Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Boyd Prognosticates

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
wait CNN has some hot chics for news....can I just watch it with the mute on?
 
Benhuntn said:
wait CNN has some hot chics for news....can I just watch it with the mute on?

Yes you can, it's actually a lot more enjoyable that way. :)
Bye the way MSNBC has got it's share of hotties also.

Bye the way what's a B-720?
 
Last edited:
brainhurts said:
Hey nfg,
You seem like a nice guy but this post takes no point. It rambles around some allusion to Us history from the late 30s and presidental attrubutes and who you are. You kind take a swipe at the politics of fear insinuating this admin is making the threat much worse than it is. How can it be worse? The real politics here is trying to pin this administration between not doing enough to stop the Islamic threat and doing too much to stop the Islamic threat. The reason I take this seriously is because it is serious. I do not mind debating this stuff with you and I do not think you are tratorous. See my above post on the subject. But like I said before, if you want to debate this issue, you are going to have to get in the ring. Once you are in the ring, and the bell goes off--I am coming out swinging on this issue.


Wow, I thought I was just typing stuff onto a computer, I wasn't aware that I was locked in hand to hand combat with you. :) You seem to be confused with what I meant. It seems to me that you think that these politics of fear that I was talking about is a method this admin. uses to fight terrorism. I don't think that is true. I think they use it purely to keep and solidify their grip on power. How many times did we hear about imminent threats to some target in the US, just to see it be called off at the last moment? When did we hear about these attacks? They were all in the runup to the last elections. Not one since. They were meant to scare people and show them "see, we can keep you safe. There was this threat and nothing happened, becuase we keep you safe." I think those were meant purely to win that election. That's my opinion, when they actually produce some facts, then maybe I will change my mind. Also, I don't understand how you can say in one post that people have a right to say whatever they want, and then turn around and say that the Willie Nelsons, Streisands, Fondas etc. are traitors. Aren't they just exercising their rights? They are not helping the enemy just by critisizing the president. I am willing to bet that Bin Laden has never even heard of Willie Nelson! Now, if they were actually killing Americans, selling state secrets or whatever, then I would agree with you. But they are not doing that. By your logic, going by the fact that Bush has approximately a 30% approval rating, 70% of Americans are traitors. Nobody is saying that we shouldn't be fighting terrorism. (I sure am not) People just don't agree with the methods. How many reasons for the Iraq war have we heard by now? We should have finished the job in Afghanistan, and not have gone into a war of choice. I think that's all people are trying to say, including the Nelsons, Straisands, and Fondas. Anyway, keep going, maybe we'll agree on something. :laugh: Take care.
 
nfg,
You and I will probably never agree on anything because you are a liberal. You will talk on and on about creating dialouges and reaching out to people, letting the UN work ad nausium. The sad thing is that I will win this argument the hard way, WHEN we are attacked with WMD. You are wrong about my concept of the politics of fear. There is a reason to fear. If you think this admin is actually making this stuff up for effect, I think you have the wrong admin.
You are very liberally twisting my post. Nelson, Streisand etc. can say whatever they want. That does not mean that they should use their position to say whatever they want. It is not fair to you and me who's voice seems to be smaller than theirs. If they want to say their piece and it gives comfort to the enemy, then there are consequences. People like me can call them on it and reach the conclusion they are traitors. You are naive to think Bin Laden has no grip on American popular culture. He has an intel unit like any other organization. Does he know who W Nelson is? Who cares? He knows liberal Hollywood is on his side and he sees this as a positive because it is. I think this war in Iraq would have been a different story if we could have at least shown a unified poker face to radical Islam instead of jumping right in with the anti war/anti Bush crap. The average Iraqi is now afraid to come out for freedom because of your crowd who wants to pull out. This is classic in history. We needed a period for this to work and give confidence to the Iraqi people that we would be there for them. They know that our leaders can change quickly, so with your hollywood friends and liberal leadership, it is not a great confidence booster for them to take sides. Who is bearing the brunt of all this? The US grunt. You should feel proud of your sides lip service to him, and then taking actions that hurt his cause. I actually am done debating with you because I think you will be pulling out astrology charts next to defend yourself, and I have learned there is no arguing with a liberal. Feelings are more important than facts.
 
I think this war in Iraq would have been a different story if we could have at least shown a unified poker face to radical Islam instead of jumping right in with the anti war/anti Bush crap. The average Iraqi is now afraid to come out for freedom because of your crowd who wants to pull out. This is classic in history.


Amen, These clowns have no idea how much comfort they give to the enemy when they start their "Tokyo Rose" B.S. . . . . "Me love you long-time, GI Joe".
 
I think he is vascillating back and forth with USAir. USAir pretty much rides the SWA wave. Everytime they raise fares, it incrementally gives a boost to USAir because of the large route overlap. Doug Parkers biggest challenge is melding the two cultures. His tirade on Neeleman is a classic leadership example of building one loyal culture by focusing adversarial thoughts toward the competition in lieu of within.

Oil will go down over the next couple of weeks.....Positon play for traders....As far as the overall effect of oil on the airline industry it surely will be an increased cost on the bottom line going forward. Withstanding hedges and route systems, the airlines with the least cost will survive the next two to three years..Beyond that is anyones guess. In my opinion, those airlines that show loyalty to their employees by profit sharing plans will be well hedged. Keep the price down up front and reap the synergy with increased route structure and employee motivation will undoubetdly make for success. forget the spelling....too long in the Cockpit to care. So now you have it boyz..... How will you use it..????? BE SMART and FOCUS on the dynamics of an era we have never really seen before. Those smart enough to digest the economics we currently live with will reap the rewards within ten years. K no longer than three years. Focus Out................
 
Then again Boys and Girls it may be time to take over the Oil Fields of the World......Are we ready for that....perhaps W is on the right course........God help Us all if we have reached that point.
 
Its amazing how this gentleman from the East Coast can get our blood rising with his editorial on the industry we all work within. I have to admit,,,,its plausible....Wow......I havent typed that word since college.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top