Guility/Innocent

[Anonymous]

Guilty untill proven innocent

[Anonymous]

Guilty untill proven innocent

[wabash1]

Ironken

The way i understand it is the vote you give only lets your utu reps know what you want. the only vote that counts with them is the reps vote. in other words if you have 100 members in your local and 98 of them vote no but your 2 reps vote yes that is what they submit. to the international. and your vote dont mean anything. you are doing the right thing, join the ble and vote on your future. also get a nomination for "a" cards out for the right for the ble to manage and take over the utu contract that is voted localy and if the ble is voted in the utu is out. no questions nothing they can do about it. I just cant understand how a union who represents garbage men in LA can represent fully conductors on the railroad. ble only represents railroaders . conductors and engineers

[wabash1]

Ironken

The way i understand it is the vote you give only lets your utu reps know what you want. the only vote that counts with them is the reps vote. in other words if you have 100 members in your local and 98 of them vote no but your 2 reps vote yes that is what they submit. to the international. and your vote dont mean anything. you are doing the right thing, join the ble and vote on your future. also get a nomination for "a" cards out for the right for the ble to manage and take over the utu contract that is voted localy and if the ble is voted in the utu is out. no questions nothing they can do about it. I just cant understand how a union who represents garbage men in LA can represent fully conductors on the railroad. ble only represents railroaders . conductors and engineers

[Anonymous]

Guilty. An indictment is indeed not proof of guilt but is an indication that the prosecution has enough of a case to proceed to trial. Apparently, they do and they will.

LC

[Anonymous]

Guilty. An indictment is indeed not proof of guilt but is an indication that the prosecution has enough of a case to proceed to trial. Apparently, they do and they will.

LC

[zardoz]

All these guilty verdicts!! SHAME ON YOU "AMERICANS"

I sure hope that if I ever have to go on trial, you pre-judgers are not on my jury.

And if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

[zardoz]

All these guilty verdicts!! SHAME ON YOU "AMERICANS"

I sure hope that if I ever have to go on trial, you pre-judgers are not on my jury.

And if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

[Anonymous]

Ironken, just remember who started selling out ists members. The good old BLE, just give me a few dollars and we don't need the firemanl, if their are less ground men give me some extra money and I won't squawk.

The biggest problem with the rail unions is they spend more time and money fighting amongst themselves than with the companies. Just what they want. Sit backk and let them cut their own throat.


Tom
Retired 43 year rail
GOD BLESS THE GREAT NORTHERN

[Anonymous]

Ironken, just remember who started selling out ists members. The good old BLE, just give me a few dollars and we don't need the firemanl, if their are less ground men give me some extra money and I won't squawk.

The biggest problem with the rail unions is they spend more time and money fighting amongst themselves than with the companies. Just what they want. Sit backk and let them cut their own throat.


Tom
Retired 43 year rail
GOD BLESS THE GREAT NORTHERN

[Bergie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

PS the advertising on the right-hand side of the screen was about attorneys!

I find that in itself very interesting! [8]

FYI... Our team of ad sales people aren't THAT good. Those Google ads are delivered based on the text on the page. Usually it's worked fine, but lately it's been too good. Having lawyer ads on this page for example isn't exactly how we intended for it to work. I typically pulled in railroad-related ads, but since it saw the legal speak, it delivered those attorney ads. Please forgive us if you're offened. Trust me, we didn't rush out and sell those ads based on the conversation. [V]

Erik

[Bergie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

PS the advertising on the right-hand side of the screen was about attorneys!

I find that in itself very interesting! [8]

FYI... Our team of ad sales people aren't THAT good. Those Google ads are delivered based on the text on the page. Usually it's worked fine, but lately it's been too good. Having lawyer ads on this page for example isn't exactly how we intended for it to work. I typically pulled in railroad-related ads, but since it saw the legal speak, it delivered those attorney ads. Please forgive us if you're offened. Trust me, we didn't rush out and sell those ads based on the conversation. [V]

Erik

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wabash1

Ironken
I just cant understand how a union who represents garbage men in LA can represent fully conductors on the railroad. ble only represents railroaders . conductors and engineers

Problem is, there just aren't enough jobs out there any more to give RR unions the sway they once had. UTU sucks, and unfortunately, the alternatives are none too great either. BLE and BMWE are about to become little more than footnotes to those wonderful Teamsters. Truck drivers who compete with the RRs for business don't seem to have the interests of us RRers at heart. I find it rather frightening, both operating unions seem to be taking different, but equally poor paths for the employee.

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wabash1

Ironken
I just cant understand how a union who represents garbage men in LA can represent fully conductors on the railroad. ble only represents railroaders . conductors and engineers

Problem is, there just aren't enough jobs out there any more to give RR unions the sway they once had. UTU sucks, and unfortunately, the alternatives are none too great either. BLE and BMWE are about to become little more than footnotes to those wonderful Teamsters. Truck drivers who compete with the RRs for business don't seem to have the interests of us RRers at heart. I find it rather frightening, both operating unions seem to be taking different, but equally poor paths for the employee.

