Re: Rhonda Bunny-Boiler explains why she's now threatening to out personal email to the police.
Kadaitcha Man
botcher's apprentice. Thou little hangman. Ye harangued:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:44:25 +0545, Kadaitcha Man sat in thee Comfee
> Chaire, and didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <rhon...@gmail.com> Thou breeder of sinners. Thou
>> clay-brained guts. Ye fudged together:
>>> "Kadaitcha Man" wrote
>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <rhon...@gmail.com> Thou stigmatic. Thou hog
>>>> cholera. Ye drooled:
>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" wrote
>>>>>> Nelson Muntz <no...@this.time> Thou illiterate loiter. Thy
>>>>>> complexion is like Swart, like my shoe, but thy face nothing
>>>>>> like so clean kept, for
>>>>>> why, ye sweats, a man may go over shoes in the grime of it. Ye
>>>>>> hectored:
>>>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whilst it is true there is no winner, the court of public
>>>>>>>> opinion has already spoken.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's just a sad situation all the way. She clearly still has
>>>>>>> feelings for you,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bad luck for her. She should have thought about that before she
>>>>>> started passing around her dirty knickers, thick with filthy
>>>>>> lies and provably twisted distortions, in public on usenet and
>>>>>> to goodness knows how many people in private, making veiled
>>>>>> allusions and threats that later became direct accusations and
>>>>>> actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Love from a distance."
>>>>>
>>>>> We<BITCHSLAP>
>>>>
>>>> No such entity exists.
>>>
>>> Sure it does.
>>>
>>> Just because one knows that a relationship can't be fixed, doesn't
>>> mean that love evaporates.
>>
>> Emotional manipulation.
>>
>>> But you mentioned in a different post that survival instinct trumps
>>> principle. It's odd that you would call the police because you
>>> decided to interpret the same long-repeated words to mean I was an
>>> imminent suicide, and yet you fail to understand that extricating
>>> myself from you is a survival issue for me.
>>
>> Diversion, emotional manipulation and fact denial.
>>
>>> It would be easy if I didn't care, but I do, so it's hard.
>>>
>>> The thing is, having gone so many rounds since October, there was no
>>> doubt in my mind that there would be something more after February
>>> 1. And there was.
>>
>> Self-justification dressed up to hide veiled accusations.
>>
>>> I can handle this. I can't handle another round of what we were
>>> doing all that time.
>>
>> Dowager drama queen act.
>>
>> Rhonda, nobody but you seems to believe your spin and lies any more.
>> You sit alone with your self-deceptions and self-justifications to
>> keep you in your own miserable company. Not even your knight in
>> shining tinfoil, crasston, is defending you anymore against the
>> charges being repeatedly laid against you. All he can do is throw
>> pathetic lames around and talk about himself. His silence on
>> everything except himself is both deafening and telling.
>>
>> You need to get help and you need to uninstall hamster, cancel your
>> news services and get the fuck offline.
>
> Rhonda: "You can't bully me off usenet!!!" If it's so hard for her to
> extricate herself from you, the simplest solution would be to get off
> of usenet.
I have now twice indicated the following to her:
[QUOTE]
If the underlying idea in the post linked to below has an accurate basis
that exposes the psychology of what is actually in the emails you want
posted: news:sjijh.6...@news.alt.net
Then your "five months of written evidence" are your ticket to a jail spell
for online stalking and harassment.
Talk it over with your attorney.
*hint* *hint*
[/QUOTE]
Consequently I'm now bowing out of these threads and this whole discussion
in its entirely. I am certain that Michael Cranston attorney will want to
explain to Rhonda why I might be doing such a thing. I also hope he has the
brains to realise that if the above has even a shred of merit then this:
news:f0lpup$o1m$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
...may put him firmly in possession of libel and he would do well not to
empty his mailbox and chat histories.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member:
Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Usenet Ruiner Lits
Top Assholes on the Net Lits
Most hated usenetizens of all time Lits
"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Nu vind ik je een kleffe afgepelde geitenwipper.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:sjmuc.l...@news.alt.net
And I have many more times invited you to call the Australian Federal
Police, as you threatened, or to take any other action you should
choose.
