Originally Posted by
ATCsaidDoWhat
So now you've gone from "I heard" to "I think." When you had an opportunity to get answers from the person who leads the Division, you refused. And you end with the cute line about the IBT "hiding" information.
1. Does Pat Gannon not even know how much money is going to National? We wanted answers from him.
2. I asked a question. I'm glad you thought it was cute, but I'd prefer and answer to compliments (or evasion?)
Originally Posted by
ATCsaidDoWhat
You then "suggest" that Pat didn't attend on "orders from above." Despite knowing better. So it's obviously better to claim that information is "hidden" and Pat is controlled "on orders from above."
1. I was clear that it wasn't rhetorical, and thus not a "suggestion", but a question.
2. Once again, you lie. I asked a question - I didn't claim that.
Originally Posted by
ATCsaidDoWhat
You also "forgot" to answer the question about your "kitty." How much do you anticipate spending on the lawsuit you just filed? How much for attorneys? Experts? How much are you spending for your concessionary talks with Bedford?
The whole SLI case cost about $2 million, so while I'm not the treasurer, it's certainly a whole lot less than that. FAPA gets a lot of bang for the buck - dozens of LOA's without a fuss. It's called negotiating, vs demanding. It's quite apparent to me which has produced better results for its respective pilot group.
Originally Posted by
ATCsaidDoWhat
What's the offer? You'll fly for less to screw the other pilots on the property? Maybe you can take the 2 million and PAY Bedford to fly his jets.
That's just pure rhetoric there.
Regarding FAPA's finances, I can call our treasurer and ask him about that, but I don't feel a need to share that with you. If you don't like that, then no need to vote for FAPA (I'm not). I'm asking the question because Teamsters IS asking for my vote.