RIP, Lech Kaczinski

[Arneb]

The President of Poland diedin an airplane crash this morning, along with more than 80 members of the Polish political élite.

The plane was en route to a memorial event at Katyn, where, 70 years ago, the Soviet secret service murdered several thousand officers, academics, doctors, and intellectuals, in an effort to "decapitate" the Polish population.

What a bitter tragedy. If there really is a Catholic God, he extremely harsh on his stoutest followers.

I had very little sympathies for his policies - a bullyish anti-intellectual like Walesa, but without the latter's grace, honesty and sheer human next-door neighbour decency. (they both had tremendous, incredible courage though). He came to power on a ticket of aggressively nationalistic, anti-European, anti-German , anti-Russian, homophobic, anti-liberal, and frequently, anti-semitic Catholic redneck resentment. But he did sign the Lisbon treaty, and when the Polish parliament voted for it resoundingly, he did not attempt to withold his signature.

Our chancellor (maybe reflecting a similar sentiment)said, "he loved his country, and he was a disputatious European. We Germans, too, have suffered a great loss"

[wring]

I found that shocking. I can't imagine how devestating it will be to the country to effectively lose that much of their leadership all at once.

[Heid the Ba]

I can't agree with many of his policies but that's democracy. He certainly wasn't the worst leader in Europe.

I must admit that my first thought was to juxtapose this news with the announcement that proper nouns are now legal in Scrabble.

I'll get me coat . . .

[Мастер]

I found that shocking. I can't imagine how devestating it will be to the country to effectively lose that much of their leadership all at once.

Oddly enough, that's more or less the nature of the event they were going to commemorate.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Damn. This sounds like a bad techno-thriller.
(Of course the conspriri-tards love this one.)

I hope this tragedy leads to rapprochement between Poland and Russia, rather then more resentment.

I found that shocking. I can't imagine how devestating it will be to the country to effectively lose that much of their leadership all at once.

Oddly enough, that's more or less the nature of the event they were going to commemorate.

Smolensk District is not a good place for the Polish.

Among the victims are the last president of the Polish government-in-exile, and the woman who's getting fired from the Gdansk shipyard set in motion a chain of events which ultimately led to the fall of the regime.

I really can't think of an analogy to describe what a blow this must be to the whole nation.

[Arneb]

Yes, very much so. Espicially the fate of the woman from the Lenin shipyard was extremely moving.

Oddly enough, Kaczinsky's courage and stubbornness may have been his and the other occupants' undoing. There is a rumor circulated in the German press that he may have bullied the pilot into attempting multiple landings at Smolensk airport, which is not equipped for instrument landings (visibility was 400 m). The pilot is said to have ignored multiple warnings by the tower and suggestions to reroute to either Moscow or Minsk. It was said that ususally a pilot wouldn't refuse to hear those warnings except under extreme pressure.

[Heid the Ba]

The media here are taking a similar line, though blaming the pilot. Probably because the media here have no idea how to spell Kaczinsky never mind knowing what he was like.

[troubleagain]

I cannot imagine how this would feel if it were our country (which probably wouldn't allow so many powerful people to be in one plane.)

[Arneb]

That's easy. If it were Obama and his Marxist Fascist Socialist freedom eaters, Fox would explode with joy, and Glenn Beck would dribble on and on how the country would be now safe from tyranny and descent into chaos if only they voted for the hate-monger of the day (an Alaskan job-quitter comes to mind).

They would publish flyers on which the portraits of the deceased would be crossed out, "96 done, another ... to go", etc. The Tea Parties would party. Etc.

Just imagine how B.T. would run around shitting his pants with delight, and take it by x1000. That's what would happen.

The ROW, unimportant as always, would stare in stunned silence.

[Мастер]

That's easy. If it were Obama and his Marxist Fascist Socialist freedom eaters, Fox would explode with joy, and Glenn Beck would dribble on and on how the country would be now safe from tyranny and descent into chaos if only they voted for the hate-monger of the day (an Alaskan job-quitter comes to mind).

This seems to flare up at IRU from time to time. If it were me, I would ask whether a-minority-represents-the-whole is really a principle I'd want to espouse. It could set an inconvenient precedent.

[Blue Monster 65]

I just happened to be passing by ABC News (their morning show - I stopped to watch this bit) this morning and they mentioned that it's suspected the pilot was bullied into attempting to land by Kaczinsky. They said he had done it before; forcing his pilot to land in a war zone.

[Мастер]

I just happened to be passing by ABC News (their morning show - I stopped to watch this bit) this morning and they mentioned that it's suspected the pilot was bullied into attempting to land by Kaczinsky. They said he had done it before; forcing his pilot to land in a war zone.

