111052138180.13487-100000%40spock.peak.org&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DOden%2BGreen%2Bparty%2BMaine%2Bdisruptive%26hl%3Den\|Brent White] about her approach that level. I agree with you that more disinterested reports about Bangor would be better, but I don't think that's going to appear. Sorry for chastising you. I'm done in this thread, I hope. Cheers, Scott.
Post #17,224 by Ashton 11/7/01 6:17:30 PM Reply	Whew.. Lots of duplication in the posts, but one excerpt appears to be similar to mine: As I said before, the Oden case appears to me to be a case of individual harassment. The evidence is not quite in yet on what actually happened though. I would personally like to hear what impartial people who watched this had to say before I am ready to make a final conclusion. I heard her side of the story on the radio. It may not be the only side as is true in almost all disputes like this. Since this strongly appears to be an individual (and serious) dispute, I think there is a little time to look into this further. Mr. Cohen mentioned that several politicians were investigating this. I know the Green Party of the U.S. says it is doing the same. Let's see what they find here. Similar to mine except: I'm not convinced yet that she Was 'singled out because of her politics' - I am fairly convinced though, that she Though that was the reason (and was likely unaware of the 'web'-ordered ticket connection). Peace. A.

Welcome to IWETHEY!