SEE I TOLD YOU!!!!!
krp
acts of the US were "CRIMINAL..."
"Ron Kuby, a New York-based civil rights lawyer, said he has been in
discussions about forming a legal team to represent the Somalian.
"I think in this particular case, there's a grave question as to whether
America was in violation of principles of truce in warfare on the high
seas," said Kuby. "This man seemed to come onto the Bainbridge under a flag
of truce to negotiate. He was then captured. There is a question whether he
is lawfully in American custody and serious questions as to whether he can
be prosecuted because of his age."
(Kuby is a primary lawyer for the ACLU in New York)
John Smith
"krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:LSmHl.1436$N5....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Obviously, in your constant confused and warped mental condition, you can't
comprehend the reality of what's going on here.
The actions of the United States MAY HAVE BEEN ILLEGAL - since they were NOT
operating within the boundaries OF the United States!
Docky Wocky
this pirate asshole was found to have hung himself in his cell using his
prayer beads tomorrow morning..
Bill Smith
It's been a very long time since there has been high profile piracy
like this. So, no doubt, case law on this sort of thing is a bit
dated. I don't see anything wrong with the ACLU taking this approach
in court, it's how things like this get settled.
Piracy, as practiced now, is armed robbery and kidnapping, and
claiming it's, somehow, an act of war is, of course, nonsense, but
they have start someplace.
I rather like Thomas Jefferson's approach to the problem, but Obama
doesn't have the stones to do it that way.
Bill Smith
Bill Smith
So no country can legally protect it's citizens and assets in the open
sea? I think that question was settled a very long time ago.
I don't think the ACLU will get very far trying to convince a court
that armed robbery and kidnapping are acts of war and that a flag of
truce from a pirate has the same protections.
Bill Smith
krp
"John Smith" <bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:o1nHl.2015$b11....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Apparently some people don't agree.
krp
"Bill Smith" <quan...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:qv3su4h1iv9k2tfis...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:54:03 GMT, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>I said it would not take long before an ACLU lawyer would allege that the
>>acts of the US were "CRIMINAL..."
>>
>>"Ron Kuby, a New York-based civil rights lawyer, said he has been in
>>discussions about forming a legal team to represent the Somalian.
>>
>>"I think in this particular case, there's a grave question as to whether
>>America was in violation of principles of truce in warfare on the high
>>seas," said Kuby. "This man seemed to come onto the Bainbridge under a
>>flag
>>of truce to negotiate. He was then captured. There is a question whether
>>he
>>is lawfully in American custody and serious questions as to whether he can
>>be prosecuted because of his age."
>>
>>
>>(Kuby is a primary lawyer for the ACLU in New York)
>
>
> It's been a very long time since there has been high profile piracy
> like this. So, no doubt, case law on this sort of thing is a bit
> dated. I don't see anything wrong with the ACLU taking this approach
> in court, it's how things like this get settled.
No they get "settled" by blowing the pirates back to ALLAH!
krp
"Freewhilin Franklin" <Freewheel...@freakbros.ro> wrote in message
news:fk5su45bia8983g8t...@4ax.com...
> USS
> Bainbridge by agents (US Navy) offically representing the US Government,
> and at
> the direction of that Government..
So is your point that the U.S. acted improperly?
Docky Wocky
______________________
That means he has been check whether any rich Arabs will bankroll the pirate
defense.
Now they violated the "truce" clause of the...er?...where was that truce
clause?
I still say leave a nice hank of rope in his cell and make sure he is in one
with a sprinkler overhead.
Bill Smith
I was speaking of matters of law, and if you'd read on, you'd discover
that I agree with you.
Bill Smith
Bill Smith
>
>Not that I care two shits about pirates or terrorists - right or left wing. It
>is just the moronity of the right wing is just too incredible to believe.
Would you please explain what you mean by this as pertains to this
incident.
Bill Smith
Billzz
Check out "Barbary Pirates," from whence came the expression, "Millions for
defense. Not one cent for tribute!"
John Smith
> <bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>news:LSmHl.1436$N5....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>>>I said it would not take long before an ACLU lawyer would allege that the
>>>acts of the US were "CRIMINAL..."
>>>
>>> "Ron Kuby, a New York-based civil rights lawyer, said he has been in
>>> discussions about forming a legal team to represent the Somalian.
>>>
>>> "I think in this particular case, there's a grave question as to whether
>>> America was in violation of principles of truce in warfare on the high
>>> seas," said Kuby. "This man seemed to come onto the Bainbridge under a
>>> flag of truce to negotiate. He was then captured. There is a question
>>> whether he is lawfully in American custody and serious questions as to
>>> whether he can be prosecuted because of his age."
>>>
>>>
>>> (Kuby is a primary lawyer for the ACLU in New York)
>>
>>Obviously, in your constant confused and warped mental condition, you
>>can't
>>comprehend the reality of what's going on here.
>>
>>The actions of the United States MAY HAVE BEEN ILLEGAL - since they were
>>NOT
>>operating within the boundaries OF the United States!
>>
>
> So no country can legally protect it's citizens and assets in the open
> sea? I think that question was settled a very long time ago.
??????
There are international laws, for the open sea, that OVER-RIDE any
individual nation's wishes.
Many of the ships "being protected", are NOT associated with the United
States.
(Ship owners constantly register their ships in nation that have weither NO
taxes for such ownership, or a minimal amount.
Several of the ship, in that area of the ocean, merely FLY the flag of the
United States hoping it will give them some protection.
Americans, aboard a ship registered to another nation, are not, legally,
"protected" by United States laws!
Any nation has the right, ONLY, to follow the international laws .......
which include A CERTAIN LEVEL OF assistance and protection.
That the United States grabbed one of the pirates (according to one place,
while he was holding a white flag), and brought him TO the United States to
stand trial - is not only ridiculous ....... but probably illegal in the
initernational court system.
>
> I don't think the ACLU will get very far trying to convince a court
> that armed robbery and kidnapping are acts of war and that a flag of
> truce from a pirate has the same protections.
>
> Bill Smith
No; but the ACLU, and the United Nations, would argue that it is NOT up to
the United States to ignore international laws (as George Bush had done),
and act as its own police anywhere it wants.
The question is not whether the pirate committed a crime - it is about who
holds the authority to prosecute that criminal.
The U.S. doesn't RUN the open seas.
John Smith
"Freewhilin Franklin" <Freewheel...@freakbros.ro> wrote in message
news:fk5su45bia8983g8t...@4ax.com...
> USS
> Bainbridge by agents (US Navy) offically representing the US Government,
> and at
> the direction of that Government..
Those specific actions MAY be legal (by international law), because the
shooters were acting to defend a person whom they thought was in imminent
danger.
Docky Wocky
little pirate/brigand/terrorist who has only his lucky stars to thank that
he ain't fish food on the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
Now the turkey with the tear-jerker bandaged hand has had a so-called Somali
mother coming to his aid by the simple post-paid petitioning the big sucker
Messiah for mercy for the little tyke, and the so-called Somali poppa, doing
much the same - which really brings out the tear-jerking in spades.
While Somali mom and pop will inevitably end up in the American court room
to assist the ACLU as they make a mockery of justice, I only hope someone
asks for a DNA test somewhere along the line before they get across the
actual border.
There must not be any crime, any depth of criminal behavior, any animal-like
non-human activity that would deter a lib from calling for the ACLU to come
to the miscreant's aide, even if the sucker had followed through on his
original gang's threats to kill captain Phillips while engaged in the highly
witnessed act of piracy and hostage-taking on the high seas.
No, we have to deal with lib assholes putting on air's as pseudo-shrinks
who, unluckily, learned how to spell paranoia, and some of the other neat
psychiatric-sounding terms while they perform no human functions other than
tear-jerking.
Hopefully, with the unresisted spread of the islamic pseudo-religion
throughout the American prison system, thanks to the collusion of the libs
and their ACLU compadres, we surely need yet another dopey islamic asshole
taking up space and some of my money while he converts other idiots during
his coming incarceration.
Every ACLU member should do a 1 year internship in a paradise like Somalia.
krp
"Freewhilin Franklin" <Freewhee...@freakbros.cd.ro> wrote in message
news:r9esu4tneumv5nrt6...@4ax.com...
> beings
> on the high sease as weakness.
No but it took 4 days to get up the testosterone to do it. Remember -
when the Captain escaped the Bainbridge could have sunk the dingy. They were
ORDERED not to do so. It wasn't until AFTER the world wide LAUGHTER at four
bush men from Somalia in a DINGY staring down the ENTIRE UNITED STATES NAVY
began to get loud enough for Washington to HEAR IT that the okay was finally
RELUCTANTLY given. Only AFTER the Navy and the US was made a laughingstock
did they act. There are 22,788 ways they could have ended it. Most with just
sinking the dingy. Send ONE seal over in the night and poke a hole in the
thing. What are they gonna do then? "SWIM" or die. Oh maybe some folks
thing the 4 bushmen would then HIJACK a Navy Destroyer. I'll let you know
when I can get up off the floor.
krp
>>So is your point that the U.S. acted improperly?
> No, the US acted quite properly to defend it's property and citizens from
> criminals. It was a masterful use of diplomacy until diplomacy didn't
> work,
> then the hammer. This is unlike the pugs who like to bomb first, then
> have teh
> audacity to ask questions and demand the answers they want to hear (except
> there are not WMD in Iraq, nor terrorists).
So you LIKE all this "diplomacy" shit huh? You know, all FACTS
considered (they WERE pirates - any debate?) "diplomacy" was and IS
pointless. Sadly with such people there is only ONE answer. YOU KILL THEM.
Sooner or later you will HAVE to kill them. I am not at all sure of the
point of this "DIPLOMACY" since in the end as any reasonably intelligent
person could have told you - proved to be ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS and only put
the hostage at greater risk. Let's do examples with this case and the one
the Canadians ran into.
MY WAY.
The Alabama Hijack. I'd have sent a Seal over the first night to place a
SMALL charge on the stern of the dingy, enough to sink it but know hurt
anyone. I'd have armed the entire CREW of the Bainbridge and had them ON
DECK. With their guns pointed at the pirates in the water. I'd use the
loudspeaker to tell them in their language) "SURRENDER OR BE FISH FOOD."
The incident with the Canadians and the boats of Pirates. When they
broke up the hijack of a Norwegian freighter. I'd have opened up (GUNS) on
the boats to sink them, and then told the fukkers to SWIM HOME- and GOOD
LUCK!
krp
"Billzz" <billzz...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:3f220$49ee4d0b$9440b19b$22...@STARBAND.NET...
They didn't fly a flag of truce. The guy came over DEMANDING medical
care or the hostage would be killed.
krp
> No; but the ACLU, and the United Nations, would argue that it is NOT up to
> the United States to ignore international laws (as George Bush had done),
> and act as its own police anywhere it wants.
> The question is not whether the pirate committed a crime - it is about who
> holds the authority to prosecute that criminal.
> The U.S. doesn't RUN the open seas.
Be specific Johnny. WHAT LAW did the U.S. violate? CITE IT so we can all
SEE this MYTHICAL law of yours. The one you just invented. Tell me something
Johnny, you are some Somali bushman pirate in a 18 foot dingy with your
FIERCE AK-47 and an RPG, and you have a U.S. Navy DESTROYER about 200 feet
away . WHO runs the open sea - YOU or the Destroyer????????
Frank Galikanokus
What he is talking about is equal justice for all. It's the American
way. Well, unless you are wealthy or well connected, then the rule of
law doesn't apply.
JAM
krp
"Frank Galikanokus" <FrankGal...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:49EF3E87...@nospam.net...
What "JUSTICE" did this PIRATE caught in the act dispense????? Kuby is
speaking BULLSHIT. Do YOU have ANY questions that he's a PIRATE???? Any SANE
question?
