Polish President, First Lady, 94 Othe...

Polish President, First Lady, 94 Others Perish in Plane Crash

There are 56 comments on the Towleroad story from Apr 10, 2010, titled Polish President, First Lady, 94 Others Perish in Plane Crash. In it, Towleroad reports that:

A plane carrying Polish President Lech Kaczynski , the first lady, and dozens of top government and military officials crashed in a bleak forest outside Smolensk, Russia in heavy fog as it attempted a landing.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Towleroad.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
CHAS

Breckenridge, CO

#1 Apr 10, 2010
This is gay news?

“Married as I can be!”

Since: Jun 07

Las Vegas

#2 Apr 10, 2010
Only in that Poland's president was rabidly anti-gay. That's about it. I kinda think this doesn't belong here either. I mean, do we post obits for all the homophobes out there?
Lukashenko is Dr Phil

Tampere, Finland

#3 Apr 10, 2010
The man was probaly going to spent his retirement days with his grandchildren. Very sad.

Never got to spent his retirement days. Hope he is in better place now. RIP

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#4 Apr 10, 2010
Am I supposed to ... care? As in, be sad? I mean, I can't account for every one of the 94, but the president himself doesn't look good. Here, lemme poke my eyes and pretend to be crying over the death of someone the world is better off without.

This has all gotten quite viciously nasty and I have no problem saying I don't give a shit that he died in a ball of fire. Please, don't pretend I have to honor the dead when they did not honor the living who were completely innocent. You won't like my response, I promise you.

Perhaps the phelpses can include this little factoid in their *rambling monologue* about god's wrath, since a virulently anti-gay person just died in a ball of fire. By their logic, they don't want to know what god has in store for *them*. It may just be awesome.

Thanks for reading.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#5 Apr 10, 2010
Considering all those who were on that plane, I can't get over the feeling that a house cleaning has occurred.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#6 Apr 10, 2010
Jesus is punishing homophobes. If they can blame gays for natural disasters, we can blame them for dying in plane crashes!

Since: Aug 08

Brooklyn, NY

#7 Apr 10, 2010
rdg1234 wrote:
Am I supposed to ... care? As in, be sad? I mean, I can't account for every one of the 94, but the president himself doesn't look good. Here, lemme poke my eyes and pretend to be crying over the death of someone the world is better off without.
This has all gotten quite viciously nasty and I have no problem saying I don't give a shit that he died in a ball of fire. Please, don't pretend I have to honor the dead when they did not honor the living who were completely innocent. You won't like my response, I promise you.
Perhaps the phelpses can include this little factoid in their *rambling monologue* about god's wrath, since a virulently anti-gay person just died in a ball of fire. By their logic, they don't want to know what god has in store for *them*. It may just be awesome.
Thanks for reading.
the entire ruling elite, president, wife, head of church, army, air force, other govt departments were all on their way to russia for a 70 year anniversay of the Katyn massacare, an event that took the lives of many and for a long time ruined polish/russian relations. on board was a 91 year old Katyn veteran who was one of the few who survived the massacare, and the decades of secrecy that followed it, and ironically dies in the crash on his way to finally put an end to that terrible chapter and improve relations with russia. That is just SAD. what a tragedy. and you post garbage like this? this stuff MATTERS and affects many people. your sexual orientation does NOT matter and nobody cares about it but you. every gay person i know expessed their condolences to the victim's families and the people of poland, while you are (and another one 2 posts below you) are here posting dumb garbage about jesus punishing people who are anti-gay. you are anti many things, doesnt mean you and your family should die in a ball of fire now does it?

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#8 Apr 11, 2010
Pravda wrote:
<quoted text>
the entire ruling elite, president, wife, head of church, army, air force, other govt departments were all on their way to russia for a 70 year anniversay of the Katyn massacare, an event that took the lives of many and for a long time ruined polish/russian relations. on board was a 91 year old Katyn veteran who was one of the few who survived the massacare, and the decades of secrecy that followed it, and ironically dies in the crash on his way to finally put an end to that terrible chapter and improve relations with russia. That is just SAD. what a tragedy. and you post garbage like this? this stuff MATTERS and affects many people. your sexual orientation does NOT matter and nobody cares about it but you. every gay person i know expessed their condolences to the victim's families and the people of poland, while you are (and another one 2 posts below you) are here posting dumb garbage about jesus punishing people who are anti-gay. you are anti many things, doesnt mean you and your family should die in a ball of fire now does it?
I wrote a much longer reply in which I ripped you to shreds for (a) presuming to know *NUMEROUS SO-CALLED FACTS* about *COMPLETE STRANGERS* on this board whom you have never seen, heard or met; and for (b) failing *blatantly* to have read and followed *exactly what was said in my original post*, directly above, so that you further insulted me by impugning me with motives that are either *not present in that post*, or that *you have chosen to second-guess*.

