Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / March 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Bowditch takes the Bait

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ilena Rose - 11 Mar 2008 19:07 GMT
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/PropagandistProbert.html
www.BreastImplantAwarness.org/SandraProbert.htm
Details of Probert's disbarment
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/snake-oil.htm#Mark-S-Probert

Mark S Probert, disbarred attorney and long time member of the
disgraced Rag-tag Posse of Snake-oil (Vaccinations) Posse, along with
the 3 losing plaintiffs in Barrett Vs Rosenthal, posted a recent lie:

" Cut the crap. Ilena tried it, and only made helself look like a
stalker."

No Mark, I outed YOU as the stalker, calling yourself "Marla Maples"
and attempting to infiltrate my private email support group, then
harassing and threatening me at my home/office.

It's Attorney Tricks 101 to accuse your 'mark' of your own crimes.

I have admitted I waited far too long to contact Sandra Probert ... as
soon as I discovered her husband in drag lying to get close to my
group ... I should have alerted her of your frightening behavior.

Your continued howlings that her knowing of your stalking would
"stifle" your freedom speech says to me volumes.
Mark Probert - 12 Mar 2008 01:59 GMT
> Mark S Probert, disbarred attorney and long time member of the
> disgraced Rag-tag Posse of Snake-oil (Vaccinations) Posse, along with
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> and attempting to infiltrate my private email support group, then
> harassing and threatening me at my home/office.

Like I said at the time, I received hate filled emails that were
replete with Ilena-isms wishing ill for my son who was about to
undergo pump implant surgery. I was looking to find out just what you
were telling your group. Nothing more.

Of course, you claimed that I never received these emails, but never
explained how you knew that. Of course, there are only two ways you
could make that claim: 1) you were intercepting my emails, or 2) your
group does not exist. If you disagree, please explain a third way,
and, your idle speculation does not count.

> It's Attorney Tricks 101 to accuse your 'mark' of your own crimes.

Since when are you an attorney? This is something that you routinely
do.

> I have admitted I waited far too long to contact Sandra Probert ... as
> soon as I discovered her husband in drag lying to get close to my
> group ... I should have alerted her of your frightening behavior.
>
> Your continued howlings that her knowing of your stalking would
> "stifle" your freedom speech says to me volumes.

You have that wrong. I have said that your purpose in contacting my
wife was to feebly attempt to stifle my free speech by intimidating
me.

You have never, ever, explained why YOU stalked my wife, and, as of
today, my explanation is the only one on the table. If you disagree
with my explanation, please explain YOUR motive in doing so. I note
that I was not the first male you did this to.

So, the bottom line is that you are wrong, and you will never, ever
admit why you stalked my wife.
Jan Drew - 12 Mar 2008 04:07 GMT
On Mar 11, 2:07 pm, Ilena Rose <B...@mundo.com> wrote:

OOps.. There goes the fake UDP again.

> Mark S Probert, disbarred attorney and long time member of the
> disgraced Rag-tag Posse of Snake-oil (Vaccinations) Posse, along with
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> and attempting to infiltrate my private email support group, then
> harassing and threatening me at my home/office.

<Like I said at the time, I received hate filled emails that were
replete with Ilena-isms wishing ill for my son who was about to
undergo pump implant surgery. I was looking to find out just what you
were telling your group. Nothing more.>

More made up stories.
Forget you said this??

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.attn-deficit/msg/b47238df12888f43

Anecdotes are not facts. They are, at best interesting stories. At
worst, outright lies.

<Of course, you claimed that I never received these emails, but never
explained how you knew that. Of course, there are only two ways you
could make that claim: 1) you were intercepting my emails, or 2) your
group does not exist. If you disagree, please explain a third way,
and, your idle speculation does not count.>

YOU said YOU received emails.  YOU prove it.

Forget you said this also?

Rod wrote:

>> Ilena Rose wrote:

>>> She also continues to lie for Mark S Probert

>> I am not your enemy.

> Were you not "Marla Maples"?

Rod, I have tried to end the feud/war/what-have-you with Ilena since she
returned to the newsgroups. If you, and Jan, want to dredge up ancient
history, feel free. I do not play that game anymore.

