The Bob Show

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=5095
Moderation

Mike Moacanin - 2016/01/23 19:21:08 UTC
Somis

Moderation

I have a topic with the very same title over on the bag forum:

http://www.paraglidingforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=30195

Check it out - motherfucker.

After discussion with board members and our President I have deleted the entire thread containing a poll regarding a specific person.

- You're not speaking his name 'cause he's an unrepentant child molester?

- How lucky hang gliding is to have total douchebags controlling forums, annihilating the work of contributors, destroying historical records, arbitrating what will and won't be publicly discussed.

Although there are "Terms of Service", we are a forum without formal rules.

So we do whatever the fuck we feel like doing for whatever reason we feel like using.

The only rule that might exist is one that says: "If you make us act as if we have rules, then you are probably breaking them". In this case all sides behaved poorly.

- In stark contrast to the usual stellar behavior of the magnificent individuals constituting the Grebloville club. Orion Price comes to immediate mind.

- So a good rule of thumb for maintaining a stellar standard of behavior is to never weigh in on any issue of any actual importance - particularly if there's a risk some level of controversy may be involved. And, if you must, try to say what you think the moderators and board members would want you to say.

As a community, this forum is publicly viewable, and the kinds of personal attacks and ranting that just occurred are not how we wish to represent our club to the outside world.

As we actually are - rather than as G rated friendly and wonderful cartoon characters.

Please refrain from personal attacks and treat members of the community with respect regardless of your personal opinions or feelings.

Also regardless of whether or not any of the motherfuckers DESERVE any molecules of respect.

If you must argue on a personal level, get each other's email address, phone number, or send personal messages and have at it. Either way, take your personal disagreements offline from the SHGA Forum.

Yes. Darkness has always been the best disinfectant.

Michel Moacanin - Somis, California - 25125 - H4 - 1981/08/04 - J.F. Lucas - AT FL AWCL CL FSL RLF TUR XC

And now the Grebloville site is safely back down to the mind-numbing boring crap level that's become the standard of all glider forums - 'cept this one that everybody's too scared shitless to mention - over the course of the past decade or so. Fine, douchebags - fewer hits for Grebloville, more hits for Kite Strings.

[Steve Davy]

I got a topic with the very same title over on the bag forum:

The Moderation Team - 2010/02/24 18:58:26 UTC

The topic is locked while it is under discussion in the Moderator Board.

Gotta love the irony there.

[Tad Eareckson]

So there's this really cool pot/kettle battle going on at:

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=5196
High Time Bob Banned From This Forum- Board Action Requested

between Bob and a few Grebloville douchebags - with both sides scoring some pretty good hits. I'm loving it 'cause it's like watching Jack and Davis going after each other with flamethrowers. It's not gonna end well for at least one of the motherfuckers and there’s virtually no possibility that that there won't be a significant increase in the quality of the gene pool.

Then Bob's ol' Tad-bashing buddy and extremely brief Kite Strings member, OP, starts fabricating and putting up this:






crap and Bob does in that situation exactly what his buddy Scott C. Wise does when mega douchebag Bille Floyd calls him a retard on The Davis Show...

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/05/04 19:54 UTC

OP, I am again asking you to modify those pictures where they reside so they cannot be used to defame myself, the US Hawks, the Sylmar Hang Gliding Association, or any of the names shown in your picture. Your modification should clearly state that they are not accurate depictions of the US Hawks web site or the SHGA web site.

I am also asking you to change your post that suggests that I've threatened Sherri Lightner or her family.

I really dislike having to involve lawyers, but your slanderous posts are forcing my hand. Once the call is placed, it gets more difficult and costly to reverse it.

I can be patient, but I won't wait forever.

...starts making legal action noises. So Grebloville first locks the thread then, shortly thereafter, pulls a Davis with it and feeds it into the shredder.

Great moves, Scott and Bob. Historians the world over thank you for your efforts.

Me? I'm always HONORED to have attacks from the likes of Bille and OP plastered prominently on the web. Ditto for Scott and Bob. Go long ways to boost the power of the toldyasos and further damage...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1252
Bill Cosby speaks his mind

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/04/26 05:37:14 UTC

Bill Cosby is a national hero for trying to save so many wasted lives. Go Bill, Go!!

...the reputations of the attackers.

The loss of "High Time Bob Banned From This Forum- Board Action Requested" isn't quite as devastating 'cause Bob has maintained something of an archive and posted material and comments on his cult's website. But it IS forever removed from its context and less in public view.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=2466
SHGA - Call for Ban

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/05/05 05:14:55 UTC

These images contains the watermark "FAKE", but the versions OP posted to the Sylmar forum and on imgur.com do not. Those versions appear as if they were real snapshots of the US Hawks and Sylmar sites. But if you look closely, you'll see post titles on the first one that were never made by any of our members. Yet they appear to have been made by Sam, Rick, Bill, Doug, Howie, and myself.

Sure, Bob. Somebody's gonna look CLOSELY at those "SNAPSHOTS" and think that Bob Kuczewski started a topic titled, "I have tasted the menses of Sherri Lightner".

And I notice you didn't seem to have the slightest problem with this characterization:

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=3840
[TIL] About Tad Eareckson

Orion Price - 2013/03/11 15:12:28 UTC

His situation reminds me of a tragedy of a family friend. As began to loose his edge, he proportionality wanted to write people weirder and weirder letters. Newspaper editors, distant relatives, and especially the government would receive long rants pointing out his intelligence and schadenfreuding over their failures. Eventually his internet usage had to be monitored, and his snail-mail letters "mailed" by someone else. The failure mode exhibited here is nearly identical.

of Yours Truly.

You'll see similar forged content on the Sylmar version.

Not any more you won't.

To be continued...

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=5196
High Time Bob Banned From This Forum- Board Action Requested

Jim Shaw - 2016/04/30 13:17 UTC

He is stuck trying to have things totally his way, or the highway. I think this is plainly evident by his insistence that Ken get him back in the USHPA Bob's way.

Please read, CAREFULLY, this statement I copied verbatim yesterday from the site of the US Hawks - Bob's creation.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a Board of Directors for the US Hawks?
Not yet. The HGAA's early problems arose because different people wanted to take the organization in different directions. That created power stuggles which cost the HGAA some of its early leadership. For now, I'm going to take the US Hawks in the direction that I believe is right. If people want to go along, then they're welcome. If not, there are at least two other alternatives.

There is so much wrong with this statement I don't know where to begin, but I strongly believe I caught the essence of the man with just that one statement of his.

WHAT DOES HIS STATEMENT SAY? Some early leadership left because of a power struggle. That means some stayed? But Bob has declared his total dictatorship, and taking the group in the direction HE wants, and if people don't go along with HIS WAY they can hit the highway!

This "free flight" organization is actually a dictatorship by Bob's own words, plain and simply. And HE is going to dictate to the whole group.

Nail on the fuckin' head. And if you go over to the Bob Show archive:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=2466
SHGA - Call for Ban

and look for a punctuation mark's worth of response to this dead-on assessment of Bob and his insurgent freedom movement you won't find one. Five and three quarters years now and 100.00 percent of Bob Show power remains in Bob Show hands. And that Bob Show SOP has been carved in granite for that aforementioned time period. In near half a dozen years Emperor Bob hasn't been able to bring in one single individual who shares his vision and whom he trusts enough to share a dust particle's worth of power. (Start adding up the number of individuals who left sport feet first since the founding of The Bob Show a few months before the beginning of this decade.) So what does that tell one about the viability of Emperor Bob's stated vision?

And anybody wonder what happens to his democratic Utopia if he gets hit by truck this afternoon?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1041
"Sharing" of Hang Gliding Information ?!?

Merlin - 2012/05/26 14:22:30 UTC

I confess to previously having a bit of an Oz Report habit, but the forced login thing has turned me off permanently, and I am in fact grateful. Frankly, the site had pretty much been reduced to a few dedicated sycophants in any case.

I've seen many times the destructive consequences of "control freaks".

But at least Davis has Gerry functioning as an Administrator - probably all the same access, buttons, powers that Davis has. The corollary to the situation I described above is that the only individuals Bob is able to bring and keep on board are cocksuckers. Even if someone is 100.00 percent in sync with all of Bob's stated positions, statements, actions he's still a cocksucker for not DEMANDING a position of meaningful say, leadership, control, autonomy. That's not a democracy, that's a cocksucker cult - just like the Jack and Davis Shows, the most prominent glider forums on the planet.

That's why hang glding is undeniably going down the tubes as we speak. The sport won't tolerate individuals who AREN'T cocksuckers. Don't believe me? Read the u$hPa SOPs.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=5196
High Time Bob Banned From This Forum- Board Action Requested

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/05/03 18:36 UTC

By the way, since this discussion happens to be in the "Ban Bob" topic, I'd like to offer a few comments on the knee-jerk impulse to ban people who say things that others don't like.

Stay tuned, people of varying ages. From one of hang gliding's greatest, albeit closeted, knee-jerk banners of people who say things others don't like, this should be good.

The hang gliding community is tiny enough even with everyone participating.

And I'm gonna do everything I can to make it even tinier.

The slicing and dicing of our community by all these little fiefdoms which ban one person/group or another isn't helping our growth.

The US Hawks has only banned one person, and that was based on a public safety concern.

Fuckin' gold mine.

- You've never been concerned about the safety of anyone other than you in your fuckin' life. After your pigfucker buddy Sam made a good decision in the interest of Terry Mason's safety on 2012/06/16 it was the better part of three months before you even acknowledged that anything unpleasant had happened.

- If you were interested in PUBLIC safety and your action was legitimate you'd be using your Grebloville pulpit to get the word out to a lot more of the PUBLIC than you're able to do on your fringe cult forum. Just three weeks ago you were up in front of the San Diego City Council screaming (fake) child endangerment...

113-220710
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8700/17205433495_ea31ccab99_o.png

155-250728
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7676/16582983444_899f4fe69c_o.png


...using material you snatched up from your friendly neighborhood unrepentant child molester.

Me? When we've got some lying instructor bozo like Ryan Instant-Hands-Free-Release Voight teaching students and anyone who will listen that you can weight shift roll control a hang glider hands free...

069-25104
http://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1572/26142964830_289bc3f2cb_o.png


...I'm gonna hit the motherfucker with everything I've got at every opportunity until he slinks away out of public view and beyond until hell freezes over.

- This is a great smoking gun post 'cause you've just said:

The US Hawks has only banned one person...

while the black and white documented history is:

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/15 00:27:23 UTC

Peaceful Coexistence

Hello Tad,

I just wanted to codify in writing what I had been proposing on the phone today.

I feel that we have some common goals and some conflicting goals. Unfortunately, I feel that the conflicting goals will end up destroying our ability to cooperate. That's the "train wreck" that I mentioned during our phone calls.

I believe if we continue down the current path, that train wreck will destroy our ability to cooperate on any of our shared goals, and we will walk away as enemies. I would like to avert that train wreck with the simple suggestion that we use our two forums for the different purposes that we've defined and that we mutually support the two forums for those different purposes.

More specifically, I would like to see you voluntarily resign from active participation in the US Hawks with a statement that you support what we are doing but want to focus on your work at Kite Strings. I will follow that with a statement that we've appreciated your contributions to the US Hawks and we'll be following your progress on Kite Strings as well as seeking your specialized advice as we progress in building the US Hawks. I'll encourage cross-linking to Kite Strings, and you'll encourage cross-linking to US Hawks. We'll both benefit.

If we can do something like that, then I think it will help both of our causes and strengthen our ability to cooperate on our shared objectives. If we cannot do something like that, then I think we'll end up harming both our shared objectives and our non-shared objectives as this train wreck evolves. This is a sincere offer to try to work together, and I hope you'll take it in that spirit.

Thanks,
Bob Kuczewski

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/15 01:26:02 UTC

Re: Peaceful Coexistence

Tad,

After our last conversation which I've documented below for my own memory, I've decided that I don't want you on the US Hawks forum any longer. Period. I'll take the lumps for banning you if that's what it takes.

I will still honor my suggestion below that you resign from the forum voluntarily so we can support our shared causes, but I do not want you to continue posting on the US Hawks forum. Please let me know if you'd like to resign "peacefully" as I've outlined by midnight tonight (Eastern time), or I'll remove you and state my own reasons.

Bob Kuczewski

---- For my own memory ----

You stated that you had a "relationship" with a 7 or 8 year old boy (later corrected to possibly 8 or 9). You did not elaborate on the details of the relationship, but when I asked if you were sexually attracted to the boy, you replied in the affirmative. That's when I ended the conversation and decided that I no longer want you on the US Hawks forum. As I said, I'm willing to take whatever criticism comes my way for that decision. Some things are more important than a hang gliding club.

-- I can't do shit about anything "FOR your own memory" 'cause it's YOUR own memory and YOUR own memory is anything you want it to be.

-- You will still just have me quietly exiled to another parish where I'll be free to prey on all the seven, eight, nine year olds I feel like if I play ball with you. Otherwise you'll state from your memory that Tad said he was sexually attracted to seven, eight, nine year old boys. That has shit to do with concern with public safety. That's 100.00 percent BLACKMAIL attempt.

-- I tell you to go fuck yourself - which is ALWAYS the correct response to blackmailer sleazebags.

-- You respond with:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/15 05:12:16 UTC

It gives me no great pleasure to announce that Tad's account has been suspended.
This is a sad day for the US Hawks, and I wish I could have found some other way to handle this situation.
I apologize to everyone (including Tad) that I could not find a better way.