LC

[cabforward]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz1

..if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

zardoz,

i wish i knew what you are talking about..

nothing's happened that i can see, unless maybe......

this is the court of public opinion.. we are all jurors.. we promise only to say what we think, to consider the evidence we believe is important, and to deliberate as long as we can focus our attention on the topic at hand or until somebody drags us away to go shoping or change the oil in the car..

the only requirement is the ability to use a keyboard..

you must be thinking of the part of the constitution that talks about a trial by a jury of your peers.. this isn't it.. noone here owes anybody anything, except the agreement to behave on this forum as the mgmt. directs..

if you want a fair trail, then sue someone and thake them to court..

[cabforward]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz1

..if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

zardoz,

i wish i knew what you are talking about..

nothing's happened that i can see, unless maybe......

this is the court of public opinion.. we are all jurors.. we promise only to say what we think, to consider the evidence we believe is important, and to deliberate as long as we can focus our attention on the topic at hand or until somebody drags us away to go shoping or change the oil in the car..

the only requirement is the ability to use a keyboard..

you must be thinking of the part of the constitution that talks about a trial by a jury of your peers.. this isn't it.. noone here owes anybody anything, except the agreement to behave on this forum as the mgmt. directs..

if you want a fair trail, then sue someone and thake them to court..

[edblysard]

There you go,
Cabforward hit the nail right on the head!.
As he pointed out, there has yet to be a trial by jury, in a court room.
But, the instant the press release hit from the DOJ, the trial by public opinion started.
And based on the results, these guys better pack toothbrushes!

What I wanted to point out was that the image we, the general public received, was one of guilt, based only on the media coverage, not data or transcripts from the actual trial or any of the leaks that are sure to come.

Granted, this isnt the most objective group of people, and most of the railroaders, BLE or UTU members, came to the plate with a guilty bias.

I had hoped one of the links would have shown a photo of Boyd.
Talk about looking like a mafia hood!
Cheap and shiney polyester suits, pudgey, with greasey black hair, and a look on his face right out of the godfather.

My point was going to be that the image of guilt, like the image of sucess Arnold projects, isnt based on facts, but on what is perceived to be.

Has Arnold even said a thing about how he is going to fix California's problems?
No, not really, but if the rest of America could vote in the election tomorrow, Arnnie would have a nice new office, right quick.

Are Boyd and Little guility?
We dont really know.
But the majority of us,(note I used the word majority, not all) follow the logic of,
if they were indicted, they must have done something, or they wouldnt have been charged.
And based on the limited information released in the press,
well, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.

Could any of us truly be objective?
Any post 85 UTU member most likley cant, like myself, we all have felt cheated by our union, or the lack of having a real union, and would gladly watch Boyd and Little spend the rest of their days in jail, because we were the folks getting hustled.

Those outside the union crafts would also get the impression of guilt, if only because the media has not bothered to point out any positive thing Boyd has done for the membership.
But then again, that would be mighty slim pickings!

Most of us put the cart before the horse, and had made up our minds before we got all the evidence, if for no other reason, its a very subjective issue.

Only a few of us fell back on the legal objectivity of our justice system, and the rights provided by the constitution, that being, one is innocent untill convicted in a court of law.
But, regardless of that fact, they have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion, and Boyd, even if found innocent, will alway be considered a crook.

The image projected is what we looked at, not the facts behind the issue!

Now, for whats its worth, I did a little nosing around.
If your local TV station dosnt, the national networks might have something to show you.

Oh, and for the record, my vote is guility.
Stay Frosty,
Ed

[edblysard]

There you go,
Cabforward hit the nail right on the head!.
As he pointed out, there has yet to be a trial by jury, in a court room.
But, the instant the press release hit from the DOJ, the trial by public opinion started.
And based on the results, these guys better pack toothbrushes!

What I wanted to point out was that the image we, the general public received, was one of guilt, based only on the media coverage, not data or transcripts from the actual trial or any of the leaks that are sure to come.

Granted, this isnt the most objective group of people, and most of the railroaders, BLE or UTU members, came to the plate with a guilty bias.

I had hoped one of the links would have shown a photo of Boyd.
Talk about looking like a mafia hood!
Cheap and shiney polyester suits, pudgey, with greasey black hair, and a look on his face right out of the godfather.

My point was going to be that the image of guilt, like the image of sucess Arnold projects, isnt based on facts, but on what is perceived to be.

Has Arnold even said a thing about how he is going to fix California's problems?
No, not really, but if the rest of America could vote in the election tomorrow, Arnnie would have a nice new office, right quick.

