"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...

"Shad O'Shay" wrote in message
...
This person sounds like a paranoid, revengeful nut case. (and I ain't
talking about Perez) Wow!

http://www.sailsea.org/

Be careful where you go to learn how to sail.


Shad O'Shay



Jonathan did a job no one else wanted (at no pay) for 5 years. He grew the
outfit in size and scope. Many people benefitted from his hard work. He
was the only one qualified to teach the larger and harder classes. The non
profit was nominated for a prestigious award with him at the helm. He's
got an MBA AND USCG captain's license, two combined qualifications that
are hard to find. It was HIS vision and HIS hard, selfless work. Now that
things are up and running smoothly a bunch of ingrate wannabes wanted to
take over and take over they did. It wasn't a simple vote that got him
outed, it was a deliberate conspiracy. Jonathan shouldn't go back, he is
only lowering himself to their standards. He might do much better creating
a new, competing non profit with iron clad bylaws that don't allow others
to commandeer the ship. It won't be the same if he goes back, hurt
feelings and grudges usually can never be put aside. Be the better man and
take the high road, it will serve you well in the long term. He may have
made mistakes, he has admitted them and now he can use what he has learned
to do much, much better. Anger and resentment are based upon things of the
past, hope and vigor are for the future! Carry the torch forward and may
it shine brightly upon all!

Admiral Momsen

Good grief, Momsen, have you taken leave of your senses? Have you been
drinking the liberal Kool Aid? Have you been smoking some of that there
wacky tobaccy? Or perhaps you got ahold of some of Gaynze's 10X strength
LSD?

Get a grip on yourself, Admiral! Next thing you know, if you keep spouting
such nonsense, Obama will come schlepping around and appoint you to head the
Joint Chiefs of Staff!

You need to get a clue. There's some behind-the-scenes information I am
privy to which sheds an entirely new light upon this situation. I can't be
specific at this time but it concerns possible abuse of the non-profit
status of the organization by the fired member. Does the term "under the
table" mean anything to you? This whole episode with the web site and the
feuding is all about a cover-up. Of course the organization wants rid of a
possible huge liability but said liability thinks only about its own hurt
pride. I understand Perez has even been talking to an F. Lee Bailey type
(shhhhh! don't tell anybody).

Can you expand your rigid mind to encompass such a scenario? It happens all
the time. Usually greed is at the core of the misdoings. Greed and a total
disregard for the law. This is how liberals think - laws are for somebody
else.

Wilbur Hubbard