Good Luck, Jim!

In article , Ron Wanttaja says...

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:20:01 GMT, "Juan Jimenez"
Ah yes, the moral values of the one who never brings anything he owns and
can't afford to lose to SNF.

I've heard he only wears six of his ten Rolexes to SnF. But that's to make
his hands faster when he steals chicken.... :-)

Ron all I can say is that poor jaun is so uninformed. Lets see I brought my new
Dodge Ram truck to SnF in 1998 ,1999 and my next new one in 2000 ,2001
2002 and 2003 .I just bought another new one that I'll be bringing to SnF in
2004. Credibility, it's still about credibility and "mini zoom" doesn't have any
more credibility then his hero.

By the way I just got a letter from Garfield Hts. Municipal court which stated
that "after review of plaintiff (G.Conn) and defendant's (Chuck S/CGS Aviation)
Brief's, Defendant's motion to quash debtor's exam of defendant Charles
Slusarczyk is granted." Case # is CUH0300308 the judgement was issued
10/09/03. It seems to say as I have been saying all along that I personally
didn't owe Conn any money. More details later after I talk to my attorney. I can
see Tony smiling right now and I can hear him saying now you can go after zoom
and Conn for all the money they cost you. Hmmmmm

Actually Ron I like to wear my deer hunting watch with the light up dial so's I
can tell time in the dark :-)

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it was always about credibility" chuck s

On 12 Oct 2003 19:37:45 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
wrote:

In article , Ron Wanttaja says...

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:20:01 GMT, "Juan Jimenez"
Ah yes, the moral values of the one who never brings anything he owns and
can't afford to lose to SNF.

I've heard he only wears six of his ten Rolexes to SnF. But that's to make
his hands faster when he steals chicken.... :-)

Ron all I can say is that poor jaun is so uninformed. Lets see I brought my new
Dodge Ram truck to SnF in 1998 ,1999 and my next new one in 2000 ,2001
2002 and 2003 .I just bought another new one that I'll be bringing to SnF in
2004. Credibility, it's still about credibility and "mini zoom" doesn't have any
more credibility then his hero.

By the way I just got a letter from Garfield Hts. Municipal court which stated
that "after review of plaintiff (G.Conn) and defendant's (Chuck S/CGS Aviation)
Brief's, Defendant's motion to quash debtor's exam of defendant Charles
Slusarczyk is granted." Case # is CUH0300308 the judgement was issued
10/09/03. It seems to say as I have been saying all along that I personally
didn't owe Conn any money. More details later after I talk to my attorney. I can
see Tony smiling right now and I can hear him saying now you can go after zoom
and Conn for all the money they cost you. Hmmmmm

Actually Ron I like to wear my deer hunting watch with the light up dial so's I
can tell time in the dark :-)

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it was always about credibility" chuck s

Go for it, Chuck!!!

I doubt Zoom will have any assets to attach but it would be
nice to see him nailed for his actions.

John

"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...

Ron all I can say is that poor jaun is so uninformed. Lets see I brought
my new
Dodge Ram truck to SnF in 1998 ,1999 and my next new one in 2000 ,2001
2002 and 2003

No. I'm not. Care to show whose name is on the title? Heck, you already
mentioned the name of the person responsible for forcing you to keep your
property out of SNF. You know, the one with the judgement?

Credibility, indeed. Toldya not to run at the mouth again, 'cause you'd get
your tongue stomped. Oh, and make sure you post what your lawyer tells you
when he explains what a debtor's exam is, and why denying the motion doesn't
prove anything about whether or not you owe Mr. Conn the sum of the
judgement.

Have a nice day.

In article L6sib.747566$YN5.703313@sccrnsc01, Juan Jimenez says...

No. I'm not. Care to show whose name is on the title?

How about putting some money where your mouth is ? I'm saying I have a new 2003
Dodge Ram 1500 pick up and my name is on the title. I'm willing to put up $500,
or you pick the amount since your saying my name isn't on the title and I'll
scan the title and post it here. I'll back up what I say with proof not just
make unsubstantiated statements like you and zoomy.

Heck, you already
mentioned the name of the person responsible for forcing you to keep your
property out of SNF. You know, the one with the judgement?

Sure the one with the judgment is George Conn I never made it a secret and you
must know who the judgement is against yet you playing the zoom game of
innuendo.When did I say he was the person responsible for forcing me to keep my
property out of Sun n Fun. Listening to zoom again?


Credibility, indeed. Toldya not to run at the mouth again, 'cause you'd get
your tongue stomped.

That statement makes no sense except maybe in your own mind.


