05/03/2007
Gay Couple Receives Biblical Threat at Florida Baggage Claim
I received an interesting email this morning from Towleroad reader and law professor Anthony Niedwiecki about an incident that occurred at the Fort Lauderdale Airport on Tuesday. He and his partner Waymon Hudson had a jarring experience upon their arrival:
Niedwicki: "At approximately 12:45 am, my partner and I were in the baggage claim area in terminal 3. We had just arrived from Chicago and were waiting for our bags when an announcement came over an intercom. It was a recorded message and basically said that 'a man who lies with another man as he would a woman is subject to death.' We couldn't believe what we heard, and then it came over the intercom again a few minutes later. We were shaken by the announcement because it specifically said 'subject to death'.
...We called the airport and after five call transfers (including the sheriff's department), we got an airport manager. He seemed disinterested and more interested in the exact bible verse than taking care of the problem. He simply said 'sorry for the inconvenience.' I sent an email to United/Ted (our airline) because I could not get anyone on the phone. I was told by some person at the airport (during my 'phone shuffle' yesterday afternoon) that only airline employees have access to the intercom.
...As of today, I have not heard back from the airport or United. NBC6 news, our local channel, aired a story about this yesterday and today. The airport spokesperson said that anyone could have made the comments, which should give us all pause in a time of terrorism (anyone can use the PA system of an airport?)."
Here's the writeup from NBC6 in South Florida. According to airport representative Steve Belleme, they are attempting to uncover who might be reading passages from Leviticus over the airport intercom: "So far we don't think we can identify the location but that's what we're trying to do."
Posted 10:11 AM EST by Andy Towle in Florida, News, Religion, Transportation | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I am smelling some first-year associate arrogance coming on here...
Posted by: Gary | May 3, 2007 12:06:18 PM
Marcus, rather than jump to conclusions about your motivations I'd like to hear why your first response was to question the wording of the article?
If you maintain that the media are guilty of sensationalism I can't argue with that. But my first impulse was to take the witnesses at their word and to see this for what it was - the improper use of a public PA system to make a threat against gay men.
But you didn't see it that way. Your first impulse was to pick apart the wording of the headline. What is your explanation for this difference?
Posted by: mark m | May 3, 2007 12:30:19 PM
In situations like this, police should be called. This is a blatent security and safty breach as well as a criminal act as these two and any other homosexuals in the building had received a public death threat. We're not Kingston Jamaica, its not okay for people's lives to be threatened in such a public manor. If air port security isn't responding, call the police. Don't be quiet, be methodical about bringing this to the forefront. This is not okay.
Posted by: David Oxley | May 3, 2007 12:36:46 PM
Leland...heeheehee...you crack me up...and nice use of the word 'jejune', by the way.
xo
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | May 3, 2007 12:39:07 PM
Gary: Then the gay people did it to themselves by migrating to a gay-unfriendly territory named Florida. Its time to move on.
Americans just understand two things: money and power. (gross generalization, i know, but it is true. i had a deep south business man greet me - an asian/pacific islander - when i was in a suit, and ignored me the same day when i wasnt)
American LGBT need to combine their resources make sure businesses and politicians will hurt if they target LGBT community for harmful actions. Your society is fairly primal that way, as such, you should respond accordingly.
Posted by: Landis | May 3, 2007 12:54:13 PM
Umm, the guy's a lawyer and he didn't consider suing the airline for issuing a death threat?
Posted by: Anon | May 3, 2007 1:00:39 PM
This is absurd. The airport should know exactly who has access to the PA system and moreover I am certain that there are rules regarding the use of the PA system.
I think that it is obvious that the comments were directed at Niedwicki and his partner. I would bet that some smart-ass breeder was sitting in the security booth and watching people on camera, saw the gay couple and took it upon himself to thrust his own religious belief on people who had no way to respond or fight back.
Posted by: Jonathon | May 3, 2007 1:12:03 PM
Was this a United Airlines terminal? Actions speak louder than words. Obviously there is a coverup since they can't find the person or person's responcible.
Easy solutions---Call the airport and tell them that you will never travel to that city. Tell United Airlines (if this was their terminal) that you will not fly on their airlines until they take corrective action.
The religious right uses boycotts as a way to scare companies from supporting equality. Let's do the same. Please everyone start making calls or e-mail so our message is heard loud and clear.
Posted by: Dawson | May 3, 2007 1:12:35 PM
Just because I am a lawyer, it doesn't mean that the first thing I do is sue! I think going to local officials and the media is the best way to get action. Once a lawsuit is filed, nobody will talk with me or deal with it openly. Also, I am not looking for money or anything other than to get this person fired!
Here's an update: I have been interviewed by several news sources, and only after that and speaking with a county commissioner, did I finally receive a call from the sheriff's office. They will be investigating it to see if they can see or hear anything on any recordings or video tapes.
Posted by: Niedwiecki | May 3, 2007 1:22:37 PM
To all concerned, I never use aliases...it's always the same one. I'm not questioning his credibility at all. He heard what he heard. I have no reason to call him a liar. I just inquired if anyone had come forward. I find it odd that no one has come forward to speak out. I don't use aliases because I am not ashamed of what I say or my views. And to the people who call me a troll or whatever other name, it doesn't bother me in the least. I have had intelligent discussion with others on here who do not name call and have changed my position on several issues. I'm not a hate monger or troll. I see nothing wrong with asking questions.
