If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
And if he was headed back to DC for a session of the Senate that may have
well been a Constitutional violation. "Roger Long" wrote in message . .. Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his flight. Now, I know that the political leanings of most of you in this group will lead you to think that keeping people like Kennedy off of airplanes and away from Washington is good for the nation. However, if it can happen to him, it can happen to anybody. Considering some of my posts here, I won't be surprised if I can't get on my next commercial flight either. The days when we have to stop by the police department before we leave town can't be very far off. -- Roger Long |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Roger Long" wrote: Putting Kennedy on a no-drive list would make more sense... Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his flight. -- Take out the airplane for reply |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Robert Briggs" wrote in message ... lance smith quoted: Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for Ridge's department. Was Ridge *really* making sure that "the situation was remedied"? Or was he merely interested in avoiding a repeat incident for Ted? I think the proper term is "sucking up." IMWTK |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The airline has a right and responsibility to not board Ted Kennedy.
The FAA has a FAR which prohibits the boarding of an intoxicated passenger. Besides, any aircraft, short of a C5A, would be over max. ramp weight with that lard butt on board. Wallace Berry wrote in message ... In article , "Roger Long" wrote: Putting Kennedy on a no-drive list would make more sense... Yes, really! It took him several phone calls before he could get on his flight. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Recently, lance smith posted:
I'm not the biggest fan of Kennedy but he raises a good point- if it took a senator weeks and many calls to get off the list, what would it take and how long would it take an ordinary American to get off the list? It may not be possible. Here's the link and the text of the Reuters story: How can some of this just "slip by" people? A Kennedy spokesman said the whole thing had resulted from a simple error and had not been politically motivated. How would a Kennedy spokesman know this? It sounds like a political appeasement to me. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge personally called Kennedy "to make sure that the situation was remedied," said a spokeswoman for Ridge's department. Why would Ridge have to check with Kennedy to make sure of such a thing? He should have complete access to the system that created this "simple error", and should know for a fact whether the situation (obviously not the ability to make such "simple errors") was remedied. Calling the victim of such errors should yield no useful information whatsoever, as the victim would only know whether they were stopped on a particular flight, not whether the "situation was remedied". Are we really that gullible a people? Neil |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | December 1st 04 06:28 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | November 9th 04 03:47 PM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | April 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | March 1st 04 07:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | November 1st 03 06:27 AM |