The Quintessential Kook
Suzyqyou
>Rick wrote:
>> In article <19990101035300...@ng119.aol.com>,
>> Suzyqyou <suzy...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >Ed-i just loves to use those 'buzzwords' like "stalking" doesn't he?
Can you
>> >imagine anyone giving enough of a darn to "stalk" Wollmann? The very
idea
>> >makes me giggle.
>Well, we broke up long ago, you still come here and harass me and post
>no astrology.
>And please explain what you meant by "kindness is the only way
>Eddy"? -Obviously you meant "the only way you will not be treated >cruelly
>and harassed by me if you don't do what I say while I join in with >other
>>spinics and harass you" kindness. Am I getting it yet? Is this how >your
>kindness philosophy works? Isn't this a tad hypocritical?
Ol-a, Kookboy!! Pls describe any words or deeds of yours that are deserving of
even the smallest modicum of kindness. No, you obviously *don't* get it,
Wollmann. Besides being an asshole of monumental proportions and the most
bald-faced, shameless liar I have ever the misfortune to encounter, you are the
most disgusting egoist posting on Usenet today. The elaborate defense system
that you have set up to rationalize your nasty and destructive nature is
shocking and pathetically obvious.
>This is cyber stalking at least. I can only assume that
>people like you and Rick would stalk me in person like you do here on
>usenet. Therefore I would be well advised to file charges to at least
>make it known to the authorities of persons like you in case you go
>beyond this usenet defamation and harassment.
>> He's been whining about the spinics "stalking" him for a long time now.
Even
>> after I pointed out to him that the California stalking law excludes
first
>> amendment activities like pointing out the bullshit in his posts on
Usenet.
>You have only posted one astrology post in TWO years;
>Subject: Re: Saturn/Moon
>Date: 1996/08/08
>Susan wrote:
> My Moon cojuncts Saturn in Libra, what additional affect does this
> lend?
> Thanks Edmond!
> Susan
> 103674,2...@compuserve.com
And so??? What possible reason have you for posting this non-sequitur? This
more than TWO year old post is appropos of absolutely nothing
>And a couple of others asking about some other guy you were >seducing.
So what does the statement "I am your protection Eddy" mean?
>Protect me from what. Spamming abusers you brown nose everyday?
>Remember when you told me this?
Nope!
>Is this because you sleep with >every guy on
>this newsgroup and they attack me for that reason?
Lord, Ed-i, you are a hoot! Why do you insist on the continuance of this
obsession regarding my personal life? Yeah, that's it all right. The *only*
reason anyone attacks you is because of me! Wollmann, you are off yur rocker!
>Looks like they are a
>bunch of brainwashed idiots and haven't looked carefully at this
>hypocritical "kindness philosophy" bullshit you try to pass off.
<giggle>
>Funny how
>you and your advice only goes for others and not yourself.
Uh, huh, sure, pantihed.
>I am simply expressing my view on a public forum. How others think this
>gives them the right to harass and defame me escapes me.
>> >Hey Pantihed, I've got a suggestion. Make sure you wear that black
polyester
>> >'muscleshirt' of yours at night. Would make you more difficult to
"stalk".
>What does that have to do with anything? You wore spandex pants when you
>were here-a teddy, stockings, garters- It would be fallacious for me to
>use that as an argument against your astrological arguments-were you to
>suddenly break down and make some.
>Did you divorce your husband yet? Or are you still chasing men >while
>married?
Tsk, tsk. Give it up *boy*. Why don't you find some other unsuspecting female
(or, perhaps male?) to obsess over?
>Do you have any astrology to post yet?
Remember, "Astrology is very valuable"!
>You need to read my book, especially the part about powerless >placements.
Uh, Wollmann, you begged me to read your piece of shit book, remember? Like
most others in this forum, I was unable to make my way through the gobbledegook
crap that permeates its entirety.
>Saturn in;
>LIBRA- Fear of not being accepted by others, leads to possibly being >untrue
>to the self-or even what the self's true position is. Natural >aggression is
>a must with this placement.
Nice plagiarization again there, kook. You do much better as an 'original'
kook. Shall we consider Saturn in Scorpio???
>Or read some Lewi.
>52. MARS IN CANCER
You are at a disadvantage, for the aggressive en-
ergetic urges work here through the defensive sectors
of the Vitasphere, and the result can more often than
not be an undermining of the very security you think
you are working for. In its best manifestation, this
makes you a gentle and peaceful soul, content to give
yourself to the establishing of a home and the rearing
of children. But this best manifestation is rare. You
will in any case think this is what you would want out
of life if-alas!-so many things did not demand at-
tention first! Women with this position have a curious
way of ruling the roost, at the same time that they
think they want a strong brave man to shield them
from the world. Men with this position frequently are
ruled by their women or by the psychological biases
rooted in the mother inheritance. You must constantly
strive to direct your energies; your passions, your intu-
itions, and prevent them from directing you. You tend
to try too hard, and, thus to lose the benefits of the free
flow of instinct. And through trying too hard, or de-
manding too much, you run the risk of endangering
the very security without which you never will express
your best self. Your fears are all too likely to get the
upper hand and to cause you to exaggerate little trou-
bles. You make mountains out of molehills, and the
mountains bring forth an avalanche on your head.
You take yourself and your private life too seriously;
and must beware of destructively directing into them
the energies that should be flowing out to the world
of business or society.
"Astrology For The Millions" Grant Lewi, Doubleday, Doran & Co.
1940 to 1980 Bantam and Llewellyn publishing houses of a tremendously
insightful astrologer.
Edmond Wollmann sent me an email regarding a Sun in Cancer, Moon in Libra
combination that he lifted straight from Lewi's book "Heaven Can Wait". He
represented this work as his own with his copyright. When I confronted him, he
hedged and stated that what he "would write" about this particular combination
would be "similar" to Lewi's.
Edmond Wollmann is a liar and a plagiarizer, in addition to his numerous other
unappealing and at times criminal character traits.
Despite his threats to sue and attempts to blackmail me from posting anything
about him on alt.a, I will continue to answer his lies and evasions with truth.
Thanks to all who have written to me encouraging me to post Wollmann's private
email to me here. Although I have been reluctant to do so, I am now seriously
considering it as they paint a complete picture of this distubed individual.
>"Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench. >Care
>about people's approval and you will be their prisoner.
>Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity." Lao-tzu
Uh, huh. That ugly, jealous nature of yours at work again.
Jkal
> Thanks to all who have written to me encouraging me to post Wollmann's private
> email to me here. Although I have been reluctant to do so, I am now seriously
> considering it as they paint a complete picture of this distubed individual.
>
SuzyQ, Please do!
"Mmmmm, teddy, stockings, and garter belt... Where do I sign up in the
anti-wollmann legion?"
Jkal, No laughing matter. Hehehehehehehehehehehehehhehehhehehe
Edmond Wollmann
> A true Kook for the next Millenium wrote nonsensically:.
> >Rick wrote:
> >> In article <19990101035300...@ng119.aol.com>,
> >> Suzyqyou <suzy...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >Ed-i just loves to use those 'buzzwords' like "stalking" doesn't he?
> Can you
> >> >imagine anyone giving enough of a darn to "stalk" Wollmann? The very
> idea
> >> >makes me giggle.
> >Well, we broke up long ago, you still come here and harass me and post
> >no astrology.
> >And please explain what you meant by "kindness is the only way
> >Eddy"? -Obviously you meant "the only way you will not be treated >cruelly
> >and harassed by me if you don't do what I say while I join in with >other
> >>spinics and harass you" kindness. Am I getting it yet? Is this how >your
> >kindness philosophy works? Isn't this a tad hypocritical?
> Ol-a, Kookboy!! Pls describe any words or deeds of yours that are deserving of
How does it serve you to tell you about your beliefs, to imply that you
are somehow ordained to be "determiner" of what *I* deserve? We don't
have to do anything special in order to deserve things-especially things
that are the subjective determinations of what others think we "should
be". I have seen nothing in any of your posts or letters "deserving" of
serious consideration as insightful or genuine.
> even the smallest modicum of kindness. No, you obviously *don't* get it,
> Wollmann.
No, I get it, this is called conditional kindness, wherein I have to do
things the judgmental Mars in Cancer square Saturn's eyes BELIEVES I
"should" in order to "deserve" kindness. I am afraid as usual you tell
us of you and your limitations and nothing of me or the concept of
deserving.
> Besides being an asshole of monumental proportions
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.
> and the most
> bald-faced, shameless liar I have ever the misfortune to encounter, you are the
> most disgusting egoist posting on Usenet today. The elaborate defense system
Ah, ah! I am not the one with Mars in Cancer square Saturn in
Libra-therefore, how does it serve you to see your projected version of
this "elaborate defense system" you use to justify the inability to take
responsibility for your reality? You also have Mars conjunct the
Sun-this IS the sign of a very ego oriented persona, and combined with
Cancer in its fall, I would say an elaborately defensive ego at that.
So, how can you use this recognition in a positive way to resolve your
tremendous relationship defensiveness? How does maintaining that belief
serve you?
> that you have set up to rationalize your nasty and destructive nature is
> shocking and pathetically obvious.
Emotive spin.
> >This is cyber stalking at least. I can only assume that
> >people like you and Rick would stalk me in person like you do here on
> >usenet. Therefore I would be well advised to file charges to at least
> >make it known to the authorities of persons like you in case you go
> >beyond this usenet defamation and harassment.
> > >> He's been whining about the spinics "stalking" him for a long time now.
> Even
> >> after I pointed out to him that the California stalking law excludes
> first
> >> amendment activities like pointing out the bullshit in his posts on
> Usenet.
> >You have only posted one astrology post in TWO years;
> >Subject: Re: Saturn/Moon
> >Date: 1996/08/08
> >Susan wrote:
> > My Moon cojuncts Saturn in Libra, what additional affect does this
> > lend?
> > Thanks Edmond!
> > Susan
> > 103674,2...@compuserve.com
> And so??? What possible reason have you for posting this non-sequitur? This
Because it demonstrates WHO has the elaborate defense system and who has
constructive argued and posted articles on astrology. ACTION is the
reflected conviction of belief. And your ACTIONS betray a person who has
never complimented me publicly even though privately praising me as
evidenced by your letters-who somehow has forgotten that she started
posting vehement attacks upon me simply because I believed (and
obviously rightly so) that she was just waiting for an excuse to dump
her defensive psychic garbage on me with little provocation. You can't
honestly believe that any thinking person believes anonym's posts are
positive?:-)) Yet you praise the abuser simply because he tries to
belittle me. You were obviously either lying when you were praising me
or are now. Or worse yet, you are so temperamental and defensive your
critical faculties don't allow you to be cool enough to know WHAT you
believe. I don't care if you post any of my letters-I will say the same
thing in public as in private and can defend my statements because they
are not out of trickery or deceit as yours are. Making fun of someone
because of their state of being without regard for their efforts and
demonstrated actions is the sign of an immature imbecile. Why don't I
place some skinny Somalians at my site and you can ridicule them as well
for being so stupid as to be in a situation where they are starving? Eh?
Is that another part of your "kindness philosophy"? Or what special
things must everyone do to please your highness ? What makes you think
YOU are in integrity enough TO discern what is and is not needed? You
are defensive now because you wish for popularity-not truth and standing
up for things that may go against the popular grain are a terror to you.
The Sun square moon is not exactly indicative of a persona in touch with
inner and outer.
> more than TWO year old post is appropos of absolutely nothing
It signifies how long ago it was you were on topic. And you were only
trying to "get" me then and were not interested in an answer anyway.
> >And a couple of others asking about some other guy you were >seducing.
> So what does the statement "I am your protection Eddy" mean?
> >Protect me from what. Spamming abusers you brown nose everyday?
> >Remember when you told me this?
> Nope!
I see you are at a loss for an answer, should I post the statement?
> >Is this because you sleep with >every guy on
> >this newsgroup and they attack me for that reason?
> Lord, Ed-i, you are a hoot! Why do you insist on the continuance of this
> obsession regarding my personal life? Yeah, that's it all right.
I was perfectly content two years ago to serve here -it was YOU and your
spinic friends through ad hominems and your conditioned responses with
fallaciousness that brought on ANY war that may have ensued. I asked you
to think twice about starting a personal war here but you and your
"elaborate defense system" couldn't resist-problem is, I am far more
armed than you-because I have FORESIGHT.
>The *only*
> reason anyone attacks you is because of me! Wollmann, you are off yur rocker!
I did not say that is the only reason, but one of them. And since you
are all cowards along with most of the astrological community, I am left
as the only one posting truth instead of kindergarten attacks.
> >Looks like they are a
> >bunch of brainwashed idiots and haven't looked carefully at this
> >hypocritical "kindness philosophy" bullshit you try to pass off.
> <giggle>
Looks like I hit it on the head eh? How does it serve you to be shown a
hypocrite who preaches kindness and practices childish hatred for her
own poor judgments and mistakes? You asked me to warn you when you were
saying stupid things-well, I have warned you and you have ignored them,
now you will continue into your abyss of stupidity along with your
highly intellectual anonym.
> >Funny how
> >you and your advice only goes for others and not yourself.
> Uh, huh, sure, pantihed.
More ad hominems. Didn't most of us stop silly schoolyard names in about
4th or 5th grade?
> >I am simply expressing my view on a public forum. How others think this
> >gives them the right to harass and defame me escapes me.
> >> >Hey Pantihed, I've got a suggestion. Make sure you wear that black
> polyester
> >> >'muscleshirt' of yours at night. Would make you more difficult to
> "stalk".
> >What does that have to do with anything? You wore spandex pants when you
> >were here-a teddy, stockings, garters- It would be fallacious for me to
> >use that as an argument against your astrological arguments-were you to
> >suddenly break down and make some.
> >Did you divorce your husband yet? Or are you still chasing men >while
> >married?
> Tsk, tsk. Give it up *boy*. Why don't you find some other unsuspecting female
> (or, perhaps male?) to obsess over?
I don't obsess over anyone, thats why you have been told by all my ISPs
to not write me anymore like you did in early 98. I will not accept
anymore of your disingenuous invites.
> >Do you have any astrology to post yet?
> Remember, "Astrology is very valuable"!
> >You need to read my book, especially the part about powerless >placements.
> Uh, Wollmann, you begged me to read your piece of shit book, remember?
No I didn't beg anyone, you said you read it and it was good-want me to
post that again? OK;
Subject: Re: Apollo speaks of Karma
Date: 24 Aug 96 00:41:37 EDT
From: "Susan Boyle" <103674.201 @CompuServe.COM>
To: Edmond Wollmann <woll...@mail.sdsu.edu>
Eddie,
When I think of all the people who purchase sophomoric books like "When
Bad Things Happen to Good People", I cannot help but consider how much
more they could be helped if they had your book instead. The papers
that I have read thus far are elegantly written and beautifully
articulated, with self empowerment perfectly integrated with basic
astrological tenets. I have combed the bookstores here for something
like this, but have never found it! Who has bought your articles? How
long do you think it will be before the book comes to fruition? I
believe it has been a while since a truly meaningful book re:astrology
has been published; correct? It would seem as though the time is
right, Edmond.
