john_tullamarine
Your post leaves me somewhat piqued.
I am flabbergasted as to how anybody can post an opinion on a topic without having watched the central and only supportive evidence that this topic is offering.
Don't get me wrong, but in the society where I grew up, that would mean automatic disqualification. To discredit any evidence prior to its review is WRONG!
To discredit it after review (if warranted) is OK!
More important, I have avoided in my posts to bite into the debate of whether there is a safety issue or not. What I have highlighted is that in this case, there appears to be an inappropriate relationship between the investigating and investigated parties (FAA/Department of Justice and Boeing). And, by the way, I don't refer to any Al Quaida footage - ah sorry, I meant Al Jazeera footage to substantiate the reasons for my anxiety. I refer to original footage of a video taped court affidavit. This footage is not Al Jazeera's. Of course, if one refuses to watch, one wouldn't and couldn't know, could one?
Same with the FAA investigator - if you don't look for evidence, you can say truthfully and under oath that you have seen no evidence - can't you?? The question is whether actively avoiding to look at any evidence makes it right??
I reserve my right to form an opinion on any poster's contribution on a post by post basis rather than the number of posts made, years of membership, past contributions, number of medals etc. etc.
Maybe, just maybe I have qualifications and experience that will dwarf some of the guys that are held in high esteem by the PPRUNE constabulary?? Then again, maybe not.
I'd rather err on the side of caution.
Merry Christmas to ALL
Regards,
Jerry B.