If I wasn’t on the government watch list before, I am now. Here is 16 year old Kendall Jenner wearing an outfit that a girl her age shouldn’t be wearing out in public. Someone needs to have a talk with her parents because obviously they’re not doing their job well.
Welcome to THG Asks, a feature in which our two celebrity gossip experts debate a topical issue in the entertainment world and readers decide on which side they fall. Today, we turn our focus not just to Kristen Stewart and her shocking affair with Rupert Sanders , but to her unusual decision to issue a public apology regarding her actions. We ponder both arguments and then THG Asks: Should the actress have taken this step? ——————————————- NO. By Free Britney Kristen Stewart owes the public one thing and one thing only: the best performance she can give on screen. She’s an actress. She didn’t cause any personal or emotional harm to a single fan out there and, no offense, but if she did… that’s your fault, not hers. Kristen owes Robert Pattinson an apology. She owes Liberty Ross , the wife of Sanders, an apology. She owes the director’s two kids an apology. These were people actually affected by her lapse in judgment. But what Stewart does in the privacy of her own home – or in the front seat of a car , apparently – is between Stewart, the person she is doing it with and those connected to either or both. When it comes someone such as Kristen, who has clearly never craved fame, I choose to judge her solely on her acting chops and don’t expect her to meet any sort of ethical standard in her personal life. And I certainly don’t need her to apologize to me when she fails to do so. YES. By Hilton Hater Hi, Free Britney. Welcome to 2012. Your argument may have made sense a couple decades ago, prior to tabloids and the paparazzi and the Internet and the blurring of lines between the public, the private and the professional. But this isn’t a debate over how thing should be. It’s a debate over how things are . And this is how they are in this age, especially for a star such as Stewart and a franchise such as The Twilight Saga: the movies are sold as much on Kristen and Rob’s relationship as they are on vampires, werewolves and half-human babies. It’s very easy to argue that Stewart’s dalliance with Sanders will cost the studio millions, considering fans who simply won’t be able to stand her on screen any longer. Yes, Twihards take their Robsten very seriously and, whether Stewart wanted to play that game or not, she profited significantly from it. The investment of others in her relationship with Pattinson shot this actress on to the A-list. And she knew that. She may have disdained the spotlight, but she was aware that countless fans were staring at her in it and expecting her – at the very least – not to cheat with a married man nearly twice her age. I mean, seriously. Are we really at the point where we’re second guessing an apology? Isn’t that what we ask for from those who make a mistake? Your turn, readers. What do YOU think? Should Kristen Stewart have issued a public apology for cheating on Robert Pattinson?
Unlike the cities of Boston and Chicago, Laguna Hills did not place a ban on the opening of Chick-fil-A in its area. But perhaps it now wishes it had. A new store in that town was greeted this morning by protestors from the Orange County Gay and Lesbian Community Services Center, holding signs and calling for boycotts of the chain whose President has come out against gay marriage. Aside from simply saying his company was “guilty as charged” when it came to supporting the “biblical definition of marriage,” Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy has donated millions to the Marriage & Family Foundation and the Family Research Council. The issue first came to attention when Ed Helms Tweeted his reaction to that news and said Chick-fil-A had lost him as a customer. The The Jim Henson Company has also severed ties with the store, who tried to stem the tide of public disdain by releasing a statement that read: “Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.” So far, as today demonstrated, it has not worked.