(which comes four days after you've told everybody how little pleasure it has given you to...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/11 00:56:51 UTC

It gives me no pleasure to restrict Tad. I think he has a lot to offer the sport and that's why I sought him out and invited him to join us.

...restrict Tad to Bob's Basement to run your fake "experiment" for "about a month" to find out whether or not doing so will encourage more participation by your pet cocksuckers. (Can't really figure that, Bob. It always gives ME a great deal of pleasure to pull the plug on some deserving motherfucker over here. You, Sam, OP, Jeffrey Roberson, Christopher LeFay, Lin...) And, by the way... Not one of those bannings drew a hint of protest from anybody here or anywhere else within hearing range.)

-- 100.000 percent Emperor Bob's decision to ban Tad to make The Bob Show a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. You did not and can not produce one quote from anybody else that my membership was presenting a danger to public safety - 'specially after you posted:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 05:55:39 UTC

If I boot you permanently it will be due to my concerns over the topic we discussed on the phone. This forum should be a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. You have not given me any assurances that's true with you on this forum.

to publicly label me as a child molester for anybody with an IQ in the low double digits or up.

You threatened and tried to blackmail me publicly and privately and when that didn't work you pulled my plug without the slightest pretense of consulting a single one of your pet cocksuckers. You had yourself an unrepentant child molester who would almost certainly lure the first seven year old boy who registered on The Bob Show to his destruction - a fate even worse than:

061-161912
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7611/16585242313_3053e16bd7_o.png

113-220710
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8700/17205433495_ea31ccab99_o.png

065-165122
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7626/16582991104_894af44666_o.png


and still you couldn't risk opening up a discussion and trying to get a consensus on pulling my plug. Fuck, Bob. If you can't risk going for a consensus on a no brainer like that then what CAN you risk going for a consensus on?

So when you say:

The US Hawks has only banned one person, and that was based on a public safety concern.

You make it blindingly obvious that "The US Hawks" and Emperor Bob Kuczewski are one and the same.

Sorry. A lot more to come on this.

Bob's an intelligent, articulate, literate version of Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney or Davis Dead-On Straub. He presents himself as being honest, trustworthy, straightforward and his strategy is to take an issue with some small core or trace of truth to it and then manipulate and twist everything to some multilayered unrecognizable massive tangle. He can write two medium length paragraphs that one needs to spend about a month tearing apart and debunking.

But Bob's essentially a con artist running multiple Ponzi schemes and lethal mistakes are one hundred percent inevitable. And it's important to get them identified and documented, archived to limit the amount of damage he can do before he implodes.

And do not EVER engage this motherfucker in an unrecorded conversation on an issue of contention. What he'll "remember" you saying will bear little to no resemblance to what you actually said.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 23:25:21 UTC

I've been polling some of the people who I thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. Here's part of one response that I got via email:

When I say that I want absolutely nothing to do with him, I am not exaggerating. The simple fact that he's on your forum means that I will not participate at all.

This is Scott C. Wise - no question whatsoever. And by the point of that post we know...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 04:53:36 UTC

This concerns me greatly ... and I still don't know what to do about it.

I heard about this incident when I was on the road, but I waited a few days until I got to San Diego to address it with Tad. Whenever I hear a rumor, I try to either dismiss it or confirm it directly with the person being accused. That's what I did with Tad in this case, and I called him personally to ask about the incident. To his credit, Tad admitted the incident as he has in his post above.

But what concerned me greatly was Tad's response when I asked him if he felt he'd done anything wrong by having homosexual relations with a 12 year old boy. I don't recall Tad's exact words, but they did not reflect any significant remorse for his actions toward the boy.

...that Bob already has the child molester card and knows exactly what he's gonna do with it. Even if he DIDN'T have a child molester card we know that Bob's "experiment" to find out if Tad's presence outside of Bob's Basement was discouraging others from joining and participating was gonna be a success and Tad would've remained in Bob's Basement for "about a month" until he was able to concoct some excuse for banning me.

Ooh! And I just realized Bob didn't say that somebody called him up and VOLUNTEERED the information about me. Bob HAD heard about my background and it's a damn good bet that he was calling around trying to get ahold of something solid. No. Belay that. He just needed an exchange with timing that was gonna work for what he was gonna do.

Now watch this, people of varying ages...

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 23:25:21 UTC

I've been polling some of the people who I thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. Here's part of one response that I got via email:

When I say that I want absolutely nothing to do with him, I am not exaggerating. The simple fact that he's on your forum means that I will not participate at all.

Why just part, Bob? 'Cause the other part is blindingly obviously 'cause Scott C. Wise ain't gonna be on no forum with no fuckin' convicted child molester? Probably not 'cause of Tad's positions on hang checks, standard aerotow weak links, bent pin releases. If it had been ANYTHING other than the child molester thing is anybody stupid enough to think that Emperor Bob wouldn't have played it to the fuckin' hilt?

Emperor Bob's not telling us WHY Scott C. Wise wants absolutely nothing to do with Tad because he's pretending - when he stupidly makes that 2011/12/13 23:25:21 UTC post - that it's just the nature of my online conduct that's discouraging others from participation.

Scott's not the LEAST bit worried about the threat to the safety of people of varying ages on The Bob Show. If he were he'd have gotten on the wire a half hour after my first post - 2011/02/11 19:52:35 UTC - and broadcast an alert for all people of varying ages to have nothing to do with that perverted sicko. He just despises child molesters. Fuck, who doesn't?

Lemme tell ya sumpin', Scott - you miserable little worm... When I hate somebody as much as you hate me I'm gonna get on the forum and cut him to fuckin' shreds up to the nanosecond that somebody cuts my wire. And I've had my wires cut to nine of these shit heaps so far. And after I've had my wire cut I'm gonna come back here where none of these douchebags can cut my wire and continue the assault until there's nothing left of the motherfucker.

And I've got ZERO respect for worms like you and Bob who won't engage - 'cause they know they CAN'T.

Ooh! And look at this:

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 23:25:21 UTC

I've been polling some of the people who I thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. Here's part of one response that I got via email...

How 'bout all the other responses, Bob? How come you're not quoting from any of those? What is it you don't want us to see? Fuckin' snake oil salesman. You get taken in by this guy pretty fast but there's always this little warning bell faintly pinging in the background until you finally figure out where he's coming from and what he's doing.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 23:25:21 UTC

I've been polling some of the people who I thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. Here's part of one response that I got via email...

