Air Travel

Question:

> >> I am an honest, well-informed person. >Hahahahaha. You are just spreading Israeli propaganda. You don’t contribute >anything to solving the complicated problems in that part of the world. >You are also an apologist for the Israeli terrorists. >Sjoerd > And you are one for Palestinian terrorists > If ever the pot called the kettle black Sjoerd baby,

Thanks for calling me baby. I am indeed very sweet. Sjoerd

Response:

>Suggestion:  Ignore or Filter Subjects or Posters you don’t want to >read.  Works for me!

The problem is that it not only puts the onus on the victim of the political hacks but requires that one constantly adjust the filters. edwardseco

Response:

>>Suggestion:  Ignore or Filter Subjects or Posters you don’t want to >read.  Works for me! >The problem is that it not only puts the onus on the victim of the political >hacks

I resent being called a political  hack. I am an honest, well-informed person. but requires that one constantly adjust the filters. Aw! So much work!  Just filter the suspect poster and your task is made lighter. — Polar

Response:

>>>Suggestion:  Ignore or Filter Subjects or Posters you don’t want to >>read.  Works for me! >The problem is that it not only puts the onus on the victim of the political >hacks >I resent being called a political  hack. >I am an honest, well-informed person.

From reading your posts you are nothing but an Israel apologist and Palestinian hater. Maybe you could spent some time recommending how the conflict can be resolved peacefully. John – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->but requires that one constantly adjust the filters. >Aw! So much work!  Just filter the suspect poster and your task is >made lighter.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>Suggestion:  Ignore or Filter Subjects or Posters you don’t want to >>read.  Works for me! >The problem is that it not only puts the onus on the victim of the political >hacks > I resent being called a political  hack. > I am an honest, well-informed person.

Hahahahaha. You are just spreading Israeli propaganda. You don’t contribute anything to solving the complicated problems in that part of the world. You are also an apologist for the Israeli terrorists. Sjoerd

Response:

>> I am an honest, well-informed person. >Hahahahaha. You are just spreading Israeli propaganda. You don’t contribute >anything to solving the complicated problems in that part of the world. >You are also an apologist for the Israeli terrorists. >Sjoerd

And you are one for Palestinian terrorists If ever the pot called the kettle black Sjoerd baby, you just did it now. That’s what I love about you.  You never realize you are the joke – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

>Good post, Polar.  Thanks.

And thanks to YOU for a word of encouragement. (tried to send this by email but it bounced) It isn’t exactly fun trying to bring a grain of truth to people on these NGs who may see/hear nothing but the managed pop media and don’t want to know what’s underneath. I feel like a self-appointed Socrates, and you know what happened to HIM! Again, thanks… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> [...] > >As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are > >just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, > >why not take the time to do some research and post some balance? > [...] > I would have to respectfully disagree that they are "one-sided". > What *is* one-sided is the sensationalist pop media, which habitually > leads with "Israel tanks entered.." or "Israeli forces killed…" or > ""n" Palestinians were killed today when…":  WAY down the article — > if anybody bothers to read that far, you discover that the incursion > was in response to a murderous attack against innocent civilians. > Sometimes the writer doesn’t even get that far, or rather the editor > cuts out the exculpatory material.  And that is in *newspapers*. > Remember? Those hard copy thingies that people used to read? > In TV, it is far, far, far worse.  Since TV news functions primarily > to fill the time between commercials, and since savvy TV experts have > rightly assessed the attention span of the average viewer, we are fed > 30 second (or less) sound bites, again habitually leading off with the > sensationalist reports that seem to blame Israel. Rare indeed is there > any mention that they were trying to find the murderers and/or those > who trained and equipped them to seek "martyrdom". > On radio, it is nearly as bad.  Even NPR usually pitches soft balls. > You have to go to alternative radio to get anything like a real > investigative report. > Same with the alternative print media. > I HAVE done a lot of research, including direct access to Arab sites, > and I am all too aware of how the PA spins — read: "lies" — events. > The UNRWA , which you mention further down in the message to which I > am replying, is notorious for its pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel stance, > so I would have to have corroborating evidence from an *impartial* > observer before lending credence to any of their reports > Bottom line:  Israel is always wrong, no matter what. > Remember the first intifada?  It took place in the Egyptian portion of > Gaza, as well as in the Israeli/Palestinian portion.  The Egyptians > lined up the demonstrators and machine-gunned them.  End of intifada. > The Israelis, being Jews, could not do that. They were so unprepared, > they sent 18-year-old draftees into the "territories" to deal with the > stone-throwing children sent out by their cowardly parents.  Didn’t > work very well! > Remember Jordan?  The area now "claimed" by Palestinians used to > belong to Jordan.  After 1967, the biggest trouble-makers fled to > Jordan and tried to take over that government.  The King had about > 20,000 of them killed.  End of problem. > Remember Lebanon?  When Israel decided to get out unilaterally, the > Arab mind — which works quite differently from the Western mind — > interpreted the action as a sign of weakness, and began to intensify > its terrorism against Israel. > Sigh!  Your suggestion of people doing some research is a good one, > but I fear it will fall mostly on deaf ears, if people continue to get > their opinions from the canned pop pmedia. > . > — > Polar

