ZZZooommm rant latest

Richmond, Virginia Circuit Court: Case # LK-989-3.

Now, close your trap before another fly gets attracted to the odor. Your
hero already admitted he lied.

"RobertR237" wrote in message
...
In article J5V5b.266971$cF.84535@rwcrnsc53, "Juan E Jimenez"
writes:


Only he would know the totals, Dan. I just know his claim that he's never
been successfully sued is a lie on at least two counts. I have located
the
details on one, and am awaiting the details on a second instance. Let's
wait
and see what he says in response to my question.



PROOF! Where is your PROOF? Produce it or shut up.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article vC26b.367444$uu5.70843@sccrnsc04, "Juan E Jimenez"
writes:


Richmond, Virginia Circuit Court: Case # LK-989-3.

Now, close your trap before another fly gets attracted to the odor. Your
hero already admitted he lied.


Again, what are the specifics that prove your point. That doesn't tell anybody
anything. Did the case go to trial and was CGS found liable by a design fault?
If not, it proves nothing.

Now a question for you...even if the above case is fact and CGS has been sued,
how does that justify an ongoing personal and very public assult on Chuck and
CGS in USAviator and now into ANN? Is CGS the only aviation related company to
be sued, successfully or otherwise? How about your hero Bede, how many times
was he sued, how many bankruptcies has he been through, but does Jimbo
constantly rant on his past? What will it take for Jim to quit using ANN to
continue the attacks on CGS and Chuck or must he put up with it forever?

I don't really give a damn if Chuck has been sued, successfully or not, it is a
fact of doing business in this country. If you produce a product, you will
eventually get sued by somebody. Hell, even Jim's plane of the year is
produced by a company that is being sued for millions. Does he make a point to
repeatedly make that a newsworthy issue?

What I see as the problem is the use of a public news publication as a weapon
for personal use. Jim has used his position and his publications to attack
others, CGS is just one of a lengthy list, without providing factual
information and without providing any means for rebuttal by those charged. In
fact, any attempt at a rebuttle is met with threats of lawsuits if any further
contact is attempted. I find his actions and your support of those actions to
be unreasonable and unfair. It may not be illegal but certainly is unethical.


PS: If you are going to quote me, quote me entirely, not some out of context
quote that fits your warped sleezeball reporting style.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Juan wrote:

Now, close your trap before another fly gets attracted to the odor. Your
hero already admitted he lied.


Jeremy (from across the pond in the UK) adds:

As an observer from afar I'm a bit perplexed by all this. This debate (as I
see it) is really about truthfulness, or the lack of it. The following are
a matter of public record, both from statements on here and from various
legal documents that are freely available:

1) Chuck Slusarczyk seems to have consistently told the truth, even when it
has been an admission that he has settled law suits for fairly large sums of
money, which could reasonably be expected to cause a certain amount of
embarrassment. Despite many attempts to catch Chuck out in a lie, no-one
seems to have succeeded.

2) Jim Campbell has been proven to be a liar several times, including in
courts of law. From my own investigations into false claims he made in a UK
aviation magazine I know beyond any doubt whatsoever that he has fabricated
large areas of his personal history and experience. The magazine
independently checked his credentials and subsequently watered down his bio
as a result.

Irrespective of the details of the various court cases, personally held
prejudices and vendettas, those are irrefutable facts, Jim Campbell is a
proven liar, Chuck Slusarczyk is not. I've read every post from Chuck
Slusarczyk on here over the years, and cannot recall one single statement of
his that has been proven to be untrue. Unfortunately the same cannot be
said about Jim Campbell's writings on ANN and elsewhere, he seems to
consistently exaggerate and lie, almost as if he suffers from some form of
delusional disorder.

Just the view from a distant Brit who has watched the saga unfold over the
years. Feel free to ignore my ramblings, many do.................

Jeremy

"Jez" wrote in message
news

1) Chuck Slusarczyk seems to have consistently told the truth, even when
it
has been an admission that he has settled law suits for fairly large sums
of
money, which could reasonably be expected to cause a certain amount of
embarrassment. Despite many attempts to catch Chuck out in a lie, no-one
seems to have succeeded.

You're entitled to your opinion. I disagree.

In article vC26b.367444$uu5.70843@sccrnsc04, Juan E Jimenez says...

Richmond, Virginia Circuit Court: Case # LK-989-3.

Now, close your trap before another fly gets attracted to the odor. Your
hero already admitted he lied.

I admitted no such thing your like your hero zoom playing word games and
twisting the factsand telling the lie so often that you believe it.

# LK-989-3 I believe that's the Morgan Case which I located today, after I read
it over to refresh my memory I'll comment on it here ,in public .I will also
comment on the Florida case you mentioned .But if you were as good at digging up
dirt as you think you are you should have known the George Conn subject has been
talked about quite a bit in this public forum. Ask Kevin O'Brien about the
paperwork I showed him concerning the George Conn situation.
Once again I got nothing to hide .

In fact Conn and I have a case pending right now and as soon as we get it over
with if anyone wants to know how it comes out I'll tell them .
As I said before I got nothing to hide unlike your hero zoom.

Chuck SRAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it was always about credibility" chuck s

"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote in message
...

I admitted no such thing your like your hero zoom playing word games and
twisting the factsand telling the lie so often that you believe it.

If that's the case looks like you two must be twins separated at birth.

# LK-989-3 I believe that's the Morgan Case which I located today, after I
read
it over to refresh my memory I'll comment on it here ,in public .I will
also
comment on the Florida case you mentioned .But if you were as good at
digging up
dirt as you think you are you should have known the George Conn subject
has been
talked about quite a bit in this public forum. Ask Kevin O'Brien about the
paperwork I showed him concerning the George Conn situation.
Once again I got nothing to hide .

Sure, now that I have proven that neither I nor Jim was lying, there is in
fact nothing to hide, is there. More to the point, there is nothing you can
hide now.

In fact Conn and I have a case pending right now and as soon as we get it
over
with if anyone wants to know how it comes out I'll tell them .
As I said before I got nothing to hide unlike your hero zoom.

I already knew that.

Next time, think twice before posting messages implying I am lying about
you.

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 03:14:28 GMT, "Juan E Jimenez"
wrote:

I haven't responded to your query because I didn't see any point in
embarassing you any further, and frankly I had better things to do such as
working on installing a turbine ignition exciter on my jet, but since you
insist...

Are you claiming in this forum and in front of all your fellow gaggle
groupies that you have _never_ been successfully sued on an issue related to
your company and your products? Yes or No will suffice.

Be careful how you answer, toadsucker. Settlements count, particularly when
they happen about two weeks prior to the trial, about the time when you
found out what expert witnesses were lined up to testify against you...


Settling out of court, pretrial, is not an admission of guilt.

BWB

In article , Badwater Bill says...

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 03:14:28 GMT, "Juan E Jimenez"
wrote:

I haven't responded to your query because I didn't see any point in
embarassing you any further, and frankly I had better things to do such as
working on installing a turbine ignition exciter on my jet, but since you
insist...

Are you claiming in this forum and in front of all your fellow gaggle
groupies that you have _never_ been successfully sued on an issue related to
your company and your products? Yes or No will suffice.

Be careful how you answer, toadsucker. Settlements count, particularly when
they happen about two weeks prior to the trial, about the time when you
found out what expert witnesses were lined up to testify against you...


Settling out of court, pretrial, is not an admission of guilt.

BWB


Thank you BWB, but in zoooms and jauns world it is

In article ,
(Badwater Bill) writes:


Settling out of court, pretrial, is not an admission of guilt.

BWB



Come on Bill, don't confuse the poor dumbass. If he has proof, he should
produce it or shut up.

This crap by Campbell has gone on way too long now and needs to be brought to
an end. Jim Campbell's never ending vendetta against Chuck, even if the so
call charges were true, is getting ridiculous. Nobody should have to put up
with having their name and business trashed in any publication on an ongoing,
never ending basis. This is especially true when the proof of the allegations
has never been forthcoming. The whole issue used as the justification for the
ongoing assault is more than 7 years old.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Come on Bill, don't confuse the poor dumbass. If he has proof, he should
produce it or shut up.

This crap by Campbell has gone on way too long now and needs to be brought to
an end. Jim Campbell's never ending vendetta against Chuck, even if the so
call charges were true, is getting ridiculous. Nobody should have to put up
with having their name and business trashed in any publication on an ongoing,
never ending basis. This is especially true when the proof of the allegations
has never been forthcoming. The whole issue used as the justification for the
ongoing assault is more than 7 years old.


Bob Reed

I'm not so sure that the publicity Chuck gets from some maniacal rant
is all harmful. I think most people who really know what's going on,
understand the rift and take it for what it's worth. As for those who
don't know beans about Zoom or Chuck, I really think that the press,
even though negative possibly helps Chuck because it keeps his
company's name in circulation.

Yes, I know this is a strange thing to say to some of you, but I have
friends who feel that any press, negative press included can be a
benefit.

I'm not trying to open a debate over this, I'm just speculating a bit,
and I'm not sure what the real outcome is. But, I'll guarantee you
one thing, everybody in the ultralight industry knows who Zoom is and
they all hold him and what he says in context. Having Zoom out to get
you is considered an product endorsement by many. In fact most of the
readers of this group are in that category!

Just some simple minded thinking out loud this morning.

Bill