Normally, Bob, when a forum administrator, or member, wants to conduct a POLL he creates a POLL topic on his forum - like you did with:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=822
US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/11/04 04:41:45 UTC

This issue has been discussed at great length in many other topics, so I'd like to start collecting everyone's thoughts in one place. I'd also like to start building a solid consensus on what the US Hawks hook-in verification policy should be. I suspect this will require a series of proposals, discussions, and votes. So I'd like to start with one proposal that's been brought to us by Tad. Here's the proposition:

The US Hawks should:

A - Require ALL pilots to launch with a tight hang strap in ALL conditions.
B - Recommend launching with a tight hang strap, but leave it to the pilot's decision whether it's safe to do so in any conditions.

I'd like to get an "A" or a "B" from everyone whose posted on these discussions. You can list other choices in your post, but please also list your choice between A and B (imagine they were the only choices and you had to make a decision). I've also created this topic as a poll, but since the poll system is somewhat untested (in this forum), I'll only be counting those votes listed in each person's posts.

Thanks.

P.S. I vote for "B".
---
The US Hawks should:
- require ALL pilots to launch with a tight hang strap in ALL conditions.
- recommend launching with a tight hang strap, but leave it to the pilot's decision whether it's safe to do so in any conditions.

when you LIED about what I was proposing in order to sabotage implementation of anything resembling u$hPa's then 30.5 year old hook-in check requirement. (By the way... Did you notify Harry Martin of the existence of your fake poll...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2019
Hook-In Alarm

Harry Martin - 2015/12/23 03:33:01 UTC

I just finished reading Tad Eareckson's review of my hook-in alarm on his forum.
Here: http://www.kitestrings.org/post8270.html#p8270

He spends a great deal of time ripping my article (from 1992) to pieces... He quite rightly stresses again and again the process of lifting the glider and feeling the leg loops... Something I have always done without thinking much about. If I couldn't feel the leg loops, I didn't launch. Quite right and the correct practice that has never failed me... Flying a Fledge 2 teaches you to do that because for me, it's damn near impossible to launch a Fledge as it is VERY tail heavy. If you can't feel the leg loops tugging at your legs, crotch, and butt, the glider won't launch because as you start your run, the tail will drop and you will just be dragging a stalled dead glider behind you. You stop dead in your tracks. I always did anyway. Feeling the leg loops, the Fledge is easier to balance as you start your run. Plain and simple. I never installed the hook-in alarm on my Fledge because I knew it wouldn't make any difference, but on my WW, I figured it might. Also, on the Fledge, you don't hook into a hang strap. There is none, only a bracket and a bolt. It never had a backup strap either.

The practice of lifting my glider and feeling the leg loops has always worked for me, even while flying other gliders. Enough said there.

Had I read FTHI.pdf by Tad Eareckson, I probably would have never built the device...

After reading Tad's essay, I'm more inclined to remove the device and the extra hang strap.

...and request his vote and comments?)

But:

I've been polling some of the people who I thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. Here's part of one response that I got via email...

Why weren't you polling ALL of the people who you thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad? The number was too huge so you just polled the people you thought would give you the results you wanted your survey to reflect? You didn't have a whole shitload of people participating prior to my ten month plus three and a half day reign of terror and long after...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1019
USHPA's New Secret Web Site?

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/05/04 19:46:26 UTC

To be honest (a little painfully honest), I've been disappointed with the participation in the US Hawks.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1186
D. Straub's Politics=Gun Grabbing, Constitution/Baby Killing

Bob Kuczewski - 2013/02/19 04:39:45 UTC

Don't worry ... your secret is safe here on the US Hawks ... after all, we've only got about 5 active participants.

...you'd run your experiment and more.

Couldn't POSSIBLY have taken too fuckin' long for you to poll ALL of the people who YOU thought might have been avoiding the US Hawks because of Tad. I'm guessing three or four individuals. A NON slimeball would want that process to be fully open and public. But you need to filter it 'cause you can't afford to have anybody respond...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=881
Davis Straub; Idiot Statist, Endless Wars & Tyranny

Warren Narron - 2015/02/08 01:52:29 UTC

New Rule: Oath of Fealty?

Bob, without looking up the actual quote, have you ever stated that it is ok to reference anything from Tad?
Am I incorrect in this assumption?
Were there any bad words or threats in those two posts, where Tad is asking you to respond to ongoing safety concerns in the way hang gliding is done? These are safety considerations that you have addressed in the past.
Do you feel that those questions are not worth discussing when it comes to safety and therefore, the future of hang gliding?

Let me know exactly when the rules you have established were changed.

The course you are now embarked will mark the beginning of the end of this little experiment.
Have you noticed the distraction this paranoiac witch hunt has caused in shutting down discussion in another thread about the promotion of hang gliding? If it were possible for you to understand my developing proposal, could give the US Hawks some much needed credibility.
But no. You won't have any of it.
You are the smartest guy here and you want no part in developing any plan that doesn't come from your own slide rule calculator.
Moving a computer scale line by two megapixels does not reverse the laws of physics.
That kind of manipulation is not going to carry the US Hawks over the finish line of your imagination.

The Hawks has no product. There is no there, there.
You are selling pie in the sky and there is no market for it.
I am here to help you and you won't let me.
You don't know what I have to offer the Hawks because you don't listen.
Turn me out for the fake reasons I've seen here and my new motivation will be quite different.
The wisdom of wisdom is that you learn from your mistakes.
A little humility goes a long way too.

Do you really want to make something of the Hawks or is this just a big popularity contest?
Valid hang gliding safety concerns should never be off the table of any organization that professes to be a hang gliding organization.
Wherever they come from.

You can make rules about how these are presented but the first entrenchment or retreat from these issues are when the organization begins to lose relevancy.

Right now you are calling all the shots. Continue the course you are going and the gloves will come off.
You are not the only one allowed that privilege.
You can choose to lose my contribution and have it turned against you.
This is not a threat, it is just nature.
I've been railroaded before and I don't like it.
You know that feeling right? It's what brought us all together.
Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

..."Fuck Tad. I have no interest in participating in the US Hawks because of YOU!" And there's no dire shortage of those individuals in hang gliding - as you very well know.

When I ban some motherfucker off of Kite Strings all relevant correspondence is totally 100.00 percent open and public. And if anybody subsequently posts anything relevant here or elsewhere it gets fully responded to, addressed. And if you can find anything resembling a legitimate complaint about my fairness then please lemme know about it.

Also doesn't sound very credible that you'd WANT the kind of douchebags who would just quietly drift away because the presence of one antisocial child molester with nothing to offer the sport or group...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?
You will ... hopefully. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Everyone has to do their part once in a while. If you see something that's not being done correctly, then it's your duty to speak out.

Guess that's just for show, Bob. You've NEVER been the least bit interested in QUALITY. You just want the biggest collection of ass kissers you can assemble and maintain - just like Warren said.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 04:53:36 UTC

This concerns me greatly ... and I still don't know what to do about it.