If you continue to post with the same attitude, I will correctly assume
that you, too, in addition to Jan, want the war to continue.

I do not.

> It's Attorney Tricks 101 to accuse your 'mark' of your own crimes.

Since when are you an attorney? This is something that you routinely
do.

> I have admitted I waited far too long to contact Sandra Probert ... as
> soon as I discovered her husband in drag lying to get close to my
> group ... I should have alerted her of your frightening behavior.
>
> Your continued howlings that her knowing of your stalking would
> "stifle" your freedom speech says to me volumes.

<You have that wrong. I have said that your purpose in contacting my
wife was to feebly attempt to stifle my free speech by intimidating
me.

You have never, ever, explained why YOU stalked my wife, and, as of
today, my explanation is the only one on the table. If you disagree
with my explanation, please explain YOUR motive in doing so. I note
that I was not the first male you did this to.

So, the bottom line is that you are wrong, and you will never, ever
admit why you stalked my wife.>

Your wife was never stalked.  Period.
You OTOH, emailed me.  It was NOT your wife Sandra.

Dear Mrs. Drew:

I am using email to you since I do not wish to participate in Usenet. I
trust that you *wil* respect this. I *wil* not email you again, except to
forward to you other emails that Rosenthal has sent to me. She had the
unmitigated gall to actually post this email to a webpage, which she
acknowledges, and has since removed. She had the nerve to post my place of
employment in the newsgroups and on that webpage.

Frankly, I am tired of your constant blaming Mark for everything that
Rosenthal has done to him. This email was sent to ME, not him, by her. He
had warned her several times not to do so, but, she went ahead and emailed
me. I have spoken with some of Mark's friends in government law enforcement,
and they tell me that this can be construed as stalking behavior, since I
have never had contact with her.

Let me be blunt: I have been fully aware of Mark's activities from day one
as we share *verything* in our relationship. He has NEVER posted as Will
Ketcher, and we have not had an AOL account for a long time. However,
Rosenthal persists in accusing him.

Let me clear up this issue Mark's attempt to infiltrate her email list. He
has never denied doing so, and has clearly stated his reasons, which
Rosenthal rejects. When he mentioned that our younger son was about to have
surgery he began receiving some very nasty email which sounded quite a bit
like Rosenthal. I read them, and know that they were hate filled and
mirrored her usual verbiage. Some of them actually wished ill to our son.
Remember, I am an English teacher and I spend hours a day reading students'
work. I also felt that they could have originated with people who were
affiliated with her.

Mark was deeply offended by some of the statements in these emails, and he
attempted to locate the senders, but was unsuccessful. He then decided to
try to read her group to see if he could identify the offending individuals.
As you know, she found out what he did, and posted a message to that effect.
Mark *immeidatrely* acknowledged what he did, and expressed his reasons,
which she denied and said that we never received such email, even though she
had absolutely no way of reading his email inbox.

You have been *concistently*wrong about Mark, and even more consistently
wrong about Mark. I have read many instances where it was clear that you did
not *udnerstand* what he was saying. Now that you do not read his full
messages (many times you respond to something that has been severely edited)
or his replies, you are making assumptions based on less than all the facts.
If you were my student, you would get an F.

When I first received this email I was very upset by her actions, and I
wanted to file complaints with Hotmail, RoadRunner and GoDaddy, her website
host. Mark talked me out of it, as he does not think that such actions *wil
lhelp* her. In fact, he is convinced that she *wil* become even more abusive
and obsessed with "enemies." You know that I have every right to make such
complaints.

Several of my students have used her website about Mark in their *wrtiings*
in my senior honors writing seminar. Another group has used Rosenthal in a
debate in my senior debating class. They used her to demonstrate that the
First Amendment, which is posted in Mark's study, protects even the most
vile people. I gave them an A.

I trust that this helps you get a better perspective on Mark, and on
Rosenthal.

As I said above, I will not email you again, but I will forward all of her
current messages to me.

If you wish to respond to me, please do so at SandraProb...@hotmail.com. I
am using my professional email address simply because that is the address
Rosenthal used.

Sandra Probert

SPro...@nycboe.net
 
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



©2008 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.