- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

NO WAY!

Is this for real? No one can speak out against the glorious leader, even on a T-shirt in Australia? I mean apart from anything else, saying George W Bush is the world's number one terrorist is a true statement isn't it?

Banning the flag (even if it has been hijacked as a symbol for racist thugs who last year at the Big Day Out saw gangs roaming the crowd making people pledge loyalty to the flag or they got bashed) - NEVER!
Banning T-shirt that suggests George W Bush is the number one terrorist - ALWAYS

Well I'm glad we were able to sort out what is to be censored and what can't be censored in Australia.

Flight ban for anti-Bush T-shirt
A passenger barred from a Qantas airlines flight for wearing a T-shirt depicting US President George Bush as a terrorist has threatened legal action.
Allen Jasson said he was sticking up for the principle of free speech by challenging the decision by the Australian flag carrier. Mr Jasson was stopped as he was about to board the flight from Melbourne to London last Friday. Qantas said the T-shirt had potential to offend other passengers. The T-shift features an image of President George W Bush, along with the slogan "World's Number One Terrorist".

'Principle'
The 55-year-old computer specialist, who lives in London, had encountered difficulties with the same T-shirt on an earlier Qantas flight in December. After clearing the international security checks at Melbourne Airport, he reportedly approached the gate manager to congratulate him on the company's new-found open-mindedness. At that point, Mr Jasson was ordered to remove the T-shirt after being told it was a security threat and an item which might cause offence to other passengers. He was offered the chance to board the flight wearing different clothing, but refused. "I am not prepared to go without the t-shirt. I might forfeit the fare, but I have made up my mind that I would rather stand up for the principle of free speech," he told Australian media. A Qantas spokesman defended the airline's decision, saying: "Whether made verbally or on a T-shirt, comments with the potential to offend other customers or threaten the security of a Qantas group aircraft will not be tolerated".

36 Comments:

At 23/1/07 11:39 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Whether made verbally or on a T-shirt, comments with the potential to offend other customers or threaten the security of a Qantas group aircraft will not be tolerated".

You shallow idiot... why is this statement so hard for you to understand. And before you jump on the free speech soap box. Freedom of speech is one thing we are always fighting to defend but anyone with half a brain can understand you still don't yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater and call it free speech. You are so fucking ignorant you're funny. Is this blog really a spoof?

 
At 23/1/07 11:40 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't normally get involved in this type of discussion, when you get to my age you realise your views are irrelevant to how the world works but......

….. I saw this on the news last night and my immediate reaction was how silly who cares about a stupid t-shirt. That’s another thing about age, you grow out of silly tee shirts.

Then I thought more about it - I wouldn't want to sit next to this person, or anyone else wearing a ‘look at me’ slogan or behaving in a ‘look at me’ way.

This person was flying to the UK. I have done a few long haul flights in my time and who you have to sit next to for 24 hours can make a big impact on whether the flight is bearable or a nightmare.

In most other environments you have a choice and there is only a short time involved. So if I get on a bus and someone who makes me uncomfortable or is a nuisance sits next to me it’s probably only for half an hour at most so I can ignore them, or I can get off and get on another bus. On a plane to the UK its 24 hours and you can’t get off.

In business (and I am in business) you cannot give precedence to the desires of one person or group over another, you have to keep everyone happy. Everyone pays and most people realise when we are in close contact with strangers we may have to modify our behaviour so that everyone can feel comfortable.

This person is obviously living in the centre of the universe and considers himself to be extremely important. Using some judgment and consideration to the feelings of others is beyond him.

Being prepared to modify behaviour for the comfort of others I see nothing wrong with that, I would say most of us do it all the time without even thinking about it.

As I said I am old and from a time when we were expected to put the feelings, comfort and needs of others before our own. Sadly a strange and alien concept today.

 
At 23/1/07 1:33 pm, Anonymous cliff said...

bomber, you know you have struck a raw nerve when the response is as shrill as the first or as defensive as the second

 
At 23/1/07 1:55 pm, Blogger Southern Gent said...

The issue is not "free speech" it is property rights!

The owners of the plane decide the terms underwhich they will let people onto the craft.

The passangers either comply or chosse another method to reach their destination.

Simple really.

SG

 
At 23/1/07 2:04 pm, Blogger Mark said...

Striking a nerve doesn't necessarily mean that the striker has actually said anything of substance. It can often mean that they have said a stupid comment that gets up the nose of a strikee who knows it is a stupid comment. After all getting a reaction is pretty easy. For example, saying "all Maori are criminal shitheads" is untrue and reprehensible, but I'm sure would get a shrill reaction.

 
At 23/1/07 2:26 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh my god he is 55, does he still live his mummy.

Not to bright it would seem. Imagine this idiots company for 24 hours.