Chinese artist Ai Weiwei lead ArtReview magazine’s list of the 100 most powerful artists in the world last October. The Beijing-based artist, photographer, documentarian, architect, activist, dissident, avid-Tweeter and charismatic father made a splash on the international scene when he helped Swiss architectural firm Herzog & de Meuron design Beijing’s National Stadium – more commonly known as the Bird’s Nest due to its design – which served as both corner stone and bragging material for the Beijing Olympics by the government. While immensely proud of the project, Mr. Ai denounced the regime and famously criticized officials for its treatment of dissenters and its human rights record in the lead-up to the event. Freelance journalist Alison Klayman met the artist through her roommate in 2008 by chance as he prepped an exhibition of photos he took while living in New York in the ’80s and early ’90s. Initially commissioned to do a short video on the fly, Klayman, who lived in China from 2006 – 2010 producing shows for PBS Frontline , National Public Radio and A.P. took on a larger doc about Ai Weiwei. In the film, Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry which will be released this weekend via IFC Films, she captured him being assaulted by police, confronting police, promoting his view of human rights and traveling to acclaim overseas. But it’s his political activism that has brought him both fame and danger at home. Authorities have “minders” in unmarked cars outside his home and studio in the Chinese capital as well as cameras pointed at his compound, which is filled with his beloved cats where he lives with his wife. The film also delves into his personal life and reveals the backstory about his very young son and his passion for Twitter and the internet. The latter were surprises for Klayman as she edited the film, which debuted earlier this year at the Sundance Film Festival – an event Ai Weiwei did not attend, likely due to restrictions he now lives under following an 81 day detention by authorities. ML spoke with Klayman last week about her film and spending time in the glare of Ai Weiwei’s spotlight. How did it work out that you came into contact with Ai Weiwei in Beijing and get him to work with you on this documentary? Yeah. The the answer to that pretty much answers like a whole host of questions like, ‘how did you hear of him and how did you get a chance and the access and all that stuff.’ I was already living in China. I went there after school and I was there for two years already. My roommate was curating a show for him at a gallery… So you speak Mandarin? By 2008, I did. In 2006 I went with a few sentences that I could use upon arrival. I worked really hard. I had a lot of jobs, which I saw all as vehicles for adventure and also on the job language-learning. By 2008 I was waiting to get a press credential which was coming through and my roommate was working on an exhibition of Ai Weiwei’s for a local gallery. It was his New York photographs – all the black and white. There were 10,000 of them and I would look through them at the kitchen table because she’d bring her work home and she’d tell me about it. So that’s really how I even first heard of him. I didn’t know about him before I went to China or anything like that. And she asked me if I wanted to do a video for the exhibition – just do one of those things that plays in the lobby on loop. I was really excited to try my hand. I wanted to do more video film documentary, and so the first time I met Ai Weiwei it was just like, “Here’s Alison. She’s here to do a video for the show.” So I came with the gallery team and they introduced me. There was never a transition from like being a random person to being the person who films him. It was just ‘this is Alison, she’s here to film you’ and, you know, it really – even in those first few weeks—his personality totally won me over and made me curious. I wanted to know about him. I felt like he could absolutely carry a longer piece than this kind of 20-minute thing. I just felt like to do a character portrait of him would really not only be entertaining but also it would illuminate something about a side of contemporary China that I felt like I was just encountering for the first time through him. Our conversations were already [developing] about his blog and censorship and the upcoming earthquake campaign. All stuff that just wasn’t going to fit in the video about New York photographs. So I was definitely feeling that at least I needed to follow up with this guy and he liked the video that I did for the exhibition. So that was also a good way to keep moving forward. So when you decided to continue going forward, were there any boundaries that you had set as far as what areas of his life you could explore, because you’re following him in his home, not just when he’s out traveling and being the public persona of Ai Weiwei. Totally true. I mean, in terms of my working style, I feel like I push, but I’m not pushy in the sense that he would sometimes chastise me. He’d be like, “Why do you always ask? You’re always so polite. Just do it.” But filming in his home is a really good point. At one point, I [spoke to] his wife about the fact I was coming around a lot and asked her, “I recognize that this is your home and there really aren’t any separations here so please tell me if you ever like – if I’m doing something you don’t like, or if you ever want me to turn off the camera.” And she was really sweet. She was like, “Oh, it’s totally fine. You can film me doing