Pilot demands 'common decency' after passengers argue U.S. politics

[Rockie]

The mods on this site are progressives.

So is Canada, in case you haven't noticed.

It must be fun trolling Rockie for a while, but I think everyone is getting a bit bored of this by now.

Im not, but I'm an unusually patient man. However it is time to give the poor darlings a rest.

[Rookie50]

The CBC cannot, and does not take any action in favour of any political candidate.

Holy crap Rockie! How do you breath with your head so far up your own ass?

The CBC is a public broadcaster and by mandate must maintain complete impartiality. Of course to a rabid right winger any coverage that isn't as rabidly right wing must therefore be rabidly left wing. Impartiality is an alien concept to them. Old story.

Funniest thing I've read all week. CBC impartial? Hilarious, and obviously -- not.

I thought for some naive reason US media wasn't so bad, but on CNN when every Trump sniffle was given breaking news attention for a week, and so many HRC scandal stories suppressed -- simply not reported -- hard to believe. Every accusation given full media credibility.

Where are all his accusers now? Not one lawsuit. Not one criminal investigation of conduct. All disappeared. Yet all those accusations were honest and belivable, per the media. Hmmmm.

When one sees on multiple occasions a conservative guest commentator with a great anecdote HRC story , on point, immediately cut off by the CNN anchor, "thank you, time for commercial" one wonders about the integrity out there....

Debates? Brutal. I would think the moderators had their marching orders from the sitting administration - "or else". Forget ever having access, again. Softball questions to HRC, which she had -- in advance!

I could go on and on.

It's not an accident media credibilty has never been lower in history. 97% of financial donations from the media were to HRC. But there is no media bias anywhere.



Remember during the early years of Harper? Media favourite -- CBC's -- focus was Harpers "hidden agenda". Like he was going to bring in concentration camps. Brutal fear based reporting. We don't see that with Trudeau Junior. It's a perpetual honeymoon.

Unbiased? Ok......

[CpnCrunch]

Funniest thing I've read all week. CBC impartial? Hilarious, and obviously -- not.

At the risk of prolonging this rediculousness, how exactly are CBC biased? I'm guessing they're foaming-at-the-mouth liberals? I just did a quick search for Trudeau stories on CBC and the top stories include:

"Justin Trudeau boxed himself in on more than just pipelines ..."
"Trudeau undoes father's legacy, former minister says - British ..."
"Why Kinder Morgan could severely damage the Trudeau-BC ..."

So, I'm not sure why a supposedly rabid left-wing organisation would be bad-mouthing their lover boy. (Or is the problem that they've discovered that he's actually a secret conservative pretending to be a liberal, after the recent pipeline approval?)

Where are all his accusers now? Not one lawsuit.

Statute of limitations. The alleged sexual assaults all took place too long ago to bring any charges against him. I don't think anyone said they would bring charges against him. Trump himself said he would sue his accusers, but that would just open a big can of worms for him, so I suspect he'll quietly drop it.

Remember during the early years of Harper? Media favourite -- CBC's -- focus was Harpers "hidden agenda". Like he was going to bring in concentration camps. Brutal fear based reporting. We don't see that with Trudeau Junior. It's a perpetual honeymoon.

Unbiased? Ok......

Um...see above.

[Rookie50]

Ok then. A couple of questions:

Why has there NEVER been criminal charges against Trump for ANY of of the accusations raised? They only arise during an election. OK. And I believe the Dem's had Nothing to do with that. Uhmmm, OK. Maybe.

Couple potential answers: A) Every single victim was too "scared" to press charges. Every one. But throwing out allegations without reprecussions is just fine, and there is no responsibilty by the media to vet such claims before publishing? Off topic, but Such serious allegations can be serious for other (men) in other professions. Just look at what has happened to the odd teacher falsely accused by an angry student. Life, career ruined, no reprecussion for the media reporting, either.

B) It's reprehensible behaviour but not criminal. Fine, and I don't support remotely such disrespect for women. Not in the slightest. I'm no Trump admirer, that's for sure. But then again, why is it - if not criminal -- over the top a news story while debatably very criminal behaviour from HRC -- everyone agrees anyone else would have been indicted -- isn't "newsworthy" according to CNN, who tried to shut down discussion of it however they could? Never mind the Clinton foundation -- zero press on CNN. To me that stuff is a heck of lot more newsworthy. Payoffs are newsworthy. CNN doesn't think so.

Double standard. Clearly.

As for CBC -- gosh it's so obvious --

I'm small C conservative. Much more left as the years roll along. Happy to see Green Party get a seat. Really. I don't have a problem wiith them so much as the blatant lack of media integrity. It's horrible from whatever chair you sit. They can destroy lives without any accountability. They are 100% about ratings from feeding trash to a reality TV audience and could care less about balance and accuracy.

[North Shore]

I suggest we rename this thread: 'Mod observes 'common decency' as AvCanadians argue US politics'

BUT,



nobody's mind is getting changed here......

[pelmet]

So you say that the FBI broke their own policy but when taken to task to show me the policy, you can't.

You're in luck, turns out the FBI has a website.

