Why'd they have to punish everyone else though?
November 13, 2001 9:30 PM Subscribe
Well, they aren't punishing 'everyone else'. They are simply securing the airplane to prevent a potential hijacking.
posted by schlyer at 9:39 PM on November 13, 2001
posted by schlyer at 9:39 PM on November 13, 2001
What I learned from this article:
- Go to the bathroom before the flight.
- Never screw with a plain-clothes sky marshal.
- Navajos were here before all you people.
posted by TacoConsumer at 9:52 PM on November 13, 2001
- Go to the bathroom before the flight.
- Never screw with a plain-clothes sky marshal.
- Navajos were here before all you people.
posted by TacoConsumer at 9:52 PM on November 13, 2001
Drink plenty of fluids. Effect bladder enlarging exercizes.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:29 PM on November 13, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 10:29 PM on November 13, 2001
"I just wanted to go to the bathroom"
"wanted" is in.. no longer needed
posted by stbalbach at 10:38 PM on November 13, 2001
"wanted" is in.. no longer needed
posted by stbalbach at 10:38 PM on November 13, 2001
Um, can they maybe hire sky Marshals who aren't so jumpy? I don't know that I like the idea of being locked in a little plane for X hours with armed men with hair triggers like that.
posted by MonkeyMeat at 10:42 PM on November 13, 2001
posted by MonkeyMeat at 10:42 PM on November 13, 2001
MonkeyMeat, I don't think you appreciate the severity of the situation. That man could have urinated all over the pilot.
posted by Doug at 10:44 PM on November 13, 2001
posted by Doug at 10:44 PM on November 13, 2001
I'll bet he was headed in there to tamper with the smoke detector, the fiend!
posted by MonkeyMeat at 12:02 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by MonkeyMeat at 12:02 AM on November 14, 2001
Ayep, reason #1,729 why I'm now rooting for the terrorists to win. Actually, reason #1729 is basically the same as the previous 1,728 reasons:
People are soooo fucking stupid, and they're horribly overreacting to everything now. Bastards! It brings out my inner misanthrope, and reminds me of what Bill Hicks had to say about Hitler...
posted by hincandenza at 12:44 AM on November 14, 2001
People are soooo fucking stupid, and they're horribly overreacting to everything now. Bastards! It brings out my inner misanthrope, and reminds me of what Bill Hicks had to say about Hitler...
posted by hincandenza at 12:44 AM on November 14, 2001
Ludicrous over-reaction.
What diid Bill Hicks say about Hitler, he asked, with a due sense of apprehension..
posted by salmacis at 1:28 AM on November 14, 2001
What diid Bill Hicks say about Hitler, he asked, with a due sense of apprehension..
posted by salmacis at 1:28 AM on November 14, 2001
Aside from everything else discussed here, this sort of thing worries me:
"However, the Airports Authority police issued a summons ordering Ortiz to appear in court in Loudoun County to answer a charge of misdemeanor drug possession in connection with the alleged possession of marijuana, according to an Airports Authority spokesman."
A stroll up the aisle for a pee turned into a drug charge.
Now that the US government has such easy excuses to arrest anyone, tap phones, search e-mail, watch homes, search homes, search pockets, interview neighbors, and pretty much do anything else they feel like doing, all with Homeland Security guns drawn, it won't be hard for them to pin something on almost anyone.
You, for instance, or your family. If they don't know about you now, they will. Maybe you're not a terrorist, but by the time they check you and your family out, you or yours will be some kind of criminal if they feel like it. And they will almost certainly press charges against people who might complain about their fascist tactics. "Oh, so you don't like having guns trained on you and being thrown to the ground and arrested because you tried to use the toilet? How about a drug charge, Mister not-one-of-us Navajo environmentalist hotshot lawyerboy? No? We thought you'd see it our way."
posted by pracowity at 2:35 AM on November 14, 2001
"However, the Airports Authority police issued a summons ordering Ortiz to appear in court in Loudoun County to answer a charge of misdemeanor drug possession in connection with the alleged possession of marijuana, according to an Airports Authority spokesman."
A stroll up the aisle for a pee turned into a drug charge.
Now that the US government has such easy excuses to arrest anyone, tap phones, search e-mail, watch homes, search homes, search pockets, interview neighbors, and pretty much do anything else they feel like doing, all with Homeland Security guns drawn, it won't be hard for them to pin something on almost anyone.
You, for instance, or your family. If they don't know about you now, they will. Maybe you're not a terrorist, but by the time they check you and your family out, you or yours will be some kind of criminal if they feel like it. And they will almost certainly press charges against people who might complain about their fascist tactics. "Oh, so you don't like having guns trained on you and being thrown to the ground and arrested because you tried to use the toilet? How about a drug charge, Mister not-one-of-us Navajo environmentalist hotshot lawyerboy? No? We thought you'd see it our way."
posted by pracowity at 2:35 AM on November 14, 2001
My thoughts exactly, pracowity.
I'd like to add that the sky marshall should have announced who he was, and shown a badge instead of simply standing up and yelling, "Stop!" If I've really gotta take a leak, and some guy in plain clothes stands up and yells at me, I'm not going to treat the situation the same way as I would if an officer identifies himself to me and politely asks me to return to my seat. This was either poor judgement or poor training.
I was considering flying to New Orleans sometime in February, but between planes mysteriously falling to pieces in mid-air and trigger-happy sky marshalls taking down anyone that looks funny, I'm not sure that I'm so interested in helping the airline industry out anymore. It's only a 16 hour drive. ;-)
posted by Smuj at 3:40 AM on November 14, 2001
I'd like to add that the sky marshall should have announced who he was, and shown a badge instead of simply standing up and yelling, "Stop!" If I've really gotta take a leak, and some guy in plain clothes stands up and yells at me, I'm not going to treat the situation the same way as I would if an officer identifies himself to me and politely asks me to return to my seat. This was either poor judgement or poor training.
I was considering flying to New Orleans sometime in February, but between planes mysteriously falling to pieces in mid-air and trigger-happy sky marshalls taking down anyone that looks funny, I'm not sure that I'm so interested in helping the airline industry out anymore. It's only a 16 hour drive. ;-)
posted by Smuj at 3:40 AM on November 14, 2001
I kinda like that this happened. If there was any doubt that we now have sky marshals on those flights, and that they would react to provocations, those questions have been dispelled. This should increase people's sense of security, if they're logical.
posted by dhartung at 3:57 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by dhartung at 3:57 AM on November 14, 2001
"This should increase people's sense of security, if they're logical."
*Whew.* That's a pretty big "if" there.
posted by topolino at 4:10 AM on November 14, 2001
*Whew.* That's a pretty big "if" there.
posted by topolino at 4:10 AM on November 14, 2001
The passenger was most likely a dick. The only "if" is whether passengers are being clearly informed of the No Pee Policy in effect.
posted by ParisParamus at 4:21 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 4:21 AM on November 14, 2001
It would increase my sense of security if the remainder of the passengers were not then forced to keep their hands behind their heads or on the seats in front of them for the remainder of the trip. Talk about an overreaction. One guy ignores the announcement (or perhaps doesn't hear it -- who's to say that he wasn't, like many people do, using headphones to listen to music during the flight) and decides to go to the restroom. The other 114 people are then treated as though they're all potential hijackers who must be closely monitored.
It reminds me of stories from nursery school -- a few kiddies acted a little hyper, so everyone was forced to take a nap. The trouble is that these people all paid a substantial amount of money to this airline, to be treated like misbehaving children (or worse) and end up at an airport where they did not have rides/rental vehicles/cars parked waiting for them, with a promise by the airline to fly them back the thirty miles across town some three hours later.
The airlines are tanking. Instead of providing any true measures of security, they're cutting back on service. They've laid off workers which has left the remaining workers overextended and surly. They've perpetrated the "everyone is a potential threat" idea which allows flight attendants and airport agents to treat any person they deem "off" with disdain, contempt and open suspicion which always seems to translate to rudeness or, at least, a dismissive 'you'll know what we tell you now sit down and shut up or we'll make this really hard on you' attitude. Cabin service is worse than it's ever been, and now we're going to have to deal with sky marshals who draw guns mid-flight and tell everyone else not to move.
What if someone had started having a sneezing fit? What if someone had a dreadful itch on their leg and "thoughtlessly" bent down to scratch it? What if a child started fussing? What if the stress caused someone with epilepsy to begin having a sudden, jerking grande mal seizure? Would the marshals with the drawn guns have grabbed those people and thrown them to the floor in a tackle manuever as well, or just shot them, to sort it all out once the plane was on the ground?
