 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / August 2005Thanks To Mark Thorson For Exposing These *Truths*
FACTS (Not hatred) Indeed, the Jews and atheists on this ng have lied over and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites trying to personally trash. That is the facts. >Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? >From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" MarkProbert02-21...@lumbercartel.com >Date: 2/23/2004 6:39 AM Pacific Standard Time >Message-id: <Kgo_b.56997$ac.12726...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> >"Jan" <jdrew63...@aol.com> wrote in message >news:20040221170251.20558.00000101@mb-m28.aol.com... >> >Subject: Re: What The Bible Teaches About Forgivness. >> >From: "Peter Moran" mori...@gil.com.au >> >Date: 2/21/2004 12:53 PM Pacific Standard Time >> >Message-id: >><4037c565$0$889$61c65...@uq-127creek-reader-02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au >> >Enough, Jan. I forgive you. Everything. >> >Peter Moran >> God Bless You, and I forgive you, now go no more and ****make no claims >that aren't >> truthful and I will do the same.**** >Is Jan using WMD's??? >*W*ords of *M*a.s *D*eception! There is an EXCELLENT example of one hate filled jew (on this ng). He is making light of forgiveness. Jan To say the JewS rejected Christ, is NOT anti-semitism,,, IT IS THE TRUTH. To say Satan is the king of all liars, and leads those who practice lying is NOT anti-semitism,,,IT IS THE TRUTH. To say the Jew on this ng are liars, is NOT anti-semtisim, ,,, IT IS THE TRUTH AND HAS BEEN PROVEN WITH THEIR OWN WORDS. We have seen every single Jew here lie (with the exception of IIena), but it isn't limited to them. > FACTS > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites > trying to personally trash. That is the facts. Her English doesn't improve, does it? > >Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? > >From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" MarkProbert02-21...@lumbercartel.com [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > There is an EXCELLENT example of one hate filled jew (on this ng). Assuming he's hate-filled (?), of what relevance is his religion? > He is making light of forgiveness. > > Jan > > To say the JewS rejected Christ, is NOT anti-semitism,,, > IT IS THE TRUTH. But surely Jan must know that all of the disciples were Jewish? And that they argued amongst themselves as to whether they should bother to carry their message to gentiles at all? > To say Satan is the king of all liars, and leads those > who practice lying is NOT anti-semitism,,,IT IS THE TRUTH. "To say Satan is the king of all liars" has precisely what to do with Jews? > To say the Jew on this ng are liars, is NOT anti-semtisim, ,,, > IT IS THE TRUTH AND HAS BEEN PROVEN WITH THEIR OWN WORDS. The anti-semitism is, of course, Lollipop bringing up religion where it is not relevant, thus attempting to associate lying and Judaism. I have often wondered in this group how Lollipop reconciles her many lies with her christianity, thereby implying that christians are expected not to lie, but I have never called her a lying, hate-filled christian, and nor has anyone else. > We have seen every single Jew here lie (with the exception of IIena), but it > isn't limited > to them. We know; she doesn't like catholics or atheists either. Sadly, Jan actually seems to think that anti-semitic rants such as these prove that she's not anti-semitic. > FACTS > > (Not hatred) The FACT is, you post HATRED as shown here. > Indeed, the Jews and atheists on this ng have lied over > and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites > trying to personally trash. That is the facts. What does ones relgion have to do with their veracity? NOTHING. Thus, by linking religion and your misperception of a group's veracity, you demonstrate bigotry. >>Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? >>From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" MarkProbert02-21...@lumbercartel.com >>Date: 2/23/2004 6:39 AM Pacific Standard Time >>Message-id: <Kgo_b.56997$ac.12726...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Yes, I did get it rgith back then, and nothing has changed. >>>>Subject: Re: What The Bible Teaches About Forgivness. >>>>From: "Peter Moran" mori...@gil.com.au [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Jan Yes, WMD's used by Jan. > To say the JewS rejected Christ, is NOT anti-semitism,,, > IT IS THE TRUTH. > To say Satan is the king of all liars, and leads those > who practice lying is NOT anti-semitism,,,IT IS THE TRUTH. > To say the Jew on this ng are liars, is NOT anti-semtisim, ,,, > IT IS THE TRUTH AND HAS BEEN PROVEN WITH THEIR OWN WORDS. See above, bigot. Still trying to defeind yourself? You cannot. You lose, bigot. > We have seen every single Jew here lie (with the exception of IIena), but it > isn't limited > to them. True. You do it all the time, but, no one links it to your false Christianity. >> FACTS >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What does ones relgion have to do with their veracity? NOTHING. The FACT is: Indeed, the Jews and atheists on this ng have lied over and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites trying to personally trash. That is the facts. >>>Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? >>>From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Yes, WMD's used by Jan. I beg your pardon. God Bless You, and I forgive you, now go no more and ****make no claims that aren't truthful and I will do the same.