I heard about this incident when I was on the road, but I waited a few days until I got to San Diego to address it with Tad. Whenever I hear a rumor, I try to either dismiss it or confirm it directly with the person being accused. That's what I did with Tad in this case, and I called him personally to ask about the incident. To his credit, Tad admitted the incident as he has in his post above.

But what concerned me greatly was Tad's response when I asked him if he felt he'd done anything wrong by having homosexual relations with a 12 year old boy. I don't recall Tad's exact words, but they did not reflect any significant remorse for his actions toward the boy.

This concerns me greatly...

1. Good thing that concerns YOU greatly, Bob. 'Cause none of your Bob Show cocksuckers have stated that it concerns THEM greatly.

2. Ya know what else concerns you greatly?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxgAEkNpgJc
4 11 16 Ushpa

Bob Kuczewski - 1:46

If that's not enough, they decide they're gonna walk on the top of the other paraglider. Two young boys!

113-220710
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8700/17205433495_ea31ccab99_o.png


Also didn't concern anybody else greatly. Or at all.

3. Ya know who you remind me of?

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=41619
Goodbye Bob K?

Mark G. Forbes - 2015/04/21 01:32:02 UTC

Oh, we'd heard BobK's name before...he's hardly an unfamiliar topic at the BOD. You might even describe him as "legendary". We reviewed written and video materials before taking the vote. We also read through the court transcripts and depositions. There was an extended discussion of that material before we voted. I don't think any of the directors made their decision on the basis of just one side of the story. What you've been getting here is pretty much the Bob side of the story, because (as I've said several times) I'm trying to stay out of a discussion of the merits of Bob's arguments until after the hearing.

So far as the wing walking thing goes, as soon as we were made aware of it last year, we immediately suspended the tandem rating, followed (after procedure) by a permanent revocation of that rating. Had we known about it sooner, we would have acted sooner. That's the disciplinary process that is available to us as a membership association. It's all there in SOP 12-7 for you to read for yourself, in the members section of the USHPA website.

Identical totally fake concern for the safety of people of varying ages.

... and I still don't know what to do about it.

1. Quote one of your pet cocksuckers ASKING you to do anything about it.

2. Yeah ya do - motherfucker. You know EXACTLY what you're gonna do about it. You're just pretending to be in the throes of an ethical dilemma so you can appear to be a responsible dictator - rather than the hypocritical backstabbing piece o' shit you actually are.

3. There's a great deal to be said for having people who don't know what to do about situations that concern them greatly not doing anything. Like a waitress at Denny's who is greatly concerned about one of her charges complaining of chest pains should probably not conduct open heart surgery to diagnose and address the issue. Sometimes chest pains turn out to be nonissues and fix themselves.

Whenever I hear a rumor, I try to either dismiss it or confirm it directly with the person being accused.

1. Wow. WHENEVER you hear a rumor. One wonders how you ever find time to piss if you're so obsessed with following up on rumors.

2. So all rumors you hear concern someone being accused of something. How very odd.

3. What was this person ACCUSING me of? There's a very public record that nobody's disputing. Bradley Manning WikiLeaked the Collateral Murder video of one of our obscene war crimes / mass murders in Iraq. Was convicted of security violations and sentenced to 35 years (while the trigger happy psychopaths in the Apache chopper suffered not so much as slapped wrists lest their job performances be impaired). What rumors have you heard lately about what he's being accused of and what are you doing to dismiss or confirm them?

That's what I did with Tad in this case, and I called him personally to ask about the incident.

1. Why did you call me PERSONALLY, Bob? You characterize this as a RUMOR that was circulating about me that you're bringing up because of your "PUBLIC SAFETY" concern, so why didn't you raise the issue PUBLICLY? You thought I might present a threat to your people of varying ages so why not keep your membership - along with anybody who cared to click onto your slide - totally tuned in and up to date on this public safety issue.

Two possible responses...

- "No. Your source is confusing me with TED Eareckson. Florida. No relation. Here's a link to the newspaper report. Don't worry about it. I get this all the time.

- "Yeah Bob, you've got a dangerous unrepentant child molester in your midst - just like your source said. Guess I better go register on the Grebloville forum now to continue being able to communicate with people of varying ages."

You called me personally so there would be no record of our conversation and you could twist, distort, misremember, lie about any aspects you felt like.

2. Bull fucking shit, Bob. You didn't call me to ask me about no fuckin' INCIDENT because nobody ever spoke to you about an INCIDENT.

To his credit...

Oh, thank you so much for CREDITING me, Bob. I just live to have your praise bestowed upon me.

...Tad admitted the incident as he has in his post above.

Here's his post above:

Wow, Bob! It took DAVIS and ROONEY about five years to get desperate enough and sink low enough to play the child molester card. I'da thunk you'd have kept that one up your sleeve for at least six months or so.

(In case anyone was too stupid to be able to read between Bob's lines I had a fairly happy two year relationship with a twelve to fourteen year old gay kid about 25 years ago which ended with the usual catastrophic legal consequences - for both of us. And Bob thinks that I'm hanging out on HIS forum so I can target one of the many young adolescents who come to places like this to help build better national hang gliding organizations. I will then PM him or her (really doesn't matter) and to lure him or her to the mall in Sioux Falls under false - or not false - pretenses and leave him or her in such a state of ruin that the only humane thing to do would be to put him or her on a dolly with a Lookout release and fire up the Dragonfly.)

as you've copied and pasted it with your underlining and bold text font amended to decrease the odds of the semiliterate dregs you entertain in your dump missing anything you want them to see.

There is nothing that can be construed as an ADMISSION - which implies that I was concealing something shameful, dishonorable about myself - or an INCIDENT. You are LYING. You're such a pathological and bald-faced liar that you present twist, distort, obliterate the truth while your audience is staring at the source material. Same deal as:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__LgBpwUWQE
4 12 16 Ushpa

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/04/12

In that same video we have young children, two young children, um... things that we would never even do ourselves...

113-220710
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8700/17205433495_ea31ccab99_o.png


You LIE. You make a rational discussion between yourself and someone coming from a different position IM fucking POSSIBLE. You have zilch interest in the truth and will do whatever you feel like in order to push your agenda. And your agenda is nothing but BOB.

This is a serious matter...

Must be. You just said it was.

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/04/12

These boys were almost killed.

And yours is the only voice on The Bob Show that counts.

...and it's one that I never anticipated when I created this forum or when I invited Tad to join us. I really don't know how to handle this...

Great Bob. We'll just add this to the very long list of things you totally suck at handling.

...and I would appreciate thoughtful comments from anyone on this subject.

1. Why?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a Board of Directors for the US Hawks?
Not yet. The HGAA's early problems arose because different people wanted to take the organization in different directions. That created power stuggles which cost the HGAA some of its early leadership. For now, I'm going to take the US Hawks in the direction that I believe is right. If people want to go along, then they're welcome. If not, there are at least two other alternatives.

You're gonna do whatever the fuck you feel like doing. And you decided what the fuck you were gonna feel like doing anyway.

2. So quote me some of the thoughtful comments you got in support of what you were gonna do anyway.

Thanks in advance.

Sure Bob. You never DREAMED that you could have anybody on a GLIDER FORUM who could be attracted to anybody across a legal age barrier. When the reality is that there's a 0.0 percent probability that you have an individual on your glider forum who ISN'T attracted to people of ages varying below legal age barriers. And if you actually had anybody below a legal age barrier there would also be a 0.0 percent probability of him or her being attracted to people of ages varying above legal age barriers.

http://www.film4.com/media/images/Channel4/Film4/1970s/taxi-driver-jodie-foster_LRG.jpg

http://c1.staticflickr.com/1/887/39567143990_56cc1e1f71_o.jpg

That would, of course, include your obviously hypocritical ass. Or if we take you at your word... ...that should call into mega serious question your competence in psychoanalyzing individuals, predicting behaviors, assessing threats, developing and implementing policy.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=877
Discuss Tad here

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/15 05:12:16 UTC

It gives me no great pleasure to announce that Tad's account has been suspended.
This is a sad day for the US Hawks, and I wish I could have found some other way to handle this situation.
I apologize to everyone (including Tad) that I could not find a better way.

1. Oh. I wasn't banned. It's just that my account was suspended. So when's my suspension gonna be over? In about a month?

2. Well, I guess if YOU couldn't have found a better way to handle this situation then nobody could have. So it would've been totally pointless to call for a discussion.

3. Plus you might've heard from a few defenders of fairness who'd have told you to go fuck yourself. So it was imperative for you to pretend you were agonizing over a decision for a couple of days, collecting information, then strike suddenly to ensure the safety of Bob Show members of varying ages - before there was any possibility of a discussion that might go my way.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=883
What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/03/14 15:03:47 UTC

My final decision...

Which, by happy coincidence, was also your FIRST decision.

...was made based on a phone call...

How CONVENIENT that it was a PHONE CALL - that nooooobody else got to listen to. A phone call in which I revealed my TRUE thoughts and feelings on the issue - the stuff that I'd NEVER reveal in a PUBLIC discussion.

...where Tad relayed...

Where Tad "RELAYED"? That's a very strange word to use when referring to a telephone conversation with the ultimate source of information.

relay
- receive and pass on (information or a message)
- broadcast (something) by passing signals received from elsewhere through a transmitting station

...that he had molested a 12 year old boy while he (Tad) was in a position of trust (scouting, in this case) regarding the boy.

Well I was just RELAYING that, Bob. It's just what I heard and was passing on. I have no fuckin' clue as to whether or not it's true or not. And since you actually ARE *RELAYING* information, by the black and white dictionary definition...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 04:53:36 UTC

I don't recall Tad's exact words...

...the credibility of what YOU'RE saying is even more suspect. It's what the courts define as hearsay evidence and rule as inadmissible. And you've already cut my wire. And you don't ever ask me for my recollection of the information I was RELAYING in order to arrive at an agreement of the gist of my exact words - 'cause you obviously have ZERO interest in letting any FACTS get in the way of your decisions and policies. Vintage fuckin' Bob.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2286
hanggliding.org tanslates uskawks to losreville.org

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/02/21 10:00:30 UTC

Forget Trump ... Bill Cummings for President!!!

(Thank you, God. Bill Cummings even more Donald Trump than Donald Trump. )

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 04:53:36 UTC

This concerns me greatly ... and I still don't know what to do about it.

Oh, YOU *STILL* don't know what to do about it. And you haven't been able to open a discussion with your highly valued membership to get any thoughts out of a deep respect for the privacy of an unrepentant child molester. How very ethical of you.

I heard about this incident when I was on the road...

Sounds like at least one of your highly valued members knew about it.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 18:51:49 UTC

Please don't blame me. I am just trying to deal with a concern that has been brought to my attention by one of our members.

He had a concern about it so obviously wanted you to do something. What was he asking you to do? And why isn't he in this discussion...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?
You will ... hopefully. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Everyone has to do their part once in a while. If you see something that's not being done correctly, then it's your duty to speak out.

...doing his duty to speak out? Is that really the kind of member you want on your team to help build a better hang gliding organization? No, wait...

http://www.kitestrings.org/post1025.html#p1025
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/20 20:54:36 UTC

I didn't "dig into" anyone's background or personal life. One of our members called me with a concern about Tad's past.

His concern was only about my PAST - from a quarter century prior. He had no concern whatsoever for the people of varying ages on your forum... He just thought it would be fun to tell you I was a child molester so he could watch you exploit my background, try to use it to humiliate and intimidate me, use it to silence a dissenting member the way u$hPa Jack, Davis, Peter, the pigfuckers running Ridgely, Capitol, Rocky Mountain, Bags do.

US Hawks - a hundredfold more insidious version of u$hPa hiding behind a six inch thick layer of lipstick. But I digress.

And we know that Emperor Bob's road trip from Florida was over sometime prior to...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=888
Little Hawk at UCSD (December 2011)

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/11 04:31:49 UTC

One of the last things I did before going to Florida in 2010 was bring Little Hawk to UCSD.
One of the first things I did when I got back to California in 2011 was bring Little Hawk to UCSD.
Here are a few of the photos from my recent visit (December 10th, 2011) ...

...2011/12/10.

...but I waited a few days until I got to San Diego...

So we're undoubtedly talking 2011/12/06 as the ABSOLUTE LATEST Bob heard about this nonexistent "INCIDENT" from his cowardly anonymous little snitch Bob Show member - who to this day hasn't come forward to acknowledge his role and back Emperor Bob's course of action.

...to address it with Tad.

Why? This concerns you greatly, it's a...

This is a serious matter...

...SERIOUS MATTER, the lives a people of varying ages are at stake - and you WAITED a few days? Until you got to San Diego to address it with Tad? What, you got one of those cell phones that only works on the road to hear rumors and only works to address things with people when it's in San Diego? If you'd heard a rumor about an imminent al-Qaeda terrorist attack on the United States on 2001/09/10 would you have waited until you got to San Diego on 2001/09/12 to discuss it with the FBI?

THIS:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 05:55:39 UTC

If I boot you permanently it will be due to my concerns over the topic we discussed on the phone. This forum should be a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. You have not given me any assurances that's true with you on this forum.

is when you first started publicly playing the child molester card. You've got NINE posts prior to that one THAT DAY - Pacific local time. You probably had SCORES of people of varying ages registered on The Bob Show interested in helping you build an alternate and better national hang gliding association...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=929
Training Manual Comments / Contribution

Bill Cummings - 2012/01/13 21:44:54 UTC

HAWKS,
I think it was a prudent move on Bob's part, and also from a legal perspective, that he put into type on this forum his intent to protect young readers.
As a parent and grandparent I would expect nothing less of a website moderator.
To have knowledge of child endangerment or abuse and not report it or intervene can, in many states, land an individual in a lot of, "hot water."

