- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
I'm being very careful what I post here on the issue regarding executive conduct on the 5/4/2011 MAN-PHL flight as there is some new evidence. The evidence isn't fully developed yet and like everything else it's a bit dodgy and that always arouses my curious and suspicion, so here's what's new in my zoo on this. NOTE: I'm making no accusations of any kind here, just an update.
One, I now have the name of the F/A involved
Two, This person apparently hasn't worked since the incident (Whatever it was)
This comment was relayed to me. "Don't believe anything the Union or Company tells you" as being from the person directly involved.
More then above I do not know. What I posted was in my Mail Box as I encourage anyone with information to do. Send an untraceable snail mail version of what you know. Very hard to trace that way.
All I will say as to my opinion is this. I smelled a rat the moment I saw the initial report. Truthfully for all I know the F/A could be angling for a winning lawsuit. Something happened, what I couldn't tell you. This whole thing no matter whose version has never passed the smell test and I'd like to find out why.
One, I now have the name of the F/A involved
Two, This person apparently hasn't worked since the incident (Whatever it was)
This comment was relayed to me. "Don't believe anything the Union or Company tells you" as being from the person directly involved.
More then above I do not know. What I posted was in my Mail Box as I encourage anyone with information to do. Send an untraceable snail mail version of what you know. Very hard to trace that way.
All I will say as to my opinion is this. I smelled a rat the moment I saw the initial report. Truthfully for all I know the F/A could be angling for a winning lawsuit. Something happened, what I couldn't tell you. This whole thing no matter whose version has never passed the smell test and I'd like to find out why.