**** >> To say the JewS rejected Christ, is NOT anti-semitism,,, >> IT IS THE TRUTH. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > True. You do it all the time, NO, I do not do it all the time. but, no one links it to your false > Christianity. False. >>>FACTS >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites > trying to personally trash. That is the facts. You did not answer my question. I asked what one's religion has to do with their veracity. Explain the connection. >>>>Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? >>>>From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > I beg your pardon. Words of mass deception. What you post, every time you post. > God Bless You, and I forgive you, now go no more and ****make no claims > that aren't truthful and I will do the same.**** [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >><snip instigating a fight, for a Jew, I might add)> I wrote the truth. See above, bigot. Still trying to defeind yourself? You cannot. You lose, bigot. Yes, you are trying to deFIEND yourself. >>>We have seen every single Jew here lie (with the exception of IIena), but >>>it isn't limited [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > NO, I do not do it all the time. Yes you do, except on every February 30th. > but, no one links it to your false > >>Christianity. > > False. Truth. >>>>FACTS >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > You did not answer my question. I asked what one's religion has to do with > their veracity. Explain the connection. The FACT is: Indeed, the Jews and atheists on this ng have lied over and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites trying to personally trash. That is the facts. >>>>>Subject: Are these Jan's WMD???? >>>>>From: "Mark Probert-February 21, 2004" [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > <snip lies> >>>>We have seen every single Jew here lie (with the exception of IIena), >>>>but it isn't limited [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > <snip lie, yawn> > >>>>FACTS > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > > > > <snip lie, yawn> Lollipop misses the point again. When she thinks, or pretends to think, that people are lying, why does she bring up their religion? Religious bigotry. LadyLollipop wrote: > > LadyLollipop wrote: > >> [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] > > > > <snip lie, yawn> Lollipop misses the point again. When she thinks, or pretends to think, that people are lying, Wrong. All proven. why does she bring up their religion? Got nothing whatsoever to do with religion. The FACT is: On this ng: It is indeed the Jews and atheists who have lied over and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites trying to personally trash. Those who announced they were Jews: Richard H Jacobson Andrew Kingoff Mark Probert Joel Eichen Andrew Langer ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers. All atheists: Peter Bowditch Rich Shewmaker CathyB/ believed to be Rosalind Dalefiield Rich Andrews Mark Thorson? NanaWeedkiller/akaTedNidiffer Terry Polevoy ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers > LadyLollipop wrote: > > > LadyLollipop wrote: [quoted text clipped - 135 lines] > > ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers She's done it again. Quite apart from the fact that she is telling blatant untruths, she still doesn't see that to associate a person's religion or lack thereof with their supposed lies is religious bigotry. Truly, she is dim. And bigoted. >She's done it again. Quite apart from the fact that she is telling >blatant untruths, she still doesn't see that to associate a person's >religion or lack thereof with their supposed lies is religious bigotry. Jan's denial is impenetrable. A nuclear bomb would not touch it. >Truly, she is dim. And bigoted. She surely is a disturbed woman. Cue Jan to accuse me of diagnosing on the net. Saying Jan Drew is a disturbed woman is surely belaboring the obvious. In fact her next post about me will serve to add another data point to that observation. Aloha, Rich PS: I changed the subject of this thread to another subject in another thread to more appropriately reflecting the discussion. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Best defense to logic is ignorance >LadyLollipop wrote: >> > LadyLollipop wrote: [quoted text clipped - 135 lines] > >ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers Just thought I would repost this insuring the proper subject title lest someone miss it. The most incredible thing is that Jan Drew has absolutely no insight into her bigotry. If Jan was a normal person I might suggest that she print out her post and show it to her pastor. Sadly it would do no good. Jan Drew's bigotry combined with obvious denial result in her repeatedly demonstrating how incredibly hateful and bigoted she is. It is sad that some of the folks who agree with Jan Drew's ideology don't confront her about her egregious bigotry. Could it be that they share her bigoted opinions?? Hmmm. Aloha, Rich PS: I guarantee that Jan Drew is going to start a new post proving that she is stalking me in my private life. Jan Drew is foaming at the mouth that her stalking has not resulted in her finding where I am. I imagine she is spending hours each day trying to figure out how to find where I am so she can stalk me. Jan Drew is a cautionary tale: Never reveal your true identity on the net. There are too many kooks like Jan Drew who will stalk you out of anger and hatred. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Best defense to logic is ignorance >>Lollipop misses the point again. >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > print out her post and show it to her pastor. Sadly it would do no > good. I have found that religious bigots usually have religious leaders of a like mind. > Jan Drew's bigotry combined with obvious denial result in her > repeatedly demonstrating how incredibly hateful and bigoted she is. It > is sad that some of the folks who agree with Jan Drew's ideology don't > confront her about her egregious bigotry. Could it be that they share > her bigoted opinions?? Hmmm. Those who remain silent remind me of those who remained silent when the horrors of the Holocaust became known. > I guarantee that Jan Drew is going to start a new post proving > that she is stalking me in my private life. Jan Drew is foaming at the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Never reveal your true identity on the net. There are too many kooks > like Jan Drew who will stalk you out of anger and hatred. Count on it. > ------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------------- > > Best defense to logic is ignorance Jan is well defended. > why does > she bring up their religion? > > Got nothing whatsoever to do with religion. If it has nothing to do with religion, why do you mention it. Obviously, in your so-called mind, there is a relationship. Explain that relationship, or stop mentioning a persons religion. > The FACT is: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Joel Eichen > Andrew Langer And proud of it. Remember, N E V E R A G A I N1 > ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers. Only in your so-called mind. > All atheists: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > NanaWeedkiller/akaTedNidiffer > Terry Polevoy So what? > ALL proven liars, all proven trouble makers All people who do not take your crap. That is the real reason why you call them as you do. And, I call you... B I G O T. N E V E R A G A I N. >>>>>FACTS >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites > trying to personally trash. That is the facts. You did not answer my question. I asked what one's religion has to do with their veracity. Explain the connection. Note that failure to explain the connection will result in my continuing to expose your bigotry. >>>>>>FACTS >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >with their veracity. Explain the connection. Note that failure to >explain the connection will result in my continuing to expose your bigotry. Jan Drew has already explained the connection between religion and veracity. I am not sure why you keep asking her. It is as follows according to Jan Drew: >>> Yes Jesus was a jew, his own people rejected him. >>> They debunked all his words and works, and now debunking and >>> lies are second nature to them. That is how Satan works. >>> Jan Drew/Lady Lollipop the Bigot It is pretty obvious that Jan Drew believes that lying comes second nature to Jews because they don't believe that Jesus is their lord and savior and are controlled by Satan. But Jan Drew is not a bigot. She is just telling the truth:-)))) Aloha, Rich PS: Cue Jan to start a new thread attacking or stalking me. Just watch. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Best defense to logic is ignorance >>>>>>>FACTS >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > savior and are controlled by Satan. But Jan Drew is not a bigot. She > is just telling the truth:-)))) I was not certain that Jan recognized that she had posted that and it was responsive to my question. I was needling her... > Aloha, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Best defense to logic is ignorance And Jan Drew don't need no Scotty to get those shields up! >>>>>>>>FACTS >>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >> veracity. I am not sure why you keep asking her. It is as follows >> according to Jan Drew: Isn't it most strange that Richard H Jacobson is eager to think he can answer for me, but he can NOT answer questions asked directly to himself. >>> Jan Drew has already explained the connection between religion and >>> veracity. I am not sure why you keep asking her. It is as follows >>> according to Jan Drew: > >Isn't it most strange that Richard H Jacobson Is this thread about Richard H Jacobson?? The thread is about Jan DRew and the connection between religion and veracity. I will restore what Jan Drew snipped. It is no surprise that she snipped the very thing that proves that she believes that lying comes second nature to Jews: >>> Yes Jesus was a jew, his own people rejected him. >>> They debunked all his words and works, and now debunking and >>> lies are second nature to them. That is how Satan works. >>> Jan Drew/Lady Lollipop the Bigot According to Jan Drew saying that lying comes second nature to Jews is not bigotry because it is the truth. And believing that lying comes second nature to Jews is how Satan works. Aloha, Rich ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Best defense to logic is ignorance >>>>>>FACTS >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > their veracity. Explain the connection. Note that failure to explain the > connection will result in my continuing to expose your bigotry. There is NO connection, whatsoever. There is also no bigotry. The FACT is: Indeed, the Jews and atheists on this ng have lied over and over, as well as posting nasty hateful lying websites trying to personally trash. That is the facts. < snipped bigot trash> UM MOM Susan > < snipped bigot trash> UM MOM Susan Please do that when you see any of Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly lying hatred for the Jews Lying posts that are trash, Susan. Oh, that, right, I forgot, you read all 20,000 of Joel's lying posts trashing me, and that was A OK. Do a reality check, Susan. JJ MOM Jan First I don't read every post. I also don't call people liars all day because I don't look for this either. I come here to see if anyone posts anything that could help me. You seem to have your own agenda and that's fine but this thread you started is bigoted trash and you know it. UM MOM Susan > Please do that when you see any of Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly > lying hatred for the Jews Lying posts that are trash, Susan. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Jan > First I don't read every post. I also don't call people liars all day > because I don't look for this either. I come here to see if anyone posts > anything that could help me. You seem to have your own agenda and that's > fine but this thread you started is bigoted trash and you know it. UM MOM > Susan *I* did not start this thread! You made that claim before and once again you are wrong. Mark Thorson has HIS agenda. I have never been a bigot ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PERIOD! Neither do I call people liars, unless they LIE. >> Please do that when you see any of Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly >> lying hatred for the Jews Lying posts that are trash, Susan. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> Jan > Neither do I call people liars, unless they LIE. You do it all the time. Here's a perfect example: To see Jan's ORIGINAL POSTING, go here: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20040310000815.25804.00001173%40mb-m01.aol.com Jan wrote: > >From: Mark Thorson nos...@sonic.net > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You can't YOU JUST LIED AGAIN!!!!!!! ----- example quotes of Jan accusing people of being paid shills ----- Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030415173745.18794.00000646%40mb-fn.aol.com Any time alt. health is mentioned the personal trashing starts. Mostly comes from paid shill Mark Probert. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030412210802.08778.00000680%40mb-fw.aol.com Internet bully Mark Probert who is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030410170838.14245.00000347%40mb-ct.aol.com As for Mark, he is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030325123827.25124.00000246%40mb-mn.aol.com As long as Mark is here, the paid shill will call names when in fact he is the one who is a bigot. Speaking of his own people. >>First I don't read every post. I also don't call people liars all day >>because I don't look for this either. I come here to see if anyone posts [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > *I* did not start this thread! LIAR! I just checked. You started it under the subject: "Thanks To Mark Thorson For Exposing These *Truths*" The subject just got changed. Learn how to use a newsreader. > You made that claim before and once again you are wrong. > > Mark Thorson has HIS agenda. > > I have never been a bigot ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PERIOD! Wrong. You have clearly demonstrated that you are by your own words. > Neither do I call people liars, unless they LIE. BWHAHAHAHA >>>Please do that when you see any of Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly >>>lying hatred for the Jews Lying posts that are trash, Susan. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>> >>>Jan >Neither do I call people liars, unless they LIE. The following proof that Jan Drew does call people liars when they tell the truth has been posted dozens of times. Jan Drew is well aware that she often calls people liars when they tell the truth. Here is an example: To see Jan's ORIGINAL POSTING, go here: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20040310000815.25804.00001173%40mb-m01.aol.com Jan wrote: > >From: Mark Thorson nos...@sonic.net > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You can't YOU JUST LIED AGAIN!!!!!!! ----- example quotes of Jan accusing people of being paid shills ----- Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030415173745.18794.00000646%40mb-fn.aol.com Any time alt. health is mentioned the personal trashing starts. Mostly comes from paid shill Mark Probert. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030412210802.08778.00000680%40mb-fw.aol.com Internet bully Mark Probert who is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030410170838.14245.00000347%40mb-ct.aol.com As for Mark, he is a paid shill and lives off his wife. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030325123827.25124.00000246%40mb-mn.aol.com As long as Mark is here, the paid shill will call names when in fact he is the one who is a bigot. Speaking of his own people. <end of quote> Jan has never apologized for falsely calling Mark a liar. And she will not apologize. Instead she will divert attention by talking about how others lie and don't apologize. Jan Drew is unable to take responsibility for her own behavior. Sad that. Aloha, Rich PS: I predict Jan Drew will start a new thread to divert attention from her own lies. In that thread she will prove that she is a stalker. Just watch. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Best defense to logic is ignorance >>< snipped bigot trash> UM MOM Susan > > Please do that when you see any of Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly lying > hatred for the Jews Lying posts that are trash, Susan. Since Mark uses your own words, can I assume that you are now admitting you posted trash? > Oh, that, right, I forgot, you read all 20,000 of Joel's lying posts > trashing me, and that was A OK. > > Do a reality check, Susan. Susan uses both hands to hold onto reality. >>>< snipped bigot trash> UM MOM Susan >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Since Mark uses your own words, can I assume that you are now admitting > you posted trash? Is your name, Susan? Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly lying hatred for the Jews >> Oh, that, right, I forgot, you read all 20,000 of Joel's lying posts >> trashing me, and that was A OK. >> >> Do a reality check, Susan. > > Susan uses both hands to hold onto reality. Susan defended Joels's lying posts as well as his impersonation, as did you. >>>>< snipped bigot trash> UM MOM Susan >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Is your name, Susan? Irrelevant. > Mark Thorson's repeated, repeatedly lying > hatred for the Jews MT does not hate Jews. you do. >>>Oh, that, right, I forgot, you read all 20,000 of Joel's lying posts >>>trashing me, and that was A OK. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Susan defended Joels's lying posts as well as his impersonation, as did you. I do not recall defending Joel's impersonation of you. Why would anyone in their right mind want to impersonate you? *Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* * My Style is adjusted* <snip> > *Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* > > * My Style is adjusted* > > <snip> I do not recall defending Joel's impersonation of you. Why would anyone in their right mind want to impersonate you? >> *Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I do not recall defending Joel's impersonation of you. Mark Probert Feb 23 2003, 9:21 pm >>She revels in stifling free speech, mainlybecause she does not understand >>the concept of free speech. Impersonation and words are what gets accounts closed, the poster need to be responsible. >I see, so you finally have admitted that you censor people for the words they post. >As I said before. >You are an enemy of the First Amendment >Why would anyone > in their right mind want to impersonate you? Joel did it to harass. When has Joel ever been in his right mind? jdrew63929@yahoo.com Answer, he like you, never learns, he has now had three accounts closed. >>>*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >>You are an enemy of the First Amendment Yes, I said that, to you, and others, who whine to ISPs, etc. Nothing has changed. Either deal with it right here, or not at all. > >Why would anyone > >>in their right mind want to impersonate you? > > Joel did it to harass. When has Joel ever been in his right mind? I see. So now you are diagnosing on usenet. > jdrew63929@yahoo.com > > Answer, he like you, never learns, he has now had three accounts closed. >>>>*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Yes, I said that, to you, and others, who whine to ISPs, etc. Nothing has > changed. You did not recall defending Jeol for impersonating me. Sorry you have such a bad memory. > Either deal with it right here, or not at all. I dealt with it long ago. You defend impersonation. >> >Why would anyone >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> Answer, he like you, never learns, he has now had three accounts closed. >>>>>*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > You did not recall defending Jeol for impersonating me. Sorry you have such > a bad memory. Like I said, he had to be nuts to impersonate you. >>Either deal with it right here, or not at all. > > I dealt with it long ago. You defend impersonation. No, I defend the truth and the right of free speech. Impersonation can be a form of speech. >>> >Why would anyone >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >>I see. So now you are diagnosing on usenet. >>>jdrew63929@yahoo.com >>> >>>Answer, he like you, never learns, he has now had three accounts closed. >>>>>>*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > No, I defend the truth and the right of free speech. NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. Impersonation can be a form of speech. So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those who defend it are W R O N G. You were W R O N G. A G A I N YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN TO SHUT UP! >>>> >Why would anyone >>>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>> >>>>Answer, he like you, never learns, he has now had three accounts closed. > So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those > who defend it are W R O N G. Jan and those she defends would *never* slander, right? Vashti >> So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those >> who defend it are W R O N G. > > Jan and those she defends would *never* slander, right? > > Vashti Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? To take the heat off of her buddy Mark Probert, right? Mark Probert" <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote >>>>>><snip> >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > No, I defend the truth and the right of free speech. NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. Impersonation can be a form of speech. > Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? The changed meaning being from slander being wrong *to* er- slander being wrong... > To take the heat off of her buddy Mark Probert, right? Jan seems to believe only buddies would speak up about anything that strikes them as being hypocritical, makes sense I guess. Vashti >>Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Jan seems to believe only buddies would speak up about anything > that strikes them as being hypocritical, makes sense I guess. I hope that enemies would speak up about free speech. Wrote where?? >> Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Vashti Actually, if Vashti was honest, she could do the right thing and post properly. Vashti" <vashti...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:20050809211300.795be8bd@linux.local... >> So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those >> who defend it are W R O N G. > Jan and those she defends would *never* slander, right? > Vashti Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? To take the heat off of her buddy Mark Probert, right? Mark Probert" <markprob...@lumbercartel.com> wrote news:PoJJe.18655$_R1.12167@fe11.lga... >>>>>><snip> >>>>>I do not recall defending Joel's impersonation of you. >>>> Mark Probert Feb 23 2003, 9:21 pm >>>>>>She revels in stifling free speech, mainlybecause she does not >>>>>>understand the concept of free speech. >>>> Impersonation and words are what gets accounts closed, the poster need >>>> to be >>>>responsible. >>>>>I see, so you finally have admitted that you censor people for the >>>>>words >>>>they post. >>>>>As I said before. >>>>>You are an enemy of the First Amendment >>>Yes, I said that, to you, and others, who whine to ISPs, etc. Nothing has >>>changed. >> You did not recall defending Jeol for impersonating me. Sorry you have >> such a bad memory. > Like I said, he had to be nuts to impersonate you. >>>Either deal with it right here, or not at all. >> I dealt with it long ago. You defend impersonation. > No, I defend the truth and the right of free speech. NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. Impersonation can be a form of speech. > Wrote where?? Jan doesn't remember what she