You had knowledge of child endangerment which you SAT ON - without reporting it to the proper legal authorities or even cautioning your membership or confiding in the individuals you had in mind for stacking your Fake Board of Directors - for gawd knows how many days, an absolute minimum of a week. And your first hint that there might have been anything amiss...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/13 05:55:39 UTC

If I boot you permanently it will be due to my concerns over the topic we discussed on the phone. This forum should be a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. You have not given me any assurances that's true with you on this forum.

What the fuck was THAT supposed to mean?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 18:51:49 UTC

Tad, I called you privately because I felt this was a private matter. That's also why my posted reference was non-specific. You've made it public by your own choice. Please don't blame me. I am just trying to deal with a concern that has been brought to my attention by one of our members.

Bill Cummings - 2011/12/14 21:48:54 UTC

Bob, the only thing I was able to read between the lines was that the issue was language and personal attacks on Peter, Jim, Davis and others.

Then Tad's, "Between the lines," post is the first time I saw anything in print here about an incident that happened 25 or so years ago. Unless I missed something it looks to me like Tad threw the first card on the table.

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 21:57:52 UTC

As Bill pointed out, I think that reference could have been taken any number of ways. For example, I have warned you about foul language many times in the past, and that quote could easily have been a reference to that. Also your graphic descriptions of how people have been killed or how you wish they might be killed are also inappropriate for certain age groups. So there was no clear connection to child molestation until your own post. You can blame me for "outing" you, but that was your own doing ... or undoing.

You felt it was a PRIVATE matter, non-specific reference, could've been taken any number of ways... foul language, graphic descriptions of how people have been killed or I wish they might have been killed. No clear connection to child molestation whatsoever. And if not for my own post - it wasn't until I alerted people of varying ages to my presence - it would've have remained PRIVATE and I wouldn't have been undone. Seems like I did more to ensure the safety of your people of varying ages than all the rest of you pigfuckers put together - times fifty. 'Specially your wormy little member who anonymously tipped you off and did NOTHING while you sat on the intelligence about the danger in our midst.

You gonna do an annual Safety Award like u$hPa? Make an argument that I shouldn't win it hands down for 2011.

[Tad Eareckson]

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 04:53:36 UTC

Whenever I hear a rumor, I try to either dismiss it or confirm it directly with the person being accused. That's what I did with Tad in this case, and I called him personally to ask about the incident.

Then you sit on it. If the unrepentant child molester says nothing publicly everything stays private. Only if he goes public and warns all the people of varying ages about his presence do you ban him to make The Bob Show a safe place for people of varying ages to visit. Gee Bob, one can only wonder about the number of other Bob Show child molesters about whose backgrounds you're keeping quiet.

To his credit, Tad admitted the incident as he has in his post above.

Good thing, Bob. Now Bill can start taking action to protect his moronic children and grandchildren from me. I think I should get EXTRA credit for doing your fuckin' job for you. Maybe a free blow job from Bill as well.

But what concerned me greatly was Tad's response when I asked him if he felt he'd done anything wrong by having homosexual relations with a 12 year old boy. I don't recall Tad's exact words...

Lemme help ya out with that one, Bob. My exact words were:

Well FUCK! Not one percent of what would've been wrong if I'd had a HETEROsexual relations with a 12 year old boy!

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=883
What will keep the US Hawks from becoming another USHPA or HGAA?

Bob Kuczewski - 2012/03/14 15:03:47 UTC

I asked Tad if he felt that it was wrong for a 30 year old man to have a sexual relationship with a 12 year old boy.

Why? Was that something you were considering giving a go? Why the fuck were you interested in my feelings and/or opinions?

He replied that he didn't see a problem other than the consequences dealt by society. He couldn't seem to grasp that a 12 year old boy does not have the maturity to enter into that kind of relationship.

1. Yeah Bob. I have so much difficulty seeming to be able to grasp basic concepts. Probably a consequence of my low double digit IQ.

2. If someone is unable to grasp that a twelve year old boy does not have the maturity to enter into that kind of relationship can you justify having him suffer criminal prosecution, penalties, consequences? Shouldn't he just be tortured in a state Cuckoo's Nest facility until he's cured or succumbs to natural causes?

Now I can be forgiving of many things if people are repentant.

We bask in the light of your magnanimity.

But Tad gave me no assurance whatsoever that he would not repeat this behavior.

So if I'd said:

Emperor Bob, I give you all my assurance that I will not repeat this behavior.

we'd have been good to go. I'd have been released from Bob's Basement after your experiment was over in about a month free to post anywhere on The Bob Show - other than in Bob's Sam Show of course - and communicate using personal messaging with people of varying ages to my heart's content. How I now regret not having given you all my assurance that I would not repeat this behavior. (Pity we don't have you sitting in on the parole board. What a waste of talent.)

Since I have no control over the ages of people on this forum...

Yeah? Later in this post:

I am open to any suggestions on how we can do that while not exposing our younger members to any potential risk.

You've obviously been able to identify at least a few members under age eighteen. Care to tell us how? Who they are? Why you didn't notify them individually the instant you had reason to believe that one of your non younger members was a child molester?

...and since I do not monitor any PM messages sent between members...

Yeah?

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Tad Eareckson - 2011/12/10 16:44:09 UTC

P.S. Not only am I...

You are not authorised to send private messages.

...not authorized to send private messages....

You are not authorised to read private messages.

...I can't even access my archived private messages.

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/11 01:24:47 UTC

Hi Tad,
That was an oversight on my part, and I believe I've fixed it. Please test it out to let me know.
I apologize for any inconvenience.

You've got me locked down in Bob's Basement to run your experiment to see whether or not my presence in the main forum is discouraging participation by the cocksuckers you want to participate, you've accidentally (default) also chopped my personal messaging capabilities, on or probably well before 2016/12/06 you've been advised that Tad's a child molester by someone you've identified as a member and whom you have no reason to doubt. And at least four days later without having bothered to verify or dismiss the intelligence by running it by me or anyone else YOU *RESTORE* MY PERSONAL MESSAGING CAPABILITIES.

Can you explain how that was by any stretch of the imagination a responsible thing to do when the safety of people of varying ages was concerned?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__LgBpwUWQE
4 12 16 Ushpa

Bob Kuczewski - 2016/04/12

These boys were almost killed.

Your people of varying ages were almost raped and murdered as a consequence of your obscene level of negligence.

...I decided that it was prudent to ban him from the forum.

