parris_k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On 31 Jan, 19:33, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>> On 31 Jan, 17:13, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>> On 31 Jan, 16:03, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 15:44, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 14:44, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 14:27, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> parri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31 Jan, 13:24, Wolfie <Wolfie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'sBoy.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' ) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> B1ackwater wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' )" <tributyltinpa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23434850-details/Flight+to...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #begin quote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The co-pilot of a Heathrow-bound plane was dragged
kicking and screaming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >from the cockpit after suffering a mental breakdown
while in control of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the flight.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He began yelling and "invoking God" as the Air Canada
767 flew at 37,000
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feet over the Atlantic. He was held down by other crew
members and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passenger, a member of the Canadian armed forces.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The co-pilot then had restraints fastened to his wrists
and ankles and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was handcuffed to a seat. The flight from Toronto made
an emergency
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> landing in Shannon and the co-pilot, who had been crying
and screaming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to witnesses, was taken off the plane.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He was taken by ambulance to a psychiatric ward where he
is being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> treated for a suspected nervous breakdown.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 146 passengers on the overnight flight continued
their journey and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got to Heathrow eight hours behind schedule after the
drama on Monday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Passenger Sean Finucane told of his shock as he
witnessed the co-pilot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being carried out of the cockpit in restraints.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He said today: "He was very, very distraught. He was
yelling loudly at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> times. When they tried to put his shoes on later he
swore and he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threatened people. His voice was clear so he didn't
sound drunk or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything. He was swearing and was very distressed."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr Finucane, from Lanca****re, told how the pilot kept
shouting: "I need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to talk to you God."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RADical man ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then I guess any high-pressure profession suffers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from a dispro****tionate number of mental breakdowns.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just hope it doesn't happen to your doctor when he's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transplanting a kidney or something :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Al Qaeda put some LSD in his coffee.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah but it sounds startlingly like that Air Egypt plane
that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was piloted into the sea after leaving the US. Pilot was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also raving.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your proof for this being?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Its a matter of record.
>>>>>>>>>>> No, it's a matter of record that people have SAID he was
barking.
>>>>>>>>>>> It being named as the cause of the crash (or even being a
fact) isn't.
>>>>>>>>>>> Not by a long stretch:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2002/aab0201.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200111/langewiesche
>>>>>>>>>>> An opinion piece is "proof"?
>>>>>>>>>> Wow. You're like the guy speeding through the neighborhood
>>>>>>>>>> who runs down a cat and then claims the cat committed suicide.
>>>>>>>>>> Wait here, we'll try to find its note.
>>>>>>>>> That's yuor answer to the question "an opinion piece is proof?"
?
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am curious to know why you asked?
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm just a stickler for accuracy..
>>>>>>>>>> If you have a rebuttal of the CVR transcript as contained in
>>>>>>>>>> the item above, lets have it.
>>>>>>>>> It's the interpretation of teh CVR rather than what is on it
that is
>>>>>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>>>>> But as long as you recognise you have no proof, only
interpretation of
>>>>>>>>> evidence...
>>>>>>>> You are just babbling here.
>>>>>>> Not at all. I'm trying to show you the difference between proof
and
>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>> You claimed you had proof.
>>>>>>>> Offer some factual rebuttal
>>>>>>>> of the CVR and flight recorders technical data that
>>>>>>>> shows that you have any vestiges of credibility on this
>>>>>>>> topic.
>>>>>>> I'm not the one claiming that it has been "proven" that the
co-pilot
>>>>>>> was "raving" by citing an opinion piece.
>>>>>>> I have already referred you to the _factual_ re****t on the crash.
>>>>>> Oh grow up.
>>>>> Temper temper. May I suggest you consult a dictionary for a
definition
>>>>> of "raving", for a start.
>>>>> THe first officer was CLEARLY not "raving" accoring to any of the
>>>>> primary, secondary or tertiary definitions in the dictionary.
>>>>>> Here's the same thing from atsb
>>>>> NTSB.
>>>>>> - your link which Langewiesche
>>>>>> wrote about:
>>>>>> The National Trans****tation Safety Board determines that the
probable
>>>>>> cause of the EgyptAir flight 990 accident is the airplane's
departure
>>>>>> from normal cruise flight and subsequent impact with the Atlantic
Ocean
>>>>>> as a result of the relief first officer's flight control inputs.
The
>>>>>> reason for the relief first officer's actions was not determined.
>>>>> I agree. That's hardly the proof you claim it is (i.e. that the
pilot
>>>>> was "raving")
>>>>>> Except that he was the one that pushed the craft into a steep dive,
>>>>>> and switched off the gas while shouting "I rely on God, I rely on
>>>>>> God"
>>>>> Incorrect.
>>>>>> and failed to help the desperate first officer who tried to pull
the plane up.
>>>>> The captain was the one trying to "pull the plane up". The relief
>>>>> first officer was the one who was apparently trying to crash the
>>>>> aircraft.
>>>>>> Moron.
>>>>> Suits you better than "Wolfie",or is it an insult you decide to
throw
>>>>> out because you simply can't admit you're wrong?
>>>>> Even if we accept the Egypt air relief first officer was, in fact,
>>>>> insane, it DOESN'T sound a great deal like the incident under
>>>>> discussion because:
>>>>> 1) the Air Canada chap didn't try to crash the plane
>>>>> 2) The EgyptAir chap wasn't raving. In fact, he was rather calm and
>>>>> collected on the CVR.
>>>> While saying "I rely on God, I rely on God"
>>> Ooh! I thought you said he was shouting, earlier.
>>> Have your reading skills just improved? ;-)
>>>> after putting the plane into a 575mph nosedive and turning off the
gas.
>>> As I said - look up "raving".
>>> Once again, the two situations don't look all that similar. Except
>>> that both invovled aircraft...
>> Lets see if I understand your insanity.
>> You're saying the guy who was saying
>> "I rely on God" before and after he turned
>> off the autopilot, placed the plane into a steep
>> unrecoverable dive AND turned off the gas,
>> remained calm while the pilot was hysterical with
>> stress trying to get him to help pull the plane
>> up.
>
> I claim he wasn't raving. Have you read the CVR transcript?
>
>> You're saying the guy that crashed the plane
>> was calm as a cu***ber
>
> Well, calm at least. Have you read eth CVR transcript? The crash
> re****t?
> I thought you claimed it was a matter of record that he was raving?
>
>> and that means he wasn't mad and delusional as apparently you are?
>
> Wow! You're not very good at this logic thing, are you old boy?
> You need to take a deep breath, suppress your emotional side and maybe
> you won't go jumping to false conclusions
>
> Once again, there is no evidence the co-pilot was raving. He may or
> may not have been insane, he may or may not have been delusional.
>
> None of the above is a "matter of record" one way or the other, and
> you ignoring at least two scenarios that must be at least as likely
> (or at least have as much evidence for them)
>
> How are your reading skills coming along? ;-)
What an idiot.
--
Wolfie
|
