NBC News Attempt To Discredit GA

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 11:40:53 GMT, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

"Henry A. Spellman" wrote in message
news:9FkTc.149574$eM2.97519@attbi_s51...
If NBC has any integrity, they will run the story, showing that some
people out there are awake and taking the terrorism threat seriously.

But I doubt that they will, and I will have to put them in the same
category I use for CBS - purveyors of only the news that supports their
point of view. Too bad.

They already ran the story, as AOPA's web site has noted. Phil Boyer
remarked: "And to NBC: We appreciate that you accurately reported these
misguided escapades on tonight's network news."



I think he's doing a great job, perhaps the best seen and I've been a
member since 1970. I'd nominate Phil Boyer for president, but then we
would lose him as the chief of AOPA

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...


This is exactly what is attributed to you above. What part do you deny
saying?

The part where you have me saying:

Bloody awesome story. Great catch by the FBO team, and a reminder to
the rest of us that it's not just terrorists we need to be vigilant
against. The more we prove we can police ourselves well, the less the
public will demand government agencies to do it for us.

I strongly doubt these guys had any intention of pulling their toys
out in flight, but rather simply wanted to prove they had been able to
get them on. Even a reporter couldn't be that stupid.

You see, I think you don't even have to be a reporter to be that stupid. A
rock will not attempt to hijack an airplane, but apparently those reporters
were even dumber than that.

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
My email to NBC:
***************************

I read with disgust and contempt of your reporter's attempt to "expose"
security lapses at a St Louis airport.

The relentless and unfair "piling on" General Aviation to instill
unwarranted
fear in a population that is basically ignorant about aviation is a
disservice.
NBC News loses credibility when these stories are pursued for
sensationalism
and ratings. Shame on you.

General Aviation had NOTHING to do with 911 or terrorism. Innocent
law-abiding
pilots who earn a living flying are being unfairly scapegoated because we
are a
small and un-influential constituency.

I have lost all my respect for your organization. Chet Huntley is
spinning in
his grave.

Shoot, I lost all respect for them long before that. Virtually all network
news reporting is of the same stripe. You might recall that it was NBC that
resorted to using fireworks to make sure that a gas tank exploded when they
were doing a hit piece on trucks.

C J Campbell wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...


This is exactly what is attributed to you above. What part do you deny
saying?


The part where you have me saying:


Bloody awesome story. Great catch by the FBO team, and a reminder to
the rest of us that it's not just terrorists we need to be vigilant
against. The more we prove we can police ourselves well, the less the
public will demand government agencies to do it for us.

You need to learn how to read attributions. I never "had" you saying
any such thing. That is clearly atrributed to "C Kingsbury". I'm
reposting the entire message below for you to look at again. The
"carats" show the threads and who said what. When more than one person
has responded, you have to follow the carats, or bars or whatever your
reader uses.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

C Kingsbury wrote:


"C J Campbell" wrote in
message

...




This seems incredibly dangerous. A lot of pilots have made the
decision

to

never allow themselves to be hijacked, no matter what. So these

'reporters'

start pulling out knives or other weapons:

My instinct would be to kill them without hesitation. Nor would I

believe

them if they started claiming that they were only reporters. Any

hijacker

could claim that.



Bloody awesome story. Great catch by the FBO team, and a reminder to
the rest of us that it's not just terrorists we need to be vigilant
against. The more we prove we can police ourselves well, the less the
public will demand government agencies to do it for us.

I strongly doubt these guys had any intention of pulling their toys
out in flight, but rather simply wanted to prove they had been
able to
get them on. Even a reporter couldn't be that stupid.

-cwk.


Don't underestimate reporters. They were stupid enough to put
explosives in a Chevy pickup and blow it up claiming it was a defective
fuel tank design.

People with brains don't go into the news reporting business.


Please don't include portions of posts made by others and attribute them to
me. I did not say what your post says I said.

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:PkcTc.40042$xk.7845@fed1read01...
I strongly doubt these guys had any intention of pulling their toys
out in flight, but rather simply wanted to prove they had been able to
get them on. Even a reporter couldn't be that stupid.

-cwk.

Wanna Bet?

BT

Perhaps the true story is that NBC were duped by a group of terrorists into
believing they were journalists and who persuaded the NBC editors to pay for
them to suss out airports in the hope of finding out which were insecure and
which were not. NBC thought this would be a good story and the terrorists
have impeccable cover.

In the event of getting caught, the reporter/terrorists just use the NBC
cover to get out of trouble.

It is perfectly feasible and can NBC fully vouch for there reporters? I
doubt it.

Matt Whiting wrote in message ...
C Kingsbury wrote:

I strongly doubt these guys had any intention of pulling their toys
out in flight, but rather simply wanted to prove they had been able to
get them on. Even a reporter couldn't be that stupid.

-cwk.

