<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Los Angeles Times Gets It Badly Wrong On A PATRIOT Act Story</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/</link>
	<description>A Group Complaint about Law, Liberty, and Leisure</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:39:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-75584</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 02:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-75584</guid>
		<description>Aw, Joe, why would you use the email address of Dave Begy of the San Diego Libertarian Party to leave a dumb, sub-literate troll comment like that?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aw, Joe, why would you use the email address of Dave Begy of the San Diego Libertarian Party to leave a dumb, sub-literate troll comment like that?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joe</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-75581</link>
		<dc:creator>joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 01:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-75581</guid>
		<description>Hay dumbass Republican&#039;s you are not safer on airlines becuase the Gov&#039;t uses the Patriot Act for trivial nonsense like this. The LA Times was very correct in there reporting. Welcome to the USSA</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hay dumbass Republican's you are not safer on airlines becuase the Gov't uses the Patriot Act for trivial nonsense like this. The LA Times was very correct in there reporting. Welcome to the USSA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patterico&#8217;s Pontifications &#187; L.A. Times Expert Speaks Out: I Disagree With the Thesis of That Article That Quoted Me</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-36439</link>
		<dc:creator>Patterico&#8217;s Pontifications &#187; L.A. Times Expert Speaks Out: I Disagree With the Thesis of That Article That Quoted Me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-36439</guid>
		<description>[...] the help of Ken at Popehat, I recently took apart a biased Los Angeles Times article on the PATRIOT act as applied to unruly [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the help of Ken at Popehat, I recently took apart a biased Los Angeles Times article on the PATRIOT act as applied to unruly [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patterico&#8217;s Pontifications &#187; L.A. Times Has Substantially Misleading Story on the Patriot Act and Unruly Airline Passengers</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-36436</link>
		<dc:creator>Patterico&#8217;s Pontifications &#187; L.A. Times Has Substantially Misleading Story on the Patriot Act and Unruly Airline Passengers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-36436</guid>
		<description>[...] a tremendous blog that I just learned about today, a former federal prosecutor named Ken absolutely rips apart an overwrought L.A. Times story about the Patriot Act as applied to unruly airline [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a tremendous blog that I just learned about today, a former federal prosecutor named Ken absolutely rips apart an overwrought L.A. Times story about the Patriot Act as applied to unruly airline [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pajamas Media » Child Abuse Case Used to Question the Patriot Act</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-23076</link>
		<dc:creator>Pajamas Media » Child Abuse Case Used to Question the Patriot Act</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 08:23:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-23076</guid>
		<description>[...] (I found the complaint thanks to Ken, a former federal prosecutor who blogs anonymously as Ken at Popehat.com.) The event occurred on an airplane and has very little to do with the Patriot Act, except that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (I found the complaint thanks to Ken, a former federal prosecutor who blogs anonymously as Ken at Popehat.com.) The event occurred on an airplane and has very little to do with the Patriot Act, except that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Airlines Defining Anyone Disruptive as Terrorists - Political Forum</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22650</link>
		<dc:creator>Airlines Defining Anyone Disruptive as Terrorists - Political Forum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 01:47:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22650</guid>
		<description>[...] kissing and acting in a manner that made other passengers uncomfortable.&quot;EDITED TO ADD (2/2): Blog post showing that the article is a lot more hyperbole than fact. And commentary on the commentary.      [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] kissing and acting in a manner that made other passengers uncomfortable.&quot;EDITED TO ADD (2/2): Blog post showing that the article is a lot more hyperbole than fact. And commentary on the commentary.      [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Disruptive Airline Passengers are Terrorists? &#124; angiemedia</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22489</link>
		<dc:creator>Disruptive Airline Passengers are Terrorists? &#124; angiemedia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 07:14:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22489</guid>
		<description>[...] The Los Angeles Times Gets It Badly Wrong On A PATRIOT Act Story [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Los Angeles Times Gets It Badly Wrong On A PATRIOT Act Story [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22261</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:01:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22261</guid>
		<description>As for the main thrust of the post, which is the blatant slanting of the article, in my experience, most bad journalism is properly attributed to stupidity and sloth. Because of what has been happening to journalism as business, the amount of stupidity and sloth  has grown faster than the decrease in journalists.

In other words, not only are there fewer reporters, the ones that remain are lazier and dumber than in years past.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As for the main thrust of the post, which is the blatant slanting of the article, in my experience, most bad journalism is properly attributed to stupidity and sloth. Because of what has been happening to journalism as business, the amount of stupidity and sloth  has grown faster than the decrease in journalists.</p>
<p>In other words, not only are there fewer reporters, the ones that remain are lazier and dumber than in years past.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elatua</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22185</link>
		<dc:creator>Elatua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22185</guid>
		<description>Hello Ken, 

Thank you for your excellent journalism and sane response to hysterical reporting.  As a Purser Flight Attendant for a major airline, I knew there was a lot more to the story than was reported.  

Over the years, I have had a number of flights met by authorities or passengers removed beforehand and it is never without legitimate cause.  And quite frankly, alcohol is usually a big factor.  

As stated in the affidavit: 

- Tamera Freeman appeared intoxicated and violent towards her children before she boarded the flight in San Francisco;

Unfortunately, this entire incident could have been avoided simply by refusing Ms. Freeman boarding.  It is absolutely a violation of FAA regulations to *knowingly* board any person who appears to be intoxicated and the airline can be levied hefty five-figure $ fines for doing so.  The rule of thumb is that if behavior appears to be a problem on the ground, then it will be a problem in the air.