Docky Wocky
A so-called, "animal rights extremist," from Berkeley, California (where
else)., was added to the FBI's "Most Wanted" list of terrorist suspects,
Bureau spokesperson, Michael J. Heimbach, an assistant director of the
FBI's Counterrorism Division,. said today.
Daniel Andreas San Diego, cousin of the famous "Where In The Hell Is Carmen
San Diego," a 31-year-old computer specialist, has been on the run since
2003 and is wanted in two bombings that year of corporate offices in
California.
Let us all hope that the miscreant is taken, dead, as the USA will not
stand for 2 terrorist trials without coming apart.
Frank Galikanokus
None at all.
However, in a free, country we do not lynch people, we allow the our
system of laws to run it's course.
JAM
krp
> None at all.
Allowing the system of law to run its course is one thing. To ATTACK our
system is another. The Navy acted well within the law. Kuby is TRYING to
invent NEW LAW. INSANE new law.
Frank Galikanokus
> > system of laws to run it's course.
>
> Allowing the system of law to run its course is one thing. To ATTACK our
> system is another. The Navy acted well within the law. Kuby is TRYING to
> invent NEW LAW. INSANE new law.
Then he will not be successful.
JAM
M.Butzin
Wrong, Kuby is trying to make sure he gets a fair trial under US law, it's you Krp who wants to dispense with the Constitution. Krp you need to study up on Maritime Laws.
krp
"M.Butzin" <marc...@attNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:ngMHl.25222$c45....@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
So are you saying that what the Navy did was ILLEGAL???
M.Butzin
ABSOLUTELY NOT! It is an American flagged ship with Americans on Board, we already went through this with Black Hawk down when our Embassy was about to be over run, but your not gonna scare these little shit heads with the Navy either. They are so hungry and desperate that if you air dropped Tons of biscuits and jelly, they would kill each other off just to have two biscuits. Think about it where would a fifteen year old hide his cut of millions of dollars? He wouldn't make it to a bank if there were one, much less out of the country without a pass port. These "guys" are hi jacking ships to buy what, where? Make it known that there is going to be a food drops at a place and see how many rats leave those boats and head for that food. Then sink all the boats.................in pirate cove, get' em all in one place sink the boats end of problem. Bomb the harbor, drop mines.
krp
"M.Butzin" <marc...@attNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> Wrong, Kuby is trying to make sure he gets a fair trial under US law, it's
> you Krp who wants to dispense with the Constitution. Krp you need to study
> up on Maritime Laws.
> So are you saying that what the Navy did was ILLEGAL???
MB> ABSOLUTELY NOT! It is an American flagged ship with Americans on Board,
we already went through this with Black Hawk down when our Embassy was about
to be over run, but your not
MB> gonna scare these little shit heads with the Navy either.
Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let the
bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of their
"pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
Pirates.
MB> They are so hungry and desperate that if you air dropped Tons of
biscuits and jelly, they would kill each other off just to have two
biscuits.
Sorry Marc, whose fault is that? Ours? THEY made a mess of their country
NOBODY ELSE DID! Maybe when enough of them die - they'll decide to FIX it.
MB> Think about it where would a fifteen year old hide his cut of millions
of dollars? He wouldn't make it to a bank if there were one, much less out
of the country without a pass port. These "guys" are hi MB> jacking ships to
buy what, where? Make it known that there is going to be a food drops at a
place and see how many rats leave those boats and head for that food. Then
sink all the boats.................in MB> pirate cove, get' em all in one
place sink the boats end of problem. Bomb the harbor, drop mines.
You convey vastly more nobility to those thugs than they merit, Marc.
There is only ONE solution to being infested with rabid rats. YOU KILL THEM
before they give YOU rabies!
whitevamp
> "M.Butzin" <marcu...@attNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
>
> news:zGQHl.25258$c45....@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> > Wrong, Kuby is trying to make sure he gets a fair trial under US law, it's
> > you Krp who wants to dispense with the Constitution. Krp you need to study
> > up on Maritime Laws.
> > So are you saying that what the Navy did was ILLEGAL???
>
> MB> ABSOLUTELY NOT! It is an American flagged ship with Americans on Board,
> we already went through this with Black Hawk down when our Embassy was about
> to be over run, but your not
> MB> gonna scare these little shit heads with the Navy either.
>
> Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
> taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let the
> bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of their
> "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> Pirates.
This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so he
wouldn't serve in Nam.
Kenneth Pangborn is hardly a source for reason and responsible
action. www.aboutkenpangborn.com shows some of his posting rants over
the last decade or so, his mail order " cum laude" degrees and his
misogyny.
He recently even made a threat against a woman " tapping" her aside
the head with a baseball bat and a jackhammer.
A veteran he is NOT!
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
"http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/blies.htm
whitevamp
So you leaving your home with termites, a sinkhole and other problems
is your idea of preventive measures?
krp
"whitevamp" <fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:898a6391-66de-440b...@t10g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
> Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
> taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let
> the
> bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of
> their
> "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> Pirates.
MOE> This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
MOE> conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so he
MOE> wouldn't serve in Nam.
My goodness, how many LIES can you cram into one sentence? I served 6
YEARS of active duty, Moe, you KNOW this. Short???? It was the term I
enlisted for. My service for those 6 years was "REGULAR AIR FORCE" and THEN
I served in the reserves. LITTLE GIRL - I could have been called-up at any
time - even though I was a full time student in college, and later was
married and had a family. There was NO "busted kneecap" Maureen not during
that period. You claims that I wouldn't serve in Viet Nam is BULLSHIT!!!
YOU ARE A PATHETIC FEMINAZI LIAR!
whitevamp
wrote:
> 77Start General Maureen McAlister"whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:898a6391-66de-440b...@t10g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
> > taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let
> > the
> > bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of
> > their
> > "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> > Pirates.
>
> MOE> This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
> MOE> conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so he
> MOE> wouldn't serve in Nam.
>
> My goodness, how many LIES can you cram into one sentence? I served 6
> YEARS of active duty, Moe, you KNOW this. Short????
And during this time you CLAIM you were an " advisor" and a " weapons
instructor" AND that you went through the tests for being a
pilot.Problem with the latter is one requirement for being a pilot
means you have to be an OFFICER Kennie. SO what officer rnkn were you?
You never said.
The point is that you want to use excessive force to stop the Somali
pirates. Anyone without a conscience would see no problem with what
you advocate. But an honorable person would see what you advocate for
what it is-- murder.
I pointed out your lack of service in Nam for good reason Kennie. You
bailed out in 1965 and if you actually were as you claim, the AF would
have recalled you to active duty. For a tough talking obese guy in a
motorized chair who is a misogynist and (according to one of your
daughters) has a child porn collection, you have ZILCH experience in
actual combat. You talk tough but you didn't stick around to put your
arse on the line.
> It was the term I
> enlisted for. My service for those 6 years was "REGULAR AIR FORCE" and THEN
> I served in the reserves. LITTLE GIRL - I could have been called-up at any
> time
Then WHY WEREN'T YOU??? You HID like a coward you are Kennie!
Or maybe the AF had enough janitors and mess cooks on their
staff....
>- even though I was a full time student in college, and later was
> married and had a family. There was NO "busted kneecap" Maureen not during
> that period. You claims that I wouldn't serve in Viet Nam is BULLSHIT!!!
Then why didn't you ASK to serve Kennie? Nothing would have stopped
you.
Except cowardice.
FYI lardo, a lot of AF men who had wives and children served in Nam,
my father being one of them.
The simple fact is that since 1965 and before the Tet Offensive you
could have reenlisted. You didn't. And now you claim you WOULD HAVE
served? Uh huh Kennie. Sure.
You're full of hot air and blubber Kennie. Why is it that if you
served in the " regular" AF you suddenly went to the " reserves" if
you were so valuable? Sounds to me like they were glad to get rid of
you.
> YOU ARE A PATHETIC FEMINAZI LIAR!
As opposed to your misogyny and lying Kennie?
Call me whatever name you want Ken. Your own posts speak for
themselves. Your AOL and Google accounts were suspended for your abuse
on usenet.
And who comes to your aid? Greggor AKA Greg Hanson who abused a seven
year old girl and who " innocently" was in the bathroom with the naked
girl " washing the pee" off of her with his bare hands. And THAT was
what he was CAUGHT doing to her.
krp
> > Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
> > taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let
> > the
> > bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of
> > their
> > "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> > Pirates.
>
> MOE> This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
> MOE> conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so he
> MOE> wouldn't serve in Nam.
>
> My goodness, how many LIES can you cram into one sentence? I served 6
> YEARS of active duty, Moe, you KNOW this. Short????
MOE> And during this time you CLAIM you were an " advisor" and a " weapons
MOE> instructor" AND that you went through the tests for being a
MOE> pilot.Problem with the latter is one requirement for being a pilot
MOE> means you have to be an OFFICER Kennie. SO what officer rnkn were you?
MOE> You never said.
Now Moe, I thought your DADDY was commander in chief of thre Air Force.
You should know that the testing is done at the time of enlistment. Well,
started, and then finished when you get to Texas for basic.
MOE> The point is that you want to use excessive force to stop the Somali
MOE> pirates. Anyone without a conscience would see no problem with what
MOE> you advocate. But an honorable person would see what you advocate for
MOE> what it is-- murder.
MOE> I pointed out your lack of service in Nam for good reason Kennie.
Because you are a habitual LIAR whioch comes natural for WICCAN
FEMINAZIS.
MOE> You bailed out in 1965 and if you actually were as you claim, the AF
would
MOE> have recalled you to active duty.
Did your daddy the GENERAL tell you that piece of bullshit? I served 6
years of ACTIVE DUTY. In 1965 that concluded my commitment. You sure claim
LOTS of expertise on the military, Moe, and someone who was "MAYBE" a
military BRAT..
MOE> You talk tough but you didn't stick around to put your arse on the
line.
You are LYING again Moe. You have NO idea what I did and did not do.
NONE!
> It was the term I enlisted for. My service for those 6 years was "REGULAR
> AIR FORCE" and THEN
> I served in the reserves. LITTLE GIRL - I could have been called-up at any
> time
MOE> Then WHY WEREN'T YOU??? You HID like a coward you are Kennie!
Ask your DADDY the former commander in chief of thre Air Force to search
the records and tell us. My time was up, my reserve unit was NOT called up.
>- even though I was a full time student in college, and later was
> married and had a family. There was NO "busted kneecap" Maureen not during
> that period. You claims that I wouldn't serve in Viet Nam is BULLSHIT!!!
MOE> Then why didn't you ASK to serve Kennie? Nothing would have stopped
you. Except cowardice.
Sorry Moe, I could have been called up as a reservist with my Unit. My
time was UP for REGULAR AIR FORCE. I could only have gone AT THAT TIME if
my unit had been activated. It wasn't and FRANKLY I gave my SIX YEARS Moe.
How many years did YOU give?
> YOU ARE A PATHETIC FEMINAZI LIAR!
MOE> As opposed to your misogyny and lying Kennie?
MOE> Is your misandry somehow MORE NOBLE?
whitevamp
> STALKING LITTLE MOE
Are you admitting you are stalking me? Hmn. maybe the police should
be involved......
"whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:dfcd4774-e669-4e46...@k41g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care about
> > > taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks. Let
> > > the
> > > bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of
> > > their
> > > "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> > > Pirates.
>
> > MOE> This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
> > MOE> conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so he
> > MOE> wouldn't serve in Nam.
>
> > My goodness, how many LIES can you cram into one sentence? I served 6
> > YEARS of active duty, Moe, you KNOW this. Short????
Actually yes. Considering how you are in soc.veterans try to make
yourself out to be an expert on planes and even said " we in Vietnam"
reference as if you actually served in Nam, which you didn't. All
your lying and bullshitting to the contrary isn't going to change the
facts about you. You are pretending to be what you never were Kennie.