1. See above.

2. Bull fucking shit, Bob. If you GENUINELY thought there was a danger to people of varying ages you'd have IMMEDIATELY posted what you'd heard prominently on your home page, made sure my personal messaging wire was chopped, and immediately thereafter asked me for any clarifications regarding what you had been alerted to. And you'd have also put out an advisory regarding any current and past personal messaging exchanges and requested reports of anything inappropriate. Of course you didn't do that because you knew there wouldn't be anything and you'd look like the asshole everybody and his fuckin' dog know you to be - usually from personal experience.

3. Clearly stated desire...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=884
The Bob Show

Bob Kuczewski - 2011/12/14 18:51:49 UTC

Tad, I called you privately because I felt this was a private matter. That's also why my posted reference was non-specific. You've made it public by your own choice. Please don't blame me.

...to keep this matter PRIVATE. So I was able to communicate with, molest, rape, and murder an extra four of your people of ages varying between seven and twelve before revealing myself as a threat. And that's all YOUR responsibility - I'm just a delusional freak of nature with no ability to control my behavior or grasp that a 12 year old boy does not have the maturity to enter a homosexual relationship with a 30 year old man. (A homosexual relationship with a 30 year old woman - whole different ballgame.)

No Bob, sure can't fault you on your prudentry, prudery, whatever the fuck that word is. 'Scuse me for a minute... choking on the smoking gun gunsmoke.

As a side note, Tad's inability to see a problem with his 12yr/30yr relationship reflects a systemic problem in Tad's reasoning.

1. Coming from someone who restores the ability of an unrepentant child molester to communicate privately with twelve year old boys. The solution to the fake problem...

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1787
USHPA Expulsion Proceeding

Warren Narron - 2015/03/23 21:11:39 UTC

Tad has told you how to let him post and protect people of varying ages and the answer is also within your own words.

...is already accidentally in effect and you switch it off. The shark net's enclosing the swimming area and you pull it in...



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/06/15/02/29A03C6300000578-0-image-a-37_1434332488656.jpg

...while the kids are splashing around without cares in the world.

2. There is NOTHING wrong with Tad's reasoning...

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=16265
weaklinks

Kinsley Sykes - 2010/03/18 19:42:19 UTC

In the old threads there was a lot of info from a guy named Tad. Tad had a very strong opinion on weak link strength and it was a lot higher than most folks care for. I'd focus carefully on what folks who tow a lot have to say. Or Jim Rooney who is an excellent tug pilot. I tow with the "park provided" weak links. I think they are 130 pound Greenspot.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hhpa/message/11361
Question

Zack C - 2010/10/15 13:25:50 UTC

Speaking of which, while I can fault Tad's approach, I can't fault his logic, nor have I seen anyone here try to refute it.

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=31781
Another hang check lesson

Alan Deikman - 2014/09/23 19:47:06 UTC

For my part I will just refer you to the classic Tad Eareckson essay which I call "the gun is always loaded" which is a bit overworked but probably all you will ever need to read regarding FTHI. A lot of people will find it gores their particular sacred Ox, but I have never seen anyone point out a flaw in his logic.

http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=5034
USHPA mailer re: donations for RRG

Bob Kuczewski - 2015/12/20 04:20:05 UTC

A third-party perspective

But Tad is a smart guy, and he reads a lot. He also reads through a lot of the smoke that people blow.

...motherfucker. And lemme know after YOU've done something to get any of the aeronautical aspects of this sport on the right track. If there's anything wrong with Tad's reasoning then hang gliding doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell.

I believe this is the root of many of Tad's problems in other areas.

You believe that stalls are harmless, one needs to hold his wing down out of a turbulent jet stream just prior to launch, and that Sam Kellner is quite a genius.

If Tad can defend and justify his sexual relationship with a 12 year old boy, then I believe he can defend and justify anything that he does or says.

Wow. Point of agreement. So do I. Name some people in the sport who DON'T believe they can defend and justify anything they do or say. I'll get ya started - Jim Keen-Intellect Rooney and Ryan Instant-Hands-Free-Release Voight. But you won't find them posting much anymore on the insane dangers of Tad-O-Links or how they're able to weight shift roll control gliders running on the ground without using their hands.

I believe that's been his fundamental problem on all of these forum discussions.

1. And yet u$hPa's imploding, Highland Aerosports is extinct, many of us are now happy with Tad-O-Links, and Kite Strings is still chugging along just fine.

2. WHICH forum discussions, Bob? You've been banned from the Jack and Davis Shows, HGAA, Torrey Hawks Forum, Bags, and Kite Strings. And you've used ammunition I've fed you to shoot back and stay alive at Grebloville.

Having said all of that, I still believe that Tad can contribute to the sport of hang gliding in many ways.

Oh really? So name some people of varying ages you believe can contribute to the sport of hang gliding in many ways. Failing that, name some people of varying ages who HAVE contributed to the sport of hang gliding.

Since there OBVIOUSLY AREN'T ANY and NEVER WILL BE wouldn't it be better just to exclude them from the Bob Show and include Yours Truly? The Bob Show's massively hostile to the idea of people of varying ages having any autonomy anyway. Got a whole 39 post thread over there:

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1865
Flying with children

spewing negativity about kid participation in foot launchable soaring aircraft aviation, ferchrisake. (Using four of my stills from the Brad Geary video, I see.) Get rid of the fuckin' people of varying ages that you don't have anyway and let me contribute to the sport of hang gliding in the many ways you still believe I can and always work to prevent me from doing.

I am open to any suggestions on how we can do that while not exposing our younger members to any potential risk. Thanks.

1. I got a few suggestions, Bob. But the vast majority of them would be very problematic from an anatomical aspect.

2. Oh. You're gonna bring your fake younger members into the sport of HANG GLIDING but they won't be exposed to ANY *POTENTIAL• RISK. Guess you won't be needing no parents nor guardians signing no waivers then. 'Cause Bob Show hang gliding is the only flavor of aviation on the planet with ZERO...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8143/7462005802_bbc0ac66ac_o.jpg


http://www.ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1081
Platform towing /risk mitigation / accident

Sam Kellner - 2012/07/03 02:25:58 UTC

No, you don't get an accident report.

...potential risk. The only bad thing that can possibly happen to them is having a homosexual relationship with a 30 year old man that they don't have the maturity to enter into.

Tell ya sumpin', motherfucker... The ABSOLUTE *WORST* thing you can tell anybody getting set to take a glider into the air - or walk out the front door - is that there's no potential risk involved. In hang gliding you make it clear that most of the things that have killed Zeroes and Ones are the same things that have killed Fours and Fives and you teach them how to recognize, neutralize, manage risks. And I'd say that a twelve year old boy who can't be taught how not to have a homosexual relationship that he doesn't want with a thirty year old man also can't be taught how to make sure he's connected to his fuckin' glider just prior to running off a ramp. Same way lotsa Fours and Fives can't.