– Polar

Response:

> [...] >As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are >just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, >why not take the time to do some research and post some balance? > [...] > I would have to respectfully disagree that they are "one-sided".

And I’ve got to respectfully ask you to post these rants in a newsgroup which is RELEVANT TO THE CONTENT. Scotty — Academic Services, CCS                          (519) 824-4120 x2556 University of Guelph                     "If it’s not Scottish it’s CRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPP!"

Response:

> Hi, Darren,thanks for your message.  I did post to several of the NGs > which I visit regularly.   Thought that X-posting is sort of frowned > on, isn’t it?

Yup but I would’ve been less surprised.  Hehe. Dairenn Lombard Los Angeles, CA

Response:

> PA Intramural Soccer Tournament Honors Terrorists > The Palestinian daily, al-Hayat al-Jedida, the official organ of the > Palestinian Authority (PA) published under the auspices of Yasser > Arafat, reported today (21 Jan) on a soccer tournament being held at > a PA school in Tulkarm.

<snip, snap> > As long as Arafat’s regime of terror and incitement remains in place, > there will be neither genuine reform of the Palestinian society nor > an opportunity for a genuine peace process.

We in the north use to name teams after our heroes, the VIKINGS. They were appreciated for brutal force, killings, murder, rape, runsacking, taking slaves on the whole they had a pleasant hobby and were awsome holiday makers. We still uphold their memory!!!!!!! /Anders > — > Polar

– Remove the obvious part before replying by mail please!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> [...] >>As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are >>just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, >>why not take the time to do some research and post some balance? > [...] > I would have to respectfully disagree that they are "one-sided". >And I’ve got to respectfully ask you to post these rants in a newsgroup >which is RELEVANT TO THE CONTENT.

Suggestion:  Ignore or Filter Subjects or Posters you don’t want to read.  Works for me! — Polar

Response:

> >> Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course. > When you post hate mail, what do you expect? > While, specifically  on the Israel/Palestinian thing, I don’t agree with > Polar, surely however excessive, her views don’t justify hate mail?

I am against hate mail, but I can fully understand that people get angry about the extremely one-sided, anti-Palestinian and pro-Israeli-terrorist posts of Mr.or Ms. Polar. He/she abuses this newsgroup for his racist rants and his approval for the methods of the Israeli terrorists is disgusting. Terrorism is wrong. Some Palestinians are terrorists and the current Israeli government are terrorists. Sjoerd

Response:

