Bill,
I am not sure exactly what your problem is or why you are being so offensive and aggressive. How we got here from 'earned memberships' is a function of your choices.

I can find no place in the AMA Safety Code rule #1 that allows for the CD to suspend the event so a brand new plane can be test flown. You indicated (again) that you could see where a CD might do that. I see that action as a clear, open and intentional violation of the AMA Safety Code. Worse yet, I see it as a violation by the very appointed representative of the AMA who is supposed to prevent such actions. I stand by that.

You have taken cheap shots at other folks for not screaming foul at a sanctioned event when they have seen something you determined was in violation of the rules and yet you see where a CD might hold a case for violating the stated rules. I find that confusing, but others better than you have called me stupid.

Since you have determined that I am wrong, please explain the dichotomy (different words for 'two faced') shown with your remarks of admonishment to Mr. Cain and your apparently casual acceptance of CD's violation AMA Safety Rule 1. I will be surprised you can do that and then demonstrate where the elected AMA official can possibly be more concerned about liability than "Joe Flightpack". No liable, simple question of your remarks that just don't seem to add up.


Since I made no allegations of any "conspiracy' you remarks about that make me wonder and worry about your health. I made a stated assumption that you are welcome to defend or debunk as your conscience directs.

Be well.

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428