Meloz and 89

[CitizenXX]

Thanks you Water Ops, and I don't have to resort to slinging $hit to win it by a mile.

Notice KM didn't address the issue of the wine merchant and the first female having a go and being knocked back? If $cabs are bad, then they are the worst possible kind. Nor did he address the issue of QF flying over domestic routes after supposedly giving an undertaking to the AFAP that they wouldn't do so. The fact is, there was no undertaking. McCarthy told us there was, but the QF union never gave any such undertaking.

And KM, I carry no stigma, can look anyone in or out of the aviation business right in the eye, not abuse them, and don't have to feel that I should justify my actions. Whenever that distant event is discussed, people comment on what a gutsy decision it was, and say that they would have done the same.

I feel the AFAP management should have justified themselves. Contrary to what a few senior pilots sworn in the courts, I was coerced into submitting my resignation, and was told that they would NEVER be submitted. It was just a tactic to frighten the companies. Yeah, well it frightened the $hit out of them. History reveals that.

The was also the issue of lying about foreign pilots, QF pilots' undertaking, along with a plethora of other lies to keep the faithful strong. More like feeding mushrooms bull**** I'd say.

WaterOps, you're right though; this is boring. KM, TTT, Amos etc have all had these cases put to them numerous times, but they just don't get it. One would hope that their behaviour is just a charade, because if it's not, I have serious doubts about their reasoning abilities. Fortunately, when I have the time, I don't mind a little verbal jousting, but time is tight and I am unable to give it as much time as KM, TTT, Amos etc.

The infantile name calling - oh dear! Isn't this primary school (and early primary school, at that) stuff?? I'm glad that I don't have a limp, lisp or disability they could home in on. I'd hate being called Ita Buttrose, Hoppy or similar.

Wiley, there will always be such people who slip through the system. You know the old rule - 5% aces, 90% average, and 5% duds. They'll always exist, and somehow survive because they know the checkie, just lucky on the day, or the most important one, they have something on someone well up the food chain, and that's a lot more common than anyone imagines. Don't be fooled into thinking that everyone who didn't return in 89 was an ace because that is a fallacy. Some of those less than competent types are still flying BIG aircraft round the world today. Just goes to show that it is more forgiving than most believe.

One of those duds gets a mention elsewhere. The F27 Capt who was demoted because of the low run followed by a wingover at ASP with a tube full of terrified Japanese tourists. He would have to have been in the bottom 5% of the bottom 5%. And guess what? That was revealed within a month of his signing with a middle east airline in late 89. He was back running a Tattslotto agency before Christmas. If you need further proof that those who 'held the line' were not all guns, I'd be only too happy to oblige.

And Wiley, in your next post, could you please lose the tedious 'sics'? Very few who post here would have learnt touch typing, don't bother to proof read, and just want to contribute, with a few typos seen as acceptable. Alternatively, you could quote your mates, TTT, KM, etc and your post wouldn't make sense because of the number of 'sics' you would need to insert.
Like you, I am at times appalled by the standard of English expression used by some posters here, but I'm sure there are other issues as I've mentioned above. Rather than try to humiliate them, I commend them on their willingness to post.

And KM, I'm not finished with you yet. I've jumped through the SQ hoops over the past couple of months, and am waiting on a date and base. If it's Singapore, I won't be going, but if it's in Australia, I will accept. Nice position to be in, isn't it. And there were a number of others leaping through the hoops with me, so your assertion that SQ won't be taking more is more bull$hit. I'm sure you called someone in power there and advised them of their folly in employing more scabs. Let's see if your call was heeded.