Oh, and make sure you post what your lawyer tells you
when he explains what a debtor's exam is, and why denying the motion doesn't
prove anything about whether or not you owe Mr. Conn the sum of the judgement.

It has everything to do with it .Conn's judgement is against an old corporation
called CGS Aviation Inc. of which I was one of many "stockholders". Conn with
zooms help tried to transfer the debt of the old corporation to me and my new
company .The purpose of the hearing was to determine if my new company was an
extension of the old company or a totally different one . If I was deemed to be
the old CGS as you ,zoom and conn keep implying then I would in fact be the
debtor and be subject to a debtors exam. If the old CGS doesn't exist anymore
and I am not responsible for the debts of the old corporation then there is no
one to exam. Maybe you should have talked to Kevin O'Brien about this ,he saw
the paperwork you and zoom never saw. Your sure an example of zoom style
reporting ,it's no wonder you don't write for any legitimate aviation
publications. Credibility it's about credibility.


Have a nice day.

I just did.

chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"once a toady always a toady" Froggie the Gremlin

In article , John Ammeter says...

Go for it, Chuck!!!

I doubt Zoom will have any assets to attach but it would be
nice to see him nailed for his actions.

John

I'm seriously considering that venue, zoom has cost me a lot and I feel he
should be held accountable for things he has done not only to me but to a lot of
people. I'm getting my ducks in order and believe it or not I 'm following an
outline that Tony gave me as to the course of an action against zoom and conn.
He felt I had a solid case against both of them and the only way to deal with
them was a court action. I'll see.

See ya

Chuck RAH-15/1 ret

"evil didn't prosper because good men spoke and evil is still nuts" anon

"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...
In article L6sib.747566$YN5.703313@sccrnsc01, Juan Jimenez says...

How about putting some money where your mouth is ?

No need to put money anywhere. Just post the entire title, and proof that
it's been to SNF.

Sure the one with the judgment is George Conn I never made it a secret...

....and nobody's ever sued you successfully. Unhuh.

When did I say he was the person responsible for forcing me to keep my
property out of Sun n Fun. Listening to zoom again?

Oh, so you do admit that what I said was true. Gotcha.

It has everything to do with it .

No, it does not. A denial of a motion for a debtor's exam is not a dismissal
of a judgement. Compare each of the four words if you have any doubts about
that.

Juan

In article , Juan_Jimenez
says...

How about putting some money where your mouth is ?

No need to put money anywhere. Just post the entire title, and proof that
it's been to SNF.

I guess you lack the courage of your convictions to put up or shut up.What's the
problem ? If what you say is true you should be willing to put up $1000 or more
it shouldn't matter ...if your right. Or is it maybe your the one who just put
your foot in your mouth? .It's all about credibility and here's your chance to
show who's credible you or me...Since I'm sure zooms the one who's feeding you
your info maybe he should ante up the money for the bet. Maybe you'll learn a
little about zooms credibility in the process.


Sure the one with the judgment is George Conn I never made it a secret...

...and nobody's ever sued you successfully. Unhuh.


Oh so we're back to word games again.Ok tell me what "succesfully sued " means
to you and I can answer.


When did I say he was the person responsible for forcing me to keep my
property out of Sun n Fun. Listening to zoom again?

Oh, so you do admit that what I said was true. Gotcha.

You got nothing..I never said conn or anyone else was forcing me to keep my
property out of SnF, your the one making that claim.


It has everything to do with it .

No, it does not. A denial of a motion for a debtor's exam is not a dismissal
of a judgement.

Your not paying attention again. The Judgment against CGS Aviation "INC" ,the
OLD company, the defunct Company ,the non existent since 1986 company is the
company that has the judgment against it. Not me ...not CLM Marketing Inc or the
current CGS Aviation.I never said it was dismissed your saying it, the judgment
against CGS Aviation INC still stands and that's who conn should be after not
me. He was trying to make me personally responsible for the debt of a defunct
out of business corporation. Even you should be able to tell the difference...
Well probably not.

Just for the record are you saying I personally owe conn money? Are you also
saying that I gypped conn out of his deposit he paid to a dealer? Put some
definitive statements out here in public,no beating around the bush or vague
generalities.


Still having a nice day

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"evil didn't prosper because good men spoke and evil was nuts" anon

Chuck,

Juan is merely a troll. He gets his rocks off from
irritating posts. Every post he makes that someone responds
to is just another stroke for him.

Personally, I'd recommend you simply ignore him and spend
your time nailing Campbell in court.

John


On 13 Oct 2003 20:11:13 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
wrote:

In article , Juan_Jimenez
says...

How about putting some money where your mouth is ?

No need to put money anywhere. Just post the entire title, and proof that
it's been to SNF.

