Opportunity for Bob
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>cope...@1eagle1.com (Charles Copeland) wrote:
>
>>Anybody out there not believe that the self-promoting Bobster will use
>>Mahmoud Abdul's refusal to stand up during the the national anthem as a
>>future program topic and to milk it for all it's worth?
>
>Yeah, I believe he covered it a couple of days ago. That means it'll
>actually be on the air in a couple of weeks.
>
>Bob seems to have quite a nice little buffer set up. Whenever he does a
>"topical" show, it's always for somethine that happened weeks ago.
>
>I guess with all the nice snow Colorado's got, you've got to make
>allowances for all that extra ski-time :)
Word is that Bob's down to two days a week....
>---
>John Hattan High UberPopeness -The First Church of Shatnerology
>The Code Zone Sweet Software for a Saturnine World
>hat...@fastlane.net http://www.fastlane.net/~hattan/
>
John Hattan
>hat...@fastlane.net (John Hattan) wrote:
>>cope...@1eagle1.com (Charles Copeland) wrote:
>>
>>>Anybody out there not believe that the self-promoting Bobster will use
>>>Mahmoud Abdul's refusal to stand up during the the national anthem as a
>>>future program topic and to milk it for all it's worth?
>>
>>Yeah, I believe he covered it a couple of days ago. That means it'll
>>actually be on the air in a couple of weeks.
>>
>>Bob seems to have quite a nice little buffer set up. Whenever he does a
>>"topical" show, it's always for somethine that happened weeks ago.
>>
>>I guess with all the nice snow Colorado's got, you've got to make
>>allowances for all that extra ski-time :)
>
> Word is that Bob's down to two days a week....
Well, he talked about the Ireland massacre yesterday. That means that
he's working on about a two-week delay.
"Bob Larson Live". Whatta racket!
Kent B. Wills
>Well, he talked about the Ireland massacre yesterday. That means that
>he's working on about a two-week delay.
>"Bob Larson Live". Whatta racket!
Gee, a two week delay, huh? Amazing how he knew I was going to
call his 800 number and donate money twoo weeks before hand. Since he
said my name and city over the air roughly 10 minutes after I called,
the only possible answer is that he knew two weeks ahead of time that
I would donate.
"Bob Larson Live". What a voice for God!
KENT B. WILLS
kwil...@ecity.net / comp...@prodigy.com
http://wwww.geocities.com/SoHo/1523/
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>At one time, hat...@fastlane.net (John Hattan) wrote:
>
>>Well, he talked about the Ireland massacre yesterday. That means that
>>he's working on about a two-week delay.
>
>>"Bob Larson Live". Whatta racket!
>
>
> Gee, a two week delay, huh? Amazing how he knew I was going to
>call his 800 number and donate money twoo weeks before hand. Since he
>said my name and city over the air roughly 10 minutes after I called,
>the only possible answer is that he knew two weeks ahead of time that
>I would donate.
>
>"Bob Larson Live". What a voice for God!
It _MUST_ be a miracle. Bob was never that fast when he WAS live....
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>At one time, hat...@fastlane.net (John Hattan) wrote:
>
>>Well, he talked about the Ireland massacre yesterday. That means that
>>he's working on about a two-week delay.
>
>>"Bob Larson Live". Whatta racket!
>
>
> Gee, a two week delay, huh? Amazing how he knew I was going to
>call his 800 number and donate money twoo weeks before hand. Since he
>said my name and city over the air roughly 10 minutes after I called,
Intriguing -- especially, considering that Bob has stopped mentioning
city names....
>the only possible answer is that he knew two weeks ahead of time that
>I would donate.
I can think of a few other possibilities....
>
>"Bob Larson Live". What a voice for God!
It boggles the mind. But you know who was the star of the first high-
powered television broadcast....
"Adolf Hitler Live" What a voice for Man!
Kent B. Wills
> Intriguing -- especially, considering that Bob has stopped mentioning
>city names....
Really? So why did I hear my name and city? I don't know if his
pollicy is to name every name and city, but he did in my case.
> I can think of a few other possibilities....
Well, what are they?
> It boggles the mind. But you know who was the star of the first high-
>powered television broadcast....
> "Adolf Hitler Live" What a voice for Man!
When did TV come into this? Are you attempting to get away from the
main point of this disscusion by bring TV into it?
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>
>
>> Intriguing -- especially, considering that Bob has stopped mentioning
>>city names....
>
>Really? So why did I hear my name and city? I don't know if his
>pollicy is to name every name and city, but he did in my case.
>
>> I can think of a few other possibilities....
>
>Well, what are they?
Before I answer that, I'd like to confirm the salient facts. Kent, as I
understand it, you are claiming that on Monday, March 25, 1996, during the
broadcast of Bob Larson Live ("Disaster in Dunblane"), you called Bob Lar-
son Ministries and made a donation. Second, you are asserting that Larson
apparently acknowledged your gift by mentioning both your name and city on
the air -- within 10 minutes (more or less) of your having made that dona-
tion. Is this a fair summation of your claim?
>
>> It boggles the mind. But you know who was the star of the first high-
>>powered television broadcast....
>
>> "Adolf Hitler Live" What a voice for Man!
>
>When did TV come into this? Are you attempting to get away from the
>main point of this disscusion by bring TV into it?
>
No. I'll be happy to defer this point until after we resolve the matter
which you have put on the table.
Kent B. Wills
> Before I answer that, I'd like to confirm the salient facts. Kent, as I
>understand it, you are claiming that on Monday, March 25, 1996, during the
>broadcast of Bob Larson Live ("Disaster in Dunblane"), you called Bob Lar-
>son Ministries and made a donation. Second, you are asserting that Larson
>apparently acknowledged your gift by mentioning both your name and city on
>the air -- within 10 minutes (more or less) of your having made that dona-
>tion. Is this a fair summation of your claim?