And you hate me for pointing out your lies.
>
> MOE> And during this time you CLAIM you were an " advisor" and a " weapons
> MOE> instructor" AND that you went through the tests for being a
> MOE> pilot.Problem with the latter is one requirement for being a pilot
> MOE> means you have to be an OFFICER Kennie. SO what officer rnkn were you?
> MOE> You never said.
>
> Now Moe, I thought your DADDY was commander in chief of thre Air Force.
LIAR. I never said what rank my father was. He did, however serve in
Nam and was in fact a pilot.
Unlike you.
> You should know that the testing is done at the time of enlistment. Well,
> started, and then finished when you get to Texas for basic.
LIE number two. Pilot testing DOES NOT start at the time of
enlistment. The tests are the usual aptitude tests. The FIRST thing
they test for MOS is color discrimination in the vision acuity tests
and you said you FAILED that test.
The fact that you went to BASIC shows you were enlisted not
comissioned, Kennie.
How many times do I have to repeat this Kennie? To be eligible for
pilot training one of the things you have to be is an officer. And you
want to bullshit claim that once you enlisted you were eligible for
being a pilot?
You're a liar, Kennie.
>
> MOE> The point is that you want to use excessive force to stop the Somali
> MOE> pirates. Anyone without a conscience would see no problem with what
> MOE> you advocate. But an honorable person would see what you advocate for
> MOE> what it is-- murder.
>
> MOE> I pointed out your lack of service in Nam for good reason Kennie.
>
> Because you are a habitual LIAR whioch comes natural for WICCAN
> FEMINAZIS.
Coming from someone who lies constantly and whom is such a pest on
usenet that in 2000 you received the KOOK of the MONTH AWARD, I find
your attempts to diss me to be pathetic.
Yes I am a Wiccan/Pagan. So what?
No I am not a " feminazi" ,no matter how much you try to claim I am.
As for my " lying", I am pointing out YOUR lies ( of which there are
many) and how your claims about being tested for an AF pilot doesn't
match with the facts about the process for tests to be eligible for
pilot training. And, may I add, I showed you lied when you lied about
me saying you were a pilot.Your own cut and pastes showed you lied and
proved me right.
As for " habitual liars" " Wiccan feminanzis" I've never met any.
But that is usual for you to lie and rant on.
>
> MOE> You bailed out in 1965 and if you actually were as you claim, the AF
> would
> MOE> have recalled you to active duty.
>
> Did your daddy the GENERAL tell you that piece of bullshit?
Once again I never said what rank my father was. But he was an
officer, unlike you.
That never stopped you from lying, OC.
>I served 6
> years of ACTIVE DUTY. In 1965 that concluded my commitment.
In which by your own words you were transferred fro regular AF to the
reserves. Not exactly a testament to your competence, Kennie.
Again I ask, if you were so good, why not reenlist?
>You sure claim
> LOTS of expertise on the military, Moe, and someone who was "MAYBE" a
> military BRAT..
Actually I was. I never claimed " lots of expertise" on the military
Kennie ( another of your lies). Even so, time and time again I
have exposed YOUR bullshit and showed you to be the posturing liar
you are.
And that is why you hate me so much. Because I'm exposing you for the
liar you are.
>
> MOE> You talk tough but you didn't stick around to put your arse on the
> line.
>
> You are LYING again Moe. You have NO idea what I did and did not do.
> NONE!
I go by your BULLSHIT claims Kennie.
I KNOW you didn't reenlist and serve in Vietnam.
I showed that your claim of being eligible for pilot training is
bullshit.
I showed that your blathering on about various aircraft was not form
personal experience.
You claim you were an "advisor" and a " weapons instructor", both
claims I find absurd. Both is SIX years of service, Kennie? REALLY?
I showed that you didn't know what " full bull" means even when I
showed FOUR sources FROM THE AF where they used that term.
In essence I am pretty damn sure what you DID NOT DO while in he AF
Kennie. Because no responsible person would allow a fuck-up like you
in anything that would cause harm to others.
I am damn sure you were never a pilot.
I am damn sure you NEVER served in Vietnam.
>
> > It was the term I enlisted for. My service for those 6 years was "REGULAR
> > AIR FORCE" and THEN
> > I served in the reserves. LITTLE GIRL - I could have been called-up at any
> > time
>
> MOE> Then WHY WEREN'T YOU??? You HID like a coward you are Kennie!
>
> Ask your DADDY the former commander in chief of thre Air Force to search
> the records and tell us.
Your lies about my father only shore up the fact that you are a
habitual liar, Kennie.
> My time was up, my reserve unit was NOT called up.
>
> >- even though I was a full time student in college, and later was
> > married and had a family. There was NO "busted kneecap" Maureen not during
> > that period. You claims that I wouldn't serve in Viet Nam is BULLSHIT!!!
>
> MOE> Then why didn't you ASK to serve Kennie? Nothing would have stopped
> you. Except cowardice.
>
> Sorry Moe, I could have been called up as a reservist with my Unit. My
> time was UP for REGULAR AIR FORCE. I could only have gone AT THAT TIME if
> my unit had been activated. It wasn't and FRANKLY I gave my SIX YEARS Moe.
> How many years did YOU give?
>
> > YOU ARE A PATHETIC FEMINAZI LIAR!
I am no feminazi. Yelling it over and over and calling me a liar only
reflects on your lack of credibility, Kennie.
FYI both my parents served in the AF.My mother had to resign when she
got married. My father served his cull commission, INCLUDING serving a
tour in VIETNAM ( while you DIDN'T) where he risked his life ( while
you didn't).
The years you " gave" are self-serving Kennie, and you damn well know
it. You LEFT when hints of actual war were in the air.
As for active duty, INDIVIDUALS can ask to serve and go back to
active duty. They don't have to wait for their reserve unit to be
called up.
So Kenny, why didn't you reenlist?
>
> MOE> As opposed to your misogyny and lying Kennie?
>
> MOE> Is your misandry somehow MORE NOBLE?
I don't hate males Kennie.
Yet another of your LIES
BTW what does " nobility" have to do with this, Kennie? Is your
obvious misogyny somehow more " noble" than your CLAIM of my
misandry?
Lie about me and my father all you want Kennie. You are so frigging
stupid when you bullshit about yourself that even a civilian like me
can show your lies.
So you're a " noble misogynist"?
(( laughing))
krp
> > > Marc - I don't care about "scaring" these little shitheads. I care
> > > about
> > > taking the deck gun and blowing their little boats into toothpicks.
> > > Let
> > > the
> > > bastards SWIM back to Somalia. You know, Marc, if we blow up enough of
> > > their
> > > "pirate ships" they won't be scared, they''ll just be out of boats AND
> > > Pirates.
>
> > MOE> This from a guy who in his SHORT service in the AF Reserves
> > MOE> conveniently left the AF before Nam and had a " busted kneecap" so
> > he
> > MOE> wouldn't serve in Nam.
> > My goodness, how many LIES can you cram into one sentence? I served 6
> > YEARS of active duty, Moe, you KNOW this. Short????
MOE> Actually yes. Considering how you are in soc.veterans try to make
MOE> yourself out to be an expert on planes and even said " we in Vietnam"
MOE> reference as if you actually served in Nam, which you didn't. All
MOE> your lying and bullshitting to the contrary isn't going to change the
MOE> facts about you. You are pretending to be what you never were Kennie.
MOE> And you hate me for pointing out your lies.
See IF you can sell that to other vets Moe. Every Vet LOVES listening to
the war stories of a military BRAT. Maureen - "we" refers to men I served
with. You have NO idea where I served, you just make sit up right and left.
> You should know that the testing is done at the time of enlistment. Well,
> started, and then finished when you get to Texas for basic.
MOE> LIE number two. Pilot testing DOES NOT start at the time of
MOE> enlistment. The tests are the usual aptitude tests. The FIRST thing
MOE> they test for MOS is color discrimination in the vision acuity tests
MOE> and you said you FAILED that test.
Maureen the first set of testing is general aptitude and intelligence.
When applying to fly they give you basic tests relating to that. Math,
intelligence, etc. I passed all of the tests that would have qualified me
for flight training, but indeed color vision is early. HOWEVER - BIMBO -
they don't tell you until all the testing is done. Oh and MOE as yopur VAST
combat experience tells YOU (as a BRAT) they subject wannabe pilots to some
extra physical requirements. I quualified on all but color vision. I still
wanted to serve, so YES Maureen I went in as ENLISTED and NOT as an officer.
MOE> The fact that you went to BASIC shows you were enlisted not
comissioned, Kennie.
NO SHIT - give the BRAT a cigar!
MOE> How many times do I have to repeat this Kennie? To be eligible for
MOE> pilot training one of the things you have to be is an officer. And you
MOE> want to bullshit claim that once you enlisted you were eligible for
MOE> being a pilot? You're a liar, Kennie.
As an EXPERT BRAT, Maureen, typically they don't START you as an
officer, you get your commission AFTER you get your wings. With a daddy that
was a 129 Star General, I think he'd have told you that much. Depending on
when you wash out if you go to pilot training - some qualify as sergeants.
If you never get to go, like I didn't, than you go in as just a regular
troop.
Greegor
TWO of Kent Wills' usenet newsgroup identities:
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, misc.legal,
soc.men, alt.support.foster-parents, alt.adoption
From: "Kent Wills" <compu...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:06:14 -0600
KW > Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
KW > (DOB 05/22/1959)
KW > CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
KW > 04/10/1996 Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
Kent posted a FRAUD that I had an OWI (Drunk Driving).
I've only tried to get drunk once in my entire life.
Except for that and a few Rum/Pepsi (social drinks)
I do not drink alcohol.
Of course, I never had any accusation, charge
or conviction for OWI.
Like your Vodka there comrade Willenski?
WILLS, KENT B [ Collected March 7, 2009]
Age: 40
Rogers, AR
Ankeny, IA
Marshalltown, IA
Bartlett, IL
Villa Park, IL
And from another source: Hanover Park, IL
WILLS, FREDERICK ALFRED (Kent's Dad 65 )
WILLS, MICHAEL A (Kent's son ??)
WILLS, JANET RAE (Kent's Mom 62 )
HARTWIG,TIFFANY JEANNE (Wills) (Kent's sister )
From another source: Kelly M Wills Kent's wife ?? )
( Samantha T Wills, Kathleen M Wills, James Wills )
--------------------------------------------------------
Pay close attention to past owners of 202 NW College Ave.
Kent made affirmative claims about the property online.
Kent's folks sold it in 1994 while Kent lived there!
On 03/30/1999 Sweeney's filed on Kent for UNPAID RENT!
GeoParcel 8024-15-452-029 District/Parcel 181/00392-048-000
[ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Seller: WILLS, FRED A. & JANET R.
Buyer: THE SWEENEY REVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST
04/26/1994 135,000 D/Deed 7010/188
-
Seller: SHELDAHL, ERIC A.
Buyer: WILLS, FRED
01/02/1990 130,500 D/Deed 6189/972
A Larger photo:
http://www.assess.co.polk.ia.us/cgi-bin/seephoto/photosize.cgi?gp=802415452029&size=Large
Notice that name SWEENEY above?
Check this out!
Iowa Courts Docket and Disposition web site
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click
Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection
Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >
Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT ******
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
A list of case numbers will be presented.
Click on the SWEENEY case, 4th one down.