We're paying for this kind of service? The government is giving this industry -- which was largely flailing (to put it mildly) before 9/11 -- billions of our tax dollars in a bailout? I say let this kind of service warrant what it would in any non-propped industry, in any truly free market. Let these airlines (even my hometown US Airways, second largest private employer in this city) go under, and let their replacements learn the hard way that people cannot be treated this way, that 9/11 is not an excuse to treat paying customers as an unfortunate consequence of doing business instead of the sole reason for doing business.
posted by Dreama at 4:27 AM on November 14, 2001
It reminds me of stories from nursery school -- a few kiddies acted a little hyper, so everyone was forced to take a nap. The trouble is that these people all paid a substantial amount of money to this airline, to be treated like misbehaving children (or worse) and end up at an airport where they did not have rides/rental vehicles/cars parked waiting for them, with a promise by the airline to fly them back the thirty miles across town some three hours later.
The airlines are tanking. Instead of providing any true measures of security, they're cutting back on service. They've laid off workers which has left the remaining workers overextended and surly. They've perpetrated the "everyone is a potential threat" idea which allows flight attendants and airport agents to treat any person they deem "off" with disdain, contempt and open suspicion which always seems to translate to rudeness or, at least, a dismissive 'you'll know what we tell you now sit down and shut up or we'll make this really hard on you' attitude. Cabin service is worse than it's ever been, and now we're going to have to deal with sky marshals who draw guns mid-flight and tell everyone else not to move.
What if someone had started having a sneezing fit? What if someone had a dreadful itch on their leg and "thoughtlessly" bent down to scratch it? What if a child started fussing? What if the stress caused someone with epilepsy to begin having a sudden, jerking grande mal seizure? Would the marshals with the drawn guns have grabbed those people and thrown them to the floor in a tackle manuever as well, or just shot them, to sort it all out once the plane was on the ground?
We're paying for this kind of service? The government is giving this industry -- which was largely flailing (to put it mildly) before 9/11 -- billions of our tax dollars in a bailout? I say let this kind of service warrant what it would in any non-propped industry, in any truly free market. Let these airlines (even my hometown US Airways, second largest private employer in this city) go under, and let their replacements learn the hard way that people cannot be treated this way, that 9/11 is not an excuse to treat paying customers as an unfortunate consequence of doing business instead of the sole reason for doing business.
posted by Dreama at 4:27 AM on November 14, 2001
The air cop was most likely a dick, and I don't mean a detective. A dick with a gun.
Instead of sending the guy back to his seat, they pulled a gun on him, ganged up on him, handcuffed him, ordered everyone else on the plane to put their hands up, and turned the whole fucking plane around.
I'd rather not fly with guys like that on the plane.
posted by pracowity at 4:36 AM on November 14, 2001
Instead of sending the guy back to his seat, they pulled a gun on him, ganged up on him, handcuffed him, ordered everyone else on the plane to put their hands up, and turned the whole fucking plane around.
I'd rather not fly with guys like that on the plane.
posted by pracowity at 4:36 AM on November 14, 2001
I think the location of the plane--near Washington DC--has to be taken into account in understanding the context.
posted by ParisParamus at 4:43 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 4:43 AM on November 14, 2001
> I think the location of the plane--near Washington DC--
> has to be taken into account in understanding the context.
OK, so the place isn't known as the center of human intelligence. But they were only near Washington; theoretically, they could have had some sense left in them before the plane touched down and the mysterious forces sucked their minds dry.
posted by pracowity at 4:54 AM on November 14, 2001
> has to be taken into account in understanding the context.
OK, so the place isn't known as the center of human intelligence. But they were only near Washington; theoretically, they could have had some sense left in them before the plane touched down and the mysterious forces sucked their minds dry.
posted by pracowity at 4:54 AM on November 14, 2001
Dangerous activities in these United States of America: driving while black, loving while queer, and flying while brown.
posted by Carol Anne at 5:16 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by Carol Anne at 5:16 AM on November 14, 2001
Dangerous activities in these United States of America: driving while black, loving while queer, and flying while brown. -- Carol Anne
... add to that list:
Being too stupid, or unaware at a time when people are flying airplanes into skyscrapers to pay attention to repeated on-board anouncements. Flying is a serious business these days, and the rules apply to everyone.