Odd, I don't recall giving a date. In fact, I don't recall stateing
anything that would lead anyone to guess at the date. I merely stated
that he had stated my anem and city around 10 minutes after I called
(a little more, little less).
John Hattan
>At one time, Rang...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>> Intriguing -- especially, considering that Bob has stopped mentioning
>>city names....
>
>Really? So why did I hear my name and city? I don't know if his
>pollicy is to name every name and city, but he did in my case.
>
>> I can think of a few other possibilities....
>
>Well, what are they?
Here's a few. . .
1. Bob show is a hodgepodge of materials on different delays. For
example, the guests often give Bob a "Good Morning" at the beginning of
the show. It's also pretty obvious that the compassion chest callers
are taped and replayed; from the fidelity changes to Bob's hammy
caller-intros ("So, tell me Betty, how did you get involved in the
occult?"), it is obvious that the show is pieced together. For all we
know, Bob could be calling in the "thank you's" from home.
2. You cought Bob right when he was taping a set of shows, and he
squeezed your name in.
3. You are being less than truthful about the timing. Given that the
only thing I know about you is that you support a known liar, I feel I
can make this an item.
4. You are correct, and the shows really *are* live. Bob Larson has
just become really bad at choosing topical shows. Given that today's
(Monday's) topic was the Oscars, it might be safe to assume that Bob
likes to talk about things after they are a couple of weeks old.
>> It boggles the mind. But you know who was the star of the first high-
>>powered television broadcast....
>
>> "Adolf Hitler Live" What a voice for Man!
>
>When did TV come into this? Are you attempting to get away from the
>main point of this disscusion by bring TV into it?
I think he's telling you not to support every populist liar that
broadcasts. Read the WWW page.
Ken Smith
as I >>understand it, you are claiming that on Monday, March 25, 1996,
during the >>broadcast of Bob Larson Live ("Disaster in Dunblane"), you
called Bob Lar->>son Ministries and made a donation. Second, you are
asserting that Larson>>apparently acknowledged your gift by mentioning
both your name and city on>>the air -- within 10 minutes (more or less)
of your having made that dona->>tion. Is this a fair summation of your
claim?
>
>Odd, I don't recall giving a date. In fact, I don't recall stateing
>anything that would lead anyone to guess at the date. I merely stated
>that he had stated my anem and city around 10 minutes after I called
>(a little more, little less).
As you should recall, Kent, you were taking issue with John Hattan's
observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
As I pointed out, Bobby E. has generally abandoned his long-standing
practice of stating the name AND city of his donors, probably with the
intent of deceiving unsuspecting donors into believing that his show is
live. We have both audiotape and teFrom: rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith )
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson
Subject: Re: Opportunity for Bob
References: <copeland-140...@ep226.itsnet.com> <314c2493...@news.fastlane.net> <4ivt4j$t...@tribune.cris.com> <3157fc54....@news.fastlane.net> <4jvog5$g...@news2.ios.com> <4k347a$b...@tribune.concentric.net> <4k4f6q$o...@news2.ios.com> <4k5ru2$l...@tribune.concentric.net> <4k9qrm$5...@news2.ios.com>
In <4k9qrm$5...@news2.ios.com> kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills)writes:
>
>At one time, Rang...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>> Before I answer that, I'd like to confirm the salient facts. Kent,
as I >>understand it, you are claiming that on Monday, March 25, 1996,
during the >>broadcast of Bob Larson Live ("Disaster in Dunblane"), you
called Bob Lar->>son Ministries and made a donation. Second, you are
asserting that Larson>>apparently acknowledged your gift by mentioning
both your name and city on>>the air -- within 10 minutes (more or less)
of your having made that dona->>tion. Is this a fair summation of your
claim?
>
>Odd, I don't recall giving a date. In fact, I don't recall stateing
>anything that would lead anyone to guess at the date. I merely stated
>that he had stated my anem and city around 10 minutes after I called
>(a little more, little less).
As you should recall, Kent, you were taking issue with John Hattan's
observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
As I pointed out, Bobby E. has generally abandoned his long-standing
practice of stating the name AND city of his donors, probably with the
intent of deceiving unsuspecting donors into believing that his show is
live. We have both audiotape and testimonial evidence to that effect.
And while we do not discount the possibility that Larson will, on rare
occasions, actually do a "live" show, the overall point stands.
But let's get to the more interesting question (assuming that you're
telling the truth -- it's hard to believe that you would be in support
of the blue-ribbon campaign, and yet, be giving money to Bob): Why did
you donate money to Bob Larson Ministries?
And, after visiting the Website, are you prepared to defend him?
_______________________________________________________________________
Like slimy preachers? Check out the Bob Larson Fan Club Homepage!
http://www.cris.com/~Ranger57/blm.htm
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>>>city names....
>>
>>Really? So why did I hear my name and city? I don't know if his
>>pollicy is to name every name and city, but he did in my case.
>>
>>> I can think of a few other possibilities....
>>
>>Well, what are they?
>
>Here's a few. . .
>
>1. Bob show is a hodgepodge of materials on different delays. For
>example, the guests often give Bob a "Good Morning" at the beginning of
>the show. It's also pretty obvious that the compassion chest callers
>are taped and replayed; from the fidelity changes to Bob's hammy
>caller-intros ("So, tell me Betty, how did you get involved in the
>occult?"), it is obvious that the show is pieced together. For all we
>know, Bob could be calling in the "thank you's" from home.
>
>2. You cought Bob right when he was taping a set of shows, and he
>squeezed your name in.
>
>3. You are being less than truthful about the timing. Given that the
>only thing I know about you is that you support a known liar, I feel I
>can make this an item.
>
>4. You are correct, and the shows really *are* live. Bob Larson has
>just become really bad at choosing topical shows. Given that today's
>(Monday's) topic was the Oscars, it might be safe to assume that Bob
>likes to talk about things after they are a couple of weeks old.
5. If you check out his website, you are left with the impression that
Kent is just a good old-fashioned prankster. It's hard to believe that
any follower of Beggin'Bob would even consider joining the Blue-Ribbon
Campaign....
BTW, Bob apparently recorded the Oscar show two or three days after the
Oscars -- I'm waiting for Ted Baehr to get back to me with confirmation.
Charles P. Hobbs
>4. You are correct, and the shows really *are* live. Bob Larson has
>just become really bad at choosing topical shows. Given that today's
>(Monday's) topic was the Oscars, it might be safe to assume that Bob
>likes to talk about things after they are a couple of weeks old.
>
show in years!)
Bill Price
wrote:
>At one time, Rang...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>
>
>> Before I answer that, I'd like to confirm the salient facts. Kent, as I
>>understand it, you are claiming that on Monday, March 25, 1996, during the
>>broadcast of Bob Larson Live ("Disaster in Dunblane"), you called Bob Lar-
>>son Ministries and made a donation. Second, you are asserting that Larson
>>apparently acknowledged your gift by mentioning both your name and city on
>>the air -- within 10 minutes (more or less) of your having made that dona-
>>tion. Is this a fair summation of your claim?
>
>Odd, I don't recall giving a date. In fact, I don't recall stateing
>anything that would lead anyone to guess at the date. I merely stated
>that he had stated my anem and city around 10 minutes after I called
>(a little more, little less).
>
>
>KENT B. WILLS
>kwil...@ecity.net / comp...@prodigy.com
>http://wwww.geocities.com/SoHo/1523/
>
Kent,
The time and date issue is between you Ken and I will stay away from
that issue. BUT, You Actually sent that man MONEY ? Your joking,
Right ?
Bill
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
I sent Beggin'Bob money once: A grand total of $6.66, earmarked for his
"private dick" fund. My guess is that he blew it on condoms....
Kent B. Wills
> As you should recall, Kent, you were taking issue with John Hattan's
>observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
>time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
>show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
>cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
>in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
>all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
First, I would like to appologize for the delay in responding. My
server isn't known for being the most relyable for getting posts in a
timely manner.
I did take issue with the atated time delay, but, and I checked
what I wrote, I did not give anything that would hint at a date of
broadcast.
Since I don't bother to memorize the dates that I donate (I could
check in my check book, but it's not that important to me) I doubt I
would have given anything to indicate a specific date. You chose to
deside the date with out anything from me to give you even so much as
a hint.
> As I pointed out, Bobby E. has generally abandoned his long-standing
>practice of stating the name AND city of his donors, probably with the
>intent of deceiving unsuspecting donors into believing that his show is
>live. We have both audiotape and testimonial evidence to that effect.
>And while we do not discount the possibility that Larson will, on rare
>occasions, actually do a "live" show, the overall point stands.
If you do have such evidence, I would like to see it. If said
evidence is something you can send via E-mail, please send it to me.
I will review it. If not, E-mail me and I will E-mail back me mailing
address (I'm sure you can understand my not giving it out on a New
Group).
> But let's get to the more interesting question (assuming that you're
>telling the truth -- it's hard to believe that you would be in support
>of the blue-ribbon campaign, and yet, be giving money to Bob): Why did
>you donate money to Bob Larson Ministries?
> And, after visiting the Website, are you prepared to defend him?
Where's the problem with this? I feel that I and anyone else should
be permited to say what ever they believe on-line, regardless as to
whether I agree with it or not. I want to be able to speak my mind
and since I want to do such, I feel I should allow others to do the
same.
Do I like pornography being so easily available on the Internet?
No. However, I don't think banning it, thereby violateing the
Constitution, is correct either. What would be better would be to
show people how it is an abomination to God and then people will
remove it on thier own.
I donate to Bob Larson Ministries because he is doing what God has
instucted him to do. Since I have the fancial means to help him out,
I do.
Yes, I am prepared to defend him since I saw nothing on the Web
page but sarcasm. If any actuall proof were offered, I might think
differently, but at the bottom of nearly everything I read stated
something to the effect that it was satirical.
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>At one time, rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith ) wrote:
>
>>observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
>>time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
>>show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
>>cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
>>in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
>>all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
>
>server isn't known for being the most relyable for getting posts in a
>timely manner.
> I did take issue with the atated time delay, but, and I checked
>what I wrote, I did not give anything that would hint at a date of
>broadcast.
> Since I don't bother to memorize the dates that I donate (I could
>check in my check book, but it's not that important to me) I doubt I
>would have given anything to indicate a specific date. You chose to
>deside the date with out anything from me to give you even so much as
>a hint.
Kent, you are _obviously_ being either inattentive or disingenuous. If
you should recall, I ASKED YOU whether mine was a fair summation of your
position. If you _had_ answered in the affirmative, then your testimony
could have been accepted as direct evidence to refute Mr. Hattan's claim.
Otherwise, you wouldn't have testimony worth listening to.
>
>> As I pointed out, Bobby E. has generally abandoned his long-standing
>>practice of stating the name AND city of his donors, probably with the
>>intent of deceiving unsuspecting donors into believing that his show is
>>live. We have both audiotape and testimonial evidence to that effect.
>>And while we do not discount the possibility that Larson will, on rare
>>occasions, actually do a "live" show, the overall point stands.
>
> If you do have such evidence, I would like to see it. If said
>evidence is something you can send via E-mail, please send it to me.
>I will review it. If not, E-mail me and I will E-mail back me mailing
>address (I'm sure you can understand my not giving it out on a New
>Group).
>
Some of it is there on the Homepage, if you would only take the time to
look. Check out, "The Boy Can't Help It," in the Larson articles section
of the Page. The letter from Brian Bown is also available on the Net, if
our ftp site is running (ftp://fianna.cris.com/pub/larson/pics/bown1.gif
to bown4.gif, inclusive).
I look forward to your defense of everyone's favorite millionaire mail-
order minister, but can't make my opening statement at this time.
