More facts on KVKX closing

[John Swarey]

As I suspected, the real reason for the closure of Potomac Airfield is
the morons at Hyde. I have noticed for quite some time that there are
certain people at Hyde who seem to have a vendetta against Potomac.
They are extremely lucky I am no longer based at VKX. If they had
caused my very expensive plane to be stranded, they would have to deal
with me face to face. I can assure you that would not be pleasant.
Consider yourself lucky, asshole.




Sorry for the formatting...it's juts pasted from email.





ARE YOU CURIOUS WHY POTOMAC GOT ZAPPED BY TSA?

QUESTION: How do you make a nazi?

ANSWER: you give small people rules they can lord over others, which
makes
them feel like big people.

TSA are NOT the small people in this, not at all, (believe it or not),

The TSA folks have always been courteous, professional, polite, and
friendly;
using JUDGEMENT.

The nazis in this case are certain persons at a nearby competing
airfield who
failed to use JUDGEMENT.



BACKGROUND - For over three years now, TSA would routinely drop by for
an
'inspection' of the field, procedures, etc.

We've been doing that for four years, no problem.

As Potomac Pilots know, in addition to the funny airspace stuff, we
use
essentially the 'community watch' that USSS suggested years ago.

People keeping an eye on other folks they personally know, to make
sure nothing
untoward is going on.

One person designated to make a call to a certain place under certain
conditions, merely to make sure the call gets made.


No, I was not meticulously checking peoples' drivers licenses, because
at
Potomac, we all know each other quite well.

Thus technically, while the TSA procedural speed limit was '55mph,' we
were
running at about 59 mph.

Technically over the speed limit, but well within the intent of the
rules.

So what happened?


Element #1:

My ADIZ newsletter poked some serious holes in the ADIZ.

That set the inflammatory stage; but my opinions often do.

I thought that might 'draw fire. No real harm in that, sometimes
drawing fire
is a very good thing.

I'm trying to replace the ADIZ with something workable and effective,
operationally, and politically.

But no good deed goes un-punished.


Element #2:

Our little friends at Hyde, outraged that I was not meticulously
staying below
55 mph,

For example, by not checking the driver's licenses of people I've had
to
dinner,

Kept telling TSA that "Wartofsky is not following the rules like Hyde,
so what
is TSA going to do about it?"

Up to and including Hyde Field's'security coordinator' storming over
to Potomac
to lecture me.

No kidding.

(It is unlikely I will ever have him to dinner).


So Hyde's 'demands' to TSA essentially rubbed TSA's nose in
well-meaning,
poorly though out first-draft procedures, procedures even TSA has been
stuck with
because they lack the procedureal means to change it.

Hyde Field essentially coerced TSA to formally keep repeating to the
MD3
airports that the posted speed limit was 55, i.e. 'facial
recognition,' 'lists' etc.

Which of course shouldn't really apply to folks you've had to dinner,
not in
the real world.


Element #3:

About a week ago, one Sunday morning, at Potomac, someone from Hyde
Field,
because THEY didn't recognize 'someone standing around,' immediately
reported
'there is no security at Potomac.'

The people who got the call knew it stank, but it was a recorded line
to boot.

When I got word, I called the flight school, and initially got no
answer.

I made another call and was informed that the fellow had been there
since 8AM.

A bit later I called and reached him at the field.

No big deal... thinks I. He stepped out for a minute.

In fact, he told me he had the trots and was in the can.


SO HERE IT GOES:

The Hyde Field's call triggered about 7 inspections of Potomac by TSA
in two
days,

TSA just happened to come by when 'security person #1' had gone out
for an
short errand,

So the poor kid who had failed to 'identify himself' earlier to TSA,

...again didn't SAY he was 'security,' he said, quite correctly, he was
a flight
instructor.

And that #1 would be back in about 10 minutes.

So technically, while the kid WAS a 'security person,' he failed to
identify
himself to TSA.

