-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

DON'T BELIEVE ME, LOOK IT UP.

Rest assured, I do not believe you, in part because I've already looked it up.

You and Brad have some strong common traits, so don't be surprised if I
abruptly discontinue the conversation. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be
much intelligent discussion of aviation on this group at the moment, so I have
a bit of extra time.

What, that we throw documentation supporting our claims
directly at you, yet you don't refute them? I haven't seen a single
post of yours that argues against mine since I started in this thread.
You have asked for regulations to be cited, and I showed you them (and
yes, you can bet your life that the AIM will be treated as regulation,
even though it is a guideline for pilots). Like I told you many times
over, as far as ATC is concerned, the 7110.65T *IS* the be all/end all
for controllers.

I'm still waiting for your response to refute my claim. But
then again, perhaps the Dilbert rule still applies:

"Never argue with an idiot. They will drop you down to your
level, then beat you with experience."

Perhaps your discontinuing this conversation is your following
that rule; it certainly is now for me.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFMqriHyBkZmuMZ8L8RAiuzAJ97lm8NvHQF0CAyciE4nR msFmT93wCgv5PR
xAITvOlqwa6tdMiZAuYkp0c=
=R4L3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----