CNN announces George Bush as next president
Beep
<edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
Whom did you predict, btw?
Pam
email address: beep at west dot net
Rheumatic Disease info: http://www.silcom.com/~sblc
Яллю
Edmond Wollmann
Moon opposition Mars applying.
And a sword shall pierce your heart.
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
http://home.earthlink.net/~arcturianone/
SDSU http://www.astroconsulting.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Tom Kerr
>On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>>
>>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
Nagilah
"Bush will lose" - Ed Wollmann
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!
Nagilah
"Wrong Way" Wollmann wrote:
>
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> And a sword shall pierce your heart.
More violent threats, Eddddie?
"Bush will lose" -Ed Wollmann, proving once again how he's always wrong.
Tom Kerr
>
>
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!
Well, as I type this, it seems the election still isn't over - Florida
hasn't quite made up its mind yet.
In any case, Wollmann has made it pretty clear that his "astrological
talent" is nothing more than him watching the news and then contradicting
himself as long as he thinks it'll make him look as though his astrology
is predictive.
Unknown
> On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> >Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >
> >And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> Whom did you predict, btw?
Edie's pissed cause he wasn't elected.
Just wait until all the votes are counted in Florida. It will be a
decisive Excalibur-like blow! Dan Rather will be crying in his
beer.
Spamster
Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
Any chance you're going to make a coherent post this year?
Cujo
"Edmond Wollmann" <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8uav32$69$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> Moon opposition Mars applying.
Another Excalibur-like postdiction from the Uberkook!
Richard Nolle
> Well?
>
> Jeb's chart?
BUSH,JOHN ELLIS (JEB)
FEB 11, 1953
08:50:00 PM CST +06:00
Midland, TX
102W04'00" 31N59'00"
Data Source: personal email to me claiming his own birth certificate data
as reference.
> What is going on about the voters discrepancy?
>
> Is voter fraud being about yet?
This cuts both ways. Bob Butterworth, FL Attorney General, is a Democrat
and Gore's campaign chairman for FL. Butterworth phoned Gore headquarters
last night and asked them to rescind the concession because the FL race
was so close as to require a recount.
Let's be fair: handcuff Butterworth to Jeb and have Jimmy Carter and
Gerald Ford watch 'em both like hawks until the recount is done.
-- Richard
http://www.astropro.com/
NetPager = http://wwp.mirabilis.com/1710868
NetPhone = Microsoft NetMeeting
phone/fax = 480-753-6261
"Astrology is about time . . . what else is there?"
Robert MacGregor
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> And a sword shall pierce your heart.
CNN has announced no such thing.
You're a fucking moron, Edmond. Shut the fuck up before I stick that
sword up yer butt.
Edmond H. Wollmann
t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
wrote:
> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
spa...@west.net wrote:
> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >Whom did you predict, btw?
Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
correct.
> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
concept).
Which I REstate here.
I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
also made. Those who can see, let them see.
"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
see, and those who do see may become blind.
The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would have
no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/
T
Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
>wrote:
>spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>correct.
>
>
>> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>
>Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
>this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>concept).
>Which I REstate here.
>I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
>out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
>also made. Those who can see, let them see.
>
>"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
>see, and those who do see may become blind.
>The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
>blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would have
>no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
>
>
>Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
>© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
>Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.con/
>
Fraudulent, control freak, out of integrity -that sums you up in a nut sac.
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> wrote:
> > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> spa...@west.net wrote:
> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> correct.
>
Wow, that's amazing. How did you do it with a measly 50% chance of being
correct. What a fool!
T
Spamster wrote in message <3A09AA63...@ftc.g0v>...
>
>
>"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>
>> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
>> wrote:
>> spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>>
>> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>>
>> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>>
>> correct.
>>
>
>Wow, that's amazing. How did you do it with a measly 50% chance of being
>correct. What a fool!
>
Spamster
T wrote:
> Spamster wrote in message <3A09AA63...@ftc.g0v>...
> >
> >
> >"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> >
> >> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> >> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> >> wrote:
> >> > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> >> spa...@west.net wrote:
> >> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> >> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> >> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >>
> >> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >>
> >> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >>
> >> Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> >> correct.
> >>
> >
> >Wow, that's amazing. How did you do it with a measly 50% chance of being
> >correct. What a fool!
> >
> The ole eeny, meeny, miney, edmo. Works 1/2 of the time.
Yep. I wonder if he understands that advanced mathematical concept.
Dee
----------
In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
<woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> wrote:
Edmond Borgnine
plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
abuser by SDSU, and remorseless confessed killer of another human being wrote:
>
> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> wrote:
> > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> spa...@west.net wrote:
> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> correct.
You MORON!
You said, and I quote:
"Bush will lose."
You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the election."
That's how you make your predictions, eh?
Make them intentionally vague, and even when you get specific, you
redefine the terms, should you prove to be wrong?
But hey! It *could* happen that he *does* lose tomorrow.
What's your prediction on the recount, kook?
>
> > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
> > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
> I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> momentum.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
What a pathetic excuse! What delusions of grandeur!
You COULDN'T affect the momentum, dumbshit! You're just a scrawny little
kook in San Diego, guy!
>I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
> this momentum.
Especially since astrology can't predict shit!
>The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> concept).
No, Ed, we don't want to see you dressed in drag.
> Which I REstate here.
> I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
> out of integrity trying to influence the outcome,
You did? Like who?
> by the Orion post I
> also made.
WHAT?
You're an idiot, Wollmann. The only fraud around here is you. Oh, and
Kettler, too.
Those who can see, let them see.
They'd have to wear special kook glasses which would bring their IQs low
enough to do that.
Cujo
"Edmond H. Wollmann" <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> wrote:
> spa...@west.net wrote:
> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> correct.
No, it indicates that you were prepared to waffle on this one as long as you
had an out.
> > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
> > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
> I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
Stop dodging the issue.
> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
> this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> concept).
Evasion noted.
> Which I REstate here.
> I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
> out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
> also made. Those who can see, let them see.
"Orion is a star" influenced the election?
BWAHAHAHA!!!!!
Beep
<ernestw...@dankettler.com> wrote:
>Edmond Heinz Wollmann, dumpster-diving, bankruptcy-filing kook,
>plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
>loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
>misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
>sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
>and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
>abuser by SDSU, and remorseless confessed killer of another human being wrote:
>
>>
>> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
>> wrote:
>> > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>>
>> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>>
>> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>>
>> Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> correct.
>
>You MORON!
>
>You said, and I quote:
>
>"Bush will lose."
>
>You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the election."
There were several astrologers that I noticed on mailing lists talking
about how this election would be strange and unusual with the
possibility of surprises...
Ed wasn't one of them.
Beep
wrote:
>Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
>SNIP!
>> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> momentum.
>
>Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not Ed
>is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
Tsk tsk!
What a mess he made!!!
Pam
Ed, next time make the electoral vote match the popular vote, kay?
email address: beep at west dot net
Rheumatic Disease info: http://www.silcom.com/~sblc
ίλλώ
Robert MacGregor
> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> wrote:
> spa...@west.net wrote:
> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> correct.
Keep jerkin yerself off, Edmond.
You fuckin asshole idiot. You are full of shit. Go fuck yourself with
your book up your asshole!!! BUAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Beep
<woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
Five-alarm paranoia alert!!!!
>wrote:
>> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>correct.
>
>> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
>> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
>Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>momentum.
Sweet of you.
>I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
>this momentum.
You could not predict.
Exactly.
End of story!
>The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>concept).
>Which I REstate here.
>I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
>out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
>also made. Those who can see, let them see.
I see just fine and dandy!
You're an old postdictor from 'way back!
Pam
>
>"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
>see, and those who do see may become blind.
>The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
>blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would have
>no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
Hint: You're not the Christ either.
email address: beep at west dot net
Rheumatic Disease info: http://www.silcom.com/~sblc
Яллю
Dan Kettler
Tom Kerr wrote:
>
> In article <3A09F0...@yahoo.com>, loumi...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
> >SNIP!
> >> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> >> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> >> momentum.
> >
> >Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not Ed
> >is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> Hmmm....
>
> It makes you wonder why he predicted that Bush would lose if he didn't
> want to "affect the momentum".
He didn't want to "affect the momentum", which is lucky, because it
would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to "affect the momentum"!
I like how he predicted, then said he couldn't predict!
Dan Kettler
Tom Kerr wrote:
>
> In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> >wrote:
>
> Any chance of providing some evidence that I have no other interest other
> than defaming you?
>
> >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> >spa...@west.net wrote:
> >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> >> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >
> >> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >
> >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >
> >Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> >correct.
>
> The popular vote isn't the one that decides who'll be president. In any
> case, you've managed to try and predict a 50/50 occurance (by saying Bush
> will lose) and now try to backpedal by explaining how astrology says Bush
> will win.
Yep!
>
> And does Moon opposition Mars have nothing to do with the popular vote?
Er...
>Or
> is there some magical inverse property of this opposition in that it
> reflects the popular vote differently to the presidential vote?
DOOP!
>
> In any case, it's all daft, because if you had any predictive ability at
> all, you'd have known that soon after you posted, the result of the
> election would suddenly have become unlear again.
I think you've hit on something there.
In fact, Ed Wollmann has just as much predictive ability as Dan Kettler
has psychic powers!
>
> It would have been much more convincing if you had actually predicted the
> rather unusual events that occured after your post rather than trying to
> retrofit.
But Ed can't do that! He's a FRAUD!
>
> >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> >
> >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> >
> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> >
> >I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
> Nor did I say anything about who you were for. Where did you get that
> silly idea from?
The shiny thick skull that the rest of his kookfarts emanate from!
>
> >Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> >time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> >momentum.
>
> And yet you made a prediction that Bush would lose. Wouldn't that effect
> the momentum?
DOOP!
>
> >I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> >the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
> >this momentum.
>
> Are you saying you couldn't work out what the charts would look like
> beforehand? The planets move in pretty predictable ways, you know.
So do astrologers, when they move the goalposts!
>
> In any case, all you're saying is that you saw things change in real time
> and it was clearly unpredictable, so you couldn't make a prediction. It's
> as simple as that.
Soitenly!
>
> >The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> >days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> >concept).
>
> So, what will happen?
Crickets...
>
> >Which I REstate here.
> >I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
> >out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
> >also made. Those who can see, let them see.
>
> Which posts are you referring to?
Some incoherent, vague ones that he will later say predicted something
they never did.
Dan Kettler
Tom Kerr wrote:
>
> In article <3A09F0...@yahoo.com>, loumi...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
> >SNIP!
> >> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> >> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> >> momentum.
> >
> >Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not Ed
> >is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> Hmmm....
>
> It makes you wonder why he predicted that Bush would lose if he didn't
> want to "affect the momentum".
He sure hasn't "affected the momentum" of Usenet.
After pledging to change the face of it, it's even more recognizable
than it ever was, what with the Abusive ISP page filling up and his
account loss record climbing ever higher!
SDSU cuts Edmo's access for a record *16* ISP accounts toasted!
Lou Minatti™
SNIP!
> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> momentum.
Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not Ed
is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
--
The Infamous Brad Pitt Equalization Device!
http://www.watchingyou.com/brad.html
Tom Kerr
>SNIP!
>> Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>> time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> momentum.
>
>Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not Ed
>is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
Hmmm....
Tom Kerr
>In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
>wrote:
Any chance of providing some evidence that I have no other interest other
than defaming you?
>> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>correct.
The popular vote isn't the one that decides who'll be president. In any
case, you've managed to try and predict a 50/50 occurance (by saying Bush
will lose) and now try to backpedal by explaining how astrology says Bush
will win.
And does Moon opposition Mars have nothing to do with the popular vote? Or
is there some magical inverse property of this opposition in that it
reflects the popular vote differently to the presidential vote?
In any case, it's all daft, because if you had any predictive ability at
all, you'd have known that soon after you posted, the result of the
election would suddenly have become unlear again.
It would have been much more convincing if you had actually predicted the
rather unusual events that occured after your post rather than trying to
retrofit.
>> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
>> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
Nor did I say anything about who you were for. Where did you get that
silly idea from?
>Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>momentum.
And yet you made a prediction that Bush would lose. Wouldn't that effect
the momentum?
>I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
>this momentum.
Are you saying you couldn't work out what the charts would look like
beforehand? The planets move in pretty predictable ways, you know.
In any case, all you're saying is that you saw things change in real time
and it was clearly unpredictable, so you couldn't make a prediction. It's
as simple as that.
>The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>concept).
So, what will happen?
>Which I REstate here.
>I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
>out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
>also made. Those who can see, let them see.
Which posts are you referring to?
<snip>
digger
> He sure hasn't "affected the momentum" of Usenet.
Don't be silly.
Edmond invented Usenet!
> After pledging to change the face of it, it's even more recognizable
> than it ever was, what with the Abusive ISP page filling up and his
> account loss record climbing ever higher!
>
> SDSU cuts Edmo's access for a record *16* ISP accounts toasted!
Jo Mazzotta
"Edmond Borgnine" <ernestw...@dankettler.com> wrote in message
news:3A09B12E...@dankettler.com...
> Edmond Heinz Wollmann, dumpster-diving, bankruptcy-filing kook,
> plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
> loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
> misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
> sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
> and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
> abuser by SDSU, and remorseless confessed killer of another human being
>
> >
> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
> > wrote:
> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >
> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >
> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >
> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > correct.
>
>
> You said, and I quote:
>
> "Bush will lose."
>
> You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the election."
>
>
> Make them intentionally vague, and even when you get specific, you
> redefine the terms, should you prove to be wrong?
>
> But hey! It *could* happen that he *does* lose tomorrow.
>
> What's your prediction on the recount, kook?
>
> >
> >
> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> >
> > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> >
> > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
> >
> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > momentum.
>
>
> What a pathetic excuse! What delusions of grandeur!
>
>
> You COULDN'T affect the momentum, dumbshit! You're just a scrawny little
> kook in San Diego, guy!
>
> > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
> > this momentum.
>
>
> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> > concept).
>
>
>
> > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
> > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome,
>
>
> > by the Orion post I
> > also made.
>
>
> You're an idiot, Wollmann. The only fraud around here is you. Oh, and
> Kettler, too.
>
>
> enough to do that.
Who's that talking?
)*(&#@@^@$%~!~+)
Edmond H. Wollmann
astrology evokes complaints there--which I will resume after refuting a
few idiots.
In article <uShO5.91227$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
"T" <tl...@att.net> wrote:
> Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> >wrote:
> >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> >spa...@west.net wrote:
> >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> >> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> >correct.
> >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> >I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
> >Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead
of
> >time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> >momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> >the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
predict
> >this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> >days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> >concept).
> >Which I REstate here.
> >I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
are
> >out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
> >also made. Those who can see, let them see.
> >"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
> >see, and those who do see may become blind.
> >The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
> >blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would
have
> >no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
> Fraudulent, control freak, out of integrity -that sums you up in a
nut sac.
Spinic evidence of a pattern of defective behavior noted. Ad hominem
defective fallacy.
This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person" (Argumentum ad
Hominem)
This fallacy always involves two arguers. One of them advances (either
directly or implicitly) a certain argument, and the other then responds
by directing his or her attention not to the first person's argument
but to the first person himself. When this occurs, the second person is
said to commit an argument against the person.
The argument against the person occurs in three forms: the ad
hominem abusive, ad hominem circumstantial, and the tu quoque.
In the ad hominem abusive, the second person responds to the first
person's argument by abusing the first person.
In the circumstantial it begins the same way, but instead of heaping
verbal abuse on his or her opponent, the respondent attempts to
discredit the opponent's argument by alluding to certain circumstances
that affect the opponent. By doing so, the respondent hopes to show
that the opponent is predisposed to argue the way he or she does and
should therefore not be taken seriously.
In the tu quoque it begins the same way-except that the second arguer
attempts to make the first appear to be hypocritical or arguing in bad
faith-i.e. "how dare you argue that I should stop doing x; why, you do
or have done x yourself!" Logic, 4th Edition Hurley, University of San
Diego, Wadsworth Publishing, 1991
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Edmond H. Wollmann
Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
> "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> > wrote:
> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > correct.
> Wow, that's amazing. How did you do it with a measly 50% chance of
being
> correct. What a fool!
Prediction--as I have stated hundreds of times (verifyable in
deja.news) is pointless UNLESS it allows us to do something
constructive with the prediction. Because astrology IS NOT A SCIENCE
predictions--although valid and possible--will never be able to "prove"
the validity of astrology. Because we have free will, and this is
encouraging to me, not discouraging.
All accurate predictions do OTHERWISE is reinforce the ego of the
predictor--which again, is pointless and petty.
Did you have anything beyond defects to present stalker?
Edmond H. Wollmann
"Dee" <lil...@attcanada.ca> wrote:
> In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
> <woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> > wrote:
> >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
Yes, and? I also stated in the Mercury rx thread how significant this
election would be, did you spinics get that?
Edmond H. Wollmann
. wrote:
spam snipped because it is so old its pathetic.
> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> > wrote:
> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > correct.
> You MORON!
This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person" (Argumentum ad
Hominem)
This fallacy always involves two arguers. One of them advances (either
directly or implicitly) a certain argument, and the other then responds
by directing his or her attention not to the first person's argument
but to the first person himself. When this occurs, the second person is
said to commit an argument against the person.
The argument against the person occurs in three forms: the ad
hominem abusive, ad hominem circumstantial, and the tu quoque.
In the ad hominem abusive, the second person responds to the first
person's argument by abusing the first person.
In the circumstantial it begins the same way, but instead of heaping
verbal abuse on his or her opponent, the respondent attempts to
discredit the opponent's argument by alluding to certain circumstances
that affect the opponent. By doing so, the respondent hopes to show
that the opponent is predisposed to argue the way he or she does and
should therefore not be taken seriously.
In the tu quoque it begins the same way-except that the second arguer
attempts to make the first appear to be hypocritical or arguing in bad
faith-i.e. "how dare you argue that I should stop doing x; why, you do
or have done x yourself!" Logic, 4th Edition Hurley, University of San
Diego, Wadsworth Publishing, 1991
> You said, and I quote:
> "Bush will lose."
Yes, and he did.
> You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the
election."
I wasn't asked who would be president, they were discussing polls, not
who would be president, these are two different ideas.
> That's how you make your predictions, eh?
I did not make a prediction, even though you spinics tried to egg me on
to make one about 20 times in the election threads.
Predictions are usless unless they allow us to alter or expand our
consciousness--which the hundreds of ACCURATE predictions (I only make)
have done as evidenced at my website--my service is to alter
perspectives and understanding, not reinforce negative ego (the only
thing your tiny brain understands).
> Make them intentionally vague, and even when you get specific, you
> redefine the terms, should you prove to be wrong?
Nope, I was discussing the aspects of the astrological significators
and how I saw them, and the reason WHY I did not see making a
prediction as being necessary.
> But hey! It *could* happen that he *does* lose tomorrow.
Yes it could, he is down to about 500 votes difference now after the
counting, and I say HE WON!
> What's your prediction on the recount, kook?
I have already hinted at that, but this is a necessary process the
country needs to go through in conjunction with Nader's disruption of
the clear winner's momentum.
> > > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
ahead of
> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > momentum.
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> What a pathetic excuse! What delusions of grandeur!
More ad hominems, you are the most illogical abuser I have ever seen,
how do you live with yourself?
> You COULDN'T affect the momentum, dumbshit! You're just a scrawny
little
> kook in San Diego, guy!
In your irrelevant mind.
> >I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
predict
> > this momentum.
> Especially since astrology can't predict shit!
Actually, it can, it is what we do with that idea that is important,
most astrologers get caught up in the petty ego crap which affects
their objectivity.
> >The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> > concept).
> No, Ed, we don't want to see you dressed in drag.
Ad hominem defective abuse--as usual.
> > Which I REstate here.
> > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
are
> > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome,
> You did? Like who?
You want names?
> > by the Orion post I
> > also made.
> WHAT?
> You're an idiot, Wollmann. The only fraud around here is you. Oh, and
> Kettler, too.
You are an obsessive/compulsive abuser who is obviously addicted to
harassing people and wasting your life away in defective spamming and
irrelevant infantile arguments that aren't arguments.
> Those who can see, let them see.
> They'd have to wear special kook glasses which would bring their IQs
low
> enough to do that.
You must have those coke bottom bottle ones then.
"He who has so little knowledge of human nature as to seek happiness by
changing anything but his own disposition, will waste his life in
fruitless efforts and multiply the griefs which he proposes to remove."
Webster
Edmond H. Wollmann
"Cujo" <cu...@usenet-performance-art.org> wrote:
> "Edmond H. Wollmann" <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> > wrote:
> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > correct.
> No, it indicates that you were prepared to waffle on this one as long
as you
> had an out.
I did not make a formal prediction, nor did I have any interest in
doing so.
> > > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
> Stop dodging the issue.
I never dodge issues, why do you continue to harass and stalk people
here?
> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
ahead of
> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
predict
> > this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> > concept).
> Evasion noted.
Lack of cogent arguments noted.
> > Which I REstate here.
> > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
are
> > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post
I
> > also made. Those who can see, let them see.
> "Orion is a star" influenced the election?
I never said specifically that Orion was a star, nor have I ever
believed Orion is a star, why do you wear out this crap? Lack of
imagination on top of defective arguments?
> BWAHAHAHA!!!!!
The frailty of your ego glares.
"Now none of you are basically afraid of failure. You are not afraid
that your quest for truth will have no reward.
You are afraid of much more mundane things.
You are afraid of playing the fool.
You are afraid of letting go.
You are afraid of not being dignified.
You are afraid of not being pretty.
You are afraid of not being conventional.
You are afraid that someone will laugh.
All of this means that you do not trust the inner self-your own
identity.
That you have little faith in yourself. And until you have faith in
yourself, you can have no real faith in the Universe or in 'All That
Is.'"
Seth, early 1972
Edmond H. Wollmann
> SNIP!
> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
ahead of
> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > momentum.
>
> Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not
Ed
> is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
Every single being on the planet makes a difference, even you spinics
choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
and I do not.
I see you continue to abuse this group, attacking people because of
differences is against the charter.
Did you have anything about astrology to share regarding this issue?
"All you backwoods schemers-power-trip-dreamers better find something
new to say, cause its the same old story and the same old crime and you
got some heavy dues to pay!!!! I'm a space cowboy, bet you weren't
ready for that! I'm a space cowboy, I know you know where its at, yeah,
yeah, yeah, yeah!!!! Steve Miller "Space Cowboy"
> --
> The Infamous Brad Pitt Equalization Device!
