Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

On Mar 17, 4:18*pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:11:42 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So according to you, everybody

I didn't say everybody. You and I have this issue every time we post.
You go off half-cocked, posting a bunch of self-determining hooey as
fact.

over reacted to your oh so simple
request for information.

Simple? I don;t see anything simple about this thread. Or the airpark
business. Or determined the truth in the statistics of which, have you
done your homework on that? I have and posted the same. More Bob Hooey.





I would contend that you in fact brought it
on yourself from the very first post forward and the one that finally
got me involved was totally off the charts.

. Whenever you have 600 airplanes residing in a place, you are going
to
. have SOME incidents --ranging from groundloops to full-house
"screwing
. the pooch."

YOUR RESPONSE BELOW:

.Let's start this over Captiva.
.
.Planes...landing..people...mistakes..houses...too close...imminent
death.
.
.Yes?

See the question mark? =See, there it is again, *another question mark.
Wanna see another? =There it is. Learning anything? =There's another
one.

Question marks are not for statement, they are, for, er, lemme see.
Questions.

Let me repeat my previous answer *to you in this thread, this time take
notes.

Ready? =There's another one.

"Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path? = =

"You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty."

.
.Make sense?
.????

In the future, you might get a much more acceptable response by
stating you purpose and engaging in a reasoned discussion of the
issues. *You instead decided on an approach that you fully well knew
would result in exactly the response you got and then whine about
it.

Only whining I hear is yours.

Rinse, dry, repeat the above.
--
- Show quoted text -

Overall, you have gotten the responses you asked for and deserved. If
you had wanted to discuss airparks, airpark living, or even the
liability issues of airparks, you went about it in a very strange and
confrontational manner from the outset.

So bitch on, you clearly have nothing to add so PLOINK!

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:50:16 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

Organization: http://groups.google.com
So bitch on, you clearly have nothing to add so PLOINK!

lol

More Bob Hooey.