For AMA??
 

Perhaps you should look a little closer, JR, the event in question was this one:

TX

SEPT 20-22--Monaville, TX (C) Bomber Field Annual B-17 & Big Bird Gathering. Site: Bomber Field, Monaville, TX Bob Buckabee CD, 2504 Savannah Court, College Station, TX 77845 Phone:979-779-8125(day), 979-764-9076(eve) Sponsor: Bomber Field, Inc. #2307 Restricted to Military & Civilian aircraft meeting IMAA size requirements. Scale or Stand-off scale. Jets welcome. Aerobatic aircraft will be required to fly standard pattern unless requested otherwise. RV parking and camping on site. No Hook-ups. Concessions on site. Landing fee $20.00 Spectators-$4.00 per person

This is the event listing from the D-8 web page and reveals that this most certainly WAS a sanctioned event..

[quote]How about explaining the following comments. The first makes a statement. The second seems to refute it.

Quote:

---

***********
I TRULY want an answer: I don't have one myself!
***********
Well, of course unless it's on private land and then nobody has any right to say anything
***********

---

You're absolutely RIGHT, JR! The first is MY statement, and the second was taken from your EVP nominee! The second is one of those viewpoints I was looking for: I want others. Sure don't agree with it, but it IS one person's point of view.


O.k., I plead guilty to having another agenda! :-) No need to leave it to anyone, JR.

In addition to REALLY WANTING to get the folks' input on the question, it was AWFULLY difficult to not illustrate your basic disagreement with your candidate in this issue.

Who's challenging ANYTHING, JR? OTOH, anybody that blindly agrees that everything the EC does is somehow sacred is foolish, but those who work WITH and WITHIN the system instead of trying to tear it down are not bashers. JR, you know that. Don't you? (Maybe you DON'T!)

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

P-51,

THANK YOU!

Thank you for answering the question with almost the exact answer I was going to give. In my club it is the responsibility of each and every single member to address flyer's violating safety infractions. Safety is not something that is limited to me or you or the guy on flight station #1, but it is an issue we all must be responsible for, elected or not.

I do not think that anyone ever voted for a flying field policemen in any AMA election, so requiring an elected official to observe some infraction is an abuse of modeler responsibility. No, we ALL need to provide the leadership and intestinal fortitude to address unsafe actions where ever we observe them regardless of the actor.

As you know Bill, I have already made it clear that there is one club in D8 that will never seem my planes again because the CD clearly violated Safety Code rule #1 for the convenience of his friends. I have been told by the powers that be in my district to blow it off because no formal charges were filed and it was no big deal and I handled it all wrong.

Lets look at the other side of the same question Bill.

EXACTLY what action would you have taken were you visiting an event you paid to fly in and the CD stopped the event so his buddy could test fly his plane before a group flew together as part of the event?

What part of that action requires the observer to be an elected official?

Is the risk to the public any less if there is no elected AMA official there?

Simple questions that should only need simple answers.

Regards,

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

If I was a competitor in the event, I probably would voice my concern to the CD. I am not sure I see what Safety Code was violated unless this was actually the FIRST time the model had been flown. OTOH, one COULD make the case (not that I would!) that suspending the contest in mid-stream like that was within the CD's rights.

I suspect your decision to not ever go back is the right one. Perhaps that would be MY recourse, too. Did you leave at the time the incident took place, or did you stick around for the rest of the event?

Now, as JR quoted for us, there IS a formal procedure that you can follow to bring the situation to the consciousness of the EC. Not sure if that procedure existed when you had your encounter, but you sure could use it if it happened today.

Obviously none. OTOH, it seems to me that an AMA official, who you would think is concerned about protecting the organization from a possible monster lawsuit over a big model going into the crowd, should perhaps be a bit more concerned than Joe Flightpack.

Not that EVERY one of us need not be concerned.

Obviously not.

Regards,

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Bill

I was under the impression that the plane in question was flown after the sanctioned event had concluded. All I ever saw on this was some cat fight you and Horrace were having on rec.models. I am not sure the offense was ever described. Am I correct in believing that is was the size of the plane that is at issue? I tend to leave threads, where you and Horrace engage in your antics, alone. At least you and I keep it civil. Well... kind of :)

Quote:
*************
Who's challenging ANYTHING, JR? OTOH, anybody that blindly agrees that everything the EC does is somehow sacred is foolish, but those who work WITH and WITHIN the system instead of trying to tear it down are not bashers. JR, you know that. Don't you? (Maybe you DON'T!)
*************
Bill, when you ask questions, as in this thread, that appear to fly directly in the face of recent EC decisons, what other choice is there but to conclude that you are challenging the previous EC actions? It's not pleasurable to be characterized as an AMA basher for raising questions, its it Bill? I know the feeling.