> http://www.watchingyou.com/brad.html
>
--
Edmond H. Wollmann
Robert MacGregor <rmacgr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In alt.astrology.metapsych, Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
me
> > wrote:
> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
> >
> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
> >
> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >
> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > correct.
>
>
> You fuckin asshole idiot. You are full of shit. Go fuck yourself
with
> your book up your asshole!!! BUAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Well, there's a well thought out argument.
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> metapsych removed because spinical arguments as to the validity of
> astrology evokes complaints there--which I will resume after refuting a
> few idiots.
>
Spinical is not a word, kook.
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> All accurate predictions do OTHERWISE is reinforce the ego of the
> predictor--which again, is pointless and petty.
I agree. It's pointless for you to reinforce your delusional ego.
>
> Did you have anything beyond defects to present stalker?
>
Yes. Why is it that you can no longer post from SDSU?
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> In article <yfiO5.91233$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> "Dee" <lil...@attcanada.ca> wrote:
>
> > In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
> > <woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
>
> > > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
> me
> > > wrote:
> > >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> > >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
> > >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
> > >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
> Yes, and? I also stated in the Mercury rx thread how significant this
> election would be, did you spinics get that?
>
So? That's like predicting the sun will come out tomorrow.
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> In article <ano...@pacbell.net>,
> . wrote:
>
> spam snipped because it is so old its pathetic.
>
Screed, which *IS* a word, snipped because it's incoherent.
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> In article <3A09F0...@yahoo.com>,
> loumi...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
> > SNIP!
> > > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
> ahead of
> > > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > > momentum.
> >
> > Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not
> Ed
> > is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> Every single being on the planet makes a difference, even you spinics
Why do you continue to use made-up words?
Cujo
Can't answer it, liar?
> > > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> > > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
> me [and does it quite well]
> > > wrote:
> > > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> > > spa...@west.net wrote:
> > > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> > > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
> > > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
> > > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
> > > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
> > > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
> > > correct.
>
> > You MORON!
>
> This fallacy is called "Argument Against the KOOK" (Argumentum ad
> Kookiness)
> This fallacy always involves two arguers. One of them advances (either
> directly or implicitly) a certain argument, and the other then responds
> by directing his or her attention not to the first person's argument
> but to the KOOK himself. When this occurs, the second person is
> said to commit an argument against the KOOK.
SNIP!
> > You said, and I quote:
>
> > "Bush will lose."
>
> Yes, and he did.
Nope. Keep weaseling, asswipe.
> > You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the
> election."
>
> I wasn't asked who would be president, they were discussing polls, not
> who would be president, these are two different ideas.
Liar.
> > That's how you make your predictions, eh?
>
> I did not make a prediction, even though you spinics tried to egg me on
> to make one about 20 times in the election threads.
Only because you always seem to chime in after the fact and use vague claims
you made beforehand to 'prove' your predictions were 'accurate'. The egging
on was for the purpose of nailing you to specifics.
> Predictions are usless unless they allow us to alter or expand our
> consciousness--which the hundreds of ACCURATE predictions (I only make)
> have done as evidenced at my website--my service is to alter
> perspectives and understanding, not reinforce negative ego (the only
> thing your tiny brain understands).
<SNARF!> .sig material alert!
> > Make them intentionally vague, and even when you get specific, you
> > redefine the terms, should you prove to be wrong?
>
> Nope, I was discussing the aspects of the astrological significators
> and how I saw them, and the reason WHY I did not see making a
> prediction as being necessary.
Even though you made one? What kookery!
> > But hey! It *could* happen that he *does* lose tomorrow.
>
> Yes it could, he is down to about 500 votes difference now after the
> counting, and I say HE WON!
Whining evasion noted.
> > What's your prediction on the recount, kook?
>
> I have already hinted at that, but this is a necessary process the
> country needs to go through in conjunction with Nader's disruption of
> the clear winner's momentum.
Now he drags in some other distractions. Great move, even the rubes aren't
impressed!
> > > > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
> > > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
> > > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
> > > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
> > > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
> ahead of
> > > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > > momentum.
>
> > HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
> > What a pathetic excuse! What delusions of grandeur!
>
> More ad hominems, you are the most illogical abuser I have ever seen,
> how do you live with yourself?
What projection, what a PKB!
> > You COULDN'T affect the momentum, dumbshit! You're just a scrawny
> little
> > kook in San Diego, guy!
>
> In your irrelevant mind.
And many others, you dumpster diving freak!
> > >I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
> > > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
> predict
> > > this momentum.
>
> > Especially since astrology can't predict shit!
>
> Actually, it can, it is what we do with that idea that is important,
> most astrologers get caught up in the petty ego crap which affects
> their objectivity.
More .sig material!
> > >The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
> > > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> > > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> > > concept).
>
> > No, Ed, we don't want to see you dressed in drag.
>
> Ad hominem defective abuse--as usual.
So defensive on that point!
> > > Which I REstate here.
> > > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
> are
> > > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome,
>
> > You did? Like who?
>
> You want names?
Yes.
> > > by the Orion post I
> > > also made.
>
> > WHAT?
>
> > You're an idiot, Wollmann. The only fraud around here is you. Oh, and
> > Kettler, too.
>
> You are an obsessive/compulsive abuser who is obviously addicted to
> harassing people and wasting your life away in defective spamming and
> irrelevant infantile arguments that aren't arguments.
You're right, there is no argument. You are a kook.
> > Those who can see, let them see.
>
> > They'd have to wear special kook glasses which would bring their IQs
> low
> > enough to do that.
>
> You must have those coke bottom bottle ones then.
He doesn't wear glasses. DOOP!
T
Cujo wrote in message <8ueg1s$klc$1...@m3t00.databasix.com>...
big, ugly bald head.
Dee
----------
In article <8uee5q$rfu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
<woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <3A09F0...@yahoo.com>,
> loumi...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
>> SNIP!
>> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
> ahead of
>> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> > momentum.
>>
>> Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not
> Ed
>> is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> Every single being on the planet makes a difference, even you spinics
> choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
> and I do not.
No, you don't choose to be negative, do you ? It's something you have no
control over, and it pisses you off immensely.
"...you spinics choice to be..." is what language ?
> I see you continue to abuse this group, attacking people because of
> differences is against the charter.
That particular charter must be in your brain somewhere, but you are not
being attacked because of your differences.
>
> Did you have anything about astrology to share regarding this issue?
Trying to be on-topic again ? Pretty feeble.
>
>snip copyrighted stuff and spam, spam, spam.
a
Edmond H. Wollmann <OrionI...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
>I never said specifically that Orion was a star
Perhaps the complete, original article will refresh your memory:
From: Edmond Wollmann <arctu...@yahooo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.astrology,alt.astrology.metapsych,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: Capricorn moon and abandonment issues
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:03:56 -0800
Organization: Astrological Consulting/Altair Publications SAN 299-5603
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
References: <7cjc1e$12i$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <19990315174538...@ng-ce1.aol.com>
Reply-To: arctu...@yahooo.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 30.los-angeles-11-12rs.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net 921639862 27516 12.72.10.30 (17 Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@worldnet.att.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U)
Wyndnwyre wrote:
> >You might be surprised to see just how fearful
> >negative Orion controllers can be.
> What is an Orion controller? I'm curious what that is astrologically...
Orion is a star. Controler is what negative Orion type persons attempt
to do, like the dogma of the Christian coalition. They are controllers
seeking to control you not serve you.
See?
> >Abandonment fears would be more closely identified with a Saturn in 11, or
> >reflected by Uranus in developmental tension.
> I have Saturn in Pisces, and in my 4th House. I also have Saturn and Uranus in
> opposition in my chart.
I do not make analysis that way, you would be better off posting data.
"I don't want no woman-to tie me down! Gotta be free baby, to roam
around. Well you can love me if you want to-but I do declare! When I get
restless, I've got to move somewhere. 'Cause I'm a Roadrunner baby,
gotta keep movin on! Hey! And I love the life I live, and I'm gonna live
the life I love! A Roadrunner baby!" Fleetwood Mac "Roadrunner"
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
) 1999 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.astroconsulting.com/personal/
http://home.earthlink.net/~arcturian1/
Cujo
"Edmond H. Wollmann" <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8uee5q$rfu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > SNIP!
> > > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
> ahead of
> > > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > > momentum.
> >
> > Folks, if there are any of you wavering over deciding whether or not
> Ed
> > is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
> and I do not.
What a kook! I guess someone will be along to point out how negative it was
to stalk Kronert. 16+ lost accounts is a real positive effort Eddieeeeeee!
> I see you continue to abuse this group, attacking people because of
> differences is against the charter.
Try this in English next time, kook.
> Did you have anything about astrology to share regarding this issue?
Not with an asshole like you.
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person" (Argumentum ad
>Hominem)
No, Wollmann, it isn't. But you are too stupid to see that. It was simply
an observation that you continue to demonstrate yourself to be a moron. But
we already knew that.
Dee
In article <3A0AC247...@ftc.g0v>, Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
>
> "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>
>> > <woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
>>
>> > > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>> me
>> > >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> > > spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>>
>>
>> > >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>>
>> > >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>>
>> election would be, did you spinics get that?
>>
> So? That's like predicting the sun will come out tomorrow.
>
Dee
----------
In article <okrj0tss6ppd051rh...@4ax.com>, Beep
<spa...@west.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 13:01:51 -0700, Edmond Borgnine
> <ernestw...@dankettler.com> wrote:
>
>>Edmond Heinz Wollmann, dumpster-diving, bankruptcy-filing kook,
>>plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
>>loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
>>misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
>>sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
>>and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
>>abuser by SDSU, and remorseless confessed killer of another human being wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>>> t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming me
>>> wrote:
>>> > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>>> spa...@west.net wrote:
>>> > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>>> > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>>> > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>>>
>>> > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>>>
>>> > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>>>
>>> Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>>> correct.
>>
>>You MORON!
>>
>>You said, and I quote:
>>
>>"Bush will lose."
>>
>>You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the election."
>
> There were several astrologers that I noticed on mailing lists talking
> about how this election would be strange and unusual with the
> possibility of surprises...
>
> Ed wasn't one of them.
Why am I not surprised ?
> Pam
>
Hug to you, Pam
Dee
>
> email address: beep at west dot net
> Rheumatic Disease info: http://www.silcom.com/~sblc
> Яллю
Dee
----------
In article <0NxO5.7846$%d.10...@news1.wwck1.ri.home.com>, "Jo Mazzotta"
<jod...@home.com> wrote:
>
> "Edmond Borgnine" <ernestw...@dankettler.com> wrote in message
> news:3A09B12E...@dankettler.com...
>> That's how you make your predictions, eh?
>>
>> Make them intentionally vague, and even when you get specific, you
>> redefine the terms, should you prove to be wrong?
>>
>> But hey! It *could* happen that he *does* lose tomorrow.
>>
>> What's your prediction on the recount, kook?
>>
>> >
>> > > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>> >
>> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>> >
>> > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>> >
>> > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>> >
>> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead of
>> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> > momentum.
>>
>> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>>
>> What a pathetic excuse! What delusions of grandeur!
>>
>>
>> You COULDN'T affect the momentum, dumbshit! You're just a scrawny little
>> kook in San Diego, guy!
>>
>> >I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>> > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not predict
>> > this momentum.
>>
>> Especially since astrology can't predict shit!
>>
>> >The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
>> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>> > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>> > concept).