So TSA annotated the file, 'no security persent #2.'


Next day more TSA inspectors, asking for a copy of our 'approved
security
plan.'

The last HARD COPY TSA ever signed being over 3 years old,

It was out of date, IT didn't show the new people, because it was a
three year
old copy!

The information they were looking for IS current SOMEWHERE ELSE, but
those
inspectors have no access to SOMEWHERE ELSE.


AND SO IT GOES SOME MORE: Once the machine gets spooled up, it keeps
going.

Next, TSA came by, quite embarassed, with a notice closing us down for
the
above violations.

Can you see me getting ****ed?

Potomac 'Violated' by Hyde Field weasels, because of their repeated
coercing of
TSA to narrowly apply the least effective of its its rules,

Because Hyde follows them to the letter. They 'have acces' to nothing
else.


'Violated' agani because some Hyde weasel dropped a dime, because HE
didn't
recognize anyone Sunday morning. (The security guy was out as his
tie-down).

'Violated' again because some poor nervous flight instructor forgot to
say
'ASC' when TSA asked him what he did.

(I should have briefed the kid better, so that's on me).

Then violated again because TSA inspectors, unaware of other
coordination tools
in use by government agencies (wink wink), walked off with a three
year old
piece of paper; and couldn't find there everything going on for the
last three
years.

IT IS SOMEWHERE ELSE...



So what happens when I get ****ed?

I questioned through Congress TSA's statutory authority for requiring
THEIR
signature on a PRIVATE-SECTOR program.

And I gave the EXOP a heads up; so now I suspect TSA is getting pinged
all
over.


TSA doesn't have signature authority, which is WHY they've never been
able to
sign anything since.

I think they want to do things, but they're caught between a rock and
a hard
place.


No big deal, recognize this as unexpected consequences of too much
information
in too many little boxes,

...keep everyone informed of what you're doing, ignore the catch 22 and
move on.

Regardles, TSA closed Potomac.


======

For those of you in Government getting this, you have my express
permission to
reproduce it.

I verify it to be true, and will do so under oath if necessary.


It is with my deepest regrets for the damage this has done to so many,
I never
started any fight.

Does anyone think I would drag 400 pilots into this?

Whose freedom do you think I've been protecting? Those 400 and many,
many
more.

From exactly this kind of thing.


When people at Hyde dragged a well-meaning but slightly confused
Federal agency
in to pick their fight for them,

(Because Hyde Field is such a negative, lousy, miserable airport,
populated by
people who cannot compete on anything based on what THEY can do),

I merely questioned the authority of that Federal agency, using their
limited
jurisdiction as the way to resovle the matter. But they don't want
their
jurisdiction limited, so that made it more complicated.

No good deed goes unpunished.


So now what?

The problem correctly understood is solvable. We solve the problem.



David Wartofsky 11-5-05

[.Blueskies.]

"John Swarey" > wrote in message ...
> As I suspected, the real reason for the closure of Potomac Airfield is
> the morons at Hyde. I have noticed for quite some time that there are
> certain people at Hyde who seem to have a vendetta against Potomac.
> They are extremely lucky I am no longer based at VKX. If they had
> caused my very expensive plane to be stranded, they would have to deal
> with me face to face. I can assure you that would not be pleasant.
> Consider yourself lucky, asshole.
>
>
>

This ****ing contest is a pretty normal process between competitive organizations, but to say that the system that
created the TSA is not to blame is really putting your head in the sand. There is no way that the Hyde folks would cause
a plane to be 'stranded', that is entirely because of these misguided 'rules'....

[John Swarey]

On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 14:44:35 GMT, ".Blueskies."
> wrote:


>This ****ing contest is a pretty normal process between competitive organizations, but to say that the system that
>created the TSA is not to blame is really putting your head in the sand. There is no way that the Hyde folks would cause
>a plane to be 'stranded', that is entirely because of these misguided 'rules'....
>


Sure, the system sucks. Everyone in aviation knows that TSA is a joke,
the FRZ is a joke, and the ADIZ is a joke. To use the system to cause
harm to other pilots is beyond despicable.

[Jay Honeck]

> To use the system to cause
> harm to other pilots is beyond despicable.

That says it all.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Michelle P]

John,
Your mis-representation of the true facts is admirable.
Basically the manager of VKX got into a ****ing contest with a TSA agent
and lost. It was not the un-authorized departure out of W32 that caused
the closing. That just got the TSA's attention.
Michelle

John Swarey wrote:

>As I suspected, the real reason for the closure of Potomac Airfield is
>the morons at Hyde. I have noticed for quite some time that there are
>certain people at Hyde who seem to have a vendetta against Potomac.
>They are extremely lucky I am no longer based at VKX. If they had
>caused my very expensive plane to be stranded, they would have to deal
>with me face to face. I can assure you that would not be pleasant.
>Consider yourself lucky, asshole.
>
>
>
>
>Sorry for the formatting...it's juts pasted from email.
>
>
>
>
>
>ARE YOU CURIOUS WHY POTOMAC GOT ZAPPED BY TSA?
>
>QUESTION: How do you make a nazi?
>
>ANSWER: you give small people rules they can lord over others, which
>makes
>them feel like big people.
>
>TSA are NOT the small people in this, not at all, (believe it or not),
>
>The TSA folks have always been courteous, professional, polite, and
>friendly;
>using JUDGEMENT.
>
>The nazis in this case are certain persons at a nearby competing
>airfield who
>failed to use JUDGEMENT.
>
>
>
>BACKGROUND - For over three years now, TSA would routinely drop by for
>an
>'inspection' of the field, procedures, etc.
>
>We've been doing that for four years, no problem.
>
>As Potomac Pilots know, in addition to the funny airspace stuff, we
>use
>essentially the 'community watch' that USSS suggested years ago.
>
>People keeping an eye on other folks they personally know, to make
>sure nothing
>untoward is going on.
>
>One person designated to make a call to a certain place under certain
>conditions, merely to make sure the call gets made.
>
>
>No, I was not meticulously checking peoples' drivers licenses, because
>at
>Potomac, we all know each other quite well.
>
>Thus technically, while the TSA procedural speed limit was '55mph,' we
>were
>running at about 59 mph.
>
>Technically over the speed limit, but well within the intent of the
>rules.
>
>So what happened?
>
>
>Element #1:
>
>My ADIZ newsletter poked some serious holes in the ADIZ.
>
>That set the inflammatory stage; but my opinions often do.
>
>I thought that might 'draw fire. No real harm in that, sometimes
>drawing fire
>is a very good thing.
>
>I'm trying to replace the ADIZ with something workable and effective,
>operationally, and politically.
>
>But no good deed goes un-punished.
>
>
>Element #2:
>
>Our little friends at Hyde, outraged that I was not meticulously
>staying below
>55 mph,
>
>For example, by not checking the driver's licenses of people I've had
>to
>dinner,
>
>Kept telling TSA that "Wartofsky is not following the rules like Hyde,
>so what
>is TSA going to do about it?"
>
>Up to and including Hyde Field's'security coordinator' storming over
>to Potomac
>to lecture me.
>
>No kidding.
>
>(It is unlikely I will ever have him to dinner).
>
>
>So Hyde's 'demands' to TSA essentially rubbed TSA's nose in
>well-meaning,
>poorly though out first-draft procedures, procedures even TSA has been
>stuck with
>because they lack the procedureal means to change it.
>
>Hyde Field essentially coerced TSA to formally keep repeating to the
>MD3
>airports that the posted speed limit was 55, i.e. 'facial
>recognition,' 'lists' etc.
>
>Which of course shouldn't really apply to folks you've had to dinner,
>not in
>the real world.
>
>
>Element #3:
>
>About a week ago, one Sunday morning, at Potomac, someone from Hyde
>Field,
>because THEY didn't recognize 'someone standing around,' immediately
>reported
>'there is no security at Potomac.'
>
>The people who got the call knew it stank, but it was a recorded line
>to boot.
>
>When I got word, I called the flight school, and initially got no
>answer.
>