It is a nerve it you travel a lot I suppose, who hasn't had the nutter on the bus/train/plane sit next to them. Some are scary and some make good dinner party stories but on the whole I prefer a quiet, peaceful, uneventful, trip.

 
At 23/1/07 4:25 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Striking a nerve doesn't necessarily mean that the striker has actually said anything of substance. It can often mean that they have said a stupid comment that gets up the nose of a strikee who knows it is a stupid comment. After all getting a reaction is pretty easy. For example, saying "all Maori are criminal shitheads" is untrue and reprehensible, but I'm sure would get a shrill reaction.
Is this the same Mark who claimed that the BBC were anti-semitic?

 
At 23/1/07 5:03 pm, Blogger karlos said...

So, if the t-shirt had read "George Bush is a defender of freedom", would they have let him on the plane?

I doubt it would got a second look.
Food for thought I think.

Possible someone with a grudge pick on this guy?

 
At 23/1/07 5:16 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Probably not a grudge, but jokes about terrorism don't tend to go down well in airports or on planes...

 
At 23/1/07 5:19 pm, Anonymous Tom Joad said...

lol @ property rights. please

Karlos has it wrapped up. that is the issue. the fact is, the accuracy of the statement is no in question, it is simply the words 'terrorist' being seen on a plane. I think the guy is fighting a losing battle - maybe the wrong place to make this point? I tried to wear a 'terrors the product you push' t-shirt through LAX, with an upside-down american flag, and in New Zealand they told me i wouldn't get too far in LA with it on, so I took it off. I dont think it's a compromise of the principal. I could put it back on as soon as i got out of the airport.

but this libertarian property rights shit is just a way for white people with nothing interesting to say to disengage from discussion.

 
At 23/1/07 6:09 pm, Anonymous Another Mark said...

Even if it said I HATE TERRORISTS, who wants to see the word terrorist while flying. It's like a pool attendant wearing a "Drowning Pool" (a band) T-shirt, common sense says it's not a smart idea. They were even nice enough to ask him to change. I'd rather sit next to a crying baby.

 
At 23/1/07 7:06 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Bomber

I got a bukcet of these Ts out the back. This one's from the Austrain Marxist sister group of Aotearoa's own Socialist Worker. The French ones are far better though- range of colours and Darth Vader style Bush...NIce.

Let us know if you want one next time you fly Stateside.

Kia kaha
JOe C
www.anticapitaliste.blogspot.com

 
At 23/1/07 11:20 pm, Blogger karlos said...

Or maybe if it read "Osama is a terrorist". Would things have been different?

who wants to see the word terrorist while flying.
Oh please get over it. Have we become so precious that the mere word 'terrorist' brings on fear and offends people? How childish can people be?

I find this kinda of 'control' quite concerning. The state of fear whipped up by the media since 9/11 is forever justifying more grotesque erosions of people's freedom.

It's a fuckin t-shirt for fucks sake!

 
At 24/1/07 8:00 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So a T-Shirt that read "Karlos is a rapist" would be appropriate to wear to your funeral? Cool, fire me an email if you die.

 
At 24/1/07 8:42 am, Blogger bomber said...

...
How could wearing a factual statement get you pushed off public transport? What other factual statements should we ban? I mean if it's all about what an airline will allow people to wear, what if it was 'USA - WE ARE HERE TO TAKE YOUR OIL', or 'Lesbians against Bush', or 'Democracy is a warm M16' - can I say any of those phrases? And what about trains, do trains count? Can I think those things or is that illegal as well?

 
At 24/1/07 8:47 am, Blogger bomber said...

...
PS - Karlos, genius post as usual, Joseph if I am ever lucky enough to go to America - you are on my friend.

oh and this...
but this libertarian property rights shit is just a way for white people with nothing interesting to say to disengage from discussion.
...Tom this is the funniest most insightful thing I've ever read on this site!

 
At 24/1/07 10:00 am, Blogger Mark said...

Oh well done on sticking to the point Bomber. Is this the Bomber who hates whites, the Police, Israel, farmers, people who live in rural areas, National Voters, Australians, Americans etc. Yet at the same time the same Bomber who hates bigotry?

 
At 24/1/07 10:23 am, Anonymous cliff said...

so that's a yes then Mark?

 
At 24/1/07 11:16 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Factual statements because you say so – Helen is a fag-loving lying hag - is a factual statement but I would not support the production of the tee-shirt.

Maoris are far more likely to commit violent crime that white NZérs - (what are the facts – something like 10% of the population but 80% of the crime) is a factual statement, but what sort of pilock wants to wear the tee shirt.

‘Factual’ sound bites are simplistic and juvenile. Why should strangers have to have other peoples ‘factual’ statements shoved in their face.