>>
>> No, Ed, we don't want to see you dressed in drag.
>>
>>
>> > Which I REstate here.
>> > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who are
>> > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome,
>>
>> You did? Like who?
>>
>> > by the Orion post I
>> > also made.
>>
>> WHAT?
>>
>> You're an idiot, Wollmann. The only fraud around here is you. Oh, and
>> Kettler, too.
>>
>> Those who can see, let them see.
>>
>> They'd have to wear special kook glasses which would bring their IQs low
>> enough to do that.
>
> Who's that talking?
> )*(&#@@^@$%~!~+)
>
Sounds familiar, eh ? I think there's a buggy aboard ;-)
>
eve nshali
See what? Oh, yeah. Edie is an Orion controller. It's all crystal
clear now. How's that second sentence? What a laugh!
>> >Abandonment fears would be more closely identified with a Saturn in 11, or
>> >reflected by Uranus in developmental tension.
>
>> I have Saturn in Pisces, and in my 4th House. I also have Saturn and Uranus in
>> opposition in my chart.
>
>I do not make analysis that way, you would be better off posting data.
>
>"I don't want no woman-to tie me down! Gotta be free baby, to roam
>around. Well you can love me if you want to-but I do declare! When I get
>restless, I've got to move somewhere. 'Cause I'm a Roadrunner baby,
>gotta keep movin on! Hey! And I love the life I live, and I'm gonna live
>the life I love! A Roadrunner baby!" Fleetwood Mac "Roadrunner"
I wonder what the significance of these lyrics is. I guess Wyndnwyre
was a babe Edie tried to scam by playing hard to get.
eve nshali
<woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <MPG.1473974b1...@east.usenetserver.com>,
> Robert MacGregor <rmacgr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> In alt.astrology.metapsych, Edmond H. Wollmann wrote:
>> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>me
>> > wrote:
>> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> > spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>> >
>> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>> >
>> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>> >
>> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> > correct.
>>
>> Keep jerkin yerself off, Edmond.
>>
>> You fuckin asshole idiot. You are full of shit. Go fuck yourself
>with
>> your book up your asshole!!! BUAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
>Well, there's a well thought out argument.
>
>
Well, he had to bring himself down to your level.
Spamster
Dee wrote:
> In article <3A0AC247...@ftc.g0v>, Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
> >
> > "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> >
> >> In article <yfiO5.91233$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> >> "Dee" <lil...@attcanada.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
> >> > <woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
> >>
> >> > > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
> >> > > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
> >> me
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
> >> > > spa...@west.net wrote:
> >> > >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
> >> > >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
> >>
> >> > >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
> >>
> >> > >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
> >>
> >> > >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
> >>
> >> Yes, and? I also stated in the Mercury rx thread how significant this
> >> election would be, did you spinics get that?
> >>
> > So? That's like predicting the sun will come out tomorrow.
> >
> Yes, and he answered the same line already with different babble, sheesh.
Well, he is very good at babbling.
Dan Kettler
Edmond Heinz Wollmann, dumpster-diving, bankruptcy-filing kook,
plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
remorseless confessed killer of another human being wrote:
>
>
> > You said, and I quote:
>
> > "Bush will lose."
>
> Yes, and he did.
*What* did he lose, IDIOT?
>
> > You didn't say "Bush will lose the popular vote, but win the
> election."
>
> I wasn't asked who would be president,
You weren't asked ANYTHING!
You just butted in like a stupid dumbfuck and blurted out your ignorance!
> they were discussing polls, not
> who would be president,
Yes, they WERE talking about who would be President, you BRAIN-DEAD BUTTPIMPLE!
> these are two different ideas.
Oh, really? Nobody was talking specifically about the popular vote in
that post, either, so I guess you were lying when you said you were
referring to the popular vote, Mr. Backpedal!
Let's look at the original post, you moron!:
///////////////////////////////
cma...@cts.com wrote:
>
> All:
> Despite what you hear from the mainstream media, Bush is slightly ahead in two very respected polls: by about
> two to three points in both the Voter.com Battleground poll and the Rasmussen Portrait of America poll. That means that
> it is a statistical dead heat and all the Bush-bashing hasn't affected him one bit. BTW, Bush's positive ratings are
> going up and Gore's negatives are going up as well. Looks like Bush may be getting the momentum back!
>
> Keith Lee
Bush will lose.
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/
http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/tableof.htm
<img src="http://www.dejanews.com/ndc2.xp?04.32653.2.0.4196.214">
////////////////////////////////
So now you're saying that you were talking about two *polls*, not the election.
Well, GUESS WHAT, you stupid retarded motherfucker!
Bush WON the Voter.com Battleground poll that was being discussed!
Bush 49%, Gore 44%! Results released 9/15/00!
Wanna know who won the Rasmussen Portrait of America Poll discussed in
the post, results released 9/17/00?
Bush 44%, Gore 41%!
So, you
STUPID
FUCKING
ASSHOLE!
You can't even POSTDICT accurately!
If you say you are talking about polls, you claimed Bush would lose two
polls he'd ALREADY WON!
Now, if Bush REALLY loses the election in the recount, you can't go back
and say you meant "as President"!
And if Bush DOES win the election, then you'll have been wrong THREE WAYS!
Or will you then say you meant he will lose his contact lenses?
Ed, you idiotic high-school dropout, you're going to need to learn to:
A: Communicate more clearly
and
B: Realize that people can spot you lying and stupidly and pathetically
trying t cover up our fuckups a MILE AWAY!
CHRIST, Ed, you're a fucking MORON!
AAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Orion
eve nshali wrote:
>
> On 9 Nov 2000 12:48:00 -0500, a...@shell3.shore.net (a) wrote:
>
> >In article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> >Edmond H. Wollmann <OrionI...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
> >>I never said specifically that Orion was a star
...
> >Message-ID: <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
...
> >Wyndnwyre wrote:
> >
> >> >You might be surprised to see just how fearful
> >> >negative Orion controllers can be.
> >
> >> What is an Orion controller? I'm curious what that is astrologically...
> >
> >Orion is a star. Controler is what nega
DOOP!
That's how dishonest Ed Wollmann really is!
He figures that because he said Orion "is" a star, he can get away with saying:
"I never said specifically that Orion was a star"
^^^
Now you gonna fall back on your dropping out of high school as an excuse
as to why you might not know the difference between past and present tense?
What a bloated asshole you are, Edmo!
Cujo
Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8ueclb$q39$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>metapsych removed because spinical arguments as to the validity of
>astrology evokes complaints there--which I will resume after refuting a
>few idiots.
AAM added back. Fuck you, Ed! You're the only one complaining, and it does
no good.
>In article <uShO5.91227$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> "T" <tl...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>> >In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>me
Translation: This is how Wollkook whines when he loses an argument.
>> >wrote:
>> >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> >spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> >> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> >> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>> >Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> >correct.
>
>> >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
>> >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>> >I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
>> >Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead
>of
>> >time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> >momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>> >the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
>predict
>> >this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
>> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>> >days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>> >concept).
>> >Which I REstate here.
>> >I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
>are
>> >out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
>> >also made. Those who can see, let them see.
>
>> >"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
>> >see, and those who do see may become blind.
>> >The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
>> >blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would
>have
>> >no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
>
>> Fraudulent, control freak, out of integrity -that sums you up in a
>nut sac.
>
>Spinic evidence of a pattern of defective behavior noted. Ad hominem
>defective fallacy.
The only behavior that's defective around here is yours. You abuse NANA*,
you stalk Kronert and you raid dumpsters. That's a pretty impressive track
record.
screed snipped.
Cujo
Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uecu4$q88$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <3A09AA63...@ftc.g0v>,
> Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
>
>> "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>
>> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>me
>> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> > spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> > correct.
>
>being
>> correct. What a fool!
>
>Prediction--as I have stated hundreds of times (verifyable in
>deja.news) is pointless UNLESS it allows us to do something
>constructive with the prediction. Because astrology IS NOT A SCIENCE
>predictions--although valid and possible--will never be able to "prove"
>the validity of astrology. Because we have free will, and this is
>encouraging to me, not discouraging.
So you've created a reality where you make predictions and then try to lie
about them later?
>All accurate predictions do OTHERWISE is reinforce the ego of the
>predictor--which again, is pointless and petty.
That sums you up pretty well.
>Did you have anything beyond defects to present stalker?
Backpedal noted, numbnuts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
Winner of the August, 2000 HL&S award. Hail Petitmorte!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
Did you have a question about how the ALL THAT IS is reflected through
astrology? I was an astrologer 1000 times in Babylon.
- Ed Wollmann, THE #1 delusional kook explains his past.
Cujo
Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <8ucf70$f7k$1...@kneejerk.databasix.com>,
> "Cujo" <cu...@usenet-performance-art.org> wrote:
>
>> news:8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>> > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>me
>> > wrote:
>> > > In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> > spa...@west.net wrote:
>> > > >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> > > ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> > > >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> > > >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> > > >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> > > >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>> > Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> > correct.
>
>as you
>> had an out.
>
>I did not make a formal prediction, nor did I have any interest in
>doing so.
Liar.
>> > > Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
>> > > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> > > I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>> > I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
>> Stop dodging the issue.
>
>I never dodge issues, why do you continue to harass and stalk people
>here?
Who have I stalked, kook? I don't show up uninvited to people's offices like
you do, I guess you're the stalker, asshole.
>> > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
>ahead of
>> > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> > momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>> > the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
>predict
>> > this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
>> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>> > days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>> > concept).
>
>> Evasion noted.
>
>Lack of cogent arguments noted.
I need do nothing but let you babble on, you defeat your own arguments.
>> > Which I REstate here.
>> > I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
>are
>> > out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post
>I
>> > also made. Those who can see, let them see.
>
>> "Orion is a star" influenced the election?
>
>I never said specifically that Orion was a star, nor have I ever
>believed Orion is a star, why do you wear out this crap? Lack of
>imagination on top of defective arguments?
Oh dear, here comes the proof.
>> BWAHAHAHA!!!!!
>
>The frailty of your ego glares.
You aren't qualified to judge that, SDSU admins declared you an abuser with
many problems. You've lost 16+ accounts for being an asshole, that says that
you're the one with the frail ego.
Cujo
Orion wrote in message <3A0ADBB0...@wollmann.com>...
Look at the back cover of that shitty book Edmond screeded. It's obvious
that whatever gets past a spell checker gets printed.
>What a bloated asshole you are, Edmo!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
T
Jo Mazzotta wrote in message ...>news:8uedon$r03$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
Wollmann or the spam?
>
>
>
Spamster
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> In article <8ueo0g$6...@shell3.shore.net>,
> a...@shell3.shore.net (a) wrote:
> > In article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Edmond H. Wollmann <OrionI...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
> > >I never said specifically that Orion was a star
> >
> > Perhaps the complete, original article will refresh your memory:
> >
> > From: Edmond Wollmann <arctu...@yahooo.com>
> > Newsgroups: alt.astrology,alt.astrology.metapsych,alt.paranormal
> > Subject: Re: Capricorn moon and abandonment issues
> > Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:03:56 -0800
> > Organization: Astrological Consulting/Altair Publications SAN 299-5603
> > Lines: 31
> > Message-ID: <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
> > References: <7cjc1e$12i$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> <19990315174538...@ng-ce1.aol.com>
> > Reply-To: arctu...@yahooo.com
> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 30.los-angeles-11-12rs.ca.dial-access.att.net
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > X-Trace: mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net 921639862 27516 12.72.10.30 (17
> Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT)
> > X-Complaints-To: ab...@worldnet.att.net
> > NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT
> > X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U)
> >
> > Wyndnwyre wrote:
> >
> > > >You might be surprised to see just how fearful
> > > >negative Orion controllers can be.