Good post, Polar.  Thanks.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > [...] >As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are >just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, >why not take the time to do some research and post some balance? > [...] > I would have to respectfully disagree that they are "one-sided". > What *is* one-sided is the sensationalist pop media, which habitually > leads with "Israel tanks entered.." or "Israeli forces killed…" or > ""n" Palestinians were killed today when…":  WAY down the article — > if anybody bothers to read that far, you discover that the incursion > was in response to a murderous attack against innocent civilians. > Sometimes the writer doesn’t even get that far, or rather the editor > cuts out the exculpatory material.  And that is in *newspapers*. > Remember? Those hard copy thingies that people used to read? > In TV, it is far, far, far worse.  Since TV news functions primarily > to fill the time between commercials, and since savvy TV experts have > rightly assessed the attention span of the average viewer, we are fed > 30 second (or less) sound bites, again habitually leading off with the > sensationalist reports that seem to blame Israel. Rare indeed is there > any mention that they were trying to find the murderers and/or those > who trained and equipped them to seek "martyrdom". > On radio, it is nearly as bad.  Even NPR usually pitches soft balls. > You have to go to alternative radio to get anything like a real > investigative report. > Same with the alternative print media. > I HAVE done a lot of research, including direct access to Arab sites, > and I am all too aware of how the PA spins — read: "lies" — events. > The UNRWA , which you mention further down in the message to which I > am replying, is notorious for its pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel stance, > so I would have to have corroborating evidence from an *impartial* > observer before lending credence to any of their reports > Bottom line:  Israel is always wrong, no matter what. > Remember the first intifada?  It took place in the Egyptian portion of > Gaza, as well as in the Israeli/Palestinian portion.  The Egyptians > lined up the demonstrators and machine-gunned them.  End of intifada. > The Israelis, being Jews, could not do that. They were so unprepared, > they sent 18-year-old draftees into the "territories" to deal with the > stone-throwing children sent out by their cowardly parents.  Didn’t > work very well! > Remember Jordan?  The area now "claimed" by Palestinians used to > belong to Jordan.  After 1967, the biggest trouble-makers fled to > Jordan and tried to take over that government.  The King had about > 20,000 of them killed.  End of problem. > Remember Lebanon?  When Israel decided to get out unilaterally, the > Arab mind — which works quite differently from the Western mind — > interpreted the action as a sign of weakness, and began to intensify > its terrorism against Israel. > Sigh!  Your suggestion of people doing some research is a good one, > but I fear it will fall mostly on deaf ears, if people continue to get > their opinions from the canned pop pmedia. > . > — > Polar

Response:

[...] >As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are >just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, >why not take the time to do some research and post some balance?

[...] I would have to respectfully disagree that they are "one-sided". What *is* one-sided is the sensationalist pop media, which habitually leads with "Israel tanks entered.." or "Israeli forces killed…" or ""n" Palestinians were killed today when…":  WAY down the article — if anybody bothers to read that far, you discover that the incursion was in response to a murderous attack against innocent civilians. Sometimes the writer doesn’t even get that far, or rather the editor cuts out the exculpatory material.  And that is in *newspapers*. Remember? Those hard copy thingies that people used to read? In TV, it is far, far, far worse.  Since TV news functions primarily to fill the time between commercials, and since savvy TV experts have rightly assessed the attention span of the average viewer, we are fed 30 second (or less) sound bites, again habitually leading off with the sensationalist reports that seem to blame Israel. Rare indeed is there any mention that they were trying to find the murderers and/or those who trained and equipped them to seek "martyrdom". On radio, it is nearly as bad.  Even NPR usually pitches soft balls. You have to go to alternative radio to get anything like a real investigative report. Same with the alternative print media. I HAVE done a lot of research, including direct access to Arab sites, and I am all too aware of how the PA spins — read: "lies" — events. The UNRWA , which you mention further down in the message to which I am replying, is notorious for its pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel stance, so I would have to have corroborating evidence from an *impartial* observer before lending credence to any of their reports Bottom line:  Israel is always wrong, no matter what. Remember the first intifada?  It took place in the Egyptian portion of Gaza, as well as in the Israeli/Palestinian portion.  The Egyptians lined up the demonstrators and machine-gunned them.  End of intifada. The Israelis, being Jews, could not do that. They were so unprepared, they sent 18-year-old draftees into the "territories" to deal with the stone-throwing children sent out by their cowardly parents.  Didn’t work very well! Remember Jordan?  The area now "claimed" by Palestinians used to belong to Jordan.  After 1967, the biggest trouble-makers fled to Jordan and tried to take over that government.  The King had about 20,000 of them killed.  End of problem. Remember Lebanon?  When Israel decided to get out unilaterally, the Arab mind — which works quite differently from the Western mind — interpreted the action as a sign of weakness, and began to intensify its terrorism against Israel. Sigh!  Your suggestion of people doing some research is a good one, but I fear it will fall mostly on deaf ears, if people continue to get their opinions from the canned pop pmedia. . — Polar

Response:

>>> Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course. > When you post hate mail, what do you expect? >While, specifically  on the Israel/Palestinian thing, I don’t agree with >Polar, surely however excessive, her views don’t justify hate mail?

