But, on terra firma, would any company keep an employee who expressed wanting to attack clients of a political persuasion. How about someone who objected to serving let alone threatening a republican, or democrat, or gay, or Moslem or Jewish.

I think it extremely unlikely that person would keep their job.

But she's not " a republican, or democrat, or gay, or Moslem or Jewish". She is the daughter of a corrupt politician who has stolen billions from the Thai people, and lives in luxury on the proceeds. Do you think that some educated people don't resent that? Or do you consider that resentment wrong?

People are judged by those with which they associate. Or put more simply, when you lay down with dogs, don't be surprised to have fleas.

BTW yes, "let alone threatening" - the hostie expressed a desire (which was expressed but suppressed), which is not the same as threatening.

So when I saw abhist at ploenchit fair I could have thrown a drink over him and you would have defended me on Thai visa for doing it?

Also the more educated amongst us would understand that she has no control over what her father does or does not do, guilty by association? I would have thought you would know better that that.

No cue posts about share concealment etc.

The fact is what this idiot air hostess did was wrong, irrespective of who it was against and rightly she now has no job. Some of you need to realize the law is the law and it doesn't just become legal because of who it is aimed against.

To put it in perspective you should have said Abhisits daughter at Ploenchit fair.

And just thought of throwing a coffee at her... how abysmally twisted and sick.

You've never seen a "I just wanted to hit him/her" comment? If everyone was sacked for saying that, there would be no service/sales staff.

Sent from my HTC phone.

Saying that after the event is enormously different to asking your manager, "is it ok if i hit this customer because she is my enemy".

Once again ... you've never heard "Can I shoot him?" said around someone who is being annoying?

I am sure flight attendants have said "Can I pour coffee on them?" thousands of times.

How different would it be if this flight attendant had not posted the passenger list and just posted that she "saw her and wanted to throw coffee on her" as I expect many service people do about many hi-so's and celebrities?

You've never seen a "I just wanted to hit him/her" comment? If everyone was sacked for saying that, there would be no service/sales staff.

Sent from my HTC phone.

Saying that after the event is enormously different to asking your manager, "is it ok if i hit this customer because she is my enemy".

Once again ... you've never heard "Can I shoot him?" said around someone who is being annoying?

I am sure flight attendants have said "Can I pour coffee on them?" thousands of times.

How different would it be if this flight attendant had not posted the passenger list and just posted that she "saw her and wanted to throw coffee on her" as I expect many service people do about many hi-so's and celebrities?

Actually extremely different, but she probably would have still got into trouble.

Posting it after the event as a sign of frustration is extremely different to asking right there and then if its ok.

I wish i had is very difficult to, am i allowed to?

But she's not " a republican, or democrat, or gay, or Moslem or Jewish". She is the daughter of a corrupt politician who has stolen billions from the Thai people, and lives in luxury on the proceeds. Do you think that some educated people don't resent that? Or do you consider that resentment wrong?

People are judged by those with which they associate. Or put more simply, when you lay down with dogs, don't be surprised to have fleas.

BTW yes, "let alone threatening" - the hostie expressed a desire (which was expressed but suppressed), which is not the same as threatening.

So when I saw abhist at ploenchit fair I could have thrown a drink over him and you would have defended me on Thai visa for doing it?

Also the more educated amongst us would understand that she has no control over what her father does or does not do, guilty by association? I would have thought you would know better that that.

No cue posts about share concealment etc.

The fact is what this idiot air hostess did was wrong, irrespective of who it was against and rightly she now has no job. Some of you need to realize the law is the law and it doesn't just become legal because of who it is aimed against.

Is it so difficult to understand that she didn't act out her desires. Yes, I would defend your right to WANT to throw a drink, but not to do it.

Guilt by association? She is old enough to know her families history, but hasn't the morality to realise theft is wrong, especially when she reaps the benefits.

But, on terra firma, would any company keep an employee who expressed wanting to attack clients of a political persuasion. How about someone who objected to serving let alone threatening a republican, or democrat, or gay, or Moslem or Jewish.

I think it extremely unlikely that person would keep their job.

But she's not " a republican, or democrat, or gay, or Moslem or Jewish". She is the daughter of a corrupt politician who has stolen billions from the Thai people, and lives in luxury on the proceeds. Do you think that some educated people don't resent that? Or do you consider that resentment wrong?

People are judged by those with which they associate. Or put more simply, when you lay down with dogs, don't be surprised to have fleas.

BTW yes, "let alone threatening" - the hostie expressed a desire (which was expressed but suppressed), which is not the same as threatening.

Glad your not in charge, or anyone who was related to, lets say, the English should be punished for all past invasions/murders committed by the Empire in the name of the Almighty God/Dollar. Or put more simply, the British wealth was gained by exploitation so you shouldn,t live off the proceeds.

I think you are a century too late. Would you wish to associate with the children of a mafia don, living on proceeds of crime? Are you amoral enough to ignore the recent source of a person's wealth, especially when the criminal acts are still in process?

You've never seen a "I just wanted to hit him/her" comment? If everyone was sacked for saying that, there would be no service/sales staff.

Sent from my HTC phone.

Saying that after the event is enormously different to asking your manager, "is it ok if i hit this customer because she is my enemy".

Once again ... you've never heard "Can I shoot him?" said around someone who is being annoying?

I am sure flight attendants have said "Can I pour coffee on them?" thousands of times.

How different would it be if this flight attendant had not posted the passenger list and just posted that she "saw her and wanted to throw coffee on her" as I expect many service people do about many hi-so's and celebrities?

Actually extremely different, but she probably would have still got into trouble.

Posting it after the event as a sign of frustration is extremely different to asking right there and then if its ok.

I wish i had is very difficult to, am i allowed to?

Your application to join the Thought Police has been approved.

"I immediately told my flight manager I could not work knowing the daughter of my enemy was on the plane," the attendant posted on Facebook, according to the newspaper.

"I called my personal adviser asking if it would be all right to throw coffee at Paetongtarn, but was told that this could breach Hong Kong's laws."

Sounds a bit like something that a high-so/spoiled child would say.

Edited December 6, 201213 yr by arminbkk

Why doesn't daddy give the poor girl a private plane? It will cost a billion baht max to have a decent plane that can fly to Hongkong and Dubai. Peanuts for the Shins. From the rice scam alone they could buy a few boeings. What is this elite girl doing flying among the peasants?

At least you don't sound like you're green with envy and pettiness . . .