CBS "News" strikes AGAIN

Roger Halstead writes:
Can you imagine the damage on the ground caused by an F-16 or 15
shooting down a low flying small plane over a populated area?
That would be a disaster no amount of spin could change. The public
outcry could easily cripple valid air patrols.

I tend to agree but what about the damage if the drunk pilot had spun out
of control and plowed into a building killing many yet the military did
nothing? Can go both ways.

"C J Campbell" writes:
Maybe you would like to shoot school children or mothers, too. Who else
would you like to shoot? Republicans? Baptists? Anybody that Dan Rather
does
not like?

So to you shooting down a drunk pilot busting airspace is the same as
shooting school children and mothers?

"Royce Brown" wrote in message
news:fc.003d093b01c589f03b9aca00bb6b3d27.1c589f4@a mugonline.org...
| "C J Campbell" writes:
| Maybe you would like to shoot school children or mothers, too. Who else
| would you like to shoot? Republicans? Baptists? Anybody that Dan Rather
| does
| not like?
|
| So to you shooting down a drunk pilot busting airspace is the same as
| shooting school children and mothers?

It is if the school children and mothers happen to be passengers aboard the
plane.

Now, it turned out that there were no passengers on this plane. But no one
knew that for sure until the plane landed, did they?

Only mothers who drive drunk.


"Royce Brown" wrote in
news:fc.003d093b01c589f03b9aca00bb6b3d27.1c589f4@a mugonline.org:

"C J Campbell" writes:
Maybe you would like to shoot school children or mothers, too. Who else
would you like to shoot? Republicans? Baptists? Anybody that Dan Rather
does not like?

So to you shooting down a drunk pilot busting airspace is the same as
shooting school children and mothers?

That's the point dufuss, its out of control so folks don't bother to get
technical about the very very few. When things are so screwed up and to the
extreme that our system is nothing more than government learning centers,
who give a crap about the very few. They don't matter at this point. Do
the math then decide when to use your favorite ancient word phrases that
most of us would rather frequent at some engineers annual meeting.

huh?

what basis are those claims made by?

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Judah" wrote in message
...
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in
:


"Jordan" wrote in message
...

If we have to have celebrity endorsement, then our nation is too brain
dead to endure and is finished.

That's what happens when teachers make minimum wage, and celebrities
make
$100,000 an episode...

Teachers hardly make minimun wage. Even if we paid them $100K, they don't
know _how_ to teach (besides being beholden to the unions). Further, even
those who LOVE to teach, still miss HOW the human mind learns and grasps
information in the form of concepts. That's why most all of "education" is
now BY ROTE.

"Royce Brown" wrote in message
news:fc.003d093b01c589e23b9aca00bb6b3d27.1c589ef@a mugonline.org...
| Roger Halstead writes:
| Can you imagine the damage on the ground caused by an F-16 or 15
| shooting down a low flying small plane over a populated area?
| That would be a disaster no amount of spin could change. The public
| outcry could easily cripple valid air patrols.
|
| I tend to agree but what about the damage if the drunk pilot had spun out
| of control and plowed into a building killing many yet the military did
| nothing? Can go both ways.

Not really. Shooting down the pilot practically guarantees you will
everybody on board the airplane and possibly injure people and property on
the ground, not only with the destroyed aircraft, but also with all the
falling anti-aircraft munitions. Leaving the drunk alone, he might indeed
crash and hurt someone, but then again he probably will not. Shooting him
down merely turns a small chance of something bad happening into a high
probability.

You make several assumptions here that are probably incorrect.

First of all, it seems from recent history that piston-prop planes like
the one this guy was flying generally do not kill all that many. In most
cases, the only fatalities are the people in the plane, and sometimes
even the people in the plane survive.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/bre...p-125879c.html
http://www.sptimes.com/2002/09/02/Ta...ane_cras.shtml
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/monte...ws/7492384.htm

Second of all, your use of the term "spun out of control" is an
automobile term. When a plane gets into a spin, there are specific
techniques that can be used to regain control.

Third of all, hindsight is 20/20. The plain reality is that it is foolish
to believe that the military would shoot down a single engine plane just
because the plane went into Class B (not even restricted, just requires
clearance) airspace without a clearance. It would be like firing Mortars
at a drunk driver who accidentally went up a one-way street the wrong
way. And I have even done that when I wasn't drunk!

The only thing to fear is fear itself.

"Royce Brown" wrote in
news:fc.003d093b01c589e23b9aca00bb6b3d27.1c589ef@a mugonline.org:

Roger Halstead writes:
Can you imagine the damage on the ground caused by an F-16 or 15
shooting down a low flying small plane over a populated area?
That would be a disaster no amount of spin could change. The public
outcry could easily cripple valid air patrols.

I tend to agree but what about the damage if the drunk pilot had spun
out of control and plowed into a building killing many yet the military
did nothing? Can go both ways.

That's the point dufuss, its out of control so folks don't bother to get
technical about the very very few. When things are so screwed up and to the
extreme that our system is nothing more than government learning centers,
who give a crap about the very few. They don't matter at this point. Do
the math then decide when to use your favorite ancient word phrases that
most of us would rather frequent at some engineers annual meeting.





"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...
Howdy!

In article ,
Tom Sixkiller wrote:

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote:
I think our liberal media is chastising the government for not
doing anything so they can chastise them again if they do.

It's got nothing to do with liberal or conservative: Fox was shrieking
as loud as the rest.

Dan, Your capacity for critical thinking and differentiation is
remarkable....when it suits your preconceived notions.

Boy isn't that the pot calling the kettle black, Mr. Teachers-are-
worthless-pieces-of-****. I suppose your opinion here is one of an
expert in the field.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

Howdy!

In article ,
Tom Sixkiller wrote:

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...
Howyd!

In article ,
Tom Sixkiller wrote:

"Judah" wrote in message
.. .
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in
:

[snip]

Teachers hardly make minimun wage. Even if we paid them $100K, they don't
know _how_ to teach (besides being beholden to the unions). Further, even
those who LOVE to teach, still miss HOW the human mind learns and grasps
information in the form of concepts. That's why most all of "education"
is
now BY ROTE.

Bull****. You don't even bother to slip in a weasely "most"; you simply
tar all teachers with your calumny.

Well, if in sending my kids to public schools all these years (they're all
in or past college now) I'd seen even ONE that comprehended HOW the young
minds grasps knowledge I'd say "most". That's not been me experience.

....so on the basis of your limited sample, you assert a universal condition.
As I said, "bull****". You seem to suggest, as well, that children all learn
the same way. More bogon flux. If they all learned the same way, wouldn't you
think there would be greater uniformity in educational approaches? Instead,
we have Montessori (works for some, but not for others), boot camps, etc.

You show no grasp of the lameness of your claim.


I won't deny that there are a significant number of teachers whose ability
to teach is questionable, but many teachers actually give a damn about
their
students, doing their best to *teach*. Oh, and "rote learning" is not so
nearly ubiquitous as you would claim.

"Giving a damn" is completely worthless if they don't know _HOW_ it works.

Huh?

Your tirade is so full of manure that it is laughable -- or would be if
you weren't expressing a range of opinions that are painfully common.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Is that the best you can come up with? You don't offer meaningful substance
to your outlandish claims. You are just blathering.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/