3 ms·
I think you're ranting, and did not actually read the article. This guy clearly did not have the objective of "getting in the TSA workers' faces"; the article c
by Bud 14y ago
I think you're ranting, and did not actually read the article. This guy clearly did not have the objective of "getting in the TSA workers' faces"; the article clearly states that he had already cleared the TSA checkpoint without incident, and was then challenged by a Delta supervisor.
It sounds to me, based on all the facts we have available, that someone got in this guy's face. Not the other way around.
So basically, you are making up your entire argument.
- dhimes 14y agoNope. You are reading his story without thinking. I don't buy his story. He's a punk who was getting off on the whole idea of what he was doing. There are three possibilities in this case: (1) he woke up, possibly hung over, and dressed without thinking; (2) he deliberated picked his shirt knowing he would be dealing with TSA agents, etc. (in your face!) and possibly knowing that he would make some folks nervous and not giving a shit; or (3) he made the choice in #2 but with the aim to antagonize-- in essence, psychologically bullying those around him (Oh, I'm not scared, are you?). I figure that if it was #1 the blog post would have bee a whole lot different. The best I can allow him is that it was a move of immaturity. I am not applauding, regardless of my stance on the TSA and their practices.
- Someone 14y ago"based on all the facts we have available"? The only facts I get from this page are "there is this guy who is pissed because he got kicked from a plane, allegedly solely for wearing this anti-TSA t-shirt". The article contains a one-sided statement. It may be factually correct, or it may not, but we do not know which.