anything, but I don’t want to do it a sit down interview. That really freaks me out.” She has a very different personality than him in terms of media savvy and kind of playing with it. So actually much, much later I asked her for an interview, but on the whole I just felt like with him you certainly should never be embarrassed to ask. And through asking there were usually no boundaries, except his kind of private life in terms of his son. When he was first born, he said, “Oh, you should meet him. He’s the smartest baby in the world.” He was already the proudest dad ever. He said, “You know, so you want to come meet him?” I said, “Yeah, can I bring my camera?” And then he’s like, “Come on, no. That’s a baby.” And really it wasn’t a complicated situation. I found some boundaries, so I guess he had to get a little older before he kind of felt comfortable [with shooting him].” And it was interesting. I mean, we’ll get more into his activism side in a moment, but it was interesting though that the backstory behind his son actually came out while you were filming Ai Weiwei doing separate interviews with various press. There were two. The first one was in Beijing with the New Yorker correspondent, and then the second one was the BBC guy at the Tate Modern. For me to sit down and ask him about something that he knew I already knew the answer to was not really going to work. I feel like he does enough interviews a day that he doesn’t need to talk if he doesn’t want to talk. So I felt like [filming him doing a separate interview about his son] was probably going to be the only way for him to explain it and I think it’s really instructive to see how he deals with different people as well. Ai Weiwei has been called “the most powerful artist in the world today,” and certainly if not the most famous living artist, then definitely in the very top tier. After your time with him, what is your take on his approach to art, political activism and how he connects the two? Well, if there’s a question whether they are related, I would say yes. For me, the artist side is trying to be as relevant and engaged and fostering more conversations. To me, that’s definitely the most interesting. I think how you feel about his artwork and museum [exhibitions] is up to people’s taste. I personally really like so many of his works because I think that they actually don’t say something specific. I think they are kind of really hard to read and complicated and they leave a lot of room for you to say what the meaning possibly is. When he gives an interview or posts a Tweet, he’s pretty direct about his criticisms and what he says he thinks. So it’s all about his artistic practice and it’s kind of in its entirety. And he does have all these different ways of speaking – whether it’s in a populous way or in a fine art way. I think from the beginning I was definitely told that he was a very famous artist, and not being from the art world, I just had to take people’s word for that. When I went to his show in Munich I think that was really the first time when I really appreciated that this guy is really, really famous. He has a very big audience and following in Germany, but I mostly saw him in the context of Beijing. So that was my first exposure to how the art world treats him. Then there’s also the news world. He was one of the few prominent people who would actually tell you what they thought on the record when you needed a more critical voice. In a way, I felt like I was doing something about someone who was kind of over exposed but still room to do something that had more quality and substance. I was so focused on that, that I didn’t know what the movie was like, but I just I needed to be filming as much as possible in all these different parts of his life and stay really open and not draw conclusions on a lot of questions until I was in post-production. For example, I heard him for years talking about the internet, which was always the subject he would turn to in interviews. I feel sometimes I was like rolling my eyes in my head maybe a little bit. I didn’t think I was making a movie about the power of the internet because I hadn’t really examined it that much. When I went back and thought about the meaning of his life’s work and progress, and also what’s going on with the realities of contemporary China, and the world – and all this pre-dated the Arab Spring and WikiLeaks and all this stuff – suddenly I was like, “No, this is totally on point.” I don’t think I got it at first. It was interesting to learn he had lived in New York for ten years. And he had already at least participated in some protests against the regime in China while living here – of course with comparatively much less fanfare than his protests and criticisms since returning to China. But I nevertheless found it curious that he was still asked and participated in the design of the Bird’s Nest stadium for the Beijing Olympics. The thing with the Olympics is it always gets short-handed that he was asked but that wasn’t actually how it happened. I tried as much as I could to make this clear in the film, because the film doesn’t say he was asked but maybe it’s not fully clear enough how it happened. The Swiss architectural firm Herzong & de Meuron wanted to do more projects in China and they were introduced to Weiwei by a former Swiss ambassador and a really big collector.