>I made another call and was informed that the fellow had been there
>since 8AM.
>
>A bit later I called and reached him at the field.
>
>No big deal... thinks I. He stepped out for a minute.
>
>In fact, he told me he had the trots and was in the can.
>
>
>SO HERE IT GOES:
>
>The Hyde Field's call triggered about 7 inspections of Potomac by TSA
>in two
>days,
>
>TSA just happened to come by when 'security person #1' had gone out
>for an
>short errand,
>
>So the poor kid who had failed to 'identify himself' earlier to TSA,
>
>..again didn't SAY he was 'security,' he said, quite correctly, he was
>a flight
>instructor.
>
>And that #1 would be back in about 10 minutes.
>
>So technically, while the kid WAS a 'security person,' he failed to
>identify
>himself to TSA.
>
>So TSA annotated the file, 'no security persent #2.'
>
>
>Next day more TSA inspectors, asking for a copy of our 'approved
>security
>plan.'
>
>The last HARD COPY TSA ever signed being over 3 years old,
>
>It was out of date, IT didn't show the new people, because it was a
>three year
>old copy!
>
>The information they were looking for IS current SOMEWHERE ELSE, but
>those
>inspectors have no access to SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>
>
>AND SO IT GOES SOME MORE: Once the machine gets spooled up, it keeps
>going.
>
>Next, TSA came by, quite embarassed, with a notice closing us down for
>the
>above violations.
>
>Can you see me getting ****ed?
>
>Potomac 'Violated' by Hyde Field weasels, because of their repeated
>coercing of
>TSA to narrowly apply the least effective of its its rules,
>
>Because Hyde follows them to the letter. They 'have acces' to nothing
>else.
>
>
>'Violated' agani because some Hyde weasel dropped a dime, because HE
>didn't
>recognize anyone Sunday morning. (The security guy was out as his
>tie-down).
>
>'Violated' again because some poor nervous flight instructor forgot to
>say
>'ASC' when TSA asked him what he did.
>
>(I should have briefed the kid better, so that's on me).
>
>Then violated again because TSA inspectors, unaware of other
>coordination tools
>in use by government agencies (wink wink), walked off with a three
>year old
>piece of paper; and couldn't find there everything going on for the
>last three
>years.
>
>IT IS SOMEWHERE ELSE...
>
>
>
>So what happens when I get ****ed?
>
>I questioned through Congress TSA's statutory authority for requiring
>THEIR
>signature on a PRIVATE-SECTOR program.
>
>And I gave the EXOP a heads up; so now I suspect TSA is getting pinged
>all
>over.
>
>
>TSA doesn't have signature authority, which is WHY they've never been
>able to
>sign anything since.
>
>I think they want to do things, but they're caught between a rock and
>a hard
>place.
>
>
>No big deal, recognize this as unexpected consequences of too much
>information
>in too many little boxes,
>
>..keep everyone informed of what you're doing, ignore the catch 22 and
>move on.
>
>Regardles, TSA closed Potomac.
>
>
>======
>
>For those of you in Government getting this, you have my express
>permission to
>reproduce it.
>
>I verify it to be true, and will do so under oath if necessary.
>
>
>It is with my deepest regrets for the damage this has done to so many,
>I never
>started any fight.
>
>Does anyone think I would drag 400 pilots into this?
>
>Whose freedom do you think I've been protecting? Those 400 and many,
>many
>more.
>
>From exactly this kind of thing.
>
>
>When people at Hyde dragged a well-meaning but slightly confused
>Federal agency
>in to pick their fight for them,
>
>(Because Hyde Field is such a negative, lousy, miserable airport,
>populated by
>people who cannot compete on anything based on what THEY can do),
>
>I merely questioned the authority of that Federal agency, using their
>limited
>jurisdiction as the way to resovle the matter. But they don't want
>their
>jurisdiction limited, so that made it more complicated.
>
>No good deed goes unpunished.
>
>
>So now what?
>
>The problem correctly understood is solvable. We solve the problem.
>
>
>
>David Wartofsky 11-5-05
>
>