I guess you lack the courage of your convictions to put up or shut up.What's the
problem ? If what you say is true you should be willing to put up $1000 or more
it shouldn't matter ...if your right. Or is it maybe your the one who just put
your foot in your mouth? .It's all about credibility and here's your chance to
show who's credible you or me...Since I'm sure zooms the one who's feeding you
your info maybe he should ante up the money for the bet. Maybe you'll learn a
little about zooms credibility in the process.


Sure the one with the judgment is George Conn I never made it a secret...

...and nobody's ever sued you successfully. Unhuh.


Oh so we're back to word games again.Ok tell me what "succesfully sued " means
to you and I can answer.


When did I say he was the person responsible for forcing me to keep my
property out of Sun n Fun. Listening to zoom again?

Oh, so you do admit that what I said was true. Gotcha.

You got nothing..I never said conn or anyone else was forcing me to keep my
property out of SnF, your the one making that claim.


It has everything to do with it .

No, it does not. A denial of a motion for a debtor's exam is not a dismissal
of a judgement.

Your not paying attention again. The Judgment against CGS Aviation "INC" ,the
OLD company, the defunct Company ,the non existent since 1986 company is the
company that has the judgment against it. Not me ...not CLM Marketing Inc or the
current CGS Aviation.I never said it was dismissed your saying it, the judgment
against CGS Aviation INC still stands and that's who conn should be after not
me. He was trying to make me personally responsible for the debt of a defunct
out of business corporation. Even you should be able to tell the difference...
Well probably not.

Just for the record are you saying I personally owe conn money? Are you also
saying that I gypped conn out of his deposit he paid to a dealer? Put some
definitive statements out here in public,no beating around the bush or vague
generalities.


Still having a nice day

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"evil didn't prosper because good men spoke and evil was nuts" anon

John Ammeter wrote:

Chuck,

Juan is merely a troll. He gets his rocks off from
irritating posts. Every post he makes that someone responds
to is just another stroke for him.

Personally, I'd recommend you simply ignore him and spend
your time nailing Campbell in court.

John
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

How do you nail somebody that
has a net worth not worth nailing?


Barnyard BOb --

From what I've seen over the last couple of years, he has no "rocks" to get
off.

Must be some other motivation.

John Stricker

"John Ammeter" wrote in message
...
Chuck,

Juan is merely a troll. He gets his rocks off from
irritating posts. Every post he makes that someone responds
to is just another stroke for him.

Personally, I'd recommend you simply ignore him and spend
your time nailing Campbell in court.

John


On 13 Oct 2003 20:11:13 -0700, ChuckSlusarczyk
wrote:

In article ,
Juan_Jimenez
says...

How about putting some money where your mouth is ?

No need to put money anywhere. Just post the entire title, and proof
that
it's been to SNF.

I guess you lack the courage of your convictions to put up or shut
up.What's the
problem ? If what you say is true you should be willing to put up $1000
or more
it shouldn't matter ...if your right. Or is it maybe your the one who
just put
your foot in your mouth? .It's all about credibility and here's your
chance to
show who's credible you or me...Since I'm sure zooms the one who's
feeding you
your info maybe he should ante up the money for the bet. Maybe you'll
learn a
little about zooms credibility in the process.


Sure the one with the judgment is George Conn I never made it a
secret...

...and nobody's ever sued you successfully. Unhuh.


Oh so we're back to word games again.Ok tell me what "succesfully sued "
means
to you and I can answer.


When did I say he was the person responsible for forcing me to keep
my
property out of Sun n Fun. Listening to zoom again?

Oh, so you do admit that what I said was true. Gotcha.

You got nothing..I never said conn or anyone else was forcing me to keep
my
property out of SnF, your the one making that claim.


It has everything to do with it .

No, it does not. A denial of a motion for a debtor's exam is not a
dismissal
of a judgement.

Your not paying attention again. The Judgment against CGS Aviation "INC"
,the
OLD company, the defunct Company ,the non existent since 1986 company is
the
company that has the judgment against it. Not me ...not CLM Marketing Inc
or the
current CGS Aviation.I never said it was dismissed your saying it, the
judgment
against CGS Aviation INC still stands and that's who conn should be after
not
me. He was trying to make me personally responsible for the debt of a
defunct
out of business corporation. Even you should be able to tell the
difference...
Well probably not.

Just for the record are you saying I personally owe conn money? Are you
also
saying that I gypped conn out of his deposit he paid to a dealer? Put
some
definitive statements out here in public,no beating around the bush or
vague
generalities.


Still having a nice day

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"evil didn't prosper because good men spoke and evil was nuts" anon