| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Johnny" |
| Date: |
22 Jan 2005 07:46:20 AM |
| Object: |
I am in full favor of |
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on the
an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
.
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 01:37:07 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet dream
of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make the old
USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put up
the money to implement it.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
It's no one's fault but your own that you can't get laid.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
I'll support increasing funding to South Carolina's MHMRA, as obviously you
need their services.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, San Antonio 2 (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, January 22 vs. Grand Rapids, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 05:36:29 PM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream
of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make the old
USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men.
Got it yet?
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put
up
the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself.
The men who are assessed the fees would pay the costs.
You still against taking care of women?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 09:38:09 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, San Antonio 2 (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Sunday, January 23 vs. Grand Rapids, 5:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 02:57:05 AM |
|
|
Patrick Lee Humphrey wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
If you need a good belly laugh, here's something to think about.
Picture Johnny, having to surrender all his medical files for
examination for criminal activities. Yes, you can hear the scream
already, I'm pretty sure from how he dodges that there's something
incriminating in there. We do the inspection and start faxing the
records off to all law enforcement agencies for matching against
unsolved cases. So now the entire country has his files (can you picture
the laughter over morning coffe at his urologists' report?).
Now picture Johnny getting the bill for all this.
Tell me that doesn't give you a belly laugh.
--
--sexkitten--
Let the president answer a higher anarchy
Strap him with an Ak-47, let him go, fight his own war
Let him impress daddy that way
No more blood for oil, we got our own battles to fight on our own soil
No more psychological warfare, to trick us to thinking that we ain't loyal
If we don't serve our own country, we're patronizing a hero
Look in his eyes its all lies
The stars and stripes, they've been swiped, washed out and wiped
And replaced with his own face, Mosh now or die
If I get sniped tonight you know why,
Cause I told you to fight.
Eminem "Mosh"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 05:02:03 AM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35h772F4mr6poU1@individual.net...
Patrick Lee Humphrey wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to
put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone
else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides
the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't
YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
If you need a good belly laugh, here's something to think about.
Picture Johnny, having to surrender all his medical files for examination
for criminal activities. Yes, you can hear the scream already,
Your mind imagines such?
I'm pretty sure from how he dodges that there's something incriminating in
there. We do the inspection and start faxing the records off to all law
enforcement agencies for matching against unsolved cases. So now the
entire country has his files (can you picture the laughter over morning
coffe at his urologists' report?).
Now picture Johnny getting the bill for all this.
Tell me that doesn't give you a belly laugh.
There is no probable cause or sufficient reason to investigate all my
medical records, and I am not unwilling for my recorsd to be subject to
review.
And, I wouldn't be required to foot the bill in any such investigation on my
records.
You obviously do not understand due process.
There is sufficient reason and probable cause to investigate abortion clinic
records.
Once ALL medical records are reviewed there would be data to support any
criminal indictments.
Are you ready now, since I am willing to allow my records to be reviewed, or
are you going to throw another ***** rant to keep your medical records
secret while wanting to look at others?
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 06:15:28 AM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35h772F4mr6poU1@individual.net...
Patrick Lee Humphrey wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to
put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone
else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides
the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't
YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
If you need a good belly laugh, here's something to think about.
Picture Johnny, having to surrender all his medical files for examination
for criminal activities. Yes, you can hear the scream already,
Your mind imagines such?
It's not imagination.
I'm pretty sure from how he dodges that there's something incriminating in
there. We do the inspection and start faxing the records off to all law
enforcement agencies for matching against unsolved cases. So now the
entire country has his files (can you picture the laughter over morning
coffe at his urologists' report?).
Now picture Johnny getting the bill for all this.
Tell me that doesn't give you a belly laugh.
There is no probable cause or sufficient reason to investigate all my
medical records,
Nor is there one for abortion records. Welcome to reality.
and I am not unwilling for my recorsd to be subject to
review.
And, I wouldn't be required to foot the bill in any such investigation on my
records.
Why not? It's my fantasy. You dream your way, I'll dream mine.
Who do you reckon is going to be paying for your fantasy? The one or two
men that they find, out of how many million records?
Who will be paying for the rest? You?
You obviously do not understand due process.
Neither do you, if you are insisting that all abortion records be made
public.
There is sufficient reason and probable cause to investigate abortion clinic
records.
Nope. Individual cases only, court order required with probable cause
shown before a judge.
Once ALL medical records are reviewed there would be data to support any
criminal indictments.
Sure. You first.
Are you ready now, since I am willing to allow my records to be reviewed,
Post your doctors names (all of them, Johnny) and fax them all a release
of records form.
or
are you going to throw another ***** rant to keep your medical records
secret while wanting to look at others?
Newsflash for you: I've never kept my abortions secret. I've posted them
several times.
You, on the other hand, throw tantrums every time I ask to review your
records. Wonder what's in there.
--
--sexkitten--
Let the president answer a higher anarchy
Strap him with an Ak-47, let him go, fight his own war
Let him impress daddy that way
No more blood for oil, we got our own battles to fight on our own soil
No more psychological warfare, to trick us to thinking that we ain't loyal
If we don't serve our own country, we're patronizing a hero
Look in his eyes its all lies
The stars and stripes, they've been swiped, washed out and wiped
And replaced with his own face, Mosh now or die
If I get sniped tonight you know why,
Cause I told you to fight.
Eminem "Mosh"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 08:28:07 AM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35hir1F4lfmn6U1@individual.net...
Johnny wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:35h772F4mr6poU1@individual.net...
Patrick Lee Humphrey wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions
on the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that*
wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would
make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to
put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay
the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone
else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides
the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't
YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
If you need a good belly laugh, here's something to think about.
Picture Johnny, having to surrender all his medical files for examination
for criminal activities. Yes, you can hear the scream already,
Your mind imagines such?
It's not imagination.
I'm pretty sure from how he dodges that there's something incriminating
in there. We do the inspection and start faxing the records off to all
law enforcement agencies for matching against unsolved cases. So now the
entire country has his files (can you picture the laughter over morning
coffe at his urologists' report?).
Now picture Johnny getting the bill for all this.
Tell me that doesn't give you a belly laugh.
There is no probable cause or sufficient reason to investigate all my
medical records,
Nor is there one for abortion records. Welcome to reality.
and I am not unwilling for my recorsd to be subject to
review.
And, I wouldn't be required to foot the bill in any such investigation on
my records.
Why not? It's my fantasy. You dream your way, I'll dream mine.
Who do you reckon is going to be paying for your fantasy? The one or two
men that they find, out of how many million records?
Are you so stupid, ignorant, behind the times?
Use your brain for a change.
DNA testing is here and the man who impregnated the female would be saddled
with the costs.
Any more questions?
Who will be paying for the rest? You?
You think I want to go through every abortion record since 1973?
I am more concerned about the current practice.
Let me know when you are no longer stuck in the mud on these issues. and
when you want to start looking forward.
You obviously do not understand due process.
Neither do you, if you are insisting that all abortion records be made
public.
You do NOT understand.
Your efforts to quell review of medical records in the abortion industry are
nothing more than part of the coverup and the big lie in the USA which is
protecting criminals.
There is sufficient reason and probable cause to investigate abortion
clinic records.
Nope.
Disagreement doesn't make my statement false.
Individual cases only, court order required with probable cause shown
before a judge.
No. Heard of class actions before?
Heard of Eminent domain yet?
I will not allow crimes to go unpunished via sacrifice.
Once ALL medical records are reviewed there would be data to support any
criminal indictments.
Sure. You first.
Sure thing.
So, it's your turn now.
Are you ready now, since I am willing to allow my records to be reviewed,
Post your doctors names (all of them, Johnny) and fax them all a release
of records form.
Why?
"court order required with probable cause shown before a judge."
You got that?
No, you don't.
And, the government does have such in the matter I am addressing.
It is called investigation.
It does not require individuals to be named to investigate a business.
I am sure there will be names on the investigation documents though.
And, then criminal indictments will follow if there is enough evidence to
produce such.
or
are you going to throw another ***** rant to keep your medical records
secret while wanting to look at others?
Newsflash for you: I've never kept my abortions secret. I've posted them
several times.
So, who paid?
You, on the other hand, throw tantrums every time I ask to review your
records. Wonder what's in there.
I'm not bitching about it, Ms. non-compliance.
This is going to come down on people like you who are so uncooperative
doubly hard.
Read revelation where it instructs people to render double evil treatment
unto Babylon.
Since you won't do anything but ***** and complain and fail to cooperate, we
will get the stuff by force if necessary.
And, I will be on the winning side in that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 10:03:12 AM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> writes:
Patrick Lee Humphrey wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make
the old USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men. Got it yet?
You'll never get it, because a woman's right to choose is for everyone's
protection. (Unless you happen to have been born of a man, anyway.)
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put
up the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself. The men who are assessed the fees would pay the
costs. You still against taking care of women?
I'm still against your attempts to force your hallucinations on anyone else.
You leave a thousand and one questions unattended, such as: who decides the
"fees"? Who calculates how much the costs actually are? Why shouldn't YOU
foot the bill, since it's YOUR daydream?
If you need a good belly laugh, here's something to think about.
Picture Johnny, having to surrender all his medical files for examination for
criminal activities. Yes, you can hear the scream already, I'm pretty sure
from how he dodges that there's something incriminating in there. We do the
inspection and start faxing the records off to all law enforcement agencies
for matching against unsolved cases. So now the entire country has his files
(can you picture the laughter over morning coffe at his urologists' report?).
Now picture Johnny getting the bill for all this.
Tell me that doesn't give you a belly laugh.
Belly laugh? I'd be for videotaping _that_ psychotic episode, with an
occasional showing on Comedy Central -- with a portion of the advertising
revenues (.01%, anyone?) going to help pay Johnny's bill...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, San Antonio 2 (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Sunday, January 23 vs. Grand Rapids, 5:05
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 08:53:51 PM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0p9l0gs.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the
an abortion certificate.
Sorry, but no one (save your fellow fetus fanatics) will buy *that* wet
dream
of yours. All you're asking for is a surveillance that would make the old
USSR look positively libertarian by comparison.
Woamn's right to choose does nothing to protect men.
I told you already, when you're ready to let us inspect your medical
records for evidence of criminal activity, we'll talk.
Got it yet?
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Start selling your ***** on the street, then -- your idea, so you get to put
up
the money to implement it.
It would pay for itself.
The men who are assessed the fees would pay the costs.
You still against taking care of women?
No. That would once again be you.
--
--sexkitten--
Let the president answer a higher anarchy
Strap him with an Ak-47, let him go, fight his own war
Let him impress daddy that way
No more blood for oil, we got our own battles to fight on our own soil
No more psychological warfare, to trick us to thinking that we ain't loyal
If we don't serve our own country, we're patronizing a hero
Look in his eyes its all lies
The stars and stripes, they've been swiped, washed out and wiped
And replaced with his own face, Mosh now or die
If I get sniped tonight you know why,
Cause I told you to fight.
Eminem "Mosh"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 01:31:00 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on the
an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
Nice little dictatorship you long for.
Why don't you live in Iran where wives are bought and women are
controlled?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 02:40:45 PM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on the
an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 05:37:08 PM |
|
|
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of
any responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
22 Jan 2005 09:40:07 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of
any responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed my home
phone number before. Take it up with SBC if your mind's too shredded to
remember.) I'm hiding in plain sight, and you can do precisely nothing about
it.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, San Antonio 2 (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Sunday, January 23 vs. Grand Rapids, 5:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 05:04:45 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the an abortion certificate.
With DNA testing, this is now entirely possible, even in gang bang
pregnancies.
The current Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient.
Our nation needs a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of
our
people. The men who impregnate the females should be required to foot
the
bill for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of
any responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed my
home
phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
Why don't you do something about it then?
Or, take out your phone line if you didn't get it so you can be called.
Take it up with SBC if your mind's too shredded to
remember.)
Why should I?
I am not having a hissy fit about someone calling me, but you are.
I'm hiding in plain sight, and you can do precisely nothing about
it.
What makes you think I want to come see you?
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street cornet
at 3am in Houston.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 10:09:32 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions on
the an abortion certificate. With DNA testing, this is now entirely
possible, even in gang bang pregnancies. The current Pro-Choice,
gender-biased policy is insufficient. Our nation needs a more
responsible abortion policy to protect all of our people. The men who
impregnate the females should be required to foot the bill for the
abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed my
home phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
I think you're a certifiable lunatic *and* idiot. You never have attempted to
explain what made you dial those ten digits.
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
Or, take out your phone line if you didn't get it so you can be called.
You really should lay off the psychotropics before you try and post.
Take it up with SBC if your mind's too shredded to
remember.)
Why should I? I am not having a hissy fit about someone calling me, but you
are.
I'm having a bit of fun yanking the chain of a gibbering loon in South
Carolina, at the moment.
I'm hiding in plain sight, and you can do precisely nothing about
it.
What makes you think I want to come see you?
I'm not worried that you ever will -- you're not exactly overendowed with
clues when it comes to getting from point A to point B, as it is.
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street cornet
at 3am in Houston.
Since I made no such invitation, it was your idea all along. I think it's
time for you to be returned to the Home. (If they'll take you back, mind
you.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 4, San Antonio 2 (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Sunday, January 23 vs. Grand Rapids, 5:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 07:16:46 PM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkr7kcjfer.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions
on
the an abortion certificate. With DNA testing, this is now entirely
possible, even in gang bang pregnancies. The current Pro-Choice,
gender-biased policy is insufficient. Our nation needs a more
responsible abortion policy to protect all of our people. The men who
impregnate the females should be required to foot the bill for the
abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed my
home phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
I think you're a certifiable lunatic *and* idiot. You never have
attempted to
explain what made you dial those ten digits.
I told you already it was to confirm your appointment you set with me to
meet at 3am on a street corner in Houston.
You forgot about that part?
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Or, take out your phone line if you didn't get it so you can be called.
You really should lay off the psychotropics before you try and post.
Take it up with SBC if your mind's too shredded to
remember.)
Why should I? I am not having a hissy fit about someone calling me, but
you
are.
I'm having a bit of fun yanking the chain of a gibbering loon in South
Carolina, at the moment.
I'm hiding in plain sight, and you can do precisely nothing about
it.
What makes you think I want to come see you?
I'm not worried that you ever will -- you're not exactly overendowed with
clues when it comes to getting from point A to point B, as it is.
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street
corner
at 3am in Houston.
Since I made no such invitation, it was your idea all along.
Nah. You don't get off that easy.
You're the one who typed to meet you at 3m on a street corner in Houston.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
23 Jan 2005 11:23:20 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkr7kcjfer.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions
on the an abortion certificate. With DNA testing, this is now
entirely possible, even in gang bang pregnancies. The current
Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient. Our nation needs a
more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our people. The men
who impregnate the females should be required to foot the bill for the
abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed my
home phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
I think you're a certifiable lunatic *and* idiot. You never have attempted
to explain what made you dial those ten digits.
I told you already it was to confirm your appointment you set with me to
meet at 3am on a street corner in Houston.
You forgot about that part?