We are dealing here with a sub-population of either chronological or psychological immaturity, or both, which feels free to call names over the ‘Net, where they would not dare confront the same individual in person.  It is true mainly (and here I can expect more "hate" mail <g>) of the male population, as females are not biologically programmed to lock horns, electronically or otherwise.   Let it be hastily, and sincerely, soecified that there *are* male posters on this and other NGs who are correct, civil, analytic, and have  inquiring minds.  Unfortunately, the signal-to-noise ratio is not in their favor. As to the Mid-East question, which only a few seem understand affects us all, I don’t think my posting information is "excessive". What it does, is frighten and upset  people who don’t want to think about the issue; want to go on with their little lives (just as I do!!!) and Let Someone Else Handle It.  They are content to absorb the managed drumbeat of the pop media, without seeking other sources of information.   That isn’t new; it’s always been the generality of the population that just "didn’t want to know".  Unfortunately, with the electronic media. it is easy for the immature to call names rather than study issues. — Polar

Response:

>> Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course. >When you post hate mail, what do you expect?

As far as I’m concerned, Polar’s posts are not "hate mail" – they are just extremely one sided in their outlook. If you disagree with them, why not take the time to do some research and post some balance? OK, here goes again: Late last year Iain Hook, a British employee of the UN relief agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), was shot by members of the IDF. There are a lot of discrepancies between the account of the IDF and that of UNRWA and other witnesses. The IDF claim that their soldiers mistook him for an armed Palestinian during a heavy exchange of fire. A spokesman for UNRWA claimed that Mr Hook was shot in the back with a single bullet at a time when no military activity was taking place. The ambulance called to the UN compound to collect Mr. Hook was delayed by the IDF, which probably contributed to his death. It’s been alleged that the US has put pressure on the UN to soft pedal any investigation of Mr. Hook’s death. The UK government has stated that it wants a full inquiry, but doesn’t seem to have actually done anything to make this come about. When Syria tabled an (admittedly very anti-Israeli) UN resolution criticising the killing of Mr. Hook, the US vetoed it. It seems that the alliance between the US and UK is very much a one way street. — Simon Elliott http://www.ctsn.co.uk/

Response:

> Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course.

When you post hate mail, what do you expect?

Response:

>> Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course. > When you post hate mail, what do you expect?

While, specifically  on the Israel/Palestinian thing, I don’t agree with Polar, surely however excessive, her views don’t justify hate mail?

Response:

> But post *anything* remotely critical of Palestine or (implicitly) > pro-Israel, and the boom is lowered. > Truly interesting.

There have been posts critical of that thread…… And more than the ONE negative response you got for this one. Seriously though, why put it here?

Response:

> Interesting.  One can post anything OT on this NG, such as the "How > the U.S. helped Iraq build deadly arsenal" that has been running > interminably, and incur no criticism (read: Netcopping). > But post *anything* remotely critical of Palestine or (implicitly) > pro-Israel, and the boom is lowered. > Truly interesting.

I don’t have a problem with anybody talkin’ crap about Palestine.  My personal opinion is that as soon as Mr. Bush makes sure that Saddam has the fire power of a 4 year old with a sling shot, Mr. Sharon should take out Arafat once and for all. Don’t misinterpret my lack of condemnation to that waste-of-bandwidth called a thread about how the US helped build Iraq’s arsenal as approval.  Anybody with an 1/8th of a brain already knows we did when we were trying to stick it to Iran.  I just figured that with 50 posts, enough people have already said, "this is off-topic and doesn’t belong in the newsgroup" by now without me acting like an AOL’er and quoting the entire message just to say, "I agree." There sure are a lot of newsgroups where a well-written message like that should’ve been posted.  I just found myself surprised that it was not cross-posted from some place else but sent ONLY to a newsgroup about air travel. Dairenn Lombard Los Angeles, CA

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Interesting.  One can post anything OT on this NG, such as the "How > the U.S. helped Iraq build deadly arsenal" that has been running > interminably, and incur no criticism (read: Netcopping). > But post *anything* remotely critical of Palestine or (implicitly) > pro-Israel, and the boom is lowered. > Truly interesting. >I don’t have a problem with anybody talkin’ crap about Palestine.  My >personal opinion is that as soon as Mr. Bush makes sure that Saddam >has the fire power of a 4 year old with a sling shot, Mr. Sharon >should take out Arafat once and for all.