Quote:
*************
JR, your paranoia and conspiracy behind every tree mentality is showing!
*************
I can not recall EVER having claimed ANYTHING was a conspiracy on ANY forum I have EVER posted on. That's probably going to bite me, 'cause as you have said, ever is a long long time. It's a term that, if the truth be known, fits you better than me. You might want to consider your use of the word conspiracy more carefully. There might actually be one out there some time and then what will you do?

Quote:
**************
Unfortunately, JR, you are stooping to cheap shots and insults. Can't you ever discuss an issue without doing that? That kind of cr*p doesn't even deserve a response.
*************

Bill, I never thought that I would see the day that you would disavow the opinions, thoughts or actions of Sandy Frank. If you now assert that you want your name disassociated with Sandy Frank, I will no longer make the connection.

JR

For AMA??
 

I cannot say for sure one way or the other, JR. However, I did go back and read several threads on RCU where the Bomber Field event was discussed, and I did not get any impression that it was anything but a part of the event. May be wrong.

I don't know, JR, I've never been nor been characterized as such. And as I said, anybody that accepts the EC as infallable is foolish, and working WITH and WITHIN the system is not bashing.



Sheesh, JR! How would you describe this quote from a post of yours if not conspiracy: "Feel assured that the simple question posted had more behind it. "??? Or the one where you "pointedly" asked me if I would ever run against Sandy Frank. Or.... and the beat goes on and on and on...

If I ever DO see one, you'll be the first to know! :-)


Please don't try and put words in my mouth or incorrect meaning when there is none. Your cheap shot was the implication that I am just the parrot for Sandy Frank. Yes, that's a cheap shot, JR, and you know it. Yes, Sandy and I are good friends. Yes he shares a lot with me. Yes he asks for my input on a lot of things. But if you really want to see the relationship you have to also be aware that I raise h*ll with him on a frequent basis!

I don't disavow myself of him or his opinions or anything else since he is a d*mned good VP, one who listens to civil input, who seeks out opinions of those whom he represents, who votes the sentiment of the District. But when you come across as paranoid or a malcontent with nothing to offer but p&m, he will turn one of his very deaf ears on you in a heartbeat! He listens to those with something to say.

Which of those categories are YOU in, JR?

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Bill Lee

GEEZE. I am a dope. I am a dope. I am a dope.

I go take the dog for a walk and come back and there are 6 e-mails telling me so. I feel like the guy that hears the first line of a joke and blurts out the punch line.

Here I was, thinking all day long that you had some point to your question. I just never put the title of the thread with it. I could not quite figure out why you were bringing Horrace into it.

Now, if I am wrong, you tell me. I did not go research the facts, but, this is the picture given to me by the e-mails.

It was your point that 'My Candidate' was at some sanctioned event. Either during or after, no one seems sure, a plane was flown. He posted some overly glowing report of some huge plane that was flown by a Russian. I understand it was multi engined, weighed 6000 pounds and had a 44 ft wingspan. The point being it was clearly over the Safety Code weight limit.

You then posted asking what Horrace did about that.

He posted something about the inalienable rights of man, the sanctity of God, and individual property rights.

You posted back that he, as a prespective AMA EVP should have stopped the flight.

He posted back something about you belonging to a conspiracy trying to take the AMA to China. or something along those lines.

You then posted that he should have:

a. confronted the CD

b. baring corrective action by the CD, he should have impounded the Tx for the plane.

c. if that didn't work, he should have thrown his body in front of it, making take-off impossible.

d. brandished an unloaded pistol in an effort to stop the flight

Horrace continued his posts suggesting you were something less than a nice guy.

You in turn posted something about 'it takes one to know one' or something along those lines.

Your point all the time being that as a prospective elected AMA official he should have taken action.

Whewwwwwweeeeee!!!!

Then I come along playing straight man, and give you the correct answer that he should have given you in first place.

I'm truly sorry Bill, and this is the truth, it never occured to me that you were trying to make a political thread out of this, until one of the e-mails pointed out the name of the thread.

I hope this helps you to make your point. I'm sorry I blew the punch line, though.

JR

For AMA??
 

Bill,

If you were to try to make that case (as a CD), I would encourage everyone to leave and never fly at one of your events again. READ rule #1 and then please explain how it is being followed if the CD suspends the event for the very first flight on a new model. There is no way to do that and stay within the moral and ethical standard set forth in that rule. I do not recall that rule as being equivocal. I recall it sort as being to the same standard as the old never point a gun at someone rule. I suppose one could argue about the status of the ammunition in the gun (Really officer, it was unloaded! I swear!), but I wouldn't.