John Hattan
>At one time, rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith ) wrote:
>
>> As you should recall, Kent, you were taking issue with John Hattan's
>>observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
>>time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
>>show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
>>cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
>>in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
>>all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
>
> First, I would like to appologize for the delay in responding. My
>server isn't known for being the most relyable for getting posts in a
>timely manner.
> I did take issue with the atated time delay, but, and I checked
>what I wrote, I did not give anything that would hint at a date of
>broadcast.
> Since I don't bother to memorize the dates that I donate (I could
>check in my check book, but it's not that important to me) I doubt I
>would have given anything to indicate a specific date. You chose to
>deside the date with out anything from me to give you even so much as
>a hint.
So I am to understand that you sent BegginBob a check, and he thanked
you ten minutes later?
You've got really good mail service where you live :)
I smell a hoax.
Bill Price
> I donate to Bob Larson Ministries because he is doing what God has
>instucted him to do. Since I have the fancial means to help him out,
>I do..
You certainly have the right to send your money anywhere you please
Kent. I also have the financial means to support people and
organizations as I am so driven. But I tend to evaluate a bit closer
than you.
Sorry, but I have an extremely difficult time in matching up Bob
Laron's approach of prejudice, fear, manipulation and marketing of
12th century demonology with anything to do with goodness, family
values and normal healthy human behavior. In my opinion, it would
require a rather large dose of superstition and ignorance in order to
relate to the BLM message. It is quite a stretch from the 20th century
to the extremely paranoid dillusional world of Bob Larson.
If all one needs to do to get your check is to wrap himself in
scripture or self appointed instructions from God, then please make a
check out to Ken to help support his web page. You can TRUST me when I
tell you that Ken has DIRECT instructions from God to nail Bob Larson.
Forget the megabytes of evidence that Ken has accumulated about
Larson. Just listen to the man talk for about 10 minutes. He claims
to see Demon's, talkes regularly to Demon's, boast of outwitting them
with his superior intellect. Gay bashing, relgious bashing......
ANYTHING, and I mean the sky is the limit, to get you scared or angry
enough to send HIM money.
You ask for more proof from Ken.... next time you send Larson a
check, ask for a photo of one of those Demon piloted UFO's Bob has
clamed exist. Come on Kent. If it talks like a nut, walks like a nut
then it probalby is a nut.
Remember, without people like you, the man would not exist. Shame
on you.
Bill
EskWIRED
: kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills ) wrote:
: >At one time, rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith ) wrote:
: >
: >> As you should recall, Kent, you were taking issue with John Hattan's
: >>observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
: >>time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
: >>show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
: >>cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
: >>in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
: >>all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
: >
: > First, I would like to appologize for the delay in responding. My
: >server isn't known for being the most relyable for getting posts in a
: >timely manner.
: > I did take issue with the atated time delay, but, and I checked
: >what I wrote, I did not give anything that would hint at a date of
: >broadcast.
: > Since I don't bother to memorize the dates that I donate (I could
: >check in my check book, but it's not that important to me) I doubt I
: >would have given anything to indicate a specific date. You chose to
: >deside the date with out anything from me to give you even so much as
: >a hint.
: So I am to understand that you sent BegginBob a check, and he thanked
: you ten minutes later?
: You've got really good mail service where you live :)
: I smell a hoax.
: ---
: John Hattan High UberPopeness -The First Church of Shatnerology
: The Code Zone Sweet Software for a Saturnine World
: hat...@fastlane.net http://www.fastlane.net/~hattan/
--
============================================================
---------...@shore.net------------
============================================================
Subscribe to Alt.Food.Barbecue--Usenet's ONLY Barbecue Newsgroup!
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
It's hard to believe, but kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills) actually
wrote (in pertinent part):
> I donate to Bob Larson Ministries because he is doing what God has
>instucted him to do. Since I have the fancial means to help him out,
>I do.
So in effect, Kent, what you are suggesting is that God _INSTRUCTED_ Bob
to:
(1) Buy his Ministry's office building for $1,415,000 -- using no money of
his own -- and then sell it to his Ministry less than 15 months later, for
an apparent $385,000 profit (sales price: $1.8M) ... while the Denver real
estate market was in a virtual free-fall;
(2) Bleed his Ministry dry with his princely (approx. $500,000/year) com-
pensation package;
(3) Have staffers write and edit "his" books while on his Ministry's time,
and pocket 100% of the royalties;
(4) Divorce the "help-mate" God gave him -- against her wishes -- in favor
of a younger (and, more fertile!) trophy-wife;
(5) Deliberately mislead contributors as to the financial condition of his
Ministry and the size of his compensation package;
(6) Require a Ministry vice-president to sign a confidentiality agreement
which specifically prevents her from talking about whether or not she had
an extramarital affair with him;
(7) Fabricate evidence in an attempt to discredit his critics;
(8) Knowingly slander his critics over the air (BL even claimed that "Sat-
anists were more to be trusted than Christians in the media");
(9) Use Ministry money to wage legal campaigns against his critics; and
(10) Concoct a bogus campaign to "revive Christian radio" -- which crashed
and burned -- and claim that God gave him a vision to do it?
Interesting God you worship, Kent.
As long-time readers of this NG know, I can come up with lots more, with
or without slides. The evidence is there for everyone to see (if our ftp
site happens to be up).
You don't have to like my writing style -- on balance, I get more comp-
liments than complaints -- but you can't ignore the megabytes of evidence.
In the "case" against Bob Larson, the most incriminating "witness" is Bob
Larson!
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
ed >something to the effect that it was satirical.
"But the targets of satire are always the last to laugh.
Due to various personal reasons, they cannot see the joke.
But satire is not written for them. It is written for others
so that, like the fable, they can see that the `emperor has
no clothes.'
That is why satura is fun."
- L. Ron Hubbard
_Mission Earth_
Kent, satire is a wonderful way to make a point. And, in the case of
Beggin'Bob Larson, it is SATIRE BASED ON FACT!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>
> I donate to Bob Larson Ministries because he is doing what God has
>instucted him to do.
And how do _YOU_ know? Get that burning in the bosom? Or, was it just
the heartburn you got from eating at Wendy's? Maybe it was that demon who
"possessed" you when you watched Brady Bunch reruns on the Family Channel?
Received your hundred-fold blessing yet?
John Hattan
>What did BL say about the Oscars, I'm curious. (I haven't heard the
>show in years!)
The same old crap.
"How could movies that glorify violence, homosexuality, abortion,
rebellion, death-metal music, Mormons, demons, and male pattern-baldness
possibly be honored with awards."
Or something like that.
Kent B. Wills
>So I am to understand that you sent BegginBob a check, and he thanked
>you ten minutes later?
>You've got really good mail service where you live :)
>I smell a hoax.
You can't be this stupid can you? Do I need to write out every
little thing for you?
I called the 800 number, then I wrote the check, put it in an
envelope, addressed it, placed a stamp on it and set it on the table
with other items to be mailed. When I left my house I mailed the
check and the other items.
It was roughly ten minutes after I called that he thanked me. NOT
ten minutes after I sent the check.
John Hattan
>At one time, hat...@fastlane.net (John Hattan) wrote:
>
>>So I am to understand that you sent BegginBob a check, and he thanked
>>you ten minutes later?
>
>>You've got really good mail service where you live :)
>
>>I smell a hoax.
>
> You can't be this stupid can you? Do I need to write out every
>little thing for you?
Please don't resort to insults. Frankly, I don't think that a person
who claims to have sent money to Bob Larson is in the position to
question anyone's intelligence.
> I called the 800 number, then I wrote the check, put it in an
>envelope, addressed it, placed a stamp on it and set it on the table
>with other items to be mailed. When I left my house I mailed the
>check and the other items.
I really doubt that Bob would thank someone for a donation until he has
a cleared check. That's why he loves credit cards so much --immediate
gratification!
If he immediately thanks people who *promise* to send him money, maybe
I'll be a thousand-dollar hero today :)
> It was roughly ten minutes after I called that he thanked me. NOT
>ten minutes after I sent the check.
If you really did donate, there's one thing you can be happy about. . .
Given that the Ken Smith lawsuit is over, you can be secure in the
knowledge that your donation probably didn't go toward's Bob's lawyer
fund. Your money more likely went into his ski-vacation fund.
P.S. Enjoying your video? Please tell us about Noah's pet dinosaurs :)
Pedro Bedard
> You can't be this stupid can you? Do I need to write out every
> little thing for you?
Wait a minute, you sent a check to our favorite snake-oil salesman and
you have the gall to call someone else stupid?
"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your eye, and then you will see
clearly enough to take the speck out of your brothers eye" Matt 7:5
(I love turning that crap back on you people.)
Kent B. Wills
> So in effect, Kent, what you are suggesting is that God _INSTRUCTED_ Bob
>to:
> As long-time readers of this NG know, I can come up with lots more, with
>or without slides. The evidence is there for everyone to see (if our ftp
>site happens to be up).
[Other itens snipped for the sake of space]
You have made some interesting claims. However, I require proof of
what you charge. If such proof exists, either E-mail it to me or
E-mail me for my personal snail-mail address. You can even mail it
potage due if you like.
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>
>You have made some interesting claims. However, I require proof of
>what you charge. If such proof exists, either E-mail it to me or
>E-mail me for my personal snail-mail address. You can even mail it
>potage due if you like.
To quote one of your favorite people (unjustly haranguing John Hattan),
"You can't be this stupid can you? Do I need to write out every
little thing for you?"
He who is without sin, Kent, may cast the first stone. First off, your
grammatical prowess is almost Larsonesque. Second off, thousands of visi-
tors to the Bob Larson Fan Club Homepage
(http://www.cris.com/~Ranger57/blm.htm)
have had little or no difficulty in finding the "proof" you demanded. As
such, your personal attacks upon Mr. Hattan are uncalled for.
Start with my "Minute Messages," which combine text, gif'd documents,
and audio clips in a succinct presentation of the case for several of the
ten listed allegations (not that there aren't more; I merely listed ten
for effect). Then, go to the interactive articles in the Larson Article
Index. Read my popular pamphlets ("The Two Faces of Bob" and "Sympathy
for the Devil"). The evidence is there for those who make even a cursory
effort to find it.
Our ftp site has been off line for a few days; if you will send me your
snail-mail address, I'll send gif'd copies of some of the key documents.
Kent B. Wills
>Wait a minute, you sent a check to our favorite snake-oil salesman and
>you have the gall to call someone else stupid?
>"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your eye, and then you will see
>clearly enough to take the speck out of your brothers eye" Matt 7:5
>(I love turning that crap back on you people.)
Yes, I infered that he was/is stupid. I joined Mensa in 1987, when
did he join?
I find it interesting that so many are willing to bash Mr. Larson
and make all sorts of claims of wrong doing on his part, but when I
request proof of such, I never hear anything back. This leads me to
belive that there is no such proof and that the claims are erronious
at best, flat out lies as worst.
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>
>>Wait a minute, you sent a check to our favorite snake-oil salesman and
>>you have the gall to call someone else stupid?
>>"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your eye, and then you will see >>clearly enough to take the speck out of your brothers eye" Matt 7:5
>>(I love turning that crap back on you people.)
>
> Yes, I infered that he was/is stupid. I joined Mensa in 1987, when
>did he join?
As a former Mensan who has three earned college degrees, I think I have
standing sufficient to call you stupid. (In case anyone is wondering, I
don't think very much of Mensa -- the only other time I have seen such a
lethal concentration of primadonnas was at the National Religious Book-
sellers' convention.)
I find it interesting that so many are willing to bash Mr. Larson
>and make all sorts of claims of wrong doing on his part, but when I
>request proof of such, I never hear anything back. This leads me to
>belive that there is no such proof and that the claims are erronious
>at best, flat out lies as worst.
