20/20 hind sight!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kerikeri New Zealand
Age: 89
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20/20 hind sight!
The aviators out side Godzone(NZ) should be thank-full that you do not have to put up with the righteous low houred critics that live in NZ.
An article was written that was published in the local aviation monthly about some of my experiences ranging from PPL up to B747-200.
The article was my opinion, not meant to be a legal document of precise law!
In passing dialogue, I criticised an old friend because of some of his decisions, which in my view on the edge of being out of order.
The critics got their teeth into this, and it was as if I had done a low level Right hand turn after take as an act of exhibitionism.
Up to date the brown stuff is still being splattered over the horizon, almost as bad as if I had said the Pope is really an Atheist.
Long live the freedom of speech.
Gulfairs.
An article was written that was published in the local aviation monthly about some of my experiences ranging from PPL up to B747-200.
The article was my opinion, not meant to be a legal document of precise law!
In passing dialogue, I criticised an old friend because of some of his decisions, which in my view on the edge of being out of order.
The critics got their teeth into this, and it was as if I had done a low level Right hand turn after take as an act of exhibitionism.
Up to date the brown stuff is still being splattered over the horizon, almost as bad as if I had said the Pope is really an Atheist.
Long live the freedom of speech.
Gulfairs.
Not familiar with your article, however;
Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences from that speech.
An article in the Irish times described it the best
Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences from that speech.
An article in the Irish times described it the best
Consequence of speech
Consequence of speech
More than this, freedom of speech should never be confused with freedom from consequence of speech. The former is, of course, sacrosanct; everyone has a right to their own views, however odious or erroneous they might be. However, the crucial caveat is that this right does not shield one from being judged on content of those views. One may, of course, espouse racist, homophobic, misogynistic or otherwise distasteful positions – and others have the right to judge them for it.
There is no automatic protection against opprobrium inherent in the right to free speech. Nor is anyone entitled by virtue of this right to a platform for their views. The mere fact that one can hold any view they desire does not automatically mean those views have to be respected – a nuance with which many decrying criticism of their views seem to struggle.
Dr David Robert Grimes
There is no automatic protection against opprobrium inherent in the right to free speech. Nor is anyone entitled by virtue of this right to a platform for their views. The mere fact that one can hold any view they desire does not automatically mean those views have to be respected – a nuance with which many decrying criticism of their views seem to struggle.
Dr David Robert Grimes
OK, put the voyeurs among us out of our misery and post a link to said article.
Low level right hand turn after take off. Is that supposed to be bad?
Low level right hand turn after take off. Is that supposed to be bad?
I wondered in my previous if this is part of the article, page 38, May issue and part nine of a series.
http://www.aviationnews.co.nz/upload...eEuxqRAaTPsH08
Not if you're a pax in a DC-9 taking off setting course for a not too distant stop, nobody complained.
http://www.aviationnews.co.nz/upload...eEuxqRAaTPsH08
Low level right hand turn after take off. Is that supposed to be bad