Don't underestimate reporters. They were stupid enough to put
explosives in a Chevy pickup and blow it up claiming it was a defective
fuel tank design.

That was fraud, not stupidity. They used Estes model rocket engines
IIRC and it worked great. Stupidity would be if they blew themselves
up while wiring it.

The purpose of carrying the weapons was to prove they could get them
on the helicopter. Pulling them out would serve no purpose, unless you
want to suggest that they would in fact hijack the bird "to prove it
could be done" which would be both criminal and insane. I don't think
so. They would go for the ride, see how close they could get to the
arch or some other important building, then ambush the FBO owner with
cameras when they got off and show him the bags full of box cutters.

People with brains don't go into the news reporting business.


It is true that something like 90% of reporters are registered
Democrats, which might lead some to agree with your argument. Lazy,
biased, ill-informed, coffee-stained, foul-smelling, and generally
coprophagous, yes, but stupid, no.

The average journo like most people want to get the maximum bang for
the minimum buck. A cookie-cutter story (small-plane scare) with a
salacious angle (terrorism!) is every newsie's wet dream. Ideally you
sit at your desk, make a few calls, file two hours before deadline,
and head to the bar. Unless someone tells me otherwise, why should I
write this plane crash story up any differently than the last 15? It
just fell out of the sky, narrowly missing a playground at recess
time. That's what happens when the engine stalls.

Back when I worked at the Boston Herald (1999) there was a young
reporter there (Azell Cavaan IIRC) who always talked about wanting to
take flying lessons, but a cub reporter's salary in Boston won't allow
for that. I was even younger and poorer and hadn't even started taking
lessons so I couldn't help.

If you run a flight school, or are an independent CFI, drop a note to
your local news organizations and offer a free lesson/ride or two to
any interested parties. I bet you'll get takers, and do it at least
once a year. They'll get an easy feel-good story out of it they can
use anytime, and you'll go into their rolodex as a source to call when
they're doing an aviation story. Bonus points if you have a female
and/or minority CFI to hook them up with, or can show them students
who aren't 40-year-old white male stockbrokers. Take them for a walk
around the field and introduce them to the mechanic, other operators,
etc, show them how the airport creates economic activity for the
community. Introduce them to a 40yo stockbroker who flies sick kids
and their families in his Bonanza for Angel Flight. Hell, you might
even get a new student out of it.

Most reporters do not investigate, they report. A few positive hours
one afternoon will do a lot more to improve the quality of news than a
stack of angry letters. These days we need all the help we can get.

Best,
-cwk.

"Eric Fletcher S.O.C." writes:

On 8/13/04 6:57 PM, in article
, "Bob Miller"
wrote:

Maybe you can't fold a sectional inflight, but Alan Barklage killed a
felon with her own weapon in a helicopter flying out of the same
airport in St. Louis.


Same FBO too....

Man I miss Alan.



Cites? I can't find this story...
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

C Kingsbury wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote in message ...

C Kingsbury wrote:


I strongly doubt these guys had any intention of pulling their toys
out in flight, but rather simply wanted to prove they had been able to
get them on. Even a reporter couldn't be that stupid.

-cwk.

Don't underestimate reporters. They were stupid enough to put
explosives in a Chevy pickup and blow it up claiming it was a defective
fuel tank design.


That was fraud, not stupidity. They used Estes model rocket engines
IIRC and it worked great. Stupidity would be if they blew themselves
up while wiring it.

Committing fraud on camera is stupid. Getting caught is even more
stupid. They were stupid from any angle you look at it.


Matt

"Henry A. Spellman" wrote:

If NBC has any integrity, they will run the story, showing that some
people out there are awake and taking the terrorism threat seriously.

According to AOPA, they did. "And to NBC: We appreciate that you accurately reported
these misguided escapades on tonight's network news. And we hope this gives you — and
the other media who make a living by generating unnecessary fear — ample reason to
stop making GA a security scapegoat."

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
news

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
My email to NBC:
***************************

I read with disgust and contempt of your reporter's attempt to "expose"
security lapses at a St Louis airport.

The relentless and unfair "piling on" General Aviation to instill
unwarranted
fear in a population that is basically ignorant about aviation is a
disservice.
NBC News loses credibility when these stories are pursued for
sensationalism
and ratings. Shame on you.

General Aviation had NOTHING to do with 911 or terrorism. Innocent
law-abiding
pilots who earn a living flying are being unfairly scapegoated because
we
are a
small and un-influential constituency.

I have lost all my respect for your organization. Chet Huntley is
spinning in
his grave.

Shoot, I lost all respect for them long before that. Virtually all network
news reporting is of the same stripe. You might recall that it was NBC
that
resorted to using fireworks to make sure that a gas tank exploded when
they
were doing a hit piece on trucks.

Read the book "Airframe" by Michael Crichton...the whole book is the crap
the media plays with the aviation industries (carriers and manufacturers).