Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity Status?"//You Betcha!
Dr. Richard X. Frager
Are UFO Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity Status?"//Most Likely
With much help from the Budd Hopkins article "Losing a Battle While Winning the War."
The UFO phenomenon has been viewed with increased seriousness over the past 40
years. This once lightly regarded subject has slowly but inexorably moved toward the
mainstream of public awareness.
Back in the 60's and 70's, what little media or scientific attention there was,
was usually of the silly-season, why-bother-with-this-foolishness variety. Physicist
Edward Condon's outrageous misreading of the data his own committee had assembled
marked the high point of the media's attention to the UFO phenomenon. After Condon's
grandiose dismissal of the evidence, if UFOs were discussed at all, they were most
often though of as a weird psycho-social phenomenon, particularly by the mental health
community. Unfortunately, in the 60's and 70's, there was little consistent mainstream
attention to the phenomenon.
But through the 80's and into the 90's that has been changing drastically. Press
attention has become the norm. Now, instead of a UFO researchers having to plead with
the media for a speedy squint at the accumulating evidence, it is the aging squad of
self-designated DEBUNKERS who have to beg for press coverage. Phil Klass, for one,
appears irate at his diminished circumstances. In his ever rarer media appearances, he
bares his hatred for UFO witnesses ever more nakedly, until, as one viewer recently
remarked, he has become on the TV screen a perfect blend of form and content. It must
be galling to be viewed by strangers as an embittered crank, a dinosaur in the
evolution of public awareness.
The beginning of this basic change in public and media attention can be dated to
the spring of 1987 when three major publishers - "Atlantic Monthly Press, Random House
and Morrow"- published books on the UFO abduction phenomenon. The nearly simultaneous
appearance of Whitley Strieber' "Communion," with it's compelling cover illustration of
a staring alien head, Gary Kinder's "Light Years," and Budd Hopkins "Intruders,"
accomplished together what no single one of those books could have done alone: force
the abduction issue by the sheer weight of numbers into the public consciousness. The
New York Times, 20/20, and the Washington Post treated the abduction subject seriously
and respectfully. Important later books like Dr. David Jacobs, "Secret Life" and Ray
Fowler's "The Watchers" built further upon the public's interest, and since then the
momentum has never slackened.
The response of the mental health community to the idea that UFO abductions are
real, event-level experiences has been equally gratifying. Over ninety-five thousand
psychiatrists and psychologists have received copies of the "Roper Survey of Unusual
Personal Experiences," a booklet detailing what might be called the UFO abduction
syndrome. Over one thousand, two hundred of these have sent the publisher requests for
further information about abduction workshops, lectures and so on. Dr. David Jacobs,
psychotherapist John Carpenter, Dr. John Mack and Budd Hopkins have addressed a number
of these subsequent workshops. They have also spoken to other gatherings of mental
health professionals, their numbers by now are probably approaching ten thousand
individuals. Thirty, twenty, even ten years ago this kind of widespread professional
interest would have been unthinkable.
The level of serious scientific discussion of the UFO abduction phenomenon, at the
Temple University and M.I.T. conferences, for example, has been increasingly profound
and rewarding. As the "invisible college" of concerned scientists and medical
practitioners has increased its membership, the sophistication of data gathering and
analysis has also grown perceptibly. Some credentialed professionals are now willing
to admit publicly that an extraordinary phenomenon such as UFO abductions demands an
extraordinary investigation. Ignoring the evidence is no longer intellectually
respectable.
In a kind of last-ditch stand, the dwindling band of self-anointed debunkers have
intensified its campaign to intimidate witnesses, to create a climate or ridicule and
disparagement for anyone who dares to come forward to describe personal UFO encounters
- particularly abduction experiences. In the world of criminal law, the intimidation
of witnesses is a felony; in the court of public opinion there is no such stricture.
It is perfectly legal for someone like Phil Klass to describe nervous, traumatized men,
women and children, victims of UFO abductions, as "Little nobodies, people seeking
celebrity status." In a stunning bit of unconscious self-description, Klass assured
'The New York Times" that otherwise these "little nobodies" would never get to appear
on Oprah Winfrey's show. His attack, cruel and self-revealing though it was, was
nevertheless effective. This writer has to wonder if the UFO debunkers themselves are
the "little nobodies, people seeking celebrity status, or just plain school-yard
bullies!"
Over the years, hundred of people that Budd Hopkins have dealt with who recalled
UFO abduction experiences have come form virtually every socio-economic and educational
level. A NASA scientist, nearly a dozen police officers, six psychiatrists, many
doctors, lawyers, businessmen, military officers and so on, from various layers of
society have declined to come forward to describe their experiences publicly. A
first-hand account by any one of these people would lend great credence to the mass of
anonymous eyewitness reports, but each has too much to lose by doing so in the present
climate of witness intimidation.
What can we do to reverse the tide and begin to create a climate more congenial to
scientific research? Clearly, the issue is one of ethics. The problem is how to force
the fanatics on the other side to give up the tactic of intimidation which has served
them so well. One way to help bring this about is to absolutely refuse to deal with
anyone on the (thankfully) short list of character assassins who regularly practice
this immorality. No researcher, witness or abductee should ever agree to participate
in any media presentation which includes any of these people. They should be
completely frozen out of serious discourse, period! They are a block to research and a
hindrance to any dialogue of value.
There are good people whom we must cultivate in order to establish a climate where
genuine dialogue and the objective study of the evidence can flourish. Science can
only be damaged by the present level of McCarthyite intimidation.
Our side is winning. The public and the mainstream media know that the UFO
phenomenon is here to stay. Our job, now, is finding ways to end this one destructive
battle. I look forward to a time when no witness, no abductee should ever hesitate to
give testimony, because of the fear for her reputation, for his career, for their
children - just because a group of bullies do not want us to hear the truth!
Edited from the Budd Hopkins article, "Losing a Battle While Winning The War."
Originally published in the June 1994 edition of the MUFON Journal.
Richard Caldwell
In Article Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//You Betcha! , "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> Are UFO Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//Most Likely
>>>> BIG SNIP OF MUCH WASTED BANDWIDTH <<<<
> Edited from the Budd Hopkins article, "Losing a Battle While Winning The
> War." Originally published in the June 1994 edition of the MUFON Journal.
Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's, alien
visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and debunkers.
It makes one wonder if he's not really one of those government Sp00ks,
payed to lead the UFO newsgroups off on irrelevant issues like questioning
the motives of the people on the other side of the fence. What better
cover for a Sp00k than to claim to be on the side of the "believers" and
ETH proponents, all the while dragging the discussion off on tangents.
By the way, Dr. Fragger, you never did tell us what it is that you are a
doctor of. Did I miss that post?
Richard
VP. Richard X. Frager
Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>
>In Article Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
>Status?"//You Betcha! , "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>
>Status?"//Most Likely
>
>
>> War." Originally published in the June 1994 edition of the MUFON Journal.
>
>visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and debunkers.
A sp00k lie. Now is the time:
Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
Meet your usenet sp00ks and KooKs.
This list is provided as a public service to all
real researchers and people just curious about the
truth regarding extraterrestrials and the alien presence.
This list will be constantly updated
Lou (The Spook) Manetti- Obvious sp00k, low-level operative, never addresses
UFO facts. Worthless. Anal-retentive. Unhappy childhood.
Already admitted he is a "Spook" whose job is to disrupt UFO newsgroups.
Started a cult based on hubcaps, ball lightning and swamp gas. Weird-O!
Rating: 0
Twit: Admitted 5-time loser, has decided to throw
in his lot with UFO debunkers. Now 6-time loser.
Rating: 0
Rich Thorne- Pseudo-scientist, flunked physics and
toilet-training. Low I.Q. and self-esteem. Insecure. Nicknamed by wife:
"Knucklehead" and "Total Screw-up" Still can't tie shoes or sleep without
Teddy Bear! Bumper-sticker on car says, "Debunkers are people too!"
Couldn't prove by Thorne, though.
Rating: 1
Michael Edelman- Delusional paranoid. Obvious
sp00k, "Don't bother me with the facts, my
mind is made up." Dismissed even by other debunkers. Pitiful.
Rating: 1 1/2
Robert Imrie A.S.S.H.O.L.E. - Phony intellectual,
Pentagon apologist, "If I refuse to look at the evidence,
then there is no evidence." Witless and clueless.
Rating: 0
Richard Cadwell - Debunker wannabee. Johnny-One-Note.
Would deny existence of UFO even if he bumped into one,
"My eyes were closed, the bump on my head is proof that
UFO's don't exist." Family does not allow "Dickie" around
sharp objects. Confuses logic with stupidity.
Super-sp00k, although still can't tie his shoes!
Rating: 2
Dean Adams-Super sp00k, a legend in his own mind,
"We must cover-up all aspects of the alien presence."
Laughed out of group, at least for now!
Rating: Minus 50
John Hutchins-Had latrine duty in Military, even screwed that
up. Used to be a great fisherman until he hooked his, well,
use your imagination. Banned from participating on talk
shows because of an unusual odor, thought to be left over
from the Big-Bang! Only contribution to society is that
he waters his lawn every day, although he lives in Seattle
where it rains 300 days a year. Go figure.
Karl (Klutz) Mamer- A.K.A. Carl Lamer; Lame-Brain; Lambaste.
As worthless as a debunker can get. Even the Air Force laughed
at him (and that's not easy to do!) Only human to successfully
perform a lobotomoy on himself. Volunteered to walk through
"Ground zero" during atomic bomb tests, now glows in the dark.
Lamer gloats "Haven't bought a light-bulb in decades."
Wrote his auto-biograhphy in one hour and according to Lamer,
"it was only one page long!" Maybe he'll write another page in the
next decade, and title it "I was a useless debunker." We might
even buy a copy!
Harry Bosch
Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>
> Are UFO Debunkers "Little Nobodies--
..... rest of post deleted as a rerun .....
To: DOCTOR DICK
Salem Asylum
Purple Flower,
Straight Jacket Section
Salem, Oregon
Hi DOCTOR DICK.
I really need your help.
As you know I have a 5 pound spaceship with FTID and I am wanting to
enlarge my fleet to maybe 50 or more. I know you have posted in the
past that you have proof of 200 plus UFO crashes. Would you be
willing to let me know where these crashes took place? As you
probably know, when a UFO crashes the cloaking device automatically
engages so that humans cannot find the crashed spaceship. On board
my 5 pound spaceship is an electronic device called a "smash locator".
We can locate the crashed spaceships and get them running again
(after removing the Bovine Butt Bouquet of course). The removal of
this odoriferous essence is very expensive so the finders fee I can offer
you will be only $1000 each. If we are to "whip" these dang aliens
at their own game (abducting humans and coring cows) we must increase
the size of our fleet.
Thank you very much DOCTOR DICK, for your help in this matter.
Regards,
Harry
King of the Usenet Skeptibunker SpOOks.
--
========================================
"A five pound space ship made of sticks,
and foil,and floral tape? Oh, my!"
The Roswell debris.
har...@chatlink.com
========================================
Don Bother
In article <69o80i$ft2$1...@news.cyberhighway.net>, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>
> In a kind of last-ditch stand, the dwindling band of self-anointed
debunkers have
> intensified its campaign to intimidate witnesses, to create a climate or
ridicule and
> disparagement for anyone who dares to come forward to describe personal
UFO encounters
> - particularly abduction experiences. In the world of criminal law, the
intimidation
> of witnesses is a felony; in the court of public opinion there is no
such stricture.
Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
(and the # is increasing!)
Don
VP. Richard X. Frager
Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother) wrote:
>In article <69o80i$ft2$1...@news.cyberhighway.net>, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>In a kind of last-ditch stand,
>>the dwindling band of self-anointed
>debunkers have intensified its campaign
>>to intimidate witnesses, to create a climate or
>ridicule and disparagement for anyone who
>>dares to come forward to describe personal
>UFO encounters--particularly abduction experiences.
>>In the world of criminal law, the intimidation
>> of witnesses is a felony; in the court of
>>public opinion there is no such stricture.
>
>Which is exactly what goes on here at this group.
>95% Debunkers & Spooks,(and the # is increasing!)
>Don
That is so true, Don. Although I believe we can learn some
of their methodology though, about how sp00ks communicate
with each other.
Dean Adams admitted outright he worked for the NSA;
Manetti all but conceded that fact. The Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne
faction may be even deeper than that.
The increased amount of sp00ks all but proves that they
are running scared, and for good reason. Whatever mankind's
real future, and for that matter, the past, holds for us,
UFO Debunkers and their pals in the Intel. communities
and the weapon makers WILL be held accountable for their actions.
If evidence shows that they were helping mankind from withholding
the truth, than so be it. But if the facts prove that they were
selfeshly hording the spoils of their Alien Over-Lords for their
own benefit, as I believe the evidence suggests, than they will
be expunged off the face of the Earth.
May the Lord be the final arbitrator of the human race; and the
bastard race known as UFO debunkers. Until that time comes when
the Lord will finally Judge, I will have to do the Lords work and make
sure that these Debunkers get their day in court, and may the
Lord have mercy on their soul, if they even have a soul left
to give. Perhaps they let the "Praying-Mantis" types have
their souls for a few trinkets: Cobalt anti-matter bombs and
anti-gravity meg-levs. Wow!
Dr. Richard X. Frager
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 16 Jan 1998 21:24:23 -0500, Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother)
wrote:
>In article <69o80i$ft2$1...@news.cyberhighway.net>, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>
>> In a kind of last-ditch stand, the dwindling band of self-anointed
>debunkers have
>> intensified its campaign to intimidate witnesses, to create a climate or
>ridicule and
>> disparagement for anyone who dares to come forward to describe personal
>UFO encounters
>> - particularly abduction experiences. In the world of criminal law, the
>intimidation
>> of witnesses is a felony; in the court of public opinion there is no
>such stricture.
>
>Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
>(and the # is increasing!)
Which just goes to show you the Power of the Paranoids. I mean, look how
many of US it takes to balance out a handfull of nutcases.
--
(reply to usenet at clubvb.com)
PHD: Feanturi
VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
Etc.....
Dr. Fragger,
You continue to disappoint me. Richard Caldwell's comment was very valid.
You label yourself as one on the side of truth in the UFO/ET debate, but I have
yet to see you add anything of any worth to that debate. The same problem I have
with some of the skeptics, and most of the debunkers holds true for you: You
spend most of your time blowing off thoughtful, but opposite, opinions with
petty insults, irrelevant comments and name calling more appropriate to
elementary school recess than a forum for serious discussion.