Er…not a good idea.  His own people have to get rid of him. But how? The Arab "street" is so thoroughly propagandized now, that they have not the foggiest idea of the facts on the ground.  They have little or no exposure to Western media, or to countervailing opinions.. Tough to get rid of a corrupt dictator, supported by Big Oil.  All the decent Palestinians (who are hard-working entrepreneurial folks just like their neighbors) long ago fled abroad when they saw what Arafat & Co. were cooking up.   One of the worst ideas that (naive) Israel ever had was to bring that murderer back from Tunisia, thinking that his Hamas would be a counter-weight to the other terrorist organizations, like Hizbollah, etc.  Didn’t turn out that way, did it! Israel can’t do anything that "normal" countries (like the U.S.)  do, such as carpet-bombing the place, like we did Afghanistan. Whatever they do, they get criticized.  Retaliate: Criticized.  Pull back and offer peace:  More suicide-murders.  Retaliate: Criticized. (Can you spell J-E-W?) The American media is so totally uninformed, it’s not surprising that listeners/viewers lack background. Personally, I wouldn’t mind if the whole bunch was relocated to Jordan (which was supposed to be their home turf originally). >Don’t misinterpret my lack of condemnation to that waste-of-bandwidth >called a thread about how the US helped build Iraq’s arsenal as >approval.  Anybody with an 1/8th of a brain already knows we did when >we were trying to stick it to Iran.  I just figured that with 50 >posts, enough people have already said, "this is off-topic and doesn’t >belong in the newsgroup" by now without me acting like an AOL’er and >quoting the entire message just to say, "I agree." >There sure are a lot of newsgroups where a well-written message like >that should’ve been posted.  I just found myself surprised that it was >not cross-posted from some place else but sent ONLY to a newsgroup >about air travel.

Hi, Darren,thanks for your message.  I did post to several of the NGs which I visit regularly.   Thought that X-posting is sort of frowned on, isn’t it? Got a certain amount of hate mail, but that’s par for the course. Worth it if a crack is opened in even one mind. — Polar

Response:

PA Intramural Soccer Tournament Honors Terrorists The Palestinian daily, al-Hayat al-Jedida, the official organ of the Palestinian Authority (PA) published under the auspices of Yasser Arafat, reported today (21 Jan) on a soccer tournament being held at a PA school in Tulkarm. The student teams participating in the tournament have been named after suicide terrorists, who are responsible for the murder of dozens of Israelis.  For example, one of the teams has been named after Abd al-Basset Oudeh, the terrorist who carried out the Passover Eve Massacre at the Park Hotel in Netanya in which more than thirty Israelis were killed. This carnival of incitement is being conducted under the auspices of official PA educators – among them the school principle and the PA’s regional superintendent of education. This is the nature of education provided by the Palestinian Authority.  This is also the nature of the PA reform, which while supposedly includes a cessation of incitement, is in actuality encouraging profound hatred and terrorism. As long as Arafat’s regime of terror and incitement remains in place, there will be neither genuine reform of the Palestinian society nor an opportunity for a genuine peace process. — Polar

Response:

What’s fascinating about this post is that on any other newsgroup it might’ve been great.  The problem is, it was posted to rec.travel.air without the words jet, passenger, ticket, reservation, luggage, airport, TSA, Bill The Mattocs, aircraft, Boeing, airline or bankruptcy. Dairenn Lombard Los Angeles, CA

Response:

> What’s fascinating about this post is that on any other newsgroup it > might’ve been great.  The problem is, it was posted to rec.travel.air > without the words jet, passenger, ticket, reservation, luggage, > airport, TSA, Bill The Mattocs, aircraft, Boeing, airline or > bankruptcy.

*LOL*

Response:

>What’s fascinating about this post is that on any other newsgroup it >might’ve been great.  The problem is, it was posted to rec.travel.air >without the words jet, passenger, ticket, reservation, luggage, >airport, TSA, Bill The Mattocs, aircraft, Boeing, airline or >bankruptcy.

Interesting.  One can post anything OT on this NG, such as the "How the U.S. helped Iraq build deadly arsenal" that has been running interminably, and incur no criticism (read: Netcopping). But post *anything* remotely critical of Palestine or (implicitly) pro-Israel, and the boom is lowered. Truly interesting. — Polar

Response: