Patience: I'm already working on getting the referenced attachments.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Latest St. Marys letter to FAA, RE: airport relocation.
Click on images to enlarge.
Patience: I'm already working on getting the referenced attachments.
Patience: I'm already working on getting the referenced attachments.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
Interesting at the difference in the appraisal of the property. i am suprised they even showed the lower appraisal.
Better they did than not, wouldn't you agree?
I see that you chose not to post my comments about the City of StMarys' apparent postition on the airport. Why not?
You, Sir or Madam, are either a liar who never sent a comment or you screwed up sending it.
The known fact is that I have not deleted any comment that has come in on this post.
If you are not a liar, but just an inept boob, send it again and I will poost it.
poost - verb 1. To flush or bury fecal material Usage- "I saw my cat poost the poop in the back yard."
Yep, just as I sujspected, you lying scum - you never sent a comment but were pulling one of those old "Is it true that uyou've stoipped beating your wife?" dirty tricks.
I am quite capable of posting on a blog, and have in fact, posted on this one several times. Many of those times have been to agree with you or to provide information in relation to a current topic. My point of asking the question of why the comments were not posted was that most of my others have been. Having said that, I resent being called a liar and/or a boob. My assumption was that I had followed the procedure for things to post just as I had done on all previous posts. And no, I am not the one that posted the definition. I eagerly await your pithy and condescending comments.
So I guess this means that your best guess is that you somehow screwed up when you tried to comment. If your thoughts were so important and you arr so indignant thatr they were not published ( becuase they never arrived), would it really be that difficult to type and send them again, or do you really not have anything to say and really just want to spread the canard that I routinely quash comments I don't agree with? Which is it, Alex?
correct me if im wrong jay, on the ballot it sait at no cost to taxpayers of c.c. or stm.right?
but on 3rd paragraph of last page it says using state,LOCAL,and private funds. where dose state and
local funds come from? is it taxes
seapro
I am not spreading a canard. I merely asked for a possible explanation for why they were not published. Thank you for not dissapointing me with your arrogant and condescending explanation and comments. I assure you that I will not waste the time to post again.
Anonymous said...
I am not spreading a canard. I merely asked for a possible explanation for why they were not published. Thank you for not dissapointing me with your arrogant and condescending explanation and comments. I assure you that I will not waste the time to post again.
August 28, 2009 9:38 PM
I went to copy this but accidentally cut it instead - hence the deletion of the original.
As I've said before, don't let the cyber door hit you in the ass, but you keep coming back.
By the way, that was me in my big, green (literally) gas-guzzling, eco-unfriendly van yesterday as you zipped along in your golf cart in front of the new St. Marys Elementary School.
Weird - it disappeared then it returned.
Seapro,
I don't remember if the referendum said at no cost to the city and county or just the city.
However, I went to the 3rd paragraph of the last page. Yes, it does say that, but if you will go to page 4, 2nd paragraph, 3rd subparagraph, you will see that it is the city's intent to use the appraised value of the land donated by Sea Island to fulfill the city's financial "matching" obligation.
i know i was out in sun for awhile but what does finanicial obligation mean? and if that land is worth that much up in swamp land why are they not paying that much in taxes on it?
sp
its hogwash and you know it
I would explain to yuo why once again, you are wrong, but it wpould be pointless. You sneaked in under your passive flag and I cut you some slack.
Now, you are once again sailing under your agressive, misanthropic, irrational, paranoic flag.
I'm no psychiatrist, but I'll bet that your remaining hemisphere will respond just as well to the appropriate psychotherapeutics as a whole brain would. Why not give it a try?
I'll not relent again, unless it is evident that you've been properly diagnosed and prescribed, so don't bother to comment until then.
Good luck.
Jay, your ever-increasing level of paranoid is starting to worry me now.
I haven't read (or written) anything on your blog for ages - there's simply no point - and the last thing that I wrote was in my own name. I took a notion to check out your site today and am most amused (?) by your strange obsession.
Feel free to continue your imaginary conversations with me...just know that you're making a complete fool of yourself.
While I have neither a master's degree (so far) nor the liberals' "Vision Of The Annointed," I nonetheless feel confident that ther word you were looking for was the noun "parnoia" vice the adjective "paranoid."
Perhaps you were out saving something that day.
It really is a little lame when your only answer to criticism is to point out a typo error. If you want to carry on an intelligent discussion, try to hold up your end
Oops! I failed to recognize that ad hominem canard as the opening gambit of a civil conversation. My bad!
Actually, my civil conversation quota is full, but thanks.
“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you” Kurt Cobain
Jay,
I see by an article in last Friday's T&G that there was a little falsehood in the original letter. Mr. Shanahan has written a revised version and will, supposedly, be sending it to replace the flawed version. How about posting the revised letter.
Post a Comment