_________________________________________________________________ Thomas Easop writes... >Public scrutiny??? While most of us aggree that Joe Public needs much >more training to do recreational diving than what the mainstream >agencies are teaching, we are going to let him 'scrutinze' these >incidents?? What planet are you on? I saw the Space Shuttle Challenger >explode in the sky, on TV. Did I expect to be included in the >scrutiny? >NASA handled it, like the should have. Not the public and not the >media. I don't recall any cover-up; NASA was pretty frank about that incident. We, as the scrutinizing public, insomuch as we could un-educatedly scrutinize, accepted the accident as the manifestation of the risk involved in such an endeavor. The same thing applies to plane crashes. We get, through the media, a very detailed analysis of what is often a boneheaded human error, yet the planes still fly, and we, the public fly on them. [ValuJet is a case in point] When information is witheld, or covered up, somebody has something to hide, and that is dangerous. So, by your logic, the shop and agencies involved should be allowed to operate out of the public's eye, and therefore avoid accountability? Are you kidding? This must be a troll. WRR -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]