Judge Cummings, you freaking a--hole,
samsloan
progress?
Keep going and you'll soon earn the butt whipping you've been begging for.
If
you value the continued functioning of your cornhole, wise up. But
quickly.
Sam Sloan
> SAM R.CUMMINGS
> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
> Date: 1/4/2010
jkh001
Oh, please, not another FSS. Don't the seventh-graders ever grow up?
samsloan
from bananasplit.info . Most Fake Sam Sloan postings nowadays come
from anonymous remailers dizum.com or bananasplit.info, although there
is another one in Italy and another one in Australia that the Fake Sam
Sloan uses also.
I hope that the federal judge to whom the above posting is addressed
gets the FBI after these people and brings an end to this through a
long prison sentence.
The Real Sam Sloan
Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!
feed.tweaknews.nl!194.109.133.84.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!
newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.wiretrip.org!
news.bananasplit.info!mail2news
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address
above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.
Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
remailer administrator at <ab...@frell.theremailer.net>.
Identifying the real sender is technically impossible.
Subject: Judge Cummings, you freaking a--hole,
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics
X-Clue: KRON001082 (Bates stamp)
From: samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com>
Message-ID:
<7848217e146f5a6c...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Precedence: anon
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:58:56 +0100
X-Abuse-Contact: ab...@bananasplit.info
Organization: Bananasplit - Mail2News
samsloan
Did Truong only make it to the seventh grade?
The Real Sam Sloan
MrVidmar
judge. Someone might want to bring this to the attention of the court
or the Federal Marshalls.
samsloan
Also note that there is an obvious motive.
Paul Truong and Susan Polgar are obviously likely to be upset at the
two decisions by Judge Cummings yesterday, January 4, 2010, which have
likely ended the pro-Polgar settlement they thought they had in the
bag. Thus, this lashing out at the judge immediately following those
two decisions is likely the work of Polgar or Truong.
The Real Sam Sloan
Chris Falter
Motive does not imply involvement. Many people could have a motive to
try to embarrass the Real Sam Sloan. Whether their motives are well-
founded or not is besides the point; the point is that the finger of
guilt could point in many directions. There could even be some as yet
unidentified anarchist who just likes to stir up trouble.
In fact, it would be extremely risky for Truong to indulge in FSS
postings. Threatening a federal judge could bring in the FBI, and
they could subpoena the anonymizer, and then it's game over. I will
leave to others any speculation about whether Truong would act
prudently with regard to this issue.
Bobcat
Come on Sam, you might not like Paul and Susan, but PLEASE get a grip
on it. Being that Paul is still under a cloud of being the FSS, he is
NOT so stupid as to return to the scene of the crime to replicate the
EXACT SAME CRIME, given that he already knows he would be suspect #1.
No, either it is some one else, or given your comments, that YOU are
the FSS trying to pin this on Paul and/or Susan. Using your rather
piss poor form of "logic" -- which is to say NONE -- and given the
fact that YOU just got your head handed to you on a silver platter
with the following ORDER:
ORDER
The Court having considered Defendant Sam Sloan’s Motion to Suspend
and
Terminate Mediation and for Sanctions Against Rogue Mediators Daniel
Bowling and
Robin W. Siefkin, filed December 22, 2009, is of the opinion that the
same should be
DENIED. The parties may continue to pursue any settlement discussions
and negotiations on their
own or with the help of Mediators Bowling and Siefkin, who have been
diligently attempting to
assist the parties in arriving at a settlement. The parties are
reminded that the Court has
set this case for trial on March 1, 2010.
Then YOU are the one that is faking this FSS post by lashing out at
the very same judge that DENIED your motion to Suspend and Terminate
all efforts at Mediation and your call for Sanctions against the
"Rogue" Mediators. Truthfully I'm surprised that YOU were not
sanctioned by the court. My hat off to you however that you can play
this very reckless and dangerous game of yours of running right up to
the edge without stepping over the line. One day however you will
miscalculate and the full weight of the law will come down on you like
a 800 lb gorilla. While I seriously doubt YOU faked this FSS post, if
I were to use your rather faulty form of logic, then YOU have just as
much a reason to fake the post as either Paul and/or Susan and for the
exact same reason you gave. In short STOP trying to stir the pot with
reckless allegations of accusing someone without a shred of proof.
jkh001
Uh huh. And the only person who has made repeated public complaints
about the mediation efforts and tried to blow up any settlement is ...?
raylopez99
> In fact, it would be extremely risky for Truong to indulge in FSS
> postings. Threatening a federal judge could bring in the FBI, and
> they could subpoena the anonymizer, and then it's game over. I will
> leave to others any speculation about whether Truong would act
> prudently with regard to this issue.