[John Swarey]

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:23:19 GMT, Michelle P
> wrote:

>John,
>Your mis-representation of the true facts is admirable.
>Basically the manager of VKX got into a ****ing contest with a TSA agent
>and lost. It was not the un-authorized departure out of W32 that caused
>the closing. That just got the TSA's attention.
>Michelle

Michelle, your mis-hyphenation makes my ****ing brain want to explode.
Basically, you want to think it is OK to turn the fascist Bush regime
on law abiding Americans. You think there is some legitimacy in the
hijacking of American freedom. There is none. This is the ****ing
UNITED States of America.

We are not united turning each other in to the ****ing government. We
are DIVIDED. We are lost. You are lost.

If you find yourself attacking your fellow American, who are you?
Friend or foe?

[Jose]

> Basically, you want to think it is OK to turn the fascist Bush regime...

I don't think that conclusion is warranted from her post or her hyphenation.

When wrong is done, it's important to know where it comes from, despite
the fact that you may (legitimately) hate someplace else where the wrong
could be assigned. It's important to see the little picture as well as
the big picture. Citing the little picture does not invalidate the big one.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Michelle P]

I find myself One who is willing to follow the rules laid down by the
"leaders" of our country weather or not I agree with them. I still get
to fly and that is really what counts.
Michelle

John Swarey wrote:

>On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:23:19 GMT, Michelle P
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>John,
>>Your mis-representation of the true facts is admirable.
>>Basically the manager of VKX got into a ****ing contest with a TSA agent
>>and lost. It was not the un-authorized departure out of W32 that caused
>>the closing. That just got the TSA's attention.
>>Michelle
>>
>>
>
>Michelle, your mis-hyphenation makes my ****ing brain want to explode.
>Basically, you want to think it is OK to turn the fascist Bush regime
>on law abiding Americans. You think there is some legitimacy in the
>hijacking of American freedom. There is none. This is the ****ing
>UNITED States of America.
>
>We are not united turning each other in to the ****ing government. We
>are DIVIDED. We are lost. You are lost.
>
>If you find yourself attacking your fellow American, who are you?
>Friend or foe?
>
>
>
>

[John T]

John Swarey wrote:
>
> As I suspected, the real reason for the closure of Potomac Airfield is
> the morons at Hyde.

From <http://www.potomac-airfield.com/updated_november_3.htm>:
<quote>
Recently, [David] Wartofsky publicly challenged TSA's implementation of
airspace security policy.

TSA replied by using a poorly disguised 'security violation' to shut down
Wartofsky's business and to drive away his customers.

An insider at TSA this morning confirmed to Wartofsky that in fact, TSA took
this action in retaliation to Wartofsky's challenge, as an attempt to
silence him.
</quote>

This makes it sound like Wartofsky picked a fight with the TSA, not
suffering a stab in the back by Hyde users.

Wartofsky's own words from your post were "I was not meticulously staying
below 55 mph..." So he brags that he's not following the letter of the
rules, points to the "rats" at Hyde as the culprit for getting caught, then
claims he's just a victim of the TSA, then tries to claim he's tilting
windmills standing up for the little guy.

Which story am I to believe? And if this is the kind of double-facing
Wartofsky shows the TSA folks, I should expect VKX to stay closed.

