Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA

[Luce]

Howdy Glen

I am pleased you acknowledged my query as legitimate and of good faith. That’s truely how I intended to come across. No insult, no misleading, just a legitimate and I believe a relevant query. Albeit I do now see my error in lack of clarity about a GA operator and flight training. As I would expect, despite another chipping in, it was gracious of you to accept the premise of my query and pen a considered, unemotional and intelligent response. Fair play indeed.

You are in battle Glen and all great leaders in battle are wise to abide in the art of war. The words of Sun Tzu, “you can be sure of succeeding in your attacks if you only attack places which are undefended. You can ensure the safety of your defense if you only hold positions that cannot be attacked”.

So query, can your position be attacked.

Complete agreeance with your matter about intent and very well raised. A sound trait and a backbone of fine aviators from yesteryear. Though, here still lies my simple query for using this fella as support, an ally as such. I found interest to read your own management team considered possible danger here. There must have been concern similar.

Alas, back to the beginning of your mention to Aunty ABC investigative piece. That was on telly prior to the air crash report. I put it that would Aunty have run the story if that crash report was finished. Its in print, the fella has his say, the poor bloke flying had his say. All involved had there say and it still reads like a tragic novel. These media sods never come back to finish the story. Would their investigative piece stand up now. What would that tale tell to put part 2 on telly but I fear it will never see daylight.

Since my original query to you I’ve almost finished the port bottle taking in the long, long, crash report and it certainly peaked the thinning eyebrow to the utterly alarming number of elementry problems unturned that simply, quite basically boil down to pilot lessons 101. Things that disprove claims made in the Aunty story, overloading, low flying and turn backs after engine failure at low level. It’s all over internet videos too. Beggars belief to put yourself on camera doing this stuff. How the authorities didn’t find this sooner, well I’m stuffed to wonder that.

So at curtain call the show stops with the tragic death of one, the maiming of two, the shattered families, the old Bailey out to lock up the poor old pilot. There are no winners. Preventable just if there was basic sound airmanship and a couple of pondering chats over a cold brew about what ifs.

So, all the way back too intent. I stand with you on how you ascertain the matter but I ask you how is it possible in this case to say intent was good. One issue. Good intent remains. Two,three issues. The eyebrows rise but good intent still hanging on. Countless issues, serious issues that cannot be unseen. History repeats. What do wise men say, those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Surely most men would learn from criminal convictions. Well now is it reasonable to question if good intent is a fair leap of faith in this case. Can reputation be rebuilt from that.

Lets move on a bit. Alas the same CASA characters from your story are in this fellas too. You’ve chatted to the fella, shared a few yarns and there is a bond of sorts to use your words. Like a brotherhood of war. I understand the bond and the building emotion, the common cause, your both passionate about the enemy. But strongly beware the false consensus effect. But your story is the opposite ends of the paddock to the other story. It is here which I am puzzled to see how the two yarns can be used together to fight the battle.

Letting the old ticker settle for a spell, emotions aside, let’s ask a common man on the street, when presented the truth, all the facts as you have genuinely done so on this forum
1. Was it wrong to cut the wings off this fella’s operation.
2. Was it wrong to cut the wings of APTA.

Glen, in that horse race the common man would back you being the victim of injustice every day.

Going all the way back to your post No46 you spell out CASA never put forward a supporting safety case. Because there isn’t one in your case, not so hard to find thou in the other.

The fella’s words of breaches of administrative law, being denied natural justice and procedural fairness. They are on record but as I read were disproven. And don’t forget the old Bailey is taking action too from their own separate copper investigation. Let’s think about that for a minute, a magistrate, a trusted person of legal cloth is hearing charges against the pilot. This is outside of CASA and all other organizations.

Where there is smoke there is fire and here lies a smouldering wreck of lives and legal proceedings. If the fella was still with us would he be standing up next to the pilot. I wonder if Aunty have a ‘correcting the record’ to their halfway piece of work has come adrift and has sunk.

And so we finish at the start, I read from post 1 to here now and what a read. The tale portraits an intelligent man of courage with an untainted reputation in all eyes here. A genuinely wronged man and I applaud your will to fight. You have not lost your reputation Glen, your evidence stands up to question and investigation. But consider your allies wisely. The very people to whom you seek a listening ear and the hand of Justice can also read and I assure you they too have read this fella’s tragic novel.

Ponder the art of war, regroup, rethink and ask yourself honestly, are you ensuring your defense is safe and can your position be attacked.

Keep up the fight Glen. I wish you all the best in your quest for justice.