Striking Photo of N714CK Cockpit
08-11-2008, 09:12 AM
#21
Slainge Var'
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
Posts: 1,530
JJ, as the person who took this photo slowly backs away, one step at a time, when does inappropriate become appropriate? Open exit door from 5 feet, empenage from 50 feet, down the engine from 75 feet, entire aircraft wreckage from 500 feet, photo from behind a fence 1 mile away, satelite photo from 500,000 feet? Remember the photo of the Southwest 737 at the gas station in Burbank or the Air France A-340 in Toronto? Were those news photos inappropriate as they were before the investigation had started? It's a big bucket of worms but if there are to be rules, you'll have to tell us what they are before the next one happens.
08-11-2008, 10:00 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 829
Orion,
I didn't miss anything. None of your previous posts on this thread were related to privileged info being released. Your original posts referred to a non-privileged factual photo that included no inferences (such as "check out those fuel cut-off levers, I bet that's what caused this) and was sourced from no privileged source.
Your only post that I agree with is the last in that I am extremely against the unauthorized release of privileged as well as classified information - and if you searched my flightinfo posts you would be well aware of that. But, in this case and in Runner's post there was nothing of the sort done. You want to rant on the cases where it was actually done, do so and I will fall into step - but don't criticize Runner for the indiscretions of others. If you really are a qualified investigator, I am pretty sure your training would include what is privileged and what is not - I know mine did.
I didn't miss anything. None of your previous posts on this thread were related to privileged info being released. Your original posts referred to a non-privileged factual photo that included no inferences (such as "check out those fuel cut-off levers, I bet that's what caused this) and was sourced from no privileged source.
Your only post that I agree with is the last in that I am extremely against the unauthorized release of privileged as well as classified information - and if you searched my flightinfo posts you would be well aware of that. But, in this case and in Runner's post there was nothing of the sort done. You want to rant on the cases where it was actually done, do so and I will fall into step - but don't criticize Runner for the indiscretions of others. If you really are a qualified investigator, I am pretty sure your training would include what is privileged and what is not - I know mine did.
Last edited by LivingInMEM; 08-11-2008 at 11:49 AM.
08-11-2008, 11:31 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Mayor of Awesometown
Posts: 137
All-
To those who are offended by this image, I apologize. However, I did not take this picture. I saw the image on airliners.net and posted the link, thinking a.) since it's already in the public domain, it will not be damaging to share it on APC, and b.) it does not show human carnage. My intentions were not to draw the blood-thirsty masses, but to share it among a group of professionals who might look at the picture and possibly learn something from it (for example: the durability of the Boeing fuselage, as stated by LivinginMEM).
To those who are offended by this image, I apologize. However, I did not take this picture. I saw the image on airliners.net and posted the link, thinking a.) since it's already in the public domain, it will not be damaging to share it on APC, and b.) it does not show human carnage. My intentions were not to draw the blood-thirsty masses, but to share it among a group of professionals who might look at the picture and possibly learn something from it (for example: the durability of the Boeing fuselage, as stated by LivinginMEM).
