Welcome to PPRUNe jeta108 ...
I'm amazed at how quickly you have worked me out ... or, at least, think you have. If you hang around a bit longer you might find out that I carefully consider reasoned argument and that I enjoy objective debate. You'll also find that I have agreed with Mr Smith on occassions (rarely).
I belong to no aviation body, nor do I work for any aviation based organisation.... so I have no agendas ...not many here who can say that !
What I don't tolerate are pretend debaters who, when they can't sway others with their arguments, drag out the ... "you're only a mouthpiece for so and so organisation" ... or " how can we believe you because you won't state your name" ... surely you agree that's a sure sign that they have given up on rational argument.
Unfortunately, you appear to be starting off on the wrong foot too. Your statement... " If james michael has an identity to protect that is of such concern that AOPA have to intervene, one or both should sue Mr Smith. At least his identity is known .." places you fairly and squarely in my list of those who've appeared to have "given up".
Please prove me wrong and post some objective opinions ... so I can consider them.