It's hard for me to forget something I never did in the first place. I made
no such appointment. (That's *your* delusion.)
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it wsa too obvious for you to notice.
[...]
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street corner
at 3am in Houston.
Since I made no such invitation, it was your idea all along.
Nah. You don't get off that easy.
You're the one who typed to meet you at 3m on a street corner in Houston.
Prove it, Sherlock.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Grand Rapids 4, Houston 3 (SO) (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Tuesday, January 25 vs. Milwaukee, 5:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
24 Jan 2005 05:14:03 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk4qh7ienr.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkr7kcjfer.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all
abortions
on the an abortion certificate. With DNA testing, this is now
entirely possible, even in gang bang pregnancies. The current
Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient. Our nation needs
a
more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our people. The
men
who impregnate the females should be required to foot the bill for
the
abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of any
responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed
my
home phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
I think you're a certifiable lunatic *and* idiot. You never have
attempted
to explain what made you dial those ten digits.
I told you already it was to confirm your appointment you set with me to
meet at 3am on a street corner in Houston.
You forgot about that part?
It's hard for me to forget something I never did in the first place. I
made
no such appointment. (That's *your* delusion.)
Sorry you are resorting to lies to defend yourself.
If you are going to bring up me phoning you, then you need to realize why I
called.
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call? Did
you forget that, too?
You are seriously deluded.
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it wsa too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
[...]
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street
corner
at 3am in Houston.
Since I made no such invitation, it was your idea all along.
Nah. You don't get off that easy.
You're the one who typed to meet you at 3am on a street corner in Houston.
Prove it, Sherlock.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
And, how long ago was it?
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
You'll never be able to make me slip.
You really need to realize that.
Since you are the one who says USENET records are there forever, the proof
is obtainable.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
24 Jan 2005 10:39:02 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk4qh7ienr.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkr7kcjfer.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkpszw4xuw.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:hTyId.1429$xB2.1368@news02.roc.ny...
Johnny wrote:
listing the men's names who impregnated the females in all abortions
on the an abortion certificate. With DNA testing, this is now
entirely possible, even in gang bang pregnancies. The current
Pro-Choice, gender-biased policy is insufficient. Our nation needs
a more responsible abortion policy to protect all of our people. The
men who impregnate the females should be required to foot the bill
for the abortion, thereby alleviating all non-involved parties of
any responsibility in this area.
Of course you'd support such a thing - you're an idiot.
Me, an idiot?
Yes, you are a certifiable idiot.
Why do you need to hide if you are not an idiot?
He's not hiding, moron. Neither am I. (After all, you *have* dialed
my home phone number before.
You think I broke the law when I called your phone number?
I think you're a certifiable lunatic *and* idiot. You never have
attempted to explain what made you dial those ten digits.
I told you already it was to confirm your appointment you set with me to
meet at 3am on a street corner in Houston. You forgot about that part?
It's hard for me to forget something I never did in the first place. I
made no such appointment. (That's *your* delusion.)
Sorry you are resorting to lies to defend yourself.
I made no such appointment. Prove me wrong, SC Fruitcake.
If you are going to bring up me phoning you, then you need to realize why I
called.
Do YOU even realize why you called? I seriously doubt it.
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call? Did you
forget that, too? You are seriously deluded.
Besides the bothersome fact that I wasn't home at the time, you didn't bother
leaving a message -- you called and hung up. It's certainly interesting to
watch you get defensive over something you did.
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it wsa too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
Gave you even more rope, which you're obligingly using to hang yourself.
[...]
I once thought about it after you invited me to meet you on a street
corner at 3am in Houston.
Since I made no such invitation, it was your idea all along.
Nah. You don't get off that easy.
You're the one who typed to meet you at 3am on a street corner in Houston.
Prove it, Sherlock.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
In other words, you can't prove I "typed" that -- because I never did.
And, how long ago was it?
What does it matter? The number that shows up in a "whois incomeasap.com"
appeared on my CLID box.
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
I know more than you'll ever be capable of knowing. If that upsets you, you
still have the right to ignore me. (Not that I expect you'll ever have enough
backbone to do it, mind you.)
You'll never be able to make me slip.
I don't have to even try. You've made a career out of landing on your head.
You really need to realize that. Since you are the one who says USENET
records are there forever, the proof is obtainable.
That explains why you've never found it. You're too stupid *and* insane to
ever figure it out.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Grand Rapids 4, Houston 3 (SO) (January 21)
NEXT GAME: Tuesday, January 25 vs. Milwaukee, 5:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
24 Jan 2005 12:23:49 PM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bwqn5nd.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
Sorry you are resorting to lies to defend yourself.
I made no such appointment. Prove me wrong, SC Fruitcake.
If you are going to bring up me phoning you, then you need to realize why
I
called.
Do YOU even realize why you called? I seriously doubt it.
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call? Did
you
forget that, too? You are seriously deluded.
Besides the bothersome fact that I wasn't home at the time, you didn't
bother
leaving a message -- you called and hung up.
You expected me to leave a message when your machine had something on it
about 'telemarketers stay away'?
It's certainly interesting to
watch you get defensive over something you did.
Defensive?
