Same Old BS Finally Equals Kill File

Yeah, that's what we're talking about.

It sounds like what was posted in the Tripoli Report may have been "heavily edited" as they say.

-dave w

You're right, he doesn't have to... but if he wants anyone to believe him, he'd better provide some proof. Without proof, no one's going to buy his story. His claims are contrary to what the Orange Book says and what the ATF said in court and thus would lack credibility coming from anyone. As a convicted fraud and proven liar, he has no credibility to begin with.

That's why he's no longer "living the lifestyle".

This "IS" the JI newsgroup. When the preponderance of posts are either aimed at, retorts to, from or about JI, what else can it be? Surely not a "rocketry" newsgroup.

A JI newsgroup with occasional rocketry diversions? Maybe we should start putting [OT][F-FT] on all rocketry-related threads ;-)

I read RMR because, in amongst all the nonsense, there are occasional items of interest/usefulness, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which threads have descended into JI-based nonsense.

Nope. Just start with the assumption that it is a JI thread, then proceed cautiously.

Perhaps [OT-No-JI-Content] would be more appropriate.

Please.

Exactly.

They would never do that. Would they?

It's all about Jerry.

Well...maybe 80%, followed by 15% BATF and 5% rocketry :-p

The MS usenet stats page is always interesting, every time I've checked Jerry's been No1 (a dubious honour perhaps).

Enough of this anyway, don't really want to go any further down this route!

In which case you would be free to contribute without harrassment, *if* it your content is rocket related, and not org/regs/laws related (which I do not deny the importance of, however it does often drown out content specifically about rockets). I wonder sometimes if this is rec.models.rockets.regulations!

I do not deny that some of your posts are (gasp) relavent to the threads (even if you do tend to write 'Tech Jerry', which just starts some people off on the same boring old nonsense).

Too many rules.

rec.models.rockets.ignoretheregulations

:)

Considering that it reads much like the evasive replies you get on here when you try to pin him down, I doubt that it's far from the truth, if it's not completely accurate.

-Kevin

In this case I can say it varies from reality by a wide margin. So much so I would INVITE the release of the audio recording.

It should be noted in general that upon review of the iussues at that meeting, TRA was unable/unwilling to produce a true and correct copy of the report on which my removal was based. Further even the letter and check from TRA itself could not be produced.

NEW ISSUES were raised as a means to try to obfuscate and justify the PAST action.

They were at no time an element of the issues I was removed (fraudulantly) on.

That matters.

But not to the sycophants.

Jerry

It did sound like the "Jerry Speak" we've been hearing for years already.

It was funny considering it was the "reinstatement into TRA" hearing that JI requested. and he seemed to refuse to directly answer any question! Thinks like "no, I can't produce a waiver that covers that launch site on those dates" would have gone much further to his case than the stuff he was saying!

Like I said, I remember getting it and reading it, and just laughing at what JI was saying! Kind of like when Jerry was claiming he was "only an employee" in a company with less than two employees, but was not in charge, as he did in the DOT stuff!

The TRA Report of JI's hearing read just like JI's postings here (and on ROL before he got booted)

David W... Did you read the TR yourself, or are you just claiming it's wrong because Jerry said so?

ATF. He's already gotten help with DOT. To bad he took liberties with the truth.

They are not "extra-legal" to TMT. If you want certified motors, you have to follow their rules.