On Jan 10, 10:39*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message

...







David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

Billy Burpelson wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

* Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you
did
not stay and fight.

Just asking as a disinterested observer, how could one " *stay* and
fight" if they were " *removed* at gunpoint"? It seems it would be
difficult to stay when you have been removed, does it not?

How does one get confronted *at gunpoint*, then is conveniently
released
to go
about his/her business for 24 hours pulling a *Catch 22* on some f00kin
hunta,
then is picked up later on to be brought to the airport *at gunpoint*?

I was confronted and told I had to leave; as I have said for the period
up
to the next flight, I was escorted by my new buddies with rifles.

Interesting, if only it were true. Personally, I would have hauled your
lying
ass directly to the airport.

Yeah, that is what nearly anyone would do: give up about a dozen radio
stations.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, you informed on others in order to save your own miserable hide.

"Steve" wrote in message
...

No, you informed on others in order to save your own miserable hide.

That makes no sense. Of course, your lie about NYC stations being interfered
with makes no sense, either. At least you are consistent.

On Jan 10, 9:50*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

...

No, you informed on others in order to save your own miserable hide.

That makes no sense. Of course, your lie about NYC stations being interfered
with makes no sense, either. At least you are consistent.

It makes perfect sense. What makes no sense is your persistent belief
that you can hoodwink the readers of this group with your absurd fairy
tales.

y'all play nice, now.
Is Burr constipated? He isn't saying much.
cuhulin