Bridge Collapse

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

One imagines an annoyed tw, on the scene, sternly ranting at all the people trying to help the kids on the bus.

Meanwhile, what tw posted is contrary to what UT "imagines". Notice that very first paragraph about that school bus (which is what set Yesman065 into a meltdown tirade):

Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.

A tw has been seen running past the gaukers to start a solution. But tw, UT, and Yesman065 were not there. A responsible and very first question that tw, UT, and Yesman065 should ask (if concerned for children on every school bus) is "why did this happen?" or "what kids are currently at risk and where?"

Meanwhile, UG again takes cheap shots by quoting a UT post that contradicts what tw posted. Well that is logical and predictable since UG's routinely posts personal attacks on tw (and others); since UG has been caught repeatedly lying by tw. So where are all those fallen dominos in SE Asia?

The post remains accurate, pertinent, still unanswered, and obviously attacks no one:

Demonstrated is a difference between what yesman065 saw and what I saw. That yellow school bus: time to worry about it was long ago when this failure was predictable. Whereas contents of that bus were immediate concern to those on the bridge, instead, the rest of us should be worrying about all school busses.

A bridge fails in America every week.

Why UG is even posting is his need to post personal attacks on one who repeatedly exposes his lies.

Still at risk are other school busses: every school bus that was not on that bridge last week and is still carrying kids over other bridges. These bridge failures are predictable. Another question still not answered: how predictable was this failure. Or was the problem identified? Question far more important than unharmed kids on one school bus.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile, what tw posted is contrary to what UT "imagines". Notice that very first paragraph about that school bus (which is what set Yesman065 into a meltdown tirade): A tw has been seen running past the gaukers to start a solution. But tw, UT, and Yesman065 were not there. A responsible and very first question that tw, UT, and Yesman065 should ask (if concerned for children on every school bus) is "why did this happen?" or "what kids are currently at risk and where?"

Still at risk are other school busses: every school bus that was not on that bridge last week and is still carrying kids over other bridges. These bridge failures are predictable. Another question still not answered: how predictable was this failure. Or was the problem identified? Question far more important than unharmed kids on one school bus.

NO The first question to be asked here was how can I get the children on THAT bus taken care of - period. The second one was every other human in that situation and a VERY DISTANT third, at best was how can we do something to protect the children everywhere else who are on school busses at 9:00 at night. Prevention is important, but in a crisis situation ACTIONS speak a lot louder than questions. Identifying the problem and rectifying or preventing it from happening again are not the logical course in an immediate crisis.

After the immediate situation is resolved is the time to look elsewhere for other POTENTIAL problems - dealing with the one that IS happening is paramount.


Aside - tw, I offered you an opportunity to settle our differences - you chose not to - thats fine. Therefore, please do not use me as an example or reference in any of your posts/rants. Whether you feel it is demeaning or derrogotory is irrelevant - everyone else sees it for what it really is. Thanks, have a nice day.

[tw]

Originally Posted by yesman065

NO The first question to be asked here was how can I get the children on THAT bus taken care of - period. The second one was every other human in that situation and a VERY DISTANT third, at best was how can we do something to protect the children everywhere else who are on school busses at 9:00 at night. Prevention is important, but in a crisis situation ACTIONS speak a lot louder than questions.

So how did you get those children off and taken care of - since you worry about things relevant? Those in MN responded accordingly. Why do you associate yourself with them? We could have sucked our thumbs and accomplished just as much. That school bus was their concern - not yours. To put it at 'concern number one' is an emotional response - not logic.

As posted repeatedly, people who must be concerned for those children were at the bridge. That definitely was not Yesman065 who would somehow save children by worrying?

Whereas you were concerned with details you could do nothing about, instead, I was more concerned with the bigger picture - and things I might be able to accomplish.

But again, so as to be clear because assumptions, speculations and implications now routinely become conclusions. Nothing here is an insult or an attack. Demonstrated is exactly how two people see things completely different - exactly as posted in the very first paragraph. For a bonus, demonstrated is how one has an emotional meltdown over a simple logical comparison - to wildly assume an insult where none existed.

Your offer was simple. You stopped posting attacks and the only time I demonstrated what an insult really looks like then stopped - just as I stated. See how easy it works? If you were making so other offer, well, I don't read nor even consider things implied.

Meanwhile, when you become a perfect example for a point, then I will use you accordingly. Again, that is not an insult even though I can already (all but) hear you assuming so. Whereas we outside of MN needed to see the bigger picture (ie a bridge fails every week), instead, Yesman065 worries about kids he can do nothing for (and calls that responsible action?). But again, demonstrated is a perfect comparison of how two people see the exact same event differently. What followed is how one takes personal insult to what was a simple logical comparison.

So what was the larger point? Intended was to demonstrate how some people see only tactical objectives when the strategic objective is looming and requires attention. Demosntrated is how many cannot see the strategic objective - the bigger picture. We never got there. You took insult where none existed.

For us, that single school bus situation was solved the minute that bridge collapsed. What remained was a problem only for people on that bridge. Apparently others (including UT) never grasp that point. The minute that bridge collapsed, our immediate concern was why and what other school busses are at risk. For example, how many bridges of that design exist in your county? Three exist in MN. Did you know that? Do you know those answers that are very much relevant if concerned for the safety of your peers? Why not? Later we look back to see if others whose job were those kids got done.

Maybe you worry about things that cannot be solved. So tell us. How many bridges in your area have the same non-redundant design? Did you ask? Is anyone? Did you even ask if anyone is asking or instead worry about insults that never existed? Or do we simply wait for another school bus to fall?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile, what tw posted is . . .

Curiously in the third person. Odd. Not the sort of thing I do.

Meanwhile, UG again takes cheap shots by quoting a UT post that contradicts what tw posted. Well that is logical and predictable since UG's routinely posts personal attacks on tw (and others); since UG has been caught repeatedly lying by tw. So where are all those fallen dominos in SE Asia?

North Vietnam, Laos, South Vietnam, and Cambodia, in approximately the order of their fall. You could count Burma in there somewhere if you like. I've told you this more than once, and more than once you ignore these data -- ignoring data is not honesty. The contiguous dominoes that didn't fall were Thailand and Malaysia, to their great good fortune. It wasn't all luck, but it had luckiness to it.

And post #76 is not a contradiction of any sort, but a satire. If you don't want to scroll back that far, see post #99, which quotes 76 in full.

Why UG is even posting is his need to post personal attacks on one who repeatedly exposes his lies.

I do not lie even to you, tw, and the whole Cellar knows it -- you are the one exception. I'm not here to steer you wrong, either -- see previous.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

North Vietnam, Laos, South Vietnam, and Cambodia, in approximately the order of their fall. You could count Burma in there somewhere if you like.

I don't think lumping in a right-wing military Junta with communists would be a good idea.

BTW, the most damning statement I've ever seen of any government is in the CIA fact book on Burma.

the judiciary is not independent of the executive

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I don't think lumping in a right-wing military Junta with communists would be a good idea.

Though I do -- on the grounds that totalitarian regimes are fundamentally more alike than different. Dictatorship is dictatorship, no? That all such governments are much poorer at caring for a population's needs than democracies are hardly needs mentioning, and is among their salient characteristics.

When you've fallen into the heart of darkness, do you care what color it is?