ADVERTISEMENT

American Airlines plane crash

It is true that the Biden and Obama FAA prioritized DEI over safety. Whether DEI is directly responsible for this crash, we can’t know yet.

I personally don't see it as being directly responsible for the Reagan, Potomac River crash itself but the extreme efforts going all the way back to Obama to bring DEI into the mix when it came to hiring ATC's certainly appears to have had a direct effect on the shortage of Controllers and in some cases, their overall competence... If you lower the standards you get an unsurprising result...

There's an Aviation Lawyer who has been on Fox and Newsmax recently who has made some eye opening and extremely concerning (if true) statements about DEI and the hiring, training and retention of ATCs... His name is Micheal Pearson (he's also a former ATC)..,

Here's the clip from Newsmax (the FOX one was clearer but I can't find it...):



Now I disagree with him about the helicopter pilot in this case not having "any" responsibility for the crash but what he has to say about the long term effects of DEI and the ATC's going back to Obama is both interesting and concerning...
 
Hmm - so because this woman attended some pride rallies and stood behind a lectern with the presidential seal are you implying that she shouldn’t have been in her role and might have been directly or indirectly responsible for last week’s crash?

Do you think last week’s tragedy would have been avoided if there were no people you consider DEI hires on board either air craft?

Sometimes people from under represented populations actually are hired on merit. I don’t know what happened on that helicopter or plane, but it’s bonkers that any serious person would suggest that none of this would have happened if only we didn’t have all these DEI hires.

Here’s a link that you might find helpful.
 
I personally don't see it as being directly responsible for the Reagan, Potomac River crash itself but the extreme efforts going all the way back to Obama to bring DEI into the mix when it came to hiring ATC's certainly appears to have had a direct effect on the shortage of Controllers and in some cases, their overall competence... If you lower the standards you get an unsurprising result...

There's an Aviation Lawyer who has been on Fox and Newsmax recently who has made some eye opening and extremely concerning (if true) statements about DEI and the hiring, training and retention of ATCs... His name is Micheal Pearson (he's also a former ATC)..,

Here's the clip from Newsmax (the FOX one was clearer but I can't find it...):



Now I disagree with him about the helicopter pilot in this case not having "any" responsibility for the crash but what he has to say about the long term effects of DEI and the ATC's going back to Obama is both interesting and concerning...
I’ll wait until the final investigation comes out, but right now there is nothing about last week’s crash that would suggest DEI initiatives caused it. I honestly don’t know how you’d even begin to prove that.

I find it pretty despicable that this tragedy is being used as an example of perceived failings of DEI efforts. Supposing that all of this could have been avoided had only people perceived as non-DEI hires been involved is at best an absolute guess.
 
Last edited:
jack-benny-look.gif


Who wants to tell him?
Really!
 
I’ll wait until the final investigation comes out, but right now there is nothing about last week’s crash that would suggest DEI initiatives caused it. I honestly don’t know how you’d even begin to prove that.

I find it pretty despicable that this tragedy is being used as an example of perceived failings of DEI efforts. Supposing that all of this could have been avoided had only people perceived as non-DEI hires been involved is at best an absolute guess.
As a general rule. Women should not operate heavy machinery.
 
I’ll wait until the final investigation comes out, but right now there is nothing about last week’s crash that would suggest DEI initiatives caused it. I honestly don’t know how you’d even begin to prove that.

I find it pretty despicable that this tragedy is being used as an example of perceived failings of DEI efforts. Supposing that all of this could have been avoided had only people perceived as non-DEI hires been involved is at best an absolute guess.

Guess you missed or ignored the first half of my opening sentence: "I personally don't see it as being directly responsible for the Reagan, Potomac River Crash"...
That said..., I also don't think you can dismiss, out of hand, Anything that may have had an effect, big or small, on any of the personnel involved in any aspect of this disaster....

Accidents like this are often the result of a myriad of things that have an influence in setting up the circumstances for the accident to take place... Little mistakes add up in the Negative in life or death situations..., especially when it comes to aviation.

Things that may have had an affect on the accident such as: Control Tower staffing, ATC overall training, pilot competence (in relation to the others in her unit), pilot training, Unit Command competence, Unit Command attention to detail, (such as: why allow a training mission to be run short one crewman [who very well might have seen the correct aircraft from their position in the fuselage] in a high traffic area....?). Was the pilots training degraded or impaired by the amount of time spent as window dressing at the White House versus actual flight time...??

All those questions (and more left unsaid) are valid ones in regard to their potentially having some bearing, large or small on the catastrophic result...

The pilot convincingly Failed her training flight by the way..., and so did the ATC (FAIL) in their lack of situational awareness, and incomplete communications with the helicopter pilot...

Why the ATC didn't just tell the chopper to Stop and Hold your position when it appeared there might be a flight traffic conflict is baffling (those choppers can go into a flare, stop and hover)...

I think the answers to all those those questions and more might very well not be the ones you'll find palatable...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Guess you missed or ignored the first half of my opening sentence: "I personally don't see it as being directly responsible for the Reagan, Potomac River Crash"...
That said..., I also don't think you can dismiss, out of hand, Anything that may have had an effect, big or small, on any of the personnel involved in any aspect of this disaster....

Accidents like this are often the result of a myriad of things that have an influence in setting up the circumstances for the accident to take place... Little mistakes add up in the Negative in life or death situations..., especially when it comes to aviation.

Things that may have had an affect on the accident such as: Control Tower staffing, ATC overall training, pilot competence (in relation to the others in her unit), pilot training, Unit Command competence, Unit Command attention to detail, (such as: why allow a training mission to be run short one crewman [who very well might have seen the correct aircraft from their position in the fuselage] in a high traffic area....?). Was the pilots training degraded or impaired by the amount of time spent as window dressing at the White House versus actual flight time...??