With warmth, respect, admiration and love for you darling,
Susan
> Like
> most others in this forum, I was unable to make my way through the gobbledegook
> crap that permeates its entirety.
Oh, I see, more lies, either in the letter or now. I have said many
times, If it serves you use it, if it doesn't fine. I do not insist that
those it does not serve be forced to read it. But powerless negative
persons are not content with that, because they seek to FORCE their
opinion upon others because they do not believe the opinion the are
forcing, themselves.
> >Saturn in;
> >LIBRA- Fear of not being accepted by others, leads to possibly being >untrue
> >to the self-or even what the self's true position is. Natural >aggression is
> >a must with this placement.
> Nice plagiarization again there, kook. You do much better as an 'original'
> kook. Shall we consider Saturn in Scorpio???
How is that a plagiarization? I will be taking legal action against all
your defamation, trust me.
No, I did not, I have my copyright on all my posts or mail, this does
not mean I believe the contents are mine. We discussed Lewis right on
interpretation of your tremendous insecurity before so you know I was
not trying to pass off anything. Simply because you get confused and
have trouble understanding others, is not an indication of their
intent-it tells us of YOUR intent.
confronted him, he
> hedged and stated that what he "would write" about this particular combination
> would be "similar" to Lewi's.
It would have to be-as are Noel Tyl's because Lewi was so accurate. Are
you chastising Tyl now too? And why isn't everyone attacking him and his
"counseling"? He has only a BA and no MSW or MFCC and has been
counseling for years-I suppose you and your cynics will be reporting him
to the authorities as well? :-))))
> Edmond Wollmann is a liar and a plagiarizer, in addition to his numerous other
> unappealing and at times criminal character traits.
As I said, you can call me pantihead nonsense all day, but THAT is
actionable and I will be making you and anonym pay-When? Try July of
99-want to bet on the prediction?
> Despite his threats to sue and attempts to blackmail me from posting anything
> about him on alt.a, I will continue to answer his lies and evasions with truth.
You wouldn't know truth if it bit you in your masculine looking ass.
> Thanks to all who have written to me encouraging me to post Wollmann's private
> email to me here. Although I have been reluctant to do so, I am now
seriously
> considering it as they paint a complete picture of this distubed individual.
Knock yourself out, you also now threaten new authors I have and my
whole company when you do so. So AGAIN, I am telling you to use caution,
because I will be taking action. When? When the time is right. And when
I do, like I have with all other actions, you and your schoolyard
sarcasm will be powerless to stop it.
> >"Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench. >Care
> >about people's approval and you will be their prisoner.
> >Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity." Lao-tzu
> Uh, huh. That ugly, jealous nature of yours at work again.
More contradictions and lying.
Subject: Re: Various and sundry
Date: 20 Aug 9617:16:15 EDT
From: "Susan" <103674.201 @CompuServe.COM>
To: Edmond Wollmann <woll...@mail.sdsu.edu>
Oh, Ed I like you so much! I am 'bowled over' by your article (and I
do not bowl), and so enamored of your extraordinary abilities in purely
linnear reasoning delivered with passion & a certain panache. I have
some understanding of Saturn's transits, but now have so much more.
Thank you. Am fascinated by the clients you describe and your
deductions. The symmetry is beautiful. Being in service in unusual
ways indeed! Could these people assimilate your insight here and let it
help them? Are you frustrated when others perceive you as
"airy-fairy"? I wish somehow I could help them realize how helpful it
would be if they could abandon defensiveness and examine without
prejudice the truth of what you counsel (and write). I would like to
read a whole book on this. Do you have more I can read?
I welcome your instruction. I am honored to have your keenness
turned in my direction and you are like a lens to me.
.....
Besides your intellect and knowledge, I now value your kindness and
spiritual generosity. I can feel you tempering your predilection for
the aforementioned linnear reasoning with kindness in taking in account
my sensitivity. This does allow me to examine what you say without
defensiveness and apply it to my development. WHAT a counselor you are.
Is your pursuit of a Ph.D a nod to what the general public seems to want
with the current cult of experts with titles? Your ability seems more
innate here than anything so would the title be a compromise?
"Gazing past the planets, looking for total view. I've been lying here
for hours-you've gotta make the journey out and in, out and in, out and
in. And if you think its a joke, well thats alright do what you want to
do, I've said my piece and I leave it all up to you." The Moody Blues
"Out and In"
"You keep looking for someone, to tell your troubles to. I'll sit down
and lend an ear, yet I hear nothing new. Then the tide rushes in and
washes my Castles away-then I'm really not so sure which side of the bed
I should lay, I should lay." The Moody Blues "The Tide Rushes In"
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 1998 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.astroconsulting.com/personal/
SDSU http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~wollmann/
anonym™
Asshole™ wrote:
>
> Suzyqyou in elaborate defensiveness wrote:
>
... I am afraid as usual you tell
> us of you and your limitations and nothing of me or the concept of
> deserving.
>
> > Besides being an asshole of monumental proportions
>
> This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person"
SNIP!
Not when it's true, ASShole.
>
> > and the most
> > bald-faced, shameless liar I have ever the misfortune to encounter, you are the
> > most disgusting egoist posting on Usenet today. The elaborate defense system
>
> Ah, ah! I am not the one with Mars in Cancer square Saturn in
> Libra-
No, you are the one with a biker in your mouth and panties on your head
and 1000 dollars that you stole from Susan in your pocket.
..
>
> Because it demonstrates WHO has the elaborate defense system and who has
> constructive argued and posted articles on astrology.
Yeah.
You're the one with the elaborate defense system!
...
>Making fun of someone
> because of their state
You mean your uncontrollable bowel problem?
> I asked you
> to think twice about starting a personal war here but you and your
> "elaborate defense system"
SNIP!
Forget the other buzzwords!
"Elaborate Defense System" is THIS WEEK'S *special* phrase!
>
> >The *only*
> > reason anyone attacks you is because of me! Wollmann, you are off yur rocker!
>
> I did not say that is the only reason, but one of them. And since you
> are all cowards along with most of the astrological community, I am left
> as the only one posting truth instead of kindergarten attacks.
You are left as the kookiest ASSHOLE.
...
>
> > Uh, huh, sure, pantihed.
>
> More ad hominems. Didn't most of us stop silly schoolyard names in about
> 4th or 5th grade?
Apparently not you, fuckface:
"She is the shitball"--Ed Wollmann.
"Now why are you continuing to crosspost to metapsych you fucking
troublemaker!!!" Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
"Losing what you fucking idiot? You've lost it."
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
"Inconsiderate fucking cynic." Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
"Whoopdiedoodledaday! Cynics can post all fucking year
-but let me post a couple of remarks and whooooooaaaa!"
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"YOU are a sock puppet you lying piece of shit!"
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"And ugly as fuck to boot!!!"Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"I am unlike anyone you have ever met and ever will-
don't pigeon hole me you son of a bitch!"
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"I am Just analytically correct-
you are ugly as fuck inside and out."
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"Now whos the fucking bully asshole?" Edmond
Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"Wait till we meet in person ass hole I'll rip you
a new one then too." Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"Got a problem with it TV? Killfile me bitch."
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"Snipped your 196th spam of you fucking URL I will
never go to and no one gives a shit about."
Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
" Get out-if you think I'll ever let go of your ass you've got
another thing coming." Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
"EAT SHIT YOU UGLY BITCH!!!!!!" Edmond Wollmann P.M.A.F.A
Edmond Wollmann
Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
their own abusers continuance of it-therefore I will continue to
complain ad infinitum.
Path:
newshub.sdsu.edu!news1.best.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!cyclone.swbell.net!typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Message-ID:
<3692EB3B...@pacbell.net>
From:
anonym™ <ano...@pacbell.net>
Reply-To:
ano...@pacbell.net
Organization:
Organization
X-Mailer:
Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version:
1.0
Newsgroups:
alt.astrology, alt.astrology.metapsych
Subject:
Re: The Quintessential Kook
References:
<19990105025949...@ng117.aol.com>
<3692D9...@yahooo.com>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Lines:
118
Date:
Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:49:30 -0800
NNTP-Posting-Host:
209.79.180.238
X-Complaints-To:
ab...@pacbell.net
X-Trace:
typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 915598131
209.79.180.238 (Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:48:51 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:
Tue, 05 Jan 1999 20:48:51 PDT
Xref:
newshub.sdsu.edu alt.astrology:251348
alt.astrology.metapsych:28136
Asshole™ wrote:
anonym™ wrote:
>
> Asshole™ wrote:
> >
> > Suzyqyou in elaborate defensiveness wrote:
> >
>
> ... I am afraid as usual you tell
> > us of you and your limitations and nothing of me or the concept of
> > deserving.
> >
> > > Besides being an asshole of monumental proportions
> >
> > This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person"
>
> SNIP!
>
> Not when it's true, ASShole.
> >
> > > and the most
> > > bald-faced, shameless liar I have ever the misfortune to encounter, you are the
> > > most disgusting egoist posting on Usenet today. The elaborate defense system
> >
> > Ah, ah! I am not the one with Mars in Cancer square Saturn in
> > Libra-
>
> No, you are the one with a biker in your mouth and panties on your head
> and 1000 dollars that you stole from Susan in your pocket.
>
> ..
>
> >
> > Because it demonstrates WHO has the elaborate defense system and who has
> > constructive argued and posted articles on astrology.
>
> Yeah.
>
> You're the one with the elaborate defense system!
>
> ...
>
> >Making fun of someone
> > because of their state
>
> You mean your uncontrollable bowel problem?
>
> > I asked you
> > to think twice about starting a personal war here but you and your
> > "elaborate defense system"
>
> SNIP!
> Forget the other buzzwords!
>
> "Elaborate Defense System" is THIS WEEK'S *special* phrase!
> >
> > >The *only*
> > > reason anyone attacks you is because of me! Wollmann, you are off yur rocker!
> >
> > I did not say that is the only reason, but one of them. And since you
> > are all cowards along with most of the astrological community, I am left
> > as the only one posting truth instead of kindergarten attacks.
>
> You are left as the kookiest ASSHOLE.
> ...
> >
> > > Uh, huh, sure, pantihed.
> >
> > More ad hominems. Didn't most of us stop silly schoolyard names in about
> > 4th or 5th grade?
Please take action.
Mark Backues
alt.astrology.metapsych are swamped with this stuff,
and meaningful postings are pretty much washed out.
-**** Posted from remarQ, Discussions Start Here(tm) ****-
http://www.remarq.com/ - Host to the the World's Discussions & Usenet
Robbin Roberts
Edmond Wollmann wrote in message <36953F...@edmond.hwo>...
>Your client continues to spam-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,violate
>Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
>their own abusers continuance of it-therefore I will continue to
>complain ad infinitum.
Please cease spamming, Mr. Wollmann. We will not tolerate it, nor will we
tolerate your unconscionable behavior any more. Certain paranormal
proponents have banded together and are in the process of dealing with you
as we speak. Kudos to all those who have made it a success so far. There of
course is the matter of your rape conviction in New Mexico when you were 22,
but we'll keep that our little secret.
Lucianarchy aka Robbin Roberts
Edmond Wollmann
> Edmond Wollmann wrote in message <36953F...@edmond.hwo>...
> >Your client continues to spam-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,violate
> >Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
> >their own abusers continuance of it-therefore I will continue to
> >complain ad infinitum.
> Please cease spamming, Mr. Wollmann.
You obviously have no clue what spam is.
> We will not tolerate it, nor will we
> tolerate your unconscionable behavior any more. Certain paranormal
> proponents have banded together and are in the process of dealing with you
> as we speak. Kudos to all those who have made it a success so far.
Thats a lie.
>There of
> course is the matter of your rape conviction in New Mexico when you were 22,
> but we'll keep that our little secret.
HHHmmmm. Interesting. Public records show me in college in California at
age 22.
> Lucianarchy aka Robbin Roberts
Nice try abuser. Forged Headers follow, complaints sent.
Path:
newshub.sdsu.edu!newshub.csu.net!usc!howland.erols.net!remarQ73!supernews.com!news.alt.net!usenet
From:
"Robbin Roberts" <Robbin...@uudial.org>
Newsgroups:
alt.astrology, alt.paranormal
Subject:
Re: The Quintessential Kook Ed Wollmann continues to
demonstrate the support of unethical policy of
personal destruction and violation of his school's AUP
Date:
Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:42:04 -0800
Organization:
pipex.net
Lines:
18
Message-ID:
<773kdf$30b$0...@dosa.alt.net>
References:
<19990105025949...@ng117.aol.com>
<3692D9...@yahooo.com>
<3692EB3B...@pacbell.net> <36953F...@edmond.hwo>
X-Newsreader:
Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE:
Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Xref:
newshub.sdsu.edu alt.astrology:251689
alt.paranormal:143642
anonym™
Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
> Robbin Roberts wrote:
>
> > Edmond Wollmann wrote in message <36953F...@edmond.hwo>...
> > >Your client continues to spam-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,violate
> > >Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
> > >their own abusers continuance of it-therefore I will continue to
> > >complain ad infinitum.
>
> > Please cease spamming, Mr. Wollmann.
>
> You obviously have no clue what spam is.
It's what got you kicked off of AOL FIVE times for, and what led
Earthlink to yank your Usenet posting privileges.
>
> > We will not tolerate it, nor will we
> > tolerate your unconscionable behavior any more. Certain paranormal
> > proponents have banded together and are in the process of dealing with you
> > as we speak. Kudos to all those who have made it a success so far.
> Thats a lie.
Prove it, assshole.
>
> >There of
> > course is the matter of your rape conviction in New Mexico when you were 22,
> > but we'll keep that our little secret.
>
> HHHmmmm. Interesting. Public records show me in college in California at
> age 22.
Nothing that stops you from a little weekend choke, gag, and hump, is there?
I notice you didn't deny it. Maybe someone's digging up the REAL shit on
Edi now!
Those public records can be obtained from what agency?
>
> > Lucianarchy aka Robbin Roberts
>
> Nice try abuser. Forged Headers follow,
Are you forging headers again, Ed?
widdershins
>Robbin Roberts wrote:
>
>> Edmond Wollmann wrote in message <36953F...@edmond.hwo>...
>> >Your client continues to spam-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,violate
>> >Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
>> >their own abusers continuance of it-therefore I will continue to
>> >complain ad infinitum.
>
>> Please cease spamming, Mr. Wollmann.
>
>You obviously have no clue what spam is.
>
>> We will not tolerate it, nor will we
>> tolerate your unconscionable behavior any more. Certain paranormal
>> proponents have banded together and are in the process of dealing with you
>> as we speak. Kudos to all those who have made it a success so far.
>Thats a lie.
>
>>There of
>> course is the matter of your rape conviction in New Mexico when you were 22,
>> but we'll keep that our little secret.