Then I realized that the greatest and truest response I could make to your post here is to state emphatically that I reiterate what I said in my original post, and that I cannot overemphasize how spectacularly I don't give a goddamn shit what you think of it.

Am I clear?

Next time, read posts carefully and don't presume things you couldn't possibly know *but have obviously guessed in order to make petty, spineless excuses* for your own bad behavior.

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#9 Apr 11, 2010
Now, if you're smart, you'll *wake up* and realize that perhaps some people have really, really f***ing had it with the way this country is treating some of its citizens ... so much so that they are virtually ignoring *all standards of civility or politesse* in expressing that outrage.

That should be a huge wake-up call to you and others like you that it might be about time to *do all we can* to treat our citizens equally. Because I am not playing that "make nice" game anymore.

Not anymore. I've had it.

I've completely, utterly had it, and so have many other people.

Thanks for reading.

Since: Aug 08

Brooklyn, NY

#10 Apr 11, 2010
rdg1234 wrote:
<quoted text>
I wrote a much longer reply in which I ripped you to shreds for (a) presuming to know *NUMEROUS SO-CALLED FACTS* about *COMPLETE STRANGERS* on this board whom you have never seen, heard or met; and for (b) failing *blatantly* to have read and followed *exactly what was said in my original post*, directly above, so that you further insulted me by impugning me with motives that are either *not present in that post*, or that *you have chosen to second-guess*.
Then I realized that the greatest and truest response I could make to your post here is to state emphatically that I reiterate what I said in my original post, and that I cannot overemphasize how spectacularly I don't give a goddamn shit what you think of it.
Am I clear?
Next time, read posts carefully and don't presume things you couldn't possibly know *but have obviously guessed in order to make petty, spineless excuses* for your own bad behavior.
um... ok... re-read your post... re-red the other dude's post... um.. nope... my reply still applies.... if you dont care, dont post. hows that? clear? and if you post, it means you care to. so you either express yor condolences, or avoid the topic.

Since: Aug 08

Brooklyn, NY

#11 Apr 11, 2010
rdg1234 wrote:
Now, if you're smart, you'll *wake up* and realize that perhaps some people have really, really f***ing had it with the way this country is treating some of its citizens ... so much so that they are virtually ignoring *all standards of civility or politesse* in expressing that outrage.
That should be a huge wake-up call to you and others like you that it might be about time to *do all we can* to treat our citizens equally. Because I am not playing that "make nice" game anymore.
Not anymore. I've had it.
I've completely, utterly had it, and so have many other people.
Thanks for reading.
if you have insecurity issues go see a shrink. this is not the place for you. being that you are so smart, you should realize that, and realize that other smart people will realize it. 97 people die and you have now had it with gay rights? evreyone should now burn in a ball of fire?

Since: Aug 08

Brooklyn, NY

#12 Apr 11, 2010
what if there were gays on that plane?

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Apr 11, 2010
Pravda wrote:
<quoted text>
um... ok... re-read your post... re-red the other dude's post... um.. nope... my reply still applies....
Meaning that you are either willfully stupid, or have repeatedly ignored the specificities of my post. My post was *extremely* clear about singling out this one individual.

Not that I am interested in defending that. My point is that you are coming off, now, as very willfully stupid or willfully mendacious.
Pravda wrote:
if you dont care, dont post. hows that? clear? and if you post, it means you care to. so you either express yor condolences, or avoid the topic.
No, this is not how it works. This is not your childish little class of "Psychology 101," in which we resort to the second-grade illogic that "posting means you care!" You'd have no way of knowing that, as you have no way of knowing anything personal about anyone in this thread -- despite your stupid, frankly ignorant response that your "reply still applies!"

So "sorry" I won't go along with your childish rhetoric that one's posting means "one must have cared." There is the third alternative which most people miss, for (perhaps) chillingly obvious reasons: that a response means the reply *rejects* your weltanschauung, and tells you to go cry about it somewhere else.

I am sometimes shocked at internet arguments in ways which only augment my withering contempt. Do I *really* need to say that you have no authority to, and will not, instruct me *how to react* to any given event in this world?

