To his *credit*? He was acting like a jackass, and you think it was to
his *credit* that he didn't resist against obviously overwhelming
force when he was booted off the plane for being a jackass? He simply
decided he didn't want to see the inside of a jail. So essentially, he
'believed' in his cause enough to cause consternation for others and
to disobey the captain of the airliner, but lacked the stones to go to
jail for his beliefs. His call...but hardly anything worthy of
admiration.

A remarkable number of Americans seem to think that because they think
they *should* have the right to do something means that they *should*
so that thing. Given the current sensitivity, I think most passengers
would be a bit concerned seeing somebody saunter down to the lav
wearing a button saying 'suspected terrorist'. Is he really a
suspected terrorist? Is he being transported on this plane? If he is,
where are his keepers? Why should the 'rights' of a self-aggrandizing
fool to yelp 'it's sort of a fire!' in a theater trump the rights of
the passengers (many of whom are naturally fearful of flying) to have
a flight that is not unnecessarily fear-inducing?

Obviously BA had the right to boot him. In fact, he agreed to that
right when he purchased a ticket. That isn't in doubt. But what I find
ironic is that this moron is acting like the wounded party because he
didn't get to exercise his 'right' to call attention to himself and
make other people feel uncomfortable. His 'Hey! Look at me! I'm being
clever! LOOK AT ME!' is a pethetic example of the histrionic tendency
that many (often otherwise worthless) people have developed....I guess
if you don't do anything worthy of note, if you can get enough people
to look at you, then that's close enough.

Pathetic.


"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...
|
|
|
| He was wearing a BUTTON, for god's sake. A while ago someone was kicked
out
| of a mall for wearing a t-shirt that expressed an anti-war opinion. In
each
| of these cases, could the respective parties force the patrons to leave?
| Sure, they could and they did. However, I wonder what we have come to
when
| this happens, when many of us are so intollerant of differing opinions.
Who
| does this remind me of? Are we becoming extremists in our thinking too?
|
|

That is a whole different issue.

While I would say that British Airways has a right to be intolerant of
divergent political opinions, I would also say that their actions exhibit an
extremist point of view. I think their actions also do their business more
harm than good.

To Mr. Gilmore's credit, he does not appear to have resisted being taken off
the airplane. His threat to sue is another matter, since that involves
government enforcement. If Mr. Gilmore had not threatened to sue the airline
I would not have a problem with anything he did. That does not meant that I
agree with his point of view. It does mean that I would not have a problem
with the way that he expressed.