That said, I do agree that the sky marshalls overreacted.
posted by jpburns at 5:28 AM on November 14, 2001
... add to that list:
Being too stupid, or unaware at a time when people are flying airplanes into skyscrapers to pay attention to repeated on-board anouncements. Flying is a serious business these days, and the rules apply to everyone.
That said, I do agree that the sky marshalls overreacted.
posted by jpburns at 5:28 AM on November 14, 2001
A point people seem to be missing is that the flight path in and out of Reagan National crosses over numerous places in Washington that terrorists might choose as a target. That's why the in-flight rules are more draconian there -- it's one of the prices of keeping the airport open when some were calling for it to stay closed after Sept. 11.
Personally, I'd rather have sky marshals overreact than the alternative.
posted by rcade at 5:49 AM on November 14, 2001
Personally, I'd rather have sky marshals overreact than the alternative.
posted by rcade at 5:49 AM on November 14, 2001
repeated on-board anouncements
where does it say the announcements were repeated? for that matter, does it say when it was announced the first time?
posted by tolkhan at 6:00 AM on November 14, 2001
where does it say the announcements were repeated? for that matter, does it say when it was announced the first time?
posted by tolkhan at 6:00 AM on November 14, 2001
where does it say the announcements were repeated? for that matter, does it say when it was announced the first time?
Flight attendants had announced the ban on getting up during the last half-hour of the flight, passengers said.
Airports Authority police issued a summons ordering Ortiz to appear in court in Loudoun County to answer a charge of misdemeanor drug possession in connection with the alleged possession of marijuana
Maybe he had cottonmouth and wanted a drink. Isn't that a Constitutional right?
posted by adampsyche at 6:05 AM on November 14, 2001
Flight attendants had announced the ban on getting up during the last half-hour of the flight, passengers said.
Airports Authority police issued a summons ordering Ortiz to appear in court in Loudoun County to answer a charge of misdemeanor drug possession in connection with the alleged possession of marijuana
Maybe he had cottonmouth and wanted a drink. Isn't that a Constitutional right?
posted by adampsyche at 6:05 AM on November 14, 2001
Next thing you know, he'll be tried in a military court.
posted by mmarcos at 6:07 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by mmarcos at 6:07 AM on November 14, 2001
That's why the in-flight rules are more draconian there -- it's one of the prices of keeping the airport open when some were calling for it to stay closed after Sept. 11. Personally, I'd rather have sky marshals overreact than the alternative.
Personally, I'd rather have seen National stay closed.
posted by redfoxtail at 6:09 AM on November 14, 2001
Personally, I'd rather have seen National stay closed.
posted by redfoxtail at 6:09 AM on November 14, 2001
Actualy id rather have an over reaction in this situation then not.
I have no problems with how the situation was handled.
posted by Qambient at 7:16 AM on November 14, 2001
I have no problems with how the situation was handled.
posted by Qambient at 7:16 AM on November 14, 2001
Why'd everyone else have have to be punished?
Possibly because the air marshals in question felt unsafe and threatened. People who feel unsafe and threatened are, perhaps, not the responsible towers of authority that one would like to spend any time locked on a plane with.
We're paying for this kind of service? The government is giving this industry -- which was largely flailing (to put it mildly) before 9/11 -- billions of our tax dollars in a bailout?
the airlines must be propped up via tax-payers' money, otherwise shrubya's mates' personal coffers may suffer.
you gets what you pays for (rather than votes):
'Esso (29k PDF link) gave $1,086,080 to the Republicans last year - more than any other oil company. 91% of their political donations went to the Republicans. As soon as George Bush became president, he said that the United States would pull out of international agreements to stop global warming - exactly the policy that Esso were promoting.'
posted by asok at 8:12 AM on November 14, 2001
Possibly because the air marshals in question felt unsafe and threatened. People who feel unsafe and threatened are, perhaps, not the responsible towers of authority that one would like to spend any time locked on a plane with.
We're paying for this kind of service? The government is giving this industry -- which was largely flailing (to put it mildly) before 9/11 -- billions of our tax dollars in a bailout?
the airlines must be propped up via tax-payers' money, otherwise shrubya's mates' personal coffers may suffer.
you gets what you pays for (rather than votes):
'Esso (29k PDF link) gave $1,086,080 to the Republicans last year - more than any other oil company. 91% of their political donations went to the Republicans. As soon as George Bush became president, he said that the United States would pull out of international agreements to stop global warming - exactly the policy that Esso were promoting.'
posted by asok at 8:12 AM on November 14, 2001
Dreama, let it go. it'll be ok.