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#14 Apr 11, 2010
This is the post which prompted me to reply at all, since you resort to tactics I deem "typical."
Pravda wrote:
<quoted text>
if you have insecurity issues go see a shrink.
No matter how hard you strive and weep and strain, you cannot know anything about complete strangers. Here, you imply that any psychiatrist worth their salt would *diagnose a virtual stranger online*.

Moreover, you have fallen into the (obliquely understandable) trap of getting nasty. That only prompts me to tell you to go suck your snot and your tears down elsewhere, thanks.

You're really not getting this, or else you are a troll. I was very, very specific about the president, and I stand by that with a ferocity you are apparently stupid enough to ignore. I have my convictions for my reasons in a world in which I have a right to my life, and I'm not f***ing interested in what you think of it.

That should be clear if anything is. I exercise the same rights as you, and as you're now learning, I'm apparently *NOT BACKING DOWN* in the face of whatever emotion it is you are attempting to convey. There are reasons for this which won't be going away because you have decided to throw a tantrum in a thread.
Pravda wrote:
this is not the place for you. being that you are so smart, you should realize that, and realize that other smart people will realize it.
Actually, no. Actually, this really has nothing to do with anything, but perhaps *your emotion prevents you from seeing that*. You are being quite insistent that I should not be replying as I please because you would have your own will *forced upon me* in a way I am obviously and vehemently rejecting.

Get a goddamn backbone and accept it, once and for all.
Pravda wrote:
97 people die and you have now had it with gay rights? evreyone should now burn in a ball of fire?
This is the portion of the post which so made my jaw drop that, rather than bypassing your posts, I decided to reply and make myself *glaringly* clear. Here, for the first time, you have become egregiously manipulative.

I have *no doubt* for *one millisecond* that you said this in a deliberate bid to be *entirely* manipulative with your viewpoint. I have *no doubt* that you are well aware, if you not worthlessly stupid, that people's opinions derive from numerous sources; that those opinions cannot necessarily be knowable to others; that to reduce them to cause and effect in such a manipulative manner as this is a *direct attempt* to "shame" another person into dropping a dearly and vehemently held viewpoint; that knowing this as you do, you have *deliberately* attempted to make the response appear somehow -- these are guesses, you understand, on my part -- either "inappropriate" or "unthought" or "immature" in a way vis-a-vis which your opposition is based upon the presumption that *a response which is categorizable as emotional is dismissible, as emotion is the enemy of logic*.

Obviously I didn't fall for it, since I just ripped the curtain away from your BS and explained it fully.

You make presumptions, I make presumptions.

I'm not sure if you're used to "cowing" others into doing as you would "decree" they should be doing, but since it's not working here, one can only imagine that you'll be intelligent to see *IT'S NOT* going to work, period.

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#15 Apr 11, 2010
Pravda wrote:
what if there were gays on that plane?
This proves you didn't read my original post. You claimed you read it twice. Shall I now presume you are stupid? I want to know.

I want to know very pointedly, and I demand an answer. I demand it because here, your question shows that *you have interpreted my post as you saw fit to make your point*.

If you continue to harangue me about this and I must clarify that point, I am highly certain I will not be doing it with much kindness or patience for your obviously glaring ignorance.

Ya know what?

Know what?

I don't think you *want* to read that post and comprehend it. I am beginning to believe that it is *YOU* who had a strongly *EMOTIONAL REACTION* to my post, and who have now *CATEGORIZED AND COMPARTMENTALIZED* it such that you are hell-bent upon seeing it in a certain specific light.

The question above -- the question you ask -- directly above -- is the dead giveaway I was finally looking for. Blinded by your own emotion, you *have read my original post incorrectly TWICE OR MORE*, not that I f***ing care about the content vis-a-vis *YOUR* opinion, but only that I care that you would have the unmitigated, jaw-dropping gall to harass a *STRANGER* because you suck shit at reading comprehension.

I have no problem trumpeting the error as yours, but I wasn't 100% sure until I saw this.

The end.

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#16 Apr 11, 2010
Oh, my god.

Oh dear god.

I just reread the post.

Here's me, right? I'm thinking that perhaps you *might have arguably missed it* because I made only one reference in the second or third sentence to the declaration in my original post which proves my point.

I'm knowing that that instance came close to the beginning of the post, and that I might not have clarified sufficiently in my withering contempt for this man.

No.

Not at all.

Your reading comprehension *sucks diarrhea through a straw*, sir/ma'am. My *ENTIRE POST* clarifies my point. The *WHOLE THING* was written with this point directly in mind,*EXACTLY* the point with which you have taken issue because you decided that your pride would get in the way of making an intelligent point.

