Davis Straub; Idiot Statist, Endless Wars & Tyranny

[Free]

It's hard to converse with a zealot.

I know what you mean. Religious zealots are the worst.
You never answered any of my questions.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in his “Notes on the State of Virginia“:
“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potato as an article of food. […] It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”

This applies to food and vaccine.
Should the government be able force/mandate broccoli and spinach on all of us like the U$hPA just mandated this new helmet rule on us?
Was it punishment for what Bob did? Because we live under a dictatorship?

Should forced economic austerity and penance to enrich Al Gore, be the rule of law because of some nebulous correlation of CO2 and imagined anthropological global warming? Truthfully?
Do I have to be poisoned with a vaccine because your poison vaccine isn't doing what it is supposed to be doing for the rest of the herd??

Jefferson, the artist:
It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”

Where is the proof and truth to deem the pain and suffering, that zealots like Al Gore and Paul Offit want to force on us?
Corrupt computer models don't count.
Falsified pharmaceutical studies don't count.
Converse with me, Rick. I'm worried about our human rights.

[Free]

Bob Kuczewski - 2015/02/04 19:53:20
Warren, as I've said to Tad, I think you have a lot to offer to this forum and to the sport of hang gliding.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-460.html#p7375
Yeah Bob, you've been saying stuff like that for the better part of half a dozen years now. So name one item of the lotsa stuff that I have to offer - hook-in checks, Tad-O-Links, straight pin releases not within easy reach, wheel landings, SOPs revisions, compliance with existing USHGA SOPs and FAA safety regulations, gutting Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney, getting Sam out of circulation before he kills someone - that you haven't sabotaged.
Tad Eareckson

[Bob Kuczewski]

Warren, you may have missed the most important parts of my post:

Warren, as I've said to Tad, I think you have a lot to offer to this forum and to the sport of hang gliding. But you are letting your fears get the best of you and it is alienating good people who might otherwise agree with you. Please give that some thought because I'd really like to see you participating in a healthy way on this forum.

Tad was (and still is) motivated by hate. Tad is out to get everyone he thinks has ever slighted him in his life. Read his forum and you'll see his hatred seeping onto almost every page.

The great thing about having multiple hang gliding forums is that people can find the kinds of people they want to hang out with. We're making a sincere effort on this forum to build a national hang gliding association for people who love the sport and want to be treated fairly and decently. If you'd like to join us, you're surely welcome. I really mean that. But if you just want to throw stones, then I'm sure Tad would welcome you with open arms.

[Free]

Warren, you may have missed the most important parts of my post:

Warren, as I've said to Tad, I think you have a lot to offer to this forum and to the sport of hang gliding. But you are letting your fears get the best of you and it is alienating good people who might otherwise agree with you. Please give that some thought because I'd really like to see you participating in a healthy way on this forum.

I didn't miss it, Bob. I don't believe you.

Tad was (and still is) motivated by hate. Tad is out to get everyone he thinks has ever slighted him in his life. Read his forum and you'll see his hatred seeping onto almost every page.

I do read his forum and I believe Tad is motivated by the revenge of exposing bankrupt arguments versus his hang gliding ideas.
IMO, Tad Eareckson's, analysis and logic of things as they ought to be in hang gliding, are right on the money.
In the interest of safer hang gliding, the collective would do well to listen to what he says.
Those valid hang gliding concerns, cross posted from Tad, are direct responses to you.
The standing SOP's, that you have laid out, allow this.
All naughty words were moderated.
What really is the problem?

The great thing about having multiple hang gliding forums is that people can find the kinds of people they want to hang out with. We're making a sincere effort on this forum to build a national hang gliding association for people who love the sport and want to be treated fairly and decently. If you'd like to join us, you're surely welcome. I really mean that. But if you just want to throw stones, then I'm sure Tad would welcome you with open arms.

Bingo!
The NLP money shot!
Good job, Bob.
But I'm not taking your bait.

If you want to ban me for ~not~ violating any of your rules, then just go ahead and do it like a dictator.
If you want to change the rules in midstream then I guess a better place for discussion would be the pro-tem Executive Board.
I believe Chairman Cummings, is all saddled up and ready to ride..
Yippee-yo-ti-yaaa!

Thanks in advance.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Warren, you may have missed the most important parts of my post:

Warren, as I've said to Tad, I think you have a lot to offer to this forum and to the sport of hang gliding. But you are letting your fears get the best of you and it is alienating good people who might otherwise agree with you. Please give that some thought because I'd really like to see you participating in a healthy way on this forum.

I didn't miss it, Bob. I don't believe you.

In that case, I guess I know something that you don't.

Tad was (and still is) motivated by hate. Tad is out to get everyone he thinks has ever slighted him in his life. Read his forum and you'll see his hatred seeping onto almost every page.

I do read his forum and I believe Tad is motivated by the revenge of exposing bankrupt arguments versus his hang gliding ideas.

Warren, you titled your response "Tad: Uncensored", so I did a quick search of Tad's forum for 3 words: "war", "destroy", and "demolish". Here's just part of what I found:

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-440.html#p7282
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2015/01/13 23:30:15 UTC
You set yourself up for a fu**in' civil war and I'm gonna do everything I can to fuel it. And you can tell that I'm doing damage and can do more by reading the posts of some of your Dedicated Sycophants. ... you're gonna take some lumps - from which you, hopefully, will never recover.

That first post - all alone - pretty much sums it up. A "civil war" is a war fought among people within the same "country" or organization (the US Hawks in this case). So how could Tad "fuel" such a civil war when he is not a member? The answer is pretty clear. He sends his puppets to do his bidding. And what is Tad trying to accomplish? Is he trying to improve the US Hawks? No. He measures his success by how much "damage" he can do, and by how many "lumps" he can inflict - hopefully enough in his words that we "will never recover". That's not a "civil war". That's terrorism.

The US Hawks has been open and welcoming since we were founded ... much like the United States itself. But in recent years, we've been seeing people coming to this country (United States) not to join in our civilization and help it grow - but to do as much damage to it as possible. That's the same pattern of "forum terrorism" that we're seeing from some of Tad's puppets. Our "Terms of Service" will have to address this.

If that first post wasn't conclusive enough, here's a little more from my quick search ... all written by Tad:

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-340.html#p7060
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/11/23 05:39:02 UTC
Bob wrote: The one thing that I would request is a reduction in the "war" of rhetoric aimed at myself and others on the US Hawks.
Tad replied: Request denied. Presently gearing to REALLY ramp it up.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-230.html#p5542
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/01/03 23:42:54 UTC
Bob wrote: So I am again asking that we follow the well known adage: If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all. : )

Tad replied: You, Sam, Rick, Peter, Charlie, and - with his wildly popular but totally wacko understanding of weak links - Bill ARE *ACTUAL* *DEADLY* *THREATS* to people of ALL ages and, more importantly, to the sport of hang gliding. And y'all proved that in no uncertain terms a year and a half ago.
And, as long as that's the case - and that will ALWAYS be the case (more so as time progresses the way things have been going recently), there's no way in hell that I'm gonna do a live-and-let-live thing with you a**holes.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-50.html#p1171
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2012/01/10 18:14:02 UTC
Bob wanted a war - Bob got a war. (Just not the one he expected to win hands down in half an hour or so - one that's gonna last the rest of his life that he's never gonna win.)

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic14-210.html#p917
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2011/10/23 14:05:24 UTC
Bob...
Yeah, I'm afraid I had been reluctantly reaching that conclusion for some time. And as of last night, it seems, we're on the brink of war. Oh well, whatever the case, he can still be beaten up just for fun. And he's given us so much really good ammunition.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic6-1230.html#p6494
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/08/19 18:02:33 UTC
Tad wrote about D...:
We need to humiliate and destroy him - drive a stake through whatever he's using for a heart and decapitate him to make sure. And time is on our side. We can do it carefully and leisurely 'cause he can never effectively unpost what he's already posted.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic6-670.html#p3878
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2013/02/27 21:22:28 UTC
Tad wrote about Jim Rooney:
We NEED to destroy this motherfu**er. We've gotta get control of this sport back into the hands of hang gliders and away from the powered ultralight drivers we've been subsidizing while they've been hijacking it away from us.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic14-1110.html#p6446
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/08/11 11:10:39 UTC
I actually DO care about the sport and the kind of people who SHOULD be in it and the most important and effective thing I can do is hunt down and destroy supertrolls such as yourself, Steve Wendt, Davis, Malcolm, Matt, Trisa, Bob, Peter, Pagen... I don't want them going somewhere else and poisoning new victims. I want their names and reputations thoroughly, totally, irrevocably demolished and their places in history permanently where they deserve to be.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic6-660.html#p3849
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2013/02/23 12:25:36 UTC
And actually, all we really need to do is destroy Rooney ...