You use all the worst tactics of debunkery yourself, instead of arguing on
the facts in a polite, reasonable manner. My biggest problem with this group is
the large percentage of posters who refuse to offer anything useful to the
discussion or debate, but prefer to get into base personal attacks. You, Dr.
Fragger, are squarely in that category.
If you want to post a list of spOOks, based on your own opinions, fine. Why
don't you try including evidence or points that support your accusations,
instead of a collection of insults obviously meant to soothe your bruised ego by
lashing out at those who have opposed you.
It's very possible that some on the list have been just as petty in their
dealings with you, and may deserve the same in return. But, by lowering yourself
to the level of the lowest members of this group, you make your opinions just as
irrelevant to serious discussion as theirs are.
Based on the short time I have been monitoring this group, on the rare
occasions that you do address the issues at hand, it is often in a false or
misleading manner. If I had to play "guess the spOOks", I would put you near the
top of my list.
The articles you forward here, written by others supposedly in support of
your own views, are at least serious, and have on some occasions proven
informative and useful. But by creating such a sophomoric and caustic persona
for your self with the manner of your personal comments, you taint the serious
information you do present in much the same way that Richard Hoagland has become
a "kiss of death" for most causes he champions. You give the serious readers of
the group little reason to give validity to anything you post, even if the work
of those others is intelligent and useful.
It's possible you are a serious researcher and UFO believer who has been
expertly taunted into your current level of behavior in order to discredit you.
If so, it was still your choice to stoop so low, and it is your words, not the
words of your critics, that condemn you most.
Personally, based on what appeared to me to be a deliberate
misrepresentation of Robert Dean's claims and views, in a manner that would
serve to discredit him among the "fence sitters" on the issue, I am more
inclined to think that you are a part of the disinformation campaign yourself.
If that is not the case, maybe you should engage in some self reflection on how
you have so strongly contributed to that impression, for me, and I'm sure many
others out there, by your actions.
Your baseless, personal, and slanderous attacks in your above posted "spOOk
list" should more than adequately demonstrate my point.
Fiontar McEoghan
--
Signature:
PHD:Feanturi
ATKM...@iname.com.com Remove the second .com to respond.
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 (RSA)
mQCNAzHiR1cAAAEEAMcTM6h8Z5VRu9Vd8C6Vy2ZZsCWsl2Il0bexRGz58GGCWWhS
Howf23PXQ8yblu1h3ycq7kWcUU4EdRrIdjJPzpW0P4t5mVHBmW8dRXS330Zq9ZCp
6fDN2e47+DnEhwRR44x8e8Ki/ULapugSQJGYy5zFtsyrd6OFS2SsO4yO0m+xAAUR
tCFQSEQ6RmVhbnR1cmkgPEFUS01hamljQGluYW1lLmNvbT4=
=TdNx
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Lou Minatti
VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
> Dean Adams admitted outright he worked for the NSA;
> Manetti all but conceded that fact. The Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne
> faction may be even deeper than that.
Still fabricating stories, I see. Weird thing is, it appears some take
your posts seriously.
--
Fight back against the interstellar bastards.
Join us. Join Texans United Against Grey Aliens:
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/DEADGREY.HTM
NBC sucks. Bring back Norm.
http://www.cyberramp.net/~noel/norm.html
Don P.
Richard Caldwell writes:
>
>Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's, alien
>visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and debunkers.
>
You have a very good point Richard.
Two years ago, one of the first articles I read was the
good Dr.'s. Something to do with Mr. Hoagland I believe.
Richard, why even bother reading his posts? I stopped
after the first few. There are much more interesting and
important issues that can be grappled with, than wasting
precious time reading drivel. Unless of course you only do
so for amuesment.
>It makes one wonder if he's not really one of those government Sp00ks,
>payed to lead the UFO newsgroups off on irrelevant issues like questioning
>the motives of the people on the other side of the fence. What better
>cover for a Sp00k than to claim to be on the side of the "believers" and
>ETH proponents, all the while dragging the discussion off on tangents.
>
Good point. Actually I know now that there are
more ETH proponent spooks (less than honorable),
than any other.
It all started with the press release Colonel Blanchard
authorized in 1947, "Captured Alien Flying Saucer!" The
rest is history. The amount of *alien stigma* that has
been shoved down the masses throat since then has been
immence.
It was a brilliant hoax. Instead of the masses accusing
humans for this technology, they are off chasing Mr. ET.
Just like the carrot hanging on a string off the end of a
stick out in front of the DONKEY! They (the honest ETH proponents)
will never realize their goals, unless of course we humans
can genetically engineer an alien looking creature, then pass
it off as one.
I can't help but wonder, what life would be like today
if the physics and technology was shared with the world,
instead of being blamed on Mr. ET. Maybe it was best
that fossil fuel use was contiued. Point is that this decision
was made for us, and made for us covertly.
Can you think of a past politician that would have
stood up to the NSA's and *the powers that be*, and threatened
to disclose this technology?? I can.
It is a well known fact that the blaming of the UFO
phenomenon on Hidden Human Technology is a taboo
subject. Every crazy and outlandish idea gets addressed
except for the human factor. Is it just me, or does something
really smell rotten here.
A few simple questions and I (or any one else who cares)
can tell if an ETH proponent or skeptic is less than honorable.
It is soooooooo obvious, alas be it far from me to start accusing
my fellow posters, unless of course they stand up to the challenge.
Maybe thats why my assertions and accusations, for the most
part go unchallenged. And they will go unchallnegd, instead articles
will be posted that deal with warp engines, spooks, spelling errors,
and the price of tea in china, anything and everything except the
truth or paths that could lead to the truths. Sad but true.
If you really want to find the pot-o-gold, drop the alien gig,
and look to humans as the culprit of the UFO phenomena. If not
for anything else, you will learn to separate the honest proponents
and skeptics from the less than honorable ones.
Later.
Kind Regards
Don Palermo
Investigator of theoretical physics, and
researcher of the suppression of energy
production and anti-gravity technologies.
To reply by email remove "[A.Fuente]".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Humans have had efficient disc flight for at least
43 years."
ETH (Alien Visitation) skeptic, UFO proponent
"A human made flying disc made of rotating opposing
neodymium and barium ferrite magnets. Oh MY!"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
twi...@worldnet.att.net
Hi, Doctor Dink.
When are you going to give us the evidence that you have
about those 215 UFO crashes?
<snip>
> The UFO phenomenon has been viewed with increased seriousness over the past 40
>years. <snip>
snigger!
>
> Back in the 60's and 70's, what little media or scientific attention there was,
>was usually of the silly-season, why-bother-with-this-foolishness variety. Physicist
>Edward Condon's outrageous misreading of the data his own committee had assembled
>marked the high point of the media's attention to the UFO phenomenon. <snip>
We have once again heard how the Condon Committee was a
fraud and that there was a plot to mislead the public.
There was, indeed, such a plot, but Condon wasn't involved
in it. Several Believers, including McDonald, were
responsible!
First, had Condon made up his mind ahead of time?
Lewis Branscomb, then chairman of the Joint Institute for
Laboratory Astrophysics wrote about Condon's attitude:
"I remember vividly, a long discussion with Ed Condon in his
office ... when he was considering taking the project on.
He told me he thought the chance that he could find evidence
for a UFO of exterrestrial origin was infinitesimal, a
million-to-one shot. 'But' he said with the gleam in the
eye that betrays a true scientist on the track of a
remarkable discovery, 'if there is a chance, even the most
remote chance that there is something there, I want to be
the one to discover it.'
This is backed up by the NICAP in the January-Feburary 1967
issue of THE UFO INVESTIGATOR. "It is probably fair to say
that the scientists on the project range from open-minded
skeptics to moderately convinced 'believers'..."
Yet, there were only supposed to be open-minded skeptics on
the committee according to the proposal and the contract for
the work! Who were the believers?
David R. Saunders was one of them. He had visited the
headquarters of NICAP several months before the USAF
contract to meet with NICAP officials and to join the
organization! Saunders knew that this would disqualify him
from the study since he was involved in writing the
proposal!
So, Saunders withheld the information so he could take part
in the study!
McDonald was covertly writing to Armstrong and others in the
study group.
Levine had just graduated from the UofA with his Phd and was
a follower of McDonald's and should, on that basis, have
been disqualified according to the contract for the study.
This 'Fifth-Column' provided internal memos to NICAP and
McDonald! These 'leaked' documents, with comments taken out
of context, formed the basis of the Look article by Fuller
which was published before the Condon Report was published!
They held secret meetings with McDonald to decide how to
"engineer a confrontation"! Their conduct was sufficiently
unprofessional that, when asked, Donald Keyhoe during the
NICAP press briefing admitted that if an employee of his
acted this way "I'd probably fire him. I'd take a dim view
of the disloyalty..."
And, at the very beginning of the study, Saunders had
already had his mind fully made up! He wrote: "I had
maintained that a 'government conspiracy' to conceal the
'truth about UFOs' from the public was an even more likely
hypothesis than the ETI."
Yet, none of the documents which were submitted were used as
the basis of this belief. It was, however, the NICAP
official position!
So, the Condon Study was indeed subverted, but not by
Condon!
twi...@worldnet.att.net
"VP. Richard X. Frager" <nospams...@cyberhighway.net>
wrote:
>Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>>
>>In Article Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
>>Status?"//You Betcha! , "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
>><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Are UFO Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
>>Status?"//Most Likely
>>
>>>>>> BIG SNIP OF MUCH WASTED BANDWIDTH <<<<
>>
>>> Edited from the Budd Hopkins article, "Losing a Battle While Winning The
>>> War." Originally published in the June 1994 edition of the MUFON Journal.
>>
>>Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's, alien
>>visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and debunkers.
>
>
>A sp00k lie. Now is the time:
>
>Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>
<snip>
Thanks for making his point, Dr. Dink.
twi...@worldnet.att.net
Lou Minatti <lou-m...@usa.net> wrote:
>VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
><snip>
>> Dean Adams admitted outright he worked for the NSA;
>> Manetti all but conceded that fact. The Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne
>> faction may be even deeper than that.
>
>Still fabricating stories, I see. Weird thing is, it appears some take
>your posts seriously.
>
But no one with any intelligence.
Scott
In <69pcgi$rp3$1...@news.cyberhighway.net>, "VP. Richard X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
<snipped for your sanity. you're welcome.>
>Perhaps they let the "Praying-Mantis" types have
>their souls for a few trinkets: Cobalt anti-matter bombs and
>anti-gravity meg-levs. Wow!
You know, if Framer is the VP. I hesitate to think wha^Ho is
the President ?
--
Scott
"Assassination is the extreme form of censorship."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
Blue Resonant Human
Jerry Bryson
VP. Richard X. Frager <nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> That is so true, Don. Although I believe we can learn some of their
> methodology though, about how sp00ks communicate with each other.
Most of the time it's civilized English. You go a problem with that
>
> Dean Adams admitted outright he worked for the NSA; Manetti all but
> conceded that fact. The Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne faction may be even deeper
> than that.
So, debunkers have jobs. You got a problem with that?
>
> The increased amount of sp00ks all but proves that they are running
> scared, and for good reason. Whatever mankind's real future, and for that
> matter, the past, holds for us, UFO Debunkers and their pals in the Intel.
> communities and the weapon makers WILL be held accountable for their
> actions.
If there were a cover-up, it is being done with ET coordination. When
ET makes contact, it would be by way of the debunkers, along with the
valid reasons for the "cover-up"
>
> If evidence shows that they were helping mankind from withholding the
> truth, than so be it. But if the facts prove that they were selfeshly
> hording the spoils of their Alien Over-Lords for their own benefit, as I
> believe the evidence suggests, than they will be expunged off the face of
> the Earth.
That would be the ACC, right?
>
> May the Lord be the final arbitrator of the human race; and the bastard
> race known as UFO debunkers.
TROLL!!! I BEEN HAD!
>Until that time comes when the Lord will
> finally Judge, I will have to do the Lords work and make sure that these
> Debunkers get their day in court, and may the Lord have mercy on their
> soul, if they even have a soul left to give.
I don't think you would be saying this if you believed in God.
> Dr. Richard X. Frager
--
Nescio ne sum, ergo penso sum.
Jerry Bryson
Dr. Richard X. Frager <nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> The UFO phenomenon has been viewed with increased seriousness over the
>past 40 years.
The UFO phenomenon has been viewed with increased ridicule
>This once lightly regarded subject has slowly but inexorably moved
>>toward the mainstream of public awareness.
Along with mental health problems generally
>
> remarked, he has become on the TV screen a perfect blend of form and
> content. It must be galling to be viewed by strangers as an embittered
> crank, a dinosaur in the evolution of public awareness.
Better than Promise Keepers
> The response of the mental health community to the idea that UFO
> abductions are real, event-level experiences has been equally gratifying.
Where is evidence if this?
>Over ninety-five thousand psychiatrists and psychologists have received
>copies of the "Roper Survey of Unusual Personal Experiences," a booklet
>detailing what might be called the UFO abduction syndrome. Over one
>thousand, two hundred of these have sent the publisher requests for
>further information about abduction workshops, lectures and so on.
A great place to find patients, obviously, as well as do research.
>
>Ignoring the evidence is no longer intellectually respectable.
Ignoring the evidence of false memory syndrome is no longer
intellectually respectable.
>
> In a kind of last-ditch stand, the dwindling band of self-anointed
> debunkers have intensified its campaign to intimidate witnesses, to create
> a climate or ridicule and disparagement for anyone who dares to come
> forward to describe personal UFO encounters - particularly abduction
> experiences.
No, the wild eyes have done it to themselves
>In the world of criminal law, the intimidation of witnesses is a
>felony; in the court of public opinion there is no such stricture.
Because there is no intimidation, as you know.
> This writer has to wonder if the UFO debunkers themselves are the "little
> nobodies, people seeking celebrity status, or just plain school-yard
> bullies!"
"Nobodies," in the sense of normal citizens standing up against cargo
cults, paranoia, and ainti-American propaganda.
>
> Over the years, hundred of people that Budd Hopkins have dealt with
> who recalled UFO abduction experiences have come form virtually every
> socio-economic and educational level. A NASA scientist, nearly a dozen
> police officers, six psychiatrists, many doctors, lawyers, businessmen,
> military officers and so on, from various layers of society have declined
> to come forward to describe their experiences publicly.
If they exist
>A first-hand account by any one of these people would lend great
>credence to the mass of anonymous eyewitness reports, but each has too
>much to lose by doing so in the present climate of witness
>intimidation.
People don't generally talk about their psychiatric treatment
>
> What can we do to reverse the tide and begin to create a climate more
> congenial to scientific research?
Send money.
>Clearly, the issue is one of ethics. The problem is how to force the
>fanatics on the other side to give up the tactic of intimidation which
>has >served them so well.
What has that to do with ethics?
>One way to help bring this about is to absolutely refuse to deal with
>anyone on the (thankfully) short list of character assassins who
>regularly practice this immorality.
i.e. none.
> Edited from the Budd Hopkins article, "Losing a Battle While Winning The War."
> Originally published in the June 1994 edition of the MUFON Journal.
What did it say before it got edited? Mufon ain't this kookey, I hope.
Jerry Bryson
Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> (and the # is increasing!)
> Don
That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
Don Bother
In article <1d30bd9.ms8...@pm2-85.richmond.infi.net>,
jbr...@richmond.infi.net (Jerry Bryson) wrote:
> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> > (and the # is increasing!)
> > Don
> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
You are absolutely wrong about this!
Just Another Skeptic
That's true. It's MUCH closer to 100%. In fact, if you toss in all
the scam artists who are siphoning the UFO geeks' wallets, it's
probably OVER 100% (i.e., more UFOlogy is in progress than actually
exists, and IT'S all bunk, too.)
jas
#############################################
I Used To Be Disgusted -- Now I'm Just Amused
#############################################
Don Bother
> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> > (and the # is increasing!)
> > Don
> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
Care to elaborate on that 5% that isn't bunk?
Don
Lou Minatti
VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
OK. Here's the #1 Usenet spOOk and KooK:
Dr. Richard X. Frager, 20-year paid shill working for the CIA. Phony
doctorate; Uses his false academic credentials as part of his
disinformation campaign. Worthless.
Just Another Skeptic
On Mon, 19 Jan 1998 02:19:00 GMT, Love@.corrode.demon.co.uk (Rhd. Love
Lies Squealing) wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:07:53 GMT, sp...@no.thanks (Just Another Skeptic)
>wrote:
>
><snip>
>>>> >
>>>> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
>>>> > (and the # is increasing!)
>>>> > Don
>>>> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>>>
>>>You are absolutely wrong about this!
>>
>>That's true. It's MUCH closer to 100%. In fact, if you toss in all
>>the scam artists who are siphoning the UFO geeks' wallets, it's
>>probably OVER 100% (i.e., more UFOlogy is in progress than actually
>>exists, and IT'S all bunk, too.)
>
>Jesus, you mean to say that UFOlogy has gone over-unity?* Where do I plug
>in a hairdryer?
>
>*Cold fusion joke.
Yes, it has. Unfortunately, it's an uncontrolled reaction, and will
shortly melt itself down into one superdense pool of ignorance and
superstition. Scientists expect it will congeal near Roswell, NM,
after which the government will have to fence it off to keep other
morons from stumbling into it. A sad waste, really, but we haven't
the technology to effectively harness this much flimflammery into
something useful.
Dr. Richard X. Frager
Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother) wrote:
>In article <1d30bd9.ms8...@pm2-85.richmond.infi.net>,
>jbr...@richmond.infi.net (Jerry Bryson) wrote:
>
>> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > (and the # is increasing!)
>> > Don
>> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>
>Don
Certainly, first off the figure about is a typo.
What he meant to say was that 99.95 of ET/UFO information
is well-researched and firmly established in good, documentable science.
This, of course, has to do with the excellent research done on:
1) Animal Mutilations-done to hundreds of thousands of animals, worldwide
2) UFO Sightings by millions of people, worldwide
3) Crop-circles and pictophrams stamped in fields in every continent on
the globe, over the past many centuries.
4) Human abductions by Extraterrestrials easily in the millions,
again documented in every continent on the Globe.
5) Government and Military Coverup which includes Debunking, FOIA, CIA,
MJ-12, Grudge, Blue Book, Condon and others
6) Crash Landings- Way too many to list
7) Corporate Involvement and Back-Engineering of Alien Craft-
Bob Lazar and Col. Corso are just two of the many people who
have exposed this.
8) Secret Military Bases related to ETs and ET Hardware-Area 51,
P.Rico, Pine Gap, Australia, and many, many others.
9) Landing sights- scorched earth, radioactivity, sightings, photos
and videos.
10) Artifacts
11) Underground Bases
12) Alien Implants
13) MILABS
are just a few of the subjects that has been researched over the
many decades. Although it is doubtful you will find the
sp00k connection on this group (Manetti/Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne/
Hutchins) willing to discuss these topics in any serious fashion.
The UFO sp00k/Debunkers mission here is to make sure that these
subjects are NEVER discussed in any serious fashion.
One wonders why sp00ks/debunkers are here in the first place, since they
pretend they don't believe in the stuff. The answer is simple
really, they are holding a UFO-Debunker Waterloo in which
although they know they are on the losing side, they are trying
to save face in case their Superiors find them expendable.
Or expandable.
Dr. R. X. F.
Jerry Bryson
Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>
> You are absolutely wrong about this!
OK, 98%
Jerry Bryson
Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> > > (and the # is increasing!)
> > > Don
> > That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>
> Care to elaborate on that 5% that isn't bunk?
Really interesting stuff. Meterology, psychiatry, all kinds of areas
for study.
Richard Caldwell
In Article Re: Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//You Betcha! , "VP. Richard X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
> > Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's,
> > alien visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and
> > debunkers.
> A sp00k lie. Now is the time:
Which he immediately follows with more drivel about "sp00ks". Cute.
> Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>
> Meet your usenet sp00ks and KooKs.
> This list is provided as a public service to all
> real researchers and people just curious about the
> truth regarding extraterrestrials and the alien presence.
>
> This list will be constantly updated
>
> Lou (The Spook) Manetti- Obvious sp00k, low-level operative, never
> addresses UFO facts. Worthless. Anal-retentive. Unhappy childhood.
> Already admitted he is a "Spook" whose job is to disrupt UFO newsgroups.
> Started a cult based on hubcaps, ball lightning and swamp gas. Weird-O!
> Rating: 0
Hey, if he's actually getting paid, he must be worth *something*! 8-]
> Twit: Admitted 5-time loser, has decided to throw in his lot with UFO
> debunkers. Now 6-time loser.
> Rating: 0
What's a 5-time loser?
> Rich Thorne- Pseudo-scientist, flunked physics and toilet-training. Low
> I.Q. and self-esteem. Insecure. Nicknamed by wife: "Knucklehead" and
> "Total Screw-up" Still can't tie shoes or sleep without Teddy Bear!
> Bumper-sticker on car says, "Debunkers are people too!" . Couldn't prove
> by Thorne, though.
> Rating: 1
A rating of 1. Rich musta sent you some money to up his score. 8-]
> Michael Edelman- Delusional paranoid. Obvious
> sp00k, "Don't bother me with the facts, my
> mind is made up." Dismissed even by other debunkers. Pitiful.
> Rating: 1 1/2
I'd say mike deserves a pretty high rating. But 1.5, that's pretty high!
8-]
> Robert Imrie A.S.S.H.O.L.E. - Phony intellectual,
> Pentagon apologist, "If I refuse to look at the evidence,
> then there is no evidence." Witless and clueless.
> Rating: 0
Aw, c'mon. I haven't seen any posts by Bob Imrie in a long time and you're
still picking on him. How about Dean Adams?
> Richard Cadwell - Debunker wannabee. Johnny-One-Note.
> Would deny existence of UFO even if he bumped into one,
> "My eyes were closed, the bump on my head is proof that
> UFO's don't exist." Family does not allow "Dickie" around
> sharp objects. Confuses logic with stupidity.
> Super-sp00k, although still can't tie his shoes!
> Rating: 2
Wow! A whole 2? That must be because I *didn't* flunk physics. In fact,
I got a degree in that particular subject.
> Dean Adams-Super sp00k, a legend in his own mind,
> "We must cover-up all aspects of the alien presence."
> Laughed out of group, at least for now!
> Rating: Minus 50
Yeah, I miss old Dean-o. He was mostly a flamer, but he could be fun at
times.
> John Hutchins-Had latrine duty in Military, even screwed that
> up. Used to be a great fisherman until he hooked his, well,
> use your imagination. Banned from participating on talk
> shows because of an unusual odor, thought to be left over
> from the Big-Bang! Only contribution to society is that
> he waters his lawn every day, although he lives in Seattle
> where it rains 300 days a year. Go figure.
I wonder why he doesn't say anything about Susan? He's probably afraid of
her. I know *I* would be. 8-]
> Karl (Klutz) Mamer- A.K.A. Carl Lamer; Lame-Brain; Lambaste.
> As worthless as a debunker can get. Even the Air Force laughed
> at him (and that's not easy to do!) Only human to successfully
> perform a lobotomoy on himself. Volunteered to walk through
> "Ground zero" during atomic bomb tests, now glows in the dark.
> Lamer gloats "Haven't bought a light-bulb in decades."
> Wrote his auto-biograhphy in one hour and according to Lamer,
> "it was only one page long!" Maybe he'll write another page in the
> next decade, and title it "I was a useless debunker." We might
> even buy a copy!
Never heard of him, but he sounds like an interesting guy. 8-]
As for good old Richard X (marks the spot) Fragger, I noticed that you
changed your title from Dr. to VP. Does that mean that you are now the
President in charge of vice? 8-]
Richard
Richard Caldwell
In Article Re: Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//You Betcha! , wrote:
> Richard Caldwell writes:
> > Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's,
> > alien visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and
> > debunkers.
> You have a very good point Richard.
Yes, I have a profound grasp of the obvious. 8-]
> Two years ago, one of the first articles I read was the
> good Dr.'s. Something to do with Mr. Hoagland I believe.
>
> Richard, why even bother reading his posts? I stopped
> after the first few. There are much more interesting and
> important issues that can be grappled with, than wasting
> precious time reading drivel. Unless of course you only do
> so for amuesment.
Yeah, I know, you're right. I should listen to my own advice and ignore
the spammers, trollers, and flamers like Fragger. But, every now & then, I
get to feeling ornery and have to take it out on someone. I think it's the
winter weather that does it. 8-]
As to how much of UFO phenomena can be attributed to 'Secret Terrestrial
Technology', I cannot be certain, but I do agree that it accounts/accounted
for *some* of it.
Richard
I H Spedding
On 19 Jan 1998 08:57:03 GMT, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother) wrote:
>>In article <1d30bd9.ms8...@pm2-85.richmond.infi.net>,
>>jbr...@richmond.infi.net (Jerry Bryson) wrote:
>>
>>> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
>>> > (and the # is increasing!)
>>> > Don
>>> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>>
>>Care to elaborate on that 5% that isn't bunk?
>>Don
>
>Certainly, first off the figure about is a typo.
>
>What he meant to say was that 99.95 of ET/UFO information
>is well-researched and firmly established in good, documentable science.
In your dreams.
>This, of course, has to do with the excellent research done on:
>1) Animal Mutilations-done to hundreds of thousands of animals, worldwide
Natural predators or scavengers.
>2) UFO Sightings by millions of people, worldwide
Unreliable.
>3) Crop-circles and pictophrams stamped in fields in every continent on
>the globe, over the past many centuries.
Hoaxes.
>4) Human abductions by Extraterrestrials easily in the millions,
>again documented in every continent on the Globe.
Hallucinations.
>5) Government and Military Coverup which includes Debunking, FOIA, CIA,
>MJ-12, Grudge, Blue Book, Condon and others
Alphabet-soup conspiracy theories.
>6) Crash Landings- Way too many to list
Nice of them to come down near military bases very time and clean up
the mess afterwards. I approve of eco-friendly aliens.
>7) Corporate Involvement and Back-Engineering of Alien Craft-
>Bob Lazar and Col. Corso are just two of the many people who
>have exposed this.
Bit short on evidence, though. Shame about that.
>8) Secret Military Bases related to ETs and ET Hardware-Area 51,
>P.Rico, Pine Gap, Australia, and many, many others.
Not very secret if everybody knows where they are.
>9) Landing sights- scorched earth, radioactivity, sightings, photos
>and videos.
I think you mean "sites" - and the physical evidence is still pretty
weak.
>10) Artifacts
Such as?
>11) Underground Bases
Ours or theirs?
>12) Alien Implants
Where?
>13) MILABS
<Yawn> 'Scuse me.
>are just a few of the subjects that has been researched over the
>many decades. Although it is doubtful you will find the
>sp00k connection on this group (Manetti/Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne/
>Hutchins) willing to discuss these topics in any serious fashion.
>
>The UFO sp00k/Debunkers mission here is to make sure that these
>subjects are NEVER discussed in any serious fashion.
>
>One wonders why sp00ks/debunkers are here in the first place, since they
>pretend they don't believe in the stuff. The answer is simple
>really, they are holding a UFO-Debunker Waterloo in which
>although they know they are on the losing side, they are trying
>to save face in case their Superiors find them expendable.
>Or expandable.
Listen, Dr Dink, d'you wanna ask Langley for a new script? This one
is beginning to sound rather tired.
Ian
Pres. R. X. Frager
Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>
>In Article Re: Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>
>> Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>
>> > Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's,
>> > alien visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and
>> > debunkers.
>
>
>Which he immediately follows with more drivel about "sp00ks". Cute.
>
>> Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>>
>> Meet your usenet sp00ks and KooKs.
>> This list is provided as a public service to all
>> real researchers and people just curious about the
>> truth regarding extraterrestrials and the alien presence.
>>
>> This list will be constantly updated
>>
>> Lou (The Spook) Manetti- Obvious sp00k, low-level operative, never
>> addresses UFO facts. Worthless. Anal-retentive. Unhappy childhood.
>> Already admitted he is a "Spook" whose job is to disrupt UFO newsgroups.
>> Started a cult based on hubcaps, ball lightning and swamp gas. Weird-O!
>> Rating: 0
>
>Hey, if he's actually getting paid, he must be worth *something*! 8-]
About a buck two eighty; if that!!!
>> Twit: Admitted 5-time loser, has decided to throw in his lot with UFO
>> debunkers. Now 6-time loser.
>> Rating: 0
>
>What's a 5-time loser?
As far as Twit goes, the "Don't ask don't tell" policy
takes precedent!
>> Rich Thorne- Pseudo-scientist, flunked physics and toilet-training. Low
>> I.Q. and self-esteem. Insecure. Nicknamed by wife: "Knucklehead" and
>> "Total Screw-up" Still can't tie shoes or sleep without Teddy Bear!
>> Bumper-sticker on car says, "Debunkers are people too!" . Couldn't prove
>> by Thorne, though.
>> Rating: 1
>
>A rating of 1. Rich musta sent you some money to up his score. 8-]
No, but Thorney is well, a bit thorny at times!
>> Michael Edelman- Delusional paranoid. Obvious
>> sp00k, "Don't bother me with the facts, my
>> mind is made up." Dismissed even by other debunkers. Pitiful.
>> Rating: 1 1/2
>
>I'd say mike deserves a pretty high rating. But 1.5, that's pretty high!
>8-]
You bet, he "earned it!"
>> Robert Imrie A.S.S.H.O.L.E. - Phony intellectual,
>> Pentagon apologist, "If I refuse to look at the evidence,
>> then there is no evidence." Witless and clueless.
>> Rating: 0
>
>Aw, c'mon. I haven't seen any posts by Bob Imrie in a long time and you're
>still picking on him. How about Dean Adams?
He is still on the list, huh? So be it, Adams it coming up and
HE has been rotated with Manelli.
>> Richard Cadwell - Debunker wannabee. Johnny-One-Note.
>> Would deny existence of UFO even if he bumped into one,
>> "My eyes were closed, the bump on my head is proof that
>> UFO's don't exist." Family does not allow "Dickie" around
>> sharp objects. Confuses logic with stupidity.
>> Super-sp00k, although still can't tie his shoes!
>> Rating: 2
>
>Wow! A whole 2? That must be because I *didn't* flunk physics. In fact,
>I got a degree in that particular subject.
Couldn't prove it on this newsgroup though. Heard any
good quark or charm jokes lately?
>> Dean Adams-Super sp00k, a legend in his own mind,
>> "We must cover-up all aspects of the alien presence."
>> Laughed out of group, at least for now!
>> Rating: Minus 50
>
>Yeah, I miss old Dean-o. He was mostly a flamer, but he could be fun at
>times.
Yeah, so was Himmler and Attila the Hun, each in their own ways.
>> John Hutchins-Had latrine duty in Military, even screwed that
>> up. Used to be a great fisherman until he hooked his, well,
>> use your imagination. Banned from participating on talk
>> shows because of an unusual odor, thought to be left over
>> from the Big-Bang! Only contribution to society is that
>> he waters his lawn every day, although he lives in Seattle
>> where it rains 300 days a year. Go figure.
>
>I wonder why he doesn't say anything about Susan? He's probably afraid of
>her. I know *I* would be. 8-]
I know what you mean, at least I give him and Twit something to
do; their lives seem so empty, you know.
>> Karl (Klutz) Mamer- A.K.A. Carl Lamer; Lame-Brain; Lambaste.
>> As worthless as a debunker can get. Even the Air Force laughed
>> at him (and that's not easy to do!) Only human to successfully
>> perform a lobotomoy on himself. Volunteered to walk through
>> "Ground zero" during atomic bomb tests, now glows in the dark.
>> Lamer gloats "Haven't bought a light-bulb in decades."
>> Wrote his auto-biograhphy in one hour and according to Lamer,
>> "it was only one page long!" Maybe he'll write another page in the
>> next decade, and title it "I was a useless debunker." We might
>> even buy a copy!
>
>Never heard of him, but he sounds like an interesting guy. 8-]
Ypu'd probably like him since he hasn't a clue!
>As for good old Richard X (marks the spot) Fragger, I noticed that you
>changed your title from Dr. to VP. Does that mean that you are now the
>President in charge of vice? 8-]
>
>Richard
It's just one of those "Net" things that happen from time to time.
Take care and stay in touch,
Pres. R. X. Frager
Don P.
Richard Caldwell writes:
#Don P. Wrote
## Richard Caldwell writes:
## # Did you ever notice how Fragger *never* posts *anything* about UFO's,
## # alien visitors or anything else. All his posts are about skeptics and
## # debunkers.
#
## You have a very good point Richard.
#
#Yes, I have a profound grasp of the obvious. 8-]
#
A good grasp to have no doubt.
## Richard, why even bother reading his posts? I stopped
## after the first few. There are much more interesting and
## important issues that can be grappled with, than wasting
## precious time reading drivel. Unless of course you only do
## so for amuesment.
#
#Yeah, I know, you're right. I should listen to my own advice and ignore
#the spammers, trollers, and flamers like Fragger. But, every now & then, I
#get to feeling ornery and have to take it out on someone. I think it's the
#winter weather that does it. 8-]
#
Many of us get that way I guess. Every now and then the
spammers, trollers, and flamers posts can useful for a good
laugh. When I get the winter blues, I prefer to go on the front
porch freeze my butt off and smoke a nice Arturo Fuente, all
the while telling myself "I'm not cold!" After 30 minutes of
that I'm ready for another week.
[SNIP]
## If you really want to find the pot-o-gold, drop the alien gig,
## and look to humans as the culprit of the UFO phenomena. If not
## for anything else, you will learn to separate the honest proponents
## and skeptics from the less than honorable ones.
#
#As to how much of UFO phenomena can be attributed to 'Secret Terrestrial
#Technology', I cannot be certain, but I do agree that it accounts/accounted
#for *some* of it.
#
Thanks for taking the time to repost my article, and thanks for
your last comment, it made my day (it was a real bad day). I guess
blaming the UFO phenomenon on Hidden Human Technology is too
drab for these newsgroups. Oh well, back to warp engines, spooks,
and litlle guys with big eyes I guess.
Kind Regards
Don
Lou Minatti
Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> >> A sp00k lie.
That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
Mark Shippey
Lou Minatti (lou-m...@usa.net) wrote:
: Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
: s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
: > >> A sp00k lie.
:
: That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
You know, to paraphrase that old saying.....
He protests too loudly.
Yes, he is always posting CIA rants, and we know that this
is the best cover right? While he is posting his UFO debunking
by making the whole thing look goofy, at the same time......
HE IS ALWAYS RANTING AND RAVING ABOUT THE CIA and assorted
spOOks.
Case closed.
Actually, as a member of Fighters for Frager I am disappointed
to discover this part of the Horrible Truth.
I think we need a new organization....
Fighters Against SpOOK UFOlogists or something like that.
Blue Resonant Human
Lou Minatti <lou-m...@usa.net> wrote:
>Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>> >> A sp00k lie.
>That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
Actually, I've rather enjoyed some of his recent non-UFO posts.
Perhaps enjoy is not the correct word as they were frankly rather
enraging but yet very important nevertheless.
If there is one thing I agree with the greys on, it is that we must
stop raping this planet -- to continue doing so is the height of
lunacy. It makes pissing in your own well pale in comparison.
jolaf
On 21 Jan 1998 02:48:07 GMT, kpri...@dfw.dfw.net (Mark Shippey)
wrote:
>Lou Minatti (lou-m...@usa.net) wrote:
>: Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>: s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>: > >> A sp00k lie.
>:
>: That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
>
> You know, to paraphrase that old saying.....
> He protests too loudly.
> Yes, he is always posting CIA rants, and we know that this
>is the best cover right? While he is posting his UFO debunking
>by making the whole thing look goofy, at the same time......
>HE IS ALWAYS RANTING AND RAVING ABOUT THE CIA and assorted
>spOOks.
> Case closed.
> Actually, as a member of Fighters for Frager I am disappointed
>to discover this part of the Horrible Truth.
> I think we need a new organization....
> Fighters Against SpOOK UFOlogists or something like that.
How about: "FASCISTS"?
> Fighters Against SpOOk Conspiracy and Intelligence, Special Troll Squadron
HTH.
.
.
.
jolaf
>VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>> Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>
>OK. Here's the #1 Usenet spOOk and KooK:
>
>Dr. Richard X. Frager, 20-year paid shill working for the CIA.
And your evidence for this assertion is just what, exactly?
Extraordinary claims such as yours, demands extraordinary evidence for
your assertion? Where is is?
>Phony
>doctorate;
But it must be real to begin with. Has Frager used the title "Dr" to
mislead people into believing that he is a medical doctor? Or has he
used it for satirical purposes, as an actor or writer might use it --
has Frager broken any rules in a mediuma that is anarchistic and
lawless by nature?
Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
under the nym in the first place? Of course.
Is Frager claiming to offer medical services,? No.
Is Frager pretending to be a Medical Doctor? No.
Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
Yes.
>ses his false academic credentials as part of his
>disinformation campaign. Worthless.
And exactly what academic credentials has Dr. Frager claimed to
posess? A Usenet nym, perhaps?
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On 21 Jan 1998 02:48:07 GMT, kpri...@dfw.dfw.net (Mark Shippey) wrote:
>Lou Minatti (lou-m...@usa.net) wrote:
>: Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>: s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>: > >> A sp00k lie.
>:
>: That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
>
> You know, to paraphrase that old saying.....
> He protests too loudly.
> Yes, he is always posting CIA rants, and we know that this
>is the best cover right? While he is posting his UFO debunking
>by making the whole thing look goofy, at the same time......
>HE IS ALWAYS RANTING AND RAVING ABOUT THE CIA and assorted
>spOOks.
> Case closed.
> Actually, as a member of Fighters for Frager I am disappointed
>to discover this part of the Horrible Truth.
> I think we need a new organization....
> Fighters Against SpOOK UFOlogists or something like that.
The clincher: record the words "Doctor Frager". Then play them backwards.
Do you hear "Langley Dancer"?
--
(reply to usenet at clubvb.com)
Blue Resonant Human
jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>under the nym in the first place?
NO!
-Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
twi...@worldnet.att.net
sped...@mognet.u-net.com (I H Spedding) wrote:
>On 19 Jan 1998 08:57:03 GMT, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
><nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>
>>Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother) wrote:
>>>In article <1d30bd9.ms8...@pm2-85.richmond.infi.net>,
>>>jbr...@richmond.infi.net (Jerry Bryson) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
>>>> > (and the # is increasing!)
>>>> > Don
>>>> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
>>>
>>>Care to elaborate on that 5% that isn't bunk?
>>>Don
>>
>>Certainly, first off the figure about is a typo.
>>
>>What he meant to say was that 99.95 of ET/UFO information
>>is well-researched and firmly established in good, documentable science.
>
>In your dreams.
><snip>
No. seriously, Ian, it is good stuff and well-researched
science!
Like Gerald Anderson's Uncle's 1947 diary which was so
important to Friedman in his version of the Roswell story.
OH, that's right, it used ink that wasn't around before
1974! Hell, the dyes weren't used in ink until 1970.
But, Anderson explained that. His Uncle Ted didn't like to
make photocopies so he hand copied the 1947 diary.
Which makes Uncle Ted a very unique individual. He died in
1965 in an auto accident!
But, forget him, what about the undertaker who got the story
from a nurse?
Oh, that's right, she didn't exist.
But, 99.95% of UFO/ET info is well researched and
scientifically valid.
We have Doctor Frager's word!
And, has Doctor Frager ever lied to us?
jus...@directnet.com
> You know, to paraphrase that old saying.....
>by making the whole thing look goofy, at the same time......
> I think we need a new organization....
Hey! Lot's of dot's Mark I like that!
jus...@directnet.com
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 05:25:40 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>.
>.
>.
Hey! Jolaf's dot's go straight down the page!
Mark Shippey
jus...@directnet.com (jus...@directnet.com) wrote:
: On 21 Jan 1998 02:48:07 GMT, kpri...@dfw.dfw.net (Mark Shippey)
'Dots really funny.
How come you like dots so much?
grouchy
Blue Resonant Human wrote:
>
> -Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
Now, THERE is something that would scaret the crap out of any gentle
soul. - grouchy
KLONDY...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net
dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue Resonant Human) wrote:
>jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>>under the nym in the first place?
>
>NO!
>
> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
>
Obviously, our sigs are designed to set the tone for our postings, not as
a literal representation. Except, of course, for me. I really am Red,
god of War, Pantheon Global Hyper-government.
Red
--
Pantheon Unarmed Militia
A valid and rational solution to our nations problems
To participate visit this site and reply to the e-mail link
http://members.tripod.com/~PantheonGlobal/
Lou Minatti
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply wrote:
>
> On 21 Jan 1998 02:48:07 GMT, kpri...@dfw.dfw.net (Mark Shippey) wrote:
>
> >: Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
> >: s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> >: > >> A sp00k lie.
> >:
> >: That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
> >
> > Yes, he is always posting CIA rants, and we know that this
> >is the best cover right? While he is posting his UFO debunking
> >spOOks.
> > Case closed.
> > Actually, as a member of Fighters for Frager I am disappointed
> >to discover this part of the Horrible Truth.
>
> The clincher: record the words "Doctor Frager". Then play them backwards.
> Do you hear "Langley Dancer"?
By god you're right! Another obvious sign that Dr. Frager has been a CIA
employee all these years.
jolaf
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 23:43:07 GMT, widde...@seanet.com (John &
Susan Hutchins) wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 06:40:53 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>snip
>>
>>>Phony
>>>doctorate;
>>
>>But it must be real to begin with. Has Frager used the title "Dr" to
>>mislead people into believing that he is a medical doctor?
>
>He has used it to post opinions about medical protocols in
>alt.support.attention-deficit.
Although I may be mistaken, I was under the distinct and net(ed)ucated
impression that the good "Doctor Frager" is in fact an admitted
"patient", not a medical doctor.and his stated reasons for posting on
a.a.d-d and other NG's are merely illustrative of a self-prescribed
need for social discourse.
Any opinion posted to a.a.d-d d and any other ng in the alt*
hierarchy, is in fact, an opinion that is lawfully propagated to the
rest of Usenet, and this opinion is propagated through many news
servers around the globe, and this opinion may be subject to only one
law: the laws of the participating news admins who choose to "carry"
the alt hierarchies, inside which the good doctor's posts are to be
found.
Please demonstrate to me exactly how "Dr. Frager's" opinions made in
that medium which is Usenet, not RL, justifies your beliefs that "Dr.
Frager" is presently breaking Oregon State law, which may or may not
have any bearing on this case in question, and in fact, needs to be
determined before you continue to spread misinformation about what the
poster known as "Dr. Frager" has actually done or not done.
>This ng is peopled with folks who are
>concerned with long-term health problems.
Like Dr. Frager, a poster who is obviously using a nym, whatever his
reasons may be for doing this on the alt* hierarchies. Do you happen
to know what the word ALT stands for?
>A serch of dejanew
>using "frager" as the keyword will provide a fine example of what I
>mean. Frager might have thought it was all in fun, but his bogus
>advice could have really hurt somebody.
Is Frager really giving out "bogus" advice, or is in fact the entire
medical industry guilty for handing out bogus pop-diagnosis like
"Attention Deficit-Disorder" to kids every day in order to line the
pockets of Pharmaceutical companies while Mom and Dad are working too
hard to notice that the TV is on 6+ hours a day, but hey, no more
guilt about not having to parent junior!
Who is really giving out the bogus advice? "Dr. Frager" or a
billion-dollar a year industry that seeks to command and control your
very state of mind?
"Dr. Frager"?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
ADD is an excuse for working parents guilt, and a symptom of WAY TOO
MUCH TELEVISION.
You don't need to put people on DRUGS to figure that out...
>>Or has he
>>used it for satirical purposes, as an actor or writer might use it --
>>has Frager broken any rules in a mediuma that is anarchistic and
>>lawless by nature?
>
>Since it is a violation of Oregon state law to impersonate a
>doctor and give out medical advice and opinion,
>he surely violated
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If the facts speak for themselves, why the need to impose your opinion
on the facts? He "may" have violated certain laws in RL, and if so,
how does that apply to Usenet?
> his ISPs TOS by using their facilities to in effect
>violate the law.
What part of his ISPs ToS did he break? Quote the line and verse,
please.
>>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>>under the nym in the first place? Of course.
>>
>>Is Frager claiming to offer medical services,? No.
>
>Wrong. Yes he has. See above..
What do you mean "See avove"? Let's see your verifiable evidence for
your claim. Your claim is, "Frager claims to offer medical services".
Let's see your evidence for this claim.
>>Is Frager pretending to be a Medical Doctor? No.
>
>Same answer.
What do you mean "Same answer"? Let's see your evidence for your
claim that "Frager is pretending to be a MD".
Once again, post the evidence.
>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>state, or federal jurisdictions.
I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>>ses his false academic credentials as part of his
>>>disinformation campaign. Worthless.
>>
>>And exactly what academic credentials has Dr. Frager claimed to
>>posess? A Usenet nym, perhaps?
>
>Nope, he claimed to be a doctor. That's against the law.
Post the evidence for his claim that he offers medical services and
your other claim, where you say he pretends to be a doctor. The facts
speak for themselves, however.
Dr. Frager is merely using a screen name (nym) like 70%* (or more) of
all posters to Usenet.
Should we put the 70% of those who choose to use a nym, in jail too?
>John Hutchins
>
>
>
>I never hold a grudge. As soon as I get even with the
>SOB, I forget all about it.
>
>...W. C. Fields
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>
>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
jolaf
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:15:52 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
Resonant Human) wrote:
>jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>>under the nym in the first place?
>
>NO!
>
>-Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
Ah, but it's ok if YOU do it!
I psee, or rather, you don't.
Rhd Olaf
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>
>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>
>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
Answer:
The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
censorship.
Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
CENSORED
.
.
jolaf
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 04:43:49 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
Resonant Human) wrote:
>Lou Minatti <lou-m...@usa.net> wrote:
>
>>Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>>s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>> >> A sp00k lie.
>
>>That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
>
>Actually, I've rather enjoyed some of his recent non-UFO posts.
>Perhaps enjoy is not the correct word as they were frankly rather
>enraging but yet very important nevertheless.
>
>If there is one thing I agree with the greys on, it is that we must
>stop raping this planet -- to continue doing so is the height of
>lunacy. It makes pissing in your own well pale in comparison.
What about censoring Usenet posters for their opinions on alt*
newsgroups?
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
is Usenet rather than "RL".
That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
since they're not "RL".
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:13:29 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>>
>>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>
>>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
>
>Answer:
>
>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>censorship.
>
>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
>
>CENSORED
Talking to yourself again, eh?
Oh, and "tinc".
>
>.
>.
Hmm, trolling for the Dot Guy now?
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
If your "opinions" create legal liability for your ISP, then you should not
be surprised of your ISP brings weight to bear against you.
It's no different than your much-vaunted "RL". Want proof? Go to an
airport, stand on a ticket line, and start mumbling to yourself about bombs,
hijacking, and Cuba, and see how long it takes them to place you in a nice
comfy interrogation room.
jolaf
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:47:58 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 04:43:49 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
>>Resonant Human) wrote:
>>
>>>Lou Minatti <lou-m...@usa.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>>>>s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>>>> >> A sp00k lie.
>>>
>>>>That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
>>>
>>>Actually, I've rather enjoyed some of his recent non-UFO posts.
>>>Perhaps enjoy is not the correct word as they were frankly rather
>>>enraging but yet very important nevertheless.
>>>
>>>If there is one thing I agree with the greys on, it is that we must
>>>stop raping this planet -- to continue doing so is the height of
>>>lunacy. It makes pissing in your own well pale in comparison.
>>
>>What about censoring Usenet posters for their opinions on alt*
>>newsgroups?
>
>If your "opinions" create legal liability for your ISP, then you should not
>be surprised of your ISP brings weight to bear against you.
So you condone censorship? I don't.
>It's no different than your much-vaunted "RL".
Good point. Censorship is as rampant there as it is on the net. Want
proof? Every year there is a huge list of stories that don't get
coverage in the mainstream media, "Ten most censored" or something
like that. No surprise.
>Want proof? Go to an
>airport, stand on a ticket line, and start mumbling to yourself about bombs,
>hijacking, and Cuba, and see how long it takes them to place you in a nice
>comfy interrogation room.
I don't see how that's relevant. You're saying that Frager was doing
this strange things? Please post the evidence that shows Frager doing
these things.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:21:45 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:13:29 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>>>
>>>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>>
>>>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>>>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
>>
>>Answer:
>>
>>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>>censorship.
>>
>>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
>>
>>CENSORED
>
>Talking to yourself again, eh?
Nope. Just replying to my own posts in good BRH and Munro fashion.
When in Rome...
>Oh, and "tinc".
That's not what my sekrit ring says...and anyway, how would you know?
>Hmm, trolling for the Dot Guy now?
What's it to you?
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:46:15 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:21:45 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:13:29 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>>>>
>>>>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>>>
>>>>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>>>>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
>>>
>>>Answer:
>>>
>>>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>>>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>>>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>>>censorship.
>>>
>>>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
>>>
>>>CENSORED
>>
>>Talking to yourself again, eh?
>
>Nope. Just replying to my own posts in good BRH and Munro fashion.
>When in Rome...
You're not in Rome. Rome is in "RL", as you term it. You are in Usenet.
Usenet is not "RL", at least according to you.
>>Oh, and "tinc".
>
>That's not what my sekrit ring says...and anyway, how would you know?
Sorry, that information can only be disclosed on a need-to-know basis.
>>Hmm, trolling for the Dot Guy now?
>
>What's it to you?
Sorry, that information can only be disclosed on a need-to-know basis.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>is Usenet rather than "RL".
Please provide evidence that Frager has committed fraud.
>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>since they're not "RL".
Has Frager made death threats? Has Frager committed fraud of any
kind? What is Frager's crime?
Or do you just shoot first and ask questions later?
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:03:26 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:46:15 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:21:45 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:13:29 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>>>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>>>>
>>>>>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>>>>>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
>>>>
>>>>Answer:
>>>>
>>>>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>>>>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>>>>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>>>>censorship.
>>>>
>>>>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
>>>>
>>>>CENSORED
>>>
>>>Talking to yourself again, eh?
>>
>>Nope. Just replying to my own posts in good BRH and Munro fashion.
>>When in Rome...
>
>You're not in Rome.
Ok, so I forgot (for once) to put quotes around that statement...
>Rome is in "RL", as you term it. You are in Usenet.
>Usenet is not "RL", at least according to you.
I never said that. I just made a clear distinction between RL laws
and Usenet. I never said they didn't overlap.
>>>Oh, and "tinc".
>>
>>That's not what my sekrit ring says...and anyway, how would you know?
>
>Sorry, that information can only be disclosed on a need-to-know basis.
And you don't need to know.
>>>Hmm, trolling for the Dot Guy now?
>>
>>What's it to you?
>
>Sorry, that information can only be disclosed on a need-to-know basis.
And you don't need to know.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>is Usenet rather than "RL".
Please demonstrate that fraud has taken place.
>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>since they're not "RL".
As a writer and satirist, Frager was not concerned with RL. His
"great" work speaks for itself and needs no introduction.
As a writer for AP (Amalgamated Press) Dr. Frager astounded his Usenet
audiences time and time again, with hard-hitting, cutting-edge feature
stories written with a 21st century flair for nostalgia. Dr. Frager
was a.a.v's ACE REPORTER.
He will be greatly missed, but not forgotten. When the reptoids have
all but captured us, and we are left with a steaming pile of mud, the
people will cry out in vain for his name...
S H A Z A M!
--
// THE CABAL CENSORED FRAGER //
// WHO WILL BE NEXT? //
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:44:10 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:24:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 03:47:58 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 04:43:49 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
>>>Resonant Human) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Lou Minatti <lou-m...@usa.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Pres. R. X. Frager, AKA Dr. Frager, AKA Ernest Borgnine <nospam
>>>>>s&mqu...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
>>>>>> >> A sp00k lie.
>>>>
>>>>>That is about ALL you write, CIA-employee Dr. Frager.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, I've rather enjoyed some of his recent non-UFO posts.
>>>>Perhaps enjoy is not the correct word as they were frankly rather
>>>>enraging but yet very important nevertheless.
>>>>
>>>>If there is one thing I agree with the greys on, it is that we must
>>>>stop raping this planet -- to continue doing so is the height of
>>>>lunacy. It makes pissing in your own well pale in comparison.
>>>
>>>What about censoring Usenet posters for their opinions on alt*
>>>newsgroups?
>>
>>If your "opinions" create legal liability for your ISP, then you should not
>>be surprised of your ISP brings weight to bear against you.
>
>So you condone censorship? I don't.
Now now, sonny; don't go putting words into my mouth that you're not prepared
to eat.
I said, "If your "opinions" create legal liability for your ISP, then you
should not be surprised of your ISP brings weight to bear against you."
That is not "censorship". That is "common sense", and "self-preservation".
If I was a landlord, and you were my tenant, and I discovered that you had
turned my property into a crack house, exactly how long do you think it would
be before you found yourself living on the street?
>>It's no different than your much-vaunted "RL".
>
>Good point. Censorship is as rampant there as it is on the net. Want
>proof? Every year there is a huge list of stories that don't get
>coverage in the mainstream media, "Ten most censored" or something
>like that. No surprise.
Ooooh, attempted spin control! I am *impressed*!
Tell me, were you inspired by Clinton's McNeil-Lehrer equivocations today?
>>Want proof? Go to an
>>airport, stand on a ticket line, and start mumbling to yourself about bombs,
>>hijacking, and Cuba, and see how long it takes them to place you in a nice
>>comfy interrogation room.
>
>I don't see how that's relevant. You're saying that Frager was doing
>this strange things? Please post the evidence that shows Frager doing
>these things.
If you don't even know what I'm saying (as evidenced by your question above)
then how the hell are you qualified to attempt to argue with it?
Or are you just joshin' me?
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:01:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>
>Please provide evidence that Frager has committed fraud.
>
>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>since they're not "RL".
>
>Has Frager made death threats? Has Frager committed fraud of any
>kind? What is Frager's crime?
>
>Or do you just shoot first and ask questions later?
Answer the question, Ron.
Do you shoot first and ask questions later?
Or better yet, do you just disconnect the ISP customer in order to
PROTECT his free speech from being eroded?
How did Frager's opinions and nym damage Usenet?
Please list to me the list of people who have come forward as a result
of the injuries Frager has inflicted upon them.
Please list for me, the damages Frager's ISP incurred from his
opinions and use of his nym, and post the testimonials of the people
he "Terrorized".
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 06:23:29 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:44:10 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:24:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
Well, let's get right to the point, shall we? How did FRAGER's
opinoins create a legal liability for his ISP? Or did OTHER PEOPLE's
opinions of FRAGER create a libility for his ISP?
>That is not "censorship". That is "common sense", and "self-preservation".
Common sense? Give in to the will of the majority? Or protect the
rights of the individual from the will of the majority? Where does
the self-preservation of the individual come into play? After he's
been disconnected from his ISP? At exactly what point do you protect
free speech? Right after you've disco'ed the customer from the net?
>If I was a landlord, and you were my tenant, and I discovered that you had
>turned my property into a crack house, exactly how long do you think it would
>be before you found yourself living on the street?
Not very long. How did Frager's opinions and nym turn him into a drug
dealer?
>>>It's no different than your much-vaunted "RL".
>>
>>Good point. Censorship is as rampant there as it is on the net. Want
>>proof? Every year there is a huge list of stories that don't get
>>coverage in the mainstream media, "Ten most censored" or something
>>like that. No surprise.
>
>Ooooh, attempted spin control! I am *impressed*!
What are you talking about? I was agreeing with your point. If you
would like me to disagree with you for the sake of disagreement, then
you are talking to the wrong person. Perhaps you would *prefer* to
talk to yourself.
>Tell me, were you inspired by Clinton's McNeil-Lehrer equivocations today?
I don't usually watch TV, but I do glance at it now and then. No, I
didn't watch whatever pop-culture item you are referring to here, and
I wasn't trying to prove a point.
I am, however, trying to investigate this matter, and I would like
your cooperation.
>>>Want proof? Go to an
>>>airport, stand on a ticket line, and start mumbling to yourself about bombs,
>>>hijacking, and Cuba, and see how long it takes them to place you in a nice
>>>comfy interrogation room.
>>
>>I don't see how that's relevant. You're saying that Frager was doing
>>this strange things? Please post the evidence that shows Frager doing
>>these things.
>
>If you don't even know what I'm saying (as evidenced by your question above)
>then how the hell are you qualified to attempt to argue with it?
>
>Or are you just joshin' me?
That would have to be you, sir. Your attempt to color this issue is
most disturbing.
You accuse me of "spin control", yet in this very post you accuse
Frager of being as guilty as a crack dealer, and as crazy as a Mad
Bomber and Terrorist.
Who is joshin' who?
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:01:12 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:01:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
>>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>>
>>Please provide evidence that Frager has committed fraud.
>>
>>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>>since they're not "RL".
>>
>>Has Frager made death threats? Has Frager committed fraud of any
>>kind? What is Frager's crime?
>>
>>Or do you just shoot first and ask questions later?
>
>Answer the question, Ron.
Pardon me, you silly fuck. I guess next time I'd better answer your shitbag
of queries PRONTO or else we'll all have to bear the spectacle of you wetting
your knickers.
>Do you shoot first and ask questions later?
None of your fucking business.
> Or better yet, do you just disconnect the ISP customer in order to
>PROTECT his free speech from being eroded?
If I were an ISP, and you were my customer, you'd be shuffling through your
trash for the most recent AOL free disk, twink.
>How did Frager's opinions and nym damage Usenet?
By making it smell almost as bad as your virtual breath.
>Please list to me the list of people who have come forward as a result
>of the injuries Frager has inflicted upon them.
Please FOAD. Pretty please.
>Please list for me, the damages Frager's ISP incurred from his
>opinions and use of his nym, and post the testimonials of the people
>he "Terrorized".
Ask them, shit-fer-branez.
Man, I hope you let us know when the PMS subsides!
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:22:18 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>
>Please demonstrate that fraud has taken place.
>
>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>since they're not "RL".
>
>As a writer and satirist, Frager was not concerned with RL. His
>"great" work speaks for itself and needs no introduction.
I nearly shit my pants laughing! Your pathetic attempt at reframing Fragnatz
is *that* funny!
Ok, now how about you tell us about how Bill Clinton is a kind, honest,
ethical, caring leader, and a devout Feminist?
>As a writer for AP (Amalgamated Press) Dr. Frager astounded his Usenet
>audiences time and time again, with hard-hitting, cutting-edge feature
>stories written with a 21st century flair for nostalgia. Dr. Frager
>was a.a.v's ACE REPORTER.
With you lawyerin' for him, I'm sure he'll do at *least* as well as Slick
does with Drudge!
>He will be greatly missed, but not forgotten. When the reptoids have
>all but captured us, and we are left with a steaming pile of mud, the
>people will cry out in vain for his name...
He will be missed, but only until your aim improves, so quit whining.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:40:11 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:22:18 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
>>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>>
>>Please demonstrate that fraud has taken place.
>>
>>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>>since they're not "RL".
>>
>>As a writer and satirist, Frager was not concerned with RL. His
>>"great" work speaks for itself and needs no introduction.
>
>I nearly shit my pants laughing! Your pathetic attempt at reframing Fragnatz
>is *that* funny!
Did I make you laugh? Good. You've taken your first step to
recovery!
>Ok, now how about you tell us about how Bill Clinton is a kind, honest,
>ethical, caring leader, and a devout Feminist?
Sorry, Ron. But the topic is "Frager & Censorship", or has your
memory left you? That's ok, I'm here to remind you and provide a
tender helping hand.
>>As a writer for AP (Amalgamated Press) Dr. Frager astounded his Usenet
>>audiences time and time again, with hard-hitting, cutting-edge feature
>>stories written with a 21st century flair for nostalgia. Dr. Frager
>>was a.a.v's ACE REPORTER.
>
>With you lawyerin' for him, I'm sure he'll do at *least* as well as Slick
>does with Drudge!
"Lawyerin'" for him? You guyz have runnin' water out in your parts,
Ron? Sorry Ron, but where I live, we stopped lynchings about 100
years ago. I know that's hard for you to understand, but it's
actually a good thing.
>>He will be greatly missed, but not forgotten. When the reptoids have
>>all but captured us, and we are left with a steaming pile of mud, the
>>people will cry out in vain for his name...
>
>He will be missed, but only until your aim improves, so quit whining.
Nice job. The standard "attack your opponent with the whining
accusation" so anything your opponent replies back with appears to be
whining.
Thanks for avoiding my valid questions and "playing" stupid, Ron.
It's been fun, but far more entertaining for me, than for you, as you
can already tell.
Let me know when you get running water over in those parts.
Gonzo Skeptic
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:38:07 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:15:52 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
>Resonant Human) wrote:
>
>>jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>>>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>>>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>>>under the nym in the first place?
>>
>>NO!
>>
>>-Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
>> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
>> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
>
>Ah, but it's ok if YOU do it!
>
>I psee, or rather, you don't.
You f**king idiot, Olaff!
Josh: In the future...If you don't know who the joke is on, it is
probably on you.
Don't screw up like this again!
**********************************************
-- Gonzo Skeptic
-- http://home1.gte.net/skeptic
-- Fear and Loathing on the UFO Trail
**********************************************
Blue Resonant Human
jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>censorship.
>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
Good Lord, man! You mean The Conspiracy finally got to him?!
Damn -- he was our LAST HOPE!
Na Kaula
In article <34c8f596....@n2.supernews.com>, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron
Schwarz -- see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:01:12 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:01:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
(Snip)
>>>Has Frager made death threats? Has Frager committed fraud of any
>>>kind? What is Frager's crime?
>>>
>>>Or do you just shoot first and ask questions later?
>>
>>Answer the question, Ron.
>
>Pardon me, you silly fuck. I guess next time I'd better answer your shitbag
>of queries PRONTO or else we'll all have to bear the spectacle of you wetting
>your knickers.
>
>>Do you shoot first and ask questions later?
>
>None of your fucking business.
>
>> Or better yet, do you just disconnect the ISP customer in order to
>>PROTECT his free speech from being eroded?
>
>If I were an ISP, and you were my customer, you'd be shuffling through your
>trash for the most recent AOL free disk, twink.
>
>>How did Frager's opinions and nym damage Usenet?
>
>By making it smell almost as bad as your virtual breath.
>
>>Please list to me the list of people who have come forward as a result
>>of the injuries Frager has inflicted upon them.
>
>Please FOAD. Pretty please.
>
>>Please list for me, the damages Frager's ISP incurred from his
>>opinions and use of his nym, and post the testimonials of the people
>>he "Terrorized".
>
>Ask them, shit-fer-branez.
>
>Man, I hope you let us know when the PMS subsides!
>
>
>--
> (reply to usenet at clubvb.com)
Oh, my! Did Josh touch a nerve there, Ron?
It's not even a full Moon and your fangs are showing.
--
Address Modified to frustrate automated E-mail spamming.
To E-mail me, remove the "_" in my address.
Aloha from the Tetrahedral Volcano.
kha...@nospamhotmail.com
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:01:12 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>>
>>Please provide evidence that Frager has committed fraud.
Please stop acting as though the example Ron used was an actual
accusation.
>>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>>since they're not "RL".
>>
>>Has Frager made death threats? Has Frager committed fraud of any
>>kind? What is Frager's crime?
Please stop acting as though the example Ron used was an actual
accusation.
>Or do you just shoot first and ask questions later?
>
>Answer the question, Ron.
>
>Do you shoot first and ask questions later?
Oh brother. DRAMA!!!! You sound like a hysterical soap queen,
jolaf!! "Do you love me, Jason??? Answer me!!! Do you???"
<snip>
>Please list to me the list of people who have come forward as a result
>of the injuries Frager has inflicted upon them.
So are YOU saying that it should not be stopped until he DOES hurt
someone? If this guy is pretending to be a doctor and handing out
medical advice, then yes, he SHOULD be stopped - BEFORE he hurts
someone. Are you so friggin' dense that you can't see that???
(Accordingly, anyone who took his advice should have their heads
examined.)
>Please list for me, the damages Frager's ISP incurred from his
>opinions and use of his nym, and post the testimonials of the people
>he "Terrorized".
There is a business practice called "risk management", wherein you
attempt to nullify a risk before incurring a loss through loss
prevention and risk transfer (insurance). It is a sound business
practice, and IMHO applies to ANY nut posing as an M.D. and passing
out advice.
"God is Poohbear."
Richard Caldwell
In Article Re: Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//You Betcha! , "Pres. R. X. Frager"
<nospams...@cyberhighway.net> wrote:
> Richard Caldwell <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>>> Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>>>
>>> Meet your usenet sp00ks and KooKs.
>>> This list is provided as a public service to all
>>> real researchers and people just curious about the
>>> truth regarding extraterrestrials and the alien presence.
>>>
>>> This list will be constantly updated
Meaning you'll change the date, but not the content. You *do* need to get
some new material, you know. This old stuff is starting to yellow with
age. 8-]
>>> Lou (The Spook) Manetti- Obvious sp00k, low-level operative, never
>>> addresses UFO facts. Worthless. Anal-retentive. Unhappy childhood.
>>> Already admitted he is a "Spook" whose job is to disrupt UFO
>>> newsgroups.
>>> Started a cult based on hubcaps, ball lightning and swamp gas.
>>> Weird-O!
>>> Rating: 0
> >
> >Hey, if he's actually getting paid, he must be worth *something*! 8-]
>
> About a buck two eighty; if that!!!
Naw, the Govt. always pays at least minimum wage, which I think is up over
$4.00 an hour now.
>>> Twit: Admitted 5-time loser, has decided to throw in his lot with UFO
>>> debunkers. Now 6-time loser.
>>> Rating: 0
> >What's a 5-time loser?
> As far as Twit goes, the "Don't ask don't tell" policy takes precedent!
So, you aren't gonna tell us what a 5-time loser is, huh?
>>> Rich Thorne- Pseudo-scientist, flunked physics and toilet-training.
>>> Low I.Q. and self-esteem. Insecure. Nicknamed by wife: "Knucklehead"
>>> and "Total Screw-up" Still can't tie shoes or sleep without Teddy
>>> Bear! Bumper-sticker on car says, "Debunkers are people too!" .
>>> Couldn't prove by Thorne, though.
>>> Rating: 1
> >A rating of 1. Rich musta sent you some money to up his score. 8-]
>
> No, but Thorney is well, a bit thorny at times!
Wow! A pun! Is that what qualifies as an original thought from you?
>>> Michael Edelman- Delusional paranoid. Obvious sp00k, "Don't bother me
>>> with the facts, my mind is made up." Dismissed even by other
>>> debunkers. Pitiful.
>>> Rating: 1 1/2
>>I'd say mike deserves a pretty high rating. But 1.5, that's pretty high!
> You bet, he "earned it!"
Good. I'm glad to see recognition given where it is due.
>>> Robert Imrie A.S.S.H.O.L.E. - Phony intellectual, Pentagon apologist,
>>> "If I refuse to look at the evidence, then there is no evidence."
>>> Witless and clueless.
>>> Rating: 0
>> Aw, c'mon. I haven't seen any posts by Bob Imrie in a long time and
>> you're still picking on him. How about Dean Adams?
> He is still on the list, huh? So be it, Adams it coming up and
> HE has been rotated with Manelli.
At least Bob Imrie had the guts to tell us the subject his doctorate was
in, unlike some people whom I will not mention.
> >> Richard Cadwell - Debunker wannabee. Johnny-One-Note.
> >> Would deny existence of UFO even if he bumped into one,
> >> "My eyes were closed, the bump on my head is proof that
> >> UFO's don't exist." Family does not allow "Dickie" around
> >> sharp objects. Confuses logic with stupidity.
> >> Super-sp00k, although still can't tie his shoes!
> >> Rating: 2
>> Wow! A whole 2? That must be because I *didn't* flunk physics.
>> In fact, I got a degree in that particular subject.
> Couldn't prove it on this newsgroup though.
You can't prove *anything* on this newsgroup. We just shoot the bull a lot.
> Heard any good quark or charm jokes lately?
Nope! I try to stick more with truth and beauty. 8-]
>>> Dean Adams-Super sp00k, a legend in his own mind,
>>> "We must cover-up all aspects of the alien presence."
>>> Laughed out of group, at least for now!
>>> Rating: Minus 50
> >Yeah, I miss old Dean-o. He was mostly a flamer, but he could be fun at
> >times.
> Yeah, so was Himmler and Attila the Hun, each in their own ways.
Yeah, and they both had an occasional original thought, too.
>>> John Hutchins-Had latrine duty in Military, even screwed that
>>> up. Used to be a great fisherman until he hooked his, well,
>>> use your imagination. Banned from participating on talk
>>> shows because of an unusual odor, thought to be left over
>>> from the Big-Bang! Only contribution to society is that
>>> he waters his lawn every day, although he lives in Seattle
>>> where it rains 300 days a year. Go figure.
>> I wonder why he doesn't say anything about Susan? He's probably afraid
>> of her. I know *I* would be. 8-]
> I know what you mean, at least I give him and Twit something to
> do; their lives seem so empty, you know.
Yeah, It's not like they have to post the same old BS on a.a.v. every day.
We have *you* to take care of that.
> >> Karl (Klutz) Mamer- A.K.A. Carl Lamer; Lame-Brain; Lambaste.
> >> As worthless as a debunker can get. Even the Air Force laughed
> >> at him (and that's not easy to do!) Only human to successfully
> >> perform a lobotomoy on himself. Volunteered to walk through
> >> "Ground zero" during atomic bomb tests, now glows in the dark.
> >> Lamer gloats "Haven't bought a light-bulb in decades."
> >> Wrote his auto-biograhphy in one hour and according to Lamer,
> >> "it was only one page long!" Maybe he'll write another page in the
> >> next decade, and title it "I was a useless debunker." We might
> >> even buy a copy!
> >
> >Never heard of him, but he sounds like an interesting guy. 8-]
>
> Ypu'd probably like him since he hasn't a clue!
Naw, I already have *you* for that department.
> >As for good old Richard X (marks the spot) Fragger, I noticed that you
> >changed your title from Dr. to VP. Does that mean that you are now the
> >President in charge of vice? 8-]
> >
> >Richard
>
> It's just one of those "Net" things that happen from time to time.
> Take care and stay in touch,
> Pres. R. X. Frager
Wow! Now your the Pres. of whatever it is. How much did it cost you to
get the former Pres. assassinated, so you could take over his job? 8-]
Richard
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:49:07 -1000, h_k...@lava.net (Na Kaula) wrote:
>Oh, my! Did Josh touch a nerve there, Ron?
Nope. I just gave him what he asked for.
>It's not even a full Moon and your fangs are showing.
Must be that former postal worker thing, eh? <g>
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 08:57:25 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:40:11 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 05:22:18 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 04:18:14 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Please demonstrate to me exactly how fraud is made lawful because the medium
>>>>is Usenet rather than "RL".
>>>
>>>Please demonstrate that fraud has taken place.
>>>
>>>>That's tantamount to claiming that death threats over the phone are moot
>>>>since they're not "RL".
>>>
>>>As a writer and satirist, Frager was not concerned with RL. His
>>>"great" work speaks for itself and needs no introduction.
>>
>>I nearly shit my pants laughing! Your pathetic attempt at reframing Fragnatz
>>is *that* funny!
>
>Did I make you laugh? Good. You've taken your first step to
>recovery!
I laughed, I cried, I tossed my lunch.
>>Ok, now how about you tell us about how Bill Clinton is a kind, honest,
>>ethical, caring leader, and a devout Feminist?
>
>Sorry, Ron. But the topic is "Frager & Censorship", or has your
>memory left you? That's ok, I'm here to remind you and provide a
>tender helping hand.
Sorry, Yosh. But the topic is "Meet your #1 usenet spOOk: ?", or has your
memory left you? That's ok, I'm here to remind you and provide a
tender helping hand.
>>>As a writer for AP (Amalgamated Press) Dr. Frager astounded his Usenet
>>>audiences time and time again, with hard-hitting, cutting-edge feature
>>>stories written with a 21st century flair for nostalgia. Dr. Frager
>>>was a.a.v's ACE REPORTER.
>>
>>With you lawyerin' for him, I'm sure he'll do at *least* as well as Slick
>>does with Drudge!
>
>"Lawyerin'" for him? You guyz have runnin' water out in your parts,
>Ron? Sorry Ron, but where I live, we stopped lynchings about 100
>years ago. I know that's hard for you to understand, but it's
>actually a good thing.
Here you begin to *really* unravel. WTF does lawyering have to do with
lynching, brainstem?
[rest of your incoherent shit trimmed]
mONKEY nUTS
Blue Resonant Human <dens...@cts.com.org.net> signed his article
<88540304...@wagasa.cts.com>...
> -Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
Been listening to much domestic shortwave radio programmes perchance?
Or mabey reading much of the Spotlight also?
Have a nifty day!
Lou Minatti
It's not wise to mock Brother Blue. He ranks high in some very powerful
organizations. Organizations that you have never heard of, if you know
what I mean and I think you do.
--
Fight back against the interstellar bastards.
Join us. Join Texans United Against Grey Aliens:
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/DEADGREY.HTM
NBC sucks. Bring back Norm.
http://www.cyberramp.net/~noel/norm.html
Harry Bosch
jolaf wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:49:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
> see sig to reply) wrote:
>
> >
> >>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:27:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
> >>see sig to reply) wrote:
> >>
> >>>[rest of your incoherent shit trimmed]
> >>
> >
> >No, twinkums, I won't.
> >
> >Why?
> >
> >Because I don't get into the prove-A-neg game.
>
> I'm not trying to prove anything.
>
> I've simply asked you to provide some very simple evidence for your
> beliefs, namely, your evidence for your claim that Frager broke the
> ToS of his ISP.
>
> Why are you unable to provide this evidence? I
>
> Is this because Frager is innocent and he is not the "crack dealer"
> and "terrorist" you have painted him as on these ng's?
>
> >Tell ya what, though. YOU come up with *any* TOS from *any* ISP that
> >specifically *allows* illegal activity, and I'll shut up.
>
> (Unlike you, I don't wish that you "shut up". In fact, I encourage
> you to continue posting your opinions.)
>
> >Deal, brainstem?
>
> No deal, Corky.
>
> But, when you have a free minute away from your busy censorship
> duties, feel free to post the ToS that Frager has allegedly broken. .
> :-)
>
> According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
> by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
> written down for all to see.
>
> So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
> terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
> ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
> all to see.
>
> Once again, I ssk you, was Frager tossed out for his opinions? Or,
> was Frager disco'ed due to his alleged violations of his ToS?
>
> Here's your chance to answer that question, Ron. Let's see the
> evidence for your claim that Frager was tossed of the net for
> violating the terms of his ToS.
>
> Or, Ron, are you just defending censoring posters off the net if their
> opinions don't exactly match your own, or what you term
> "sef-preservation" and "common-sense"?
>
> I have read enough of your garbage and seen enough evidence at this
> time to conclude the latter.
>
> But that's only my opinion, and unlike you, I'm interested in the
> truth, not just opinions.
Hi jolaf
OK, you want something that shows why Frager was kicked
off of his ISP. It has nothing to do with TO's. It has
to do with state law. Oregon Revised Statute Chapter
677 spells out this law. Frager is a resident of
Portland, Oregon hence he is required to abide by
state law. Go have a look, I bet you can find it.
He was breaking the law by claiming to be a doctor,
it's that simple. His ISP had to kick him off because
he would not identify himself as a doctor and he would
not desist in using DR. Illegally. They would be
breaking the same law by ignoring him breaking the law
using them as an ISP..
You say you are interested in the truth, do a bit of work. . .
Regards,
Harry
--
========================================
"A five pound space ship made of sticks,
and foil,and floral tape? Oh, my!"
The Roswell debris.
har...@chatlink.com
========================================
jolaf
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:53:26 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>Oh, and you might want to stay away from the keyboard until you're capable of
>a modicum of common sense, too.
More censorship from Ron. Does it ever end??
Ron, have you ever heard of free speech? That means I _don't_ have to
stay away from keyboard just because _my_ sense does not meet your
expectations of what you think _your_ sense is, and what it should
dictate to others.
As for common, well, there's alot of censors out there...
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 04:00:55 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:49:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:40:43 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:27:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>>
>>>>[rest of your incoherent shit trimmed]
>>>
>>>Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly broke.
>>
>>No, twinkums, I won't.
>>
>>Why?
>>
>>Because I don't get into the prove-A-neg game.
>
>I'm not trying to prove anything.
I said *I* wasn't going to play it, you fucking moron! Sheesh!
>I've simply asked you to provide some very simple evidence for your
>beliefs, namely, your evidence for your claim that Frager broke the
>ToS of his ISP.
>
>Why are you unable to provide this evidence? I
Oh, did I say I was unable? Hmmm, I coulda swore I didn't. Please don't
mistake my joy at watching you fry your remaining synapses over my being
unWILLING for inability, brainstem!
>Is this because Frager is innocent and he is not the "crack dealer"
>and "terrorist" you have painted him as on these ng's?
More BS from Brainstem. Hmm, "BS" -- [B]rain[s]tem. It's starting to make
sense. Regardless, kindly show me where I claimed the dumfuk was a crack
dealer or terrorist, you lying sack of shit!
>>Tell ya what, though. YOU come up with *any* TOS from *any* ISP that
>>specifically *allows* illegal activity, and I'll shut up.
>
>(Unlike you, I don't wish that you "shut up". In fact, I encourage
>you to continue posting your opinions.)
Good. Here's my opinion: you're a raving lunatic vying for the coveted
"PosterBoy for Chemical Imbalance Fund" award.
>>Deal, brainstem?
>
>No deal, Corky.
>
>But, when you have a free minute away from your busy censorship
>duties, feel free to post the ToS that Frager has allegedly broken. .
>:-)
Say there, fuckwad, I again challenge you to demonstrate how I have
"censored" ANYONE. Or, of course, you have my permission to FOAD, Brainstem.
>According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
>by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
>written down for all to see.
>
>So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
>terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
>ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
>all to see.
Oh, now you're demanding that TWO people obey you? Well I expect you will
soon learn to anticipate the inevitable "FOAD". So, with no further ado,
FOAD!
>Once again, I ssk you, was Frager tossed out for his opinions? Or,
>was Frager disco'ed due to his alleged violations of his ToS?
I don't intrude on Fragnatz's dance hall endeavors.
>Here's your chance to answer that question, Ron. Let's see the
>evidence for your claim that Frager was tossed of the net for
>violating the terms of his ToS.
Did I claim that? Gee, please show me where.
>Or, Ron, are you just defending censoring posters off the net if their
>opinions don't exactly match your own, or what you term
>"sef-preservation" and "common-sense"?
I tell you what, BS: how about YOU indulge the rest of the inet in a little
"freedom experiment". Find out some type of activity that is illegal in YOUR
jurisdiction. Then, do it over the connection provided by your ISP. Then,
inform your ISP. If they threaten to dc you, inform them that they'll be
CENSORING you. Then, report back here with the results!
>I have read enough of your garbage and seen enough evidence at this
>time to conclude the latter.
If you've read enough of my "garbage", does that mean you'll stop reading it,
and autobitching at me, Brainstem?
>But that's only my opinion, and unlike you, I'm interested in the
>truth, not just opinions.
Oh, very funny!
I must say, I am not generally one to take the broomstick to the hornet's
nest, but the fact that your stinger is half as sharp as your wit lowers the
temptation threshold considerably!
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 07:16:48 GMT, ske...@gte.net (Gonzo Skeptic)
wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:38:07 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:15:52 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
>>Resonant Human) wrote:
>>
>>>jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Can one, with foreknowledge of such an action, post to alt.*
>>>>hierarchies with a nym that does not entirely best represent the
>>>>actual person or academic certificates held, by the person posting
>>>>under the nym in the first place?
>>>
>>>NO!
>>>
>>>-Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., 33°, XI°, 10=1, OT-VIII, USN (ret.)
>>> Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
>>> Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
>>
>>Ah, but it's ok if YOU do it!
>>
>>I psee, or rather, you don't.
>
>You f**king idiot
[snip]
Thanks for clarifying your position.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 12:44:12 GMT, dens...@cts.com.org.net (Blue
Resonant Human) wrote:
HOPE? You dare to speak of HOPE?
What would you know of it?
jolaf
Amazing. You haven't yet said anything of substance.
Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly violated.
jolaf
>>>According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
>>>by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
>>>written down for all to see.
>>>
>>>So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
>>>terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
>>>ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
>>>all to see.
>>
>>Oh, now you're demanding that TWO people obey you? Well I expect you will
>>soon learn to anticipate the inevitable "FOAD". So, with no further ado,
>>FOAD!
Put up or shut-up, Ron.
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 06:11:28 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
[]
>Amazing. You haven't yet said anything of substance.
Amazing. You can't read *or* think!
>Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly violated.
Quote the post where I say that I answer to you, Brainstem.
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
Or what, Brainstem?
You're too fucking obtuse to get anything, so as far as I'm concerned, it's a
bullfight. Welcome to piccadorville, Brainstem.
Kim Young
I BELEVE I SAW ONE
Richard Caldwell
In Article Re: Are UFO-Debunkers "Little Nobodies--Losers Seeking Celebrity
Status?"//You Betcha! , jolaf <jo...@best.DESPAM.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jan 98 12:31:06 PST, Richard Caldwell
> <richard....@OSF25.oklaosf.state.ok.us> wrote:
>
> >> Pres. R. X. Frager
> >
> >Wow! Now your the Pres. of whatever it is. How much did it cost you to
> >get the former Pres. assassinated, so you could take over his job? 8-]
> >
> >Richard
>
> What makes you think he's President of the USA?
Where did I say "USA"? There are all sorts of presidents of all sorts of
organizations. Fragger signed his previous post with "VP" and this one
with "Pres.", so it appears that he's given himself a promotion, just like
he gave himself a doctorate when he first posted to a.a.v.
> Frager is not only President of the A.F.F.F, but he's also the
> President of the TRR, as well as Holy Keeper of the Ten Nice Things.
All *very* important positions, I'm sure. At least, they help to keep him
off the streets. 8-]
> In fact, President Frager is actually quite busy, and doesn't have
> much time for low-level spOOks and UFO Debunkers.
That's good. He can concentrate on high-altitude sp00ks and Debunkers,
whatever that is.
> Pres. Olaf
I see you have given yourself a promotion also, from dishwasher to Pres. I
guess *everyone* wants to be Pres., now that they've discovered what an
active sex life they seem to have. 8-]
Richard
twi...@worldnet.att.net
jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:30:48 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 02:12:11 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>>>Is it ok AND legal to use a nym while posting to alt* hierarchies?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>Only so long as in doing you do not violate any laws of city, county,
>>>>state, or federal jurisdictions.
>>>
>>>I will save this juicy tidbit for another post, momentarily.
>>
>>How do the laws of city, county, state, or federal jurisdictions apply
>>to choosing a screen-name and posting to Usenet alt* hierarchies?
>
>Answer:
>
>The laws don't apply to Usenet, since the Cabal members at Aracnet
>censored Dr. Frager, not the state of Oregon, as much as they would
>like to take credit for such an odious act of pure and total
>censorship.
>
The laws do apply.
What got Frager into trouble, wasn't anything he posted on
any of the UFO ngs but what he posted on the medical support
newsgroups.
He told people, using the name of Dr. Frager and claiming to
be a doctor, to not take their prescribed medications. That
is pretending to be a doctor. His one ISP requested him to
provide a doctor's license since he was doing medical
counseling claiming to be a doctor.
Frager agreed to come in and present them with his medical
license but never showed up. He also applied for his ISP
account using a false name.
I imagine that the ISP was worried about their liability
under those circumstances since it was brought to their
attention that Frager was doing this in the State of Oregon
and thus was subject to the laws of Oregon which he was,
apparently, breaking.
>Frager was censored. By the Cabal, no less.
>
>CENSORED
>
>
>
>
>.
>.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
jolaf
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:42:35 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 07:10:15 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 05:19:19 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
>>>>>According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
>>>>>by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
>>>>>written down for all to see.
>>>>>
>>>>>So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
>>>>>terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
>>>>>ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
>>>>>all to see.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, now you're demanding that TWO people obey you? Well I expect you will
>>>>soon learn to anticipate the inevitable "FOAD". So, with no further ado,
>>>>FOAD!
>>
>>Put up or shut-up, Ron.
>
>Or what, Brainstem?
Put up or shut-up does not have "or what" after it. It's quite clear.
>You're too fucking obtuse to get anything, so as far as I'm concerned, it's a
>bullfight. Welcome to piccadorville, Brainstem.
Eh, what's up doc?
jolaf
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:41:27 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
see sig to reply) wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 06:11:28 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>
>[]
>
>>Amazing. You haven't yet said anything of substance.
>
>Amazing. You can't read *or* think!
Amazing. You continue to waste bandwidth with your drivel.
>>Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly violated.
>
>Quote the post where I say that I answer to you, Brainstem.
Why are you responding to these threads if you can't back up your
claims? That has nothing to do with "answering" to me. It has to do
with providing evidence for your beliefs.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 22:12:20 -0800, Harry Bosch <har...@chatlink.com>
wrote:
>jolaf wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:49:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>> see sig to reply) wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:40:43 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:27:54 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>> >>see sig to reply) wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>[rest of your incoherent shit trimmed]
>> >>
>> >>Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly broke.
>> >
>> >No, twinkums, I won't.
>> >
>> >Why?
>> >
>> >Because I don't get into the prove-A-neg game.
>>
>> I'm not trying to prove anything.
>>
>> I've simply asked you to provide some very simple evidence for your
>> beliefs, namely, your evidence for your claim that Frager broke the
>> ToS of his ISP.
>>
>> Why are you unable to provide this evidence? I
>>
>> Is this because Frager is innocent and he is not the "crack dealer"
>> and "terrorist" you have painted him as on these ng's?
>>
>> >Tell ya what, though. YOU come up with *any* TOS from *any* ISP that
>> >specifically *allows* illegal activity, and I'll shut up.
>>
>> (Unlike you, I don't wish that you "shut up". In fact, I encourage
>> you to continue posting your opinions.)
>>
>> >Deal, brainstem?
>>
>> No deal, Corky.
>>
>> But, when you have a free minute away from your busy censorship
>> duties, feel free to post the ToS that Frager has allegedly broken. .
>> :-)
>>
>> According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
>> by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
>> written down for all to see.
>>
>> So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
>> terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
>> ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
>> all to see.
>>
>> Once again, I ssk you, was Frager tossed out for his opinions? Or,
>> was Frager disco'ed due to his alleged violations of his ToS?
>>
>> Here's your chance to answer that question, Ron. Let's see the
>> evidence for your claim that Frager was tossed of the net for
>> violating the terms of his ToS.
>>
>> Or, Ron, are you just defending censoring posters off the net if their
>> opinions don't exactly match your own, or what you term
>> "sef-preservation" and "common-sense"?
>>
>> I have read enough of your garbage and seen enough evidence at this
>> time to conclude the latter.
>>
>> But that's only my opinion, and unlike you, I'm interested in the
>> truth, not just opinions.
>
>
>Hi jolaf
>
>OK, you want something that shows why Frager was kicked
>off of his ISP. It has nothing to do with TO's.
I believe you are telling the truth, Harry.
> It has
>to do with state law. Oregon Revised Statute Chapter
>677 spells out this law. Frager is a resident of
>Portland, Oregon hence he is required to abide by
>state law. Go have a look, I bet you can find it.
>He was breaking the law by claiming to be a doctor,
>it's that simple.
I never once read a post by Frager where he claimed to be a licensed
M.D. from the state of Oregon. If anything, Frager was not a doctor,
but a patient, which is quite obvious after reading his posts in
a.a.d-d.
>His ISP had to kick him off because
>he would not identify himself as a doctor and he would
>not desist in using DR. illegaly.
Is that true, Frager?
>They would be
>breaking the same law by ignoring him breaking the law
>using them as an ISP..
I agree.
>You say you are interested in the truth, do a bit of work. . .
I would rather here Frager's side of the story, first.
Lou Minatti
Kim Young wrote:
>
> I BELEVE I SAW ONE
You saw a Frager? What are you talking about, Web-TV user?
--
Fight back against the interstellar bastards.
Join us. Join Texans United Against Grey Aliens:
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/DEADGREY.HTM
"I hate you! I hate you and your ASS FACE!"
Lou Minatti
(alt.support.attn-deficit added)
twi...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
<snip>
> What got Frager into trouble, wasn't anything he posted on
> any of the UFO ngs but what he posted on the medical support
> newsgroups.
Yup. I don't give a rip that Frager posed as a "Dr." on the UFO groups.
But posing as a Dr. on ASAD, talking about the proper medications for
people to take or not to take, that I DO have a problem with.
Incidentally, accusations have been flying. I'd like to point out that
it wasn't me who "squealed" on Frager. And more to the point, the only
thing that happened was he was booted off an ISP. We all know how easily
he can get a new account.
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 04:33:05 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:53:26 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>Oh, and you might want to stay away from the keyboard until you're capable of
>>a modicum of common sense, too.
>
>More censorship from Ron. Does it ever end??
You're starting to sound like Ricardo Gonzales the idiot, idiot. First you
tell me you want me to express my opinion, then you call me a censor when I
do!
How have I censored you, you fucking moron? Seems to me that you're STILL
here, foaming at the mouth as usual. If I'd "censored" you, there'd be
blessed silence, wouldn't there? Oh, I'm sorry -- you'd need a whole brain
to understand such a complicated concept, Brainstem.
>Ron, have you ever heard of free speech? That means I _don't_ have to
>stay away from keyboard just because _my_ sense does not meet your
>expectations of what you think _your_ sense is, and what it should
>dictate to others.
Hey, idiot: YOU are the one who told ME to continue to express my opinion,
and now you attack me for expressing it! Looks like YOU are trying to
"censor" ME!
>As for common, well, there's alot of censors out there...
Oh, go fuck yourself!
Shaun Case
mONKEY nUTS wrote:
>
> Blue Resonant Human <dens...@cts.com.org.net> signed his article
> <88540304...@wagasa.cts.com>...
>
> > Ipsissimus and Grand Master of the Sublime Lodge of the Blue Brethren
> > Grand Knight of the Rosae Croix and Sacerdotal CIA Templar Knight
>
|
HMMMMMMMMMM......... are you a transplant, per chance. I thought in
juno they spelled it "programms". NSMF detected
Shaun Case
Lou Minatti wrote:
>
> VP. Richard X. Frager wrote:
> > Meet your Usenet sp00ks and KooKs [Updated 1998 and beyond]
>
>
> Dr. Richard X. Frager, 20-year paid shill working for the CIA. Phony
> doctorate; Uses his false academic credentials as part of his
> disinformation campaign. Worthless.
>
> --
> Fight back against the interstellar bastards.
> Join us. Join Texans United Against Grey Aliens:
> http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/DEADGREY.HTM
> http://www.cyberramp.net/~noel/norm.html
Yep, this confirms it. All Texans are IDIOTS.
Shaun Case
Rhd. Love Lies Squealing wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:07:53 GMT, sp...@no.thanks (Just Another Skeptic)
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >>> >
> >>> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> >>> > (and the # is increasing!)
> >>> > Don
> >>> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
> >>
> >>You are absolutely wrong about this!
> >
> >That's true. It's MUCH closer to 100%. In fact, if you toss in all
> >the scam artists who are siphoning the UFO geeks' wallets, it's
> >probably OVER 100% (i.e., more UFOlogy is in progress than actually
> >exists, and IT'S all bunk, too.)
>
> Jesus, you mean to say that UFOlogy has gone over-unity?* Where do I plug
> in a hairdryer?
>
> *Cold fusion joke.
>
> L O V E L I E S S Q U E A L I N G
>
> Oh children don't you weep and moan,
> Children save your breath, You'll
> draw a pretty pension, when your daddy
> meets his death. - Trad. Ballad.
Plug it into your Radio Shack special Warp drive, silly.
Raymond Tompkins
Soooo, we're back to being a Dr. are we. Do you have the proof this
time Dr.?
Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
> Cyber...@hotmail.com (Don Bother) wrote:
> >In article <1d30bd9.ms8...@pm2-85.richmond.infi.net>,
> >jbr...@richmond.infi.net (Jerry Bryson) wrote:
> >
> >> Don Bother <Cyber...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Which is exactly what goes on here at this group. 95% Debunkers & Spooks,
> >> > (and the # is increasing!)
> >> > Don
> >> That's because 95% of UFOlogy *is* bunk.
> >
> >Care to elaborate on that 5% that isn't bunk?
> >Don
>
> Certainly, first off the figure about is a typo.
>
> What he meant to say was that 99.95 of ET/UFO information
> is well-researched and firmly established in good, documentable science.
Proof? Please name the scientist responsible for the 99.95% of
"well_researched" and "firmly established" ....
>
>
> This, of course, has to do with the excellent research done on:
> 1) Animal Mutilations-done to hundreds of thousands of animals, worldwide
none of the "research" has concluded, beyond a reasonable doubt, that
the multilations were done by "aliens".
>
>
> 2) UFO Sightings by millions of people, worldwide
well we have some truth in this thread
>
>
> 3) Crop-circles and pictophrams stamped in fields in every continent on
> the globe, over the past many centuries.
meaning what? The guys who did the crop circles have come forward.
None of them are from outer space. What's your point!
>
>
> 4) Human abductions by Extraterrestrials easily in the millions,
> again documented in every continent on the Globe.
proof? Name one incident that can be proved to be the result of
"aliens". And don't quote 'Dr Mack the quack'. Incidently, he is
a Dr. and can use the title.
>
>
> 5) Government and Military Coverup which includes Debunking, FOIA, CIA,
> MJ-12, Grudge, Blue Book, Condon and others
This statement rambles. How does FOIA fit into the above? MJ-12 is
a hoax. See, it's good to be the King.
>
>
> 6) Crash Landings- Way too many to list
Goddamned pilots just can't fly straight can they. Crash, crash, crash.
What are we talking about here. Crashed UFOs? Oh no Mr. Bill.
A really real crashed UFO? Proof?
>
>
> 7) Corporate Involvement and Back-Engineering of Alien Craft-
> Bob Lazar and Col. Corso are just two of the many people who
> have exposed this.
Oh yes, Mr. Bob Lazar. Now there is a perfect example of someone
who cannot remember anything about his days in college but has an
excellent memory about "working" on alien devices.
Col Corso is still out to lunch.
Jeeze "Dr.", why don't you throw in a few other semi-official people.
>
>
> 8) Secret Military Bases related to ETs and ET Hardware-Area 51,
> P.Rico, Pine Gap, Australia, and many, many others.
Many, many, many, many, many, many, ..., what?????????
>
>
> 9) Landing sights- scorched earth, radioactivity, sightings, photos
> and videos.
Proof that any of these have been made by an extraterrestrial vehicle?
>
>
> 10) Artifacts
Got some truth there. The Indians left them all over the place. Poor
Indians. Now you're trying to tell us that they came from where?
>
>
> 11) Underground Bases
Moles, gophers, rug rats. Just can't stop them from tunnelling can we.
>
>
> 12) Alien Implants
The famous implants. Where are these famous implants other than in
the little minds of the people who write fiction.
>
>
> 13) MILABS
>
> are just a few of the subjects that has been researched over the
> many decades. Although it is doubtful you will find the
> sp00k connection on this group (Manetti/Borsch/Cadwell/Thorne/
> Hutchins) willing to discuss these topics in any serious fashion.
Serious fashion requires serious documentation and not fabrication,
theories, supposition, guesses. Man, there is no compelling proof
that the UFOs are from anywhere other than Earth.
>
>
> The UFO sp00k/Debunkers mission here is to make sure that these
> subjects are NEVER discussed in any serious fashion.
Well sport how can we take you serious when you use a moniker that
does not belong to you.
>
>
> One wonders why sp00ks/debunkers are here in the first place, since they
> pretend they don't believe in the stuff. The answer is simple
> really, they are holding a UFO-Debunker Waterloo in which
> although they know they are on the losing side, they are trying
> to save face in case their Superiors find them expendable.
> Or expandable.
Nah, that's not the way it is sport. We have teacher's to lead our young
children in the proper direction. We're just here to try and keep you from
straying too far off the face of reality. We keep trying to tell you not to
touch the wet paint sign, but you do. And then when your finger is painted
you deny it. "Did not happen on my watch, therefore it did not happen".
>
>
> Dr. R. X. F.
See ya sport.
jolaf
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:24:26 GMT, kha...@nospamhotmail.com wrote:
>>Please list to me the list of people who have come forward as a result
>>of the injuries Frager has inflicted upon them.
>
>So are YOU saying that it should not be stopped until he DOES hurt
>someone?
Misleading question. You are not very honest.
>If this guy is pretending to be a doctor and handing out
>medical advice,
I have yet to see that evidence.
>then yes, he SHOULD be stopped - BEFORE he hurts
>someone. Are you so friggin' dense that you can't see that???
I have yet to see the evidence that Frager is pretending to be a
medical doctor and handing out medical advice.
If what you say is true, however, I would expect Frager to have a
bogus medical address, a bogus medical phone number, and a bogus
medical practice.
Since there is absolutely ZERO evidence for Frager running a bogus
medical practice, and ZERO evidence for Frager harming ANYONE on the
net, I can only conclude that you are basing your beliefs on false
premises.
YOU should be stopped before YOU hurt someone!
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 20:28:39 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:41:27 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 06:11:28 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>[]
>>
>>>Amazing. You haven't yet said anything of substance.
>>
>>Amazing. You can't read *or* think!
>
>Amazing. You continue to waste bandwidth with your drivel.
>
>>>Quote the ToS that Frager allegedly violated.
>>
>>Quote the post where I say that I answer to you, Brainstem.
>
>Why are you responding to these threads if you can't back up your
>claims? That has nothing to do with "answering" to me. It has to do
>with providing evidence for your beliefs.
I didn't realize I was trying to answer you. All this time I thought I was
just provoking you.
Silly me.
Ron Schwarz -- see sig to reply
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 20:27:16 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:42:35 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>see sig to reply) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 07:10:15 GMT, jo...@best.DESPAM.com (jolaf) wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 05:19:19 GMT, dev...@clubvb.com (Ron Schwarz --
>>>see sig to reply) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>According to Scott Munro, these "laws" that are were broken in the ToS
>>>>>>by Frager, are CLEARLY spelled out in America, and in fact, are
>>>>>>written down for all to see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, you two should put your heads together and see if you can post the
>>>>>>terms of the ToS that Frager broke, which according to you, led to his
>>>>>>ISP disco'ing him, and which according to Munro, should be public for
>>>>>>all to see.
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, now you're demanding that TWO people obey you? Well I expect you will
>>>>>soon learn to anticipate the inevitable "FOAD". So, with no further ado,
>>>>>FOAD!
>>>
>>>Put up or shut-up, Ron.
>>
>>Or what, Brainstem?
>
>Put up or shut-up does not have "or what" after it. It's quite clear.
Oh, then in that case, fuck off.
See, on my planet, a "put up or shut up" directive carries an implicit "or
else" clause.