Are Boyd and Little guility?
We dont really know.
But the majority of us,(note I used the word majority, not all) follow the logic of,
if they were indicted, they must have done something, or they wouldnt have been charged.
And based on the limited information released in the press,
well, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.

Could any of us truly be objective?
Any post 85 UTU member most likley cant, like myself, we all have felt cheated by our union, or the lack of having a real union, and would gladly watch Boyd and Little spend the rest of their days in jail, because we were the folks getting hustled.

Those outside the union crafts would also get the impression of guilt, if only because the media has not bothered to point out any positive thing Boyd has done for the membership.
But then again, that would be mighty slim pickings!

Most of us put the cart before the horse, and had made up our minds before we got all the evidence, if for no other reason, its a very subjective issue.

Only a few of us fell back on the legal objectivity of our justice system, and the rights provided by the constitution, that being, one is innocent untill convicted in a court of law.
But, regardless of that fact, they have already been found guilty in the court of public opinion, and Boyd, even if found innocent, will alway be considered a crook.

The image projected is what we looked at, not the facts behind the issue!

Now, for whats its worth, I did a little nosing around.
If your local TV station dosnt, the national networks might have something to show you.

Oh, and for the record, my vote is guility.
Stay Frosty,
Ed

[cabforward]

abstract concepts are one of my favorite things.. a few thoughts about sundry topics..

in this age of the internet, 12-hour news cycles, digital-whatever and that other garbage we call civilization, one concept is now paramount: the perception is the reality.. it isn't what's true, it's what you can persuade the audience to believe is true..

the hitch about legal justice is, truth and equity have nothing to do with obtaining a decision.. the thing that gets a "win" is who puts on a better case.. the better evidence, witnesses, exhibits, lawyers, investigators, researchers, etc.. it also includes the new science on the block, jury research.. you pay thousands to people who will tell you what people you want on the jury to get you the verdict you want..

it isn't about right/wrong, fair/unfair, or david /goliath.. it's a ball game.. who is better repared to face their opponent, who has done the research to counter the other side's research, about the research they did on you..

who is better prepared to see the weaknesses in the other side's case, and exploit them.. who is better prepared to perceive that the other side is on its back and will make a deal..

last but not least, who will see technical faults in the opposition's arguments that can turn the case upside-down..

a movie with james garner ("maverick") points this out absolutely..

he was a high-powered lawyer with a big case to win.. part of his argument was not going well.. he sent an assistant to the other side with evidence the assistant was ready to sell.. the assistant transacted the sale with an opposing lawyer and recorded it all on tape..

garner blew everything wide-open.. the judge declared a mistrial, the lawyer and most of the team were disgraced.. and garner sat back and waited for someone from the opposition to approach and offer to make a deal on garner's terms.. this is justice? no, it's how the game is played..

as lt. columbo said, one more thing.. if anyone in a trial has a problem with the local jury pool, they can file for a change of venue.. that's been happening a lot lateley, with the 'big' cases..

that doesn't mean empaneling 12 people who dont know what the hell's going on, it means empaneling 12 people who aren't as close to the action and aren't as likely to be prejudicial for one side or another..

it's not-for-nothing that i watch 'law & order' every chance i get..

[cabforward]

abstract concepts are one of my favorite things.. a few thoughts about sundry topics..

in this age of the internet, 12-hour news cycles, digital-whatever and that other garbage we call civilization, one concept is now paramount: the perception is the reality.. it isn't what's true, it's what you can persuade the audience to believe is true..

the hitch about legal justice is, truth and equity have nothing to do with obtaining a decision.. the thing that gets a "win" is who puts on a better case.. the better evidence, witnesses, exhibits, lawyers, investigators, researchers, etc.. it also includes the new science on the block, jury research.. you pay thousands to people who will tell you what people you want on the jury to get you the verdict you want..

it isn't about right/wrong, fair/unfair, or david /goliath.. it's a ball game.. who is better repared to face their opponent, who has done the research to counter the other side's research, about the research they did on you..

who is better prepared to see the weaknesses in the other side's case, and exploit them.. who is better prepared to perceive that the other side is on its back and will make a deal..

last but not least, who will see technical faults in the opposition's arguments that can turn the case upside-down..

a movie with james garner ("maverick") points this out absolutely..

he was a high-powered lawyer with a big case to win.. part of his argument was not going well.. he sent an assistant to the other side with evidence the assistant was ready to sell.. the assistant transacted the sale with an opposing lawyer and recorded it all on tape..

garner blew everything wide-open.. the judge declared a mistrial, the lawyer and most of the team were disgraced.. and garner sat back and waited for someone from the opposition to approach and offer to make a deal on garner's terms.. this is justice? no, it's how the game is played..

as lt. columbo said, one more thing.. if anyone in a trial has a problem with the local jury pool, they can file for a change of venue.. that's been happening a lot lateley, with the 'big' cases..

that doesn't mean empaneling 12 people who dont know what the hell's going on, it means empaneling 12 people who aren't as close to the action and aren't as likely to be prejudicial for one side or another..

it's not-for-nothing that i watch 'law & order' every chance i get..

