View Single Post
  #138 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
Wayne Boatwright[_3_] Wayne Boatwright[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,971
Default (2008-07-16) NS-RFC: One seat or two?

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 08:41:10a, blake murphy told us...

> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:25:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu 17 Jul 2008 07:07:09p, Julia Altshuler told us...
>>
>>> Alright, how about this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
>>> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
>>> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
>>> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
>>> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
>>> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
>>> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert

passenger
>>> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
>>> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation

for
>>> the duration of the trip.
>>>
>>>
>>> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
>>> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
>>> baggage claim.
>>>
>>>
>>> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
>>> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
>>> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
>>> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't

affect
>>> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
>>> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
>>> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
>>> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
>>> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
>>> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right,

and
>>> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price,

but
>>> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
>>> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
>>> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed

luddites
>>> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
>>> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
>>> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
>>> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>>>
>>>
>>> --Lia
>>>
>>>

>>
>>Lia, I thought they already did that.

>
> you mean the c.i.a.? only certain flights to certain undisclosed
> locations.
>
> your pal,
> blake
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>


Actually, I would welcome that method just traversing from home to work and
back. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Now then, was that funny or WHAT?
-------------------------------------------