http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/07/...ain700235.shtmlhttp://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/otn/shocked/ylamazed.gif

I saw this story in the headlines and went out of my way to avoid it. The link obviously doesn't give a hint of what the story discusses. So....****WARNING****The news story within the link deals with an incident of a sensitive nature, and some may be bothered by the content.-John

Very grim, sad story. Assuming it was indeed a stowaway situation, ignorance is a helluva thing.regards,MarkXPHomeSP2/FS9.1/3.2HT/1GIG/X700pro256

Im sorry for posting that link :(I meant to express shock but "Yikes" wasnt the best choice of vocab.Also John is right...should have bunged on a warning for fellow avsimmers & expanded on the title as well.Apologies..lesson learned.

not to worryDan

I don't get where the problem is. It's news, doesn't show any graphic content... I don't think you needed to post any warning, Nevin... You're fine. This isn't any more disturbing than hearing a plane crashed, so if anyone explains to me the "disturbing" nature of it, I'll appreciate it. Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

Daniel-Just because there are no pictures doesn't mean the warning is automatically unjustified. The descriptive content of the text leads to what some might consider graphic imagery. Those that find such imagery "disturbing" probably appreciate the warning.Hope this explains it to you.Cheers.

Descriptive content? The words "body part" and "leg" are considered disturbing? I am sorry, but that seems to me like going out of your way to be PC. If someone is disturbed by non-descriptive text (they don't describe the body parts, the story is remarkably short precisely because it is not descriptive) such as this, they need help. Besides, the content isn't explicit, brutal, or suggestive. It's merely factual.Thanks for attempting to explain, but I still fail to see the urgency that requires such a reaction. I don't see warnings being put every time a plane crash is reported, although those could be found disturbing. I just think it's being a bit unfair to the poster to do that and make him feel like he's posting pornography on the forums, when the standard isn't held in a uniform manner.Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

I agree Daniel.There are many, many more horrific events that take place daily in the world and to try and shelter someone from a news story of this type is being overly PC IMO, the "ignorance is bliss" idea comes to mind. I'd be more concerned with the people and what they found in their backyard than anyone reading the story.Best case scenario, it'll teach kids NOT to stowaway in aircraft.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International