No, it will not be okay so long as so many citizens are willing to accept a presumably unarmed individual being drawn upon for failing to comply with a shouted "stop" order from an unidentified, plain clothes agent when he presumably was simply rushing to relieve himself. They pulled their guns, they tackled him, they handcuffed him, then they treated the remainder of the passengers as a threat instead of merely ascertaining the problem and responding to it instead of going into instant 'Oh No! It's an Incident' mode.
Ortiz could've (as I said) been listening to music and missed the "no bathroom now" announcement. He may have been asleep -- many people sleep through flights, even short ones. Instead of the marshal standing up, blocking his path and saying "I'm sorry sir, you're not permitted to move through the cabin at this time, there was an announcement." and giving him a chance to say "I'm sorry, I didn't know, I was just going to the bathroom, I'll return to my seat." they treated him as a criminal, presumption of innocence, reasonable reactions, asking a question before pulling a weapon all went by the wayside because the guy had to urinate.
If this is the situation that we can expect on all flights into National, shut the airport down. It is untenable that we're willing to cede our security to overreactive goons with guns on planes and a system which supports them. This is not safety, this is not security, this is not how you treat people who have no acted in a threatening manner -- walking briskly to a bathroom in and of itself is not a threatening activity -- and it is unacceptable.
posted by Dreama at 9:08 AM on November 14, 2001
No, it will not be okay so long as so many citizens are willing to accept a presumably unarmed individual being drawn upon for failing to comply with a shouted "stop" order from an unidentified, plain clothes agent when he presumably was simply rushing to relieve himself. They pulled their guns, they tackled him, they handcuffed him, then they treated the remainder of the passengers as a threat instead of merely ascertaining the problem and responding to it instead of going into instant 'Oh No! It's an Incident' mode.
Ortiz could've (as I said) been listening to music and missed the "no bathroom now" announcement. He may have been asleep -- many people sleep through flights, even short ones. Instead of the marshal standing up, blocking his path and saying "I'm sorry sir, you're not permitted to move through the cabin at this time, there was an announcement." and giving him a chance to say "I'm sorry, I didn't know, I was just going to the bathroom, I'll return to my seat." they treated him as a criminal, presumption of innocence, reasonable reactions, asking a question before pulling a weapon all went by the wayside because the guy had to urinate.
If this is the situation that we can expect on all flights into National, shut the airport down. It is untenable that we're willing to cede our security to overreactive goons with guns on planes and a system which supports them. This is not safety, this is not security, this is not how you treat people who have no acted in a threatening manner -- walking briskly to a bathroom in and of itself is not a threatening activity -- and it is unacceptable.
posted by Dreama at 9:08 AM on November 14, 2001
as someone who flys frequently, i'm glad they responded. i've never been on a flight - even before sept 11th - where it wasn't announced that you're not supposed to leave your seat during the plane's descent (which is typically the last 30 mins of the flight). apparently this guy insisted on doing it even after he got up and was warned to remain in his seat. it's not like the guy forgot the announcement, didn't hear it, or just innocently went to the front of the plane thinking it was okay. he intentionally broke the rule, and i think that's enough to indicate that he might be a problem.
posted by lizs at 9:15 AM on November 14, 2001
posted by lizs at 9:15 AM on November 14, 2001
Welcome to American Airlines. Please pay close attention to the flight attendant standing in front of you.
In the event of a crash landing, you should place your hands and head like so. Life jackets are under your seats - please do not inflate them until leaving the aircraft. Should oxygen be required, a mask will drop from the ceiling. Please be sure to insert your urinary catheter now, as all attempts to use the rest room will be met with deadly force.
Have a nice flight.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 3:12 PM on November 14, 2001
In the event of a crash landing, you should place your hands and head like so. Life jackets are under your seats - please do not inflate them until leaving the aircraft. Should oxygen be required, a mask will drop from the ceiling. Please be sure to insert your urinary catheter now, as all attempts to use the rest room will be met with deadly force.
Have a nice flight.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 3:12 PM on November 14, 2001
« Older The Women's American Football League | Childish fun-poking sites Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by trioperative at 9:37 PM on November 13, 2001