![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Robert Bonomi wrote:
And he was -not- "self sufficient", for "support services". Neither is the NSF. Do you not remember the woman diagnosed with breast cancer last year? The NSF was unable to help her. The US Air Force had to bail her ass out, first by dropping special meds to her, and later by flying a special air evac mission. So since the NSF isn't "self sufficient", your argument doesn't hold up. The NSF may well believe that denying essential assistance (like use of a phone) in Jon's case on the belief that it will discourage irrational thrill seekers. The NSF is wrong. Thrill seekers are irrational, therefore the NSF's passive dissuasion will not work. All that they have done is stir up a row among the Aussies and us, and given themselves a blackeye. Russell Kent |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|