They're reporting the first part on the news here also. On the second bit, presumably the pilot new the destination was a war zone before they got there; or did a war erupt while the plane was in the air?

[Heid the Ba]

From this article:

"In 2008, during Russia's brief war with Georgia, President Kaczynski flew to Tbilisi to support the Georgian president.

According to reports at the time, the president got into an argument with the pilot, who, because of the dangers of landing in a combat zone, went against the president's orders and diverted to Azerbaijan."

[Мастер]

From this article:

"In 2008, during Russia's brief war with Georgia, President Kaczynski flew to Tbilisi to support the Georgian president.

According to reports at the time, the president got into an argument with the pilot, who, because of the dangers of landing in a combat zone, went against the president's orders and diverted to Azerbaijan."

Huh. That's odd - presumably he knew a war was going on in Georgia before they took off . . .

[Blue Monster 65]

I can't really say, Mactep - I just stumbled upon the report while switching channels and it really just seemed like some tidbit of trivia they were attaching to a lengthier piece. It was presented rather odd, I thought.

[Мастер]

I guess the two situations could be, either the conflict suddenly intensified while the plane was in the air, or, the plane was originally supposed to go somewhere else, and the passenger attempted to persuade the pilot to divert to a more dangerous destination. Or maybe something different still, I don't know.

[Enzo]

No, the flight attendant informed them that the pretzels were NOT free, and they would have to pay for them.

And that's when the fight started.

[Arneb]

This seems to flare up at IRU from time to time. If it were me, I would ask whether a-minority-represents-the-whole is really a principle I'd want to espouse. It could set an inconvenient precedent.

Sorry for delaying my answer, Mactep. Of course, I owe you a response.

I admit that, when I answered ta's post, I was in the state of being fired up after seeing Glen Beck's mental diarrhoeas again on the internet. And of course I would NOT want to espouse the minority-represents-all attitude (I hope you didn't seriously think I would). However, I have this aching feeling that the Fox News mafia is not a fringe movement, but that the sentiment and the hatred they fling at anything and anyone disagreeing with far-right conservative evangelical dogma is a rather common trait in the current American climate.

To choose an extreme example, when the planes hit the towers, the entire nation united behind the President, even the most left-leaning Democrats didn't question George W or any of his decision. Would that happen if an attack of comparable proportions happened now? I don't think so, and I do think it is because a sizable portion of the American right has left the basic democratic consensus of this country.

Back to the scenario of Air Force 1 crashing with a whole bunch of important political figures along with the President: I don't want to say that all or even most Americans wouldn't know what is appropriate in such a tragic situation; I do want to say that an uncomfartably large portion of political America would be jubilant, and would use the incident to further their own agenda.

[Enzo]

Sadly I think you are right.

If that happened, Pat Robertson would instantly be telling us it was God's way of punishing us for allowing homosexuals to exist anywhere. Or for allowing abortions.

Fox news would briefly lament the deaths but then crow that now maybe the country can get back on track.

etc.

Glenn Back would just continue to spout nonsense.

[Мастер]

I was in the state of being fired up after seeing Glen Beck's mental diarrhoeas again on the internet.

That's an easy problem to solve!

To choose an extreme example, when the planes hit the towers, the entire nation united behind the President, even the most left-leaning Democrats didn't question George W or any of his decision.

Which decision was that? Do you mean the decision to invade Afghanistan? Although that invasion took place (as did the later invasion of Iraq), there was certainly opposition, particularly in the latter case. But it is not the case that nobody questioned him.

If you mean some other decision, such as to visit the World Trade Center site, make general "terrorism is bad" statements, etc., then sure, there was probably very little criticism of that.

FWIW, said president left office with some of the lowest poll numbers in American political history.

Would that happen if an attack of comparable proportions happened now? I don't think so

It surpasses my power to run a controlled experiment to test that idea. The assassination of a relatively moderate Democratic president resulted in that individual achieving something close to canonization, but that was almost fifty years ago, so it is not obvious the reaction would be the same today.

and I do think it is because a sizable portion of the American right has left the basic democratic consensus of this country.

I don't know if there ever was a democratic consensus. In the thirty years or so that I've been politically aware in the US, there has been (in my opinion) a very very noticeable rightward shift - Richard Nixon may well have been considered a leftist by today's standards. But I do notice that the left and right have something in common - many members of both categories are convinced that most people agree with them, and the other side is a radical fringe group.

Back to the scenario of Air Force 1 crashing with a whole bunch of important political figures along with the President: I don't want to say that all or even most Americans wouldn't know what is appropriate in such a tragic situation; I do want to say that an uncomfartably large portion of political America would be jubilant, and would use the incident to further their own agenda.

