Skylune, in a different, way OT thread, intones...
It kinda reminds me of AOPA logic. For example, user fees: they argue
simultaneously that (1) GA uses very few FAA services and therefore user
fees are not necessary and (2) user fees would impose a ruinous financial
burden on the GA industry and reduce safety (because pilots might be less
inclined to use ATC, flight following, etc.) This is weird and
disingenous reasoning.

Why is this disingenuous reasoning? (specifically I ask about the
reasoning part, not whether either of the premises are independently
true or false). It is quite possible for (1) and (2) to be both true at
the same time.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.