For many people ‘Jesus Loves You’ is a ‘factual’ statement, that’s why I had to spend money to have a ‘No Religious Callers’ sign made for my gate – so far it has worked so I least I can keep them off my property.

Trains have been mentioned (and busses) the difference is obvious surely. When I was doing the back-packing thing a black suited you man with his Mormon name tag was in the next seat, thank god it was only a couple of hours, and of course if he had really started to annoy me I could have got off.

Public religious/political statements have their place but I wish people would use some consideration and judgement where they do it.

The passive smoking situation is improving, and that has made my life a little easier, now if only I could be spared passive religion and politics .......

 
At 24/1/07 1:14 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

20 responses to this idiotic post is further evidence why the airline made the correct decision in the first place.

 
At 24/1/07 1:27 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

bomber said...

PS - Karlos, genius post as usual, Joseph if I am ever lucky enough to go to America - you are on my friend

Lucky enough to go to America!
Lucky enough to go to the Nazi state!
Lucky enough to go to the country you think is the worst on earth, where they take your fingerprints and put them on a data base!

Btw, luck has nothing to do with.
Purchase a ticket, sort out visa (if needed) and off you go.

 
At 24/1/07 4:14 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're right anon - how can people (ncluding myself) waste time on this idiot.


Time to do something more important and worthwhile - like pick my nose.

 
At 24/1/07 4:17 pm, Anonymous mike laws said...

Mark said:

'Oh well done on sticking to the point Bomber. Is this the Bomber who hates whites, the Police, Israel, farmers, people who live in rural areas, National Voters, Australians, Americans etc. Yet at the same time the same Bomber who hates bigotry?'

You forgot Christians Mark!

 
At 24/1/07 8:13 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You forgot me too Mark.

Boomer will hate you soon if you keep questioning him or pointing out the numerous flaws in his arguments.

Tom Joad - I am amazed that you can tell the color of peoples skin over the interwebs. Please forward me soonest the details of this amazing skill.
Leftie racists like you are grist for the mill my son.
Contary to what you say, I believe Southern Gent has summed up the situation perfectly.

All your blather about white folks is just a way for young leftie dickwads(like yourself) with nothing interesting to say to disengage from discussion.

AB

 
At 24/1/07 8:37 pm, Anonymous The other Mark again. said...

The only thing I will give you Bommer, is the fact you publish all the numerous criticisms to your utter fantasy. That is why I will come back to argue with everyone here. If only I could buy 11:16 a beer!

 
At 27/1/07 2:11 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
AB - you're back, wow – I’m really surprised, I mean after you threatened to turn up at my apartment and sort me out because I didn't want to talk to you after you had used unbelievably gross abusive language revolving around young girls genitalia (remember, it was the post you were pretending you hadn’t made because admitting that you had focused on young girls genitalia as an insult suggested that you weren’t all that balanced).

Sorry AB – what pointless insult were you making this time? At least you didn’t have to bring up young girls genitalia or threatening to turn up to my apartment to make your point. I suppose that is progress.

Oh and Mark – someone who thinks the BBC is anti-Semitic is on par with flat earthers, that’s why I brought it up.

Anon (11.16)– you make some great arguments, sadly all of which miss the point Karlos and Sam identified,

I am surprised that this story got so many of you worked up though – I suppose you can’t defend Bush any longer (and let’s not pretend that you weren’t all supporters of it at the beginning) so defending rights to ban a T-shirt attacking Bush is all you have.

 
At 27/1/07 9:12 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lets hear it again folks -

Posted by Boomer -

'Joseph if I am ever lucky enough to go to America'

Full of it aye Boomer.

 
At 27/1/07 10:11 pm, Anonymous sdm said...

I want to change tact slightly.

I can understand why an airline might refuse to carry such a person. Now I dont agree with it, but I understand it.

I used to work in the airport. I cant say where or what I did (bullshit security things I signed), but I know this: If an airline carries a passenger to a destination, and that passenger is refused entry, then the airline has to foot the bill of returning that passenger to the orignal departure point. So, say you were travelling to a certain country and did not have an appropriate Visa, then the airline would have to return that person home.

In this respect, Qantas may be worried about their liability if the passenger is denied entry to the destination country. \

Blame American paranoia, not the airline.

S.

 
At 28/1/07 9:40 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

People believe private airlines have the right to decide what people they want on their airline, and in bombers eyes this makes them Bush supporters.

It's a fundamentalists world of absolutes that bomber inhabits.

Thank fuck life isn't like that.

bomber, I believe airlines have the right to vet anybody who wants to fly on their planes, but I don't support Bush and I don't support the illegal invasion of Iraq.

You see, I'm not with you, or against you.

 
At 28/1/07 11:59 am, Blogger SamClemenz said...

