Reply to Fred on USR/DOT thread

Dave wrote:

I don't think he's having trouble with DOT... there were stories about Aerotech shipment of certain products being "shut down by DOT" (stories vary as to the reason) - if Jerry was having "trouble with DOT" I think he'd be the first to know.

I think NAR/TRA are making a point of having trouble with the fact that he _isn't_ having trouble with DOT...

-dave w

Yes they are.

Do you need me to post the many websites devoted to DOT troubles? (fetch) It is NOT rocket specific. And my problem is NOT with DOT.

It is with TRA making many reports TO DOT about me, and NAR making reports TO DOT about me.

I understand you are of sufficiently low intelligence and logic to not understand my words. But the rest of the readers can.

Jerry

Perfect summary.

So you don't equate your calling DOT to "just check to see if JI's paperwork is valid" to JC calling the landowner to "check to see if he gave permission for the EX launches"

Bob

This is a paper that is valid on its face and lodges with the vendor NOT with the DOT at least in 1986 when it was issued with no expiration date.

Please do.

Are you telling me the INS can't validate the legal status of an immigrant after the INS has given them their papers?

So is a driver's license -- unless you change your name, or the license is suspended/revoked, or is altered or forged. Then it is invalid. Surely there are circumstances in which green cards or E/EX numbers become invalid, and if so then there must be a means by which these documents can be verified.

A naive question indeed.

If he *is* doing something wrong, why isn't he incarcerated? If such inquiries say *anything* to me, it is that he *is* clear.

If I get a tax audit because something "looks" suspicious, and then in the end, it is found that my operations and books are fine:

Who pays for my lost time and resources spent fending off a bogus inquiry/accusation?... (me)

There is no retribution for false dime dropping. However, I don't know if I believe that Fred did do such. I do believe that TRA has done such, as such can be ascertained by certain responders to posts in the past. I am only responding to the comment by Ray: "If he isn't doing something wrong, what is there to "drop a dime" on?"

~ Duane "been in those shoes, done that" Phillips.

P.S. I have seen only one case in all my life where a government inquiry "went the other way" and had great financial benefit to the inquired, much to the disgruntledness of the agent. In most of all other cases, the inquired person/entity is vindicated, but setback in time and manpower... some times so much that they folded even after vindication, or does not have the funds/time/desire to fight the unjust deed, and simply say, "where do I pay, and to whom?"

Hey, RAY asks the question again of someone else after I have personally answered it twice. Search this forum for REPOST in the last 7 days for an answer to the question. Save the link, because Ray will ask it again, and again, and again in an attempt to create FUD.

Philip

That is PRECISELY what plea bragains are designed to encourage. Throw the shotgun of bogus charges, then settle for one that gives the agency the brownie point it needs to justify its actions and budget.

Over and over and over all day long.

Citizens are expendable.

Jerry

Huh?? I have not yet seen an answer to these questions.

Well the stop posting and read for awhile. I repeat: "Search this forum for REPOST in the last 7 days for an answer to the question"

I'm not going to waste my time searching through hundreds of old posts, especially when the two questions required only simple yes/no answers.