>
>HHHmmmm. Interesting. Public records show me in college in California at
>age 22.
>
Snippeth!
Woohoo!! The kooks are having at one another! Oh, what a
lovely war!
"Actually, I'm quite respected, and well liked."
Ed Wollmann, spammer, censor, wannabe netcop, top candidate for KOTY 1998.
anonym™
Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
> Gary L. Burnore wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:34:46 -0800, in article
> > <lwbl2.14703$n4.111827694@WReNphoon2>, mbac...@diamond.idbsu.edu (Mark
> > Backues) wrote:
> >
> > >Yes, what is all this? Both alt.astrology and
> > >alt.astrology.metapsych are swamped with this stuff,
> > >and meaningful postings are pretty much washed out.
> > >
> >
> > If Edmund Panty Head WOllmann would stop SPAMMING and Abusing and making
> > physical threats of violence, the "stuff" would die down quickly.
> >
> > Thank Eddie for the "mess".
>
> Wrong, Gary Burnore is a
Smart cookie
> who is trying to
rid
> alt.astrology and metapsych
of Ed Wollmann
>because he's best friend of
Nathan Wollmann?
Naah. Don'tt think so.
anonym™
"Gary L. Burnore" wrote:
>
> On 8 Jan 1999 00:39:36 GMT, in article <369553...@yahooo.com>, Edmond
> Wollmann <arctu...@yahooo.com> wrote:
>
> >Gary L. Burnore wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:34:46 -0800, in article
> >> <lwbl2.14703$n4.111827694@WReNphoon2>, mbac...@diamond.idbsu.edu (Mark
> >> Backues) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yes, what is all this? Both alt.astrology and
> >> >alt.astrology.metapsych are swamped with this stuff,
> >> >and meaningful postings are pretty much washed out.
> >> >
> >>
> >> If Edmund Panty Head WOllmann would stop SPAMMING and Abusing and making
> >> physical threats of violence, the "stuff" would die down quickly.
> >>
> >> Thank Eddie for the "mess".
> >
> >Wrong, Gary Burnore is a convicted criminal who is trying to disrupt
>
> >alt.astrology and metapsych because he's best friend of Rick Lazzarini
> >AKA ano...@pacebll.net the abuser.
> Eddie forgets to mention his felony confictions for assault with a deadly
> weapon and heroine possesion.
And now someone is saying he has a rape conviction?
I believe it.
> I was convicted of a misdemeanor and spent no
> jail time.
I wonder if Eddie picked up his La Jolla Biker Pub suction techniques in jail.
>
> Other than in USENet,I don't even know anonym
THAT'S TRUE!
> and I doubt his name is Rick
> Lazzarini
It isn't!
>but Eddie thinks he is.
He's wrong!
>
> Eddie forgets to mention his felony convictions for assault with a deadly
> weapon and heroin possesion.
He sounds like the type.
Ed will be glad to see me not express any skepticism here!
anonym™
Mark Backues wrote:
>
> Yes, what is all this? Both alt.astrology and
>
> alt.astrology.metapsych are swamped with this stuff,
>
> and meaningful postings are pretty much washed out.
>
Sad, isn't it?
anonym™
Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>
> Your client continues to spam
I've never spammed.
Ever.
>-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,
Not according to the groovy new charter, baby.
> violate
> Pacbell's own AUP, and Nick Nicolas, Robin Dowd and Jason Barr support
> their own abusers continuance of it
It's called Rights to Free Speech.
>-therefore I will continue to
> complain ad infinitum.
Nobody's surprised at that, you powerless asshole.
>
> Asshole™ wrote:
>
> anonym™ wrote:
> >
> > Asshole™ wrote:
> > >
> > > Suzyqyou in elaborate defensiveness wrote:
> > >
> >
> > ... I am afraid as usual you tell
> > > us of you and your limitations and nothing of me or the concept of
> > > deserving.
> > >
> > > > Besides being an asshole of monumental proportions
> > >
> > > This fallacy is called "Argument Against the Person"
> >
> > SNIP!
> >
> > Not when it's true, ASShole.
> > >
> > > > and the most
> > > > bald-faced, shameless liar I have ever the misfortune to encounter, you are the
> > > > most disgusting egoist posting on Usenet today. The elaborate defense system
> > >
> > > Ah, ah! I am not the one with Mars in Cancer square Saturn in
> > > Libra-
> >
> > No, you are the one with a biker in your mouth and panties on your head
> > and 1000 dollars that you stole from Susan in your pocket.
> >
> > ..
> >
> > >
> > > Because it demonstrates WHO has the elaborate defense system and who has
> > > constructive argued and posted articles on astrology.
> >
> > Yeah.
> >
> > You're the one with the elaborate defense system!
> >
> > ...
> >
> > >Making fun of someone
> > > because of their state
> >
> > You mean your uncontrollable bowel problem?
> >
> > > I asked you
> > > to think twice about starting a personal war here but you and your
> > > "elaborate defense system"
> >
> > SNIP!
> > Forget the other buzzwords!
> >
> > "Elaborate Defense System" is THIS WEEK'S *special* phrase!
> > >
> > > >The *only*
> > > > reason anyone attacks you is because of me! Wollmann, you are off yur rocker!
> > >
> > > I did not say that is the only reason, but one of them. And since you
> > > are all cowards along with most of the astrological community, I am left
> > > as the only one posting truth instead of kindergarten attacks.
> >
> > You are left as the kookiest ASSHOLE.
> > ...
> > >
> > > > Uh, huh, sure, pantihed.
> > >
> > > More ad hominems. Didn't most of us stop silly schoolyard names in about
> > > 4th or 5th grade?
>
> Please take action.
Notice he snipped out the part where I reposted all the filthy names
he's called people and exposed him as the fucking hypocrite he is.
Edmond Wollmann
>
> On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:34:46 -0800, in article
> <lwbl2.14703$n4.111827694@WReNphoon2>, mbac...@diamond.idbsu.edu (Mark
>
> >Yes, what is all this? Both alt.astrology and
> >alt.astrology.metapsych are swamped with this stuff,
> >and meaningful postings are pretty much washed out.
> >
>
> physical threats of violence, the "stuff" would die down quickly.
>
> Thank Eddie for the "mess".
Wrong, Gary Burnore is a convicted criminal who is trying to disrupt
alt.astrology and metapsych because he's best friend of Rick Lazzarini
AKA ano...@pacebll.net the abuser.
Header of the abuser follows;
Path:
wn7!attworldnet!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!206.165.3.11!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
From:
gbur...@databasix.com (Gary L. Burnore)
Newsgroups:
alt.astrology, alt.astrology.metapsych,
alt.bonehead.edmund-wollmann, alt.edmund-wollmanns-son-is-a-whore
Subject:
Re: The Quintessential Kook ano...@pacbell.net
continues to demonstrate the support of Pacbells policy of personal
destruction and violation of their own AUP
Date:
Fri, 08 Jan 1999 00:19:21 GMT
Organization:
The Home Office in Wazoo, NE
Lines:
13
Message-ID:
<369c4ed9....@news.primenet.com>
References:
<36953F...@edmond.hwo>
<19990105025949...@ng117.aol.com> <3692D9...@yahooo.com>
<3692EB3B...@pacbell.net>
<lwbl2.14703$n4.111827694@WReNphoon2>
Reply-To:
gbur...@databasix.com
NNTP-Posting-Host:
dbdev.databasix.com
Mime-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
X-Complaints-To:
ab...@globalcenter.net
X-Posted-By:
@206.66.160.163 (gburnore)
X-Newsreader:
Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
X-No-Archive:
yes
Xref:
wn7 alt.astrology:179039
alt.astrology.metapsych:27108
Pete
Burnore) wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Jan 1999 19:36:18 -0800, in article <3692D9...@yahooo.com>,
>Edmond Wollmann <arctu...@yahooo.com> wrote:
>
>>As I said, you can call me pantihead
>
>Ok. But Pantyhead or Pantihead mean the same thing Eddie.
pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester has a
relevant command of the language.
Pete
Burnore) wrote:
>On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:13:32 -0800, in article <36953F...@edmond.hwo>,
>Edmond Wollmann <woll...@edmond.hwo> wrote:
>
>>Your client continues to spam-OFF topic alt.astrology.metapsych,
>He's not off topic Eddie. You are.
pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester (he was raped
by a ten year old when her mother wasn't home) waxes eloquent.
Avital Pilpel
Pete wrote in message <3695dfaf...@nntp.c-zone.net>...
>pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester (he **was raped
>by a ten year old*** when her mother wasn't home) waxes eloquent.
Er... let me get this straight:
Now you're claiming not that he raped her, but that SHE (the 10-year-old)
raped HIM?
Get help, Pete.
Fast.
Luis Cypher
>>head waxes the dicks of little boys with his tongue.
Gary, I don't care what your fantasies are. I just wish you'd clean
up your posts.
Pete
Pete comments: no, that is the story gary burnore the convicted child
molester has been using to justify his conviction for raping a ten
year old girl in her own home while her mother was away.
Why do you defend a convicted child molester who post only foul slime
on alt.astrology?
you should like you need either some help or someone to help you
understand what you read.
Pete
>
>
Pete
Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
Pete
>
>
Stella
Pete wrote:
>
<snip of newbie meets usenet survivor>
>
>
> Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
Pete,
I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
gossip, when are you going to post something astrological without
reverting to personal attacks. Before you disappeared from this NG for
months you elaborately disgusted everybody with your foul imagination,
and here you are continuing with descriptions of sick imagery. I have
been raped and I would personally trust Gary Burnore to treat me with
respect, and as an equal human being, rather than you. And when are you
going to stop attacking tropical astrology? If you believe sidereal
astrology is more valid than tropical, why don't you use this forum to
prove your claim rather than fulfilling your martian imperative?
--
Stella Hill
Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
"Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
Glitter like a swarm of fire-flies tangled in a silver braid."
-Tennyson
<to email me: remove NOSPAM.>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pamela Gross
wrote:
>
>
>Pete wrote:
>
>>
>
><snip of newbie meets usenet survivor>
>
>>
>>
>> Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
>> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
>
>Pete,
>
>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
>gossip, when are you going to post something astrological without
>reverting to personal attacks.
I personally would be interested in learning a little about sidereal
astrology...it would be great if the siderealists would focus on that!
love to all
Pam
--
Pamela Gross
be...@ix.netcom.com * http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1962
Rheumatic Disease Web Site!!! http://www.silcom.com/~sblc/
Lou Minatti™
>
> On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 00:19:43 GMT, luis....@nashville.com (Luis
> Cypher) wrote:
>
> >On 8 Jan 1999 10:22:34 -0500, gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
> >>>head waxes the dicks of little boys with his tongue.
> >
> >Gary, I don't care what your fantasies are. I just wish you'd clean
> >up your posts.
>
> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
You mean he's copying your style, Peat?
--
We're watching you at SpOOk Central.
http://www.watchingyou.com
Includes brand-new Y2K-compliant Strange Foreign Objects!
Rick
>Why do you defend a convicted child molester who post only foul slime
>on alt.astrology?
Why do you continue to lie, peat? Are you manic this week?
Pete
pete comments: so we find another apologist for gary burnore the
convicted child molester coming to his defense. So all septic
cultist cultists that attack astrologers on alt.astrology (that
includes bob officer) are supporters of pedophilia (rape of ten year
old girls.)
>
Pete
old girls.) As follows:
GARY BURNORE (CHESTER THE MOLESTER)
Author:victor
Email: victor6...@agoron.com
Date:1999/01/02
Forums:alt.fan.gburnore
To anyone unlucky enough having met Gary Burnore online.
If you have made it to this newsgroup then you have reached the
newsgroup dedicated to Gary Burnore sex offender.
Gary is currently on probation for screwing around with his then
girlfriends underage daughter. If you meet Gary online you have met
the scum of the internet. He seems himself as a net cop when most
others see him as a net cock.
Gary with his gray hair and pot belly was sentenced to a 3 year
probation. His conviction date was 03-13-97.
Gary please try to become human while your serving your probation
Your friend
Vic
>
Pete
>In article <36992b33...@nntp.c-zone.net>, Pete <pet...@c-zone.net> wrote:
>Nothing. Admitting he's a sodomizer and a rapist.
>--
>gbur...@databasix.com mailto:gbur...@databasix.com
Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester is really
trying to discredit my exposing him for what he is. Note how he
refused to admit his being a pedophile while accusing others of doing
what he was convicted for. Here is the proof:
Pete comments: more denial from gary burnore the convicted child
molester: here is the proof of the turth:
AGroovyKat
>On 11 Jan 1999 00:13:49 -0800, el...@no.spam (Rick) wrote:
>
>>In article <3699223e...@nntp.c-zone.net>, Pete <pet...@c-zone.net>
>wrote:
>>
>>>Why do you defend a convicted child molester who post only foul slime
>>>on alt.astrology?
>>
>>Why do you continue to lie, peat? Are you manic this week?
>
>pete comments: so we find another apologist for gary burnore the
>convicted child molester coming to his defense. So all septic
>cultist cultists that attack astrologers on alt.astrology (that
>includes bob officer) are supporters of pedophilia (rape of ten year
>old girls.)
Shut up and take your meds, pete.
--
AGroovyKat (remove purrrrrr to Email)
Scorpio Rising Club
Official Cahooters(TM) #9
IRC, #catch-22 & #pams_friends Undernet
"Once in a while you get shown the light,
In the strangest of places if you look at it right."
Pete
wrote:
>
>
>Pete wrote:
>
>>
>
><snip of newbie meets usenet survivor>
>
>>
>>
>> Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
>> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
>
>Pete,
>
>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
>gossip,
Pete comments: why do you defend a convicted child molester that
attack astrologers on alt.astrology? You can verify this information
for yoursslf instead of attacking me personally:
Pete comments: more denial from gary burnore the convicted child
molester: here is the proof of the turth:
GARY BURNORE (CHESTER THE MOLESTER)
Author:victor
Email: victor6...@agoron.com
Date:1999/01/02
Forums:alt.fan.gburnore
To anyone unlucky enough having met Gary Burnore online.
If you have made it to this newsgroup then you have reached the
newsgroup dedicated to Gary Burnore sex offender.
Gary is currently on probation for screwing around with his then
girlfriends underage daughter. If you meet Gary online you have met
the scum of the internet. He seems himself as a net cop when most
others see him as a net cock.
Gary with his gray hair and pot belly was sentenced to a 3 year
probation. His conviction date was 03-13-97.
Gary please try to become human while your serving your probation
Your friend
Vic
when are you going to post something astrological without
>reverting to personal attacks. Before you disappeared from this NG for
>months you elaborately disgusted everybody with your foul imagination,
>and here you are continuing with descriptions of sick imagery. I have
>been raped and I would personally trust Gary Burnore to treat me with
>respect,
Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester posted on
alt.astrology that women astrologers were "cunts" and "bitchs." I
can repost the post if you like.