wrote? Can't she read messages threaded? Weirdness. > >> Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Actually, if Vashti was honest, she could do the right thing and > post properly. If Jan knew anything about Usenet she would know what posting properly entails and do so. [snip badly attributed text and what seems to be a response to a different post] Vashti >> Wrote where?? > > Jan doesn't remember what she wrote? Can't she read messages > threaded? Weirdness. Poor Vashti sounds like Mark Probert. She can't post properly as I did above, but it is not her, it is Jan. >> >> Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? >> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > If Jan knew anything about Usenet she would know what posting > properly entails and do so. I just did above. It is Vashti who NEVER posts properly. > [snip badly attributed text and what seems to be a response to a > different post] That would be a lie. Vashti" <vashti...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:20050809211300.795be8bd@linux.local... >> So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those >> who defend it are W R O N G. > Jan and those she defends would *never* slander, right? > Vashti Vashti would never snip to change the meaning right? To take the heat off of her buddy Mark Probert, right? Mark Probert" <markprob...@lumbercartel.com> wrote news:PoJJe.18655$_R1.12167@fe11.lga... >>>>>><snip> >>>>>I do not recall defending Joel's impersonation of you. >>>> Mark Probert Feb 23 2003, 9:21 pm >>>>>>She revels in stifling free speech, mainlybecause she does not [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>>Yes, I said that, to you, and others, who whine to ISPs, etc. Nothing has >>>changed. >> You did not recall defending Jeol for impersonating me. Sorry you have >> such a bad memory. > Like I said, he had to be nuts to impersonate you. >>>Either deal with it right here, or not at all. >> I dealt with it long ago. You defend impersonation. > No, I defend the truth and the right of free speech. NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. Impersonation can be a form of speech. > >> Wrote where?? > > [quoted text clipped - 79 lines] > > Impersonation can be a form of speech. Perhaps next time Jan changes a thread name in order to abuse someone, she could attempt to make her post coherent. Does she really think anyone will struggle through this confused mishmash just to find out why she's yet again squealing "Liar!" <snip lies> >> >> Wrote where?? >> > [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] >> >> Impersonation can be a form of speech. > <snip lies> > > [quoted text clipped - 83 lines] > >> > >> Impersonation can be a form of speech. Perhaps Lollipop could point out a lie in: Perhaps next time Jan changes a thread name in order to abuse someone, she could attempt to make her post coherent. Does she really think anyone will struggle through this confused mishmash just to find out why she's yet again squealing "Liar!" rather than just squealing again. [snip] > > NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > really think anyone will struggle through this confused mishmash > just to find out why she's yet again squealing "Liar!" Thing is she thinks she posted properly when it's obvious that the bit of her text I left in there isn't even directed at me. Wish she'd read up on Usenet before copying and pasting one post into another... It's *seems* it's my attribution line she's objecting to (it wasn't a dark and stormy night) even though how one uses the line is a matter of personal taste: some think the posting date, email addy, time, message ID and name should be used in the attribution line but since all that info is in the headers anyway I don't feel the need to repeat it, for reading and quoting purposes the name is enough IMO. Ah well, Jan can fume about proper posting all she likes but until she can master it herself it's a bit hypocritical of her to be pedantic about something she's clueless about. Vashti Just hit the reply button, problem is solved. See how nicely it is done, Vashti and Cathy. Get a clue. > [snip] >> > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Vashti >[snip] >> > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >It's *seems* it's my attribution line she's objecting to (it wasn't >a dark and stormy night) Jan doesn't like (or recognise) references to literature, although Edward Bulwer-Lytton may not be considered literature by some. http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/ She once accused me of writing a "silly poem" which started off "What a piece of work is a man ..." >even though how one uses the line is a >matter of personal taste: some think the posting date, email addy, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Vashti  SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com Just click on reply and the job is done. No need to yack about Jan, abuse and all the