I did nothing wrong.
Why would I be defensive about making a phone call?
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it wsa too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
Gave you even more rope, which you're obligingly using to hang yourself.
Nah.
I did nothing wrong in this matter.
I called to confirm an appointment you set for me to meet you on a street
corner in Houston at 3a.m.
You weren't there, and your answering machine did nothing to confirm the
appointment you made.
So, I hung up.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
In other words, you can't prove I "typed" that -- because I never did.
Your memory is that short?
And, how long ago was it?
What does it matter? The number that shows up in a "whois incomeasap.com"
appeared on my CLID box.
So?
You got issues with people having phone lines?
I appreciate the free publicity.
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
I know more than you'll ever be capable of knowing.
Are you so sure of that?
If that upsets you, you
still have the right to ignore me.
But, what if I called your number, your answering machine answered,and I did
not leave a message?
Do I have the right to ignore you then?
(Not that I expect you'll ever have enough
backbone to do it, mind you.)
LOL!!!!!!!!!
See above.
You'll never be able to make me slip.
I don't have to even try. You've made a career out of landing on your
head.
You really need to realize that. Since you are the one who says USENET
records are there forever, the proof is obtainable.
That explains why you've never found it. You're too stupid *and* insane
to
ever figure it out.
You think I am that concerned about something that occurred so long ago?
I thought we had a rapport going at one time, even if it was short-lived,
yet for some reason that rapport did not seem to last very long between us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
24 Jan 2005 11:19:07 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bwqn5nd.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
[...]
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call? Did
you forget that, too? You are seriously deluded.
Besides the bothersome fact that I wasn't home at the time, you didn't
bother leaving a message -- you called and hung up.
You expected me to leave a message when your machine had something on it
about 'telemarketers stay away'?
Congratulations -- you just confessed to calling. Are you so stupid that you
can't tell whether you're a telemarketer or not? You certainly aren't an
online entrepeneur, given the fact that incomeasap.com is now a parked domain
and you can't even get anyone to buy it.
It's certainly interesting to watch you get defensive over something you
did.
Defensive? I did nothing wrong. Why would I be defensive about making a
phone call?
Why would you be unable to explain why you made the call in the first place?
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it wsa too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
Gave you even more rope, which you're obligingly using to hang yourself.
Nah. I did nothing wrong in this matter. I called to confirm an appointment
you set for me to meet you on a street corner in Houston at 3a.m.
....which appointment I never made in the first place, South Carolina Psycho.
You weren't there, and your answering machine did nothing to confirm the
appointment you made. So, I hung up.
Thanks for confirming you really ARE as stupid as you act online.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
In other words, you can't prove I "typed" that -- because I never did.
Your memory is that short?
My memory is functional. Yours is delusional. You can't prove that I ever
made any such request -- not only because I never did, but also because you'd
have to lie and forge something to "prove" it.
And, how long ago was it?
What does it matter? The number that shows up in a "whois incomeasap.com"
appeared on my CLID box.
So? You got issues with people having phone lines? I appreciate the free
publicity.
Yeah, look at how well you used it: you couldn't even get anyone to bid on
one share of worthless stock in your "company", and YOU were the only bidder
on it. No wonder your domain wound up being pushed to the curb and parked.
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
I know more than you'll ever be capable of knowing.
Are you so sure of that?
I have no reason to doubt it, given your history.
If that upsets you, you still have the right to ignore me.
But, what if I called your number, your answering machine answered,and I did
not leave a message? Do I have the right to ignore you then?
If you insist on calling and not leaving messages, you're not ignoring me --
and BellSouth will agree with me on that issue.
(Not that I expect you'll ever have enough backbone to do it, mind you.)
LOL!!!!!!!!! See above.
You'd best find some way of hiding your CLID data, then.
You'll never be able to make me slip.
I don't have to even try. You've made a career out of landing on your
head.
You really need to realize that. Since you are the one who says USENET
records are there forever, the proof is obtainable.
That explains why you've never found it. You're too stupid *and* insane to
ever figure it out.
You think I am that concerned about something that occurred so long ago?
You want proof, yet you don't feel it's your job to find it? You *are*
insane.
I thought we had a rapport going at one time, even if it was short-lived,
yet for some reason that rapport did not seem to last very long between us.
That's because you are a malicious idiot, John D. Wentzky. Live with that
opinion of you, because it's going to take a near-miracle to make me change my
opinion of your act.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Grand Rapids 4, Houston 3 (SO) (January 23)
NEXT GAME: Tuesday, January 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
25 Jan 2005 07:20:35 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk1xcakrw4.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bwqn5nd.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
[...]
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call?
Did
you forget that, too? You are seriously deluded.
Besides the bothersome fact that I wasn't home at the time, you didn't
bother leaving a message -- you called and hung up.
You expected me to leave a message when your machine had something on it
about 'telemarketers stay away'?
Congratulations -- you just confessed to calling.
So what , numbnuts. I did call, and I am not ashamed of it, and I did
nothing wrong.
You, on the other hand, are acting like it is some crime to use a telephone
in the USA or not to leave a message on someone's answering machine is a
crime.
EAT ***** PATTY BOY! You are all bark and no bite, and besides that, you are
barking up the wrong tree.