Why don't you take the time to find out the truth of the matter before
you post your nonsense?
and as an equal human being, rather than you. And when are you
>going to stop attacking tropical astrology? If you believe sidereal
>astrology is more valid than tropical, why don't you use this forum to
>prove your claim rather than fulfilling your martian imperative?
> Stella Hill
> Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
>
Pete comments: so, now we understand the personal attack. You are a
tropical housologist whoo doesn't approve of my saying in public that
you are not an astrologer. Just a psychic using what you believe to
be astrology as a take off point for your psychic reception.
Note you do not have to defend a convicted child molester that has and
will continue to attack female astrologers here on alt.astrology by
callinbg them "bitches" and "cunts" to discuss my posts about tropical
housologyy not having anything to do with astrology. Just discuss
the issures as raised in my posts on the subject.
For one thing, you might answer a long standing requuest of mine - one
made on the board over and over and over for over four year now --
and one directed specifically at Robert Hand and Ken Irving - post
one thing within your astrology that works every time in every chart.
Go ahead, prove that what you do is in fact a result of what is taking
place up in the sky. I know for a fact that you cannot do it. I know
for a fact that Robert Hand cannot post of one thing that always works
in the same way within what he insists is astrology. And of course
one read of a current American Astrology Magazine - (ken irving is
editor) will show that ken iriving doesn't do astrology either.
Regards, Pete
Pete
wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:55:26 +0000, Stella <ma...@pop.net.ntl.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Pete wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>><snip of newbie meets usenet survivor>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
>>> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
>>
>>Pete,
>>
>>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
>>gossip, when are you going to post something astrological without
>>reverting to personal attacks.
>
>I personally would be interested in learning a little about sidereal
>astrology...it would be great if the siderealists would focus on that!
>
>love to all
>Pam
>
>
>--
>Pamela Gross
Pete comments: Pamela, sign on to my web page (
www.c-zone.net/sidereaal/ ) and download the SIDEREAL ANTHOLOGY by
Kay Cavender. It is kind of long - but contains all the seminal work
of those who are responsible for the re discovery of astrology here in
the West. It is a must read if you are into astrology in any way -
and will give you the direction you need to learn sidereal.
Or, you can start right out being a sidereal astrologer. All you need
to do is switch zodiacs. Cast your charts in the sidereal. Read them
in the same manner you are reading your tropical charts. The only
difference will be that the astrology parts will now actually work.
Contact me email if you need further help or direction,
regards, Pete
Pete
of the sepitic cultist is a truth:
On 10 Jan 1999 17:21:16 PST, Lou Minatti™ <loumi...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>Pete wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 00:19:43 GMT, luis....@nashville.com (Luis
>> Cypher) wrote:
>>
>> >On 8 Jan 1999 10:22:34 -0500, gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
>> >>>head waxes the dicks of little boys with his tongue.
>> >
>> >Gary, I don't care what your fantasies are. I just wish you'd clean
>> >up your posts.
>>
>> Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester doesn't know
>> the foul slime he uses to communicate is dirty.
>
Lou Minatti™
>
> pete comments: lou lou again proves the SATURN/NEPTUNE astro signature
> of the sepitic cultist is a truth:
Peat, if you're gonna flame people, at least learn some basic grammar
skills.
L@L
>"Once in a while you get shown the light,
>In the strangest of places if you look at it right."
http://www.angelfire.com/me/lucianarchy/index.html
Stella
original post is not on my server]
gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>
> :>
> :>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
> :>gossip,
> :
> : Pete comments: why do you defend a convicted child molester that
> : attack astrologers on alt.astrology? You can verify this information
> : for yoursslf instead of attacking me personally:
Gary attacks kooks and trolls like you, not astrologers. Gary has shown
concern for me, a female astrologer, whereas you, instead of apologizing for
your disgusting behaviour and answering my questions, you have turned your
attack on me. So tell me Pete, *who* exactly attacks astrologers on
alt.astrology?
>
>
> Everyone has verified it Pete. You're lying. There was no 10 year old girl
> and there was no molestation. You're lying.
>
> : Pete comments: more denial from gary burnore the convicted child
> : molester: here is the proof of the turth:
Are you an idiot? How do you consider Victor's libelous post to usenet,
proof? I don't think it would be seen as proof in the courts of law. Just
because someone else happens to agree with your belief, does not mean it
constitutes the truth. But hey, you must really think this is the case,
otherwise you would not be risking your C-Zone.net acount by spamming this
rubbish on a.a, claiming it is "proof of the turth<sic>".
>
>
> Oh right, the turth (cut and paste so you're now WELL over bi. Time to
> start the cancels)
Has anyone calculated the BI on this yet?
> :
> :
> : GARY BURNORE (CHESTER THE MOLESTER)
> :
> : Author:victor
> : Email: victor6...@agoron.com
> : Date:1999/01/02
> : Forums:alt.fan.gburnore
>
<snip of spam>
>
>
> Same victor who says he likes to fuck his dog. Typical type of person Pete
> hangs out with: EIther those that LIKE it in the ass or those who force it
> into the ass of others like he did to that boy. It's true Pete. I saw the
> proof.
> :
> :
> :
> : Pete comments: gary burnore the convicted child molester posted on
> : alt.astrology that women astrologers were "cunts" and "bitchs." I
> : can repost the post if you like.
>
> Nope. Not women astrologers. Pam and several other women post here and
> they're not bitches or cunts. Marsha (eds sock) is a cunt. Luci (spamming
> forging lying bitch is a BITCH). Naturally, you defend the scurge of the
> internet.
>
> :
> : Why don't you take the time to find out the truth of the matter before
> : you post your nonsense?
How can you claim I am posting nonsense when I have a legitimate complaint
concerning your blatant obsession with sexual perversion? *That* is the truth
of the matter - *your* supposed 'turth' seems to be based on conjecture and
exaggeration.
>
>
> Everyone has Pete. That's how they know I'm telling the truth and you're a
> liar. Goes real good for your business doesn't it Pete.
>
> :
> :
> : and as an equal human being, rather than you. And when are you
> :>going to stop attacking tropical astrology? If you believe sidereal
> :>astrology is more valid than tropical, why don't you use this forum to
> :>prove your claim rather than fulfilling your martian imperative?
> :> Stella Hill
> :> Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
> :>
> : Pete comments: so, now we understand the personal attack.
I did not personally attack you, I questioned your need to repeatedly attack
Gary and other members of this NG. I asked you simple questions, I did not
call you names or disrespect your method of astrology.
>
>
> No personal attack. Just facts about you Pete the RAPIST.
>
> : You are a
> : tropical housologist whoo doesn't approve of my saying in public that
> : you are not an astrologer. Just a psychic using what you believe to
> : be astrology as a take off point for your psychic reception.
So it seems you cannot respect me as a fellow astrologer, it seems you prefer
to call me a rather derogatory term "tropical houseologist", rather like your
other derogatory catchphrases for people who are different to you, like
"septic cultists", "wanna be Nazi Jew burners", "anti-astro clones". What do
you call racial minorities I wonder?
Personally I do not care what you decide to call me, what you fail to see is
my objection to your personal attacks and perverse imagination. I brought up
the astrology discussion because *this is an astrology NG*, it may be a
difficult concept for you to grasp, for it seems that you and Lucianarchy are
the only two who daily troll in excess with personal attacks.
By the way, I am not a psychic and I do not believe astrology works - so how
can I believe that tropical astrology serves as a psychic take off point?
> :
> : Note you do not have to defend a convicted child molester that has and
> : will continue to attack female astrologers here on alt.astrology by
> : callinbg them "bitches" and "cunts" to discuss my posts about tropical
> : housologyy not having anything to do with astrology. Just discuss
> : the issures as raised in my posts on the subject.
That was my point - you have raised no issues about astrology in your posts,
you seem more concerned with attacking everyone around you.
> :
> : For one thing, you might answer a long standing requuest of mine - one
> : made on the board over and over and over for over four year now --
> : and one directed specifically at Robert Hand and Ken Irving - post
> : one thing within your astrology that works every time in every chart.
Didn't you read my sig? I am a sceptic astrologer - oh, let me translate that
for you in a language you understand - I am a "septic tropical houseologist".
I do not believe astrology works every time, far from it.
> :
> : Go ahead, prove that what you do is in fact a result of what is taking
> : place up in the sky. I know for a fact that you cannot do it. I know
> : for a fact that Robert Hand cannot post of one thing that always works
> : in the same way within what he insists is astrology. And of course
> : one read of a current American Astrology Magazine - (ken irving is
> : editor) will show that ken iriving doesn't do astrology either.
So let me turn the tables on you. Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology
you practice works every time. Give me a list of confirmed data which proves
sidereal astrology works better than chance, with full references. I want
hard proof and evidence - go ahead!
> :
> : So what if I DID force a 13 year old boy to have sex with me? It was
> : before megans law so there's nothing you can do about it!
So you admit you are a rapist and sodomizer of a young child - have you heard
of "what goes around, comes around"? You are right, there is nothing I can do
about it, but I rest assured that you will get your punishment in time.
--
Stella Hill
Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
"Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
Stella
Stella wrote:
> [I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
> original post is not on my server]
>
And for that reason I apologize to Pete for assuming he had written the last
sentence of the post I replied to - my server has picked up Pete's original post
now. Sorry.
The rest still stands, however.
anonyml
> Stella Hill
> Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
Stella, why do you use Gary Burnore's blatant forgery of Pete's post to argue with Pete
Stapleton?
Sherilyn uses you as an example of integrity and an astrologer. Your integrity as a sceptic
is completely shot by resorting to the tactics you use above.
Ask yourself why Burnore would resort to forging a post to deflect the heat away from
himself. Do you condone such behaviour?
Feel free to use the Troll or Killfile card to evade responding.
BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
interesting facts:
################################################################
http://x15.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=344836260&CONTEXT=916149732.210829458&hitnum=10
Re: Gary Lee Burnore, Registered Sex Offender in Raleigh, NC more options
Author: Anonymous
Email: nob...@REPLAY.COM
Date: 1998/04/17
Forums: news.admin.net-abuse.email, triangle.general, alt.fan.gburnore, alt.astrology,
alt.cypherpunks, news.admin.censorship, news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, misc.kids, talk.rape
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Lee Burnore <gbur...@databasix.com> wrote:
> In 11/96, I kissed a 17 year old girl. I'm not going to provide you
> with a lot of detail because this isn't the place for it.
If the girl's mother had heeded the earlier warning she received via e-mail
about your behavior several months earlier (the one you called "harassment"
at the time), this all could have been prevented. You're lucky that the
11/96 "kiss" is all you were arrested for. You were foolish to continue it
knowing that Nancy had already been tipped off.
In case you've forgotten, you whined:
-> So now the cowards in Ronald Francis's corner (I'm outright expecting the
-> culprit to be ronald francis himself) have taken to sending email to
-> those who have names listed on databasix's web page. Sending comments to
-> a 17 year old that they're going to tell her mother that she's having an
-> affair with me. Telling her mother that I'm molesting her daughter.
-> Having all sorts of fun.
And you threatened to report the anonymous whistleblower to the
authorities? What chutzpah! You're molesting a minor, someone tips off
her mother, and you threaten to report the person who tipped her off about
your behavior?
Your claim has now been proven to be a lie. How would the mere fact that
the girl had a web page at databasix.com have alerted an outsider to the
fact that you were molesting her? Presumably she didn't post her diary on
her web page, detailing your sexual activities towards her. Where would
"Ronald Francis", or any other random "harasser" have obtained this
information? You were too quick to dismiss the idea that all the alleged
"harassment" and spam baiting might have originated from a DataBasix
insider with detailed knowledge of your private life, as well as the
complete list of all DataBasix employees and customers that Belinda Bryan
claimed had been "spam baited". Who else is getting ahold of all this
inside info, Gary?
> I pass no
> judgment on whether or not she instigated it. I held myself
> responsible. That's why I went to see a counselor and offered to pay
> for hers if she wanted to do the same.
>
> It was at the counselor's office that I learned what had happened was
> considered a crime under CA law. I discussed this with the girl and
> her mother; neither wanted to get law enforcement involved.
But apparently it was serious enough that both your victim and her mother
thought you needed psychiatric help. (Plenty of people on usenet could
have told you that.)
> To date, this ordeal has cost me nearly $30,000.00 in legal fees, lost
> wages, and other costs. That however, is nothing compared to the
> emotional stress of this.
You spent $30K on what was supposedly a misdemeanor charge to which you
pled guilty? Someone must have seen you "coming"? Was it Nancy?
The maximum penalty for a misdemeanor is what? 6 months + $500? You spent
$30K to get off with 3 years probation? On a 6 month sentence, you'd
probably have been out in 3 months, and that's assuming you got the maximum
sentence. Or was the $30K to get it plea bargained down from a more
serious charge?
> It goes on and on and on.
I thought the shrink was to ensure that if didn't.
> You know what's so damn frustrating about this? I chose to talk to a
> councelor about this even though I knew it would bring charges. I was
> doing the right thing.
What statute in California makes it a misdemeanor to kiss a 17 year old
girl? (It must make senior proms a lot of fun there if such a law really
exists as you claim.) Or does it depend on what part of her body you
"kissed" her?
It's also interesting that when it was revealed that you had also been
arrested in San Francisco for unlawful assembly in blocking traffic, you
minimized it and called it a mere "traffic ticket", concealing the fact
that you had already been convicted of something more serious.
Then when someone finally reveals a second criminal conviction on your
record, your sock puppets whine that it's a "half truth". Well, gee, Gary,
you were content when the WHOLE truth was being concealed. So much for you
"I have nothing to hide" boast!
#############################################################
http://x15.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=342947448&CONTEXT=916149732.210829458&hitnum=6
Author: Fantasia
Email: fant...@netcom.com
Date: 1998/04/11
Forums: triangle.general, news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
more headers
author profile
view thread
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <6ginsn$fbn$1...@pinta.pagesz.net>,
Camille Klein <god...@nina.pagesz.net> wrote:
>Quoth Mike Fox <mik...@ibm.net>:
>
>
>: So in this case, you can easily see on the web that Gary Burnore is a
>: registered sex offender. But if you want to verify his side of the
>: story, that "the bitch set me up" so to speak, well if you happen to be
>
>That's so near and yet so far. It was a case of a teenager deciding she
>wanted to have fun with Mom's boyfriend. Boyfriend realised what was
>going on (he woke up) and immediately called a halt to the nonsense.
According to the newly posted statement by Gary, he kissed the girl. The way
you state it, you make him free of responsibility, which he himself stated
he has accepted. If Gary was being attacked by this girl, why did he feel
guilty enough to seek counseling? Could it be his attorney, that he stated he
contacted, advised him to do so, knowing it would be a requirement of the
state anyhow? This would also look good going into court for sentencing,
too.
The way I read California State Code, the accused is allowed to enter a nolo
plea in a lessor charge of annoying a minor, and if the plea is accepted by
all partuies involved, the accused must go to counseling and pay fines. This
is the condition of the probationary time period. If the accused were to not
accept this, they would pay fines and also be sentenced to jail time.