I am more concerned with the intentions of any AMA official who worries about lawsuits more than people getting injured. Your thesis seems to assume that the AMA official is the only person who should be concerned about liability and ignores the fact that each and every REAL modeler should have concern about public safety.

Sorry, but this is an approach I am determined to change as I perceive it as bringing danger to spectators, modelers, and our hobby.


To misquote a sign on a friends factory entrance that speaks of honesty, "Safety is like pregnancy. You cannot be almost..."

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

ROFL!!!

I had to go back to the beginning of this discussion to remind myself what the title meant. Sure has wandered off into the weeds! But I do admit to changing the path of the discussion from my original question with the : What would you do if...food for thought...

JR, your reply was hysterical! Gave me a good chuckle. Admittedly full of half truths and out-right BS, but still funny in any case! Good job! I was going to reply and point out the nonsense, but then I realized you wrote that just for a good laugh. You got it!

And you didn't blow it at all, JR, you simply played the role that we all know was scripted for you.

Regards,

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Nice job of taking one sentence out of context and trying to make a point, Jim. But for folks who want to see the context, here it is:

JB: "Is the risk to the public any less if there is no elected AMA official there?"
BL: "Obviously not."

But then you bleat on about reading item 1 of the safety code, etc. which has absolutely nothing to do with the out-of-context quote you made.

Good job, Jim.

Now I suggest you go back and read CAREFULLY what I wrote, Jim. (Might be a good exercise for the other folks, too, so you can see how twisted Jim has taken it.) I need not repeat it here, and I stand by what I said.

You might also try understanding as well as just rereading, Jim. I presented no thesis. You should NOT be trying to read things that are not there and you SHOULD try understanding those that are! For you to imagine that I am saying an "..AMA official is the only.." one to be concerned is completely LUDICROUS! Jim, your imagination and bashing is getting way ahead of your thinking!

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Bill

I'm glad you took the post as it was intended. :)

JR

For AMA??
 

Mr. Lee,

Please stop putting words in my mouth when you bash on any AMA member who does not bow down and worship your words.

I think it is a neat trick you are trying to pull with your previous remarks. Surely one way to hide the fact that you are sensitive about NOT reading and living by the AMA safety code is to accuse others of bleating about it.

I stayed in the context YOU defined and now you are complaining about it?

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

?????????????????????????

Jim, you are incredible!!!

Again, PLEASE go back and read the pertinent posts! PLEASE show me where I have tried to put words in your mouth! You should be able to recognize it since you seem to be so proficient at DOING it! The post quoted above is a classic example: "...sensitive about NOT reading and living by the AMA safety code..." is such prolific hogwash that it must have the entire city of San Antonio on a Red Air Alert.

To the other members of the forum: please go back and reread this exchange and judge for yourself who is putting words in who's mouth. And my apologies for having to take up bandwidth responding to such tripe as Mr. Branaum posts.

Regards,

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Mr. Lee,

I was surprised when you said you did not see a problem with stopping and restarting the event so the new plane could be test flown after what you said to Horrible about the Bomber Field activities around some large plane. That was pretty two faced and really quite a surprise.

Your obvious dislike for the average AMA member is shown clearly in your twisting of the safety code into meaning what you have decided it should mean. Clearly the safety code is meant to protect the public and you obviously don't feel that is needed. I don't like that attitude or approach, but it is yours not mine. I am astounded with your double speak concerning liability lawsuits.

Rather than listen to you bleat about where you hid reality today, lets talk about other issues of import.

I noted Dr. Frank rushing to get AMA members to overwhelm the City of San Diego in the name of the AMA and 'helping' (after the city had ALREADY sided with the AMA). I have noticed some other things that clearly are you and your boss trying to position yourselves for your next magical trick. . . .

Only I don't think it is that special. In fact it is fairly clear that you children are getting ready to run Dr. Frank for AMA President. I just have one question for our AMA insider, Mr. Lee. Is this disdain for AMA members and CD's what District VIII AMA members should expect when Dr. Frank appoints you District VIII VP?

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

Wowee, you need a score card to figure out this thread....

For AMA??
 

Jim, I'll repost EXACTLY what I said:

"OTOH, one COULD make the case (not that I would!) that suspending the contest in mid-stream like that was within the CD's rights."

Now,what part of that sentence don't you understand?