[Anonymous]

The way it appears to me is I am not a juror and am not likely to be. No railroader is going to be on that jury unless the lawyers are stupid. I have seen through experience how Boyd operates and what is charged with falls into his modus operandi. I have the right to my opinion that he is guilty.

[Anonymous]

The way it appears to me is I am not a juror and am not likely to be. No railroader is going to be on that jury unless the lawyers are stupid. I have seen through experience how Boyd operates and what is charged with falls into his modus operandi. I have the right to my opinion that he is guilty.

[Anonymous]

Boyd only cares about his plush Cleveland office. Us rails just pay the tab. The only bad thing about this in fighting between the Unions is the old "Divide and Conquer," the carrier loves this........I hear tell that they don't love the idea of the BLE and IBT merging which makes me love the idea even more!
Ken

[Anonymous]

Boyd only cares about his plush Cleveland office. Us rails just pay the tab. The only bad thing about this in fighting between the Unions is the old "Divide and Conquer," the carrier loves this........I hear tell that they don't love the idea of the BLE and IBT merging which makes me love the idea even more!
Ken

[Anonymous]

I agree with Zarzod1 to an extent.

Sorry everyone, i don't know enough facts to criminaly put these people behind bars. I'd ahve to be present to HEAR the testmony from both sides.. it's not that i'm hired by big companys or that crap... I believe in Equal rights.
as i was brought up to. I'm sure in ways they are guilty, and i'm sure in ways they are innocent.. 1 person knows.. GOD, and unless im at the trail.. i can never be an accurate judge.

and, i agree with cabforward

QUOTE: posted by cabforward
he hitch about legal justice is, truth and equity have nothing to do with obtaining a decision.. the thing that gets a "win" is who puts on a better case.. the better evidence, witnesses, exhibits, lawyers, investigators, researchers, etc.. it also includes the new science on the block, jury research.. you pay thousands to people who will tell you what people you want on the jury to get you the verdict you want..

However, mr. Cabforward, in all honesty.. if you were a juror or a judge and i was on the stand.. would you, as we speak now.. give me a fair trial?

[Anonymous]

I agree with Zarzod1 to an extent.

Sorry everyone, i don't know enough facts to criminaly put these people behind bars. I'd ahve to be present to HEAR the testmony from both sides.. it's not that i'm hired by big companys or that crap... I believe in Equal rights.
as i was brought up to. I'm sure in ways they are guilty, and i'm sure in ways they are innocent.. 1 person knows.. GOD, and unless im at the trail.. i can never be an accurate judge.

and, i agree with cabforward

QUOTE: posted by cabforward
he hitch about legal justice is, truth and equity have nothing to do with obtaining a decision.. the thing that gets a "win" is who puts on a better case.. the better evidence, witnesses, exhibits, lawyers, investigators, researchers, etc.. it also includes the new science on the block, jury research.. you pay thousands to people who will tell you what people you want on the jury to get you the verdict you want..

However, mr. Cabforward, in all honesty.. if you were a juror or a judge and i was on the stand.. would you, as we speak now.. give me a fair trial?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz1

All these guilty verdicts!! SHAME ON YOU "AMERICANS"

I sure hope that if I ever have to go on trial, you pre-judgers are not on my jury.

And if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

Last time I checked the Bill of Rights didn't apply to straw polls on magazine websites. Besides, I am exercising my Constitutional Right to free speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to our Constitution...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz1

All these guilty verdicts!! SHAME ON YOU "AMERICANS"

I sure hope that if I ever have to go on trial, you pre-judgers are not on my jury.

And if you pre-judgers ever have to go on trial, I hope your jury is filled with types just like you, for you will deserve it.

What the hell ever happened to our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, or did you sleep through those classes also?

Last time I checked the Bill of Rights didn't apply to straw polls on magazine websites. Besides, I am exercising my Constitutional Right to free speech under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to our Constitution...

LC

[zardoz]

Thanks, Kevin.

And I apologize for my earlier tirade. I did not fully understand (meaning I did not read it carefully enough) Ed's original post asking for a straw poll based of evidence presented so far (tv, radio, presss, etc.). You all were completely within the parameters of Ed's question.

So again, I apologize for my harsh statements earlier.



p.s. Guilty!

[zardoz]

Thanks, Kevin.

And I apologize for my earlier tirade. I did not fully understand (meaning I did not read it carefully enough) Ed's original post asking for a straw poll based of evidence presented so far (tv, radio, presss, etc.). You all were completely within the parameters of Ed's question.

So again, I apologize for my harsh statements earlier.



p.s. Guilty!