Under the "Filings" tab:
JUDGEMENT DEFAULT BRANDT GREGORY D 08/25/1999 09/01/1999 09/01/1999
Comments: $156.25 7.244% FROM 03/30/99
COMPUTER GENERATED NOTICE 05/11/1999 05/11/1999 05/11/1999
Comments: Notice of Proof of Claim
RETURN OF ORIGINAL NOTICE 04/21/1999 04/23/1999 04/23/1999
Comments: 4/10/99 KENT PERS
37.60
VERIFICATION OF ACCT HAS BEEN FILED 03/30/1999 03/30/1999
03/30/1999
SMALL CLAIMS ORIGINAL NOTICE SWEENEY RENTALS 03/30/1999 03/30/1999
03/30/1999
Comments: UNPAID RENT
Under the "Financial" Tab:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 98.60 31.00 67.60
FINE 0.00 0.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 238.46 0.00 238.46
-----------
$337.06 $31.00 $306.06
SUPPORT/ALIMONY N/A 0.00 N/A
-------------------------------------
Do It Yourself Instructions to look up Kent's record
Iowa Department of Corrections records for Kent
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
Name Kent Bradley Wills [ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Offender Number 1155768
Sex M
Birth Date 01/08/1969
Age 40
Location
Offense
County Of Commitment
Commitment Date
Duration
TDD/SDD *
* TDD = Tentative Discharge Date
* SDD = Supervision Discharge Date
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 12/16/2008
Probation C Felony Polk 12/16/2008
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 11/25/2003
Iowa Courts Docket and Disposition web site
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click
Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection
Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >
Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
A list of case numbers will be presented.
Two on that list have the code "FE" in them.
One of the two ends in the two digits "76".
Click that case number.
A case caption will appear.
Tabs available to the public include
"Criminal Charges", "Filings" and "Financial".
Use the "back" button on your browser to move among them
or just hit the various tab buttons.
(See filings text if attached further down below)
IN PRINTED LAW BOOKS
West's North Western Reporter
Second Series
A Unit of the National Reporter System
Volume 696 N.W.2d
Cite as 696 N.W.2d 20 (Iowa 2005)
Kent's Appeal
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?Printable=true
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005
STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk
County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.
Defendant appeals claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender,
and Tricia Johnston, Assistant State
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin
Cmelik, Assistant Attorney General, John P.
Sarcone, County Attorney, and John Judisch,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
WIGGINS, Justice.
Kent Wills appeals his conviction for
second-degree burglary contending that
an attached garage is a separate occupied
structure from that of the living quarters
of the residence. In this appeal, we must
determine whether trial counsel was
ineffective for (1) failing to move for
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to convict Wills
of second-degree burglary when he entered
an attached garage of a residence when no
persons were present in the garage, but
when persons were present in the living
quarters; and (2) failing to object to a
jury instruction based on this same
argument. Because we find there was no
legal basis for the motion for judgment
of acquittal or the objection to the jury
instruction, Wills' trial counsel was not
ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
Around 1 a.m., an Ankeny resident called
the local police to report that a car
alarm sounded in the resident's
neighborhood. The city dispatched a police
officer to the location. Observing nothing
unusual, the officer left the area, only
to be stopped a couple of blocks later
by a person who informed the officer he
had witnessed someone running from the
area of the car alarm. As the officer
started driving back to the area of the
car alarm, he noticed a person walking
on the sidewalk. The officer asked the
person, a minor, if he had noticed anybody
running from the area. The minor answered
that he had not. While the officer and
another officer were speaking to the minor,
another resident of the neighborhood
arrived in her car and informed the
officers that she had observed two people,
one of whom was heavy set with a blinking
light on his back pocket, walking in the
area of her neighbor's residence. She
observed the heavier-set individual, later
identified as Wills, enter her neighbor's
attached garage through an unlocked service
door. She further observed a smaller
individual standing by a van parked in
the neighbor's driveway.
The officers eventually let the minor leave
even though they found a large amount of
coins, a flashlight, and an electronic
pocket organizer in his pockets. After
releasing the minor, the police officers
drove to the residence where the neighbor
observed the two suspicious people and
woke the owner. The owner, his wife,
and two daughters were in the residence
sleeping at the time. After a search
of his vehicles, the owner discovered
change and an electronic pocket organizer
were missing from the vehicles. The
owner's daughter reported a diamond ring
and some change were missing from her
vehicle. The officers then contacted
the minor's parents, who informed the
officers the minor was with Wills. After
the officers questioned the minor again,
he admitted his involvement in the theft
and implicated Wills in the burglary.
Although Wills denied involvement in the
burglary, the officers arrested him.
The State filed a trial information
charging Wills with second-degree
burglary. The State later amended the
information to include two additional
charges of burglary in the third degree
and using a juvenile to commit an
indictable offense.
The jury returned a verdict finding Wills
guilty of the crimes of burglary in the
second degree, burglary in the third
degree, and using a juvenile to commit
an indictable offense. Wills appeals his
conviction for second-degree burglary
claiming ineffective assistance of
counsel.
II. Scope of Review.
Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
are derived from the Sixth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 684-86, 104 S.
Ct. 2052, 2063-64, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 691-93
(1984). Our review for a claim involving
violations of the Constitution is de novo.
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95, 100
(Iowa 2004). We normally preserve
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
for postconviction relief actions. State
v. Carter, 602 N.W. 2d 818, 820 (Iowa 1999).
However, we will address such claims on
direct appeal when the record is sufficient
to permit a ruling. State v. Artzer,
609 N.W.2d 526, 531 (Iowa 2000). The
appellate record in the present case is
sufficient to allow us to address Wills'
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
on direct appeal.
In order for a defendant to succeed on a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
the defendant must prove: (1) counsel
failed to perform an essential duty and
(2) prejudice resulted. Id. Prejudice
results when "there is a reasonable
probability that, but for the counsel's
unprofessional errors, the result of the
proceeding would have been different."
State v. Hopkins, 576 N.W.2d 374, 378
(Iowa 1998) (quoting Strickland, 466
U.S. at 694, 104 S. Ct. at 2068,
80 L. Ed. 2d at 698). Wills' arguments
also raise issues of statutory
interpretation, which we review for
correction of errors at law. State v.
Wolford Corp., 689 N.W.2d 471, 473 (Iowa 2004).
III. Analysis.
To find Wills guilty of burglary in the
second degree, the State had to prove
Wills perpetrated a burglary "in or
upon an occupied structure in which one
or more persons are present . . . ." Iowa
Code § 713.5(2) (2003) (emphasis added).
In this appeal, Wills first contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal on
the basis there was insufficient evidence
to support a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage, there were persons
present in or upon the occupied structure.
Wills concedes the garage was an occupied
structure, but argues the living quarters
and the attached garage are separate and
independent occupied structures; therefore,
the jury could not have found there were
people present in the attached garage
at the time of the burglary.
The Code defines an "occupied structure" as:
[A]ny building, structure, appurtenances
to buildings and structures, land, water
or air vehicle, or similar place adapted
for overnight accommodation of persons,
or occupied by persons for the purpose of
carrying on business or other activity
therein, or for the storage or safekeeping
of anything of value. Such a structure
is an "occupied structure" whether or not
a person is actually present.
Id. § 702.12.
Wills relies on State v. Smothers, 590
N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999), to argue the
garage and the living quarters are separate
and independent occupied structures. In
Smothers, two separate and distinct
businesses connected by interior fire doors
were operated in the same structure.
590 N.W.2d at 723. We held the defendant
committed two burglaries by entering each
business because "[t]he facility's
construction history and physical make-up
demonstrate that the portions are
independent working units which constitute
'[a] combination of materials to form a
construction for occupancy [or] use.'" Id.
Smothers is not at odds with the present
case because the living quarters and the
garage are not separate or independent
units of the residence.
Our review of the record reveals the garage
in question was a three-car attached garage
separated from the living quarters by a
door. The same roof covered the garage as
the rest of the residence. The living
quarters surrounded the garage on two sides.
It was structurally no different from any
other room in the residence.
The garage was a functional part of the
residence. On the night of the incident,
the door was unlocked. The owner of the
residence used two stalls in the garage to
park the family vehicles. The owner used
the third stall for his motorcycle. As
such, the garage and the living quarters
are a single "structure" or "building"
functioning as an integral part of the
family residence. Thus, the residence
including the garage is a single
"occupied structure" under section 702.12.
See, e.g., People v. Ingram, 48 Cal. Rptr.
2d 256 (Ct. App.1995) (holding defendant's
entry into an attached garage constituted
first-degree burglary because the garage
was attached to the house; therefore,
burglary of the garage was burglary of
an inhabited dwelling house); People v.
Cunningham, 637 N.E.2d 1247, 1252 (Ill.
App. Ct. 1994) (holding "ordinarily an
attached garage is a 'dwelling' because
it is part of the structure in which
the owner or occupant lives");
State v. Lara, 587 P.2d 52, 53
(N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (holding "burglary
of the [attached] garage was burglary of
the dwelling house because the garage was
a part of the structure used as living
quarters"); People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d
760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988) (holding
"[s]ince the garage in the present case
was structurally part of a building
which was used for overnight lodging of
various persons, it must be considered
as part of a dwelling"); White v. State,
630 S.W. 2d 340, 342 (Tex. Ct. App. 1982)
(holding an attached garage under the
same roof as the home would be considered
a habitation within the purview of the
penal code because the garage is a
structure appurtenant to and connected
to the house); State v. Murbach, 843 P.
2d 551, 553 (Wash. Ct. App 1993)
(holding the definition of a dwelling
under Washington's burglary statute
included an attached garage).
Had Wills' trial counsel moved for a
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to support
a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage there were no persons
present in or upon the occupied
structure, it would have been overruled
by the court because the owner and his
family were present in the residence at
the time of the burglary.
Wills also claims his counsel was
ineffective for failing to object to
the jury instruction used by the district
court on the same ground; that the
living quarters were a separate and
independent occupied structure from the
attached garage. The instruction as
given stated:
The State must prove all of the following
elements of Burglary in the Second
Degree as to Count I:
1. On or about the 12th day of August,
2003, the defendant or someone he aided
and abetted broke into or entered the
residence at . . . .
2. The residence at . . . was an occupied
structure as defined in Instruction No. 29.
3. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did not have permission or
authority to break into the residence at ...
4. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did so with the specific
intent to commit a theft therein.
5. During the incident persons were present
in or upon the occupied structure.
If the State has proved all of the elements,
the defendant is guilty of Burglary in the
Second Degree. If the State has failed to prove
any of the elements, the defendant is not
guilty of Burglary in the Second Degree and
you will then consider the charge of
Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree
explained in Instruction No. 21.
(Emphasis added.)
Wills' claim is without merit. As we have
discussed, the residence is the one and
only "occupied structure" under the facts
of this case. Had Wills' trial counsel
made this objection to the instruction,
it would have been overruled.
Therefore, Wills' trial counsel is not
ineffective for failing to move
for a judgment of acquittal or objecting
to the instruction because there was no
legal basis for the motion or objection.
See State v. Hochmuth, 585 N.W.2d 234,
238 (Iowa 1998) (holding trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise an
issue that has no merit).
IV. Disposition.
We affirm the judgment of the district
court because Wills' trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise
meritless issues.
AFFIRMED.
-----------------------------------
[ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Filings
Title: STATE VS KENT BRADLEY WILLS
Case: 05771 FECR176876 (POLK)
Citation Number:
Event Filed By Filed Create Date Last Updated Action Date
ORDER OF DISCHARGE OVROM ELIZA 12/16/2008 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
Comments: FROM PROBATION
OTHER EVENT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
12/16/2008
Comments: FIELD DISCHARGE REPORT
OTHER ORDER OVROM ELIZA 12/16/2008 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
Comments: REVOCATION HEARING SET FOR 1/07/2009 IS CANCELLED
DEFENDANT HAS NOT PAID IN FULL FINANCIAL
OBLIGATIONS
ORDER FOR PROBATION REVOCATION HEARING MOISAN CYNTHIA M 12/05/2008
12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: ON 1/7/09 AT 9:30AM RM204
PROBATION REVOCATION 12/05/2008 12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: REPORT OF VIOLATIONS FILED BY JAN HORNOCKER
FORMAL PROBATION HUTCHISON ROBERT A 01/25/2006 01/26/2006
01/26/2006
Comments: EXTENDED TO 01/16/09 OR UNTIL CONDITIONS ARE MET
COURT ORDERED PAYMENT PLAN 01/13/2006 01/13/2006 01/13/2006
[ ... ]
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
" Sit"?