Jim, you are posting lies and untruths.... The above quote is so absolutely untrue as to be libelous. It in no way represents my point of view nor could you POSSIBLY interpret anything I have said to mean such. the only conclusion that can be drawn is that you are PURPOSELY lying and libeling, and I will ask the moderators of this group to take appropriate action

Oh, Jim, your conspiracy behind every bush is showing! Your supposed "issues of import" are not issues and not "import" and do not justify a response.


Regards,

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

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

For AMA??
 

Let's keep this discussion on track without the use of descriptive adjectives please. It's all right to disagree with each other, but please do it in a civilized way, thank you.

For AMA??
 

Jim, you continue to take snips out of context, twist them into your own personal reality and then try and lay them on my doorstep. Sorry, that just won't work.

It's very difficult to "defend" oneself for statements that are just plain untrue to begin with. Obviously, if I should try, that means I accept the original untruth. Not going to happen.

I am not being offensive, defensive nor aggressive, Jim, just trying to point out for all to see the outright falsehoods that you would paint me with. Also to make you try to understand that such lies are libelous and slanderous.


Here is a classic example, Jim. In NO place did I cite the Safety code in the way you would have folks believe. In NO place did I say that I could see where a CD could do....whatever you say. Please go back and read what I DID say, Jim, and please stop building untruths (lies?) from them. So you won't have to look, here it is (once again):

"OTOH, one COULD make the case (not that I would!) that suspending the contest in mid-stream like that was within the CD's rights."

Please show me where it says I "...could see where a CD might do.." that! As it DOES say, Jim, I would NOT (repeat: NOT!!) make that case.

Cheap shots? Not at all! I asked a simple question and received a diatribe about doing whatever you want on private property in spite of it being sanctioned (and thence, insured) by AMA. And NEVER an answer to the question I asked! (Sorry to the other forum members, this all occurred on the usenet news groups.)

Again, Jim, one cannot defend what is not true in the first place. You have made up your own personal reality and then expect others to join you within it. When you finally face the truth, then perhaps we can discuss something, but until then, it is pointless to continue to illustrate your lies and libel when you speak of my "...casual acceptance of CD's violation AMA Safety Rule 1".


Sheesh! I do NOT understand how you can say what you did in the above paragraph when your PREVIOUS post included THIS:

"Only I don't think it is that special. In fact it is fairly clear that you children are getting ready to run Dr. Frank for AMA President."

Conspiracy behind every bush, Jim. Try facing reality for a change.

And no need for YOU (of ALL people!) to worry about MY health, Jim. I am well, thank you.

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Bill,
Your name calling, implied threats and twisting the issue into something you would prefer is boring. Lets change the subject to the simple issue you seem to keep ducking.

I never said you cited the Safety Code, I did that so you can stop trying to put words in my mouth. In fact you said (again and again):
"OTOH, one COULD make the case (not that I would!) that suspending the contest in mid-stream like that was within the CD's rights."

Since we were discussing the test flight of a new plane, the implication of your statement is that you feel the CD has the power to suspend the AMA Safety Code at his discretion.

I contend that action is dishonest and a reasonably clear violation of the safety code.

You seem to have a problem with that.

Please explain.

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

Bill,
This is a separate issue in an effort to make sure you are not confused and are not attacking out of irritation and misunderstanding. You said
*************************************

Sheesh! I do NOT understand how you can say what you did in the above paragraph when your PREVIOUS post included THIS:

"Only I don't think it is that special. In fact it is fairly clear that you children are getting ready to run Dr. Frank for AMA President."

Conspiracy behind every bush, Jim. Try facing reality for a change.

And no need for YOU (of ALL people!) to worry about MY health, Jim. I am well, thank you.

Bill Lee

***********************

Bill, unlike you, I do make mistakes. If this is one why don't you simply say so instead of playing attack doberman and other games with your made up conspiracy theory? That single subject is what concerns me about your health.

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

For AMA??
 

Again, Jim, you are taking one quote out of context and trying to paint me with a lie. Here is the COMPLETE context from the last message:

""OTOH, one COULD make the case (not that I would!) that suspending
the contest in mid-stream like that was within the CD's rights."

Please show me where it says I "...could see where a CD might do.."
that! As it DOES say, Jim, I would NOT (repeat: NOT!!) make that case. "

Now what part of "I would NOT.." don't you understand, Jim?


For the benefit of those who don't frequent the usenet newsgroup, the reference that Jim makes is to a flight of B.B. Weber's "Bear" bomber which was discussed there. What Jim TRIES to assert is that this was the FIRST flight of the model, and what he TRIES to assert is that the CD suspended any sort of AMA Safety rules or suspended the event or........

