It is what the article said. He did not make any effort to clear up the confusion when it happened, when he could tell by her manner and her specific response that she had misunderstood him, and only tried to correct the record later, talking to third parties, when the whole thing had become irreparably "he said/she said."
I'm not trying to spin this. I'm responding to the completely inaccurate "how horrific" label you put on the hyperlink. He was not kicked off for asking if there was a meal. He was kicked off because the attendant misunderstood him and he made no effort to correct her misunderstanding. Asking about the meal was not a sufficient condition for getting kicked off *though asking a question at all is probably a necessary condition for being misunderstood* being misunderstood and letting that impression stick was the necessary and sufficient condition for getting kicked off. And he may, JUST MAYBE, have gotten clued in that the attendant thought he was asking about security when she *according to him* mentioned security in her reply.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Candidly, if*I asked a flight attendant if there was a meal on board and she said she couldn't tell me due to security reasons, I would reply in a louder and with some more enunciation, "You can't tell me if there's going to be a meal?"
As the blogger said, this is "he said, she said".
But I love the comment by the emo high school student: http://www.joesugarman.com/what-is-a...-1/#comment-20