DOT head has got to go

Notice our DOT buddy Norm Mineta may be the biggest problem of all
regarding air safety

http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

Mineta is mentioned on page 6 of this very disturbing article

Political Correctness is going to be America's demise no doubt about it

People should be flooding their congressional representatives demanding
Minetas resignation

"JJ" wrote in message
.. .
Notice our DOT buddy Norm Mineta may be the biggest problem of all
regarding air safety


http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

Mineta is mentioned on page 6 of this very disturbing article

Political Correctness is going to be America's demise no doubt about it

People should be flooding their congressional representatives demanding
Minetas resignation

Do you have even a scintilla of evidence that anything in the article is
true? Or is it too Politically Correct to give any thought to evidence and
truth?

--Gary

I'me with you Gary.

I read the original article and believe Annie over-reacted. I was
surprised the editor permitted her biased opinion to be printed.

Mike $$$

"Mike Money" wrote in message
...
I'me with you Gary.

I read the original article and believe Annie over-reacted.

Or she fabricated the story entirely.

I was surprised the editor permitted her biased opinion to be printed.

Why is that surprising? For all we know, she may BE the editor.

--Gary

I agree that she over reacted also.

The chilling thing though is that, if it had been terrorist practice or even
an attack, it probably would have appeared far less obvious and threatening
until the moment of execution.

Once the bad guys are on the plane - in the tunnel - in the harbor - next to
the chemical plant - in the country, it's probably too late.

The terrorists have to be stopped at the source which is overseas. Unless we
are prepared to simply take over every nation on earth militarily, we have
to have the help and earnest cooperation of almost all of them.

Sadam had to go. But, by doing at a time and in a way ****ed off just about
every friend we have in the world and inflamed and emboldened our enemies,
while stretching our military to its limits, we have made ourselves far less
safe than we were before 9/11.

Because of my criticism of our response to terrorism, I've had my patriotism
questioned and attacked here and elsewhere. Anyone who understands what made
our country great well enough to be a true patriot should realize that
questioning someone's patriotism because their views do not coincide with
yours is just about the most un-American thing you can do.

Let me put in pilot's terms. Patriotism is essentially about what you want
for your country, a nation of freedom and opportunity that doesn't need to
worry about having its citizens randomly killed by wackos from overseas for
example. Think of it as a destination. Call it Chicago.

You're going to fly right seat with someone to Chicago. It's hard IMC. The
PIC says is IFR currency has elapsed and some of the equipment isn't working
so he's just going to turn the transponder off and fly NORDO to an
uncontrolled field nearby. Oh yeah, the turn coordinator isn't working so if
the vacuum pump goes, he'll just duck under and scud run.

If you object, it does NOT mean that you don't want to go to Chicago. On the
contrary, it means that you very much DO want to GET to Chicago and not to
some smoking hole in the ground half way there.

The problem with Iraq is not that we did it but how. I believe that we did
far, far too little. If it was Chicago, we should have gotten the IFR
currency restored first and fixed the TC. Sadam wasn't going anywhere. Our
election cycle was the only urgency.

Just look at the numbers of the troop deployment situation, the reserve
extensions, and the situation on the ground. The scale of what needed to be
done demanded full participation from a much larger group of nations.

The PIC who headed NORDO off into the fog of war because of his personal
agenda (getting re-elected and appearing resolute), has gotten us in a real
pickle.

Don't get me wrong. I want to go exactly where he wants to go but I want to
GET there. Kerry may not be the best guy but, at this point, I'd vote for a
yellow dog just for the fresh start that will give us a chance to rebuild
the alliances we need.


--

Roger Long



"Mike Money" wrote in message
...
I'me with you Gary.

I read the original article and believe Annie over-reacted. I was
surprised the editor permitted her biased opinion to be printed.

Mike $$$

Roger Long wrote:

The terrorists have to be stopped at the source which is overseas.

So, if I understand you correctly, you'd rather fight the bad guys in
somebody else's yard.

Unless we are prepared to simply take over every nation on earth
militarily, we have to have the help and earnest cooperation of
almost all of them.

This isn't necessarily true. It would certainly be good to have more
nations helping us, but taking over "every nation on earth militarily" isn't
necessary, either.

...we have
made ourselves far less safe than we were before 9/11.

Can you demonstrate this assertion? Can you provide any specifics on
exactly how we're less safe?

whining snipped

The problem with Iraq is not that we did it but how. I believe that
we did far, far too little. If it was Chicago, we should have gotten
the IFR currency restored first and fixed the TC. Sadam wasn't going
anywhere. Our election cycle was the only urgency.

hmmm... So the only reason you see for deposing the government you say
"needed to go" was re-electing the US President. Interesting.

Just look at the numbers of the troop deployment situation, the
reserve extensions, and the situation on the ground. The scale of
what needed to be done demanded full participation from a much larger
group of nations.

Wrong. It's obvious that the military did exactly the job it was supposed
to do with far fewer troops than many people said were necessary. Remember,
the job of the military is to fight and win battles, not build nations.
Further, reserve and national guard units are part of the military and exist
for just this type of situation - providing additional manpower for
relatively short durations.

With that said, it's apparent to me that some of the underlying assumptions
made while planning the post-war period were either flat-out wrong or
otherwise faulty. For instance, information I've gotten from troops and
others who've been to Iraq noted that early on in the occupation, many
"average" Iraqis are grateful for the coalition presence, but were fearful
of helping due to the threat of retaliation. I think post-war planners were
expecting greater assistance from Iraqis earlier than they got it.

Is that the fault of the military? No. Should more troops have been sent
to the occupation to address this and other shortcomings? Maybe. It's easy
to call the plays on Monday night, though.

The PIC who headed NORDO off into the fog of war because of his
personal agenda (getting re-elected and appearing resolute), has
gotten us in a real pickle.

Again, you imply that the only reason for invading Iraq was to re-elect the
US President. Do you have anything to back this up?

Remember: Almost all friendly intelligence agencies - and many
not-so-friendly ones - were saying that Saddam was trying to build weapons
nobody wanted him to have. If all your friends are telling you that the
bully across the playground is building a gun to shoot you and everything
you can see with your own eyes fits that description, just how long are you
going to wait until you do something about it? Or are you the type to wait
until you get shot before you act?

I'd vote for a yellow dog just for the fresh start that will give us
a chance to rebuild the alliances we need.

"Anybody but [the incumbent]." That's just the kind of critical thinking I
like to hear from the voting public (regardless of position under
discussion). What about other issues? Or are you a simple single-issue
voter?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

Reading your post I realize that I agree with you on a major point and am
guilty of imprecise writing.

The invasion of Iraq and deposition of Sadam was planned and executed
brilliantly. We didn't need anyone other nation's help. I don't know anyone
who was cheering louder than I was when the statues went down and I was
thinking, "Wow, a pampered rich kid from Texas really can make it as
Commander in Chief."

Getting troops to the center of Bagdad however was like having paratroopers
jump from a plane. Except for training, the only point in it is in what they
accomplish after their boots hit the ground. My pride and joy was based on
the assumption that the next phase would be planned and executed as well and
not, as it turned out, spectacularly bungled. It's the second phase that we
needed the cooperation of other nations for.

I don't think Iraq was invaded just for domestic political reasons. I still
think we should have invaded. I think though that the electoral dynamics
played a significant part in a reckless and foolish decision to invade
before there was an adequate plan and resources for what happened after the
U.S. boots were planted in the center of Bagdad.

Would I rather we fought terrorism overseas? You bet. To the extent we have
to deal with them after they cross our borders, there will be irresistible
(and occasionally real) pressure for TFR's and other restrictions on the
freedom of ordinary citizens. Military action however, as Iraq has shown, is
only a small part and the first steps in fighting terrorism. The rest
requires a lot of help, support, and good will from other countries.

As for the rest of your reply, we probably agree more than it appears. There
's a lot of playing off of words and reacting to quickly written newsgroup
jawing. Where we disagree, well, that's what makes this country great. It
doesn't mean one of us is more or less patriotic or "soft on terrorism". We
disagree on the scale and the details of what needs to be done to reach an
objective we agree on.

I'm not a one issue voter but, if I were, I'd be looking for that yellow
dog. It's not a republican vs. democrat thing in my mind. If a democrat had
done this I'd be even more offended because they guys I generally agree with
would have screwed up.

I know most of you out there are republicans so I ask you to subject
yourself to one honest and objective test. Look yourself straight in the
mirror tomorrow morning. Screw up all the honest objectivity you use when
looking at a lousy weather report and a need to be somewhere, and ask
yourself: if a few chads had dangled the other way and everything had
happened exactly as it has, what would you be saying right now?

--

Roger Long

Howdy!

In article ,
JJ wrote:
Notice our DOT buddy Norm Mineta may be the biggest problem of all
regarding air safety

http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

Mineta is mentioned on page 6 of this very disturbing article

....disturbing for the attitudes it displays along with the level of
fine-grained detail inconsistent with the level of anxiety claimed by
the author...not to mention quoting Anne Coulter (a certifiable loon)
in support...and so on and so on...

No, the article reeks of grass processed through a male bovine...

Political Correctness is going to be America's demise no doubt about it

Right...people Making Stuff Up and passing it off as a True Story...

People should be flooding their congressional representatives demanding
Minetas resignation

Maybe, but not for this...

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

I think you have to ask whether you would buy any financial products based
on anything on this site. Looks like a pusher of penny stocks and other
financial crap.

P-r-o-p-a-g-a-n-d-a ... but whose?

"Michael Houghton" wrote in message
...
Howdy!

In article ,
JJ wrote:
Notice our DOT buddy Norm Mineta may be the biggest problem of all
regarding air safety


http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...eid=1&articlei
d=711

Mineta is mentioned on page 6 of this very disturbing article

...disturbing for the attitudes it displays along with the level of
fine-grained detail inconsistent with the level of anxiety claimed by
the author...not to mention quoting Anne Coulter (a certifiable loon)
in support...and so on and so on...

No, the article reeks of grass processed through a male bovine...

Political Correctness is going to be America's demise no doubt about it

Right...people Making Stuff Up and passing it off as a True Story...

People should be flooding their congressional representatives demanding
Minetas resignation

Maybe, but not for this...

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/

Oh my god! Middle Eastern men go to the bathroom on airplanes? Well the Air
Marshalls should have shot them for that offense! Sounds like over reacting
drivel that is destroying this country.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi, K9PO
MI-150972
PP-ASEL-IA

Are you a PADI Instructor or DM? Then join the PADI
Instructor Yahoo Group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/join
-----------------------------------
Catch the wave!
www.hamwave.com


**"A long time ago being crazy meant something, nowadays everyone is
crazy" -- Charles Manson**
-------------------------------------
"JJ" wrote in message
.. .
Notice our DOT buddy Norm Mineta may be the biggest problem of all
regarding air safety


http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/...&articleid=711

Mineta is mentioned on page 6 of this very disturbing article

Political Correctness is going to be America's demise no doubt about it

People should be flooding their congressional representatives demanding
Minetas resignation