> >
> > > What is an Orion controller? I'm curious what that is
> astrologically...
> >
> > Orion is a star.
>
> Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
Nice try, kook, but we aren't buying it!
Beep
CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
bigger than a gnat!
>End of issue.
The King hath spoken!
Pam
you pompous thing ;)
Beep
>
>
>Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
>> That's about the size of it, since you enjoy being a spinic
>
>Spinic *IS NOT* a word! It's a made up word, used exclusively by screed
>spamming kooks.
>
Well, whatever it is, now I am one!
Hope it's something nice!
Pam
Beep
>In article <8ug1rs$8go$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>Edmond "5150" Wollmann <edmond_...@my-deja.com> whined:
>
>>> >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
>
>>> CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
>>> bigger than a gnat!
>
>>There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
>>fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
>>you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
>>insignificant missteps.
>
>You have done any "real discussion" or arguments, Wollmann. All you've
>done is whine and spin everytime one of your many errors is pointed out.
>This leads me to suspect you have no real arguments to support your silly
>claims so you are reduced to name calling or complaining to hide that
>fact.
>
>>You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
>>lives.
>
>Then why are you here worrying about what we post? I don't think keeping
>you from harvesting rubes here is a waste and getting to laugh in the
>process is a great bonus.
>
>>> The King hath spoken!
>
>>That's about the size of it,
>
>Does that swelled empty head of yours really fit through standard
>size doors?
>
>>since you enjoy being a spinic,
>
>Can you do anything besides name calling?
>
>>instead of a real person.
>
>Pam is quite real. I had dinner with her last month and she's very
>charming.
You sweetheart; thank you :)
Pam
blind but charming
Nathan
Edmond Heinz Wollmann, dumpster-diving, bankruptcy-filing kook,
plagiarist, thief, asshole, spammer, big-time multiple ISP account
loser, physical stalker, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
and State game laws for abusing wildlife, described and punished as an
abuser by SDSU, and remorseless confessed killer of another human being wrote:
>
> In article <8ueo0g$6...@shell3.shore.net>,
> a...@shell3.shore.net (a) wrote:
> > In article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Edmond H. Wollmann <OrionI...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
> > >I never said specifically that Orion was a star
> >
> > Perhaps the complete, original article will refresh your memory:
...
> > Message-ID: <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
...
> >
> > Wyndnwyre wrote:
> >
> > > >You might be surprised to see just how fearful
> > > >negative Orion controllers can be.
> >
> > > What is an Orion controller? I'm curious what that is
> astrologically...
> >
> > Orion is a star.
>
> Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
Yeah, we know what you MEANT, you stupid fucking DORK!
It's those KOOKFARTS you let out like that which define you as a KOOOOOK!
> End of issue.
Not so, asshole.
It gets better.
You said, and I quote:
"I never said specifically that Orion was a star" -Ed Wollmann
So now we have the original kookfart.
Then we have the lying denial, hilarious because we all saw you say it,
yet you try to deny you said it.
Then we have the pathetic "duh, but what I meant to say was..." lameness.
Ed, you're a bumbling fucking retard.
And I mean that sincerely.
Lou Minatti™
>
> In article <3A09F0...@yahoo.com>,> > SNIP!
> > > Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew
> ahead of
> > > time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
> > > momentum.
> >
> Ed
> > is a kook, here's all the evidence you need.
>
> Every single being on the planet makes a difference, even you spinics
> choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
> and I do not.
Correction. You choose to be a KOOK.
--
The Infamous Brad Pitt Equalization Device!
http://www.watchingyou.com/brad.html
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>even you spinics
>choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
>and I do not.
But you *are* negative, moron. You are stupid too. Lying about not
being negative when it is *so* easy to show otherwise is evidence of
how stupid you are.
Here's a small sample of your negativity:
"EAT SHIT YOU UGLY BITCH!!!!!!"
"you will not succeed nor will your little boss."
"Best contact an attorney if you are going to keep defaming. Let's see
you put a killfile on the courts buddy."
"why you can't get a date so you have something to do on Saturday nights
besides chase my posts around"
"Follow ups set where I want them and you'll take them."
"now get out and shut up."
"Smart ass jumping to conclusions ignored."
"I cannot enjoy usenet isn't there SOMEONE who can control this crap!?"
"Go ahead bigots, make my day."
"You are off topic, complaints sent. No one needs you trying to control
usenet."
"SNIP! Of garbage from young punk wet behind the ears."
"And you are full of crap."
"I honor my anger because it is correct."
"I told you my polite days were over."
"Snipped your 196th spam of you fucking URL I will never go to and no one
gives a shit about."
"you are ugly as fuck inside and out."
"Wait till we meet in person ass hole I'll rip you a new one then too."
"I am the richest, most successful person on the planet! Yeeeeeehaaaaaw!!!"
"I did not you lying B$#%#@#%#!"
"You are a pile of garbage."
"You [sic] guyus are still spinning this sock puppet crap believing I posted
under other names to support myself-what sort of idiots are you?"
"Hows AOL, boy I wish I had an AOL account!"
"when do scum deserve any truth"
"Follow ups out of alt.astrology.metapsych and the other fake groups."
"THE NUMBER-IIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
IIIIIIIIIIRRRRRREEEEEELLLLLLLEEEEEEVVVVVVVAAAAAANNNNNNTTTTT."
"Then come back and I will still laugh at you."
"Really Rick, you are the lowest waste of carbon molecules I think
I have ever run across."
"You have made a life enemy, aren't you proud of yourself?"
"8000 complaints lined up."
"WRONG YOU LYING SON OF A BITCH!!!"
"GGGGTGEEEETTTT IIIIITTTTT OOOOUUUUTTT!!!!!"
"Complaintsd [sic] sent for your threats, and your death threats to me on
usenet."
"Its [sic] not me with OCD Ricky-its you spinics."
"You are a brown nosing and gutless person who seems to have no
principles or guide by which they live-other than agreeing with
everyone."
"I will straighten out your delusions."
"Pam is a slime for supporting anonym"
"I WILL NWEVER APOLOGIZE AS AN ASTROLOGER- FOR DEFENDING AN ASTROLOGY
GROUP AGAINST SPAMMING SPIN DOCTORING BIGOTS."
"Wrong, it is the theory that determines what we observe."
"I don't need a transvestite telling me how to run astrology groups."
"I am warning you spinic-you are fast becoming enemy #1-get out or post
rationally bigot."
"I only respond disruptively to disruptive posts off topic by spinics"
"I have more humor in my little Mercury in Gemini finger than you and
these abusers have ever seen."
"I am unlike anyone you have ever met and ever will-don't pigeon
hole me you son of a bitch!"
"Complaints will continue into infinity-and increase."
"Wow another immature ignoamous, why couldn't you explain your point first
before I refute it?"
"I will only respond to you and your lack of integrity by sending
complaints for your abuse from every mailbox I can get."
"You have demonstrated yourself to be vile and negative."
"LYING DISINGENOUS ABUSER"
"Have you ever had sex or even a woman Ricky?"
"Are you really so stupid and insulting?"
"Because ISPs rake in money like crazy and then UNFAIRLY kill someone's
account just because a bunch of bigots demand it to be so."
"The liars and abusers seek to defame with more lies."
"Science doesn't do anything."
"Who cares? I go to a University, I have access to MORE "proported
evidence" than you it is IRRELEVENT-it is not done correctly and it will
be very difficult to prove a subject that reflects what intelligent
people know-that the whole organizes the parts-not vice versa."
"DISCOVERY is for a criminal case idiot"
"Your client continues to stalk, harass, belittle, abuse and denigrate.
Please take action."
"Why don't you find another group for your mindless one liners?"
"She is the shitball."
"Whoopdiedoodledaday! Cynics can post all fucking year-but let me post
a couple of remarks and whooooooaaaa!"
"the difference between me nd you idiots is that I can get in a bar brawl
(I was a hoodlum biker for>years) down a 5th of Tequlia, kick the fuck
out of you, talk like this-AND STILL post something of value, counsel
persons and meitate on nature, and do a piece of art to find center."
"We will go on forever, you and I, and you sir, will lose."
"Forwarded to the state attorney general and my congressman. You screwed
up this time buddy, this is against the law."
"I don't have to be on topic here"
"Abuser kicked off Pacbell.net, now spamming from Southwest Bell.net."
"You need to see a chirpractic perspective adjuster bud."
"YOU condescending assholes, you are as arrogant as they come aren't you?"
"Wrong. I am going to SUE THE FUCK OUT OF YOU."
"We will not tolerate this abuse."
"It has nothing to do with disagreement Mr spin doctor, it has to do with
LAWS."
"I have never been incorrect. Nothing will be retracted."
"NO YOU ARE THE ABUSER and a pussy whipped one to boot!!"
"I asked your provider to not cancel your account but to warn you of
your off topic harassment."
"I AM NOT HARRASSING ANYONE, you lying MFers!!!!"
"NONE OF YOUR F___G BUSINESS-GOT THAT BOY????"
"What? You mean you looking to get the shit kicked out of you by me
because you think you are going to continue the 'teach Ed a lesson
scenario?'"
"I do do laundry. I have to because there will be no females in this house
for the next 20 years."
"Tell your mom to take you to the roller coaster at the beach, she is
getting old and will regret it."
"Complaints will be sent for your censorship and defamation."
"Your ISP has already been listed as abusive, you are not integral."
"I have BECOME harsh because I have been harassed for 3 years."
"I will have absolutely 0 problem proving defamation."
"I chose financial reorganization, just like Trump."
"I am not a criminal, nor a freeloader"
"Until you criticise ano...@pacbell.net the TRUE abuser of these groups
for 3 years, your garbage will be like all the other hypocrites!"
"I'm telling the truth."
"I pay no attention to hypocritical self-righteous lying defective
critics!!!GOT THAT??"
"No more replies to you sonny, you have a reading disability I don't have
time for."
"Critical thinking people don't need to beyond reason."
"Some one I still consider a slime for supporting anonym's abuse."
"YOU WILL ACT"
"I like feminine women"
"Prediction is only a tool to help us understand"
"There are ladies that post here? Could have fooled me."
"I am allowed to post my viewpoint, abuser."
"I have a career."
"Astrological factors "cause" nothing. No "influences". There are none,
never will be any."
"The planets are always lined up in some way."
"Something your synapses have failed to accomplish."
"Because you fucking idiot obsessed stalking abuser, the question she
asked is ANSWERED BY GOING THERE."
"I will be--very simple."
"This is complete and utter non-sense [sic]."
"Your argument is defective."
"Complaints woill [sic] be sent until you cease."
"PROVE IT! Prove that they are not abusers! I will PROVE YOU A LIAR."
"Your threats are being forwarded to the Federal Trade Commission"
"I am not opposed to off topic issues, this is natural and occurs often,
so I cannot chastise anyone for that"
"Complaints will now be sent with this evidence that you plan to abuse
me simply because you are an egomaniac."
"Free will is all there is."
"now I will pursue you for life"
"You are an abuser."
"I have never failed anything"
"No, it never fails that no matter what sort of tripe you abusers post I
still post something of value."
