ALPA has said repeatedly in every communication on the subject that I have read that they had nothing to do with this. Somehow you seem to have overlooked that based on the post above. You even jumped to the conclusion earlier in the thread that the latest True Headings said ALPA knew the hacker all along even though it stated very clearly that the pilot involved was NOT "John Doe".

This whole subject is a waste of time in my opinion and only serving as a distraction to the pilot group when we should be getting focused on the upcoming Section 6 and ensuring we maximize our opportunities at the negotiating table.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not convinced anything "illegal" took place and I am certain there was no harm what so ever; none.

They have said that they had nothing to do with it. Multiple times.

Three questions for you Hillbilly:

1. Did you read the letter by Mr. Private Writings--the one that was drafted with the assistance of ALPA National staff attorneys?

2. Do you actually believe what's in the letter?

3. If yes, do you actually believe that a website with an anti-DPA message just accidentally and coincidentally showed up on the DPA website?

Our profession is made up of skeptics. It's part of our DNA. It's what helps keep us safe and alive. Most of us can sniff BS out a mile away. This one stinks a hundred miles out.

3bil,

O.J. said he was innocent. What's your point?

Our union has lawyers who will protect a pilot from the company. Do those lawyers also protect a pilot from federal or civil prosecution?

Of course you're not. You're convinced that nothing took place. All an innocent mistake. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Luckily we have a legal system that will sort this out. And if it turns out that someone is found liable for a tort or guilty of a criminal act, you'll say the court got it wrong.

This blame the offender and attack the victim mentality that you and others share is frightening. Anything to protect your beloved club.

You and I agree on the point that ALPA should not be involved.

I would hope "Doe" pops up with his (her's, its') own Counsel who is an aggressive, energetic, early riser with a penchant for justice. ALPA will not vigorously pursue fees, costs, penalties or a slander claim against the DPA, but by golly someone should vigorously pursue such claims against the plaintiff in this matter. I'd like to see the DPA members jointly and individually held responsible for the action they have supported.

That's been answered multiple times by DALPA. No.

1. Yes

2. I don't think it's false. I do think it read very scripted and struck me as odd with the choice of words, etc. and it did raise my BS flag initially. Then I realized that the only part of any significance (in my opinion) was the part about how the individual admitted to not having the skillset necessary to hack anything and the redirect was discovered when they logged on to their own site. Hacking is the accusation after all.

3. No I don't. I suspect when the person logged onto their personal site and saw they were getting redirects they had some fun with it. Not the best headwork, but also not criminal hacking as far as I can tell.

I agree that the whole thing stinks to high heaven.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk