Washington DC airspace closing for good?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 08:46:24 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in ::


Hence shut up.

Is it your intent to revoke my right to express an opinion on Usenet?

Oh please. insert Voltaire quote if needed It's a direct referral to
your inability to present evidence for the reasons you claim the ADIZ
exists. I'm saying you're wrong. If you don't like the way I say it,
killfile me.

moo

On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 17:17:48 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in ::

I'm saying you're wrong.

As you haven't provided an alternate plausible explanation for the
existence of the DC ADIZ nor any evidence to support your view, I am
not able to argue it.

If you don't like the way I say it,

Your rudeness speaks volumes about you.

killfile me.

I prefer not to stick my head in the sand, thanks. Who knows, you
might post something about which you actually have some knowledge
sometime.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 17:17:48 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in ::

I'm saying you're wrong.

As you haven't provided an alternate plausible explanation for the
existence of the DC ADIZ nor any evidence to support your view, I am
not able to argue it.

It doesn't work that way. You made two claims. Then you engaged in warious
forms of diversion when pressed for evidence. The ADIZ is a politically
motivated action. There is *plenty* of evidence of this and I pointed you
to an article in AOPA. There is little evidence that it's to reduce radar
clutter or prevent us silly pilots from getting our stupid asses shot out of
the air. These are your claims. Government as nanny. It's crap.

Note the alternate suggestions here.

If you don't like the way I say it,

Your rudeness speaks volumes about you.

It's Usenet, darling.

killfile me.

I prefer not to stick my head in the sand, thanks. Who knows, you
might post something about which you actually have some knowledge
sometime.

In this thread, my knowledge isn't the issue as much as you try to make it
so. But, hope away.

moo