Jayzus, The World Really Is Fucked Up

[filkertom]

With much posturing and preening, the "rebellious" GOP Senators fold like a map and give Chimpy pretty much free rein to rewrite the Geneva Conventions (while our "press" dutifully reports Dear Leader's "compromise" as if he made one and the useless fucking Dems either sit on the sidelines or scream their heads off but can't get it on TV, I have no idea which), while airline crew and passengers freak because they might get Teh Icky Gay on them.

Comments

[matociquala.livejournal.com]

La.

Watch out, it's the gay.

It's like the Blob; once it's on you, it never comes off.

[hughcasey.livejournal.com]

Thanks. Now I have that damned theme song running thru my head...

"Beware-of-the-GAY!"

*sigh*

That might be a song for you to record, Tom!

[matociquala.livejournal.com]

..it creeps, and creeps, and creeps...

SECOND!

[hughcasey.livejournal.com]

Heh heh...

... it creeps, and creeps, and swishes...

*grin*

[matociquala.livejournal.com]

also, I love your icon.

[hughcasey.livejournal.com]

Thanks!

[liddle-oldman.livejournal.com]

It seeps, it creeps, it crawls across the floor?

Beware of Teh Gay indeed, then!

*SIGH!*

[unclelumpy.livejournal.com]

Beware of the the Blob
It creeps and leaps
And glides and slides across the floor
And through the door
And all around the room
A splotch, a blotch
Be careful of the Blob

Amatuers.

[admnaismith.livejournal.com]

Where does it say that any passengers freaked, or even noticed? Seems to me it was only the crew.

Yeah, someone on the crew claimed to have had complaints from passengers, but refused to identify the alleged offended passengers. Also, the stewardess claimed to be acting on the purser's orders, when the purser evidently knew nothing about it. I suspect they made up the part about complaining passengers.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

Me, too. It's akin to saying "the lurkers support me in email."

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

Actually, from the purser's initial reaction, I suspect that not only did they make up the passengers, but that the *only* person who was actually freaked was that first stewardess, and the rest of the crew thought she was being an idiot. It was only when there was a comment which, to the purser, would sound like a threatened discrimination lawsuit (which it probably wasn't but which pursers are trained to be wary of) that she got all defensive and called in the captain. As far as I can tell, a crew member got out of line and the rest of the staff weren't personally inclined to support her, but felt they had to counterattack and make it seem like all the couple's fault in order to have a case in court if the couple decided to sue later.

[delayra.livejournal.com]

Exactly my take on it, too... see below

Pardon?

[capplor.livejournal.com]

I read very carefully about the "compromise" and it seems real, to me. Admittedly I have a newspaper article, and not the source, but the shrub seems to have conceded that the Geneva convention applies. Granted, the military tribunals remain, and the classified evidence is only "summarized" (and yes, I recognize the wiggle room in that), but that's what compromise is -- you get something, but not everything, that you want.

Re: Pardon?

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

The problem is that the list of what is explicitly forbidden doesn't include all forms of torture that are known to have been used by US interrogators to this point. Combined with explicitly permitting the President to authorize various unspecified sorts of interrogation, that's tantamount to giving the Shrub permission to authorize torture AND absolving those who administer the actual torture from prosecution.

It's a nice show for the lapdog media, but there's no substantive compromise there, and certainly no ban on actual torture.

Re: Pardon?

[capplor.livejournal.com]

In theory, if the Geneva convention does apply, doesn't that cover it all?

Re: Pardon?

[zibblsnrt.livejournal.com]

Except that some of these "compromises" involve picking and choosing which elements of the Conventions apply. The idea that one can compromise on a matter like that is repugnant, even if you don't factor in the questionable legality of cherrypicking which clauses of binding treaties apply and which ones don't.

Re: Pardon?

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

Sure, the Geneva Convention applies. He just applied another signing statement like he has to some 750 laws saying that it doesn't really. Compromise to Dumbass means he gets exactly what he wants.

Re: Pardon?

[capplor.livejournal.com]

If so, then it doesn't really matter whether he gets his bill or not.

Re: Pardon?

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

How so? How can it not matter? What you should be asking here is not whether the Geneva Convention applies, but whether those who vote for this "compromise" are now accomplices to war crimes and subject to trial in The Hague.

Ok, read the "gay" article

[capplor.livejournal.com]

Seems, other than the one stewardess, they weren't afraid of gays; they were afraid of ASSERTIVE gays. I"m not sure whether that makes any practical difference, but with the one exception, they were all laid back UNTIL someone questioned their authority an iota.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

The idea of a stewardess being upset by gay people makes me laugh.

The whole thing is bullshit. Straight people aren't told to stop groping under the airline-provided blanket, but two guys give each other a peck on the lips and it's RUN SCURRY FLEE WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE OF TEH GAY!

Also, you don't divert a plane because someone is questioning the flight staff. You divert, possibly, if someone is getting belligerent. Had I been a passenger on that flight and found out we'd been diverted because a gay man asked if he was being treated differently than a straight man, it wouldn't have been the gay man I'd have been furious with.

