“The Judge’s” case for re-regulation—in his own words:
“Let it rest.” “Good idea but it won't fly.”
“…airlines can't schedule for unexpected delays…”
Judge, you should go to work in the propaganda department of the Air Transport Association. These are, almost, their exact words. The thinking as betrayed by these words shows why, if significant re-regulation occurred, almost all US-based airlines would shut-down. There is a total denial of reality. The status quo is great, and efforts at re-regulation, or anything like it, must be kept at bay—at all costs. A smart business would see the writing on the wall and take pro-active steps to deal with re-regulation sentiment. Unfortunately, the USA has only one airline—Southwest—which could qualify for the title of a “smart business.”
“I really have no idea why you beat this subject to death.”
I think that was the answer a guard, at Guantamano, gave to a prisoner who, repeatedly, complained about waterboarding. “Judge,” you, and a lot of your scum b*g colleagues, who work for US-based airlines, obviously have a big time problem with people having Constitutional rights. At the very least, as I suggested previously, you feel said rights do not extend to aircraft in-flight or to airport property. May I suggest you use your employee travel privilege to get a one-way ticket to Myamar (Burma) or to Zimbabwe. You, and a lot of your colleagues, have, through your statements and actions, made it very clear that the governments in those countries are much more to your liking. For these reasons the continued presence in this country of people like you poses a threat far greater than any terrorist.
|