Kent, I don't think that you're stupid but rather, a bald-faced liar.
The simple fact is that I _have_ asked you for your snail-mail address,
not to mention providing you with citations to specific sections of the
Homepage containing direct documentary evidence proving claims which I
have made. Most of the regulars on this page could also attest to the
documents' existence, as they have accessed them for themselves.
I find it interesting that it takes a _MENSAN_ to not be able to find
them....
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>At one time, Pedro Bedard <eko...@freenet.mb.ca> wrote:
>
>>Wait a minute, you sent a check to our favorite snake-oil salesman and
>>you have the gall to call someone else stupid?
>>"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your eye, and then you will see
>>clearly enough to take the speck out of your brothers eye" Matt 7:5
>>(I love turning that crap back on you people.)
>
> Yes, I infered that he was/is stupid. I joined Mensa in 1987, when
>did he join?
>and make all sorts of claims of wrong doing on his part, but when I
>request proof of such, I never hear anything back.
I find it interesting that you would ignore the mountain of evidence
that has been placed before you and yet, have the temerity to complain
that none has been offered.
>This leads me to >belive that there is no such proof and that the claims are erronious >at best, flat out lies as worst.
So, Kent, what's the maximum capacity of your mailbox? We're about to
find out -- I'm going to see if I can overload it.
John Hattan
>kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills ) wrote:
>>At one time, Pedro Bedard <eko...@freenet.mb.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>Wait a minute, you sent a check to our favorite snake-oil salesman and
>>>you have the gall to call someone else stupid?
>>>"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your eye, and then you will see
>>>clearly enough to take the speck out of your brothers eye" Matt 7:5
>>>(I love turning that crap back on you people.)
>>
>> Yes, I infered that he was/is stupid. I joined Mensa in 1987, when
>>did he join?
>> I find it interesting that so many are willing to bash Mr. Larson
>>and make all sorts of claims of wrong doing on his part, but when I
>>request proof of such, I never hear anything back.
>
> I find it interesting that you would ignore the mountain of evidence
>that has been placed before you and yet, have the temerity to complain
>that none has been offered.
To answer an earlier question, I, John, am not a member of Mensa. I
have never been a member of Mensa. I have no intention of becoming a
member of Mensa. I am, however, an active CTM Toastmaster if that
counts :)
I also have an engineering degree and have never sent a dime to Bob
Larson Ministries. Hopefully that's enough of a testimonial of my
intelligence.
Ken Smith
I stumbled across what appears to have been Beggin'Bob's primary source
of research on the Jessica Dubroff story: THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER!
No toys, no TV ... only the Enquirer (and Beggin'Bob) would make such
of a big deal about it. It would probably be a better world if we kept
big babies like Bob from playing with their G.I. Joes.
Guess this means Bob's no longer on a two-week delay....
"Following my bliss" :), Ken
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>In article <4lgdr6$r...@news2.ios.com>, kwil...@ecity.net wrote:
>
>> Yes, I infered that he was/is stupid. I joined Mensa in 1987, when
>> did he join?
>> I find it interesting that so many are willing to bash Mr. Larson
>> and make all sorts of claims of wrong doing on his part, but when I
>> belive that there is no such proof and that the claims are erronious
>> at best, flat out lies as worst.
>
This "Wills" fellow writes and argues like Beggin'Bob. It can't be the
water, and it can't be anything that they put in the communion wafers (as
at least two BLM employees reported, Bob wasn't big on attending church);
it must be some genetic disorder passed on when one comes in contact with
a collection plate....
Kent B. Wills
> I find it interesting that you would ignore the mountain of evidence
>that has been placed before you and yet, have the temerity to complain
>that none has been offered.
I got the E-mail you sent on the 22nd. All it said was something
to the effect of, "Here is some raw facts on Bob Larson. Don't say you
didn't get any evidence." and *nothing* more.
I don't see how this proves anything one way or the other. The
simple truth is, you haven't sent me any evidence. As far as I am
concerned, you have none and have been lieing the entire time.
> So, Kent, what's the maximum capacity of your mailbox? We're about to
>find out -- I'm going to see if I can overload it.
>
I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
that can be used for things like mail, personal web page (don't look
for one on the ecity.net domain as I don't use it), news files, and
the like. Since I only keep my mail and news there, I suspect that
there is a lot of space available.
Kent
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
>
>> I find it interesting that you would ignore the mountain of evidence
>>that has been placed before you and yet, have the temerity to complain
>>that none has been offered.
>
> I got the E-mail you sent on the 22nd. All it said was something
>to the effect of, "Here is some raw facts on Bob Larson. Don't say you
>didn't get any evidence." and *nothing* more.
> I don't see how this proves anything one way or the other. The
>simple truth is, you haven't sent me any evidence. As far as I am
>concerned, you have none and have been lieing the entire time.
And as far as I am concerned, you received the zipped file, and you have
been "lieing" the entire time. The _vast_ majority of Mensans are able to
spell simple words like lying....
I will give you the benefit of the doubt, even though you are presumably
capable of using a Web-browser, and have the same access to the BL Website
as anyone else on this NG. I've taken the liberty of setting up a special
site (http://www.cris.com/~zeke33/s4deva.htm) where you can access one of
my interactive articles ("Sympathy for the Devil"). Not only can you read
the article itself, but you can examine gif'd copies of documents cited in
the article. And if others nn this NG question my word, they can check it
out for themselves, as well.
I don't ask people to take me at my word. I don't HAVE to; the evidence
speaks for itself. Nonetheless, I do require that the hearer show a small
amount of initiative (i.e., reading the articles, and examining the gif'd
documents supporting allegations contained therein). If you are incapable
of doing so, that is YOUR shame, not mine.
Ken Holler
>At one time, Rang...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> I find it interesting that you would ignore the mountain of evidence
>>that has been placed before you and yet, have the temerity to complain
>>that none has been offered.
> I got the E-mail you sent on the 22nd. All it said was something
>to the effect of, "Here is some raw facts on Bob Larson. Don't say you
>didn't get any evidence." and *nothing* more.
> I don't see how this proves anything one way or the other. The
>simple truth is, you haven't sent me any evidence. As far as I am
>concerned, you have none and have been lieing the entire time.
It amazes me that you continue to ignore Ken's information. A simple
visit to his web page would provide you with hours of evidence. Also,
there are new things called "search engines" on the web. Trying using
one and you will find mountains of facts on Bobby Larceny and his
lying (by the way Mensa boy- the correct spelling is "lying") ways.
>> So, Kent, what's the maximum capacity of your mailbox? We're about to
>>find out -- I'm going to see if I can overload it.
>>
> I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
>that can be used for things like mail, personal web page (don't look
>for one on the ecity.net domain as I don't use it), news files, and
>the like. Since I only keep my mail and news there, I suspect that
>there is a lot of space available.
> Kent
>KENT B. WILLS
>kwil...@ecity.net / comp...@prodigy.com
>http://wwww.geocities.com/SoHo/1523/
Howard Stern in the morning -play with yourself the rest of the day.
98.5 WNCX-Cleveland's classic rock station.
kho...@ix.netcom.com (Ken Holler).
John Hattan
> Guess this means Bob's no longer on a two-week delay....
Given that he covered "Kindred: The Embraced" today, I'd say he's
graduated to a three-week delay :)
Either that or he's getting worse and worse at picking topical stuff!
Rang...@ix.netcom.com
hat...@fastlane.net (John Hattan) wrote:
>rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith ) wrote:
>
>> Guess this means Bob's no longer on a two-week delay....
>
>Given that he covered "Kindred: The Embraced" today, I'd say he's
>graduated to a three-week delay :)
>
>Either that or he's getting worse and worse at picking topical stuff!
Actually, he appears to be kind of mixing it up. His failure to mention
the name of his new show on Wednesday suggests that it was more or less on
time -- since it is known that Paul Crouch objected to the name. However,
he promoted the TV gig by name on yesterday's show, which naturally leads
me to believe it was pre-Crouch.
Your dating on the show is presumptively accurate: Bob's staff reads ALL
the really IMPORTANT literature (USA Today, The Weekly World News, People,
TV Guide, and the occasional Reader's Digest) and briefs him beforehand.
EskWIRED
Kent B. Wills (kwil...@ecity.net) wrote:
: I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
: that can be used for things like mail, personal web page...
Wow. I must REALLY be stupid compared to MensaBoy. I only get 10 Megs.
He gets 8 Gigs! More than 4 whole (BIG) harddrives just for him! What a
great ISP he must have!
Hey MensaBoy--did you mean Megs? Don't know the difference? Were you too
busy teaching yourself rocket science
when they went over such things in your 5th grade math class?
EskWIRED
Rang...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
: Your dating on the show is presumptively accurate: Bob's staff reads ALL
: the really IMPORTANT literature (USA Today, The Weekly World News, People,
: TV Guide, and the occasional Reader's Digest) and briefs him beforehand.
Well, then howcum Bob doesn't comment on those cool stories in WWW? You
know, like Jesus Greeted Astronauts on the Moon, and Satan is Released
from Hell? I would think that they would be right up his alley!
The WWW seems to have a real slant towards the gullible Christian
reader. As such, its audience and Bob's probaby overlap considerably.
Kent B. Wills
At one time, eskw...@shore.net (EskWIRED) wrote:
>Kent B. Wills (kwil...@ecity.net) wrote:
>: I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
>: that can be used for things like mail, personal web page...
>Wow. I must REALLY be stupid compared to MensaBoy. I only get 10 Megs.
>He gets 8 Gigs! More than 4 whole (BIG) harddrives just for him! What a
>great ISP he must have!
Huh? Why would it require four hard drives? I have only one HD on
my computer, and it's 10 gigs (not megs, GIGS!). It would seem
logical that ecity could give each user eight gigs without giving each
user four disks.
>Hey MensaBoy--did you mean Megs? Don't know the difference? Were you too
>busy teaching yourself rocket science when they went over such things in your 5th grade math class?
If you had to wait until fifth grade to learn something so
base...well, it would explain a lot.
Bill Price
kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills ) wrote:
I could never imagine the level of rational intelligence, and
"logic" one must be devoid of to rationalize supporting such an out of
wack "minister" such as Bob Larson.
Well now.... thanks Kent......
Now I know..
Bill
PvtJoker2
kwil...@ecity.net posted:
> At one time, eskw...@shore.net (EskWIRED) wrote:
>
>
>>Kent B. Wills (kwil...@ecity.net) wrote:
>>: I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
>>: that can be used for things like mail, personal web page...
>
>>Wow. I must REALLY be stupid compared to MensaBoy. I only get 10 Megs.
>>He gets 8 Gigs! More than 4 whole (BIG) harddrives just for him! What a
>>great ISP he must have!
>
> Huh? Why would it require four hard drives? I have only one HD on
>my computer, and it's 10 gigs (not megs, GIGS!). It would seem
>logical that ecity could give each user eight gigs without giving each
>user four disks.
>
>>Hey MensaBoy--did you mean Megs? Don't know the difference? Were you
>too
>>busy teaching yourself rocket science when they went over such things in
your
>5th grade math class?
>
> If you had to wait until fifth grade to learn something so
>base...well, it would explain a lot.
Actually, if you check the eCity homepage, you find that their dialup
account does come with eight _megs_ of personal disk space, and costs
$25/month on a yearly basis. Either Compu Oaf must be paying a king's
ransom for that extra 7.992 gigs, or he screwed up and he knows it, and is
content to sit back, obfuscate and lob lame insults. No wonder he's such
an admirer of Bob's...
John Hattan
kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills ) wrote:
>At one time, eskw...@shore.net (EskWIRED) wrote:
>
>>Kent B. Wills (kwil...@ecity.net) wrote:
>>: I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
>>: that can be used for things like mail, personal web page...
