From: thomas.e.elam@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/30/2025 3:47 PM, -hh wrote:   
   > On 11/30/25 12:05, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >> On 11/30/2025 10:20 AM, -hh wrote:   
   >>> On 11/30/25 08:42, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>> On 11/28/2025 6:33 PM, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2025-11-28 14:55, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 11/27/2025 10:27 AM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 11/26/25 13:35, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26 09:39, Tom Elam wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>> I do not think you have anything useful. I think you want $150   
   >>>>>>>>> up front for nothing. After all, you are the same person who   
   >>>>>>>>> told me I would need to travel to England to see a friend of   
   >>>>>>>>> yours who could validate my pilot logbook.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Quote please, Liarboy.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> He's whining again about an offer I made to see about asking an   
   >>>>>>> old friend of mine to review his flight logs.  At the time, that   
   >>>>>>> friend was a senior FAA official working & living in UK...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It was more than that. You suggested that since I was rich I could   
   >>>>>> just pop over with my logbook to show your "friend". You later   
   >>>>>> backtracked and said that had I actually planned to go you would   
   >>>>>> tell me there was no such friend there at that time.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> QUOTE IT, Asshole.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No need to quote anything. Hugh admits he baited me with that story   
   >>>> about a FAA "friend" in England.   
   >>>   
   >>> Another false allegation from Tommy, as I had simply stated facts.   
   >>>   
   >>> To further debunk Tommy, here's a personal photo of mine taken during   
   >>> one of my visits to his UK countryside home...FYI, I've piped through   
   >>> TinEye to show that it is unique and not stolen off of the internet   
   >>> like MuahMan used to do:   
   >>>   
   >>> >> tags=&sort=crawl_date&order=asc&page=1>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> -hh   
   >>   
   >> That is not exactly what I meant by baiting.   
   >   
   > No, that's a backpedal from you saying "friend" in scare quotes:   
   >   
   > once again you failed to realize that I have no need to lie since the   
   > truth is more devastating to you.   
   >   
   >   
   >> The "baiting" for me was that you inferred FAA routinely examines   
   >> pilot logbooks to validate entries.   
   >   
   > Nope.  It was for an unofficial, off-the-record review.  As Alan said,   
   > "Quote it":  go find & provide the original with a Google Groups URL   
   > link for us all to read, in full context.   
   >   
   >   
   >> Not true. If it was true, and it is not, there is a local FAA office.   
   >> No need to go to England.   
   >   
   > Nope, because I had offered to call in a personal favor; its not my   
   > fault or problem that they didn't happen to live in your backyard.   
   >   
   > And had it gone down, you too might have been shanghaied into learning   
   > how to do horsehair plastering for his office conversion (one of those   
   > small headaches of having a historic register home worth over £1M).   
   >   
   > -hh   
      
   Wrong again, not "friend", disputing my entries.   
      
   It would be impossible for anyone to argue with those 1967-68 entries.   
   They are all within the capabilities of the C150 and the pilot.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)