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic6-570.html#p3764
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2013/02/17 14:03:55 UTC
Tad wrote about Jim Rooney:
If we keep the heat on we can destroy this son of a bi**h.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic14-520.html#p3021
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2012/10/04 16:30:31 UTC
More to come, back to work, must destroy Ryan.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic14-110.html#p687
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2011/08/25 09:04:24 UTC
Tad wrote about Jim Rooney:
Keep it on line, Steve. We need to publicly destroy and humiliate this miserable little s**t to the maximum extent possible.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-340.html#p7060
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/11/23 05:39:02 UTC
To Bob:
The purpose of Kite Strings is to assemble top quality people, pilots, writers, and fighters to demolish evil little entities like yours, Jack's, Davis's, Peter's.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic72-40.html#p6855
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/10/22 04:02:46 UTC
Tad wrote to Orion Price:
Talk to me - motherfu**er. I'll demolish your a** so fast you won't know what hit you. Or are you gonna save that for when the forum is locked down and no one can see what's going on?

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic72-30.html#p6729
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/09/27 20:34:37 UTC
Tad wrote about the Oz Report:
A**holes in the enemy camp had set themselves up so well that even other a**holes in the enemy camp were poised to demolish them.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic10-780.html#p5819
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/03/25 20:49:45 UTC
Tad wrote possibly about Rob McKenzie (I'm not sure about this one without doing more research):
If he's some evil lying piece of s**t like Rooney or Trisa you expose him for what he is, demolish him, neutralize him as an active threat to the sport and the people in it. (We seem to have done a pretty good number on that score on Rooney and Davis and likely Trisa as well.)

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic6-930.html#p4578
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2013/06/27 06:07:21 UTC
To Dan Tomlinson:
NOBODY can make a positive contribution to the sport using ANY approach until we can demolish crud like you and flush it where it belongs.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic7-460.html#p4431
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2013/06/04 03:12:39 UTC
Yeah Steve, it doesn't get much better than this one. We can demolish Rooney, Davis, and their cult members with it - like we did when Zack Marzec bought it. It won't change much but it DOES push their credibility a little farther down the toilet.
Do whatever you feel you can, guys. Every time the opposition opens its mouth it digs itself in deeper. And Rooney doesn't have five percent of the brains he needs to know when to shut the f**k up and make himself as inconspicuous as possible.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic14-130.html#p708
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2011/08/30 19:27:12 UTC
The problem that I see is that the people who REALLY know what f**k they're talking about and how to demolish a**holes like Rooney and Davis aren't allowed to post here.

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-10.html#p1035
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2011/12/21 17:00:35 UTC
Sam wrote: Thanks BobK
Tad replied:
Yeah BobK, thank you SO VERY MUCH.
I've never hated you as much as I do at this moment - you lying, hypocritical, soulless, serial killing son of a bi**h.
Bob replied:
You see, Tad? This is exactly why people ignore you. I went out of my way to NOT ignore you and I ended up on your "most hated" list.
And you wonder why people ignore you? You're like a mad dog chained in someone's front yard. Most people will just not make eye contact and keep on walking. I stopped by to see if I could help you and now you're lunging at my throat.
So don't complain when people just refuse to engage you. Your actions toward me (and others who've engaged you) demonstrate the futility (and danger) of making that attempt.

That was just a quick (and extremely incomplete) sampling of "Tad: Uncensored".

