The Costa Citationair

[gret]

Nice try? Not sure what you are inferring.

Don't know why it is hard to provide back up so we all can hop on the bandwagon knowing the truth.

 

[OHGOON]

BS! gret,

The Dude told you it's all true. You don't need to see the letter. What purpose would it serve? We know you don't miss any chance to stir the anti union pot, but do try not to insult our intelligence that much.

The mistake you make, is that you think everyone is as incredulous and naive as you appear to be.

 

[OHGOON]

"Their for"?! Been drinking? What childish grammar.

You beat me to it... I bet he probably doesn't even know what you are getting at.


Bringing up Obama in this thread...can it get any lamer? Another mental child trying desperately to appear able to participate in an adult conversation. :erm:

Fractrash living up to his moniker again in unexpected ways...LMFAO

 

[gret]

BS! gret,

The Dude told you it's all true. You don't need to see the letter. What purpose would it serve? We know you don't miss any chance to stir the anti union pot, but do try not to insult our intelligence that much.

The mistake you make, is that you think everyone is as incredulous and naive as you appear to be.

One would hope that none of us on this reputable platform would issue statements that they won't, or can't, substantiate. If the statements are true, nobody should be reluctant to provide additional support that can stand the light of day.

If a poster is unable to support a statement, it would be helpful if they preface their remarks with "In my opinion" or "I'm pulling this out of my butt" so we can separate facts from opinions.

Nobody is trying to "stir the anti union pot". Questioning pro union posts' accuracy doesn't make you anti union.

Not to be a Brian Wilson, but wouldn't it be nice to hear the truth in a fashion that is useful and shows respect for the audience, rather than profanity laced tirades that only provide the writer short term satisfaction for his twisted brain's need to make everyone share in their perceived misery.

 

[Praetorian]

One would hope that none of us on this reputable platform would issue statements that they won't, or can't, substantiate. If the statements are true, nobody should be reluctant to provide additional support that can stand the light of day.

If a poster is unable to support a statement, it would be helpful if they preface their remarks with "In my opinion" or "I'm pulling this out of my butt" so we can separate facts from opinions.

Nobody is trying to "stir the anti union pot". Questioning pro union posts' accuracy doesn't make you anti union.

Not to be a Brian Wilson, but wouldn't it be nice to hear the truth in a fashion that is useful and shows respect for the audience, rather than profanity laced tirades that only provide the writer short term satisfaction for his twisted brain's need to make everyone share in their perceived misery.

Are you calling me a liar?

 

[gret]

Seeking facts...no way for me to make such a statement.

If you have the back up, then shouldn't be a problem. Redact whatever you consider personal information. It's not difficult and will support your arguments about mgmt being troublesome.

If you don't possess the information, say so and we can draw our own conclusions and move on to more interesting topics.

.

 

[Praetorian]

Seeking facts...no way for me to make such a statement.

If you have the back up, then shouldn't be a problem. Redact whatever you consider personal information. It's not difficult and will support your arguments about mgmt being troublesome.

If you don't possess the information, say so and we can draw our own conclusions and move on to more interesting topics.

.

You act at though I owe you some kind of explanation. I could give a $hit if you "move on to more interesting topics", or not.

As others here have confirmed, Sally is being advised by RTW. He has stated as much in the letter he distributed to my friend and the other pilots at CA. You will have to take my word for it - or not.

I think for most people it's not much of a leap to believe that since RTW is in the business of busting unions they would be involved in something like this. If that's hard for you, again, I really don't care.

 

[gret]

Don't need an explanation, I'm getting better at understanding the English language. Just looking for support to your commentary of what occurred.

Was really pulling for you on this one...Reading the embellishments and innuendos that are throw about is entertaining (and sometimes a sad reflection about society), but it would be nice to see facts once in awhile.

 

[Praetorian]

Tell you what I'll do, since my word is not good enough for you. Prove to us that you are actually a pilot and I'll post a portion of the document in question up on here for you.