"Remove this idiot from usenet NOW!!!!"
"YOU ARE OFF TOPIC BOY. You are the idiot wasting your time, put up ten
more sites idiot, I will complain 10 more times."
"I AM THE FUTURE of astrology."
"Whens the last time you got laid Ellis?"
"GET OUT!"
"Why do you call my son names? You don't know him or me--are you severely ill?"
"There's not even time for masturbation!"
"I am perfvectly [sic] creating my reality all the time-and my
book serves well."
"Yes, that was the trigger for the 7.2 in Turkey on Friday the 12th."
"Stellas posts are rarely visible from this server."
"I ACCURATELY PREDICTED ALL DE-STRUCTURIZATION IN THE AREAS ILISTED."
"I am far more perceptive than you will ever give me credit for."
"I got no support from the astrological community and they will get none
from me."
"You will never succeed. I am the James Bond of astrologers."
"I need to clearly understand what you are saying before I can refute it."
"I do NOT spam, I do NOT abuse groups that I have no interest in and I
WILL NOT TOLERATE IT FROM OTHERS. PERIOD."
"any chance I get I'll kill the account you still have.
"She must real unsightly I guess."
"Please act before you lose all credibility. And money damages."
"I am completely in control. There is no other way it CAN be-when you
transform you will discover this."
"SNIP! One of these will be posted to all 30,000 groups over the next
year."
"Sheez, what a bunch of fucking freaks."
"Never will stop doing the right thang. And you coward, what of you?"
"And I will send complaints to your ISP for eternity."
"WHEN WILL YOU IDIOTS GROW UP??????"
"WHEN WILL YOU IDIOTS GROW UP?????? No one gives a fucking shit, you just
waste posts people have to dig through to discuss here."
"I make no apologies for my prowess either with astrology, art, logic or
attractiveness to and for the oppositie sex."
"I am just getting warmed up, if these abusers keep it up, I am going to
go into 2nd gear."
"Why does a lowlife like you try to judge others?"
"I do not harass others"
"You are a punk and your account will be no more."
"Why does a loser bother you so much?"
"Anything I do is valuable."
"I don't need to "make" a living"
"I sure am potent for being so impotent."
"Thomas is correct"
"I need a psychologist"
"You'd think these idiots calling me names all day everyday would realize
that they are wasting their life away by now -but noooooo!"
"I have NEVER contradicted myself"
"You are a liar, because you are obsessed with downing me from your own
defensive insecurity."
"I hate to kill another account Thomas"
"You are sincerely dense."
"I think all astrological applications to be valid"
"The only reason you censor and harass me is BECAUSE I am dangerous to you."
"FU asshole. I'll post more tomorrow now just because you said that."
"I NEVER post off topic in alt.astrology.metapsych, the rest is
IIIIRRRREEEELLLLEEEEVVVVAAAANNNNTTTT."
"Do you have any evidence?"
"Geez, do you have any astrological knowledge at all?"
"I created the group, I should know what is and is not on or off topic."
"You all obviously cannot refute the substance of my ideas or my ideas
period, so you run your asses off straining at gnats, commas, periods
and other fallacious garbage- and non-sense."
"His special relativity paper was written then applied to Max Planck's
theory"
"I MADE NO ERRORS."
"THE FURTHER OUT IN PLANETARY ORBIT WE MOVE, THE DEEPER INTO THE PSYCHE
ARE ASPECTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS REFLECTED."
"What part of this escapes you?"
"Supernews is going to lose their posting priviledges if I have anything
to do with it."
"Sweet Keera!!! Bwahahahahahahaha!!!! You MUST be new!"
"By the way I only spent 3 days with this bitch for her to stalk
me for FOUR YEARS!!!"
"I would suggest you find a real astrologer if you want real advice."
"Jack Bailey canceled my account for content of my posts he didn't like"
"I am not interrested in killing accounts"
"Gee, southwestBell.net seems to be spamming my group again."
"You won't be happy until you are in prison, wuill you be stalker boy?"
"I flipped my mustang end over end into a ditch in NM and killed my
best friend"
"I believe there are no cosmic laws"
"I am a professional consultant"
"I pay good money for these accounts and I am not going to tolerate this crap
anymore."
"simply because I cannot produce a cancel does not mean you cannot nuke
it, you can fool others but not me."
"And who in the fuck are you?"
"Fucknuts, I see, well, what a woman."
"Marsha is welcome to post here anytime. And when I finish killing all
you spammers, we will talk like we used to."
"You put this back over here again (to metapsych) you fucking bitch, and
I will send every post you make to abuse all over the net and then some."
"if the son of a bitch was in front of me he'd have some bones crushed
in his skull as well"
"a full force campaign to separate you from usenet will ensue"
"As astrologers know, minutes of arc passed [sic] the degree of focus"
"Because of the increased security threats and accelaration of computer
and Internet abuse issues (as accurately predicted in message ID
<2000020619...@x23.deja.com>) I will be diligently sending all
abusers mail spam and usenet abuse to federal agencies and accelarated
abuse admin addresses designated for said purposes."
"I told you I will pay you back"
"4AX.COM-- NOW TOP PRIORITY ABUSER-HAS BEEN REPORTED TO ALL AGENCIES."
"Pam Gross is a liar, a cheater, I COUNSEL PHDS I CAN READ PEOPLE SHE
KNOWS NOTHING AND IS ONLY THERE TO STIR SHIT UP!!!!"
"I will NEVER give up. Comprende? I am not in the wrong, therefore it is
the abusers who create all the extra work for everyone, because I will
widen my complaints PERSISTENTLY and properly until the whole of the
Internet is exasperated with the abusers and YANKS them."
"How much does Rick Lazzarini pay you to be an asshole?"
"I have defined it 100 times and lost my account at AOL for doing so"
"I lost my account because you think that the bulk of my biusiness comes
from that ridiculous AOL page and thought you would put me out of business
or thwart the reason you BELIEVE I post for and so you COSE [sic] TO COMPLAIN
TO MAKE SURE IT WAS REMOVED-this tells us ALL about you but nothing of
me. You wanted to attack what you believe was important to me."
"Atropos at AOL bought sherilyn's deception hook, line and sinker and
never listened to my side-THERFORE I lost my account unfairly the first
and only time."
"And now we move into the period that moves us towards March 15th."
"Look, as long as you keep posting this untrue defamation I will send
compalints [sic] and the war will end with only me standing if need be--post
astrology WITHOUT THE NEED TO DENIGRATE ME, can you try that idiot?
I AM NOT THE PROBLEM and it is YOUR crap like this that fuels it, stop
the harassment and I stop the complaints VERY SIMPLE."
"And you are a lowlife spinic."
"Masculine Men with testosterone levels high are prone to baldness--you
have plenty of hair I'd guess?"
"I am the skeptic. You are kooks. You stay on usenet to stalk people. You
are psychologically ill."
"Why do you snip my copyrighted writing?"
"I am the only expert in this area."
"I will send every one of your harassing posts to nanau today."
"this astrologer is so far above spinics that I would never dream of bowing to
them or their delusional focus on the worst of the world conventional thinking."
"complaints to every governmental agency on the planet resumes."
"You are off topic and will be reported to the ftc for your federal
criminal activity."
"For example, I get fake clients often, who are just testing me."
"Comprende Ms Air sign genius?"
"Repeating websters definitions is irrelevant. It was written from physically
focused and unspiritual beings for materialistic reference."
"I have no idea what you abusers are taliking [sic] about"
"Just come to my house punk, you have my address you have been spamming
for 3 years now. I know of many substations I will be more than glad to
drag you to in a citizens arrest-- with force if necessary.
I dare you, your knock on the door will be met with tresspassing and
stalking charges in a heartbeat."
"What does my purchase of panties from the Warner Brothers store, for
Susan Boyle who I dated 4 years ago, with the sign Cancer on them (which
she is) that just happened to have tweety bird as the cartoon for that
sign--have to do with the above statement about abundance?"
"You mean it'll get redefined so EVERYONE will have tweety-bird panties?"
"Rick Lazzarini still can't get over the fact that his women run to me."
"I have no idea what you are talking about."
"I DON'T care WHO YOU ARE."
"I *DO* have an interest in justice, this is why I stay."
"I do however, have an interest and a right to protect my professional
status, and my 25 years of positive work in astrology, art and writing."
"...Dictators like Jimmy Stewart"
"YES, and they follow through too, it is irrelevant if I put follow up
to poster if I have asked their ISP 50 times for them NOT to email me,
what??? Am I MAKING them make the choice to abuse even after warning them?"
"I DO NOT HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD."
"THAT is why you have and will always fear me"
"You are a zealot, that is obvious. Why don't you come to my home nerd?
Let's see how tough you are then."
"How would you know what my dick is like?"
"How would you know what my dick is like? It is quite normal and average--thank
you."
"I don't care if you have a BILLION dollars--you will fail. You will
fail."
"I was an astrologer 1000 times in Babylon."
"Planet X' existence has been known by some of us for a long time, it has
been named Nibiru."
"I never said that, the tetrahedron as I PICTORIALLY evidenced in my
book, is a double 3 sided pyramid."
"Too bad you have no clues about astrology."
"I completely answered all of your spin and garbage. You consider
yourself an astrologer? Bwahahahahahah!!!!"
"Stop ano...@pacbell.net and other spammer like sher...@demon.net from
posting off topic in alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych and I'll
consider not bringing usenet to a halt."
"You are abusing this group again asshole. Are you going to put a page
up on yourself ?? You dumb fuck. Why don't you answer the SDSU
staff as to why you put your fucking idiotic page up? I am speaking
to the President of the university soon to have you and Bailey shut
down. And ask the owner's wife how I stood over the little booth at
SDSU and told every single student not to get Aznet-she'll tell you.
And everytime they try to sell accounts there I will stop it. Until
your fucking defamation page comes down-you got that you dumb fuck???
A POST TO NANAU WILL GO FOR EVERY ONE OF YOUR ABUSIVE POSTS--GOT THAT
PUNK?"
"If I find that this post was canceled, I will be suing you for violating
my publishing companies copyright, got that ass hole?"
"It makes me want to snip."
"You could very well be a rich bitch I have pissed off, there have been
a few you know."
"go ahead mail me."
"Tell me people what court would find me guilty of ANYthing?"
"Discuss it then you dumb fuck."
"OFFF [sic] TOPIC HARASSMENT!!!!!"
"ARCTURUS- ... This star is the center of many solar systems"
"An interesting note, my sister has this aspect and used to tell me when
I was little "let me "fix" your ice cream cone, meaning she would eat
half of it under the guise of cleaning up the drips so it wouldn't be
messy:-)) (Neptune in my 3rd?) Her negativity and jealousy of me has
been so great over the years that our family has all but disowned her,
as this negativity has remained through adult life. Sad, actually."
"You don't realize that giant ozone holes were not present in ancient Babylon?"
"you will not recognize usenet when I am finished"
"It is usually FEAR that puts people's consciousness asleep."
"Right and wrong are subjective value judgments."
"I drove to LA last night !!!! Where is it you say you
lived? I will come and visit while I am here."
Matthew
Edmond Wollmann <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>
> Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>
My astrology is horrible, never quote my astrology.
>
> And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>
Whos heart is to be stabbed?
>
Am I wrong, or do you have a symboic message to give this unruly world?
>
Almost a prophetic message, with the air of a prediction, without giving
specifics.
