First you say this...
Originally Posted by Slick:
3.) Greg Staab was NO longer employed at USAC, period, end of subject. Thus making anything Greg said pre-approval wise, a NON-FACTOR. FACT
Then you say...
Originally Posted by Slick:
Bottom line, USAC, as a whole, as the sanctioning body, APPROVED said facility
Which is it? Greg Staab approved the facility but he is no longer employed by USAC, so it's not worth consideration. Then you go on to say that USAC approved the faciliy. Did they? Not according to you.
You're just like anyone else on this board: Dealing in half-truths and "facts" that suit your bashing against USAC.
You have a bigger credibility issue than just your lack of conviction.