By Gary's own words, he sought counseling, but was it court ordered after
the fact, or before the fact as he alleges? You claim to have talked to him
about this, yet his public statement varies in a large degree to what you
have been stating on his behalf.
His statement sounds as if he willfully kissed her, and felt guilty about
it. Definitely not the way you are making it sound. If he felt guilty enough
to seek counseling for it, then it would lead one to make the presumption
that Gary felt he had a problem in this area, in which case the conviction
stands as justified.
On the other hand, if the counseling were a part of the plea bargain
agreement as stated by California State Code, he had no choice but to attend
or to do time.
From my standpoint, it certainly looks like a lot of posturing on your part,
and perhaps.. *PERHAPS* that Gary is deflecting the full truth in certain
ways to further avoid full responsibility.
In any crime, the accused is allowed and afforded the opportunity to turn
themselves in. This also lends some creedence to leniency from the
court.This was evidenced in the OJ Simpson case. I am of the opinion that
Gary's statement is a partial truth, designed to make it look as though he
took the first step in seeking an action, yet the facts that are being
stated seem to refute that, to a large degree.
On the other hand, all your posturing on this looks as though Gary was the
wronged one, and was hauled into court by an overzealous mother. Reviewing
your replies in this thread, it would appear that as the facts come out, you
are twisting it to fit the circumstance in an effort to defend Gary, and
that Gary is twisting the particular facts to make himself look like the
good guy done wrong. That is, of course, my opinion.
>Boyfriend offered to pay for counselling for teenager. Unfortunately, in
>California health care professionals (mental and otherwise) are required
>to report all incidents of any sort of contact with a minor. This would
>have been the end of the story and Gary could have served his probation
>quietly--had it not been for the girlfriend deciding to be vindictive
>after breaking up with Gary.
Wait. If the accused had already been convicted and serving probation, where
does a vindictive girlfriend enter into it? To hear you and Gary tell it,
the deed was done, and he was doing his time on probation. Something doesn't
smell right here.
>: something he didn't like out here. Also, the fact that Camille
>: speculated that it may have been an out-of-countrol, blame-throwing
>: parent before she said she corresponded with Gary makes it look to me
>: that it would have been convenient for him to see her as someone
>: sympathetic and contact her and say "yeah, yeah, that's it." Plus the
>
>Interesting guess, but it's quite off the mark. I was the one who
>initiated the contact with Gary about this whole matter. He confirmed
>that I was, essentially, correct for the most part in my assessment of the
>situation. My only error was in that it was an overreactive counsellor
>rather than an overreactive parent.
Then how do you explain the contradictory remark I pointed out above? You
can only have one way with this, Camille. Either the overzealous counselor
did it, or the vindictive girlfriend.
>Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude in this country has gone from
>"innocent until proven guilty[1]" to "Guilty--we don't care if you're
>innocent or not!" So I doubt that we will see that.
Gary has just admitted his guilt. He admitted that what he did was wrong.
Why are you continuing to posture about this?
>: 3. Who initiated the criminal proceedings? A social worker? parents?
>: The girl? Someone else (i.e., jealous boyfriend (hers) or girlfriend
>: (his)) with an interest in the outcome?
>
>A counsellor who, according to California state law, was required to
>report all incidences of "sexual" contact (note the quotes--it ranges from
>a kiss on the lips to actually whipping it out and driving it home) with a
>minor to law enforcement.
Then why are so many of your statements contradictory to what Gary has
posted, and even self-contradictory? I still fail to see where the
vindictive girlfriend remarks come from when Gary himself stated he
contacted the girl and the mother, and they both refused to press charges.
If as you stated, he immediately told the mother, why did he have to call
her and bring the situation to light?
Something isn't right in all of this, and unless full documentation is
obtained, complete with dates, then it is all just posturing in someones
defense. The counseling may have well been court ordered, and if it preceeds
the conviction, or proceeds it by only a short time, it would make it
aparent that Gary did not willfully seek counseling, but was advised to do
so by the attorney. To do so beforehand would be used by the attorney to
show good faith on Gary's part to redeem himself to society.
This is done in instances of drug rehab before court dates, as well as DUI
school before court dates to avoid stiffer penalties. It also does not
alleviate the fact that in his own words, one would presume he felt he had a
problem in the area of young girls. Else, why would he seek counseling for
it, allegedly on his own?
While you are busy obtaining the documents, please do find a copy of the
original complaint. If you are going to be posting about the documents, you
should do so in whole, not just in part.
Oh, and the part about there not being a comparable offense from one state
to another, there are *many* crimes that vary in conviction rates from one
state to another. While some states view a crime as a misdameanor, other
states may view it as a felony. It still does not change the fact that a
conviction stands. It still does not change the fact that he must register
in any state, according to the state of conviction, for the SOR.
--
Email protected by spamgard (tm).
fant...@netcom.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~fantasia
Stella
Luci forging another screen name wrote:
> Stella wrote in message <369B41A3...@pop.net.ntl.com>...
> >[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
> >original post is not on my server]
> >
> >gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
> >
> >> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>
> >> : So what if I DID force a 13 year old boy to have sex with me? It was
> >> : before megans law so there's nothing you can do about it!
> >
> >So you admit you are a rapist and sodomizer of a young child - have you heard
> >of "what goes around, comes around"? You are right, there is nothing I can do
> >about it, but I rest assured that you will get your punishment in time.
> >
> > Stella Hill
> > Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
>
> Stella, why do you use Gary Burnore's blatant forgery of Pete's post to argue with Pete
> Stapleton?
>
It wasn't a tactic it was a genuine mistake, which I apologized for, and which you conveniently
seemed to have ignored. If you notice *I* have never claimed either Gary to be a child
molester, or even Pete to be a rapist and sodimizer, I only noted Pete's apparent admission
(which turns out to be a postal tweak on Gary's part in retaliation). I stated "what goes
around, comes around", therefore if Pete is innocent, he should not expect any retribution.
> Sherilyn uses you as an example of integrity and an astrologer. Your integrity as a sceptic
> is completely shot by resorting to the tactics you use above.
My integrity and honesty shows by the fact I admitted and apologized for a genuine mistake.
When are you going to apologize for your unwarranted attacks on other members of this NG? For
example:
Subject:
Re: Dreammin the schemin neg
Date:
Sat, 9 Jan 1999 20:34:18 -0000
From:
"anonyml" <ano...@dial.pipex.com>
Organization:
UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET
WorldCom)
Newsgroups:
alt.astrology, alt.paranormal, alt.spirituality.circle, talk.religion.newage
References:
1 , 2 , 3
You wrote -
"Edmond, remember those who "try" are merely a collection of drunks ( RClip), racists (RClip),
convicts( Burnore),
relationship-rejects(Jo), dysfunctional ( Anthony Sidaway), irresponsible (Pam), spammers
Bob Officer) and, of course, queen nym ( but he is the property of pacbell.net so can't
count ). So you have nothing to worry about."
> Ask yourself why Burnore would resort to forging a post to deflect the heat away from
> himself. Do you condone such behaviour?
As far as I can tell forgeries are part of usenet life, and you are quite hypocritical
pretending that forging is so sinful. Personally, I would not forge a post, but there again I
haven't got kooks harrassing me calling me a paedophile in a completely unrelated NG.
>
>
> Feel free to use the Troll or Killfile card to evade responding.
You are a troll, but looky-here, no evasion, just facts on my part.
>
>
> BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
God, not another person who thinks other people's opinions on usenet are the truth.
>
>
> The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>
> Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
> surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
> interesting facts:
Facts? You wouldn't know a fact if it smacked you in the face ... These posts are nothing more
than malicious gossip. <snip of usenet gossip>
You have no proof that Gary was involved in the raping of a young girl. Pete seems to think
the girl in question was 10, but other stories involve a 17 year old. So where are the facts?
It is quite possible that Gary is innocent and all that happened was an awkward kissing
situation which Gary felt uncomfortable about; in this case you are unlawfully dragging this
man's name through the shit, and giving him the very same feelings of victimisation and low
self-esteem that a rape victim feels. If he really did rape a 10/17 year old I am pretty
certain he would be serving a long jail sentence, which he is not - so unless you were actually
a member of jury at his trial you cannot possibly know the facts of this case.
--
Stella Hill
Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
"Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
anonyml
>
>
>Luci forging another screen name wrote:
Stella, why are you saying using anonyml is a forgery? I am perfectly entitled to use that
name. By claiming so, you are merely adding to the lie upon lie tactics used by the
fundamentalist loons who infest these newsgroups. If you have evidence of forgery, send it to
the appropriate abuse team to deal with. You will notice, despite all the flamage directed at
me, that my account is spotless. The reason is, I have *never* committed netabuse.
>> Stella wrote in message <369B41A3...@pop.net.ntl.com>...
>> >[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
>> >original post is not on my server]
>> >
>> >gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>>
>> >> : So what if I DID force a 13 year old boy to have sex with me? It was
>> >> : before megans law so there's nothing you can do about it!
>> >
>> >So you admit you are a rapist and sodomizer of a young child - have you heard
>> >of "what goes around, comes around"? You are right, there is nothing I can do
>> >about it, but I rest assured that you will get your punishment in time.
>> >
>> > Stella Hill
>> > Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
>>
>> Stella, why do you use Gary Burnore's blatant forgery of Pete's post to argue with Pete
>> Stapleton?
>>
>
>It wasn't a tactic it was a genuine mistake, which I apologized for, and which you
conveniently
>seemed to have ignored. If you notice *I* have never claimed either Gary to be a child
>molester, or even Pete to be a rapist and sodimizer, I only noted Pete's apparent admission
>(which turns out to be a postal tweak on Gary's part in retaliation). I stated "what goes
>around, comes around", therefore if Pete is innocent, he should not expect any retribution.
>
>> Sherilyn uses you as an example of integrity and an astrologer. Your integrity as a
sceptic
>> is completely shot by resorting to the tactics you use above.
>
>My integrity and honesty shows by the fact I admitted and apologized for a genuine mistake.
>When are you going to apologize for your unwarranted attacks on other members of this NG?
For
>example:
>
>Subject:
> Re: Dreammin the schemin neg
> Date:
> Sat, 9 Jan 1999 20:34:18 -0000
> From:
> "anonyml" <ano...@dial.pipex.com>
> Organization:
> UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET
> WorldCom)
> Newsgroups:
> alt.astrology, alt.paranormal, alt.spirituality.circle, talk.religion.newage
> References:
> 1 , 2 , 3
>
>
>You wrote -
>
>"Edmond, remember those who "try" are merely a collection of drunks ( RClip), racists
(RClip),
>convicts( Burnore),
>relationship-rejects(Jo), dysfunctional ( Anthony Sidaway), irresponsible (Pam), spammers
> Bob Officer) and, of course, queen nym ( but he is the property of pacbell.net so can't
>count ). So you have nothing to worry about."
So what? Those people are the scourge of these newsgroups and warrant nothing but disdain.
They operate on a pack of jackals mentality and need each other to back up their incessant
attacks on people they ' don't like' . At least I work entirely on my own and depend on no
one. If you don't like my opinion, tough.
>> Ask yourself why Burnore would resort to forging a post to deflect the heat away from
>> himself. Do you condone such behaviour?
>
>As far as I can tell forgeries are part of usenet life, and you are quite hypocritical
>pretending that forging is so sinful. Personally, I would not forge a post, but there again
I
>haven't got kooks harrassing me calling me a paedophile in a completely unrelated NG.
>
>>
>>
>> Feel free to use the Troll or Killfile card to evade responding.
>
>You are a troll, but looky-here, no evasion, just facts on my part.
Care to back up that assertion? If people think I am a troll, they should ignore me. Simple.
I merely post in response to the overwhelming abuse, lies and harassment spewed onto these
groups by the likes of Bob Officer ( look at the harassment about 'spam' he aims at Wollman
and Kettler, both are easy targets for the weak and cowards, yet his past sig was a clear
breach of Nettiquette. He was politlely asked to stop, his attitude in response was
breathtakingly obtuse and hypocritical considering his obbsession with spam ( remember, spam
is wasting bandwidth with repetitive data) that the result was that he got a taste of his own
medicine by being called on it, big deal ) , ano...@pacbell.net ( what do you think of his
posts claiming Luci is a baby killer, child abuser, murderer, drug-dealer ), Burnore ( same
charge ) and various others. I have stacks of email from proponents and sceptics alike who
will not post to these groups because of these idiots. It would take a brave newbie indeed to
post here! I will stick around simply to give my support to proponents and show how it is
possible for individuals to stand up to these facist bullies.
>>
>> BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
>
>God, not another person who thinks other people's opinions on usenet are the truth.
Did I say that they were? These groups are a cesspit of lies.
>>
>> The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>>
>> Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
>> surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
>> interesting facts:
>
>Facts? You wouldn't know a fact if it smacked you in the face ... These posts are nothing
more
>than malicious gossip.
Stella, all post on usenet can be classed as 'gossip'. What's your point?
>You have no proof that Gary was involved in the raping of a young girl.
Stella, I have not said Gary ever did.
>Pete seems to think
>the girl in question was 10, but other stories involve a 17 year old. So where are the
facts?
The post you refer to merely presented an alternative side to Pete's story. One which dealt
with the facts as presented by Gary himself. It seems the issue is around Gary unlawfully
kissing a minor, for which he got three years Probation.
AGroovyKat
>download the SIDEREAL ANTHOLOGY
Is this available on CD and Cassette?
--
AGroovyKat (remove purrrrrr to Email)
Scorpio Rising Club
Official Cahooters(TM) #9
IRC, #catch-22 & #pams_friends Undernet
"Once in a while you get shown the light,
LadyNi
anonyml <ano...@dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:77g175$eap$1...@plug.news.pipex.net...
...
>>God, not another person who thinks other people's opinions on usenet are
the truth.
>
>Did I say that they were? These groups are a cesspit of lies.
Thanks, Luci. I knew I wasn't the only one who thought so.
Luv'n Peas,
--
LadyNi P.M.A.F.A.(astrologer/toadologer)
http://www.bcpl.net/~wnidiffe/bamt/pmafa.html
Toadology Publications/Consultations
http://www.bcpl.net/~wnidiffe/bamt/tfhome.html
Stella
anonyml wrote:
> Stella wrote in message <369B7994...@pop.net.ntl.com>...
> >
> >
> >Luci forging another screen name wrote:
>
> Stella, why are you saying using anonyml is a forgery? I am perfectly entitled to use that
> name. By claiming so, you are merely adding to the lie upon lie tactics used by the
> fundamentalist loons who infest these newsgroups. If you have evidence of forgery, send it to
> the appropriate abuse team to deal with. You will notice, despite all the flamage directed at
> me, that my account is spotless. The reason is, I have *never* committed netabuse.