>
I have been informed that e-mail and letters do not prove credibility, am I
right about that?
>
> --
> Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
> © 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
> http://home.earthlink.net/~arcturianone/
> SDSU http://www.astroconsulting.com
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
Matthews' Prophecy
http://community-2.webtv.net/saturnrules/MatthewsProphecy
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>You fuckin asshole idiot. You are full of shit. Go fuck yourself with
>>your book up your asshole!!! BUAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>Well, there's a well thought out argument.
It's almost down to the level you might understand. But not quite.
Jo Mazzotta
Edmond H. Wollmann
a...@shell3.shore.net (a) wrote:
> In article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Edmond H. Wollmann <OrionI...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
> >I never said specifically that Orion was a star
>
> Perhaps the complete, original article will refresh your memory:
>
> Newsgroups: alt.astrology,alt.astrology.metapsych,alt.paranormal
> Subject: Re: Capricorn moon and abandonment issues
> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:03:56 -0800
> Organization: Astrological Consulting/Altair Publications SAN 299-5603
> Lines: 31
> Message-ID: <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
> References: <7cjc1e$12i$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
<19990315174538...@ng-ce1.aol.com>
> Reply-To: arctu...@yahooo.com
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 30.los-angeles-11-12rs.ca.dial-access.att.net
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Trace: mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net 921639862 27516 12.72.10.30 (17
Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@worldnet.att.net
> NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Mar 1999 03:04:22 GMT
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U)
>
>
> > >You might be surprised to see just how fearful
> > >negative Orion controllers can be.
>
> > What is an Orion controller? I'm curious what that is
astrologically...
>
> Orion is a star.
Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
End of issue.
http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/propagan.htm
http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/abusive_isps_list.htm
What is a "spinic?"
A spinic is a bigoted and biased person/group who hides behind the
skepticism concept and attempts to belittle a paradigm or area of
interest without investigation, knowledge, or study of any sort. This
is bigotry, not skepticism. Propaganda is then "spun" against the
paradigm/person and they are religiously and zealously defamed
(evidenced by the multitude of defamation sites under my name-none of
which evidence any truth whatever). The individual or groups then hold
dogmatically onto their fallacious refutation despite all discrediting,
academic refutation, or current/past acceptance by a large majority of
said paradigm by the populace. This is called religion.
Spinic's actions betray their stated goals of "skepticism" by the
malicious defamation they perpetrate. Their continued hounding and
defamation of those they are bigoted against continues unabated despite
evidence of the validity and value of the paradigms they seek to
denigrate, from their bigotry not logic. Their psychological denial of
facts, refutations, and evidenced constructiveness of the paradigms
they seek to denigrate only evidences their own insecurity and
intellectual deficiency. Ignored are the rights, dignity, choice or
desire for preference of the individuals/groups they seek to destroy
through this propagandic spin and defamation.
The indices listed below are valid referenced academic areas of
accepted knowledge that refutes and describes the fallacious and
defective arguments of the typical spinic's attempts to "color" their
defamation as "argument" or disagreement.
CYNIC=From the Greek kynikos, -doglike, churlish. Philos. one of a sect
of ancient Greek philosophers who taught that pleasure is an evil if
sought for its own sake, and made an ostentatious show of contempt for
riches and enjoyment.; sneering faultfinder; one who disbelieves in the
goodness of human motives, and who is given to displaying his disbelief
by sneers and sarcasm-cynicism=the practice of a cynic; a morose
contempt of the pleasures and arts in life. Lexicon/Webster
Ig no rant=Deficient of knowledge of either general information or a
specific field; uninformed; untaught; unenlightened-ignorance, the
state of being ignorant, or of lacking knowledge; the condition of not
being cognizant or aware of. Lexicon/Webster..between ignoramus and
ignore.
Bigot=a person intolerant of creeds, opinions etc. other than his own.
(Webster College Dict.)
Case # 3,539,081
Conclusion-cynical and unable to acknowledge larger frameworks within
which fragmented knowledge fits.
Psych-Inferiority, persistent feeling that one does not measure up to
societal standards and personal fictional standards. Ego lock on
physicality and the belief that only psychic material accessible to
egoistic functions is "real."
Habitual responses. Inability for holistic cognitions.
Philo-The desire to participate in emotivism and the inability to
remove such judgments. Begging the question vicious and cyclic
argumentation which denies purposeful existence other than to prove
pointlessness. Fear that existence is pointless and construct
development to reinforce this conclusion. Pleasure derived from
invalidating arguments that inspire and improve the human condition.
Inability to understand coherence theory of truth. Inability to
understand the pragmatic theory of truth.
Frequently indulges in the logical defect fallacies of;
"Fallacy of suppressed evidence"The requirement of a true premises
includes the proviso that the premises not ignore some important piece
of evidence that outweighs the presented evidence and entails a very
different conclusion.
"Red Herring" fallacy="The red herring fallacy is committed when the
arguer diverts the attention of the reader by changing the subject to
some totally different issue.
"Missing the point" another fallacy of relevance-The conclusion of the
argument is irrelevant to the premises. "Missing the point illustrates
a special form of irrelevance. This fallacy occurs when the premises of
an argument support one particular conclusion, but then a different
conclusion, often vaguely related to the correct conclusion is drawn.
"Begging the question" occurs when an arguer uses some form of
phraseology that tends to conceal the questionably true character of a
key premise. If the reader or the listener is deceived into thinking
that a key premise is true, he or she will accept the argument as
sound, when in fact, it may not be.
"Appeal to the People" (Argumentum ad Populum)
Nearly everyone wants to be loved, esteemed, admired, valued, recog-
nized, and accepted by others. The appeal to the people uses these
desires to get the reader or listener to accept a conclusion. Two
approaches are involved, one of them direct, the other indirect.
The direct approach occurs when an arguer, addressing a large group of
people, excites the emotions and enthusiasm of the crowd to win
acceptance for his conclusion. The objective is to arouse a kind of mob
mentality. (the usenet group alt.usenet.kooks is used solely for this
defect).
Their favorite and highly relied upon one is called "Argument Against
the Person" (Argumentum ad Hominem)
This fallacy always involves two arguers. One of them advances (either
directly or implicitly) a certain argument, and the other then responds
by directing his or her attention not to the first person's argument
but to the first person himself. When this occurs, the second person is
said to commit an argument against the person.
"Bandwagon Argument" A variety of the "Appeal to the people" fallacy
that occurs when the arguer plays on the reader's or listener's need to
feel a part of the group (or to down another group). In the indirect
approach the arguer directs his or her appeal not to the crowd as a
whole but to one or more individuals separately, focusing upon some
aspect of their relationship to the crowd. The indirect approach
includes such specific forms as the bandwagon argument, the appeal to
vanity, and the appeal to snobbery. All are standard techniques of the
advertising industry. Here is an example of the bandwagon argument;
"Of course you will want to buy Zest toothpaste. Why, 90% of America
brushes with Zest."
Or
"Of course you will want to demean and defame Edmond Wollmann. Why, 90%
of alt.usenet kooks (not even 1% of usenet) voted him a kook."
Because spinics will try to discredit THESE accepted delineations, it
should be noted these definitions are taken from an academic work used
in colleges and Universities, Logic, 4th Edition Hurley, University of
San Diego, Wadsworth Publishing, 1991, page 128, "Informal Fallacies".
Sci-Participates in repeated inductive generalizations. Materialism
focused and rigid. Believes that because information not cognizable by
the ego self, it must not exist, delusional and inability for rigorous
investigation prior to conclusions. Projects that "others" are guilty
of this.
Conclusion-Perspective alteration necessary. Insists on misery and
negativity in order to resist the slightest appearance of a
relinquishment of control-which inadvertently reinforces inferiority
feelings. Denial. No known remediation at this point. Likelihood of
future crisis in perspective great.
Mature individuals can agree to disagree and recognize that often
disagreements simply boil down to preferences. There is no one truth,
except that the truth is the composition of all truths.
Analytical discernment begs for efficiency. I therefore respectfully
beg to differ with spinics and offer sincere success in their future
search for truths (should they decide to act on their preferences and
stop trying to defeat others preferences).
There is no one truth EXCEPT that THE truth is the composition of all
truths. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence-it may be a
difference in root assumptions.
My particular "Universes of inquiry" are psychology and astrology, I
respect all inquiry and the paradigms that articulate them.
Paradigms form from sets of beliefs and assumptions. To clarify the
idea of paradigms here is a quote from experimentation in abnormal
psychology taken from Thomas Kuhn's view, author of the widely
acknowledged "The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions";
"We believe every effort should be made to study abnormal behavior
according to scientific principles. It should be clear at this point
however, that science is NOT a completely objective and certain
enterprise. Rather, as we can infer by the comment from Kuhn,
subjective factors, as well as limitations in our perspective on the
universe, enter into the conduct of scientific enquiry. Central to any
application of scientific principles, in Kuhn's view, is the concept of
a paradigm, a conceptual framework or approach within which a scientist
works. A paradigm according to Kuhn, is a set of basic assumptions that
outline the PARTICULAR UNIVERSE OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY..." (my emphasis)
In addition to injecting inevitable biases into the definition and
collection of data, a paradigm may also affect the interpretation of
facts. In other words, the meaning or import given to data may depend
to a considerable extent on a paradigm.
University of Southern California", State University of New York"
Davidson and Neale, 6th edition, 1996. Wiley and sons publishers.
"The decision to employ a particular piece of apparatus
and to use it in a particular way carries with it an assumption that
only certain sorts of circumstances will arise.
Normal science research is a strenuous and devoted attempt
to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by the professional
education. Anomalies are disregarded because they do not articulate the
paradigm" (Thomas Kuhn).
Or as Einstein said "It is the theory that determines what we observe."
In short paradigmatical definitions (beliefs) can affect perception.
We don't live by logic and facts we live by trust-if you disagree with
this premise, provide the factual basis and logical reason and/or
purposes for living. If you can't produce any I suggest you stop living
because there is no evidence or "facts" available to justify and
quantify doing it anymore.
"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without
integrity is dangerous and dreadful" Samuel Johnson
Skeptic=One who doubts the truth of any principle or system of
principles or doctrines. Questioning in the search for truth.
Cynic=a sneering faultfinder; one who disbelieves in the goodness of
human motives, and who is given to displaying his disbelief by sneers
and sarcasm.
"Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much;
Wisdom is humble that he knows no more"
William Cowper "The Task bk vi"
"The Winter Walk at Noon"
Woodenheaded thinking="assessing a situation in terms of preconceived
fixed notions while ignoring or rejecting any contrary signs" (Tuchman,
1984, p. 7).
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> Orion is a star.
>Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
Irrelevant. Besides it's hardly the only thing
you've been wrong about.
>End of issue.
There's not issue. You're just stupid.
--
"The planets are circular"
-Edmond Wollmann, a$trologer, liar, spammer, hypocrite, censor, Jan. '98 KoTM,
convicted criminal, asshole, bully, Kook of the Year 1998,
the Ted Kennedy of astrologers, Village Idiot Award winner,
dumpster diver
http://lart.com/ed/
http://www.shore.net/~a/wollmann/faves.html
http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=541493235&fmt=text
http://www.rahul.net/falk/quickrefs.html#wollman
el...@no.spam
Bob Officer <bobof...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>You mean you are not blinded by Edmond's future?
Is anybody?
Spamster
Beep wrote:
> CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
> bigger than a gnat!
