Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Connell initially contacted air traffic control (ATC) at the Akron-Canton Airport to ask whether there were any reports of icing and was told there were none. His approach was then uneventful until ATC noted that he was left of his course and asked if he would like to be resequenced. Connell replied "correcting." ATC then advised him again that he was "well left of the localizer" and Connell responded that he would "like to correct."
The report continued, "N9299N [Connell's plane] was about 2 ½ miles from the airport when it then transmitted if it could execute a 360-degree turn. ATC then instructed N9299N to climb and maintain 3,000 feet and queried N9299N’s present heading. N9299N transmitted, 'heading due north and climbing.' N9299N then declared an emergency."
NTSB spokesperson Bridget Serchak told RAW STORY on Monday that she had spoken with Senior Air Safety Investigator Mitchell Gallo, the NTSB investigator on the case, and could confirm that "the pilot asked for assistance landing."
When reached by RAW STORY on Tuesday, Gallo, who had reviewed a tape of the full radio exchange, explained that the Connell had not elaborated when declaring the emergency. "He didn't describe the nature of it," Gallo stated, "but then following that ... I don't remember what the actual verbiage was ... you'd have to again refer to the actual report."
The people that claim he was shot down told me they saw a 'flare' shot up at his plane. This was before they (or I) new who he was. He went down in a spread out rural allotment close to the airport. Lot's of farm land around it. When I got there it was already blocked off. From what I can tell my neighbors aren't lying (why would they?) but it is true his approach to the landing strip was a bit off course.
Preferably at the national level (ie a national race) rather than state or local level. The Minnesota thing is a start. (<-- that one is serious.)sheeeeshIt depends on whether the lawsuit makes it to trial, and what the ruling is.
If the court finds that republicans stole 2004 through machine rigging, then the republicans are not likely to steal 2012 or 2016. If the court finds no wrongdoing, then the republicans are free to steal the next election or two.
The democrats are free to continue stealing elections until someone take them to court over it. Preferably at the national level (ie a national race) rather than state or local level. The Minnesota thing is a start.
ah, i seeI was working with xsited's theory that every election is stolen.