[realinterrobang.livejournal.com]

Straight people aren't told to stop groping under the airline-provided blanket

I beg to differ. At least on the airline for which my dad works, I know of two cases where straight-oriented sexual behaviour has, far beyond merely garnering a reprimand, gotten someone disinvited to ever patronise the airline again (as in, don't even try, we don't want your money anymore). I've never heard of a similar case involving gay behaviour. So, yes, I think they do get told to knock it off. (Keep it in your pants on the plane, people!)

A peck on the lips, straight, gay, or otherwise, shouldn't bother anyone, though.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

I was actually being hyperbolic; sorry. I should have been more clear.

I've been on planes where both have happened, to be fair: I've seen the crew tell them to knock it off, and I've seen them ignore it. I'm glad your dad's airline is one of those that doesn't put up with such nonsense.

I think what I meant (I had just woken up and was still bleary when I commented) was that, in general, straight people can get away with far more sexual behavior than a gay couple could.

ok, read the "gay" article

[kirylyn.livejournal.com]

agreed, granted it wasn't printed what was going on before but reacting to someone falling asleep and leaning their head on their fellow passenger??

what gets me is the multiple threats of turning the plane around. Granted I'm not flight crew but depending on where they were on a trans-atlantic flight, it might have been quicker to proceed to their destination than turn around.

granted it *does* seem to be the first stewardess, with her hair *and* mind stuck in the 60's, but I found the refusal to have someone from the airline meet them at the gate rather disturbing.

and if they were so "threatened" by the "unruly" passenger, why didn't they pat him down before allowing him near the captain?

yet another freedom being taken away in the name of "terror"

I'm not as worried about terrorists on board the planes as I am the flight crew abusing their authority!

[louisadkins.livejournal.com]

I really think that the current admin is trying the best to make sure that American Forces are seen in the worst light possible.

American Airlines

[delayra.livejournal.com]

I'm not surprised that it was that airline. My last encounter with them was when I was only 13... I was travelling alone from my father's home in Hawaii to my mother's in Missouri. Non-stop flight to Denver(CO) from Honolulu(HI), then to Tulsa(OK) was my flight path. They "lost" me. If a child under 14 is travelling alone, there is a special ticket-folder that they are given to identify them -- at least, this is the way it was then. There is a specific flight attendant that is in charge of making sure all the underage solo passengers are, well, kept tabs on. There were five of us on that flight, and they had me and another girl sitting together, with the three boys a couple of rows back and across the aisle. There was to be a couple hour layover in Denver, and the flight attendant rounded the five of us up and we exited the plane together. The boys hit the arcade, the other girl the clothing shop, and I went in search of food. An hour later, I came back to the gate... and was told there was still about half an hour before re-boarding. So I sat in a chair about 30 feet away and started reading a book I'd brought. I looked up from my book... and the plane was gone. I mean, when I sat down, I could see it through the big windows. I walked over to the lady at the door and she said, "Oh, was that your flight?" To which my reply was, "Why else would I have asked you about when we re-board?" She picked up an intercom and said something about a "smark-aleck kid" and was generally hostile to me for the ten minutes until the security guy came to walk me out to the rolling stairs. The plane hadn't quite taken off yet, so they'd stopped it and had the outdoor stairs brought to it. Then taken me to it to get me back on the plane. The flight attendant that was supposed to be in charge of the five underage passengers wanted to "talk" to me. The conversation was basically her telling me that yes, she'd seen me sitting there, but hadn't called out to me because it was her responsibility to make sure I was safe, not to "coddle" me and be responsible for me learning how to tell time

My mother heard the story and no one on either side of my family has ever used American again

Re: American Airlines

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

If leaving a kid alone in the airport constitutes safe, this must be some new definition of 'safe' with which I was previously unfamiliar.

Re: American Airlines

[delayra.livejournal.com]

Exactly. This was, by the way, about 18 years ago

[sifractusfortis.livejournal.com]

If I had all the money in the world, I'd buy Amtrak. Because I'm starting to think that, given the airline freaking out and the Bushinsky's freaking out over terrorism and the rising cost of fares, passenger trains are gonna make a comeback.

[admnaismith.livejournal.com]

Unless Bush dismantles Amtrak to pay for his next upper income tax cut, and to prove that government doesn't work.

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

Also, the Bushies *hate* Amtrak.

[greenlantern-oa.livejournal.com]

No where in the article were passengers freaking out about gay people, a little misleading don't ya think??
It seemed to me to be just a bunch of unprofessional stewardesses that had a problem with it.

[tomreedtoon.livejournal.com]

Back about "the Blob"...this could be a marching song for a gay/lesbian student group somewhere...

It cuts your hair
And cri-tic-iz-es all your clothes
Has pain-ted toes
A ring is in its nose
A smirk, a pose
Be care-ful of the Gay!

Be-ware of the Gay,
It cuts your hair...

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

Ok, I've wondered this for a while... is there some hidden meaning to "Teh" aside from "typing too fast to correct myself"?