>
Not to mention the spelling too.
el...@no.spam
Cujo <cu...@usenet-performance-art.org> wrote:
>> Every single being on the planet makes a difference, even you spinics
>> choice to be negative makes a difference, you choose to be negative,
>> and I do not.
>What a kook! I guess someone will be along to point out how negative it was
>to stalk Kronert. 16+ lost accounts is a real positive effort Eddieeeeeee!
It's never *his* fault. He can never admit to making mistakes even
though he makes them all the time. All one has to do is look at his
pathetic abuse ISPs web page to see how deluded Wollmann is. He is so
stupid he thinks the FBI and the California Atty. General give a rat's
ass about slander.
--
"She is the shitball."
-Edmond Wollmann, a$trologer, liar, spammer, hypocrite, censor, Jan. '98 KoTM,
convicted criminal, asshole, bully, Kook of the Year 1998,
the Ted Kennedy of astrologers, Village Idiot Award winner,
dumpster diver, loser
http://lart.com/ed/
http://www.rahul.net/falk/quickrefs.html#wollman
http://www.skeptictank.org/edm.htm
el...@no.spam
Dee <lil...@attcanada.ca> wrote:
>"...you spinics choice to be..." is what language ?
It's the same kind he uses in his so called book.
el...@no.spam
>Why do you continue to use made-up words?
Because he can't remember the real ones?
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I did not make a formal prediction,
Yes, sir, Mr. Spin Doctor!
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>Yes, and?
And it's a pathetic fraud, moron.
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>metapsych removed because spinical arguments as to the validity of
>astrology evokes complaints there--which I will resume after refuting a
>few idiots.
metapsych restored because it pisses you off
>In article <uShO5.91227$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> "T" <tl...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Edmond H. Wollmann wrote in message <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>> >In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>me
>> >wrote:
>> >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> >spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> >> >> At 2:18 am EST, November 8, 2000.
>> >> >>Moon opposition Mars applying.
>
>> >> >>And a sword shall pierce your heart.
>
>> >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>
>> >Gore, and the popular vote (which will not change) indicates I was
>> >correct.
>
>> >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>
>> >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>
>> >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>
>> >I have never stated who I was "for" (only in implicate form).
>
>> >Because it was SO difficult to determine this election, I knew ahead
>of
>> >time the closeness of this election and did not want to affect the
>> >momentum. I saw the Bush Venus trine MC at the close of the polls on
>> >the 7th, but then Gore's charts improved, so I knew I could not
>predict
>> >this momentum. The progressed solars change again by the 15th.
>> > I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
>> >days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
>> >concept).
>> >Which I REstate here.
>> >I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
>are
>> >out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
>> >also made. Those who can see, let them see.
>
>> >"I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
>> >see, and those who do see may become blind.
>> >The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
>> >blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would
>have
>> >no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
>> Fraudulent, control freak, out of integrity -that sums you up in a nut sac.
>Spinic evidence of a pattern of defective behavior noted. Ad hominem
>defective fallacy.
Once again you fail to apply the fallacy correctly. Is it just use or
are all SDSU students so poorly educated?
Spamster
el...@no.spam wrote:
Or they don't fit his definition of reality?
Edmond Wollmann
spa...@west.net wrote:
Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
> CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
> bigger than a gnat!
There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
insignificant missteps.
You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
lives.
> >End of issue.
> The King hath spoken!
That's about the size of it, since you enjoy being a spinic, instead of
a real person. Have any of you spinics ever thought about analysing why
it is that you must obsesses over insignificant and petty denigration
all day everyday? The answer is actually very simple.
"What you are speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are
saying." Walt Whitman
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
http://www.astroconsulting.com/SDSU/
el...@no.spam
>> >Why do you continue to use made-up words?
>> Because he can't remember the real ones?
>Or they don't fit his definition of reality?
That's "reality" not reality.
el...@no.spam
>> >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
>> CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
>> bigger than a gnat!
>There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
>fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
>you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
>insignificant missteps.
You have done any "real discussion" or arguments, Wollmann. All you've
done is whine and spin everytime one of your many errors is pointed out.
This leads me to suspect you have no real arguments to support your silly
claims so you are reduced to name calling or complaining to hide that
fact.
>You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
>lives.
Then why are you here worrying about what we post? I don't think keeping
you from harvesting rubes here is a waste and getting to laugh in the
process is a great bonus.
>> The King hath spoken!
>That's about the size of it,
Does that swelled empty head of yours really fit through standard
size doors?
>since you enjoy being a spinic,
Can you do anything besides name calling?
>instead of a real person.
Pam is quite real. I had dinner with her last month and she's very
charming. Unlike you she has no need to scam people to live.
>Have any of you spinics ever thought about analysing why
>it is that you must obsesses over insignificant and petty denigration
>all day everyday? The answer is actually very simple.
It is! Laughing at you is fun. It's going to be more fun when you
are sued for the slander on your web site and you lose the rights to
your own book as part of the rememdy!
Have fun whining, kook?
Spamster
Spamster
el...@no.spam wrote:
Oops!
el...@no.spam
It's also name calling by Wollmann. The very same Wollmann that claims
to be so positive.
BlueAce69
"Edmond Wollmann" <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8ug1rs$8go$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <390n0t4913a8l7ci5...@4ax.com>,
> spa...@west.net wrote:
>
> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
> > >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
>
> > CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
> > bigger than a gnat!
>
> There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
> fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
> you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
> insignificant missteps.
> You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
> lives.
Why did you create a reality in which your typos are so embarrassing?
BlueAce69
"Edmond H. Wollmann" <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8ufuaa$5to$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Orion is a star.
>
> Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
> End of issue.
"The James Bond" of astrology made a typo? I thought you created a reality
in which you were beyond such things.
Cujo
After spending a year and a half denying it, you try to backpedal out of it.
Sorry kook, it ain't cutting it. Especially in the context. You are just
shown to be stupid and perhaps you should try stealing from better sources.
Spamster
Beep wrote:
> Well, whatever it is, now I am one!
>
> Hope it's something nice!
>
It's an honor!
Cujo
> spa...@west.net wrote:
>
> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
> > >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
>
> > CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
> > bigger than a gnat!
>
> There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
> fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
> you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
> insignificant missteps.
Insignificant? Nobody can ever take your arguments seriously because they
know you just make up shit. That's just one more proof of it. There are many
others. Where would you like to start, kook?
> You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
> lives.
PKB.
> > >End of issue.
>
> > The King hath spoken!
>
> That's about the size of it, since you enjoy being a spinic, instead of
> a real person. Have any of you spinics ever thought about analysing why
> it is that you must obsesses over insignificant and petty denigration
> all day everyday? The answer is actually very simple.
Face it, you are a complete and utter fraud.
T
Edmond Wollmann wrote in message <8ug1rs$8go$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <390n0t4913a8l7ci5...@4ax.com>,
> spa...@west.net wrote:
>
>Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
>> >Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
>
>> CLUE: the size difference between a star and a constellation is a lot
>> bigger than a gnat!
>
>There is a big difference between a real discussion and arguments and
>fallacious harassment like you perpetrate for years, but I don't see
>you worried about that giant discrepancy, only my typos and
>insignificant missteps.
>You lowlifes are quite amusing with your unbelievable waste of your own
>lives.
>
>> >End of issue.
>
>> The King hath spoken!
>
>That's about the size of it, since you enjoy being a spinic, instead of
>a real person. Have any of you spinics ever thought about analysing why
>it is that you must obsesses over insignificant and petty denigration
>all day everyday? The answer is actually very simple.
>
> "What you are speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are
>saying." Walt Whitman
This coming from Mr. Caps Lock with all his diatribes.
T
>In article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>Edmond H. Wollmann <woll...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>I did not make a formal prediction,
>
T
Spamster wrote in message <3A0B90FA...@ftc.g0v>...
a
Edmond H. Wollmann <li...@astroconsulting.com> wrote:
>> Orion is a star.
>
>Gnat straining, I meant constellation.
So you lied when you said, in article <eXs8Zn8s#GA.167@cpmsnbbsa05>
(www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=488194751):
>> "Orion is a star."
>I never said that.
And you lied when you said, in article <376182...@netscap.net>
(www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=488562808):
>> >Orion is a star.
>Never said that.
And you lied when you said, in article <8uedvv$rbo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
(www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=691628322):
>I never said specifically that Orion was a star
>End of issue.
Yep. Edmond Wollmann is a liar.
--
"Orion is a star." -- Edmond Wollmann, <36EF1B...@yahooo.com>
Edmond Wollmann
> > http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
In the negative for Bush.(Sprg SR Moon squares Pluto from 2 to 5).
> I also stated in other threads that the 11th-16th would be powerful
> days in regard to this issue (which is connected to my Goddess
> concept).
> Which I REstate here.
And it will continue until the 25th.
> I also pointed out the possibility of fraud, and control freaks who
are
> out of integrity trying to influence the outcome, by the Orion post I
> also made. Those who can see, let them see.
Which I reiterate again.
> "I came into this world for judgment so that those who do not see may
> see, and those who do see may become blind.
> The Pharisees near him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not
> blind are we?" And he said to them, "If you were blind, you would have
> no sin. But now that you say, 'We see,'your sin remains." John 39-41
Either way, this scenario was created by the collectivity in an
unconscious way, to begin to take back power from government and
restore it to the person. Which prepares the collectivity for the
dramatic changes in 2012.
http://astroconsulting.com/FAQs/articles.htm
Full freedom is from full responsibility on all levels for our reality,
both collectively and personally.
"Levon wears his war wounds like a crown. He calls his child "Jesus".
'cause he likes the name, and he sends him to the finest schools in
town.
Levon, Levon likes his money! He makes a lot they say.
Spends his days counting, in a garage by the motorway.
He was born a pauper to a pawn on a Christmas day!
When the New York Times said "God is dead", and the wars begun!"
Elton John, "Levon"
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
http://astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
http://www.astroconsulting.com/SDSU
Dee
----------
In article <3A0B1D05...@ftc.g0v>, Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
>
>
> Dee wrote:
>
>> In article <3A0AC247...@ftc.g0v>, Spamster <u...@ftc.g0v> wrote:
>> >
>> > "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <yfiO5.91233$YG5....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
>> >> "Dee" <lil...@attcanada.ca> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article <8uc8gm$38e$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Edmond H. Wollmann
>> >> > <woll...@my-deja.com> more incoherent babble <snip>
>> >>
>> >> > > In article <t0i1nfd...@news.supernews.com>,
>> >> > > t...@lava.net (Tom Kerr) who is interested in nothing but defaming
>> >> me
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >> In article <ep0i0tobn44kf11le...@4ax.com>,
>> >> > > spa...@west.net wrote:
>> >> > >> >On Wed, 08 Nov 2000 07:24:20 GMT, Edmond Wollmann
>> >> > >> ><edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > >> >Whom did you predict, btw?
>> >>
>> >> > >> Wollmann predicted Bush would lose.
>> >>
>> >> > >> http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=672325763&fmt=text
>> >>
>> >> > >> I guess this Wollmann's way of always being correct.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, and? I also stated in the Mercury rx thread how significant this
>> >> election would be, did you spinics get that?
>> >>
>> > So? That's like predicting the sun will come out tomorrow.
>> >
>> Yes, and he answered the same line already with different babble, sheesh.
>
> Well, he is very good at babbling.
>
I have to agree, although it was the disgusting babbling/drooling combo that
earned him the last VIA.