NTSB schedules final report on Wellstone crash

[Jakey]

MPR News
Thursday, October 23, 2003

The National Transportation Safety board has scheduled a meeting for next month to consider the final report on its investigation into the plane crash that killed Sen. Paul Wellstone and seven others last Oct. 25.

The twin-engine turbo prop Wellstone was flying in crashed on its approach to the Eveleth-Virginia Municipal Airport. The NTSB has made public hundreds of pages of investigatory information its collected, but it's given no conclusive indication as to what caused the crash. NTSB spokesman Paul Schlamm says the probable cause will be made public at the meeting on Nov. 18 in Washington D.C.

"The board will discuss the issues involved in the report and discuss various aspects of the report with the presenters - the investigative team members who present the information," Schlamm said. "After a thorough discussion of all the issues, the board actually votes on the findings and on the probable cause and on any safety recommendations."

Information the NTSB has thus far released points strongly to pilot error rather than mechanical or weather problems.

http://news.mpr.org/headlines/#1

[TrogL]

1. Hurray!

We can finally put this behind us.

[goforit]

2. Yeah, right!!!......Try again!

:argh:

[The Zanti Regent]

3. We know Wellstone was murdered.

We know Coleman was involved.
We know Rove was involved.
We know Bush was involved.

The Nazi Republican Party and the Whore Press can lie all the lies they want BUT we KNOW that Paul was MURDERED and they COVER it up!

[Skip Intro]

4. Wild Conspirisy Theories

Are put forth by the bush regime, and its masters, on a daily basis.

"well, they're the authoities...."

on edit: This is a big f**ing deal - I agree Wellstone was murdered, and while we argue about nah, and yeah, the people who did it are on to other things.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nottingham]

5. It took this long to get a report on a Senator of the US

Talk about a long time. Must be a Helluva report that took this long to be given out :bounce:

[Nottingham]

6. No Probable Cause thats a very suspicious FINDING

and yet a Senator was killed! In a High Terror Alert

:bounce:

[TrogL]

8. "pilot error" is not "no probable cause"

I'm not going to argue it here. There's a perfectly good thread in GD.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=575117

(added link)

[TrogL]

7. go to the website

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/aviation.htm

lots of investigations take time

[Padraig18]

9. A year is about average...

... Senator or shoe salesman.

[9215]

10. NTSB and FAA corrupted

Ex-inspector general Mary Shiavo who is now representing 9/11 victims in their lawsuit against the Saudis pulls few punches in her assessment of the FAA and NTSB. IMO these orgs are simply lapdogs of the CIA.

Mary Shiavo: http://www.planesafe.org/flyingblind.htm
...........After all, it wasn't the first time that hazardous materials had caused a terrible accident on a plane, nor the first time that a disaster might have been averted if the cargo hold had been properly equipped with smoke and fire warning systems. The FAA knew this; the airlines knew it; the NTSB, the Department of Transportation and its Inspector General all knew it. Perhaps the only ignorant players in the game were the passengers. Yet even after 110 of them died in the Everglades, Peña went on television to defend his agency and ValuJet. Still, Peña seemed to underestimate the significance of the mandate.

"This led to the unacceptable perception that the FAA had to make choices between ensuring safety and promoting the industry it regulates." That was it. He thought the problem was solved.

I was working at home on my computer when Peña took to the airwaves. As I heard his comments from the television across the room, my fingers froze over the keyboard. Was Peña ignorant of the true nature of the FAA? Or had the FAA spoon-fed him this line about the dual standard being no big deal? Whether he believed it himself or not, he and the FAA knew they could utter pablum about the FAA mandate and nobody would be the wiser. They counted on the public not knowing what the mandate really means to the FAA. Peña's recommendation to Congress, no doubt supported at the FAA, was to tweak the wording of the mandate, not to dig out the root of the problem. In truth, the mission is much more than just a few words in the act. It is threaded throughout the legislation, just the way the culture of promoting aviation is woven throughout the FAA, inherent in its practices, its policies, and the people who work there. Eliminating a few lines in the law won't change the agency's entrenched favoritism toward the aviation industry.

