In the recent news :
"A MAN has threatened legal action against Qantas for barring him from an international flight because he was wearing a T-shirt depicting US President George W. Bush as a terrorist".
-Should he be allowed to fly wearing the T-shirt?
2007-01-21 17:53:59 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
As a former pilot, I see the situation as a SAFETY ISSUE and not as a political
nor freedom of speech/expression issue. In today's security environment, one should not expect a riot or possible passenger compartment melee to actually have to take place before any action is taken. I think the refusal to take the Moslem (priests?) on board was for the same line of reasoning --
not as an act of barring religious freedom.
2007-01-21 19:17:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
it's a toss-up between Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan - both of which I can't open a newspaper, turn on a tv OR my computer and hear about. It's NOT hot!
As for the T-shirt, I don't see why an Australian airline should care what is thought about a leader of another country unless it's the fact they don't want to be depicted as against the Americans and their policies. It's a joke, 'tis all, but these are frightening times so....
2007-01-21 18:07:36 · answer #2 · answered by aquiellez 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The fellow who was wearing the T Shirt may be sick due to US actions in Islamic world! That could be his personal known expression to his freedom to express!
If security in the Airport hold him, that is their duty to express the power of law!!
Better he wears a woolen jacket over the T-shirt while he enters the security and removes after the security checkup.
So both the freedoms gets negotiated with a Jacket....
2007-01-21 18:37:18 · answer #3 · answered by SESHADRI K 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, that's no longer a splendid definition. he's no longer utilising terrorism yet he's utilising conflict that's a lot each and all of the comparable. human beings criticize yet i do no longer see everyone giving strategies whilst it is composed of terrorist. i won't be able to see the different clever thank you to combat those people who kill interior the call of God. that's no longer a customary style of conflict, we are combating people who think of death is glorifying and helpful. i've got self assurance we could desire to consistently depart them to combat among themselves, the way it grow to be till now and subject greater concerning the needs of our very own u . s . a .. yet on account that oil is a controversy too, shall we've spent all that money on looking greater powerful aspects of power. Venezuela and Mexico have various of oil and shall we've negociated with them for greater grant yet now they're skiddish approximately making deals with us because of the undesirable attractiveness Bush made for himself in Irak. This Irak invasion merely ruined our opportunities someplace else.
2016-11-26 01:31:38 · answer #4 · answered by riddle 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What are you asking? Should the man wear a vulgar T-shirt? No. Virgin Blue Airlines asked him to remove the shirt too. What an idiot. Australia is better off without his citizenship.
World's worst terrorist? Each feverish fundamentalist who mindlessly straps a bomb to his body. He's like a disposable razor blade, although less bang for the buck.
Far worse are sponsors of terror: Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, Chavez, al-Assad, Kennedy, Carter...Russia, China, House of Saud, France, countries on the horn of Africa...the list goes on.
Please focus on their activities.
2007-01-21 18:53:04 · answer #5 · answered by Lana Lang 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
To quote bush, "Now we are fighting terrorist, in their home country." The t-shirt is a bit below my personal tastes. Sadly, i don't think that the freedom of free speech is internationally respected, seeing this the case i don't think he has any legal backing.
2007-01-21 18:01:42 · answer #6 · answered by jerome2all 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well if he is a member of the military, it's against the UCMJ, to go against your leader, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't let him fly, and legally he has no leg to stand on. But as far as a civilian goes, I don't see a legal reason to not let him fly, but it may have sparked some serious rage on the plane and you never know what could have happened.
2007-01-21 17:59:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, he should be. Not only is it freedom of speech but Bush is actually seen as a terrorist by many including me.
2007-01-21 18:32:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Godzilla was #1, last I checked. And yes, the man should be allowed to wear whatever he wants when he flys.
2007-01-21 18:02:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
yea i think so the constitution says that everyone has freedom of speech and if that is what this man thinks he should be able to express himself
2007-01-21 17:57:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