What he DOESN'T say is that NONE OF THESE ASSERTIONS WERE KNOWN TO BE TRUE OR FALSE IN THE THREAD HE REFERS TO!!! He has made up the story to create a false accusation (a lie?) .

NOWHERE in that thread did ANYBODY say that the CD had suspended the contest for a first-time test flight! That is Jim's lie. NOWHERE in that thread was it said that this was the FIRST FLIGHT of the model! That is more of Jim's lie.

Now I WILL admit that in previous posts in THIS thread (For AMA?) and perhaps elsewhere, others may have SURMISED that these did occur, but the original postings on the Usenet made no such statements. It appears to me that Jim has a problem separating truth from fiction as he makes up his own demented reality. He reads "implications" into other folk's words and absorbs that into his personal truth domain. Fine. But when he spouts it back, then it becomes a lie and libel and slander.


Well, Jim, I cannot refute your made-up personal reality. No matter what FACTS abound, you will believe what you will believe. Your problem. But when you post your nonsense in the a public forum such as this, then you must be answered.

As I have said over and over and over. I will NOT defend myself against untruths other than to point out the lie. When you can emerge from your personal reality and talk FACTS, Jim, come on back.

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

This is REALLY funny! One of the consumate conspiracy theorists worrying about somebody ELSE'S health!! ROFLMAO!

Again, to the folks on this forum: please read ONE MORE TIME the quote above. In it you will find that Jim has dreamed up the idea that some of us are planning some sort of political campaign for our current VP for AMA President. Another one of Jim's obvious "conspiracy behind every bush" dreams! And then he says that someone ELSE needs to worry about their health! ROFLMAO!!!

For the record, the ONLY campaign I am aware of that is ANY sort of reality is Dr. Sandy Frank's desire to run again for District VIII VP. Now THAT IS REALITY, Jim. See if you can twist THAT or find some sort of "hidden meaning" or "ulterior motive" or "conspiracy"!!!

Thanks for a good chuckle to start the morning, Jim.

Bill Lee

For AMA??
 

Bill,
You seem to thrive on the personal attacks. Too bad you refuse to simply answer the question.

I am glad I was able to shed a little cheer into you otherwise twisted life today.

For AMA??
 

Bill

In reading the previous posts, I was under the impression that what Jim posted was not about the 'bear' incident at all. I was under the impression that it was something that happened to Jim in a real life contest he was involved in. If he was, indeed, talking about the 'bear' incident, I could see where you would take a different approach to the question. I hope Jim will clear this up. Maybe we all look for conspiracies when there are none.

I saw the issue as involving two parts. First, does the CD have the right to suspend a contest and resume it later. I think one could make a case for that based on the reasoning that it is done often, for instance, to facilitate a passing storm. I think that to do so for the first flight of a new plane is a stretch of that authority and reflects on the quality of the CD.

The second part, that of allowing the first flight of a new plane with the contestants present, is an entirely separate issue. That appears to me to be a violation of the Safety Code. That would, in my opinion, subject the CD to possible sanctions rather than just having poor judgment in suspending the contest.

As to your conspiracy argument, I must admit to subscribing to that as well. I view you as a Representative of Sandy Frank and I often engage you in debate on forums because of that. I will no longer do that.

I have a question about Sandy Frank's intention's when he openly encouraged modelers, world wide, to write to the City of San Diego, and to 'sign' the petition, after the City had already sided with the Torrey Pines Gulls. I could see no useful reason for him to do this. I will now, however, post it as an open question to him in another thread.

JR

For AMA??
 

From reading, and re-reading, all the vitriol, etc., in this thread, I thought the same thing. If, in fact, that is the case, and IF, the CD suspended the contest for a "demo" first-flight of a new model (somewhat redundant, I know, but I wanted to be clear), then that is clearly a violation of the safety code, and not Bill Lee, Sandy Frank, or Dave Brown would have the authority to "leaglly" violate it, let alone a CD.

BTW, since the By-laws state the the CD is the AMA agent at AMA sanctioned events, the ORIGINAL question is answered as FOR the AMA. Chris can jump in on this, but anyone who has legal agent status, and that is what the by-laws imply, is acting on behalf of the person/organization for whom he is the agent, and that person/organization will be held legally liable for any act commited by the agent, while acting as the agent. This is why it is essential that a CD not violate the safety code. Any incident which occurred as a result of his negligence could be held agains the AMA, as an organization, and not simply the CD and/or local club.

Bill, Jim, bury the hatchet (and not in each other).