You're right, though. It's a shame one pilot (Wartofsky) is causing this
much harm to so many others. Would VKX still be open to vetted pilots if
he'd been "meticulously staying at/below 55"? He'd have much more of my
sympathy if he'd given based aircraft notice he was about to pull this stunt
so they could relocate first.

--
John T
(who hasn't flown to either VKX or W32 in years)
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Jose]

> I find myself One who is willing to follow the rules laid down by the "leaders" of our country weather or not I agree with them.

That path leads to hell. Be careful just how far you traverse it.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Beckman]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
>> I find myself One who is willing to follow the rules laid down by the
>> "leaders" of our country weather or not I agree with them.
>
> That path leads to hell. Be careful just how far you traverse it.
>
> Jose

Not automatically. There is nothing preventing you from working to oppose
or remove the rules to which you object (or those who make them) even as you
currently obey them.

That, IMO, is the essence of how things are meant to work in the USA.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Jose]

>>That path leads to hell. Be careful just how far you traverse it.
>
> Not automatically. There is nothing preventing you from working to oppose
> or remove the rules to which you object (or those who make them) even as you
> currently obey them.

Correct. One should not disobey laws one disagrees with merely for that
reason - that path leads to anarchy (which is no fun either). However,
I got the (hopefully mistaken) impression from the post that since by
obeying the rules (that she disagreed with) she got what she wanted,
that was sufficient. When bad law is unopposed, law tramples.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
"John T" > wrote:

> John Swarey wrote:
> >
> > As I suspected, the real reason for the closure of Potomac Airfield is
> > the morons at Hyde.
>
> From <http://www.potomac-airfield.com/updated_november_3.htm>:
> <quote>
> Recently, [David] Wartofsky publicly challenged TSA's implementation of
> airspace security policy.
>
> TSA replied by using a poorly disguised 'security violation' to shut down
> Wartofsky's business and to drive away his customers.
>
> An insider at TSA this morning confirmed to Wartofsky that in fact, TSA took
> this action in retaliation to Wartofsky's challenge, as an attempt to
> silence him.
> </quote>
>
> This makes it sound like Wartofsky picked a fight with the TSA, not
> suffering a stab in the back by Hyde users.
>
> Wartofsky's own words from your post were "I was not meticulously staying
> below 55 mph..." So he brags that he's not following the letter of the
> rules, points to the "rats" at Hyde as the culprit for getting caught, then
> claims he's just a victim of the TSA, then tries to claim he's tilting
> windmills standing up for the little guy.
>
> Which story am I to believe? And if this is the kind of double-facing
> Wartofsky shows the TSA folks, I should expect VKX to stay closed.
>
> You're right, though. It's a shame one pilot (Wartofsky) is causing this
> much harm to so many others. Would VKX still be open to vetted pilots if
> he'd been "meticulously staying at/below 55"? He'd have much more of my
> sympathy if he'd given based aircraft notice he was about to pull this stunt
> so they could relocate first.

WAIT A MINUTE!

Apparently, what we have here is abuse of office by the bureaucrats!
Wartofsky has challenged TSA; TSA retaliates. Wartofsky is NOT the
culprit! It is malfeasance by Government officials, who should be
prosecuted for their actions.

[John T]

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message

>
> Apparently, what we have here is abuse of office by the bureaucrats!
> Wartofsky has challenged TSA; TSA retaliates. Wartofsky is NOT the
> culprit! It is malfeasance by Government officials, who should be
> prosecuted for their actions.

Wartofsky is fighting the right battle the wrong way. He freely admitted to
not following the rules. This is akin to having a 25 mph speed limit on a
highway in the middle of nowhere. Does the rule make since? No. Do you
fight it by exceeding the speed limit? No.

What irritated me about this thread in particular was the implication that
Hyde users were responsible for the TSA shutting down Potomac when, in fact,
it was Wartofsky's actions that caused it. If Wartofsky is prone to jumping
to conclusions and picking fights before having all the facts, then I don't
want him fighting on my behalf to eliminate the FRZ/ADIZ.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[.Blueskies.]