First off Kennie, you sure as hell DON'T speak for all vets. Your
credibility-- such as it is-- is at BEST that you served six years in
the AF. As WHAT exactly you won't admit. You CLAIM "weapons
instructor" and " advisor" but you clearly were neither.
Secondly Kennie, take a real good look at the newsgroup list in these
posts. Soc.veterans isn't the only NG listed. The rest are the usual
group you use as your own trash heap of verbal abuse. If you wanted
credibility in the soc.vets group Kennie, you shouldn't have done your
crossposting so they can see what you really are like elsewhere.
Your hypocrisy is showing here Kennie. Earlier this month in the
soc.veterans newsgroup you were doing this big posturing about your "
knowledge" about various makes of planes as if you were an " expert"
in them. Turns out you got your "data" from others and not directly as
you were trying to imply that your stint in the AF includes personal
experience in these planes. You tried to make it sound like your "
expertise" was from being a pilot without actually full-blowing LYING
about it. When I caught you in your posturing act you made an excuse
of having " contacts".
Sure MY knowledge of the AF is second hand-- from someone who
actually WAS a pilot AND served in Nam. Which, may I point out again
are two things you NEVER DID. Oh, did I forget to tell you that AF
families also were in base housing?
You can bitch and howl all you want Kennie. Your little story about "
we in Nam" and a hand grenade shows pretty well that since YOU NEVER
SERVED IN NAM your story is not from personal knowledge. Like pretty
much everything else you've been doing you " cribbed" it from someone
else. And why? To make you APPEAR more than what you actually were.
IOW you lied. Again.
>
> > You should know that the testing is done at the time of enlistment. Well,
> > started, and then finished when you get to Texas for basic.
>
> MOE> LIE number two. Pilot testing DOES NOT start at the time of
> MOE> enlistment. The tests are the usual aptitude tests. The FIRST thing
> MOE> they test for MOS is color discrimination in the vision acuity tests
> MOE> and you said you FAILED that test.
>
> Maureen the first set of testing is general aptitude and intelligence.
> When applying to fly they give you basic tests relating to that. Math,
> intelligence, etc. I passed all of the tests that would have qualified me
> for flight training, but indeed color vision is early. HOWEVER - BIMBO -
So much for being a " gentleman". But thank you for showing the vets
you are trying to BS a hint of what you actually are. Ladies and
gentleman, in other newsgroups, Kennie Pangborn is far cruder than
this.
> they don't tell you until all the testing is done. Oh and MOE as yopur VAST
> combat experience tells YOU (as a BRAT)
Like your "expertise" on aircraft, Kennie?
>they subject wannabe pilots to some
> extra physical requirements. I quualified on all but color vision. I still
> wanted to serve, so YES Maureen I went in as ENLISTED and NOT as an officer.
If you still wanted to serve why DIDN'T You reenlist after 1965?
Answer: cowardice.
>
> MOE> The fact that you went to BASIC shows you were enlisted not
> comissioned, Kennie.
>
> NO SHIT - give the BRAT a cigar!
" Brats" are for children Kennie. I am an adult. You deliberately try
to use it as an insult here, like " bimbo". Call me whatever names you
want Kennie. The fact is you don't want to answer my questions about
you. I've shown how you are a liar and a posturing poser, a pissant
who deceives and gets all mad when exposed.
The simple fact is that you were never qualified to be a pilot
because you never were an officer, and all your yowling to the
contrary isn't going to alter that fact.
>
> MOE> How many times do I have to repeat this Kennie? To be eligible for
> MOE> pilot training one of the things you have to be is an officer. And you
> MOE> want to bullshit claim that once you enlisted you were eligible for
> MOE> being a pilot? You're a liar, Kennie.
>
> As an EXPERT BRAT, Maureen, typically they don't START you as an
> officer, you get your commission AFTER you get your wings. With a daddy that
> was a 129 Star General,
Lie. I never said what rank my father was.
>I think he'd have told you that much. Depending on
> when you wash out if you go to pilot training - some qualify as sergeants.
> If you never get to go, like I didn't, than you go in as just a regular
> troop.
Oh really? When you were an " airman in basic training" THIS was not
true?
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforcejoin/ss/afpilot_3.htm
To enroll in AF flight training:
"
You must be an officer, commissioned at the rank of second lieutenant.
There are a few ways to accomplish this.
• Enroll in a Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program at a
civilian college or university.
• Attend Officer Training School, an intensive 12-week
leadership program at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Ala. A
bachelor’s degree is a prerequisite.
• Apply to the Air Force Academy. Only about 1,400 applicants
are accepted every year. Aspiring cadets need to be nominated by a
member of Congress and must pass fitness and medical exams. An
admissions team evaluates applicants based on academic achievement,
character, athletic ability and leadership. "
Since WHEN were you ANY of these Kennie?
You are lying again Ken Pangborn.
Okay now that you admitted that the tests were not actual PILOT
aptitude but standardized tests that EVERYONE took as all recruits
take them, then you should have known when you failed the color
perception test that they told you you were not qualified for flight
school or officers training school and that it would be pointless to
CONTINUE the testing. YOU claimed you took ALL the tests, Kennie.
Since vision is one of the FIRST tests and you FAILED that, why did
they bother keeping on testing you as if you still qualified for
flight training when you clearly didn't? Do you actually expect people
to believe your LIE?
Like a lot of things you claim about yourself Kennie, it doesn't
stand up to scrutiny. The simple facts are not going to change because
you attack me and my father. You AVOIDED a lot of what I actually
posted because you know damn well I'm right.
You puffed yourself up to be more than what you actually were Kennie.
You tried to make yourself look special and important but the fact is
you are neither.
You're a liar, Kennie and you were far LESS in the AF than what you
claimed to be.
krp
MOE> " Sit"? First off Kennie, you sure as hell DON'T speak for all vets.
But YOU do, eh Moe? Because your DADDY (you SAY was a 97star General) in
Viet Nam.
MOE> your credibility-- such as it is-- is at BEST that you served six
years in
MOE> the AF. As WHAT exactly you won't admit. You CLAIM "weapons
MOE> instructor" and " advisor" but you clearly were neither.
Based on YOUR vast experience as a BRAT! You should find out WHY we
called your type "BRATS!"
MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
PROVE IT!!!!
MOE> If you still wanted to serve why DIDN'T You reenlist after 1965?
Answer: cowardice.
Why didn't YOU enlist and go? For me? I had other things I wanted to
do. I put my time in, I wanted to go to college and get married and live a
normal life. You claim as a FACT that I didn't go to Viet Nam. PROVE IT!
EXPERT INFO FROM A BRAT:
>I think he'd have told you that much. Depending on
> when you wash out if you go to pilot training - some qualify as sergeants.
> If you never get to go, like I didn't, than you go in as just a regular
> troop.
MOE> Oh really? When you were an " airman in basic training" THIS was not
true?
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforcejoin/ss/afpilot_3.htm
Actually Moe - in the time I went in (1959) you enlisted. You did not
need a commission to attend pilot training. When you graduated you got
comissioned with your wings. If you did not graduate no wings, no comission.
Officer training was part of flight training. Some came with a comission
from ROTC, the Academy and the like. Some qualified as pilots AT the
Academy. But many also attended as people in training to be pilots who were
not comissioned until graduation. Don't confuse it with TODAY'S programs
BRAT!
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
No I never said _I_ speak for all vets either. But YOU DID!
Also I never said what rank my father was. Your lies to the contrary
show clearly what kind of person you actually are. You blew you
posturing cover in soc.veterans, Kennie. Your posts as well as mine
show pretty much what we both really are. I have no problem being
judged by others in soc. veterans. I know you don't speak for them
Kennie, no matter how much you would love to to hoist up your ego.
Besides Kennie, I think they can speak for themselves quite nicely
without your " help", don't you agree?
(( laughing))
>
> MOE> your credibility-- such as it is-- is at BEST that you served six
> years in
> MOE> the AF. As WHAT exactly you won't admit. You CLAIM "weapons
> MOE> instructor" and " advisor" but you clearly were neither.
>
> Based on YOUR vast experience as a BRAT! You should find out WHY we
> called your type "BRATS!"
The word "brat" in terms of military families is not a derrogatory
word Kennie, though you use it as such. But then you never admitted
that " full bull" was also used in the AF. Even when I showed four
references where people in the AF used it.
The reason why you are acting like this now is that you can't explain
my point of your glaring discrepancy of claiming you passed all but
one of the tests to be a pilot when you never were an officer to begin
with. You can't back off your claim or do your usual BSing away so
you resort to this inane attack attempt.
>
> MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
>
> PROVE IT!!!!
You ended your duty in 1965 and didn't reenlist. Gee Kennie, when DID
the AF started doing tours of duty in Nam?
(( laughing))
Oh, did you " serve" in Vietnam during the war " undercover"? Hiding
in the States?
Ken, if you actually served in Vietnam during the war , you should
have no problem telling the name of the unit you served in.
But, as is typical of you, you won't name names of living people who
actually served with you to confirm or deny your claims about your
service while in the AF. You pass off names of bases you claimed you
were stationed in but never dates or whom was CO of the bases at the
time.
Probably because you can't Google that very easily.
I don't HAVE to have detailed knowledge about the military to counter
you Kennie. You're a bullshitter and you made the mistake of yammering
on pretending you were more important while in the AF than what you
actually were. You deliberately did not name COs because you knew
those who actually served under those COs could come in and discredit
your stories.
You're a posturing lying pissant Kennie.
>
> MOE> If you still wanted to serve why DIDN'T You reenlist after 1965?
> Answer: cowardice.
>
> Why didn't YOU enlist and go?
In 1965? Really? They sent toddlers to war?
> For me? I had other things I wanted to
> do.
Like hide.
> I put my time in, I wanted to go to college and get married and live a
> normal life. You claim as a FACT that I didn't go to Viet Nam. PROVE IT!
By your own words you ended your AF service in 1965. You didn't even
qualify to be a pilot. Had you served you would have been braggng
about it. That is, sadly, your egotistical nature.
You didn' serve in Vietnam. Prove that you did Kennie.
>
> EXPERT INFO FROM A BRAT:
All caps is shouting online Kennie.
Tell me, why are you so upset at me? Can't you answer my questions
about you without resorting to emotion-laden, irrational posts?
Were you like this in the AF? Is that the real reason why you were
held back?
>
> >I think he'd have told you that much. Depending on
> > when you wash out if you go to pilot training - some qualify as sergeants.
> > If you never get to go, like I didn't, than you go in as just a regular
> > troop.
>
> MOE> Oh really? When you were an " airman in basic training" THIS was not
> true?
>
> http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforcejoin/ss/afpilot_3.htm
>
> Actually Moe - in the time I went in (1959) you enlisted. You did not
> need a commission to attend pilot training. When you graduated you got
> comissioned with your wings. If you did not graduate no wings, no comission.
> Officer training was part of flight training. Some came with a comission
> from ROTC, the Academy and the like. Some qualified as pilots AT the
> Academy. But many also attended as people in training to be pilots who were
> not comissioned until graduation. Don't confuse it with TODAY'S programs
> BRAT!
Bad AVOIDANCE of the question Kennie. In order to qualify for being a
pilot and receiving flight training you had to be an officer. If you
have proof to the contrary, do show it. I showed proof to back up my
claim. Where's your proof?
So Kennie, after six years, what OFFICER rank were you?
(( laughing))
krp
DJS> No I never said _I_ speak for all vets either. But YOU DID!
You are LYING again, I made NO such claim. HOWEVER - since I actually
wore the uniform I come MUCH closer to being able to do it than a BRAT
would.
> MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
> PROVE IT!!!!
MOE> You ended your duty in 1965 and didn't reenlist. Gee Kennie, when DID
MOE> the AF started doing tours of duty in Nam?
1950, Moe. IK just LOVE your INSANE BULLSHIT.
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_history_vietnam_advisors.php
"The U.S. military advisory effort in Vietnam had a modest beginning in
September 1950, when the United States Military Assistance Advisory Group
(MAAG), Vietnam, was established in Saigon. Its mission was to supervise the
issuance and employment of $10 million of military equipment to support
French legionnaires in their effort to combat Viet Minh forces. By 1953 the
amount of U.S. military aid had jumped to over $350 million and was used to
replace the badly worn World War II vintage equipment that France, still
suffering economically from the devastation of that war, was still using."
In September 1954, right after the Geneva Accords were signed on 20 July
1954, dividing Vietnam into north and south at the 17th parallel, President
Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote to the new Prime Minister of the Bao Dai
government, Ngo Dinh Diem, promising United States support to ensure a
noncommunist Vietnam. Following through on that commitment, direct United
States aid to South Vietnam began in January 1955, and American advisors
began arriving in February to train the South Vietnamese army.
By early 1955, Diem had consolidated his control by suppressing the
religious sects in the Mekong Delta and brutally suppressing unrest in
Saigon. He also launched a campaign against Communists in South Vietnam, in
which 25,000 Communist sympathizers were arrested and more than 1,000 killed
according to claims by the Communists. In August 1955, Diem issued a
statement formally refusing to participate with the North Vietnamese in
consultations to prepare for national elections as called for by the Geneva
Agreement. In October, he easily defeated Bao Dai in a seriously tainted
referendum and became President of the new Republic of Vietnam.
READ YOU STUPID BIMBO:
During this period -- from 1955 through 1960 -- the U.S. had between 750 and
1,500 military advisors assisting the Diem government to establish an
effective army, organized as the Military Assistance and Advisory Group
(MAAG), Vietnam. By 1960 MAAGV was training more than fifty ARVN (Army of
the Republic of Vietnam) Ranger units. At almost the same time, from 1954 to
1959, the Navy Section of MAAGV, worked to develop a viable navy for South
Vietnam. Lt. General Samuel T. Williams served almost five years (1955-1960)
as chief of MAAG, based in Saigon.
By 1961 the steady progress of the insurgency was near crisis levels. The
new Kennedy administration increased American support for the Diem regime to
prevent a collapse. By December of 1961, 3,200 U.S. military personnel were
in Vietnam as advisors, supported by $65 million in military equipment and
$136 million in economic aid. Military assistance was reorganized as the
United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), formed under the
command of General Paul D. Harkins in February 1962. MACV was there to
support the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) to defend the country.
MACV included Army Special Forces (Green Beret) instructors and CIA
personnel organizing the Montagnards in the mountains."
I just LOVE a loudmouthed FEMINAZI IDIOT who THINKS she knows
EVERYTHING. According to YOU ( as THE expert ) the U.S didn't have ANY
troops in Viet Nam until AFTER 1965.
> MOE> If you still wanted to serve why DIDN'T You reenlist after 1965?
> Answer: cowardice.
> Why didn't YOU enlist and go?
MOE> In 1965? Really? They sent toddlers to war?
What about later? Why arem't you in Iraq? Afghanistan? Why didn't yopu
enlist for Desert Storm?
> For me? I had other things I wanted to> do.
MOE> Like hide.
PROOF??????? This lifetime?
> I put my time in, I wanted to go to college and get married and live a
> normal life. You claim as a FACT that I didn't go to Viet Nam. PROVE IT!
MOE> By your own words you ended your AF service in 1965. You didn't even
MOE> qualify to be a pilot. Had you served you would have been braggng
MOE> about it. That is, sadly, your egotistical nature.
Yes I did leave the REGULAR AIR FORCE in 1965 and then served in the
Reserves.
MOE> You didn' serve in Vietnam. Prove that you did Kennie.
No Moe, that's not the way it works. You made the claim. YOU PROVE IT!
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:896f8ed3-0002-4a86...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> DJS> No I never said _I_ speak for all vets either. But YOU DID!
>
> You are LYING again, I made NO such claim. HOWEVER - since I actually
> wore the uniform I come MUCH closer to being able to do it than a BRAT
> would.
>
> > MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
> > PROVE IT!!!!
If you did you would have bragged about it Kennie.
An obese self-centered sack of shit like you is big on bragging and
posturing, pretending to be something you are in fact NOT.
A spineless coward like you would avoid actually serving in a war.
Which was in fact you did. The fact that you DIDN"T reenlist when you
could have and your pathetic excuses now why you didn't on your own
reenlist are pretty damn good indications of your cowardice.
Why are you yelling Kennie?
>
> During this period -- from 1955 through 1960 -- the U.S. had between 750 and
> 1,500 military advisors assisting the Diem government to establish an
> effective army, organized as the Military Assistance and Advisory Group
> (MAAG), Vietnam. By 1960 MAAGV was training more than fifty ARVN (Army of
> the Republic of Vietnam) Ranger units. At almost the same time, from 1954 to
> 1959, the Navy Section of MAAGV, worked to develop a viable navy for South
> Vietnam. Lt. General Samuel T. Williams served almost five years (1955-1960)
> as chief of MAAG, based in Saigon.
This says nothing about the USAF. You claimed you were an " advisor'
in the AF, Kennie.
Again, if you were so damn important as you PRETEND to be Kennie, why
didn't they call you back up? Couldn't they find you? Or were you in
fact nothing more than a janitor or cook?
SQUIRM all you want Kennie. Your credibility is like you, full of
crap.
>
> By 1961 the steady progress of the insurgency was near crisis levels. The
> new Kennedy administration increased American support for the Diem regime to
> prevent a collapse. By December of 1961, 3,200 U.S. military personnel were
> in Vietnam as advisors, supported by $65 million in military equipment and
> $136 million in economic aid. Military assistance was reorganized as the
> United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), formed under the
> command of General Paul D. Harkins in February 1962. MACV was there to
> support the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) to defend the country.
> MACV included Army Special Forces (Green Beret) instructors and CIA
> personnel organizing the Montagnards in the mountains."
But there is NOTHING about the AIR FORCE in what you C&Ped, Kennie.
Are you gonna claim now you were a Green Beret?
Hurl your bullshit all you want Kennie. It doesn't change the fact
that you are a liar. You served at most six years in the USAF and you
couldn;t have qualified to enroll as a pilot because you were never an
officer, which was one of the requirements.
You never said what rank you were. Because you never were an officer
Kennie.
>
> I just LOVE a loudmouthed FEMINAZI IDIOT who THINKS she knows
> EVERYTHING. According to YOU ( as THE expert ) the U.S didn't have ANY
> troops in Viet Nam until AFTER 1965.
I never said that Kennie. I was referring to the USAF in Nam, not any
troops.
You are LYING about what I actually said-- AGAIN.
Now the question is: how could you as an ENLISTED man be an "
advisor"? Seems to me that the advisors in the USAF were all officers.
Darn, there's the you-weren't-an -officer problem again.
Tell me again Kennie, since you were an enlisted, how could you have
been an advisor? Why is it that you can't say what officer rank you
were? After all if you were an officer in LESS THAN SIX YEARS you
would have qualified to take the tests to be a pilot, wouldn't you ?
AND be qualified to be an advisor.
Tell me Kennie, how can an enlisted man become an officer in such a
short time? And if you did reach officer rank, why didn't they recall
you?
See your problem Kennie? You painted yourself as something that you
never were. Your claims about your AF service don't mesh with the
actual rules of the military.
Enlisted people do not " advise" as it is a too SENSITIVE position to
risk, both in politics and in the military, particularly in times of
war, Kennie.
And you admitted you were enlisted, Kennie.
What capacity were you as an advsor Kennie? Advisor under what
subjects?
Or are you trying to hide that you are full of shit again?
I like it when you avoid my questions Kennie. Your avoidances prove
you have a lot to hide.
krp
> DJS> No I never said _I_ speak for all vets either. But YOU DID!
>
> You are LYING again, I made NO such claim. HOWEVER - since I actually
> wore the uniform I come MUCH closer to being able to do it than a BRAT
> would.
>
> > MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
> > PROVE IT!!!!
MOE> If you did you would have bragged about it Kennie.
That's your best "PROOF" Moe? That's IT?
MOE> A spineless coward like you would avoid actually serving in a war.
MOE> Which was in fact you did. The fact that you DIDN"T reenlist when you
MOE> could have and your pathetic excuses now why you didn't on your own
MOE> reenlist are pretty damn good indications of your cowardice.
I served 6 years and then was a reservist. I served. What a "BRAT"
thinks I should have done (and SHE didn't serve a DAY) is amusing at best. I
did my time HONORABLY. AT least I served active duty.
> MOE> You ended your duty in 1965 and didn't reenlist. Gee Kennie, when DID
> MOE> the AF started doing tours of duty in Nam?
> 1950, Moe. I just LOVE your INSANE BULLSHIT.
> http://www.olive-drab.com/od_history_vietnam_advisors.php
MOE> Why are you yelling Kennie?
Because you don't seem to GET normal conversation, Moe.
> During this period -- from 1955 through 1960 -- the U.S. had between 750
> and
> 1,500 military advisors assisting the Diem government to establish an
> effective army, organized as the Military Assistance and Advisory Group
> (MAAG), Vietnam. By 1960 MAAGV was training more than fifty ARVN (Army of
> the Republic of Vietnam) Ranger units. At almost the same time, from 1954
> to
> 1959, the Navy Section of MAAGV, worked to develop a viable navy for South
> Vietnam. Lt. General Samuel T. Williams served almost five years
> (1955-1960)
> as chief of MAAG, based in Saigon.
MOE> This says nothing about the USAF.
Now your games are just SILLY Moe....
Say Moe - as a "PAGAN" as you claim, maybe you'd like to know something
interesting I learned on the History Channel yesterday. Something about your
Pagan religion and two of its more FAMOUS members from history. As you
admitted - today's Paganism (20th century re-invention) has nothing to do
with the Paganism that was practiced 1500 years ago. What we are discussion
is YOUR brand of Paganism that came to be created in the late 1920's in
Europe. Particularly, Germany in the 30's. What I am amused by in what I
learned yesterday is that TWO of its more famous members included Heinrich
Himmler and Adolph Hitler. Much of the SS were inducted into it too. Maybe
you should look at the old SS Headquarters and see the Pagan symbols on the
floor. My point? Nothing really, just something I learned. Both Hitler and
Himmler were supposedly raised as Catholics but turned to the occult
Paganism during the Nazi era. Just amused that Nazism and Paganism seemed to
blend so well together in Europe at that time. I am SURE you don't wear the
Swastika even though it *IS* a Pagan symbol.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Say Moe - as a "PAGAN" as you claim, maybe you'd like to know something
> interesting I learned on the History Channel yesterday. Something about your
> Pagan religion and two of its more FAMOUS members from history. As you
> admitted - today's Paganism (20th century re-invention) has nothing to do
> with the Paganism that was practiced 1500 years ago. What we are discussion
> is YOUR brand of Paganism that came to be created in the late 1920's in
> Europe. Particularly, Germany in the 30's. What I am amused by in what I
> learned yesterday is that TWO of its more famous members included Heinrich
> Himmler and Adolph Hitler. Much of the SS were inducted into it too. Maybe
> you should look at the old SS Headquarters and see the Pagan symbols on the
> floor. My point? Nothing really, just something I learned. Both Hitler and
> Himmler were supposedly raised as Catholics but turned to the occult
> Paganism during the Nazi era. Just amused that Nazism and Paganism seemed to
> blend so well together in Europe at that time. I am SURE you don't wear the
> Swastika even though it *IS* a Pagan symbol.
Actually you are wrong. WICCA is not from Hitler or Himmler Kennie.
Neither is most Neopaganism. Asaratu may be one exception.
And while we're looking at religion and the Nazis Kennie, do tell how
the Pope at that time FAILED TO DO ANYTHING while Hitler and his
league of thugs MURDERED millions of people, a number of whom were
Catholics. Also Kennie, had you actually read Hitler's " Mein Kampf" ,
THAT fucker hid behind the Catholic religion and made numerous
references to the god of the Bible.
Further Kennie, the anti-Semitism in Germany came from Christians,
both Protestant AND Catholic. Martin Luther was viciously anti-
Semetic.
Himmler used Hindu symbols and myths. Does that make Hindusim evil
then? Nope.
The Swastika is a HINDU symbol. Pagan is any religion not of the
major religions Kennie.
As for them being " two of its most FAMOUS members" from history,
that is one of your many lies and deceptions and you damn well know
it. The two main founders of modern Wicca is Gerald Gardner and
Aleister Crowley, neither of whom were Nazis.
Your dishonesty is obvious. Had you been honest about religion and
the Nazis you would admit that there were members of the Catholic
Church, including the Pope himself, who aided and abetted the Nazis
and the SS.
Yes Himmler and his thugs took some Pagan elements and claimed them
as their own. The KKK uses Christian elements. Does that make them
Christian?
BTW nice attempt to avoid my questions-- AGAIN. I figured you didn't
have the guts to say what " advisory" capacity you claimed you were.
Because you lied-- again.
Oh BTW as for Pagan symbols, take a REAL GOOD LOOK around Kennie,
including your religion. The Goddess of Justice at courthouses is a
Pagan deity. Saint Brigid is a Pagan deity. The " holy statues" in
Catholic churches violates Jewish customs against idolatry.
Your attempt to diss Paganism is pathetic and amateur-- as usual for
you.
So Kennie why can't you answer my questions about your ALLEGED AF
service? Instead you resort to this pathetic attempt to attack my
religion, when you don't even know which type of Paganism I may belong
to. For all you know I could be an Ancient Egyptian Pagan or a Native
American Shaman type. You DO know there are many forms of Paganism,
don't you?
Wait, you are ignorant. You DON"T know.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
You didn't answer my questions Kennie, In fact you edited them out.
Why are you avoiding my queries of your alleged AFservice?
Could it be I am exposing you for the LIAR you are?
(( begin C&P))
On Apr 29, 9:34 pm, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:896f8ed3-0002-4a86...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> DJS> No I never said _I_ speak for all vets either. But YOU DID!
> You are LYING again, I made NO such claim. HOWEVER - since I actually
> wore the uniform I come MUCH closer to being able to do it than a BRAT
> would.
> > MOE> YOU NEVER SERVED IN NAM
> > PROVE IT!!!!
If you did you would have bragged about it Kennie.
An obese self-centered sack of shit like you is big on bragging and
posturing, pretending to be something you are in fact NOT.
A spineless coward like you would avoid actually serving in a war.
Which was in fact you did. The fact that you DIDN"T reenlist when you
could have and your pathetic excuses now why you didn't on your own
reenlist are pretty damn good indications of your cowardice.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> MOE> You ended your duty in 1965 and didn't reenlist. Gee Kennie, when DID
> MOE> the AF started doing tours of duty in Nam?
> 1950, Moe. IK just LOVE your INSANE BULLSHIT.
> http://www.olive-drab.com/od_history_vietnam_advisors.php
> READ YOU STUPID BIMBO:
Why are you yelling Kennie?
> During this period -- from 1955 through 1960 -- the U.S. had between 750 and
> 1,500 military advisors assisting the Diem government to establish an
> effective army, organized as the Military Assistance and Advisory Group
> (MAAG), Vietnam. By 1960 MAAGV was training more than fifty ARVN (Army of
> the Republic of Vietnam) Ranger units. At almost the same time, from 1954 to
> 1959, the Navy Section of MAAGV, worked to develop a viable navy for South
> Vietnam. Lt. General Samuel T. Williams served almost five years (1955-1960)
> as chief of MAAG, based in Saigon.
This says nothing about the USAF. You claimed you were an " advisor'
in the AF, Kennie.
(( end C&P))
So Kennie gonna answer my questions or HIDE like the COWARDLY LIAR
you are?
(( laughing))
krp
On May 3, 6:31 am, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
(( snipped for brevity))
> Say Moe - as a "PAGAN" as you claim, maybe you'd like to know something
> interesting I learned on the History Channel yesterday. Something about
> your
> Pagan religion and two of its more FAMOUS members from history. As you
> admitted - today's Paganism (20th century re-invention) has nothing to do
> with the Paganism that was practiced 1500 years ago. What we are
> discussion
> is YOUR brand of Paganism that came to be created in the late 1920's in
> Europe. Particularly, Germany in the 30's. What I am amused by in what I
> learned yesterday is that TWO of its more famous members included Heinrich
> Himmler and Adolph Hitler. Much of the SS were inducted into it too. Maybe
> you should look at the old SS Headquarters and see the Pagan symbols on
> the
> floor. My point? Nothing really, just something I learned. Both Hitler and
> Himmler were supposedly raised as Catholics but turned to the occult
> Paganism during the Nazi era. Just amused that Nazism and Paganism seemed
> to
> blend so well together in Europe at that time. I am SURE you don't wear
> the
> Swastika even though it *IS* a Pagan symbol.
MOE> Actually you are wrong. WICCA is not from Hitler or Himmler Kennie.
MOE> Neither is most Neopaganism. Asaratu may be one exception.
Moe don't let me break this to you, BUT, Paganism had pretty much
disappeared from the face of the Earth over 1500 years ago. It was REVIVED
in Germany in the 1930's and two prominent occultist members were Himmler
and Hitler. Dance all you want, the truth is the truth.
Greegor
I thought he was just bored with you.
whitevamp
Paganism encompasses many religions Kennie, including tribal
religions.
Do some actual research before you show your ignorance.
For your claim to be true about ALL Pagan religions wiped out 1,500
years ago, then the Native Americans lost their religions way before
the White man " found" the " new world". And the Aborigonies in
Australia had no religion for 1,500 years Kennie?
Even a simpleton like Greg can see your claim is wrong and based on
ignorance.
But do continue this thread and IGNORE my questions about your
alleged AF service. Which is why you brought it up in the first place.
Paganism in its various forms did not die 1,500 years ago, no matter
what crap your church claims. However I can show many historical
instances when the Christian missionaries came along they tried wiping
out Pagan beliefs. While,OC, committing atrocities on the natives.
Oh, but did you forget THOSE historical FACTS Kennie? Did you
forget the Christian colonists in America deliberately sent disease
infested blankets to the " red men" and rejoiced to Jesus when they
died? Did you forget that in Australia the Aborigonies were at one
point whole families chased off a cliff to their deaths? Did you
forget the Trail of Tears,Kennie?
Did you forget slavery Kennie, practiced by some Christians and
condemned by some Christians, both using the Bible to support their
positions?
And lets not forget a recent big mistake in the Catholic Church,
shall we, of the Church hiding pedophile priests, only " admitting"
their abetting sex criminals after too many stories came out and there
was more than enough proof that the Church cared more about covering
their asses rather than caring for their parishioners.
Paganism in its various forms didn't die out Kent. Even when your
religion tried its cultural exterminations.
Do try to do some research before you continue to make a fool of
yourself Kennie.
krp
> (( snipped for brevity)) (Misdirection)
MOE> Paganism encompasses many religions Kennie, including tribal
religions.
Moden Paganism (WICCA) traces its roots to Germany circa 1930's - wiggle
all you want.
MOE> But do continue this thread and IGNORE my questions about your
MOE> alleged AF service. Which is why you brought it up in the first place.
Look Moe your questions have been answered, but you continue your SHRILL
repition of the same BULLSHIT over and over in the belief what if your keep
it up it will become accepted as the truth. The FACT is that I served a full
SIX YEARS in the Air Force. When I named some of the bases you claimed they
DIDN'T EXIST (were BOGUS). Then you HARP on your claim that I whould have
RE-ENLISTED. Why? I served my time! I serevd 6 years acrive duty and then
went in the reserves. You blame ME that I wasn't called up. I wanted to go
to college and be married. YOUI claim that I had "NO RIGHT" to do either.
Well I thought I did and so did my Uncle Sam. He even PAID for my college.
BOO HOO TO YOU!
MOE> Paganism in its various forms did not die 1,500 years ago, no matter
MOE> what crap your church claims.
Moe I never used the Catholic Church as a source for the demise of
Paganism, but history. NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs to
make a case that Paganism didn't die out. You just try to confuse what
Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it. Paganism was a specific
religion in Europe. By the time the Romans took over Europe it had already
died. The Paganism YOU are into was RE-INCARNATED in Germany in the 1930's.
You are just trying to wiggle free of your Occult past having two very
famous adherents. HEINRICH HIMMLER and ADOLPH HITLER! YOUR problem, not
mine. Both grew up Catholic. But for his belief in the occult, Hitler was
really an Atheist.
krp
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f23b9778-7869-465d...@s28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> I thought he was just bored with you.
She deludes hers elf that I am under some obligation to answer every bit of
silly shit she posts.
whitevamp
> "Greegor" <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
You made claims about yourself and your alleged AF service. I just
wanted specifics Kennie.
Mainly because I knew you were posturing bullshit.
I do find it interesting that you also have a double standard in
this. You demand people answer YOUR questions, which you repeat over
and over but you skitter away like an obese cockroach whenever
questions about you come along.
You claimed to have served in the AF as an advisor. Under what
capacity? And why wouldt hey allow an enlisted man to be in such a
sensitive area as an advisor?
You claimed you passed all but the color perception test in tests to
be eligible to be an AF pilot. Problem is you never were an officer,
which is one of the requirements to be eligible to even apply for
being a pilot.
You demanded I prove you were not in Nam during the war. You tried
passing off the non Air Force Vietnam involvement as including the
USAF and inferring that you could have served in Vietnam. Problem is
you changed your six years of AF " service" story regarding the amount
of time you spent in the regular and reserves AND you made an excuse
that your unit was not called for deployment. IOW you didn't serve in
the Vietnam War. And you didn't volunteer for reenlistment, even
though NOW you posture you would have.
You're a lying coward Kennie. You mouthed off enough about your AF
service, making claims about yourself that don't stand up to scrutiny.
You tried making yourself look more knowledgable than you actually
are. Heck you even lied about what I said about you never being a
pilot, and ironically your C&Ps proved my point and showed you to be a
liar.
Face it Kennie. Your credibility is in the crapper.
You " GEORGE FOX"-ed yourself.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Actually they haven't been answered. You never mentioned what officer
rank you were or under what capacity your " advisory" position was.
You AVOIDED the questions and still are avoiding them.
>but you continue your SHRILL
> repition of the same BULLSHIT over and over in the belief what if your keep
> it up it will become accepted as the truth. The FACT is that I served a full
> SIX YEARS in the Air Force. When I named some of the bases you claimed they
> DIDN'T EXIST (were BOGUS). Then you HARP on your claim that I whould have
> RE-ENLISTED. Why? I served my time! I serevd 6 years acrive duty and then
> went in the reserves. You blame ME that I wasn't called up. I wanted to go
> to college and be married. YOUI claim that I had "NO RIGHT" to do either.
> Well I thought I did and so did my Uncle Sam. He even PAID for my college.
> BOO HOO TO YOU!
You claimed your TOTAL AF service was six years, including reserves.
Now you are trying to alter the number of years you served?
>
> MOE> Paganism in its various forms did not die 1,500 years ago, no matter
> MOE> what crap your church claims.
>
> Moe I never used the Catholic Church as a source for the demise of
> Paganism, but history.