Geez Bomber, this one's been like fly paper to all those I hate Bomber" profilers out there eh?
Funny how something like a T-Shirt can bring in the snipers.
Sad though that this world has turned so upside down that it becomes such a controversial thing. I mean after all, T-Shirts have always been a statment thing haven't they.

Steinlager, All Black's, Moo-Loo's, Vive Chavez, a Hammer & Cicle, a Red Star, Eat at Joe's, Master and Slave. That's what T-shirts are for - advertising fashion or preferences or political statments.
When did all this go sideways? It went sideways after 911, when the world lost it's sense of humour. Since 911 - a deep paranoia has encircled the planet. This paranoia is much deeper than the McCarthy era "Red under the Bed" era, and it is much more deep-seated because of the internet, becuase the paranoia has reached into many more millions of lives.

Security is the number one issue these days. Everyone seems to think that if you wear a T-Shirt that knocks Bush you must be a terrorist, or a supporter, or a "For us or against us" Loony-Tune not just someone with a sense of humour or a cynic that is bucking the whole idea through their right of freedom of expression.
Personally I think most of you have gone a little too far in buying into this T-Shirt issue.
I remember when I was in school it was a sickly humourous thing to stick a note on someone's back that said "kick me". Kinda the same concept of the modern day "I'm with stupid" T-shirt. Please folks get a grip. If someone is stupid enough to wear such a controversial thing in public, knowing the risk of offence it's going to cause the security insistent paranoid lunatic's out there that have no sense of humour, then someone does need to point out that it's not a good idea for them to wear such a thing. That's what happen isn't it?

If the same person that wears the T-Shirt makes a big issue out of it, why do you need to buy into it? It's very simple isn't it, they need some attention they're not getting from anywhere else, so just move on there's nothing to see here really.
If they don't take the hint and wear the damn thing anyway it's a user pay situation.
I guess I don't see the big issue here your making more out of this than it deserves. If they get punched in the snout for being insensitive, so what? They got what they deserved for their insensitivity, and the person that punched them will get an assault rap. Duh!

 
At 28/1/07 7:54 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:59 is a smart man. If the shirt said BUSH KILLS MILLIONS there would have been no issue at all.

 
At 28/1/07 8:06 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sam,

for someone who supposedly only sweats the big stuff you happen to write the longest posts on the unimportant bits of fluff.

btw, it appears what you are saying is no-one should really have an opinion on this issue.

Except you.

Funny that.

 
At 29/1/07 2:58 pm, Blogger SamClemenz said...

Sorry Anony-moose #49, I guess I was just bored with all the flies buzzing around this article, and still, for the life of me, I can't understand what all the kerfluffle is about.
Where's the big deal in someone telling the guy to take the T-Shirt off before he flies internationally? I agree with freedom of expression, but there are limits on everything. Like the TV ad points out when "Togs" become "Underwear".
Makes perfect sense - why take a honey-bath before a walk in a woods full of bears?
Like I said before, it's a user pay thing.

 
At 30/1/07 7:18 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well then fundy Sam you have missed the points people have been making.

Most people here have been arguing that same point. Why have you missed that?

The only people arguing freedom of expression is bomber/karlos and tom joad.
You know, your mates.

But like I said, the person who is making the most kerfuffle on this blog is you.

I guess in your eyes other peoples opinions are just kerfuffle.

A very fundamentalist perspective.

 
At 30/1/07 8:59 am, Blogger SamClemenz said...

Look, I suppose I could jump up and down as if this were a huge travesty to mankind, but I take it for the paranoid reality that exists today in Australia, America, and Britain.
If you wear a T-shirt like this you have to be prepared to accept the consequences of your choice. Although there are far more people out there that view this as an open assault on "Freedom of Expression", and I agree, the reality is that wearing this T-Shirt only get's you patted on the back or punched in the nose.
I just feel there are bigger battles to fight.
Here's a comment from the original website where this story first surfaced in the U.S..

Comment #49144 by Mark Elliot on 1/23 at 5:12 am

The story continues...now the shirt is online at ebay australia. hahahahahaha

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Bush-Worlds-Number-1-Terrorist- Shirt-Medium-Very-Hot_W0QQitemZ200071919994QQihZ010QQcatego ryZ55539QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I guess Quantas refused him a refund, so he decided to turn his T-Shirt into a cash cow. Now that's true resolve!

If you want to read other comments on the story from American's who blogged it you can find it in the archives @ Truthdig.com - here's the link.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20070122_anti_bush_t_shirt_called_security_threat/

 
At 1/2/07 4:26 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Groan - Anon, Sam strikes me as the least fundy on this blog, I think you need to either check what that word means in the dictionary and get over it as sam is one of the best read bloggers on this site, and the point of the post was, as sam explains, about the mindset that the war on terror (twot for short) has created, the fact that t has been so denied and excused here suggests that mindset is a little too close to home for some.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home