> [QUOTE]
> If the underlying idea in the post linked to below has an accurate
> basis that exposes the psychology of what is actually in the emails
> you want posted: news:sjijh.6...@news.alt.net
>
> Then your "five months of written evidence" are your ticket to a jail
> spell for online stalking and harassment.
>
> Talk it over with your attorney.
>
> *hint* *hint*
> [/QUOTE]
>
> Consequently I'm now bowing out of these threads
Again.
> and this whole
> discussion in its entirely.
Again.
> I am certain that Michael Cranston
> attorney will want to explain to Rhonda why I might be doing such a
> thing.
rofl!
> I also hope he has the brains to realise that if the above has
> even a shred of merit then this:
>
> news:f0lpup$o1m$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>
> ...may put him firmly in possession of libel and he would do well not
> to empty his mailbox and chat histories.
My poor tummy.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Some are tempted to think of life in cyberspace as insignificant,
as escape or meaningless diversion. It is not. Our experiences there
are serious play. We belittle them at our risk. Sherry Turkle
John "C"
"Kadaitcha Man" <nntp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Consequently I'm now bowing out of these threads and this whole discussion
> in its entirely.
Deal.
HJ
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:f0qpn0$l26$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 13:38:16 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>
>> "Lionel" <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote in message
>> news:f0qmcu$did$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:16:38 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>>> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Art Deco" <er...@caballista.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:260420070903115247%er...@caballista.org
>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From January 23 until January 29, I didn't talk to him, nor did I
>>>>>> post in this group.
>>>
>>> As usual, Rodenta's k'lame is a lie. She actually posted to AUK on
>>> every day but two during that period.
>>>
>>>>> Well I'm certainly impressed.
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't posting here for a period of time preceding the death
>>>> troll either, but I came back as the result of it.
>>>>
>>>> I came back on the 29th becau[***Snip Soap Opera Crap***]
>>>
>>> Christ, you're a lying sack of shit, Rodenta.
>>> You posted to AUK on the 24th, 27th & 28th of January:
>>>
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks Date:
>>> Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:08:22 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <ep80f6$56v$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>>
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-vista,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac
>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:55:14 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <ep86os$k35$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>>
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks Date:
>>> Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:02:21 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <eph0do$c34$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>>
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks Date:
>>> Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:21:35 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <eph1hs$eom$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>>
>>> From: "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks Date:
>>> Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:37:52 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <eph2g9$h9o$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-vista,alt.os.windows-xp,alt.usenet.kooks
>>> Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:31:33 -0500
>>> Message-ID: <epitpb$ikj$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>>
>> I wasn't posting to auk, Lionel.
>>
>> Those didn't come up in the original search I did,
>
> They came up just fine in /my/ search, you lying Drama Queen.
Google has been broken for a couple of days. It's still being fixed.
I would think a sysadmin like you would be up on these things.
>> but even so, I was
>> posting in 24hoursupport.helpdesk, not auk.
>
> You posted to AUK, liar, as can easily be seen by the fact that
> "alt.usenet.kooks" is in every single one of the newsgroup headers of
> the above posts.
Last group in the line.
Never even noticed it.
>> As I mentioned to Deco, I
>> rarely look at the groups line, and I didn't notice where my posts
>> were going.
>
> You are so totally full of shit that I'm amazed your eyes aren't
> brown.
But they're not. They're blue with gold flecks.
>> I wasn't even reading auk directly, although I hadn't unsubscribed.
>>
>> The reason I came back was because I wrote Rick an email [*SLAP!*]
>
> Which part of "We don't want to know about your emails" is it that you
> find so difficult to understand, you lying, stalking, bunny-boiling
> sack of shit?
So how about those posts in rec.skydiving? Let's talk about them
instead.
Imagine my surprise.
Lionel
Actually, I'm an operator. I change tapes and stare at a console.