All those questions (and more left unsaid) are valid ones in regard to their potentially having some bearing, large or small on the catastrophic result...

The pilot convincingly Failed her training flight by the way..., and so did the ATC (FAIL) in their lack of situational awareness, and incomplete communications with the helicopter pilot...

Why the ATC didn't just tell the chopper to Stop and Hold your position when it appeared there might be a flight traffic conflict is baffling (those choppers can go into a flare, stop and hover)...

I think the answers to all those those questions and more might very well not be the ones you'll find palatable...
All questions are valid . That’s the point of an investigation. And why do you think the answers won’t be palatable?
 
Thought that was obvious... They may find that DEI did have an affect on the outcome...
That was my question. How do you prove there were mistakes made in that crash as a direct result of DEI initiatives? Conversely, are you suggesting that a non- DEI hire wouldn’t have had the wherewithal to avoid this accident?

I don’t think you can prove that.

And by that logic, if three co-pilots made up of a black woman, trans person and Native American fly a series of perfect Tomahawk missions and rate higher than every other pilot, does that mean DEI initiatives work?

Do you see how stupid this is? Trying to squint and tilt your head to blame last week’s tragedy on DEI initiatives is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: baileyiu
That was my question. How do you prove there were mistakes made in that crash as a direct result of DEI initiatives? Conversely, are you suggesting that a non- DEI hire wouldn’t have had the wherewithal to avoid this accident?

I don’t think you can prove that.

And by that logic, if three co-pilots made up of a black woman, trans person and Native American fly a series of perfect Tomahawk missions and rate higher than every other pilot, does that mean DEI initiatives work?

Do you see how stupid this is? Trying to squint and tilt your head to blame last week’s tragedy on DEI initiatives is dumb.

Go back a look at the questions I just listed... If DEI was involved in any of the answers than DEI will have been shown to have had an affect on the outcome...

Inferring that I'm stupid or dumb for even considering it simply shows that you've gone in full defensive mode and will refuse to acknowledge that such a link exists even if one is found... (and that type of approach is why I rarely bother to interact with you on here).

There already exists a DEI link between ATC shortages and ATC training deficiencies... There's a possible (not probable but possible) link to it in the pilots assignment and her overall proficiency... There may links to it in other areas... To ignore that possibility because it doesn't fit your politics will never allow you to see the truth of the answers...
 
What my wife asked yesterday, and I've been thinking about it lately, why are all DEI hires always portrayed as black or women and white males are never questioned on why they were hired?

Why are people only questioning some and one portion gets a free pass? I honestly can't come up with a good answer.
 
What my wife asked yesterday, and I've been thinking about it lately, why are all DEI hires always portrayed as black or women and white males are never questioned on why they were hired?

Why are people only questioning some and one portion gets a free pass? I honestly can't come up with a good answer.
How do people get into West Point? Individual congressmen appoint them. They have to meet minimum requirements, but who is to say a candidate from my district gets appointed who barely meets while a candidate whose parents don't donate big money well exceeds minimum doesn't. Isn't that just like DEI? How many of us complain about that? Has anyone brought it up on this board, ever? Congress had legislation to remove Congress from this in the 70s, since 1983 it has not had a single bill to eliminate this perk of wealthy campaign contributions.

I know I bring up college legacy admissions. Harvard admitting someone whose family gave a million is not meritocracy. How much pressure do our DEI warriors apply to eliminate that advantage?

So, two instances of people being allowed to buy their way ahead of merit. If an offending Black Hawk pilot had been a West Pointer and a White male, any chance our DEI Warriors would be attacking them for possibly getting in because of campaign contribution "DEI"?

Answer, not a chance in hell.

Let's wait and hear excuses why making West Point a pure meritocracy has never been brought up here, ever. It is easy to do, eliminate congressional appointment and require acceptance solely on admission scores. Not campaign contributions, not legacy status, just pure points.
 
How do people get into West Point? Individual congressmen appoint them. They have to meet minimum requirements, but who is to say a candidate from my district gets appointed who barely meets while a candidate whose parents don't donate big money well exceeds minimum doesn't. Isn't that just like DEI? How many of us complain about that? Has anyone brought it up on this board, ever? Congress had legislation to remove Congress from this in the 70s, since 1983 it has not had a single bill to eliminate this perk of wealthy campaign contributions.

I know I bring up college legacy admissions. Harvard admitting someone whose family gave a million is not meritocracy. How much pressure do our DEI warriors apply to eliminate that advantage?

So, two instances of people being allowed to buy their way ahead of merit. If an offending Black Hawk pilot had been a West Pointer and a White male, any chance our DEI Warriors would be attacking them for possibly getting in because of campaign contribution "DEI"?

Answer, not a chance in hell.

Let's wait and hear excuses why making West Point a pure meritocracy has never been brought up here, ever. It is easy to do, eliminate congressional appointment and require acceptance solely on admission scores. Not campaign contributions, not legacy status, just pure points.

Coming from a history buff such as yourself I would have thought you'd have known better than to post something like that...

Service Academy Appointments are among the most competitive Merit Based selections on the planet and have been going back to their inception...

Even if someone were able to somehow buy their way in, they'd be extremely sorry they did if they didn't meet the minimum standards baseline of their entire class and they'd suffer every day they were there until they were drummed out...

Two of my nephews graduated from West Point and neither had silver spoons in their mouths or any avenue to buy their way in...

Academy Appointments have little or nothing in common with DEI which routinely ignores Merit Based Competition in order to meet their own fantasy of "equity & inclusion"... (at all costs)...

Now the Academies these days may have been pushed to target certain percentages of gender and race but even those falling into that basket still have to meet the minimum extremely high standards of those they're competing against (for the Appointment).
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT