AlC wrote:Sorry Bob. Spin it any way you want. You were entirely and provably wrong in your assertions that started the topic.
- Alan
You haven't proven any such thing. To prove that USHPA does not have (or at least has had) a monetary interest in preserving the status quo at Torrey, you would have to answer this question:
4. What is the total income that USHPA has gotten through Torrey Pines over the last 10 years? Please include tandem fees, ongoing memberships from students trained at Torrey, instructor fees, and all other income that USHPA gets either directly or indirectly through the Torrey concession (including magazine advertisements).
You haven't answered that pivotal question and yet you prance around declaring victory just the same. Your "proof" is as weak as the "proof" that I "interfered with instruction at Torrey" ... in other words, no proof at all. Answer that question and let everyone decide for themselves if USHPA has had a monetary interest in keeping the concession in business. Put up or ... well you know the rest.
AlC wrote:So Bob starts out with one assertion (see first post) and when that is demonstrated to be incorrect he moves on to an entirely different set of questions without even acknowledging his initial error.
Nothing in that "first post" was demonstrated to be incorrect. In fact, let's take a look at that first post again statement by statement.
The first statement is this:
1. USHPA has known about ACA's violations at Torrey for at least 10 years. Yet they backed ACA for all those years.
Is that true or false Alan? That statement is properly reflected in my subsequent question directed at you (which you haven't answered yet ... as I predicted). Here's that question:
Alan Crouse, how long have you personally known of (or suspected) the tandem exemption violations at Torrey?
I'll bet you've known for a long time. Why won't you tell us what you knew and when you knew it?
Here's my second statement from the first post:
2. Region 3 Director Kuczewski reported violations to USHPA's Safety and Training and USHPA's EC as far back as 2010.
We know that's clearly true. I've produced the actual email sent to Safety and Training. Do you dispute it?
Here's the third statement from my first post:
3. USHPA didn't care and did nothing as long as Air California was paying them. For all those years USHPA backed ACA.
Do you dispute that? I don't think any HG pilot in the free world can disupute that. Do you?
Here's the fourth statement from my original post:
4. But USHPA could not ignore the 2011 tandem violations by Brad Geary and Max Marien which went public (on video) in 2015.
Do you dispute that? Have you seen the video? When do you think USHPA saw the video? I know I got a copy several years ago. Surely USHPA would have had it through normal discovery. They certainly had it when they expelled me because I showed it to them. Yet they did nothing to Air California Adventure in all that time. How do you explain that? That's why I asked question #5 which you've dodged:
5. What was the exact date that USHPA (including USHPA's lawyer) first became aware of the July 2011 tandem video showing Brad Geary and Max Marien bumping their paragliders into each other while both were carrying child passengers?
I'll bet they've known for a long time through Tim Herr. But nothing was done about it. You won't answer that one Alan.
Here's the fifth statement from my original post:
5. USHPA had no choice but remove the tandem ratings of Geary and Marien or the FAA might have revoked USHPA's exemption.
That seems pretty obvious. It's interesting that they levied a much more severe penalty on Brad Geary than on Robin Marien's son Max ... even though Max was the one bumping into Geary from behind. How do you explain that Alan? Do you dispute that USHPA had no choice but to take action against Geary and Marien?
Here's my 6th statement from my first post:
6. Even then, USHPA still didn't pull the plug on Robin Marien or ACA, and it was business as usual. More money for U$HPA.
Do you dispute that Alan? When USHPA saw that video (and you still haven't told us when that was), they should have immediately pulled all ratings and instructed Ken Baier (remember Ken who represents USHPA on the Torrey Pines Soaring Council?) to do whatever he could to ensure greater oversight of that operation. Did any of that happen? I'll answer for you ("NO") since you don't seem too keen on actually answering questions.
Here's my seventh statement:
7. But ACA went out and found another exemption so Max Marien (Robin's son) could continue to give tandem joy rides.
Do you dispute that? It seems quite obvious to me (and to Ken Andrews) that Max had his tandem ticket pulled by USHPA, but I had pictures of him giving tandem joy rides with children very recently.
Here's my eighth statement:
8. That's when ACA stopped sending their joy ride money to USHPA. That's when U$HPA got mad.
Maybe this is the one you dispute? Did ACA stop sending their joy ride money to USHPA when they got their other tandem exemption? Come on Alan, this is an easy one. Of course they did. And did that happen to coincide (over the span of the decades this has been going on) with USHPA pulling their tandem ticket? It seems pretty obvious that the answer is yes. Do you dispute it?
That brings us to my ninth and final statement from that first post:
9. It wasn't until ACA stopped sending money to USHPA that USHPA fired their parting shot in the letter we all saw.
That is certainly true. Read it slowly: ...
It ... wasn't ... until ... ACA ... stopped ... sending ... money ... to ... USHPA ... that ... USHPA ... fired ... their ... parting ... shot ... in ... the ... letter ... we ... all ... saw.
I believe that is absolutely true. Do you disagree?
Alan, you have the audacity to conclude with this:
Alan wrote:Then, (and this is the part that is truly amazing) he accuses the respondent (me in this case) of changing the topic as a diversion.
This is one reason Bob has so little credibility; it's all laid out in this string of posts. Start with one unfounded accusation, when proven wrong, move on quickly and attack the other party. Sorry Bob. Spin it any way you want. You were entirely and provably wrong in your assertions that started the topic.
- Alan
Alan, you will find ... when you leave the small circle of USHPA's echo chamber ... that I enjoy a fairly high degree of credibility among people who actually know me and who actually know what's going on. Yet you make a statement like: "This is one reason Bob has so little credibility" as if it were true ... when it isn't.
Furthermore, I have not been "entirely and provably wrong" in my assertions that started this topic. In fact, as people read this, I believe they'll wonder why you haven't answered the 5 questions that I've asked. Just to be clear, I'll ask them again:
1. How long have you personally known of (or suspected) the tandem exemption violations at Torrey?
2. What was the exact date that Max Marien's tandem rating was revoked?
3. What was the exact date that Torrey applied for their alternate exemption?
4. What is the total income that USHPA has gotten through Torrey Pines over the last 10 years? Please include tandem fees, ongoing memberships from students trained at Torrey, instructor fees, and all other income that USHPA gets either directly or indirectly through the Torrey concession (including magazine advertisements).
5. What was the exact date that USHPA (including USHPA's lawyer) first became aware of the July 2011 tandem video showing Brad Geary and Max Marien bumping their paragliders into each other while both were carrying child passengers?
Care to answer any of my questions?