SWA Jumpseaters Need Your Help

[kc81900]

denying JS is stupis anyway..especially to SWA guys......most CAL pilots know the story is false......but still there are those FEW..we'll watch out for you though

Those few at CAL are they the left over scabs that ALPA welcomed back with open arms (because they needed the dues money..there thirty pieces of silver every month)

 

[MINIME]

Just a regional guy here,

But I commute on LUV quite a bit and it always has been and I'm confident always will be a nice experience. No pilot that I know will EVER deny a JS to a SWA guy/gal. For those of us that benefit from your hospitality on a regular basis, we know better. But just in case there are non-believers out there, I'll definitely do my part to spread the word to whoever I come in contact with.

 

[CALnTX]

Those few at CAL are they the left over scabs that ALPA welcomed back with open arms (because they needed the dues money..there thirty pieces of silver every month)

Actually EVERY airline has their few.....scab or not......but to answer your question......probably

 

[Caveman]

......

 

[T1bubba]

deleted

 

[Caveman]

Thanks T1.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

SWA pilots welcome on the jumpseat

 

[chase]

To all,

Thanks for the overwhelming support both verbally & in posting....there has been a spike in denials (4 legacy carriers) to SWA jumpseaters....there are some unofficial reports about some inflammatory boxstuffers found in some lounges. If anyone has any information on that I'd appreciate a PM on that issue.

SWAPA is working to get the word out to the appropriate professional agencies to correct the record & remove the jumnpseat from the "poliitcal arena". The threatening phone calls and mailings sent to the pilot involved are distressing to all involved but he is handling it as well as can be expected.

I'll beg your indulgence on what other options are being considered by the those in charge but I'm confident other actions will be occurring in the near future. Thanks...

 

[80drvr]

To all,

Thanks for the overwhelming support both verbally & in posting....there has been a spike in denials (4 legacy carriers) to SWA jumpseaters....there are some unofficial reports about some inflammatory boxstuffers found in some lounges. If anyone has any information on that I'd appreciate a PM on that issue.

SWAPA is working to get the word out to the appropriate professional agencies to correct the record & remove the jumnpseat from the "poliitcal arena". The threatening phone calls and mailings sent to the pilot involved are distressing to all involved but he is handling it as well as can be expected.

I'll beg your indulgence on what other options are being considered by the those in charge but I'm confident other actions will be occurring in the near future. Thanks...

FWIW: The NYT reporter, Matt Wald, stood by the accuracy of the quote in question when contacted by a member of the APA.

IRT the jumpseat, SWA has been among the most accomodating in the industry. It should not be used to make a political statement over something as trivial as a newspaper quote.

 

[chase]

80drv,

Thanks for the update. He said the same thing to the president of SWAPA when asked. However, when asked for specifics to confirming dates/times of when he spoke to the pilot, he failed to respond with any evidence the conversation occurred. To say he stands by the story is wise....providing the wrong attribute to a quote is one thing....to have claimed he had a conversation with someone & not have it, well, careers are lost for that. He has much more to lose than what SWAPA or the pilot has already incurred.

As you said, the jumpseat shouldn't be held hostage over this issue but the SWAPA is still engaged in the process to correct the record. The NYT has not responded (not that I'm aware) to a valid request from SWAPA to provide any evidence the interview occurred except to say, "we stand behind the story". The initial information that Mr. Wald provided to the President of SWAPA one day after the story was originally posted has proven so far to be inaccurate and not verifiable. SWAPA has indicated they will be happy to share that with the NYT but it would appear as if their silence indicates they wish to have the story go away.

In the March 19 edition of the NYT, there are 16 corrections for errors in previous papers. Six of those involved the mis-identifying of persons in the story.


As the story below indicates, the NYT isn't as infaliable as the editor or Mr. Wald would like everyone to believe.

NY Times says it erred in Abu Ghraib photo report
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif] [FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif]Email this Story[/FONT]

Mar 18, 10:57 AM (ET)

var fiMaxNumSponLinks = 5;var fiSponLinksDivHgt = 195;var fiSponLinkTarget = new Array();var globHtmlWriteSponSideBar1Obj = new Object();globHtmlWriteSponSideBar1Obj.type = '8';fiSponLinkTarget[0]= new Array('gca_sidebar1', globHtmlWriteSponSideBar1Obj);fiSponLinkTarget[1]= new Array('gca_sidebar1', globHtmlWriteSponSideBar1Obj);fiSponLinksChannelTag = 'excite_myway_news_js';document.write('

');[FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]Google sponsored links[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]Dick Cheney - Should Dick Cheney be prosecuted? Vote now to see results
www.popular-survey.com

Vote in Presidential Poll - Which U.S. president had the most impact on the world? You decide.
www.allpresidents.org

[/FONT]


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The New York Times said on Saturday it had identified the wrong man as the hooded prisoner standing on a box in a photograph that came to symbolize U.S. military abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
The newspaper's March 11 profile about Ali Shalal Qaissi was challenged by online magazine Salon.com, which said an Army investigation had concluded the prisoner was a different man.
"The Times did not adequately research Mr. Qaissi's insistence that he was the man in the photograph," The Times said in an editor's note accompanying a front page story on the misidentification.
"A more thorough examination of previous articles in The Times and other newspapers would have shown that in 2004 military investigators named another man as the one on the box, raising suspicions about Mr. Qaissi's claim," it said.
The Times, one of the most respected U.S. newspapers, was stung in 2003 when former reporter Jayson Blair was found to have fabricated and plagiarized dozens of articles. Last year, the resignation of star reporter Judith Miller amid questions about her reporting in the run-up to the Iraq war further damaged the paper's standing.
In last Saturday's article, Qaissi, a former Baath Party official, described how he was arrested in October 2003 and held for nearly six months at Abu Ghraib. It said prison records confirmed he was in detention at the time.
The Times said other media outlets, including PBS and Vanity Fair, had accepted Qaissi's account and identified him as the prisoner in the photograph, which shows a man wearing a hood and a poncho with wires attached to his outstretched arms.
The paper said Qaissi did appear with a hood over his head in other photographs seized by Army investigators.
"However, he now acknowledges he is not the man in the specific photograph he printed and held up in a portrait that accompanied the Times article," the Times article said.
But, Qaissi told the newspaper, "I wore that blanket, I stood on that box, and I was wired up and electrocuted."
[/FONT]