My point is, why are you using screen names which very closely resemble other posters on
alt.astrology, if it were not to create confusion to newbies? Only recently you were complaining
that someone had forged a post claiming to be from Lucianarchy. Which is it to be? Forgeries
are meant to deceive, and you appear to be attempting this and avoiding people's killfiles by
changing your screen name. Why haven't you got the guts to keep to the same name?
In your opinion - but where is the proof that Sherilyn is dysfunctional, Pam is irresponsible
etc, etc? All the people you mentioned above regularly contribute to astrological discussion,
but you do not - so how do you come to the conclusion that these people are "the scourge of these
newsgroups"?
> They operate on a pack of jackals mentality and need each other to back up their incessant
> attacks on people they ' don't like' . At least I work entirely on my own and depend on no
> one. If you don't like my opinion, tough.
Luci logic - I'm better than all of you, because I am right even though nobody else agrees. That
buggers up the concept of democracy, doesn't it?
>
>
> >> Ask yourself why Burnore would resort to forging a post to deflect the heat away from
> >> himself. Do you condone such behaviour?
> >
> >As far as I can tell forgeries are part of usenet life, and you are quite hypocritical
> >pretending that forging is so sinful. Personally, I would not forge a post, but there again
> I
> >haven't got kooks harrassing me calling me a paedophile in a completely unrelated NG.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Feel free to use the Troll or Killfile card to evade responding.
> >
> >You are a troll, but looky-here, no evasion, just facts on my part.
>
> Care to back up that assertion? If people think I am a troll, they should ignore me. Simple.
Yes, quite simple and quite effective. It's a bit of a catch-22 situation though isn't it? You
think if you get yourself labelled as a troll, you can avoid opposing posts, and play the bully.
> I merely post in response to the overwhelming abuse, lies and harassment spewed onto these
> groups by the likes of Bob Officer ( look at the harassment about 'spam' he aims at Wollman
> and Kettler, both are easy targets for the weak and cowards, yet his past sig was a clear
> breach of Nettiquette.
Excessive sig files slightly above the 4 line threshold may show a lack of nettiquette, but is
not considered spam.
> He was politlely asked to stop, his attitude in response was
> breathtakingly obtuse and hypocritical considering his obbsession with spam ( remember, spam
> is wasting bandwidth with repetitive data) that the result was that he got a taste of his own
> medicine by being called on it, big deal ) , ano...@pacbell.net ( what do you think of his
> posts claiming Luci is a baby killer, child abuser, murderer, drug-dealer ), Burnore ( same
> charge ) and various others.
Like I said "what goes around, comes around". The abuse you receive is directly connected to the
abuse you give out.
> I have stacks of email from proponents and sceptics alike who
> will not post to these groups because of these idiots. It would take a brave newbie indeed to
> post here!
Why? I was a newbie last year, and I do not consider myself brave and yet I am still here. I
have also not received *any* abuse from the people you have so far mentioned - even though we
often have strongly opposing viewpoints.
> I will stick around simply to give my support to proponents and show how it is
> possible for individuals to stand up to these facist bullies.
So what do these proponents gain from you trolling these NG's without giving any logical input to
astrology or the paranormal? I would be interested to receive emails from these scared
individuals to find out - I promise I will be very kind to them. Email me at ma...@net.ntl.com or
stell...@net.ntl.com if you can tell me how Lucianarchy/anonym1/PZ Liar/Wally Angleseal etc,
ad nauseam, represents your opinions on astrology and the paranormal.
>
>
> >>
> >> BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
> >
> >God, not another person who thinks other people's opinions on usenet are the truth.
>
> Did I say that they were? These groups are a cesspit of lies.
>
> >>
> >> The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
> >>
> >> Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
> >> surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
> >> interesting facts:
> >
> >Facts? You wouldn't know a fact if it smacked you in the face ... These posts are nothing
> more
> >than malicious gossip.
>
> Stella, all post on usenet can be classed as 'gossip'. What's your point?
Look above, you claimed these posts contained interesting 'facts', now you admit they are gossip
<sigh>
>
>
> >You have no proof that Gary was involved in the raping of a young girl.
>
> Stella, I have not said Gary ever did.
I am pleased you have not joined Pete Stapleton with his mob rule.
>
>
> >Pete seems to think
> >the girl in question was 10, but other stories involve a 17 year old. So where are the
> facts?
>
> The post you refer to merely presented an alternative side to Pete's story. One which dealt
> with the facts as presented by Gary himself. It seems the issue is around Gary unlawfully
> kissing a minor, for which he got three years Probation.
Can you hear this Pete?
--
Stella Hill
Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
"Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
Dreammin7
>[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
>>original post is not on my server]
>>
>>gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
>>
>>> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>
>>> : So what if I DID force a 13 year old boy to have sex with me? It was
>>> : before megans law so there's nothing you can do about it!
>>
>You are right, there is nothing I can do
>>about it, but I rest assured that you will get your punishment in time.
>>
snip
>Ask yourself why Burnore would resort to forging a post to deflect the heat
>away from
>himself. Do you condone such behaviour?
>
>Feel free to use the Troll or Killfile card to evade responding.
>
>BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
>
>The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>
>Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding
>of the group
>surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of
>the most
>interesting facts:
>
>
snip
> In 11/96, I kissed a 17 year old girl. I'm not going to provide you
>> with a lot of detail because this isn't the place for it.
>
snip junk
I got married when I was 17. Stayed married for 20 years. Raised 4 kids.
Will someone get over it. She wanted to kiss Gary,, hello?
her mommy did too. There in lies the problem.
As for Peta,, he's only a mere pimp. Now that's against the law.
Jo, From Rhode Island
'Per chance to dream'
Pamela Gross
wrote:
snipped stuff for space
>BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
>
>The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>
>Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
>surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
>interesting facts:
>
>
>################################################################
>
>http://x15.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=344836260&CONTEXT=916149732.210829458&hitnum=10
>
>Re: Gary Lee Burnore, Registered Sex Offender in Raleigh, NC more options
>
>Author: Anonymous
>Email: nob...@REPLAY.COM
I hope naive posters will think twice about using Victor and
"Anonymous" as if they were unbiased sources of information.
Try reading the court report.
Lou Minatti™
displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
* Multiple name forgeries;
* Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
to make him look better;
* Denial of blatant forgeries;
* Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
threats;
* Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
few days later;
* Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
jfred
> I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
> displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
>
> * Multiple name forgeries;
> * Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
> to make him look better;
> * Denial of blatant forgeries;
> * Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
> threats;
> * Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
> few days later;
> * Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
Second!
--
Cahooter #14
Everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey.
Habent Abdenda Omnes Praeter Me ac Simiam Meam.
Dr. John
>Stella wrote in message <369B7994...@pop.net.ntl.com>...
>>
>>
>>Luci forging another screen name wrote:
>
>Stella, why are you saying using anonyml is a forgery? I am perfectly entitled to use that
>name. By claiming so, you are merely adding to the lie upon lie tactics used by the
>fundamentalist loons who infest these newsgroups. If you have evidence of forgery, send it to
>the appropriate abuse team to deal with. You will notice, despite all the flamage directed at
>me, that my account is spotless. The reason is, I have *never* committed netabuse.
It's the difference between counterfeiting and passing off, both are
sleazy practices. In either case, your intent is to deceive, Ms. "I
have *never* committed net abuse."
AGroovyKat
>Lou Minatti <loumi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
>> displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
>>
>> * Multiple name forgeries;
>> * Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
>> to make him look better;
>> * Denial of blatant forgeries;
>> * Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
>> threats;
>> * Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
>> few days later;
>> * Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
>
>Second!
Thirded.
--
AGroovyKat (remove purrrrrr to Email)
Scorpio Rising Club
Official Cahooters(TM) #9
IRC, #catch-22 & #pams_friends Powerchat
Wally Anglesea™
wrote:
>I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
>displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
>
>* Multiple name forgeries;
>* Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
>to make him look better;
>* Denial of blatant forgeries;
>* Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
>threats;
>* Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
>few days later;
>* Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
seconded.
Unfortunately, this is probably what she wants, but seconded
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
Sherilyn
<loumi...@yahoo.com> writes
>I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM.
Quite frankly, he doesn't deserve it. Kooks have entertainment value.
Lucianarchy is just a lame wannabe troll.
--
Sherilyn
G is for Goddess
Catch us on #catch-22 PowerChat
http://www.sidaway.demon.co.uk/astrology/irc/
Bob Officer
<ma...@pop.net.ntl.com> wrote:
>Has anyone calculated the BI on this yet?
in 20 postings, about his BI went to 24
thestudentcountingsqrt(1)+sqrt(1)...=24:)
Bob Officer
Warning! Reproduction without the writen permission in or on any other media than USENET NEWS GROUPS is
prohibited. All claims for copyright according to the BERN and UCC
Agreements are held by the writers. Quotes are allowed subject to Fair Use Rules of the above agreements.
Pete
wrote:
>[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
>original post is not on my server]
>
>gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
>
>> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>>
>> :>
>> :>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
>> :>gossip,
>> :
>> : Pete comments: why do you defend a convicted child molester that
>> : attack astrologers on alt.astrology? You can verify this information
>> : for yoursslf instead of attacking me personally:
>
>Gary attacks kooks and trolls like you, not astrologers. Gary has shown
>concern for me, a female astrologer, whereas you, instead of apologizing for
>your disgusting behaviour and answering my questions, you have turned your
>attack on me. So tell me Pete, *who* exactly attacks astrologers on
>alt.astrology?
Pete comments: first you post that I lie when I post that gary burnore
is a convicted child molester. Said I was in fantasy land. Then when
I post proof of the exct date - you now say I attacked you. I now
will attack you. You lie. You avoid the truth. You are not seeking
astrological comment, you are defending a convicted child molesster
who attack female astrologers on alt.astrology.
why do you call yourself an astrologer? Have you ever posted any
astrology on alt.astrology? Of course not. Hence you must be one of
the sickos like bob officer that hang out with gary burnore here on
alt.astrology.
>
PZ Myers
jf...@think.different (jfred) wrote:
>Lou Minatti <loumi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
>> displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
>>
>> * Multiple name forgeries;
>> * Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
>> to make him look better;
>> * Denial of blatant forgeries;
>> * Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
>> threats;
>> * Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
>> few days later;
>> * Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
>
>Second!
Bleh. Luci is such a tedious twit. Nothing "kooky" about her -- she's just
plain stupid, like Stapleton. Now if there were a "usenet retard of the
month"...
--
PZ Myers
Stella
Pete wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:35:48 +0000, Stella <ma...@pop.net.ntl.com>
> wrote:
>
> >[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
> >original post is not on my server]
> >
> >gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
> >
> >> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
> >>
> >> :>
> >> :>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
> >> :>gossip,
> >> :
> >> : Pete comments: why do you defend a convicted child molester that
> >> : attack astrologers on alt.astrology? You can verify this information
> >> : for yoursslf instead of attacking me personally:
> >
> >Gary attacks kooks and trolls like you, not astrologers. Gary has shown
> >concern for me, a female astrologer, whereas you, instead of apologizing for
> >your disgusting behaviour and answering my questions, you have turned your
> >attack on me. So tell me Pete, *who* exactly attacks astrologers on
> >alt.astrology?
>
> Pete comments: first you post that I lie when I post that gary burnore
> is a convicted child molester. Said I was in fantasy land.
I never said you lie, you are just unaware of the facts. My complaint was with
you writing down disgusting descriptions of rape, including graphic details such
as ripped vaginas, within an astrological NG. Don't you realise that there are
many people reading this newsgroup who have been the victims of rape? Do you
care?
> Then when
> I post proof of the exct date - you now say I attacked you.
WHAT PROOF? Somebody else's usenet post giving the date of his conviction date.
He only got probation - where is the proof that he raped a 10 year old, as you
say?
> I now
> will attack you.
Well, that doesn't surprise me in the least! You can't adequately answer my
questions, so you resort to an attack.
> You lie.
State where I have lied.
> You avoid the truth.
I avoid libel, gossip and personal attacks.
> You are not seeking
> astrological comment, you are defending a convicted child molesster
> who attack female astrologers on alt.astrology.
YOU are attacking ME, a female astrologer on alt.astrology. The evidence is
here, within this post for everyone to see.
>
>
> why do you call yourself an astrologer? Have you ever posted any
> astrology on alt.astrology? Of course not.
You need to pay a bit more attention - rather than attacking others. Check out
dejanews - you will find that nearly *all* of my posts concern astrology - unlike
yours.
> Hence you must be one of
> the sickos like bob officer that hang out with gary burnore here on
> alt.astrology.
Bob Officer is also an astrologer. Why do you attack astrologers on
alt.astrology?
Seeing as you completely evaded my questions from my last post, YET AGAIN. I
will repost just one request for your perusal.
***Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology you practice works every time.
Give me a list of confirmed data which proves sidereal astrology works better
than chance, with full references. I want hard proof and evidence - go
ahead!****
What are you waiting for? Here is your chance to demonstrate you have some
intelligence and that you can keep your mind out of the sewer. Post some
astrology!
PZ Myers
[snip]
>***Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology you practice works every time.
>Give me a list of confirmed data which proves sidereal astrology works better
>than chance, with full references. I want hard proof and evidence - go
>ahead!****
I've heard this line somewhere before...
>
>What are you waiting for? Here is your chance to demonstrate you have some
>intelligence and that you can keep your mind out of the sewer. Post some
>astrology!
From Stapleton? Are you kidding?
A suggestion: print out your post. Take it into the bathroom. Read it aloud
to your toilet. Then wait.
You are much more likely to get a reasonable response from your bathroom
fixtures than you are from Stapleton.
--
PZ Myers
jfred
Rick
Sherilyn <Sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Quite frankly, he doesn't deserve it. Kooks have entertainment value.
>Lucianarchy is just a lame wannabe troll.
In other words luci is just boring.
Bob Officer
<ma...@pop.net.ntl.com> wrote:
>
>
>anonyml wrote:
>
>> Stella wrote in message <369B7994...@pop.net.ntl.com>...
>> >
>> >
>> >Luci forging another screen name wrote:
>>
>> Care to back up that assertion? If people think I am a troll, they should ignore me. Simple.
>
>Yes, quite simple and quite effective. It's a bit of a catch-22 situation though isn't it? You
>think if you get yourself labelled as a troll, you can avoid opposing posts, and play the bully.
>
>> I merely post in response to the overwhelming abuse, lies and harassment spewed onto these
>> groups by the likes of Bob Officer ( look at the harassment about 'spam' he aims at Wollman
>> and Kettler, both are easy targets for the weak and cowards, yet his past sig was a clear
>> breach of Nettiquette.
>
>Excessive sig files slightly above the 4 line threshold may show a lack of nettiquette, but is
>not considered spam.
Stella, I did some investigating, in fact the RFD/CFD docs use the
words "shall not exceed "4 standard lines" of ascii text. in the world
of UNIX that is 4 lines of 256 letters in each line or 1024 letters,
including control characters.
What appears to be wrong doing, is a lack of understanding on the part
of people that sneer at nerds, or computer literate people. What would
look like a simple breech of nettiquette, isn't. And it is a far cry
from the "Abuse of Usenet".