That culture propelled Peña to face the public after the ValuJet crash like a nervous cheerleader whose team was forty points down in the fourth quarter. His carefully crafted explanations that ValuJet was safe were meant to prevent the public from reacting with hysteria to the truth. But the Department of Transportation wanted to prevent hysteria not to safeguard the public, but to protect the moneymaking status quo of the airline industry, and especially the low-cost or start-up carriers. The ValuJet crisis trained a floodlight on one of the more striking FAA fallacies that, once certified, an airline is always safe. That if an airline is not safe, it cannot fly. Those are simply myths. No one at the FAA or in the aviation industry wants to acknowledge that vast differences exist among airline maintenance facilities, the age and quality of aircraft, the caliber of spare-parts inventory and programs for screening bogus parts, the qualifications and experience of pilots and crew, and security practices. The public believes that caring professionals at the FAA regulate all of that through a finely honed, carefully orchestrated network of safety laws. The FAA does not want consumers to believe any differently. In reality, the FAA is at a loss to know how to deal with this new style of airline business, and with new threats to airplanes. The discount airlines that appeared and grew rapidly in the late 1980s and 1990s left the FAA stunned and blinking at a whirlwind of leased and used planes, contracted and subcontracted maintenance facilities, and inexperienced pilots and flight crews. But the FAA's inertia sent a message: what the public doesn't know can't hurt it. And the agency amply demonstrated that it wouldn't challenge that assumption until a major plane disaster claimed hundreds of lives......

And sometimes not even then.

In 1993, I learned that the FAA's abhorrence of action extended to airport security. As I discussed briefly in the introduction, plainclothes agents from my office sneaked into some of the nineteen busiest airports in the U.S. They wandered around in off-limits areas, seldom challenged by airport or airline employees. We saw other people milling about without proper identification, and they weren't stopped, either. Once my agents got into these supposedly secure areas, they walked around aircraft parking spaces, baggage processing centers, maintenance areas and ramp administrative offices. They got onto planes and into cargo holds. They wore no identification, dressed casually and didn't even pretend to belong there. They also carried guns, knives, fake bombs and a deactivated hand grenade through security screening points and x-ray machines. When we reported the lax state of airport security, our findings caused a stir in the media, on Capitol Hill, among the airlines and even at the Department of Transportation. The FAA noted that it "concurred" with virtually all of our recommendations to fix airport defenses. Unfortunately, agreement did not necessarily mean action.



More on corruption: http://www.davidicke.net/newsroom/america/usa/091901i.html

See my post near the end of this long topic:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=561809&mesg_id=561809


I am going to be gone most of the day so don't expect a reply soon.

[TrogL]

11. This from the pen of someone who announces...

"People programmed through Multiple Personality Disorder... mind controlled robots,..."

Get real.

[9215]

12. You got a link

for this quote?

Besides that yours is a cheap shot. What about the substance of the post?

[TrogL]

13. Link

http://www.davidicke.net/newsroom/america/usa/091901i.html

Top of the page.

[TrogL]

14. Substances

Seems to be mostly about the FAA.

The NTSB is what we're waiting on.

[9215]

19. Not hardly

So I must repeat what I already posted:
After all, it wasn't the first time that hazardous materials had caused a terrible accident on a plane, nor the first time that a disaster might have been averted if the cargo hold had been properly equipped with smoke and fire warning systems. The FAA knew this; the airlines knew it; the NTSB, the Department of Transportation and its Inspector General all knew it. Perhaps the only ignorant players in the game were the passengers.

In sum the whole aviation safety sector is riddled with corruption.

Rodney Stich, who is often problematic because his sources are under wraps for the safety of ongoing operations, has filed numerous lawsuits against the government because of these corruptions and the horrendous air accidents due to shoddy maintenance, safety procedures, etc.

What is not in question is that the CIA has used aircraft to smuggle drugs and illegal contraband and the only way they could have kept this under wraps is to have muzzled the FAA, et. al. In the process they marginalized or forced out the honest people like Stich who were trying to do their job.

Stich's credentials: http://www.unfriendlyskies.com/author_bio.html
Stich's lawsuits against NTSB: http://www.druggingamerica.com/judges.html

Republican, Martian, or Democrat ALL of us suffer from this corruption.

[Minstrel Boy]

17. Are you saying MKULTRA is a paranoid delusion?

Perhaps it's you who needs to get real.

The marginal David Icke isn't exactly the sole source for CIA research in mind control.

[9215]

18. ?

This is not the main substance of the post!