Henry Schmidt
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:42:42 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>
>> "miguel" <mjc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:dgr1339hae26j1cd2...@4ax.com
>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 03:58:09 +1000, Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 13:42:38 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk">>>>> news:260420071124203391%er...@caballista.org
>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Art Deco" <er...@caballista.org> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:03:11 -0600, Art Deco
>>>>>>>>> <er...@caballista.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From January 23 until January 29, I didn't talk to him, nor
>>>>>>>>>>> did I post in this group.
>>>>>>>>> self-control.
>>>>>>>> And during that time, all of AUK was wondering: "Gosh, where is
>>>>>>>> Rhonda? It's been ages since she's been around."
>>>>>>> I don't recall that auk's wondering was the point of my post.
>>>>>> Oh, well that changes everything. What about the lie that you
>>>>>> weren't posting during this time period?
>>>>> It wasn't a lie. I wasn't posting to auk.
>>>> You're a liar. You were posting to AUK:
>>>> Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:31:33 -0500
>>>> Message-ID: <epitpb$ikj$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
>> It doesn't matter. It proves that auk was at the tail end of the groups
>> line and that I was posting from 24hoursupport.helpdesk, not auk.
>
> The only reason it matters is because once again it demonstrates
> hypocrisy.
What!! Loonel is a hypocrite and a Kangaroo f*cker. I should have known!
Henry Schmidt
What!! Loonel is a hypocrite and a Kangaroo f*cker. I should have known!!
Henry Schmidt
>
Nice jizz quaffing, Loonel Lauer, As of yet non A+ certified and
Kangaroo f*cker..
Henry Schmidt
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 05:06:20 +1000, Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com>
That's Loonel's limp wristed best attempt at a flame.
Kadaitcha Man
incontinent varlets. Ye mooed:
> Name all the groups you posted to September 9 - 13, 2006, without
> checking google or any other resource.
List how many times you picked your nose, farted, belched and scratched your
arse during September 9 - 13, 2006, without checking your diary or checking
with your girlfriend.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member:
Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Usenet Ruiner Lits
Top Assholes on the Net Lits
Most hated usenetizens of all time Lits
"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Jij bent een turbo gezonde soepmongool.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:26:23 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
<laugh> Do you think that resorting to the ridiculous makes you look
good?
>> I would think a sysadmin like you would be up on these things.
>
> Google? Why would I give a fuck about Google? *My* servers are working
> perfectly. And according to you - you do your searching in the spool
> on Hamster anyway - or have you forgotten telling me that?
I search for posts on Hamster.
I never said anything about posting histories, either way.
Logic would tell you that a relatively complete posting history could
only be obtained from Google, and even then, it's probably not entirely
accurate. It's about as close as anyone can get, however, short of ones
own posting history.
>>>> but even so, I was
>>>> posting in 24hoursupport.helpdesk, not auk.
>>>
>>> You posted to AUK, liar, as can easily be seen by the fact that
>>> "alt.usenet.kooks" is in every single one of the newsgroup headers
>>> of the above posts.
>>
>> Last group in the line.
>>
>> Never even noticed it.
>
> Ah yes, so - as usual - it's not your fault that you lied, right?
I didn't lie.
A lie is deliberate. A mistake is not deliberate.
And the contention that I would try to lie about something so easily
checkable is absurd, so it's an obvious mistake.
However...there is still December, some times before December, and the
three days that I didn't post in auk at all--even if you insist on
counting crossposts I wasn't aware of.
>>>> As I mentioned to Deco, I
>>>> rarely look at the groups line, and I didn't notice where my posts
>>>> were going.
>>>
>>> You are so totally full of shit that I'm amazed your eyes aren't
>>> brown.
>>
>> But they're not. They're blue with gold flecks.
>
> You obviously jump up & down a lot to keep the shit settled down below
> your eye line.
>
> [soap opera snipped]
<"soap opera" restored>
But they're not. They're blue with gold flecks.
>> I wasn't even reading auk directly, although I hadn't unsubscribed.
>>
>> The reason I came back was because I wrote Rick an email [*SLAP!*]
>
> Which part of "We don't want to know about your emails" is it that you
> find so difficult to understand, you lying, stalking, bunny-boiling
> sack of shit?
So how about those posts in rec.skydiving? Let's talk about them
instead.
Imagine my surprise.
</"soap opera">
That argument by snippage thing sure is convenient, isn't it.
Art Deco
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 11:54:36 -0600, Art Deco <er...@caballista.org>
>wrote:
>
>>Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"WhyDidLoonelKillHisMommy" <Kiwim...@loonel.isgay.con> wrote in
>>>message news:f0qngv$j08$3...@registered.motzarella.org
>>>> Lionel wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:36:01 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>>>>> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Lionel" <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:f0qjgq$6k3$3...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:03:11 -0600, Art Deco <er...@caballista.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From January 23 until January 29, I didn't talk to him, nor did I
>>>>>>>>> post in this group.
>>>>>>>> Well I'm certainly impressed.
>>>>>>> <nods> An *entire* six days of lurking. What amazing self-control.
>>>>>> Ask what brought me out of lurk mode, Lionel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing, as it turns out. Your oh-so extended period of lurking
>>>>> lasted for all of about a one day, max.
>>>>>
>>>> Youdon't like being bested by women, eh Loonel. Rhonda *owns* ya.
>>>
>>>With all due respect, Porchy, owership of Lionel is not something I find
>>>desirable.
>>>
>>>It's obvious, however, that I'm living rent-free in his head, although
>>>that's a frightening thought, at best.
>>
>>Rhoda digs deep and pulls out a monkey-see-monkey-do.
>
>Boy, she sure has this whole "flaming" concept down pat. I'd better
>not tangle with her!
Or even worse, sic that Crashed lamer with the huge biceps on you.
--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:22:38 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk">> news:f0rif0$ios$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:42:32 -0700, miguel <mjc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 05:11:19 +1000, Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:18:50 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>>>>> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Art Deco" <er...@caballista.org> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:03:11 -0600, Art Deco
>>>>>>>>>>>> <er...@caballista.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From January 23 until January 29, I didn't talk to him,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nor did I post in this group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well I'm certainly impressed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <nods> An *entire* six days of lurking. What amazing
>>>>>>>>>>>> self-control.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> is Rhonda? It's been ages since she's been around."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't recall that auk's wondering was the point of my post.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, well that changes everything. What about the lie that you
>>>>>>>>> weren't posting during this time period?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> those posts on the first try, but they were made in
>>>>>>>> 24hoursupport.helpdesk.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can see my other post for slightly more detail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * When caught in a lie: LIE!
>>>>>>> * If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A mistake is not a lie. My mistake was in believing the original
>>>>>> google results which showed no posts from me to auk during that
>>>>>> time,
>>>>>
>>>>> What kind of fucking moron has to check Google to find out what
>>>>> groups she posted to over a six day period?
>>>>
>>>> Name all the groups you posted to September 9 - 13, 2006,
>>>
>>>
>>>> without
>>>> checking google or any other resource.
>>>
>>> too stupid to know how to search them?
>>
>> This is just too stupid for words.
>>
>> You want to argue about something this small? Talk to the wall.
>>
>> A wrong date is not a lie. It's a mistake.
>>
>> I was not posting in auk as follows:
>>
>> October 21-October 28.
>> December 14-December 22
>> January 14-January 20.
>> February 2-February 8.
>>
>> During some of those periods, I wasn't posting anywhere at all.
>
> In other words, you lied about unsubscribing to AUK.
I never said I unsubscribed from auk.
Not once.
Kadaitcha Man
mountebank. Thou gormless mother of fools. Ye cackled:
> Now try to find something less boring to harangue me about. Or talk to
> me about the interesting thing that happened in rec.skydiving at the
> end of December.
http://groups.google.com.au/group/24hoursupport.helpdesk/msg/beea0c90a6cdc6c4?dmode=source&hl=en
If you keep it up, I will rescind my decision to stay out of the shameful
mess that you insist on feeding and nurturing, and my decision will have
long-lasting rammifications for both of you far beyond usenet.
news:1q0233h6pied0su9n...@4ax.com
Both you and Michael Cranston will have some very serious explaining to do,
and it won't be to me.
Enough is enough. Leave me alone, both you and Michael Cranston. Any further
communication from you or from him that references me in any way or cuts any
allusion to my former relationship with you, either to me or to any third
party whatsoever, in any newsgroups where I have been known to regulary
post, or comminication that appears anywhere on the www, will be construed
as your unequiovacal decision to pursue me with deliberate and expressed
intent to stalk and harrass.
Leave me alone. Completely. Both of you. And no, I am not trolling.
You are a vile and obnoxious harridan. Get out of my life once and for all.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member:
Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Usenet Ruiner Lits
Top Assholes on the Net Lits
Most hated usenetizens of all time Lits
"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Straks vind ik je nog een platgestampte baarmoedergeslingerde makako.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
I have no clue what the link above means in this context.
That was the very beginning of our relationship, and that particular
post, in combination with a series of emails, represented our first
rift.
> If you keep it up, I will rescind my decision to stay out of the
> shameful mess that you insist on feeding and nurturing, and my
> decision will have long-lasting rammifications for both of you far
> beyond usenet.
Go for it, maker of real-life threats.
> news:1q0233h6pied0su9n...@4ax.com
>
> Both you and Michael Cranston will have some very serious explaining
> to do, and it won't be to me.
Rick, stop threatening me. Just do what you're going to do.
> Enough is enough. Leave me alone, both you and Michael Cranston. Any
> further communication from you or from him that references me in any
> way or cuts any allusion to my former relationship with you, either
> to me or to any third party whatsoever, in any newsgroups where I
> have been known to regulary post, or comminication that appears
> anywhere on the www, will be construed as your unequiovacal decision
> to pursue me with deliberate and expressed intent to stalk and
> harrass.
You started this, and I tried the threat of posting your unsolicited,
unwanted email as an incentive to stop.
You wouldn't stop.
Now you want it to stop for you, but there's plenty of residue for me to
deal with, so I don't see why you think you should be exempt from the
fallout.
> Leave me alone. Completely. Both of you. And no, I am not trolling.
This is usenet. Use your killfile. I'm not posting in any groups that
I've not been posting in for months.
> You are a vile and obnoxious harridan. Get out of my life once and
> for all.
I'm not in your life. This is usenet, as you keep telling me and
everyone else. It's not real life.
You've tried to run me off this group. You set Lionel, your
stalker-by-proxy, on me, and he hasn't stopped. But you expect everyone
who is not on your side to stop.
You want it over, make it over, but don't tell me that I have to stop
when it still continues to my detriment.
Kadaitcha Man
longer from head to foot than from hip to hip, thou art spherical, like
a globe, I could find out countries in thee. Ye gave forth:
One down. One to go.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member:
Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Usenet Ruiner Lits
Top Assholes on the Net Lits
Most hated usenetizens of all time Lits
"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Jij bent een transatlantische baarmoedergescheurde babbalipviskikker.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
<waits for the point>
Lionel
<spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
[...]
>You started this, and I tried the threat of posting your unsolicited,
>unwanted email as an incentive to stop.
You posted personal email about an ex. That makes you scum. There is
no spin you can put on that that makes it even slightly acceptable.
>> Leave me alone. Completely. Both of you. And no, I am not trolling.
>
>This is usenet. Use your killfile. I'm not posting in any groups that
>I've not been posting in for months.
>
>> You are a vile and obnoxious harridan. Get out of my life once and
>> for all.
>
>I'm not in your life. This is usenet, as you keep telling me and
>everyone else. It's not real life.
>
>You've tried to run me off this group.
"This is usenet" "It's not real life"
> You set Lionel, your
>stalker-by-proxy, on me, and he hasn't stopped.
Nobody "set me" on you, Rodenta. I am attacking you because your
online behaviour makes me want to puke.
> But you expect everyone
>who is not on your side to stop.
>
>You want it over, make it over, but don't tell me that I have to stop
>when it still continues to my detriment.
As long as you continue posting to AUK, I will attack you. If you stop
posting to AUK, I for one, will stop attacking you. While you continue
to post here, there is nothing that you - or your forging, net-abusing
friends - can say or do that will stop me from giving you the
bitch-slappings that you've worked so hard to deserve.
--
W "Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
. | ,. w ,
\|/ \|/ Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:35:42 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>> You started this, and I tried the threat of posting your unsolicited,
>> unwanted email as an incentive to stop.
>
> You posted personal email about an ex. That makes you scum. There is
> no spin you can put on that that makes it even slightly acceptable.
He made the emotional abuser post before I threatened to post his
unsolicited, unwanted email, which threat I backed down from within 24
hours. He made the Australian Federal Police post before I posted my own
responses to his unsolicited, unwanted email.
Your new rule that posting ones own email is unacceptable is just that:
your new rule.
You don't make the rules for me, Lionel.
But you're certainly entitled to your opinion. This is usenet, after
all.
>>> Leave me alone. Completely. Both of you. And no, I am not trolling.
>>
>> This is usenet. Use your killfile. I'm not posting in any groups that
>> I've not been posting in for months.
>>
>>> You are a vile and obnoxious harridan. Get out of my life once and
>>> for all.
>>
>> I'm not in your life. This is usenet, as you keep telling me and
>> everyone else. It's not real life.
>>
>> You've tried to run me off this group.
>
> "This is usenet" "It's not real life"
What does that have to do with "You've tried to run me off this group"?
>> You set Lionel, your
>> stalker-by-proxy, on me, and he hasn't stopped.
>
> Nobody "set me" on you, Rodenta. I am attacking you because your
> online behaviour makes me want to puke.
Hold that thought.
It'll be important when Rick takes whatever action he intends to take.
>> But you expect everyone
>> who is not on your side to stop.
>>
>> You want it over, make it over, but don't tell me that I have to stop
>> when it still continues to my detriment.
>
> As long as you continue posting to AUK, I will attack you. If you stop
> posting to AUK, I for one, will stop attacking you. While you continue
> to post here, there is nothing that you - or your forging, net-abusing
> friends - can say or do that will stop me from giving you the
> bitch-slappings that you've worked so hard to deserve.
<shrug> That's fine, Lionel.
Keep it going as long as you like.
Kadaitcha Man
pinch-spotted, broken-backed owl. Ye incited:
"But he has said he wants it over, Lionel, and yet you persist." <--- 100%
pure, unadulterated bunny-boiler logic. Damn those established patterns that
allegedly do not exist, Lionel.
Anyway, to the point... following on from your idea of bitchslapping... I
was advised by AFP investigators to give a very clear warning message, which
could not be misinterpreted; they also laid out the possibilities and
options should the warning be ignored by one or the other or both, and they
indicated the time required to get the local case together and to petition
US authorities for their involvement. They also indicated what I can and
can't say so, other than saying:
One has already impetuously ignored the clear warning and dismissed it out
of hand. The other does so at their own peril. The LART of the century may
be about to commence and I await the response of Michael Cranston.
Preferably there will be no response because he knows that I know what his
silence means. I can say no more.
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member:
Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Usenet Ruiner Lits
Top Assholes on the Net Lits
Most hated usenetizens of all time Lits
"Now I know what it is. Now I know what it means when an
alt.usenet.kook x-post shows up."
AOK in news:ermdlu$nli$1...@registered.motzarella.org
Nu vind ik je een afgelekte gediplomeerde apekop.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
I await this with much eagerness.
You may let them know that I will cooperate fully in their
investigation, including producing full chat logs as well as email and
posts, and the entire contents of my computer, if so required. Luckily
enough, I never reformatted, so it's all here, easily accessible,
including full backups.
> The other does so at their own peril. The LART of the
> century may be about to commence and I await the response of Michael
> Cranston. Preferably there will be no response because he knows that
> I know what his silence means. I can say no more.
--
Art Deco
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:47:00 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>None of which is worth much in court, if it hasn't been collected by
>means of a 3am swoop by the Fed's own IT forensics people, & not even
>then if the target is forewarned. This is because it's so incredibly
>easy to alter that kind of data post facto that even a total clubie
>like you could manage it.
Hoof-printed hard copies!
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:47:00 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
> means of a 3am swoop by the Fed's own IT forensics people, & not even
> then if the target is forewarned. This is because it's so incredibly
> easy to alter that kind of data post facto that even a total clubie
> like you could manage it.
<shrug> We both have the same exact evidence.
If mine's no good, his is no good either.
All the mail I received and sent is still on the GMail server. And a
number of newsservers have retention that goes back that far. About the
only things that don't have a similar anchor are photographic, and
they're easily verified by other means. It shouldn't be hard to
establish what went on and when, especially since the emails and posts
verify the chats.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:50:12 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
Are you planning to fuck with evidence, Lionel?
Good to know.
>> About the
>> only things that don't have a similar anchor are photographic, and
>> they're easily verified by other means. It shouldn't be hard to
>> establish what went on and when, especially since the emails and
>> posts verify the chats.
>
> You should keep on telling yourself that - I'm sure it'll make you
> feel better at night.
It's as I said, the same evidence works for everyone--as well as the
same proscriptions.
miguel
snip
>As long as you continue posting to AUK, I will attack you. If you stop
>posting to AUK, I for one, will stop attacking you. While you continue
>to post here, there is nothing that you - or your forging, net-abusing
>friends - can say or do that will stop me from giving you the
>bitch-slappings that you've worked so hard to deserve.
Dipsy on a rampage! Dipsy on a rampage!
miguel
>Fagboi in a Leather Corset:
>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote:
>> [...]
>>> You started this, and I tried the threat of posting your unsolicited,
>>> unwanted email as an incentive to stop.
>> You posted personal email about an ex. That makes you scum. There is
>> no spin you can put on that that makes it even slightly acceptable.
>>>> Leave me alone. Completely. Both of you. And no, I am not trolling.
Victolly is mine! Psick Pfreak Psycho Pstalker makes kookthreat!
>>> This is usenet. Use your killfile. I'm not posting in any groups that
>>> I've not been posting in for months.
>>>> You are a vile and obnoxious harridan. Get out of my life once and
>>>> for all.
You are a psick pfreak psycho pstalker who cannot control his own
behavior. It surprises me to this day, even knowing how damaged some
of the people in this group are, that they tolerate your obnoxious,
obsessive behavior with your Berserker and your bots.
This would be funny if you weren't so deranged.
miguel
wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:47:00 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>None of which is worth much in court, if it hasn't been collected by
>means of a 3am swoop by the Fed's own IT forensics people, & not even
>then if the target is forewarned. This is because it's so incredibly
>easy to alter that kind of data post facto that even a total clubie
>like you could manage it.
Wrong, as usual.
John "C"
"miguel" <mjc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> You are a psick pfreak psycho pstalker who cannot control his own
> behavior. It surprises me to this day, even knowing how damaged some
> of the people in this group are, that they tolerate your obnoxious,
> obsessive behavior with your Berserker and your bots.
You don't fear the "Australian Federal Police" like the rest of us do?
HJ
Kali
er...@caballista.org said:
Organized into three ring binders!
Kali
--
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
research, would it?"
- Albert Einstein
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> services. No wonder you have so much spare time for Usenet.
Says the sysadmin who can't figure out who's behind the obvious sock.
<incredulous, even if I shouldn't be surprised> You're not even
competent in your own field of endeavor, but you feel able to advise a
licensed, practicing attorney in an application of his craft.
Your hubris is beyond my comprehension; luckily for you, however, the
majority of your audience is not so discerning as to pick up on what a
blithering moron you are.
But we'll see who's right soon enough, eh, Lionel?
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:49:14 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
> have all the facts to back it up.
lol
Try again, you raving lunatic.
A question that speaks directly to the assertion you made is not an
accusation, in spite of your inability to comprehend the written word.
miguel
>On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:49:14 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>That's a very serious accusation, Rodenta. You better make sure you
>have all the facts to back it up.
It's a question, Dipsy.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:11:26 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk">> news:f0rlqa$pdr$7...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:22:38 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:42:32 -0700, miguel <mjc...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 05:11:19 +1000, Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Art Deco" <er...@caballista.org> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:260420071157503997%er...@caballista.org
>>>>>>>>>> news:260420071124203391%er...@caballista.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:260420071047491947%er...@caballista.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 09:03:11 -0600, Art Deco
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <er...@caballista.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>> I never said I unsubscribed from auk.
>
> No, you just strongly implied it, & when cornered, toned it down to
> claiming that you didn't post to AUK from Jan 23rd until Jan 29th.
You're confused again, Lionel. :)
<QUOTE>
>>>> So you think if I had left auk, he'd have left me alone?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> From January 23 until January 29, I didn't talk to him, nor did I
>>>> post in this group.
>>>
>>> "Leaving a group" means unsubscribing, not lurking.
>>
>> If I'm not posting, there's no way for anyone but me to know whether
>> I'm lurking or unsubscribed, so what you're asserting is nonsense.
>
> You're a liar, because you were lurking here.
Where's the lie?
I wasn't posting.
There's no way for anyone to know whether I was lurking or unsubscribed.
>> He did not leave me alone while I was not posting here.
>
> Tell us again how you weren't lurking here, dimwit?
I didn't say I wasn't lurking. I said I wasn't posting.
There was no way for anyone to know whether I was lurking or
unsubscribed.
I was not left alone.
news:f0qkg4$9ab$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
</QUOTE>
> Then when I checked my own archive for the period & proved that you'd
> lied about that too, you started spewing all these lame excuses about
> it being Googles fault that you'd blatantly lied.
I did not "blatantly lie." I made a mistake about the time period of
January 23 through 29. As it turns out, however, there were other,
longer periods before and after.
October 21-October 28.
December 14-December 22
January 14-January 20.
February 2-February 8
But please do proceed to rewrite history.
Anonymous
Newsgroups: alt.os.windows-
xp,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.usenet.kooks,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Rhonda Lea Kirk and Michael J Cranston
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:35:42 -0400
Organization: Not Very Much
Lines: 159
Message-ID: <f0rni9$17e$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
References: <f0qque$o01$3...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
<f0qtgl$t30$3...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
<v30233t5n6968cd18...@4ax.com>
<f0rif0$ios$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
<f0rjf0$l5f$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>
<soceg.1...@news.alt.net>
X-Trace: blackhelicopter.databasix.com 1177641354 1262
blackhelicopter.databasix.com (27 Apr 2007 02:35:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 02:35:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
"Kadaitcha Man" <nntp.n...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> Thou balloon-headed prating
> mountebank. Thou gormless mother of fools. Ye cackled:
>
>> "Lionel" <use...@imagenoir.com> wrote in message
>> news:f0rif0$ios$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:42:32 -0700, miguel <mjc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 05:11:19 +1000, Lionel <use...@imagenoir.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:18:50 -0400, "Rhonda Lea Kirk"
>>>>> <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk <spu...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq�
news:52b9a96a50943018...@breaka.net...
> Newsgroups: alt.os.windows-
> xp,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.usenet.kooks,soc.singles
> Subject: Re: Rhonda Lea Kirk and Michael J Cranston
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:35:42 -0400
Count your lucky stars. Look at her now. She's cost her poor
husband tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills, and probably
close to a hundred thousand bucks in medical bills.
Run away!!!!! Don't even get near her. Her bad luck, poor
choice of friends and associates and dumbass husband is
a clear case of karma come home to roost.
--
Sir Gregory