If you want to ban me for ~not~ violating any of your rules, then just go ahead and do it like a dictator.
If you want to change the rules in midstream then I guess a better place for discussion would be the pro-tem Executive Board.

Warren, you were the 6th member to join the US Hawks. You've been able to post here since August 17th of 2010 (4 days after our founding). If I had wanted to ban you at any time, I'd have done so already. In fact, I was really concerned about you being missing for so long. If I had wanted to ban you at any time during that long absence, I could have deleted your account then and no one would have known the difference. But I didn't.

However, as the US Hawks continues to grow, we are going to have to develop rules (Terms of Service, for example) to protect ourselves from people who want to destroy, demolish, or go to "war" with us as Tad has clearly expressed. I had never searched Tad's forum like this before, and I was surprised (although I shouldn't have been) to find that he's been sending some of "his people" over here with the explicit intention of causing us trouble (read some of his discussions with his minions). At some point we're going to have to deal with that, and I'm sure we will find a way.

As I've written before, the US Hawks would like to take the position that people should join and support - in a positive way - whatever organizations and forums they want. That's the "live and let live" model. If you like what Tad is doing, then please go over to his forum and support him there. I can respect that. But I can't respect anyone who is a member of the US Hawks for the explicit purpose of destroying it.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I checked Tad's site this morning:

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-470.html#p7379

Here's an extract of the names of the enemy individuals from your quoted passages:

Bob Kuczewski
Sam Kellner
Rick Masters
Peter Birren
Charlie Schneider
Bill Cummings
Davis Straub
Jim Rooney
Steve Wendt
Malcolm Jones
Matt Taber
Dr. Trisa Tilletti
Dennis Pagen
Ryan Voight
Jack Axaopoulos
Orion Price
Rob McKenzie
Dan Tomlinson
Craig Hassan
Paul Hurless

Kite Strings has done a lot of damage to a lot of those motherfu**ers. You're not hearing much from them or about them as go-to experts and authorities and credible individuals nowadays. Donnell Hewett's sorta in there as well. His 1.0 G magic weak link is forever down the toilet as well.

Note that he calls all of those people "enemy individuals" and brags about having "done a lot of damage" to many of them.

If anyone wants to be part of a hang gliding association bent on destroying other people and other organizations, please leave the US Hawks and join some other organization. I may disagree with some of the people in Tad's list, but my goal has always been to change their viewpoints rather than "destroying" them. There's no place for "destroying" people on the US Hawks.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I just got this message from someone who wanted to remain anonymous.

To bobk and Free,

In looking over the quotes bobk gathered from Tad's "KiteStrings" site, anyone here should be aware of the following:

18 U.S. Code § 875 - Interstate Communications

(c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing . . . any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.*

Tad wrote :

We need to humiliate and destroy him - drive a stake through whatever he's using for a heart and decapitate him to make sure . . .

That sure sounds to me like a "threat to injure". And since the message has been received by multiple parties in multiple states it unquestionably involves interstate commerce.

* < http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875 >

[Bill Cummings]

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic33-230.html#p5542
Posted by Tad Eareckson » 2014/01/03 23:42:54 UTC
Bob wrote: So I am again asking that we follow the well known adage: If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all. : )

Tad replied: You, Sam, Rick, Peter, Charlie, and - with his wildly popular but totally wacko understanding of weak links - Bill ARE *ACTUAL* *DEADLY* *THREATS* to people of ALL ages and, more importantly, to the sport of hang gliding. And y'all proved that in no uncertain terms a year and a half ago.
And, as long as that's the case - and that will ALWAYS be the case (more so as time progresses the way things have been going recently), there's no way in hell that I'm gonna do a live-and-let-live thing with you a**holes.
Bill C. two cents worth:
The post by Bob of quotes attributed to Tad’s attacks on websites and people differing with Tads opinions are in surprising abundance.
Bob can ease up now. No need to drop another bunker buster bomb on such a soft surface target. Your research, beyond any reasonable doubt, supports your contention on Tad’s ill will directed at the US Hawks and others for differing with his opinions.