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/can-i-ob ... n-the-news

Satisfied? Or is the FBI wrong about their own policy?

I said that I am willing to believe they violated their own policy if you can quote it for me. I am not going to go to FBI.gov and read through their stuff which is probably huge. Quote me the policy. There is actually a chance that you could be right for once(or should I say correct as you have obviously never been right ).

G'day

For Christ's sake Mods, either put this thread out of its misery or start up the Water cooler again. My eyes are getting blurred from reading all this left wing bleeding heart verbal diarrhea!

Cheers...Chris

I don't think you'll see that happen until it gets very clear that the right wing is getting the upper hand. The mods on this site are progressives. Just so we're clear, given that this site is privately funded and owned, i find no fault with the management pushing whatever political agenda they see fit.

I did send a PM to Sulako requesting an end to political threads or moving them to a separate forum....no response. Maybe, they feel that they are making money from all the people that seem to read and then complain(including myself). Perhaps a cut of the profits will do instead.

[pelmet]

Funniest thing I've read all week. CBC impartial? Hilarious, and obviously -- not.

At the risk of prolonging this rediculousness, how exactly are CBC biased? I'm guessing they're foaming-at-the-mouth liberals? I just did a quick search for Trudeau stories on CBC and the top stories include:

"Justin Trudeau boxed himself in on more than just pipelines ..."
"Trudeau undoes father's legacy, former minister says - British ..."
"Why Kinder Morgan could severely damage the Trudeau-BC ..."

So, I'm not sure why a supposedly rabid left-wing organisation would be bad-mouthing their lover boy. (Or is the problem that they've discovered that he's actually a secret conservative pretending to be a liberal, after the recent pipeline approval?)

I suppose it depends how you interpret the headline which can vary by your political leanings. Remember, the CBC editors know that Trudeau reads the CBC news and are trying to influence.

I see the first headline as the CBC editor being unhappy that Trudeau approved a pipeline and is giving the excuses on how he made a mistake earlier by saying he would approve it and is saying to Justin, next time don't fooloishly box yourself in with statements you shouldn't make.

The second headline is aimed directly at Trudeau by playing on his emotions about his father's legacy and that approving the pipeline is wrong as stated from a credible source, none other than a British minister.

The third headline is a warning to Trudeau that he may lose political support so do what you can in the background to end the pipeline expansion.

Here is an example of the CBC's bias from years ago. Remember the huge controversy of the Copenhagen accord and the massive media coverage it got. I paste an article here from the CBC that discusses it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/a-call-for ... t-1.791712

Obviously, the CBC is going to cover it(and of course spend your money going over their to enjoy a European reporting event). But while I have no problem with reporters quoting people over there and what they are saying with quotes made by the participants, they actually report it as fact. Here is what they said in the article...

"This summit — a meeting aimed at nothing less than saving the planet — has seen some nasty divisions develop between rich countries and poor ones."

"For a while, the possibility of the wheels falling off this meeting and the world spiralling toward environmental Armageddon seemed a real possibility."

This is not in the opinion section. This is in the world report section. Now the CBC has decided that they will tell us that the planet needs to be "saved" by Canada signing on to this. Otherwise there will be "armageddon". Sorry, that is complete bias. If they want to quote it to somebody(which they do all the time), that is legitimate, but the CBC is a mouthpiece for the environmental movement. And it appears that their agenda has been successful.

On the nightly news, I heard multiple times by the anchor on how the Copenhagen meeting was happening to "Save the world".

Please, lets not turn this into another global warming debate. We have had enough of it already. It is just to show that a side has been taken instead of being reported.

[Rookie50]

"Not in the opinion section".

Exactly. Exactly.

During the election CNN repeatedly did the same thing. Their reporting bordered on an opinion piece.

[Rockie]

Pelmet, just click on the link.

Ps. Good one about never being "right", but I actually was once. Then I started using my brain and paying attention.

[pelmet]

Pelmet, just click on the link.

Ps. Good one about never being "right", but I actually was once. Then I started using my brain and paying attention.

From someone famous......

"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains". - Winston Churchill

Hmmm.... who should I take my advice from, Rockie or Churchill? I'll stick with Churchill.

Oddly, you reversed the protocol. Does that mean you have had neither?

Still waiting for the broken rule. Not expecting to get one.

[Rockie]

Believe it or not there is an "International Churchill Society" (who knew?) dedicated to all things Churchill. You can listen to his speeches, watch old video clips of him, read about his history - and read his quotes. According to them nobody ever heard Churchill say those words. I wasn't around back then so neither did I.

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/

Regarding the FBI link, it takes you to a FAQ page that contains only the one question of policy we are talking about. It is a single page that addresses just that one exact question so no scrolling is necessary. It couldn't be easier. I've done 99% of the work for you, but if you want the answer Pelmet you'll have to click on the link yourself. Your ongoing refusal to do so reminds me of another quote that starts with "You can lead a horse to water....."

[pelmet]

Regarding the FBI link, it takes you to a FAQ page that contains only the one question of policy we are talking about. It is a single page that addresses just that one exact question so no scrolling is necessary. It couldn't be easier. I've done 99% of the work for you, but if you want the answer Pelmet you'll have to click on the link yourself. Your ongoing refusal to do so reminds me of another quote that starts with "You can lead a horse to water....."