"Jose" > wrote in message t...
>>>That path leads to hell. Be careful just how far you traverse it.
>>
>> Not automatically. There is nothing preventing you from working to oppose or remove the rules to which you object
>> (or those who make them) even as you currently obey them.
>
> Correct. One should not disobey laws one disagrees with merely for that reason - that path leads to anarchy (which is
> no fun either). However, I got the (hopefully mistaken) impression from the post that since by obeying the rules
> (that she disagreed with) she got what she wanted, that was sufficient. When bad law is unopposed, law tramples.
>
> Jose
> --
> He who laughs, lasts.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

And how is a bad law changed? Either you get the congress to repeal it or someone needs to be charged who will fight the
law under the constitution...

[.Blueskies.]

"John T" > wrote in message ...
fight it by exceeding the speed limit? No.
>
> What irritated me about this thread in particular was the implication that Hyde users were responsible for the TSA
> shutting down Potomac when, in fact, it was Wartofsky's actions that caused it. If Wartofsky is prone to jumping to
> conclusions and picking fights before having all the facts, then I don't want him fighting on my behalf to eliminate
> the FRZ/ADIZ.
>
> --
> John T

So it was not the TSA that shut down the airport? Im sorry but the individual did not cause this. At hte very least it
takes two to tango...

[John T]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message

>
> So it was not the TSA that shut down the airport? Im sorry but the
> individual did not cause this. At hte very least it takes two to tango...

Huh? Keep up... :)

Wartofsky poked the TSA bureaucracy in the eye and didn't follow the rules
imposed on the DC3 so the TSA essentially shut him down. Those are the "two
to tango".

I don't mind somebody taking up the fight with the TSA/FAA/[your alphabet
here], but I'd rather the one doing the fighting not be prone to blaming the
wrong parties and flying off the handle without all the facts. Do those
things does more harm than help to the cause.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Franklin Newton]

Weren't those the folks called "Loyalists" and sang "God save the King"?

"Michelle P" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> I find myself One who is willing to follow the rules laid down by the
> "leaders" of our country weather or not I agree with them. I still get
> to fly and that is really what counts.
> Michelle
>
> John Swarey wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:23:19 GMT, Michelle P
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>John,
> >>Your mis-representation of the true facts is admirable.
> >>Basically the manager of VKX got into a ****ing contest with a TSA agent
> >>and lost. It was not the un-authorized departure out of W32 that caused
> >>the closing. That just got the TSA's attention.
> >>Michelle
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Michelle, your mis-hyphenation makes my ****ing brain want to explode.
> >Basically, you want to think it is OK to turn the fascist Bush regime
> >on law abiding Americans. You think there is some legitimacy in the
> >hijacking of American freedom. There is none. This is the ****ing
> >UNITED States of America.
> >
> >We are not united turning each other in to the ****ing government. We
> >are DIVIDED. We are lost. You are lost.
> >
> >If you find yourself attacking your fellow American, who are you?
> >Friend or foe?
> >
> >
> >
> >

[Tom]

There-is-no-such-thing-as "freedom to fly"
any-more-than-there-is-a-freedom-to-drive-a-car.
It's-a-privilege-nimrod,-and-all-you're-shouting-and-profanity-won't-change-that.

When you grow wings you will have the "freedom to fly."

And I hope my hyphenation makes what's left of your brain explode.