How can you subpoena an anonymizer? If you're using Bittorrent etc
your message goes through dozens of servers in fragments. At best
you'll find only the rough geographic location, from what I
understand.
RL
Mike Murray
Unless a cyber cafe, where the customers pay in cash, fronts for the
service, I'd guess if the anonymizing service can be paid, its
customers and their originating ISPs can be traced.
MrVidmar
It can and has been done. There was an article several years ago in the
NY Times about a guy who was caught by the feds even though using an
off-shore remailer. Nothing is truly anonymous today. And, the
government does not take kindly to threats made against Federal judges.
Stay tuned.
RayGordon
>
> - Show quoted text -
The easiest way is on the OUTGOING end, if you have the right suspect.
You can also just check all traffic going into the anon remailer, or
just take over the remailer itself.
It'd be funn if someone from around here owned one of these remailers,
that's for sure.
Teddybear
> The easiest way is on the OUTGOING end, if you have the right suspect.
I would have thought by now you would have discovered that in Court, what
you know is irrelevant, it's what you can prove that's important. So all
your pitiful attempts at discovery won't work, you lack proof, and most of
them are out of the jurisdiction of the US.
> You can also just check all traffic going into the anon remailer, or
> just take over the remailer itself.
Yeah, I'm sure all those remailers will just lay down and let you take them
over. Pity you lack the funds, and expertise, to implement your plan. BTW,
since most of the remailers are overseas, what makes you think they care
about US law?
> It'd be funn if someone from around here owned one of these remailers,
> that's for sure.
Even if someone did, they wouldn't cooperate with you. Nobody likes you
The Masked Bishop
personal invective in any post...which is a lot more than most of the
rest of us can say.
When I read a post by "Sam Sloan" that contains phrases like "freaking
a-hole," I immediately know that's not the real Sam. The problem with
trolls posing as regulars is that most trolls are terrible writers,
and their ability to imitate prose stylings or a person's vocabulary
selection is nil.
Chris Falter
I ran the tracert utility against frell.remailer.net, which was the
remailer used by this thread's FSS. It is based in Windsor, Ontario,
Canada. The next question, then, is what if anything can US law
enforcement authorities do to get cooperation from a Canadian
networking company? Obviously they cannot issue a subpoena directly;
OTOH, it's not like it's in Russia or the Ukraine. If US authorities
can get remailer.net to disclose the originating IP address of this
post's sender, and it happens to belong to a US-based ISP, the jig is
up.
Chris Falter
Assuming US law enforcement authorities are interested in following
up, of course.
Chris Falter
It's true that Sam does not use obscenities, which is to be
commended. However...
<Sam Sloan quote from earlier thread>
claude bloodgood who, through hard work and diligent study of chess,
achieved a uscf rating or 2702, only to have it taken away from him
through a
vile conspiracy by uscf insiders jealous of his achievements
</Sam Sloan quote from earlier thread>
Does this qualify as personal invective?
ChessFire
> On Jan 8, 9:22 am, The Masked Bishop <tmb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sam Sloan has never, to my knowledge, resorted to obscenity or
> > personal invective in any post...which is a lot more than most of the
> > rest of us can say.
>
> > When I read a post by "Sam Sloan" that contains phrases like "freaking
> > a-hole," I immediately know that's not the real Sam. The problem with
> > trolls posing as regulars is that most trolls are terrible writers,
> > and their ability to imitate prose stylings or a person's vocabulary
> > selection is nil.
>
> It's true that Sam does not use obscenities, which is to be
> commended. However...
however objective such observations are, still, after 2 years most
here talk about impersonations, whereas we who know him immediately
identify the im-post-er, since it the FSS was not impersonating, but
satirizing
similarly most 'prosecutors' appearing here do not deem to notice this
obvious distinction - or dismiss it
seems like the entire case actually resolves around who might be
capable of writing 2,500 trash messages in perfect american street
cant, without error
this subject is big taboo among 'prosecutors' ;(
> <Sam Sloan quote from earlier thread>
> claude bloodgood who, through hard work and diligent study of chess,
> achieved a uscf rating or 2702, only to have it taken away from him
> through a
> vile conspiracy by uscf insiders jealous of his achievements
> </Sam Sloan quote from earlier thread>
>
> Does this qualify as personal invective?
and was that 2702 otb or correspondence?
who did he play otb to obtain that rating?
and why did uscf 'conspire' to take it away from bloodgood, and how
did they do it?