After creating a public persona with at least as much swagger as the character with whom he’s most strongly identified — Star Trek ’s Captain Kirk — it came as little surprise that the first thing William Shatner said at the beginning of Movieline’s interview for his new documentary was an explicit statement of purpose. “My film Get a Life is debuting July 28th on EPIX,” he said without being asked. “We’re going to show it at Comic-Con on Saturday – and we’re all excited about it.” Shatner is, deservedly, an icon: 45-plus years after first playing Kirk, he’s more beloved than ever, in great part because he has wholeheartedly embraced the adulation of hundreds of thousands of Trek fans. But in naming his documentary after the 1986 Saturday Night Live skit in which he jokingly challenged Trekkies to find something else to do with their time, he demonstrates that he’s not above a little self-satire, especially when it’s those fans who have continued to keep his career alive. That said, neither is he beyond some passing exasperation over hearing the same questions over and over again – evidenced most strongly when he’s finally asked something new. Shatner spoke to Movieline Wednesday morning from Kentucky, where he’s tending to his own obsession – horse breeding. While trying to get at what has made Star Trek such an enduring property, the actor revealed how he came to terms with being James T. Kirk, reflected on how the questions brought up in his first directorial effort, Star Trek V , were oddly answered 23 years later in Get a Life , and explained why fans probably shouldn’t ask him too many questions about Trek mythology. When you first started to examine why people continue to celebrate Star Trek , how in-depth did you intend to get? Was this meant to be sort of a reward for fans’ devotion or a video essay for you to try and understand it? Well, that’s exactly right. You know, the process of making a documentary is one of discovery, and like writing a story, you follow a lead and that leads you to something else and then by the time you finish, the story is nothing like you expected. And that’s the discovery I made – what you see happening to me on film is happening to me on film. I had no idea what to expect, and what I saw, my face reflected the astonishment of these various truths that came out that made it a far deeper experience than I ever thought of. How quickly did the examination become so existential? Was that something you saw in fans’ responses, or did that largely come from your conversation with the Joseph Campbell expert? That’s exactly right – from the fans’ responses, which led me to other fans that had a deeper understanding of what we were looking at, and then it just became exploration. And then bewilderment, and then wonderment! And it was something that was totally unexpected, and I expect that will be the audience’s experience as well – a totally unexpected observation of why people go to conventions, and about what the enduring fascination has been. So that’s the fascination, and that’s the secret behind the endurance of Star Trek – it has become part of the mythology of this culture. And nobody that I knew had a valid answer when I asked, “What do you think is the reason for the endurance of Star Trek , and why do you think people devote their lives to it, so much money and time, and bring their children to it?” The various answers I gave – science-fiction, the story, the appeal of the fact that we exist 300 years from now, all of those are part of it, but the real answer is more mystical than that. At what point did you decide to have that conversation with the Joseph Campbell expert? When I met him, the more I talked to him, the more fascinated I became, and so I decided to get a real setting and sit down and do a real interview. I’ve had some fun doing interviews in the past on television, and brought that experience to bear on him – and there was this whole philosophy laid out in front of me that put the whole documentary to a cohesive whole that I never expected. And had I not had it, it would be that much less. At what point did you really embrace or accept the fandom that your role as Kirk inspired? Quite a while ago. Over the years and talking to 10,000 people on an ad-lib basis, it kind of hones your skills for entertaining an audience in an [improvisational] way. And I began to use those experiences as a way of being an actor in front of an audience, and evolve stories and anecdotes that appeal to them. I wrote some books about it and ended up doing a one-man show about it last year – and we’ll be going out again this year – that exists because I’ve stood in front of large audiences not knowing what the next word coming out of my mouth was going to be. So I embraced the audiences a long time ago and sought to entertain them in various ways – this being one of them, the observation of what they are actually doing. How much are you able to apply the values and characteristics that fans see in Kirk into other creative ventures – to capitalize on the qualities that they seem to respond to? Well, the series appeals on a high moral level, that [Gene] Roddenberry engendered, and they’re universals – people are good, eventually people will be good, the evolvement of man is towards the positive, life will exist and we’ll work our way out of these problems. All of the positive aspects of life are there, and for me that certainly is a personal philosophy. How much at this point do you really know about Star Trek ? Can you go toe to toe with these fans and trade minutiae? No, no, no – I know nothing. My wife has to remind me of my name every so often. You know, it’s 40 years ago – why would I remember? It was a three-year job and then