Mcwilkers_1984 says “I do not feel the women should be attacked for the abortions. Many of them were not in a state of mind where they were able to make informed decisions.” You’re kidding right? Please say you’re kidding. Re-read what you posted and see if you see the idiocracy in your statement. She knew what she was doing, and so did her mother. She allowed Gosselin to murder her child and she got upset b/c the quack kept the babies’ foot; forget the fact that he MURDERED the baby.
The fact that Micheal feels these woman were not in the proper state of mind at the time would mean the doctors involved are guilty of mal-practice and likely more crimes due to the nature of what is done. As a doctor we are not able to do ANY medical procedure on a patient that we even suspect is not in the correct state of mind or is not able to be properly informed of the procedure they are having (unless they have a power of attorney that makes these decisions for them). But of course this just goes to show yet another liberal excuse and justification can't withstand the simple burden of fact when it encounters an informed individual.
EYEDR54 I agree with you and I have a question: When the hypocratic oath says "first do no harm" how can these medical providers who intentionally stop the life of a viable human being keep their medical license? How can the state continue to grant priviledges to a medical provider who violates the oath of their profession? Doesn't anyone find this to be just a little more than unethical?
May 2, 2013 at 5:01am
The pussification of America…adults being sqeamish and crying over a video is rediculous. Grow up people! Maybe Facebook needs to change their sign-up policy and increase the age required to sign up for an account. 13 year old kids shouldn’t have a Facebook page anyways.
May 1, 2013 at 3:28am
Those of you that are speculating about load shift and center of balance being the probable cause, you would more than likley be correct. I work in the military version of the career field that loads these aircraft and many others and have first hand knowledge of the type of cargo that was loaded. Heavy military vehicles (we call Rolling Stock) were improperly restrained inside the aircraft using cargo straps instead of chains. Myslef, along with others in my career field have seen the photos of the cargo tied down inside the aircraft before it blocked out.
I agree Parat. That seems to fit the attitude and then the full stall...
I'm a retired C-5 LM and it does appear that it was a load-shift issue. My thought is how-in-the-eff did that happen, at a main air-hub like Bagram? With all the ATOC people and the Load Planners, not to mention the civilian LM that was assigned to that aircraft, how does this happen?
This is definitely one of the most amazing (and not in a good way) videos I've ever seen.
IF IT WAS A LOAD SHIFT, WHO TIED DOWN THE LOAD?
Were Afghan or foreign Muslim workers loading the planes? In the beginning of WWII, cargo ships heading to England were loaded by Italian (Italy was at war with the US) workers at East Coast ports. The would deliberately fail to strap down heavy cargo so when the cargo ship got into heavy North Atlantic storms the cargo would break loose and sink the cargo ship. The Taliban did declare a new destructive spring offensive.
My son does the same work but in the military end of air transportation and was over there to witness it. He also believes it was caused by the cargo movement.