 

[gret]

C'mon...you know better than that...as you've read before-

I'm a cross dressing magician and juggler from Pattaya and really thank my Buddha for finding such a delightful group of people as has been demonstrated time again here on FlightInfo. It has helped with my English and grammar all get out and the patience exhibited by everyone is appreciated. In a few more years, I will learn and be able to "impose my will on mgmt" and shout "no concessions" or "what about my QOL" (what does this mean?), "company doesn't need profits, give us raises...we're professionals!", "old guys...retire and make room for me!" and other sayings that are so popular here, but so foreign to me.​

 

[Praetorian]

It a shame. Was really pulling for you on this one...Reading the embellishments and innuendos that are throw about is entertaining (and sometimes a sad reflection about society), but it would be nice to see facts once in awhile.

 

[OHGOON]

Oh snap!

What a b!tch to have your own words sink ya. Well done.

On to the next troll.

 

[gret]

Good to hear from you OHGOON! Hope all is well and life is delivering its rich rewards...

Au contraire regarding the response...simple shows a lack of creativity and my failure to respond reflects the boredom that finally sets in when dealing with a poster who can't deliver facts supporting their position.

Assuming your reference of a troll was directed at me, the fact is that I?ve been eloquently described by the poster in question as follows, albeit under the erroneous assumption of my role-

"But, I have nothing but contempt for those who openly declare their intention to scab, or those who hide their true union-busting natures behind the facade of reasonable debate and calm demeanor, and I will not apologize for attacking them."​

FYI...troll is partially defined as...a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, posting inflammatory or extraneous messages in an online community, either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response.

At times, don't we all fit this definition?

 

[The Dude Abides]

Don't need an explanation, I'm getting better at understanding the English language. Just looking for support to your commentary of what occurred.

Was really pulling for you on this one...Reading the embellishments and innuendos that are throw about is entertaining (and sometimes a sad reflection about society), but it would be nice to see facts once in awhile.

Is all of this really over P (sorry, P, I can never remember if the a comes before the e so this is easier) writing that SBOB sought/seeks help from RTW? It's not as if he wrote that SBOB was seen on his knees in front of Phildo, and "their for" (props to fractrash) must have been performing an act (when in actuality he may have simply been looking for a paperclip he had dropped). That would have been an extraordinary claim, and would, "their for," require extraordinary evidence.

The FACT that SBOB has involved RTW is not new and is not secret (and thus requires no further evidence to appease your fact-seeking endeavors)... it is disgusting though. P is not claiming a position, he stating a simple fact. If you don't buy the statement now validated by more than P, who cares? At least now it's obvious that you are not a CA pilot (otherwise this topic would not be even remotely as extraordinary as it appears you believe it to be); since you clearly are not, perhaps there are more fruitful discussions on other forums that would require minimal effort on your part to accept what's presented. Unless . . . someone has a weapon to your head and is forcing you to view/post here (cough twice if that is indeed what is happening and P will call the authorities to rescue you).

 

[gret]

Thanks for taking the time to post, but I?m not sure what your point is. As mentioned, the topic has become quite boring and your validation of the document in question is suspect.

While reading the post, The Elements of Style came to mind. It was written in 1918 by two gentlemen named Strunk and White and many find it a useful tool with written communications. It is easy to read and has helped millions of people with sentence construction and other valuable principles when writing in the English language.

The exciting aspect of the guide is that it is not without controversy, as reflected by the following two reviews-

The Boston Globe's review described The Elements of Style Illustrated (2005), by Maira Kalman, as an "aging zombie of a book . . . a hodgepodge, its now-antiquated pet peeves jostling for space with 1970s taboos and 1990s computer advice".

In 2011, Tim Skern wrote that The Elements of Style "remains the best book available on writing good English".​

The communication styles of the two reviews are helpful as to what works and what doesn't. Which review is more effective...the one written by the reviewer who didn"t like it and had to resort to derogative comments and hysterics, or the level headed positive response which appears to have been written by somebody who is comfortable in their own skin?

Maira should find perspective in her life...the book is about writing skills, not the future of mankind for goodness sakes.

Perspective, and balance, should also be found here when discussing unions, management, glycol type, FBOs, and other aspects of aviation.