>
>>Wow. I must REALLY be stupid compared to MensaBoy. I only get 10 Megs.
>>He gets 8 Gigs! More than 4 whole (BIG) harddrives just for him! What a
>>great ISP he must have!
>
> Huh? Why would it require four hard drives? I have only one HD on
>my computer, and it's 10 gigs (not megs, GIGS!). It would seem
>logical that ecity could give each user eight gigs without giving each
>user four disks.
I think he's talking about the amount of local storage your provider
gives you. If your provider gives you 8 gig of local space, you should
have had no problem receiving the 10 meg of Bob-evidence that you were
sent.
I assume your Mensa-class brain has had time to filter through the
evidence you have been sent.
>>Hey MensaBoy--did you mean Megs? Don't know the difference? Were you too
>>busy teaching yourself rocket science when they went over such things in your 5th grade math class?
>>
> If you had to wait until fifth grade to learn something so
>base...well, it would explain a lot.
My service provider only gives 5 meg per user for local storage.
Maybe that's why MensaBoy is so amazingly intelligent. He's got a
terrific service provider! If FastLane (my provider) gave each
subscriber 8 gig of local storage, they would need at least 10 terabytes
(10,000 gig) of space just to accomodate their subscribers. That'd take
quite some time to back up :)
I guess with all of that disposable income MensaBoy has, he can
certainly afford one of them "deluxe" accounts. I wonder if MensaBoy
has his personally BobAutographed copy of "Dead Hair" yet?
Greegor
From: kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills )
Subject: Re: Opportunity for Bob
Date: 1996/04/13
Message-ID: <4kmqjq$i...@news2.ios.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 147216741
references: <copeland-140...@ep226.itsnet.com> <314c2493...@news.fastlane.net> <4ivt4j$t...@tribune.cris.com> <3157fc54....@news.fastlane.net> <4jvog5$g...@news2.ios.com> <4k347a$b...@tribune.concentric.net> <4k4f6q$o...@news2.ios.com> <4k5ru2$l...@tribune.concentric.net> <4k9qrm$5...@news2.ios.com> <4kb20b$k...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>
organization: Organization? Here? BWAHAHAHAHA
reply-to: kwil...@ecity.net
newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson
At one time, rang...@ix.netcom.com(Ken Smith ) wrote:
>observation that, Bob Larson was currently working on about a two-week
>time delay. Obviously, if he had mentioned your name and city on that
>show, and you had indeed donated money to the "ministry" on that parti-
>cular day, it would have been hard evidence to the contrary. However,
>in light of your protest, it would appear that you have no evidence at
>all to refute Mr. Hattan's observation.
First, I would like to appologize for the delay in responding. My
server isn't known for being the most relyable for getting posts in a
timely manner.
I did take issue with the atated time delay, but, and I checked
what I wrote, I did not give anything that would hint at a date of
broadcast.
Since I don't bother to memorize the dates that I donate (I could
check in my check book, but it's not that important to me) I doubt I
would have given anything to indicate a specific date. You chose to
deside the date with out anything from me to give you even so much as
a hint.
> As I pointed out, Bobby E. has generally abandoned his long-standing
>practice of stating the name AND city of his donors, probably with the
>intent of deceiving unsuspecting donors into believing that his show is
>live. We have both audiotape and testimonial evidence to that effect.
>And while we do not discount the possibility that Larson will, on rare
>occasions, actually do a "live" show, the overall point stands.
If you do have such evidence, I would like to see it. If said
evidence is something you can send via E-mail, please send it to me.
I will review it. If not, E-mail me and I will E-mail back me mailing
address (I'm sure you can understand my not giving it out on a New
Group).
> But let's get to the more interesting question (assuming that you're
>telling the truth -- it's hard to believe that you would be in support
>of the blue-ribbon campaign, and yet, be giving money to Bob): Why did
>you donate money to Bob Larson Ministries?
> And, after visiting the Website, are you prepared to defend him?
Where's the problem with this? I feel that I and anyone else should
be permited to say what ever they believe on-line, regardless as to
whether I agree with it or not. I want to be able to speak my mind
and since I want to do such, I feel I should allow others to do the
same.
Do I like pornography being so easily available on the Internet?
No. However, I don't think banning it, thereby violateing the
Constitution, is correct either. What would be better would be to
show people how it is an abomination to God and then people will
remove it on thier own.
I do.
page but sarcasm. If any actuall proof were offered, I might think
Greegor
From: kwil...@ecity.net (Kent B. Wills )
Subject: Re: Opportunity for Bob
Date: 1996/05/01
Message-ID: <4m8c04$8...@news2.ios.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 152452286
references: <copeland-140...@ep226.itsnet.com> <314c2493...@news.fastlane.net> <4ivt4j$t...@tribune.cris.com> <3157fc54....@news.fastlane.net> <4jvog5$g...@news2.ios.com> <4k347a$b...@tribune.concentric.net> <4k4f6q$o...@news2.ios.com> < <4lq9pd$p...@shore.shore.net>
organization: Organization? Here? BWAHAHAHAHA
reply-to: kwil...@ecity.net
newsgroups: alt.fan.bob-larson
>Kent B. Wills (kwil...@ecity.net) wrote:
>: I don't know the amount for certain. I do know I have eight gigs
>: that can be used for things like mail, personal web page...
>Wow. I must REALLY be stupid compared to MensaBoy. I only get 10 Megs.
>He gets 8 Gigs! More than 4 whole (BIG) harddrives just for him! What a
>great ISP he must have!
Huh? Why would it require four hard drives? I have only one HD on
my computer, and it's 10 gigs (not megs, GIGS!). It would seem
logical that ecity could give each user eight gigs without giving each
user four disks.
>busy teaching yourself rocket science when they went over such things in your 5th grade math class?
If you had to wait until fifth grade to learn something so
base...well, it would explain a lot.