Know what?

If there is any such thing as karma, I hope it gives you a good swift one to the *face* for having had the nerve to either be stupid or to have *deliberately* trolled this thread like this. And to think I almost fell for this, you sack of crap.

WOW.

Since: Apr 07

Philadelphia, PA

#17 Apr 11, 2010
Interestingly, this thread just happened to come up in a conversation of mine with an acquaintance. I almost never, ever, ever talk about these things, and it turns out that I mentioned it only in passing, and that he "teased it out" of me. He ended up looking at the thread and suggested that I clarify.

I was forcefully and vehemently against this, but he persisted, and he knows how to convince me, so while I remain forcefully and vehemently against this, I will do so. It is certainly an extremely rare event for me.

Pravda,

Read my first post in this thread again.

Read it carefully.

Then read it a second time.

Then a third.

Then a fourth.

And tell me I don't have to sit here and watch my own jaw hit the floor as you *notice something about it* which I am really goddamn convinced you're *LYING* about.

Note that I mention *NO ONE* but the president. I specifically, deliberately and pointedly eschewed involving *any other person aboard that plane* in my sentiments. I targeted the president *very specifically*, and reference *him and him alone* throughout the post.

We can lock this thread at 100,000 posts and I will never, ever back down on that sentiment. The man was virulently anti-gay. Don't introduce me to a Klansperson while they're committing a lynching and then tell me to like them. I wouldn't care if they were hit by a truck and bled to death.

I had *no way of knowing* what anyone else on that plane had to do with any such issues, and my original post *clarifies that* in spades. It is extremely, even painfully clear in its wording.

I do not expect you for a moment to admit that you have been *sickening* in your conduct in this thread. Your posts evidence that you *repeatedly* presumed, or *lied about* presuming, that I was speaking about everyone on that plane.

I have no judgment of them. About the president, I have only withering contempt and zero respect.

That's not going to change.

I never lumped any of the others in with him, though.

Now, if you want to argue about that president, I'll be happy to forcefully clarify again, and again, and again, that it is none of your goddamn business and that *zero* you do will change my stance.

Am I clear?

Of course I am.

Thanks for reading.

“STFU”

Since: May 07

Atlanta, GA

#19 Apr 11, 2010
Sad that there may have been innocent people on board that plane, but I sure as hell won't mourn the loss of a complete a**hole like Kaczynski. I'd spit on his grave and smile. Now if only his brother could join him.
The Virgin Queen

Miami, FL

#20 Apr 11, 2010
fuzi wrote:
Sad that there may have been innocent people on board that plane, but I sure as hell won't mourn the loss of a complete a**hole like Kaczynski. I'd spit on his grave and smile. Now if only his brother could join him.
Hi Fuzzy Wuzzy. So nice to see you're in your usual good mood.
The Virgin Queen

Miami, FL

#21 Apr 11, 2010
Pravda wrote:
<quoted text>
the entire ruling elite, president, wife, head of church, army, air force, other govt departments were all on their way to russia for a 70 year anniversay of the Katyn massacare, an event that took the lives of many and for a long time ruined polish/russian relations. on board was a 91 year old Katyn veteran who was one of the few who survived the massacare, and the decades of secrecy that followed it, and ironically dies in the crash on his way to finally put an end to that terrible chapter and improve relations with russia. That is just SAD. what a tragedy. and you post garbage like this? this stuff MATTERS and affects many people. your sexual orientation does NOT matter and nobody cares about it but you. every gay person i know expessed their condolences to the victim's families and the people of poland, while you are (and another one 2 posts below you) are here posting dumb garbage about jesus punishing people who are anti-gay. you are anti many things, doesnt mean you and your family should die in a ball of fire now does it?
I agree with you. These guys are no better than people like Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh in their heartless comments about a tragedy.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Przemysl, Poland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Platige Image Releases Teaser For New Feature '... Nov 8 PolakPotrafi 1
News Polish church celebrates Resurrection (Mar '16) Mar '16 tworowwampum 1
News Polish opposition names hawkish lawmaker as def... (Oct '15) Oct '15 bluestreak returns 2
News Poles ambiguous over EU's, Francis' call on ref... (Sep '15) Sep '15 bluestreak returns 24
News Poland's Catholics ambiguous over Francis' call... (Sep '15) Sep '15 bluestreak returns 6
News The Latest: Polish authorities ban anti-migrant... (Sep '15) Sep '15 bluestreak returns 12
News Polish President concedes election to challenge... (May '15) May '15 William Dale Math... 1
More from around the web