Funny, I was going to use the exact same quote for you.

I'll believe you when you post the broken rule. You gave to admit. It is very strange that someone who is so adamant about the FBI breaking its own rule on a subject that he is so passionate about, refuses to post the rule here when he has spent so much effort finding it. Personally, I starting to think that is because it doesn't exist.

Believe it or not there is an "International Churchill Society" (who knew?) dedicated to all things Churchill. You can listen to his speeches, watch old video clips of him, read about his history - and read his quotes.

Doesn't surprise me. I'm sure there are societies for many famous persons throughout history. Someday, perhaps we will both be members of the Trump society. After all, Churchill had a bit of a rocky(no pun intended) start in his career.

[Rockie]

Carry on not believing me then. Here it is again should you change your mind.

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/can-i-ob ... n-the-news

In other news Trump's gross ignorance and insatiable need for fawning validation continues to lay waste to US foreign policy and diplomatic relations. I refer to Pakistan/India and Taiwan/China. And Philippine Presidential goon Rodrigo Duterte says that in a congratulatory phone call Trump praised his war on drugs during which he has so far summarily executed 4800 people. It will be interesting to see if Trump denies it.

A little over six weeks to go until he can do real damage.

[CpnCrunch]

Please, lets not turn this into another global warming debate. We have had enough of it already. It is just to show that a side has been taken instead of being reported.

I don't want a global warming debate either. However I'll just say that I base my decisions on climate change, vaccinations and operating aircraft on the best evidence available rather than emotions or newspaper stories. I hope you do the same.

[pelmet]

Please, lets not turn this into another global warming debate. We have had enough of it already. It is just to show that a side has been taken instead of being reported.

I don't want a global warming debate either. However I'll just say that I base my decisions on climate change, vaccinations and operating aircraft on the best evidence available rather than emotions or newspaper stories. I hope you do the same.

Boy, that has to be the best effort to avoid a debate that I have ever seen .

I'll do my best by not discussing the global warming subject at all and acknowledge how you interpret yourself.

A little advice for you on piloting though. You might want to reconsider how you operate aircraft. There is a lot that you can learn from newspaper stories. I fly light aircraft from more than one US location and most schools down there will have a pile of aviation traditional style newspapers available for free. They are published monthly with a few published weekly. I have several unread ones right here in my room includiing General Aviation News and In Flight USA. There is a huge amount of information in them including accident analysis and opinions. I have learned a lot from them.

I hope you might do the same.

[pelmet]

In other news Trump's gross ignorance and insatiable need for fawning validation continues to lay waste to US foreign policy and diplomatic relations. I refer to Pakistan/India and Taiwan/China. And Philippine Presidential goon Rodrigo Duterte says that in a congratulatory phone call Trump praised his war on drugs during which he has so far summarily executed 4800 people. It will be interesting to see if Trump denies it.

A little over six weeks to go until he can do real damage.

Nothing short of what was expected of him in terms of foreign relations. Once again, ask yourself why people were willing to accept this and more instead of what Hillary offered. Obviously, the ideas of Trump and the Brexiteers are more palatable than what is offered up as an alternative. Time to change the message.

Carry on not believing me then. Here it is again should you change your mind.

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/can-i-ob ... n-the-news

I think I will respond by quoting you from another ongoing thread with a four letter word removed by me...."This conspiracy theory stuff has now expanded to include questioning the objectivity and professional integrity of the FBI? " (NTSB removed).


Interesting how the related government agency did something you agree with, questioning it is a conspiracy theory. If the government agency did something you don't agree with, it is questioned.

[Rockie]

How many people who voted for Trump could find Pakistan or Taiwan on a map? How many of them know enough about the diplomatic details of the relationship to be dissatisfied and want a change? What do you think Trump's strategic plan is diplomatically speaking with Pakistan and Taiwan?

Get serious.

Looked at that link yet Pelmet?

[pelmet]

.

[B208]

Nothing short of what was expected of him in terms of foreign relations. Once again, ask yourself why people were willing to accept this and more instead of what Hillary offered. Obviously, the ideas of Trump and the Brexiteers are more palatable than what is offered up as an alternative. Time to change the message.

Pretty much hit it right on the head there pelmet. What progressives can't quite understand is that a large portion of the population sees them for what they are; A combination of cultural marxists and fascists.
It really not that surprising. Any group of people will only tolerate being shit on for so long before they snap back. That is exactly what you have seen here. Working class white people are tired of the plethora of "isms" being leveled at them.

[Meatservo]

That is exactly what you have seen here. Working class white people are tired of the plethora of "isms" being leveled at them.

Sounds like it's a bit of a trigger for them. Maybe they just need a safe space. You guys are all starting to sound the same to me, whether you "self-identify" as "left" or "right". It's just a whole lot of static.

Hey, can we kill this conversation? North Shore? Somebody? I'm getting embarrassed by it. We could talk about planes or something instead. You know, a subject people here are actually knowledgeable on.