Is the part that bothers you the "jubilant" part, or the "use the incident to further their own agenda" part? The first is untested, we will just have to wait to see if and when it happens. As for the second part - of course they would. Do you think the American left would have failed to take advantage of the loss of GWB & Dick Cheney & company in some disaster, to move the government in a direction more to their liking? Or that opposition politicians in Poland are not doing that right now? They are surely observing all the polite, solemn formalities. But I'd be amazed if some of them are not saying to themselves (and probably to each other as well, in relatively private settings), "this is our chance" . . .

[Мастер]

Fox news would briefly lament the deaths but then crow that now maybe the country can get back on track.

I think that is what they would do, but other than that their policies may be different than yours, mine, or the other person's, is there something wrong with that particular response?

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia reacted to the World Trade Center attacks in essentially this way - the attack is a tragedy, but the US should take it as an opportunity to modify its middle east policies. His $10 million contribution to the relief fund for New York City was not accepted because of this statement.

If George W Bush died in some horrible attack or accident, I don't think many of his opponents here at this board (who include me) would suddenly adopt his policies out of respect for the dead.

Glenn Back would just continue to spout nonsense.

Am I the only person here who doesn't listen to/watch (I'm not even sure which would apply) Glenn Beck?

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Who is Glen Beck?

[Enzo]

I don't "watch" Glen Beck. I find it hard to avoid him. Certainly his histrionics are steady fare for the Daily Show. And you run into "Well Glen Beck said this..."

I could be wrong, but I think you and Arneb, Mactep, are working in different time frames. When 9/11 happened, for the most part there was not a lot of argument that we should do something immediately, and strike back directly at those responsible. Attacking their bases in Afghanistan didn;t raise a lot of stink as I recall. Now not long after GW started doing things like invading Iraq, and of course there was a hue and cry over that. But in my mind that is somewhat removed from the 9/11 honeymoon. I don;t remember the democrats having fits over the Afghan operation. MAybe a month later, sure.

Low poll numbers 7 years later do not reflect the initial willingness to support GWs initial efforts. MAybe everyone and nobody are too strong terms for the support, but opposition was muted.

Enzo wrote:
Fox news would briefly lament the deaths but then crow that now maybe the country can get back on track.


I think that is what they would do, but other than that their policies may be different than yours, mine, or the other person's, is there something wrong with that particular response?

I make a distinction between someone thinking that the power vacuum has potential for their position to advance and someone like Sean Hannity coming on TV and announcing the president's death immediately followed by, " ...and NOW we can get back to returning our country to the values it was built upon." I think if a planeload of GWB and Cheney went down, KAtie COuric would not be wearing a party hat on her newscast. But I CAN see the morons on Fox news chanting "Ding Dong the witch is dead." And putting up a chart, "Day 1 of the new American opportunity."


If Bush/Cheney had met a fiery demise, no, I would not have adopted their policies out of respect or out of anything else. But I would find it offensive for people in the public eye to shout "Wahooo!!!" into the camera. Speaking for myself, I wanted them out of office or otherwise quashed, but I wouldn;t relish the loss to their families.


Of course if there is a good joke to be made, all bets are off...

[Мастер]

Who is Glen Beck?

I had no idea who he was, until I was stranded in hotel SFO (San Francisco airport) overnight back in October, and wandering aimlessly up and down looking at the (closed) shop windows, and saw his book. Apparently he is some kind of right-wing radio and/or television personality.

[Мастер]

But I CAN see the morons on Fox news chanting "Ding Dong the witch is dead."

Don't watch Fox News myself, so I don't even know what they are actually saying today, let alone what they might say in the future should certain events transpire. But, your earlier quote was:

Fox news would briefly lament the deaths but then crow that now maybe the country can get back on track.

Those two aren't quite the same. If you change what they (hypothetically) say, my opinion about its appropriateness could also change.

If Bush/Cheney had met a fiery demise, no, I would not have adopted their policies out of respect or out of anything else.

I think that's how it should be. If people thought GWB was doing the wrong thing after the World Trade Center attacks, they shouldn't have just rolled over and played dead. And if people think the government is doing the wrong thing today, they also shouldn't roll over and play dead in the face of tragedy.

I think if a planeload of GWB and Cheney went down, KAtie COuric would not be wearing a party hat on her newscast.

No, I don't think she would. But when someone wants to portray people with your political orientation as hatemongers, they won't use Katie Couric as their poster child. Do you think they'll have much trouble finding a good one?

But yes, I can easily imagine that some would use the occasion of a tragedy to make some political statement. If you're into irony, locate the post in this thread where that first started to happen. Was it a right-winger who did it?