>> He was politlely asked to stop, his attitude in response was
>> breathtakingly obtuse and hypocritical considering his obbsession with spam ( remember, spam
>> is wasting bandwidth with repetitive data) that the result was that he got a taste of his own
>> medicine by being called on it, big deal ) , ano...@pacbell.net ( what do you think of his
>> posts claiming Luci is a baby killer, child abuser, murderer, drug-dealer ), Burnore ( same
>> charge ) and various others.
>
>Like I said "what goes around, comes around". The abuse you receive is directly connected to the
>abuse you give out.
I restate, I have not "abused the net", nor attempted to assert
control over an unmoderated group. Nor am I guilty of the cut and
paste spam that Dan "themixmasterapammer" Kettler is guilty of doing
to multiple newsgroups.
>> I have stacks of email from proponents and sceptics alike who
>> will not post to these groups because of these idiots. It would take a brave newbie indeed to
>> post here!
>
>Why? I was a newbie last year, and I do not consider myself brave and yet I am still here. I
>have also not received *any* abuse from the people you have so far mentioned - even though we
>often have strongly opposing viewpoints.
Yes Stella, the difference is you didn't show up trying to take
control or act like a sheriff hire to clean up the town.
>> I will stick around simply to give my support to proponents and show how it is
>> possible for individuals to stand up to these facist bullies.
>
>So what do these proponents gain from you trolling these NG's without giving any logical input to
>astrology or the paranormal? I would be interested to receive emails from these scared
>individuals to find out - I promise I will be very kind to them. Email me at ma...@net.ntl.com or
>stell...@net.ntl.com if you can tell me how Lucianarchy/anonym1/PZ Liar/Wally Angleseal etc,
>ad nauseam, represents your opinions on astrology and the paranormal.
you know, I have yet to get e-mail asking me to stop, not that it is
welcome. I did get some e-mail, from my newsserver admins, that asked
me to tell Mr Edmond Wollmann, not to mail them anymore.
>> >> BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
>> >
>> >God, not another person who thinks other people's opinions on usenet are the truth.
>>
>> Did I say that they were? These groups are a cesspit of lies.
>> >> The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
>> >> surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
>> >> interesting facts:
>> >
>> >Facts? You wouldn't know a fact if it smacked you in the face ... These posts are nothing
>> more
>> >than malicious gossip.
>>
>> Stella, all post on usenet can be classed as 'gossip'. What's your point?
>
>Look above, you claimed these posts contained interesting 'facts', now you admit they are gossip
><sigh>
Stella I live in California. I have served on juries where the
question was child abuse. I can tell you if a DA had evidence of Child
abuse, the man would go to prison.
Also "the Law" currently requires any one of a specific group of
professionals, including those licensed councilors, to report all
cases of child abuse. The results if you have someone that is having
problems, included a situation described in this gossip, and that
person discusses the problem with a councilor, the councilor is
REQUIRED to report. Gary's largest problem was a councilor that he
alked to should have advised him to seek legal council before going to
the police.
There may more to this simple story, there may have been interaction
and jelousy on the part of the daughter, and one way to break a couple
up would be to get, between the mother and her boyfriend. Who really
knows, just Gary, his Girlfriend and the daughter.
>> >You have no proof that Gary was involved in the raping of a young girl.
>>
>> Stella, I have not said Gary ever did.
>
>I am pleased you have not joined Pete Stapleton with his mob rule.
>> >Pete seems to think
>> >the girl in question was 10, but other stories involve a 17 year old. So where are the
>> facts?
>> The post you refer to merely presented an alternative side to Pete's story. One which dealt
>> with the facts as presented by Gary himself. It seems the issue is around Gary unlawfully
>> kissing a minor, for which he got three years Probation.
>
>Can you hear this Pete?
I doubt it.
In the state gary currently lives doesn't consider the kiss a crime...
Bob Officer
Leader of the One Hand Clapping
Skepticult® # 105-757897-285
High Priest of the Church of Conic Section®
Tyler of the Grand Order of the 'Evil' ILK
Trainer of "Overseers" in alt.paranormal
Official Cohooter (TM) #23
Houndmaster, Skepticult Cancellation Hunters
Dreammin7
>Pete comments: first you post that I lie when I post that gary burnore
>>is a convicted child molester.
>
>That's because it is a lie. You also called me a felon, also a lie. You also
>said there was a 10 year old girl involved, another lie. You do nothing but
>lie.
>
>> Said I was in fantasy land.
>
>You still are. Visiting wollmann no doubt.
>
>>Then when
>>I post proof of the exct date - you now say I attacked you.
>
>You posted no proof of anything. You posted a lie posted by Victor Negron.
>Check dejanews for victor and see he's upset because he lost his netcom
>account and blames me. He's been going on and on about it for more than a
>year.
>
>> I now will attack you.
>
>You attack everybody. What ELSE is new?
>
>> You lie. You avoid the truth. You are not seeking
>>astrological comment, you are defending a convicted child molesster
>>who attack female astrologers on alt.astrology.
>
>Wrong liar. You are not an astrologer, you are a fraud.
>>
>>why do you call yourself an astrologer? Have you ever posted any
>>astrology on alt.astrology? Of course not. Hence you must be one of
>>the sickos like bob officer that hang out with gary burnore here on
>>alt.astrology.
>
>
>Poor pete. Can't stand competition or criticism.
Gary!!!!!!!???? Stop that maniac !!!! He's making me lose my lunch.
jezuz!!!
Try some prozac spray on the key board eh?
Lou Minatti™
>
> PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1dljkex.1j0...@01-043.014.popsite.net>,
> > jf...@think.different (jfred) wrote:
> >
> > >Lou Minatti <loumi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
> > >> displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
> > >>
> > >> * Multiple name forgeries;
> > >> * Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
> > >> to make him look better;
> > >> * Denial of blatant forgeries;
> > >> * Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
> > >> threats;
> > >> * Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
> > >> few days later;
> > >> * Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
> > >
> > >Second!
> >
> > Bleh. Luci is such a tedious twit. Nothing "kooky" about her -- she's just
> > plain stupid, like Stapleton. Now if there were a "usenet retard of the
> > month"...
>
> Seconded!
Thirded!
Lou Minatti™
> Fisted!
Lou Minattil
>Stella, I did some investigating, in fact the RFD/CFD docs use the
>words "shall not exceed "4 standard lines" of ascii text. in the world
>of UNIX that is 4 lines of 256 letters in each line or 1024 letters,
>including control characters.
Ah, but was that sub-section 1(a).4d - "The Biederbeck Principle"?
>What appears to be wrong doing, is a lack of understanding on the part
>of people that sneer at nerds, or computer literate people. What would
>look like a simple breech of nettiquette, isn't.
What *your* sig looks like is a simple breach of Pettyquette, Bob.
>And it is a far cry from the "Abuse of Usenet".
It certainly makes you weep.
>I restate, I have not "abused the net", nor attempted to assert
>control over an unmoderated group. Nor am I guilty of the cut and
>paste spam that Dan "themixmasterapammer" Kettler is guilty of doing
>to multiple newsgroups.
You just don't get it, do you.........
>Yes Stella, the difference is you didn't show up trying to take
>control or act like a sheriff hire to clean up the town.
Rawhide!
>you know, I have yet to get e-mail asking me to stop, not that it is
>welcome. I did get some e-mail, from my newsserver admins, that asked
>me to tell Mr Edmond Wollmann, not to mail them anymore.
Oooh! And did Mr Edmond Wollman poo his pants?
>Stella I live in California. I have served on juries where the
>question was child abuse. I can tell you if a DA had evidence of Child
>abuse, the man would go to prison.
Was that before or after you met your "distant cousin", whilst working for the secret
service,
who, coincidently, was "also called Bob Officer", who was "Prince Charles' bodyguard"?
>Bob Officer
>Leader of the One Hand Clapping
>Skepticult® # 105-757897-285
>High Priest of the Church of Conic Section®
>Tyler of the Grand Order of the 'Evil' ILK
>Trainer of "Overseers" in alt.paranormal
>Official Cohooter (TM) #23
>Houndmaster, Skepticult Cancellation Hunters
>Warning! Reproduction without the writen permission
>in or on any other media than USENET NEWS GROUPS is
>prohibited.
>All claims for copyright according to the BERN and UCC
>Agreements are held by the writers. Quotes are allowed
>subject to Fair Use Rules of the above agreements.
Oh, and you spelt cahooter wrong.......
Pamela Gross
<Bets...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>Oh, and you spelt cahooter wrong.......
It's not like we all get together and play Scrabble, "Lou".
Pam
Number Nineteen
Lou Minattil
>jfred wrote:
>>
>> PZ Myers <my...@netaxs.com> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <1dljkex.1j0...@01-043.014.popsite.net>,
>> > jf...@think.different (jfred) wrote:
>> >
>> > >Lou Minatti <loumi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I nominate Lucianarchy as the next KOTM. In my opinion, she has
>> > >> displayed many of the characteristics of a world-class kook:
>> > >>
>> > >> * Multiple name forgeries;
>> > >> * Blatant text forgeries, going as far as forging an Earl Curley quote
>> > >> to make him look better;
>> > >> * Denial of blatant forgeries;
>> > >> * Claims to have fled Usenet in fear after receiving nonexistent
>> > >> threats;
>> > >> * Repeatedly claims to be leaving Usenet for good, only to pop back up a
>> > >> few days later;
>> > >> * Resides in more killfiles than even Pete Stapleton.
>> > >
>> > >Second!
>> >
>> > Bleh. Luci is such a tedious twit. Nothing "kooky" about her -- she's just
>> > plain stupid, like Stapleton. Now if there were a "usenet retard of the
>> > month"...
>>
>> Seconded!
>
>Thirded!
Fisted!
Pamela Gross
wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jan 1999 01:16:56 -0000, "Lou Minattil"
><Bets...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Oh, and you spelt cahooter wrong.......
>
>It's not like we all get together and play Scrabble, "Lou".
>
P.S. When the meeting's at my house, the guys play strip poker and we
girls watch the game ;)
Pam
who's got that meeting schedule?
victor
wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 15:03:52 -0000, "anonyml" <ano...@dial.pipex.com>
>wrote:
>
>snipped stuff for space
>
>
>>BTW, the Gary Burnore story can easily be found in dejanews.
>>
>>The bottom line is, Burnore got put on Probation.
>>
>>Perhaps some of the more naive posters here will have a better understanding of the group
>>surrounding and defending Burnore. The following documents include some of the most
>>interesting facts:
>>
>>
>>################################################################
>>
>>http://x15.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=344836260&CONTEXT=916149732.210829458&hitnum=10
>>
>>Re: Gary Lee Burnore, Registered Sex Offender in Raleigh, NC more options
>>
>>Author: Anonymous
>>Email: nob...@REPLAY.COM
>
>I hope naive posters will think twice about using Victor and
>"Anonymous" as if they were unbiased sources of information.
>
>Try reading the court report.
>
Have you read the court report Pam? Gary's own statement says it all.
He worked on that statement for a week. The man not only cheated on
his girlfriend he did it with her underage daughter and you say I'm
biased? Truth is truth.
Your friend
Vic
>Pam
=====================================================================
GARY BURNORE states:
{{On 2/20/97, I was charged with violating section 647.6 (a) of the
California Penal Code, which is a misdemeanor. On 3/13/97, I was
sentenced to 3 years probation.}}
http://caag.state.ca.us/megan/juv.htm
647.6 translates to Annoy/molest children.
"Megans Law" States Gary Burnroe has to
register in the state he lives in for the rest
of his evil life.
Read about Garys net friends:
http://www.killfile.org/dungeon/why/burnore.html
http://members.tripod.com/~LVScott/data.html
=====================================
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pete
wrote:
>
>
>Pete wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:35:48 +0000, Stella <ma...@pop.net.ntl.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >[I will reply to P. Stapleton through Gary's post, because Stapleton's
>> >original post is not on my server]
>> >
>> >gbur...@databasix.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Admitting he sodomized a 13 year old boy, Pete wrote:
>> >>
>> >> :>
>> >> :>I am sick of reading about your fantasies based on unsubstantiated
>> >> :>gossip,
>> >> :
>> >> : Pete comments: why do you defend a convicted child molester that
>> >> : attack astrologers on alt.astrology? You can verify this information
>> >> : for yoursslf instead of attacking me personally:
>> >
>> >Gary attacks kooks and trolls like you, not astrologers. Gary has shown
>> >concern for me, a female astrologer, whereas you, instead of apologizing for
>> >your disgusting behaviour and answering my questions, you have turned your
>> >attack on me. So tell me Pete, *who* exactly attacks astrologers on
>> >alt.astrology?
>>
>> Pete comments: first you post that I lie when I post that gary burnore
>> is a convicted child molester. Said I was in fantasy land.
>
>I never said you lie, you are just unaware of the facts. My complaint was with
>you writing down disgusting descriptions of rape, including graphic details such
>as ripped vaginas, within an astrological NG. Don't you realise that there are
>many people reading this newsgroup who have been the victims of rape? Do you
>care?
>
>> Then when
>> I post proof of the exct date - you now say I attacked you.
>
>WHAT PROOF? Somebody else's usenet post giving the date of his conviction date.
>He only got probation - where is the proof that he raped a 10 year old, as you
>say?
>
>> I now
>> will attack you.
>
>Well, that doesn't surprise me in the least! You can't adequately answer my
>questions, so you resort to an attack.
>
>> You lie.
>
>State where I have lied.
>
>> You avoid the truth.
>
>I avoid libel, gossip and personal attacks.
>
>> You are not seeking
>> astrological comment, you are defending a convicted child molesster
>> who attack female astrologers on alt.astrology.
>
>YOU are attacking ME, a female astrologer on alt.astrology. The evidence is
>here, within this post for everyone to see.
>
>>
>>
>> why do you call yourself an astrologer? Have you ever posted any
>> astrology on alt.astrology? Of course not.
>
>You need to pay a bit more attention - rather than attacking others. Check out
>dejanews - you will find that nearly *all* of my posts concern astrology - unlike
>yours.
>
>> Hence you must be one of
>> the sickos like bob officer that hang out with gary burnore here on
>> alt.astrology.
>
>Bob Officer is also an astrologer. Why do you attack astrologers on
>alt.astrology?
>
>Seeing as you completely evaded my questions from my last post, YET AGAIN. I
>will repost just one request for your perusal.
>
>***Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology you practice works every time.
>Give me a list of confirmed data which proves sidereal astrology works better
>than chance, with full references. I want hard proof and evidence - go
>ahead!****
>
>What are you waiting for? Here is your chance to demonstrate you have some
>intelligence and that you can keep your mind out of the sewer. Post some
>astrology!
>
>
>--
>
>
> Stella Hill
> Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
>
> "Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
> Glitter like a swarm of fire-flies tangled in a silver braid."
>
> -Tennyson
>
> <to email me: remove NOSPAM.>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
pete comments: stella is not an astrologer.