Phil Innes
Mike Murray
<onec...@comcast.net> wrote:
> the FSS was not impersonating, but satirizing
Heh, heh, heh.
How many people are afraid to deny "satirizing" under oath?
Now, "impersonation" -- that might be a different story.
Tom Martinak
Wouldn't that be L of the BM (29)?
"Sloan is a perpetual political candidate, so all the fakes were
political satire and are protected free speech. Throw it all out. Next
case."
- Tom Martinak
ChessFire
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:37:49 -0800 (PST), ChessFire
>
> > the FSS was not impersonating, but satirizing
>
> Heh, heh, heh.
>
> How many people are afraid to deny "satirizing" under oath?
I have no idea statistically, or even quite understand what is being
asked, or why.
But I also have no idea if Murray can personally tell the real Sloan
from the FSS, since every time I ask him he ducks the issue or
prevaricates as he does here.
> Now, "impersonation" -- that might be a different story.
might...? <yawn>
how about anyone with any wit could tell, and only half-wits could
not? If half a dozen posts advise half-wits that they are reacting to
the FSS not the Sloan, and how they can tell the difference, does this
not give Murray a clue?
At least Murray should come out on the issue and tell us if he
personally could tell the FSS from the Sloan. Otherwise he continues
to prevaricate as if he represented some sort normal response. He does
not. He is into perpetuating a myth that this is impersonation,
whereas to intelligent posters here, it never was. I think Murray's
cause is to aid Sloan, since impersonation is a stronger charge than
lampooning.
Anyway, the question to Murray is an unequivocal one to his own sense
of if he could tell one from the other. Let him answer or let him talk
on behalf of other people <snort>
Phil Innes
Chris Falter
Bloodgood obtained the rating of 2702 by playing hundreds of rated
games against fellow prison inmates. As to why did the USCF
"conspire" and how, you'll have to ask the guy who charged "USCF
insiders" with a "vile conspiracy" motivated by "jealous[y] of his
achievements." BTW, my use of "<Sam Sloan..> ... </Sam Sloan...>" is
a way, using XML syntax, to indicate the start and end of a long quote
from a Sam Sloan post. Please accept my apologies if that was
confusing.
Chris Falter
Mike Murray
Good point.
Innes' pain from the last butt-kicking had faded and his memory
needed a pick-me-up.
"The tree of wisdom must be refreshed from time to time with the
aphorisms of simians and fools". Didn't Jefferson once write that?
None
"The tree of wisdom must be refreshed from time to time with the
aphorisms of simians and fools". Didn't Jefferson once write that? --
MM
I thought it was Larry Parr.
sd
A infinite number of Larry Parrs (perish the thought!), typing on an
infinite number of typewriters, couldn't produce one sentence that
well written.
In that case, my bet would be on the infinite number of simians
pounding away on the keys.
None
I have it on good authority that Larry used to be a featured writer
for Argosy, Esquire and Soldier of Fortune magazines. His non de plume
was Ichesse Scheiße
parrt...@cs.com
parrt...@cs.com
<On Jan 11 Mike Murray wrote: "The tree of wisdom must be refreshed
from time to time with the aphorisms of simians and fools". Didn't
Jefferson once write that?>--
>I thought it was Larry Parr.> -- SD
Rynd-Dowd is still with us.
The Jefferson quote was that the barbituates of liberty must water
the saps in trees ever 20 hours or so.
Yours, Larry Parr
Mike Murray
<onec...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> <onech...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> > the FSS was not impersonating, but satirizing
>> Heh, heh, heh.
>> How many people are afraid to deny "satirizing" under oath?
>I have no idea statistically, or even quite understand what is being
>asked, or why.
Phil, this is the beginning of a good mantra for ya. All it needs is
for you to add that you don't quite understand what you, yourself,
have asked or why. Repeat thrice before posting. Kinda like a mentat
mantra for dummies.
>But I also have no idea if Murray can personally tell the real Sloan
>from the FSS, since every time I ask him he ducks the issue or
>prevaricates as he does here.
Replying, to the effect, "sometimes, maybe, not always" is not ducking
the issue. Could Phil state with confidence that he could tell if the
RSS was imitating the FSS imitating the RSS ? Well, OK, he *could*
(and probably would) state with confidence, but would he be correct?