Are you so stupid that you
can't tell whether you're a telemarketer or not?
Who gives a *****, Patrick?
Who cares?
Why do I need to be a telemarketer to perceive your dislike of some types of
phoen calls?
For someone who seems to possess a reasonable degree of intelligence and
knowledge, you sure don't us it much in social matters.
Why don't you try to perceive reality and realize what a phone is, that it
is YOUR answering machine, and that I am not *required* to leave a message
on a friggin' machine?
You certainly aren't an
online entrepeneur,
Are you lying again?
given the fact that incomeasap.com is now a parked domain
and you can't even get anyone to buy it.
I am pretty sure that one of your missions in life is to sow hate and
discontent among people.
You have a seemingly self-imposed title which confirms that.
Why does it bring you pleasure to set people off?
It's certainly interesting to watch you get defensive over something
you
did.
Defensive? I did nothing wrong. Why would I be defensive about making a
phone call?
Why would you be unable to explain why you made the call in the first
place?
I already told you why I called.
You want to set another appointment to meet me again so I can call again to
confirm the appointment?
I really am not interested.
Why don't you call me?
And, maybe you did call me a few times or had other people call me.
You think I really give a ***** when I know it is long distance for you or
those who you would procure to call me?
Listen, I have ZERO fear of you or anyone like you.
Remember what I told you earlier:
You can NOT make me slip.
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it was too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
Gave you even more rope, which you're obligingly using to hang yourself.
Nah. I did nothing wrong in this matter. I called to confirm an
appointment
you set for me to meet you on a street corner in Houston at 3a.m.
...which appointment I never made in the first place, South Carolina
Psycho.
Why do you lie?
Lies and denial do nothing to prove your innocence to me.
I know what happened, and that is enough for me to maintain my position in
this matter.
My knowledge is superior to any lies or denials.
You weren't there, and your answering machine did nothing to confirm the
appointment you made. So, I hung up.
Thanks for confirming you really ARE as stupid as you act online.
You are who is cofirming you are so crazy that you think people who make
routine phone calls are somehow stupid.
You made the appointment to meet at 3 a.m. on a street corner in Houston.
I would call you again if I wanted to.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
In other words, you can't prove I "typed" that -- because I never did.
Your memory is that short?
My memory is functional. Yours is delusional. You can't prove that I
ever
made any such request -- not only because I never did, but also because
you'd
have to lie and forge something to "prove" it.
I wouldn't lie, and I wouldn't forge anything.
If it is still on usenet then it can be shown.
And, how long ago was it?
What does it matter? The number that shows up in a "whois
incomeasap.com"
appeared on my CLID box.
So? You got issues with people having phone lines? I appreciate the free
publicity.
Yeah, look at how well you used it: you couldn't even get anyone to bid
on
one share of worthless stock in your "company", and YOU were the only
bidder
on it. No wonder your domain wound up being pushed to the curb and
parked.
Why are you so concerned about my activities?
Why does it bother you so much that I did not get real money to come in on
that site?
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
I know more than you'll ever be capable of knowing.
Are you so sure of that?
I have no reason to doubt it, given your history.
If that upsets you, you still have the right to ignore me.
But, what if I called your number, your answering machine answered,and I
did
not leave a message? Do I have the right to ignore you then?
If you insist on calling and not leaving messages, you're not ignoring
me --
and BellSouth will agree with me on that issue.
*****.
There is no law against NOT leaving a message on someone's answering
machine.
Bellsouth and GTE and ATT and MCI and every other communications company and
the FCC will side with me.
There is no law which requires persons to leave a message on an answering
machine.
You think the government with a free speech requirement can force people to
talk now?
Oh, and your idea would inculcatge mute persons.
You idiot.
Why can't you understand that the world does not revolve around you, that
there are millions of other people here and that they are not all like you?
(Not that I expect you'll ever have enough backbone to do it, mind
you.)
LOL!!!!!!!!! See above.
You'd best find some way of hiding your CLID data, then.
Why?
You think I am afraid of it?
You think I am bothered by the FREE PUBLICITY?
You'll never be able to make me slip.
I don't have to even try. You've made a career out of landing on your
head.
You really need to realize that. Since you are the one who says USENET
records are there forever, the proof is obtainable.
That explains why you've never found it. You're too stupid *and* insane
to
ever figure it out.
You think I am that concerned about something that occurred so long ago?
You want proof, yet you don't feel it's your job to find it? You *are*
insane.
I do not want to look for something that happened so long agao, yet you seem
to want to bring up something about me making a legal phone call at the same
time like it is some crime.
You're the looney bin item, imo.
And, as far as my job to find it, if this were a court action, there is
something called discovery and the COURT would be obliged to issue a
subpoena to USENET to produce the information.
It would not be my duty, since it is NOT my job, to produce the information,
but I could do so as a citizen, and it would still be valid.
I thought we had a rapport going at one time, even if it was short-lived,
yet for some reason that rapport did not seem to last very long between
us.
That's because you are a malicious idiot,
Look in the mirror Patrick.
John D. Wentzky.
A very nice person, fair, intelligent, compassionate, honest, caring.