>
>
Pete
homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
be a compulsive anal weirdo.
As follows:
On Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:23:38 -0500, my...@netaxs.com (PZ Myers) wrote:
>In article <369C8B27...@pop.net.ntl.com>, ma...@NOSPAM.net.ntl.com wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>***Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology you practice works every time.
>>Give me a list of confirmed data which proves sidereal astrology works better
>>than chance, with full references. I want hard proof and evidence - go
>>ahead!****
>
>I've heard this line somewhere before...
>
>>
>>What are you waiting for? Here is your chance to demonstrate you have some
>>intelligence and that you can keep your mind out of the sewer. Post some
>>astrology!
>
paranoid1
Pete wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> pete comments: stella is not an astrologer.
>
You say that as if it was a bad thing.
paranoid
octal_103+126
paranoid1 wrote in message <36A70FC3...@bigpond.com>...
Stella
Pete wrote:
> >***Go ahead and prove to me that the astrology you practice works every time.
> >Give me a list of confirmed data which proves sidereal astrology works better
> >than chance, with full references. I want hard proof and evidence - go
> >ahead!****
> >
> >What are you waiting for? Here is your chance to demonstrate you have some
> >intelligence and that you can keep your mind out of the sewer. Post some
> >astrology!
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >
> > Stella Hill
> > Sceptic astrologer and Official Cahooter
> >
> > "Many a night I saw the Pleiads, rising through the mellow shade,
> > Glitter like a swarm of fire-flies tangled in a silver braid."
> >
> > -Tennyson
> >
> > <to email me: remove NOSPAM.>
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> pete comments: stella is not an astrologer.
Well done. You effectively reposted and EVADED all of my valid arguments to three
NG's. Do you realize how utterly foolish you look?
PZ Myers
No, he doesn't.
But the rest of us do.
--
PZ Myers
anonym™
octal_103+126 wrote:
>
> This war has been going on for 6 years. When will it ever end?
>
> paranoid1 wrote in message <36A70FC3...@bigpond.com>...
> >
> >
> >Pete wrote:
> >>
> ><snip>
> >>
> >> pete comments: stella is not an astrologer.
> >>
> >
> >You say that as if it was a bad thing.
> >
> >paranoid
Just as soon as Pete takes his next auto-erotic asphyxiation while
viewing child porn too far.
Hungry Hippo
>Pete comments: we have a convicted child molester, a close male
>homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
>alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
>be a compulsive anal weirdo.
Just my 2 cents worth, but why criticise somebody for being homosexual or a
transvestite? They are not hurting anyone and what they do in private is
nothing to do with you or I.
I agree with what you have to say about child molesters though, and I abhor
them.
Tom Kerr
Pete lives in a fantasy world in which everyone else is either a child
molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a net
abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
Pete is simply a very strange person.
Hungry Hippo
>molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a
net
>abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
>addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
>
>I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
>
>Pete is simply a very strange person.
Thank you for your time Tom. As you may gather from my other posts this is
the first time I have posted in this group. To begin with Pete comes
across as knowledgeable which is no doubt due to his self-promotion, but
after further viewing most of his claims become laughable even to a
complete novice such as I.
BTW, is it difficult squeezing a heron into the syringe? If you stop
taking Heron do you go through cold turkey?
Regards,
Hippo.
Bob Officer
(Tom Kerr) wrote:
>In article <iXDr2.7637$202.3...@news1.teleport.com>, "Hungry Hippo" <hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>>Pete wrote in message <36a70f8f...@nntp.c-zone.net>...
>>>Pete comments: we have a convicted child molester, a close male
>>>homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
>>>alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
>>>be a compulsive anal weirdo.
>>
>>
>>Just my 2 cents worth, but why criticise somebody for being homosexual or a
>>transvestite? They are not hurting anyone and what they do in private is
>>nothing to do with you or I.
>>
>>I agree with what you have to say about child molesters though, and I abhor
>>them.
>>
>
>Pete lives in a fantasy world in which everyone else is either a child
>molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a net
>abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
>addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
How many birds a day are you up to now?
>I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
>
>Pete is simply a very strange person.
I would think of several other descriptive words to use in place of
"strange person".
Bob Officer
Bob Officer
<hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>>Pete lives in a fantasy world in which everyone else is either a child
>>molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a
>net
>>abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
>>addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
>>
>>I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
>>
>>Pete is simply a very strange person.
>
>
>Thank you for your time Tom. As you may gather from my other posts this is
>the first time I have posted in this group. To begin with Pete comes
>across as knowledgeable which is no doubt due to his self-promotion, but
>after further viewing most of his claims become laughable even to a
>complete novice such as I.
>
>BTW, is it difficult squeezing a heron into the syringe? If you stop
>taking Heron do you go through cold turkey?
if you think get heron in a syringe is had, look at the size of 20 lb
turkey... is that with the stuffing?
1 Bob Officer|Skepticult® #105-757897-285 | High Priest of the Church of Conic Section®
2 Tyler of the Order of the ILK | Official Cahooter(TM)#23| Warning! Reproduction without
3 the writen permission in or on any other media than USENET NEWS GROUPS is prohibited.All
4 claims of copyright according to the BERN & UCC Agreements are held by the writers.
LadyNi
Pete <pet...@c-zone.net> wrote in message
news:36a70f8f...@nntp.c-zone.net...
>Pete comments: we have a convicted child molester, a close male
>homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
>alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
>be a compulsive anal weirdo.
Pete, what's a "close male homosexual"?
--
LadyNi
PZ Myers
>On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 12:58:46 GMT, in alt.astrology t...@prodigy.net
>(Tom Kerr) wrote:
>
>>In article <iXDr2.7637$202.3...@news1.teleport.com>, "Hungry Hippo"
<hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>>>Pete wrote in message <36a70f8f...@nntp.c-zone.net>...
>>>>Pete comments: we have a convicted child molester, a close male
>>>>homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
>>>>alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
>>>>be a compulsive anal weirdo.
I've got the idiot killfiled, so this is the first I've seen this...I've
got to wonder, though, what is a "compulsive anal weirdo"? What do they
do? And how does Simpleton know that I am one?
>>>
>>>
>>>Just my 2 cents worth, but why criticise somebody for being homosexual or a
>>>transvestite? They are not hurting anyone and what they do in private is
>>>nothing to do with you or I.
>>>
>>>I agree with what you have to say about child molesters though, and I abhor
>>>them.
>>>
>>
>>Pete lives in a fantasy world in which everyone else is either a child
>>molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a net
>>abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
>>addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
>
>How many birds a day are you up to now?
>
>>I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
>>
>>Pete is simply a very strange person.
>
>I would think of several other descriptive words to use in place of
>"strange person".
Yeah. "Strange" is too mild, and I wouldn't even dignify him with the term
"person". I'm a bit uncomfortable with the fact that I have to share a
phylum with Peat, let alone the same species.
--
PZ Myers
Hungry Hippo
>"strange person".
How many of them begin with "f" and "c"?
Bob Officer
is that a rhetorical question?
Hungry Hippo
>is that a rhetorical question?
>
>
i'm not sure. what do you think?
Tom Kerr
In article <Z5Fr2.7687$202.4...@news1.teleport.com>, "Hungry Hippo"
<hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>>Pete lives in a fantasy world in which everyone else is either a child
>>molester, a rapist, a wannabe nazi jew burner, a tax trough astronomer, a
>net
>>abuser, an anal weirdo, a heroin addict (in my case he called me a "heron"
>>addict) or some other ridiculous figment of his imagination.
>>
>>I really wouldn't pay much attention to what he says if I were you.
>>
>>Pete is simply a very strange person.
>
>
>Thank you for your time Tom. As you may gather from my other posts this is
>the first time I have posted in this group. To begin with Pete comes
>across as knowledgeable which is no doubt due to his self-promotion, but
>after further viewing most of his claims become laughable even to a
>complete novice such as I.
>
Just occasionally, *very* occasionally, Pete manages to post something quite
lucid. It's not worth hunting those posts down out of the spew he usually
posts though.
You'll find that most of the "spinics" that post here are actually quite nice
people really (as are most of the astrologers as well), and get on with a lot
of the astrologers. If you have ever used IRC, you can talk to both skeptics
and astrologers in #catch-22 on powerchat.
http://www.sidaway.demon.co.uk/astrology/irc/
>BTW, is it difficult squeezing a heron into the syringe? If you stop
>taking Heron do you go through cold turkey?
>
My herons flew away many months ago. Haven't seen them since...sniff.
Still, it saved me $500 a day....
http://www.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=371946203
pete stapleton
<hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>Pete wrote in message <36a70f8f...@nntp.c-zone.net>...
>>Pete comments: we have a convicted child molester, a close male
>>homosexual, a transvestite - all attacking astrolgers on
>>alt.astrology. Now, a thing that calls itself pzmeyers turns out to
>>be a compulsive anal weirdo.
>
>
>Just my 2 cents worth, but why criticise somebody for being homosexual or a
>transvestite? They are not hurting anyone and what they do in private is
>nothing to do with you or I.
>
>I agree with what you have to say about child molesters though, and I abhor
>them.
>
Pete comments: I do agree with you about nothing being wrong with
homosexuality or being a cross dressor. However, when you find that
being sexually challenged is found within all of those who attack
astrologers on alt.astrology - it then becomes a point of interest.
Why is it necessary to be in volved in sexual deviation in order to
be a fervent anti astro clone. gary burnore the convicted child
molester is the perfect example. bob officer is his best friend
\and so far hasn't admitted exactly what his particular sexual
fetish is - but all the rest have indicated they are part of
tony sidaway's pecular sex mob from demon com.
So, you are aright - there isn't anything wrong with being
sexually different from the hetro norm (what ever that is),
but there is something wrong when you find they act as a group
attacking responsible people. Hence, as an astrologer, you get
to see astrology in action right here on alt.astrology - and at
the same time -you become aware of just how the astrological
imprints can create group goals.
Regards, Pete
Lizz Holmans
>>
>
>
>Pete comments: I do agree with you about nothing being wrong with
>homosexuality or being a cross dressor. However, when you find that
>being sexually challenged is found within all of those who attack
>astrologers on alt.astrology - it then becomes a point of interest.
Of interest to you, perhaps. I happen to be a heterosexual woman with a
husband and three children, and I loathe astrology for the pseudoscience
it is. I have great pity for those who are caught in its uselessness.
Lizz 'no sex charges or convictions, but do speeding tickets count?'
Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
Hungry Hippo
>homosexuality or being a cross dressor. However, when you find that
>being sexually challenged is found within all of those who attack
>astrologers on alt.astrology - it then becomes a point of interest.
>
>be a fervent anti astro clone. gary burnore the convicted child
>molester is the perfect example. bob officer is his best friend
>\and so far hasn't admitted exactly what his particular sexual
>fetish is - but all the rest have indicated they are part of
>tony sidaway's pecular sex mob from demon com.
>
>So, you are aright - there isn't anything wrong with being
>sexually different from the hetro norm (what ever that is),
>but there is something wrong when you find they act as a group
>attacking responsible people. Hence, as an astrologer, you get
>to see astrology in action right here on alt.astrology - and at
>the same time -you become aware of just how the astrological
>imprints can create group goals.
>
>Regards, Pete
>
So you think that being sexually deviant and thinking you're a twit go hand
in hand? I've got news for you, I am not in the slightest sexually deviant
and I think you're an idiot to say the least. And I would go so far as to
say that most of the group is exactly as I am.
Whilst I do not dismiss your allegations of certain people having committed
certain crimes, I take them with a very large pinch of salt. How can
anyone really take these claims seriously when you spout of with so much
rubbish?
It is sad that your repeated assertions that you are an astrologer have yet
to be confirmed by any modicom of success pertaining to any of your
predictions. Knowing what a golf ball looks like does not make me a
golfer, much as writing drivel that has been shown to be very inacurate and
doesn't follow through does not make you an astrologer. Well, as you said,
anyone can call themself an astrologer. I understand now, thank you.
Bob Officer
<hi...@millenium-online.com> wrote:
>>Pete comments: I do agree with you about nothing being wrong with
>>homosexuality or being a cross dressor. However, when you find that
>>being sexually challenged is found within all of those who attack
>>astrologers on alt.astrology - it then becomes a point of interest.
This is the funny drivel Pooper Pete has spouted in ages...
>>Why is it necessary to be in volved in sexual deviation in order to
>>be a fervent anti astro clone. gary burnore the convicted child
>>molester is the perfect example. bob officer is his best friend
>>\and so far hasn't admitted exactly what his particular sexual
>>fetish is - but all the rest have indicated they are part of
>>tony sidaway's pecular sex mob from demon com.
Well I am not from demon.com, Pete I live right here in california...
where I always have... And I never meet Gary, I never knew of Gary
before he posted on alt.astrology.
As far as sexual deviancy my life is very plain with two almost grown
sons and wife. I work, and play... and type on the internet every day.
>>So, you are aright - there isn't anything wrong with being
>>sexually different from the hetro norm (what ever that is),
>>but there is something wrong when you find they act as a group
>>attacking responsible people. Hence, as an astrologer, you get
>>to see astrology in action right here on alt.astrology - and at
>>the same time -you become aware of just how the astrological
>>imprints can create group goals.
we don't attack responcible people, do you see us attacking anyone but
you (your sockpuppet huge jeffcoat), and edmo the mighty? the two
irresponsible people here... you don't see us attacking in group
roger, sudo, stella, pam, gail, or the host of other astrologers there
post here...?
>So you think that being sexually deviant and thinking you're a twit go hand
>in hand? I've got news for you, I am not in the slightest sexually deviant
>and I think you're an idiot to say the least. And I would go so far as to
>say that most of the group is exactly as I am.
he is an idiot... or criminal runing a $250 an hour scam
>Whilst I do not dismiss your allegations of certain people having committed
>certain crimes, I take them with a very large pinch of salt. How can
>anyone really take these claims seriously when you spout of with so much
>rubbish?
Gary was not convivcted of molesting a child. He he want to explain or
you need a clarification ask him... I will say california doesn't plea
bargain child molestation charges down to lessor charges and
probation.
>It is sad that your repeated assertions that you are an astrologer have yet
>to be confirmed by any modicom of success pertaining to any of your
>predictions. Knowing what a golf ball looks like does not make me a
>golfer, much as writing drivel that has been shown to be very inacurate and
>doesn't follow through does not make you an astrologer. Well, as you said,
>anyone can call themself an astrologer. I understand now, thank you.
yes another can hang out his/her shingle, even among astrologers you
will find many will not agree even on the size of the orb to use with
an aspect... it doesn't make them wrong, just different.
Greg Lynn
says...
>
>Pete is simply a very strange person.
>
>
-Greg
kava man
gbur...@databasix.com wrote :
[snip]
>You mispelled fucking asshole/boy rapist. Hope this helps.
You misspelled misspelled. I know this helps.
km