>> Now, "impersonation" -- that might be a different story.
>might...? <yawn>
>how about anyone with any wit could tell, and only half-wits could
>not? If half a dozen posts advise half-wits that they are reacting to
>the FSS not the Sloan, and how they can tell the difference, does this
>not give Murray a clue?
Does a counterfeiter get exonerated because he made poor quality
twenties? Oh, I forgot, Phil can't understand analogy.
>At least Murray should come out on the issue and tell us if he
>personally could tell the FSS from the Sloan.
Well, OK. Yes, Phil, if I met them in good light, I could tell them
apart. Age, height, ethnicity, and all. Are you happy now?
> Otherwise he continues
>to prevaricate as if he represented some sort normal response. He does
>not. He is into perpetuating a myth that this is impersonation,
>whereas to intelligent posters here, it never was. I think Murray's
>cause is to aid Sloan, since impersonation is a stronger charge than
>lampooning.
Was Sloan the only victim?
jeremy.p...@vanderbilt.edu
> However, from Phil Innes, all I want is an answer to whether he agrees
> with the statement that Truong should resign if he is the impostor
but you want direct answers, jerry, so here they are, not one, but
many
direct answers, in two groups:
--------
PART A: if a court decides after due process, my answer is no. i don't
think
he 'should resign'. i think he should be fired, or 'be resigned.'
At that time, you seemed to think that being FSS would in itself be
enough to make Truong unfit to serve on the USCF board. Have you
changed your mind on further reflection, or did I somehow
misunderstand what seemed clear to me from your answer.
Jerry Spinrad
sd
> THE JEFFERSON QUOTE
>
> <On Jan 11 Mike Murray wrote: "The tree of wisdom must be refreshed
> from time to time with the aphorisms of simians and fools". Didn't
> Jefferson once write that?>--
>
> >I thought it was Larry Parr.> -- SD
>
> Rynd-Dowd is still with us.
>
> The Jefferson quote was that the barbituates of liberty must water
> the saps in trees ever 20 hours or so.
>
> Yours, Larry Parr
Never left,liar.
Seeing as barbituates were first developed in the 1860s, are you
quoting Thomas or George Jefferson? A google search for the quote
leads us.... here only. Back to more Parr faux intellectualism.
PS, learn how to properly attribute in the group as well. I did not
state "I thought it was Larry Parr," that was another poster.
None
Yes I noticed that. Typical Parr spin of incorrect facts. i.e. If
true, blah, blah, and blah.
samsloan
anybody does not, here it is:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1881373029
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=1881373029
TooSmar...@aol.com
Tht's for the police to decide. I'm supposed to pop down to Lubbock
to file a report at some point.
Gave up on the civil case (appeals and stuff) because I was making too
much money for too many lawyers, and even if I had won, Texas is not
an easy place to collect a judgment.
I'm curious about who suspended bankruptcy law while we weren't
looking, however. Given what they're getting away with, and who is
funding them, I'd say that the special-olympics rule is going to apply
to those who defeat them in court, unless they settle.
Matt Nemmers
<TooSmarttofa...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Was Sloan the only victim?
>
> Tht's for the police to decide. I'm supposed to pop down to Lubbock
> to file a report at some point.
LOL. Not likely.
Gordo can't even put together enough scratch to join the USCF let
alone a bus ticket to Texas. Another ridiculous, yet nontheless
predictable, Gordon Roy Parker fabrication.
> Gave up on the civil case (appeals and stuff) because I was making too
> much money for too many lawyers,
Gordo gave up for several reasons, but not that one. I'm quite
positive he didn't pay one red cent to ANYBODY, let alone a lawyer --
since he's Super Pro Se Man.
> and even if I had won, Texas is not
> an easy place to collect a judgment.
Harder than collecting from you, Gordy? Doubtful. Thom Geiger is
STILL waiting for you to make good on the judgment he has against
you. Do you EVER plan on paying him?
(Don't bother answering. Without a job, it's highly improbably you
have the means to do so.)
> I'm curious about ..... <SNIP>
We're all curious about why you're here. You offer nothing, you
contribute nothing, you don't play chess, you're not a member of the
USCF, *AND* you promised that you were leaving RGCP forever on 30 June
2005. Why do you insist on infesting Usenet with your drivel?
Please go put a gun in your mouth. Everybody hates you.
Yes, everybody.