I cannot tell you how many people have imploringly looked to me with fear in their eyes when a situation begins to escalate in flight.  Post 911, we are more vigilant than ever and our passengers step up immediately to help if need be.  

Threatening, interfering with and/or failure to comply with flight crew member instructions is a Federal offense for good reason.  There are too many things that can go wrong at 40,000 feet and safety protocols must be followed to be effective.  When you are responsible for the safety and well-being of several hundred people and someone is behaving in a threatening manner - it is not personal - it is a threat to *everyone* on board.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Ken, </p>
<p>Thank you for your excellent journalism and sane response to hysterical reporting.  As a Purser Flight Attendant for a major airline, I knew there was a lot more to the story than was reported.  </p>
<p>Over the years, I have had a number of flights met by authorities or passengers removed beforehand and it is never without legitimate cause.  And quite frankly, alcohol is usually a big factor.  </p>
<p>As stated in the affidavit: </p>
<p>- Tamera Freeman appeared intoxicated and violent towards her children before she boarded the flight in San Francisco;</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this entire incident could have been avoided simply by refusing Ms. Freeman boarding.  It is absolutely a violation of FAA regulations to *knowingly* board any person who appears to be intoxicated and the airline can be levied hefty five-figure $ fines for doing so.  The rule of thumb is that if behavior appears to be a problem on the ground, then it will be a problem in the air.</p>
<p>I cannot tell you how many people have imploringly looked to me with fear in their eyes when a situation begins to escalate in flight.  Post 911, we are more vigilant than ever and our passengers step up immediately to help if need be.  </p>
<p>Threatening, interfering with and/or failure to comply with flight crew member instructions is a Federal offense for good reason.  There are too many things that can go wrong at 40,000 feet and safety protocols must be followed to be effective.  When you are responsible for the safety and well-being of several hundred people and someone is behaving in a threatening manner &#8211; it is not personal &#8211; it is a threat to *everyone* on board.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22166</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:27:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22166</guid>
		<description>But Drew, you missed the point of most of the blog post.  The only one saying she&#039;s been branded a terrorist is the LA Times.  She was convicted under a statute that existed before the USA PATRIOT Act for conduct that would have been prosecuted before the USA PATRIOT Act and received the same sentence she would have received before the USA PATRIOT Act.  You will not find the word &quot;terrorist&quot; in her complaint, her indictment, her plea agreement, or the judgment and commitment order reflecting her conviction and sentence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But Drew, you missed the point of most of the blog post.  The only one saying she's been branded a terrorist is the LA Times.  She was convicted under a statute that existed before the USA PATRIOT Act for conduct that would have been prosecuted before the USA PATRIOT Act and received the same sentence she would have received before the USA PATRIOT Act.  You will not find the word "terrorist" in her complaint, her indictment, her plea agreement, or the judgment and commitment order reflecting her conviction and sentence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drew</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22164</link>
		<dc:creator>Drew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22164</guid>
		<description>From your research, there is no doubt that she&#039;s a first class bitch and not the greatest mom in the world.  However, her actions do begin to approach what a normal person would define as terrorism.  This behavior, if done in another venue would have gotten her jail time at best.  The charge of terrorism should be reserved for terrorists, lest it be watered down by cases like this.  If you think its a smart thing to equate this woman with terrorists then you&#039;re not thinking of the legal ramifications and definitions to real terrorists that face trial.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From your research, there is no doubt that she's a first class bitch and not the greatest mom in the world.  However, her actions do begin to approach what a normal person would define as terrorism.  This behavior, if done in another venue would have gotten her jail time at best.  The charge of terrorism should be reserved for terrorists, lest it be watered down by cases like this.  If you think its a smart thing to equate this woman with terrorists then you're not thinking of the legal ramifications and definitions to real terrorists that face trial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22122</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 22:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22122</guid>
		<description>I agree with you about the lazy part, Patriot, but not necessarily about the liberal.  I&#039;m rather conservative in a libertarian sort of way, and still have little faith in TSA or any other government branch.

Bad journalism is a nonpartisan issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you about the lazy part, Patriot, but not necessarily about the liberal.  I'm rather conservative in a libertarian sort of way, and still have little faith in TSA or any other government branch.</p>
<p>Bad journalism is a nonpartisan issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: patriotflier</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22120</link>
		<dc:creator>patriotflier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:50:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22120</guid>
		<description>Thanks for showing up the lazy liberal A holes of the MSM. OLBERMAN needs to be flushed down the toilet where he csn join his ilk..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for showing up the lazy liberal A holes of the MSM. OLBERMAN needs to be flushed down the toilet where he csn join his ilk..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22118</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22118</guid>
		<description>Thank you, and reciprocated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, and reciprocated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patterico</title>
		<link>http://www.popehat.com/2009/01/22/2793/comment-page-1/#comment-22113</link>
		<dc:creator>Patterico</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 19:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.popehat.com/?p=2793#comment-22113</guid>
		<description>I have indeed added Popehat to my blogroll.  It&#039;s a fine blog.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have indeed added Popehat to my blogroll.  It's a fine blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/18 queries in 0.063 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 498/499 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.popehat.com @ 2012-02-12 10:19:32 -->