Live with that
opinion of you, because it's going to take a near-miracle to make me
change my
opinion of your act.
LOL!!!!!!!!!
So?
You don't expect people to call you on your bluffs?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
25 Jan 2005 10:21:30 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk1xcakrw4.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bwqn5nd.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
[...]
You didn't even answer your phone, and you think it was a prank call?
Did you forget that, too? You are seriously deluded.
Besides the bothersome fact that I wasn't home at the time, you didn't
bother leaving a message -- you called and hung up.
You expected me to leave a message when your machine had something on it
about 'telemarketers stay away'?
Congratulations -- you just confessed to calling.
So what , numbnuts. I did call, and I am not ashamed of it, and I did
nothing wrong.
That's assuming you even know what you're doing in the first place, which is
anything but certain, given your history in this newsgroup.
You, on the other hand, are acting like it is some crime to use a telephone
in the USA or not to leave a message on someone's answering machine is a
crime.
That's about what I'd expect from you -- since you *are* stupid _and_
psychotic. I'm just pointing out the simple fact that calling and not leaving
a message could be considered as rude, at the minimum...and abusive, if you
engage in it often enough.
EAT ***** PATTY BOY! You are all bark and no bite, and besides that, you are
barking up the wrong tree.
You're still stuck in your burrow, little aspiring pest. My feet can deal
with you.
Are you so stupid that you can't tell whether you're a telemarketer or
not?
Who gives a *****, Patrick? Who cares?
You obviously don't.
Why do I need to be a telemarketer to perceive your dislike of some types of
phoen calls? For someone who seems to possess a reasonable degree of
intelligence and knowledge, you sure don't us it much in social matters.
You don't know what social matters I'm involved in.
Why don't you try to perceive reality and realize what a phone is, that it
is YOUR answering machine, and that I am not *required* to leave a message
on a friggin' machine?
One time is a mistake. Repeat it often enough, and you're doing it
deliberately. If you choose to test BellSouth's tolerance, that's your
decision.
You certainly aren't an online entrepeneur,
Are you lying again?
No more than you're sane.
given the fact that incomeasap.com is now a parked domain
and you can't even get anyone to buy it.
I am pretty sure that one of your missions in life is to sow hate and
discontent among people.
You're sure of a lot of things that have nothing to do with reality.
You have a seemingly self-imposed title which confirms that. Why does it
bring you pleasure to set people off?
Your ignorance doesn't excuse you, Fruitcake. My nickname comes from a sport
that drives you into psychotic rants (and that I display in my .sig). If you
don't like it, you *can* ignore me. You obviously don't have the minimal
spine to do even that, though.
It's certainly interesting to watch you get defensive over something you
did.
Defensive? I did nothing wrong. Why would I be defensive about making a
phone call?
Why would you be unable to explain why you made the call in the first
place?
I already told you why I called.
....and I already told you that you're fantasizing about something that I never
did.
You want to set another appointment to meet me again so I can call again to
confirm the appointment?
Sorry, but I don't accept calls from certified loons.
I really am not interested.
Thank whatever gods there be for THAT small favor! Considering you wasted
200-plus lines being NOT interested, imagine how much bandwidth you'd burn up
if you _were_ interested!
Why don't you call me?
Because I choose not to, and I'm under no obligation.
And, maybe you did call me a few times or had other people call me.
Maybe your paranoia's taking you over again.
You think I really give a ***** when I know it is long distance for you or
those who you would procure to call me?
If you're so sure of _that_ fantasy, you know where to call: 713 884-3131.
They know how to deal with wingnuts like you.
Listen, I have ZERO fear of you or anyone like you. Remember what I told you
earlier: You can NOT make me slip.
Is that why all I have to do is respond to one of your psychotic fits, and you
proceed to flip out yet again?
Why don't you do something about it then?
I just did, moron.
And, that would be?
Evidently, it was too obvious for you to notice.
What did you do exactly other than throw another unfounded ***** rant?
Gave you even more rope, which you're obligingly using to hang yourself.
Nah. I did nothing wrong in this matter. I called to confirm an
appointment
you set for me to meet you on a street corner in Houston at 3a.m.
...which appointment I never made in the first place, South Carolina
Psycho.
Why do you lie?
I'm not lying. If you don't believe it, provide the proof that I am lying. I
can guarantee that you'll never be able to do that.
Lies and denial do nothing to prove your innocence to me.
....since you already made your mind (what little of it remains) up long ago,
and you'll not let yourself be confused by facts.
I know what happened, and that is enough for me to maintain my position in
this matter. My knowledge is superior to any lies or denials.
I'd love to see you put forth THAT argument in a court. Even you might learn
something about your stupidity.
You weren't there, and your answering machine did nothing to confirm the
appointment you made. So, I hung up.
Thanks for confirming you really ARE as stupid as you act online.
You are who is cofirming you are so crazy that you think people who make
routine phone calls are somehow stupid.
You don't get out much, do you?
You made the appointment to meet at 3 a.m. on a street corner in Houston.
I would call you again if I wanted to.
Don't expect me to answer...and don't think of repeatedly calling, as your
local RBOC will not appreciate your abuse.
You gonna report me for something I never did?
In other words, you can't prove I "typed" that -- because I never did.
Your memory is that short?
My memory is functional. Yours is delusional. You can't prove that I ever
made any such request -- not only because I never did, but also because
you'd have to lie and forge something to "prove" it.
I wouldn't lie, and I wouldn't forge anything. If it is still on usenet then
it can be shown.
Since it never was in Usenet, you'll have to make it up yourself. That'll be
a short story.
And, how long ago was it?
What does it matter? The number that shows up in a "whois
incomeasap.com" appeared on my CLID box.
So? You got issues with people having phone lines? I appreciate the free
publicity.
Yeah, look at how well you used it: you couldn't even get anyone to bid on
one share of worthless stock in your "company", and YOU were the only
bidder on it. No wonder your domain wound up being pushed to the curb and
parked.
Why are you so concerned about my activities?
What concern? All it takes is a couple of keystrokes.
Why does it bother you so much that I did not get real money to come in on
that site?
It doesn't bother me that you show yourself to be a royal *****-up.
Do you know anything about anything or are you only here to try to *****
people off?
I know more than you'll ever be capable of knowing.
Are you so sure of that?
I have no reason to doubt it, given your history.
If that upsets you, you still have the right to ignore me.
But, what if I called your number, your answering machine answered,and I
did not leave a message? Do I have the right to ignore you then?
If you insist on calling and not leaving messages, you're not ignoring me
-- and BellSouth will agree with me on that issue.
*****. There is no law against NOT leaving a message on someone's
answering machine. Bellsouth and GTE and ATT and MCI and every other
communications company and the FCC will side with me.
You really are afraid of reality, aren't you? If you abuse your phone
privilege, your RBOC *will* step in to set you straight. You haven't done
that, so far, at least not where I'm concerned. Keep it that way.
There is no law which requires persons to leave a message on an answering
machine.
RBOCs don't appreciate users who choose to make large numbers of no-message
calls to a specific number, though.
You think the government with a free speech requirement can force people to
talk now?
I'd appreciate it if you'd think at all, occasionally.
Oh, and your idea would inculcatge mute persons. You idiot.
You really should quit posting your crap while looking in a mirror.
(Obviously, you're ignorant of such services as TTY, and Relay Texas (for
messages between TTY users and non-TTY people. BellSouth have something
similar, I'd imagine.)
Why can't you understand that the world does not revolve around you, that
there are millions of other people here and that they are not all like you?
I figured that out long before you were out of your diapers, son.
(Not that I expect you'll ever have enough backbone to do it, mind
you.)
LOL!!!!!!!!! See above.
You'd best find some way of hiding your CLID data, then.
Why? You think I am afraid of it? You think I am bothered by the FREE
PUBLICITY?
Your free publicity has convinced quite a few people that you're an idiot.
That's your choice, though.
You'll never be able to make me slip.
I don't have to even try. You've made a career out of landing on your
head.
You really need to realize that. Since you are the one who says USENET
records are there forever, the proof is obtainable.
That explains why you've never found it. You're too stupid *and* insane
to ever figure it out.
You think I am that concerned about something that occurred so long ago?
You want proof, yet you don't feel it's your job to find it? You *are*
insane.
I do not want to look for something that happened so long agao, yet you seem
to want to bring up something about me making a legal phone call at the same
time like it is some crime.
A couple of years is too long? You've been throwing your temper tanturm for
over a decade by now. (That's an aside from the detail that you're ranting at
what you assume I think -- which you haven't been able to guess correctly in
some time, save for the occasional chance.)
You're the looney bin item, imo.
Too bad there are too many people out there in that real world you're a
fugitive from that know better than you.
And, as far as my job to find it, if this were a court action, there is
something called discovery and the COURT would be obliged to issue a
subpoena to USENET to produce the information.
ROTFL! Why don't they subpoena the United States of America? (Just where
*is* Usenet, anyway? You really should learn how it works before you go out
to abuse it.)
It would not be my duty, since it is NOT my job, to produce the information,
but I could do so as a citizen, and it would still be valid.
You make the claim, but it's not your duty to prove it? I'd really love to
see you try *that* one in court. It'd be short and entertaining, even if not
for you.
I thought we had a rapport going at one time, even if it was short-lived,
yet for some reason that rapport did not seem to last very long between
us.
That's because you are a malicious idiot,
Look in the mirror Patrick.
Yep, that's me looking back out. We're talking about you, though. Do try and
keep up, for once.
John D. Wentzky.
A very nice person, fair, intelligent, compassionate, honest, caring.
It's just a coincidence that none of that applies to your presence in Usenet.
Live with that opinion of you, because it's going to take a near-miracle
to make me change my opinion of your act.
LOL!!!!!!!!! So? You don't expect people to call you on your bluffs?
I expect people to act a lot smarter than you're doing, not that that's any
particular challenge...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Grand Rapids 4, Houston 3 (SO) (January 23)
NEXT GAME: Tuesday, January 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: I am in full favor of |
25 Jan 2005 11:44:05 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szky8ehv5rp.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk1xcakrw4.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk3bwqn5nd.fsf@fnord.io.com...
< | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
