Federal Aviation Administration to cut more air traffic controllers

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"John Mazor" wrote in message
...

And I repeat my request that you show even one example of me accusing the
controller of any error. You haven't, because you can't.

I never said you accused the controller of making an error, I said you
implied that he had.

Implication is in the minds of both the source and the beholder. There was
no intent in my mind, nor was there any reasonable basis for it to form in
the mind of the beholder, but apprently it has in yours.

As I said, we're not going to change each other's minds on this, so there's
no point in going around and around on this.

You have no connection to ALPA?

Irrelevant.

It's completely relevant.

If I told you that I was a corn farmer from Iowa who never got closer to an
aeroplane than my crop duster's flight patterns, would that alter in the
least the validity of anything I've said here?

Then why are you trying to protect the controller at all costs? I've
admitted numerous times that there is crew error involved.

I'm not trying to protect him at all. Why would you think he needed
protection if you knew he had made no error?

Why do you keep insisting on his innocence if he doesn't need any protection
here?

A comparison of the body of information that the two of us have
contributed to the discussion of this accident will show that I have
provided far more information to educate readers than you have.

Jon, these are aviation forums. You're not in a position to educate
anyone here.

I suppose the words "newbies" and "lurkers" have no meaning for you. Even
those who are well-informed on GA may not know much about the world of
airline ops.

There's a lot you could learn here, but it's clear you have no interest in
that.

Right. I suppose that's why, on 10/7/06, I posted the following in response
to one of the few substantively informative posts you've made he

"Thank you for the constructive information. I read it with great interest.
(Really.)"

So do tell us, what is my "true goal" here?

As I've already said, you're trying to deflect some of the responsibility
for the crash from a couple of dues-paying union members.

There's a difference between "Don't jump on the crew, it's also somebody
else's fault" and "You can't simply hang the crew for their error and let it
go at that." Apparently the difference is too subtle for you to grasp.

I never killfile anyone, but unless you have something new to contribute
beyond your hollow mantras and UseNet dodges, I see no point in
responding
to any more of your "nanner, nanner, are so!" whining. Let us know if
and
when you want to contribute anything substantive.

What makes you think anyone here gives a damn if you respond to their
messages?

You, for one, apparently do, and you're the only one I was referring to.