Posted by: Matt | May 3, 2007 1:27:49 PM
Matt: Your claim to not have an alias does nothing to add to you credibility (and the same goes for everyone else). No one can really verify such information unless it is very public (like Niedwiecki).
Posted by: Landis | May 3, 2007 2:03:20 PM
Landis,
I agree with you. I can't verify that I don't use aliases. But I at least wanted to put that out there. I've got a lot of enemies on this blog. I know that. But since I've been reading and being challenged my viewpoints have changed. I'm not the self hating gay I once was. I still have my moments but I like the debate. Regardless of what I say, I never would wish any attack or crime on anyone...gay straight black or blue.
Posted by: Matt | May 3, 2007 2:12:09 PM
A death threat over an airport intercom after 9/11? They better take it seriously.
Posted by: SGR | May 3, 2007 2:27:40 PM
What, and they didn't conclude with "have a Nice Day!" What kind of airline is this anyway?
Posted by: hill_w | May 3, 2007 2:52:52 PM
The line in Leviticus in the King James version is "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
At the risk of being ridiculously literal, I'd say this verse doesn't say anything about gay people or gay sex. The verb "lie" means "lay down" or "speak falsely."
It has nothing to do with gay people except that we've been told relentlessly that this verse is a condemnation of homosexuality.
It isn't.
Leviticus also states "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him."
Why aren't the Bible-thumpers as agitated about the millions of people who sometimes curse their parents?
Posted by: alan | May 3, 2007 2:53:44 PM
Well, clearly the WBC was in town and they wanted to welcome them!
Posted by: anon | May 3, 2007 4:05:32 PM
What the passage means and who it was for really doesn't matter. It was a death threat.
The real issue is there are rogue employees at this airport who make death threats over the intercom. It's a security issue. A serious one. Niedwiecki and Hudson aren't the only ones who could have heard this. It wasn't broadcast at a frequency that could be heard by gay ears.
So, what does it say about airport management that employees? That countless other employees and managers who heard this may failed to report it? That it's taking this long to find the culprit?
You would think that after 9/11, they would take security lapses like this very, very seriously.
Posted by: SGR | May 3, 2007 4:08:29 PM
Sorry, that should be: It wasn't broadcast at a frequency that could ONLY be heard by gay ears.
Posted by: SGR | May 3, 2007 4:09:34 PM
Midnight Lounge ^5
"recieved" or not recieved is not the issue
Leland and Zeke = exactly the message was directed towards all gay people who happened to be in the airport at the time.
Biblebasher , Good for canada. The bible is full of hateful terorist speach
Posted by: pacificoceanboy | May 3, 2007 5:11:14 PM
Thank you Niedwiecki for bringing this to the public's attention. It is horrible reading about it and for you to hear it had to be painful. Thank you for speaking out, sadly many would not.
Posted by: Mike | May 3, 2007 6:05:31 PM
Matt, you may say that you don't use aliases but if you are the same Matt who was banned from posting a while back, a simple check of IP addresses indicated that THAT Matt used about ten different aliases. This was researched and confirmed to me by Andy himself. Ain't technology grand?
If you're not that Matt they you are the unfortunate owner of a much maligned screen name here at Towleroad.
Posted by: Zeke | May 3, 2007 6:29:54 PM
Wow - unbelievable! I am going to assume it's only a matter of time before this story goes national. Thanks Niedwiecki for not "letting it go"
Posted by: Giovanni | May 3, 2007 6:45:38 PM
Anthony, I'm sorry this happened to you. Good for you about trying to raise awareness of this. Bigotry, like roaches, doesn't like sunlight.
And on another note, guys can't we at least debate respectfully? So much hating, not nearly enough love.
Sigh . . . .
Posted by: Brandon | May 3, 2007 6:54:35 PM
I just want to say as an airline employee, Airport PA systems are everywhere in airports...
They may be inconspicuous or hidden, but they are there, and it really doesnt take much for a curious person to notice it, and simply pick it up and make an announcement. Its that easy...
Really anyone could have made this announcement. I know in Orlando the PA systems are located at each Baggage Carousel so that airline reps can make an announcement as to baggage arrival,etc.
Posted by: Jeremy | May 3, 2007 8:35:27 PM
There's no denying that whoever made this announcement over the PA system was a jerk.
With that said...
From the perspective of someone who works for the operator of another aiport...
-I'd go out on a limb and say that 25+ businesses within the airport have access to the PA system, and with good reason.
> How do you expect the airport operator to efficiently monitor who is accessing the system and when?
> Who is going to pay for the system upgrades from what's probably a very basic PA system to track usage (and catch the once in a blue moon offender?)
> Don't you think the operators of airports have bigger fish to fry than monitor PA system usage?
>When is the last time you heard of some terrorist commandeering a PA system to create havoc?
There's no denying that whoever made this statement was an ignorant jerk, and that the airport should consider refreshing tenants on the appropriate protocl. But get real folks -- airports today don't have the resources to do what you want them to do, and, with so many competing priorities, they have far more important things to worry about than the occasional a-hole who makes a highly inappropriate comment.
I'd be in shock too if I heard this over the PA, and would probably inform the management at FLL...but really would have no expectations beyond an apology and a promise to refresh PA system users on what's OK to say, and what needs to be kept offline.
Posted by: Travis | May 4, 2007 1:32:10 AM