I don’t find myself in anyone’s camp of differing with Tad’s opinionS. I’ve stated in the past and Tad has even quoted me for supporting the good work that he has done with his aero towing procedures. I can only recall two opinions that differ between us. The first being weaklink strength and we are not that far apart. My upper limit is 350 pounds breaking strength or 1.6 of my all up weight when platform towing and for various situations that can arise while platform towing.
I believe in lift and tug before launch (when it can be done safely) but that caveat will easily dissolve into a blistering attack by Tad for whomever brings it up.

For these differences Tad has named me, “----with his wildly popular but totally wacko understanding of weak links - BILL ARE *ACTUAL* *DEADLY* *THREATS* to people of ALL ages and, more importantly the sport of hang gliding.”

For the up and coming tow pilots please recognize that there is more than one opinion concerning weak link strength. Not diametrically, emphatically opposing opinions to my way of thinking but apparently you must choose carefully with whom you align yourself with at the risk of being lumped in with the group that are “***holes.”

What I find confusing for Tads readers is Tad referencing my praise for his good work on his aero towing procedures and then readers finding me grouped with people that are deadly threats to hang gliding and let’s not forget “***holes.”

[Free]

Tad is already banned.
What new rules are needed to fix that problem?

It seems to me that Bob is trying to make the case for anyone tied to Tad.
Maybe like this:

HangGliding.Org Rules and Policies

No posts or links about Bob K, Scott C Wise, Tad Eareckson and related people, or their material. ALL SUCH POSTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DELETED. These people are poison to this sport and are permanently banned from this site in every possible way imaginable.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Tad is already banned.
What new rules are needed to fix that problem?

Tad was banned by my own decision. As I've stated many times, I'd like the US Hawks to migrate to a Board of Directors system of government providing due process for decisions like Tad's banning. It may be that such a Board would reverse that decision. If we are going to have a Board to make such decisions, then they're going to need guidance to fall back on. That's the model that we've used here in the United States. We have a fairly compact Constitution that provides guidance for all of our laws and even our court decisions. That's what's been missing at USHPA, and almost all other hang gliding forums. That's what we'd like to establish here.

It seems to me that Bob is trying to make the case for anyone tied to Tad.
Maybe like this:

HangGliding.Org Rules and Policies

No posts or links about Bob K, Scott C Wise, Tad Eareckson and related people, or their material. ALL SUCH POSTS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY DELETED. These people are poison to this sport and are permanently banned from this site in every possible way imaginable.

No. I would not advocate for rules banning any one person just as we don't have laws listing people by name who should be in jail. I would like to establish rules of conduct or "Terms of Service" or whatever we might want to call it to ensure that people know what the rules are and they are applied fairly to everyone.

The thorny problem we have is how to handle saboteurs. When I started this forum I imagined an organization of people working together to protect and promote the sport of hang gliding. I figured people who didn't want to participate in that endeavor would not be interested in participating on the forum (they would vote with their feet). I didn't really imagine anyone intentionally joining with the goal of destroying what we were trying to build.

saboteur (plural saboteurs)
1. A person who intentionally causes the destruction of property in order to hinder the efforts of his/her enemy.

That's pretty close to Tad's stated purpose. It also seems to be what a few others are trying to do.

It would be my hope that anyone who didn't want to support the growth of the US Hawks would just go away and start their own association ("live and let live"). Then we wouldn't need any rules for dealing with saboteurs. But that doesn't seem to be the case. So we will have to figure out how to address this problem.

Finally, it's important to note that nations and organizations have had various "pledges of allegiance" since the dawn of civilization. Sometimes it's a formal pledge (like the US Pledge of Allegiance), sometimes it's an oath (as when joining the military or law enforcement), and sometimes it's a legal agreement outlining a duty or obligation of allegiance (Board of Director's agreements, for example). But in all cases, such a pledge is intended to show a commitment to a cause. Such a commitment doesn't bar a person from expressing dissent on how to achieve the cause, but it does prohibit them from using the organization's resources to actively work against the cause. I am afraid that we may need something like that to give us a basis for separating people who want to work to build the US Hawks and people who want to work to destroy it.