garbage. >>[snip] >>> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >>Vashti [snip] > >It's *seems* it's my attribution line she's objecting to (it > >wasn't a dark and stormy night) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/ <g> I know it but it's not really *directly based upon that er- gem. Terry Pratchett used the phrase" it wasn't a dark and stormy night" in a book of his but more than that it was me rebelling against those circular stories, you know: It was a dark and stormy night and the lamp was swinging when the captain said to his mate: "Mate, tell me a story". So the mate began: "It was a dark and stormy night and the lamp was swinging when the captain said to his mate: "Mate, tell me a story" etc. > She once accused me of writing a "silly poem" which started off > "What a piece of work is a man ..." Ah, guess I'll have to leave Kubla Khan out of my attribution line then. Far too out there! ;) Vashti >[snip] >> >It's *seems* it's my attribution line she's objecting to (it [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >Ah, guess I'll have to leave Kubla Khan out of my attribution line >then. Far too out there! ;) Jan certainly would not like any allusion to an opium smoker writing about stately pleasure domes. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com [snip] > >Ah, guess I'll have to leave Kubla Khan out of my attribution > >line then. Far too out there! ;) > > Jan certainly would not like any allusion to an opium smoker > writing about stately pleasure domes. I thought it was laudanum? Never could remember the ending of that poem either... :) Vashti >[snip] >> >Ah, guess I'll have to leave Kubla Khan out of my attribution [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I thought it was laudanum? Never could remember the ending of that >poem either... :) Laudanum is opium, but maybe it was a euphemism. I remember someone telling me once that they drank very dry martinis, made with just a smear of vermouth, not enough to even taste it. I said "So you drink gin" and the person told me that I was insulting them because only low-lifes drank gin. I was looking up the end of the poem on Google, but this man came to the door ... SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > >[snip] > >> >Ah, guess I'll have to leave Kubla Khan out of my attribution [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "So you drink gin" and the person told me that I was insulting > them because only low-lifes drank gin. Gin is insulting? Must be some strange set of standards that pop up with just a smear of vermouth! > I was looking up the end of the poem on Google, but this man came > to the door ... <g> Yup, in typical inattentive style I chose that poem to try to memorise as a er- test/challenge of memory before even reading it to the end. I was 13 or so I guess... thankfully the Abyssinian maids are now also falling from memory cause it only got worse after that bit. :) Vashti >>>>>>>*Agreed. I wil lbe adjusting my style.* >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > NO, you defended Joel's impersonating me. YES, I defend impersonating when it is in the form of speech. Mocking you is S P E E C H. > Impersonation can be a form of speech. > > So can slander, and and those who do it are W R O N G and those who defend > it are W R O N G. I see, so your handler's webpages are all wrong. Actually, Jan, I do not support the torts of slander and libel. You may recall that I have said, to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, that in the free marketplace of ideas, the best response to odious speech is MORE SPEECH, and not lawsuits. Answer the slanderer with words, facts and ideas. Show them for what they are. Apply this idea for a minute to Barrett bringing Ilena into the suit he had with Bolen. You may recall that I disagreed with Barrett doing so (but I do understand why he did). AFAIAC, when Barrett entered the marketplace of alternative ideas, he should have been prepared to answer his critics, like Ilena and Bolen, with more speech based on facts, etc. and not to resort to a suit. People such as Ilena use these things to play victim, and thus add a veneer of credibility to their behavior. Some, like you, are incapable of seeing through this veneer, and, thus support them. Frankly, and I have said this several times before, I sure do hope that Ilena wins in the California Supreme Court (I wonder what is happening in that case these days). Of course, having her chortling will be annoying, but, Ilena will have enhanced my right of free speech by her win, and, thus, everyone wins. > You were W R O N G. > > A G A I N Nope. Read the above. If you want to discuss it, please do. > YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN TO SHUT UP! I know when to shut up, but, as a follower of Oliver Wendell Holmes, I partake fully in the free marketplace of ideas. Sad that you oppose it just like Barrett does for Ilena. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.