it was over, and then that was it. And then people began to remind me of what I had done. Which episode or part of the Trek world do you get asked about the most, and which do you find they ask about least, or seldom mention? There are many, many general questions, the likes of which you’re asking, and so, yeah, they’re just about what you think they are – your favorite episode, the philosophy, and why it has remained. Those questions still exist. But we sought in the documentary to bring this to another level to show these people – some in need, some in joy – but everybody being attracted to the Star Trek ideals, and yearning – that’s a word I haven’t used before – yearning for them to be true. And hoping, and living for that moment when the beauty that man can exude will be real and paramount. That’s what I think all of these people are looking for. What thing in your life gives you the same kind of passion – the fandom – that people show to Trek ? Well, right now I’m talking to you from Kentucky, where I’m competing for horses, in the horse world that I exist in for a large part of my life other than as an actor. My wife and I are totally involved in horses, and that is one of our great passions. And it’s interesting that I’m talking to you about Star Trek from another area of my life that makes me feel equally good. So in the way your fans know the mythology of the series, you would know the geneology of horses, maybe. Yes, exactly – you’re exactly right. The details of the horses are comparable to the details people ask me about Star Trek , only I think I’m far more knowledgeable about the horses than I am about Star Trek . Star Trek V , which you directed, confronted questions of faith and identity, and in retrospect it almost feels like you’re addressing the subtext of that film in this documentary. What an interesting observation. My God, man – that’s pure intelligence. My respect for you has increased enormously. That’s a wild conclusion, and yes, I agree with you. Had I known what I know now – because I had so many troubles and problems with getting the story for the search for God that Paramount wouldn’t let me make and Roddenberry wouldn’t let me make – I would have had more ammunition to convince them that the story I wanted to tell, and the story they forced me to tell made one or two compromises too many. That’s the lesson I learned on Star Trek V : When do you stand your ground and when do you compromise? We’re looking at that in our government right now, and that’s the problem with our government – everybody is standing on principle. Looking at that film and Get a Life as bookends, do you feel like you were asking questions then that you’re maybe finding answers for now? That’s right, man – you are absolutely right. I wanted to ask the question, if you were able to take a spaceship and find God, what would you find? And if you found the opposite, a fallen angel, what would you find? That’s the question I wanted to ask. That was going through my mind. Eric Van Lustbader used to write novels about an American in Japan and didn’t fit in in Japan, I wanted him to write that movie because he would have been the perfect guy to understand the philosophical questions being asked and put them into action. And the studio and Van Lustbader fought over the book right, and Van Lustbader never got to write the movie – which I think was a blow to what I would have liked to have done. So I never did accomplish in Star Trek V what I wanted to, but in this documentary, exploring those questions – where do we go, what do we do, what is mythology, what were the Greeks thinking when they made up those mythological beings, and what were they looking for. All of those questions that belonged to the universalities of man, those were some of the questions I wanted to ask in Star Trek V . And science-fiction allows us to do that because science-fiction is, in effect, the search for God. Absolutely. And that’s really all I have time to talk to you for. It’s a shame because your questions are now approaching unique – uniqueness. But I don’t have time for you. Todd Gilchrist is a Los Angeles-based film critic and entertainment journalist for a variety of online and print publications. You can follow his work via Twitter at @mtgilchrist . Read more from Comic-Con 2012 here. Follow Movieline on Twitter .
Hollywood.TV is your source for all the latest celebrity news, gossip and videos of your favorite stars! bit.ly – Click to Subscribe! Facebook.com – Become a Fan! Twitter.com – Follow Us! James Woods was spotted out at The Grove tonight. Being as awesome as only James Woods can be, he stopped and gave his thoughts on Tom and Katy’s breakout, saying eh believes in love. He also Talks about the healthcare bill. It doesn’t matter what James Woods is talking about, we’ll be listening. Hollywood.TV is the global leader in capturing celebrity breaking news as it happens. We cover all the major Hollywood events including The Golden Globes, The Oscars, The Screen Actors Guild Awards, The Grammy’s, The Emmy’s and the American Music Awards, as well as all the red carpet movie premiers in Los Angeles and New York. HTV is on the streets 24/7, at all the industry events and invited by the stars to cover their every move in Hollywood, New York and Miami. Hollywood.TV is currently the third most viewed reporter channel on www.youtube.com YouTube with almost 400 million views, and our footage is seen worldwide! Tune in daily for all the latest Hollywood news on www.hollywood.tv and http like us on Facebook!