John


"John Swarey" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:23:19 GMT, Michelle P
> > wrote:
>
>>John,
>>Your mis-representation of the true facts is admirable.
>>Basically the manager of VKX got into a ****ing contest with a TSA agent
>>and lost. It was not the un-authorized departure out of W32 that caused
>>the closing. That just got the TSA's attention.
>>Michelle
>
> Michelle, your mis-hyphenation makes my ****ing brain want to explode.
> Basically, you want to think it is OK to turn the fascist Bush regime
> on law abiding Americans. You think there is some legitimacy in the
> hijacking of American freedom. There is none. This is the ****ing
> UNITED States of America.
>
> We are not united turning each other in to the ****ing government. We
> are DIVIDED. We are lost. You are lost.
>
> If you find yourself attacking your fellow American, who are you?
> Friend or foe?
>
>

[John Swarey]

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 07:00:05 -0700, "Tom" > wrote:

>There-is-no-such-thing-as "freedom to fly"
>any-more-than-there-is-a-freedom-to-drive-a-car.
>It's-a-privilege-nimrod,-and-all-you're-shouting-and-profanity-won't-change-that.
>
>When you grow wings you will have the "freedom to fly."
>
>And I hope my hyphenation makes what's left of your brain explode.
>

I have some ****ing news for you, asshole. There is no such thing as
freedom if you buy into the fascist Bush doctrine. Everything you do
is a privilege granted to you by the corporations that run this
country. Does that make you feel better? Do you support this system?
Do you think everything is fine because you can do what you want for
the moment? What will you say when you can't? How many statements do
you think I can present as a question?

You represent everything that is wrong with this country. Your
arrogance is sickening. I do have freedom to fly, I have freedom to do
whatever the **** I want. You do not get to decide how free a person
is. Every single person born on this planet is free. What they do
with that freedom is their own business, but I choose to remain free.

Why do you even try to defend the Hyde attack monkeys? Are you one of
them?

BTW, you're = you are.
****ing moron.

[Montblack]

("John Swarey" wrote)
[soaped]
> I have some #%^&*!^ news for you, #%^&*#*.
>
> You represent everything that is wrong with this country. Your
> arrogance is sickening. I do have freedom to fly, I have freedom to do
> whatever the #%^* I want.
>
> &#%$^&* moron.


'Tis the season - Quotes from "A Christmas Story" (1983)

Ralphie Parker (Narrator): Now, I had heard that word at least ten times a
day from my old man. My father worked in profanity the way other artists
might work in oils or clay. It was his true medium, a master.

In the heat of battle, my father wove a tapestry of obscenity, that as far
as we know, is still hanging in space over lake Michigan.


Ralphie: Oooh fuuudge!

Ralphie as Adult: Only I didn't say "Fudge." I said THE word, the big one,
the queen-mother of dirty words, the "F-dash-dash-dash" word!

The Old Man: What did you say?
Ralphie: Uh, um...

The Old Man: That's... what I thought you said. Get in the car. Go on!

Ralphie: It was all over -- I was dead. What would it be? The guillotine?
Hanging? The chair? The rack? The Chinese water torture? Hmmph. Mere child's
play compared to what surely awaited me.


"Over the years I got to be quite a connossieur of soap. Though my personal
preference was for Lux, I found that Palmolive had a nice, piquant
after-dinner flavor - heavy, but with a touch of mellow smoothness. Life
Buoy, on the other hand... YECCHH! "
- Ralphie as Adult


Ralphie as Adult: I have since heard of people under extreme duress speaking
in strange tongues. I became conscious that a steady torrent of obscenities
and swearing of all kinds was pouring out of me as I screamed.


http://clark.colgate.edu/doslander/christmas.htm
ACS30 - The mother is on the telephone with Mrs. Schwartz.


Montblackgoingblue

[Ron Natalie]

Tom wrote:
> There-is-no-such-thing-as "freedom to fly"
> any-more-than-there-is-a-freedom-to-drive-a-car.
> It's-a-privilege-nimrod,-and-all-you're-shouting-and-profanity-won't-change-that.
>
Actually, that is not true. In the US, unless there is a specific
Constitutional
restriction on activity, the right/freedom belongs to the individual.

Many of the founding fathers argued that the Bill of Rights was
unnecessary as the rights enumerated already were vested in the
people. However, drawing on British legislative history, others
felt that some were important enough to require specific declaration.