Tea Party Hires African-American Consultant To Help Recruit Minorities Looks like the Tea Party is pulling out all the stops. FreedomWorks, a prominent tea party-aligned organization that supports the candidacies of conservative politicians, announced Monday that it hired prominent black conservative political consultant, Deneen Borelli , to help recruit minorities. According to a report in The Daily Caller on Monday, Borelli will serve as the group’s new director of outreach. “In her new role, Deneen will speak at events promoting FreedomWorks’ pro-liberty agenda, participate in recruiting grassroots activists — including minorities — and aggressively challenge the misleading voices of the liberal black establishment,” read the press release announcing Borelli’s hire. Borelli, author of Backslash: How Obama and the Left are riving Americans to the Government Plantation, is a contributor with the Fox News Channel and has been a featured speaker at FreedomWorks rallies for several years. Oh, look. She’s also contributed to Fox News. Source
‘My intention has always been to get this situation rectified,’ former Fugee says in a statement regarding her current tax woes. By Rob Markman Lauryn Hill Photo: Ilya S. Savenok/ Getty Images There’s a reason Lauryn Hill failed to file her taxes , whether it is a legally sound reason will be up to the courts to decide. The former Fugee released a statement on her tumblr on Friday, just a day after she was charged by the government. “For the past several years, I have remained what others would consider underground,” she wrote. “I did this in order to build a community of people, like-minded in their desire for freedom and the right to pursue their goals and lives without being manipulated and controlled by a media protected military industrial complex with a completely different agenda.” Hill said that she was taken advantage of as an artist, and she withdrew from the mainstream in order to wean herself and her family from a lifestyle “that required distortion and compromise as a means for maintaining it.” Hill rid herself of people she says she couldn’t trust and sought to be freed from the confines that she’s seen in the commercialization of music and art. The IRS estimates that the singer has earned more than $1.6 million in income cumulatively in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and failed to file in each of those years. If found guilty, she could face up to three years in prison and a $300,000 fine. Hill contends that her actions were a means of survival for her and her family. “Obviously, the danger I faced was not accepted as reasonable grounds for deferring my tax payments, as authorities, who despite being told all of this, still chose to pursue action against me, as opposed to finding an alternative solution,” she said in the statement. “My intention has always been to get this situation rectified. When I was working consistently without being affected by the interferences mentioned above, I filed and paid my taxes,” she continued. “This only stopped when it was necessary to withdraw from society, in order to guarantee the safety and well-being of myself and my family.” Hill is scheduled to appear in court on June 29. Do you agree with Lauryn Hill’s reasoning for not paying her taxes? Let us know in the comments. Related Artists Lauryn Hill
Former Fugees singer could face up to three years in prison if found guilty for failing to file income-tax returns. By Rob Markman Lauryn Hill Photo: David Wolff-Patrick/ Redferns/ Getty Images Fourteen years after she released her classic album The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, the IRS is teaching the former Fugees singer a lesson on the importance of filing her taxes. Lauryn Hill was charged Thursday (June 7) with failing to file three years of income-tax returns, and now the government is looking to settle the score. A press release issued to MTV News states that Hill, who owns four different corporations, makes most of her money from music and film royalties. In the three years in which Hill failed to file, the IRS estimates that she’s earned more than $1.6 million in income. If found guilty, she could face up to three years in prison and a $300,000 fine. The news comes just days after Hill performed in her native New Jersey at Hot 97’s annual Summer Jam concert, surprising concertgoers with a short but impactful performance. She was a special guest during Nas’ set and performed the Fugees’ “Ready or Not,” her own “Lost Ones” and “If I Ruled the World” with the Queensbridge rap legend. Hill was originally scheduled to come out as a guest during Nicki MInaj’s set, but after a Hot 97 DJ insulted the Young Money queen, Lil Wayne insisted that none of his artists perform at the concert. While Hill admitted that she was unaware of the specifics, she issued a statement in support of Minaj . “I don’t have details on exactly what transpired between the station and the artists, but I do support artists standing by their beliefs and walking with integrity,” she wrote. “We have to find a better way to commercially exploit music while giving artists their proper respect. This cannot be done while taking their contributions for granted or trying to control the scope of their growth and power through threats and fear tactics.” Hill is scheduled to appear in court on June 29. Related Artists Lauryn Hill
An unidentified woman missed her American Airlines flight last week because staff found her choice of clothing offensive, according to news reports. That’s because it bore a statement that first appeared at a pro-choice rally this year: “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d f–k a senator.” The woman, identified only as “O,” said of the incident, “When I boarded, I was one of the first groups to board (did not pass by many folks).” “I was wearing my shawl loosely around my neck and upon sitting down, the lady next to me, who was already seated, praised me for wearing the shirt.” Yet a flight attendant told her that she needed to speak with the captain before making her connecting flight because the shirt was offensive . The captain informed her that she shouldn’t have been allowed to board in the first place, and would need to change before her connecting flight. According to the woman, this caused her to miss her connection. She says the airline called ahead to the connecting gate to tell agents there that “O” needed to change her shirt, but not to hold the flight. “O” claims that her luggage was checked and “changing shirts without spending money wasn’t an option.” American Airlines spokesman Tim Smith told MSNBC: “The only reason she was asked to cover up her T-shirt was the appearance of the ‘F-word’ on the T-shirt. The [pro-choice] message is irrelevant.” AA says its terms and conditions permit it to remove passengers at its discretion, including anyone it determines is “clothed in an inappropriate manner that would cause discomfort or offense to other passengers.”
Breaking Sports Video