You claimed Paganism died out 1,500 years ago. Protestants popped up
roughly 500 years ago. The only " Christianity" that existed 1,500
years ago was the Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church.
Do try to do some actual research once in awhile Kennie.
>NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
> Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs to
> make a case that Paganism didn't die out.
The definition of Paganism is shown in the two links below. Native
Americans tribal beliefs are classified by anthropologists as Pagan.
You're wrong. Again
>You just try to confuse what
> Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it.
Kennie I know the history of Wicca. You apparently don't. I mentioned
Gardner and Crowley, both of whom heavily influenced modern Wicca,
both of whom you never mentioned.
I can mention other noted Wiccans, past and present. None of us
Pagans classify Himmler and Hitler as Pagan. Now if you want someone
who likes Nazis in a religious context, go to Michael Aquino the First
Church of Set founder and former FC of Satan member.
As for me " lying" about Wicca, no I don't do that. It, like all
religions, has some faults and I admit about those. Since you like to
call me a " feminazi" naturally you want to link Paganism to Nazis.
The problem with your claims Kennie is that any educated person can
see your lies and deliberate distortions.
> Paganism was a specific
> religion in Europe.
Not _A_ specific religion Kennie. Many religions in Europe, Asia,
Africa, the Americas, the various islands and pretty much anywhere
else humans inhabited.
> By the time the Romans took over Europe it had already
> died.
And the Romans were? BTW when Rome fell, what religions were the
conquerors, the " barbarians"?
>The Paganism YOU are into was RE-INCARNATED in Germany in the 1930's.
Neither Gerald Garner nor Crowley were Germans Kennie.
I also didn't mention which specific Pagan religion I currently
hold, And no it isn't German.
You do have a problem with facts Kennie.
> You are just trying to wiggle free of your Occult past having two very
> famous adherents. HEINRICH HIMMLER and ADOLPH HITLER! YOUR problem, not
> mine. Both grew up Catholic. But for his belief in the occult, Hitler was
> really an Atheist.
Paganism includes a number of minority religions , including tribal
ones Kennie. You made the mistake of thinking Paganism is one
monolithic faith. It isn't. You also made the mistake of claiming "
Paganism" died out 1,500 years ago. I showed examples of where your
claim is not true.
Nether Gerald Gardner nor Crowley were Nazis or Germans Kennie. Lie
all you want. Your ignorance about Paganism and your pathetic attempt
to link it to Nazism shows more about you than about me.
I've been a Wiccan/Pagan for more than two decades Kennie. Obviously
I get something out of it that I wouldn't in mainstream religions like
yours.
Your attempt to link Himmler and Hitler to Paganism is incredibly
faulty and really bad, childish " research".
Had you simply done an online definition of the word " paganism" you
would see your error.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/paganism.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism
But its obvious why you didn't even bother to look up the definition.
You wanted to attack me and the Military Channel's airing of Nazis and
the " occult" over the weekend gave you an excuse to attack my
religion.
You once again failed to mention the role the Catholic Church had in
the Third Reich because it is a shameful part of the Church recent
history, one of many shameful things the Church has done.
Distort all you want Kennie. The facts still remain the facts and
your obvious actual motivation behind this is to attack me, not to
stick to the facts.
whitevamp
About Pope Pius XII and Hitler.
http://www.ucgstp.org/bureau/wnp/wnp0015/roman.htm
(( begin c & P))
Hitler's Pope: The Roman Church and the Third Reich
Historian John Cornwell's biography of Pope Pius XII paints him as
Hitler's enabler.
by Melvin Rhodes
Hitler's Pope is a provocative title for a biography of Eugenio
Pacelli, better known as Pope Pius XII. The implication in the title
is that the pope was Hitler's enabler. The title is deliberate, the
implication substantially proved by the author, British historian John
Cornwell, a practicing Catholic who has fallen foul of the Vatican and
other leading members of the hierarchy since publication of this
revealing book by Viking.
Anybody who is familiar with Europe will be aware of the close
historical links between church and state in the various European
countries. France severed her ties in the anticlerical turmoil of the
French Revolution toward the end of the 18th century. The 19th century
wasn't good for the church either. With the theory of evolution,
socialism and rapid industrialization, the church lost power and
influence. Garibaldi's unification of Italy deprived the Roman Church
of territory, while the subsequent unification of Germany under the
Protestant Prussian kaisers led to the anti-Catholic policies of
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck.
Desperate to reassert its authority, the Papacy reacted with the
decree of papal infallibility in 1870, paving the way for increased
centralization and papal authority. Six years later Eugenio Pacelli
was born into a Roman legal family that had seen many years of service
to the Holy See. Pacelli was destined to become perhaps the most
autocratic of all popes, significantly shaping political events in the
20th century. His 19-year reign from 1939 to 1958 coincided with World
War II and the division of Europe into the "Christian" West and the
communist East that followed. Prior to becoming pope, he was Vatican
secretary of state for 10 years, guiding the Vatican State's foreign
policy.
(( end C&P))
Greegor
G > I thought he was just bored with you.
KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
She's too stupid to be real.
Is it just Kent in drag?
krp
MOE> Actually they haven't been answered. You never mentioned what officer
MOE> rank you were or under what capacity your " advisory" position was.
MOE> You AVOIDED the questions and still are avoiding them.
Moe - you have in the past DEMANDED that I name the people I served
with. That I post my entire service record for YOUR review. I have provided
gthe basic information, just because some SNOT NOSED BRAT demands more does
NOT mean I am under any obligation to provide mroe than I have. GOT IT?
>but you continue your SHRILL
> repition of the same BULLSHIT over and over in the belief what if your
> keep
> it up it will become accepted as the truth. The FACT is that I served a
> full
> SIX YEARS in the Air Force. When I named some of the bases you claimed
> they
> DIDN'T EXIST (were BOGUS). Then you HARP on your claim that I whould have
> RE-ENLISTED. Why? I served my time! I serevd 6 years acrive duty and then
> went in the reserves. You blame ME that I wasn't called up. I wanted to go
> to college and be married. YOUI claim that I had "NO RIGHT" to do either.
> Well I thought I did and so did my Uncle Sam. He even PAID for my college.
> BOO HOO TO YOU!
MOE> You claimed your TOTAL AF service was six years, including reserves.
MOE> Now you are trying to alter the number of years you served?
You suffer a brain drail Moe. I said I served 6 years ACTIVE and then
the reserves. I did NOT and WILL NOT specify how long I served in the
reserves. You see, as much as you whoop and holler does NOT mean I jump to
your every command. I don't know what makes you think I must. I have told
you all I intend to tell you. You want to know more, send of to Saint Louis
for my service record.
> MOE> Paganism in its various forms did not die 1,500 years ago, no matter
> MOE> what crap your church claims.
>
> Moe I never used the Catholic Church as a source for the demise of
> Paganism, but history.
MOE> You claimed Paganism died out 1,500 years ago. Protestants popped up
MOE> roughly 500 years ago. The only " Christianity" that existed 1,500
MOE> years ago was the Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church.
MOE> Do try to do some actual research once in awhile Kennie.
Golly there you go again correcting me on the protestant reforomation
when *I* didn't say a word about that. You're awfully busy making strawmen,
Moe.
>NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
> Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs to
> make a case that Paganism didn't die out.
MOE> The definition of Paganism is shown in the two links below. Native
MOE> Americans tribal beliefs are classified by anthropologists as Pagan.
You're wrong. Again
Antropologists classift lots of shit that are NOT in their field of
knowledge.
>You just try to confuse what Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it.
MOE> Kennie I know the history of Wicca. You apparently don't. I mentioned
MOE> Gardner and Crowley, both of whom heavily influenced modern Wicca,
MOE> both of whom you never mentioned.
Must I mention EVERFY jackass who has ever had anything to do with
Paganism???? EVERY LAST DAMN ONE?
MOE> As for me " lying" about Wicca, no I don't do that. It, like all
MOE> religions, has some faults and I admit about those. Since you like to
MOE> call me a " feminazi" naturally you want to link Paganism to Nazis.
MOE> The problem with your claims Kennie is that any educated person can
MOE> see your lies and deliberate distortions.
But you indeed ARE a Faminazi extremist, Moe. I am not the one who
linked Nasism to Paganism, blame that on Heinrich Himlet and Dolf Hitler.
Der Fuehrer! I invited you to look at some of the images on the floors of
the old SS headquarters - ALL "Pagan" symbols. You just toss your frigging
SANCTIMONY at me, and I was recently reminded (History Channel) of MODERN
Paganism's history. What does it mean? Just that YOUR CLAIMS of a pure as
driven snow religion isn't quite entirely the truth.
> Paganism was a specific religion in Europe.
MOE> Not _A_ specific religion Kennie. Many religions in Europe, Asia,
MOE> Africa, the Americas, the various islands and pretty much anywhere
MOE> else humans inhabited.
Now you are using Paganism as the Catholic church used it to refer to
ALL ofher religions as "Pagan." However that was never ACCURATE. There was a
SPECIFIC religion in Europe with tied to Nordic beliefs that was called
"PAGANISM." (Nature worship) YOUI sdesperately try to bring all sorts of
other religions into what *YOU* in your smokescreen want to include so you
can confuse the issue, such as Native American religions and Africal
religions. YOU ARE - AS USUAL - FULL OF SHIT! They are distiinct religions
that have absolutely NOTHING to do with Paganism. Not even a good TRY,
Maureen. A failing grade.
> By the time the Romans took over Europe it had already died.
MOE> And the Romans were? BTW when Rome fell, what religions were the
MOE> conquerors, the " barbarians"?
Depends on WHEN you are speaking of. For a time they believed in
polytheism, such as Jupiter, Mars, Venus etc.. LATER they were Christians.
The Barbarians were Germans, Vikings etc, primarily Pagans. Their last gasp.
MOE> You once again failed to mention the role the Catholic Church had in
MOE> the Third Reich because it is a shameful part of the Church recent
MOE> history, one of many shameful things the Church has done.
WW-2 was NOT the Catholic Church's finest hour. Am I supposed to be
silenced by the FACT that many Catholic clerics in Germany were AVID NAZIS?
Should I break out in a sweat because there were BAD Catholics? There were
bad guys during the Inquisition also. Moe - sometimes you hit a home-run and
some times you strike-out. EVERY religion is going to have some duds from
time to time so long as HUMAN BEINGS act in the name of God. Right now Islam
has its problems with clowns like Osama Bin Laden. Islam will survive it, I
am sure. You see, Maureen, I don't have to hide from the truth about my
faith. YOU DO!
Dan Sullivan
krp
> > Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> She deludes hers elf that I am under some obligation to answer every bit
> of
> silly shit she posts.
MOE> You made claims about yourself and your alleged AF service. I just
MOE> wanted specifics Kennie.
Look bimbo, if yopu want my TOTAL service record, send off to ST. Louis
and get a copy.
MOE> You claimed to have served in the AF as an advisor. Under what
MOE> capacity? And why wouldt hey allow an enlisted man to be in such a
MOE> sensitive area as an advisor?
Maureen In know your daddy was a 918 Star General, BUT, most of the
advisors were enlisted. Many sergeants etc. Just like most special forces
teams today are ENLISTED ranks with an officer or two commanding the units.
BUT I am SURE that since your DADDY was overall operations commander in
Chief that he told you ALL about that. God I just LOVE - a BRAT that thinks
she is an EXPERT on all things military.
MOE> You claimed you passed all but the color perception test in tests to
MOE> be eligible to be an AF pilot. Problem is you never were an officer,
MOE> which is one of the requirements to be eligible to even apply for
MOE> being a pilot.
BULLSHIT! Remember take a WAY BACK trip to 1959. You could enlist as an
"aviation cadet" and you got your commission with your wings. If you washed
out, depending on at what point you washed out you could serve as a regular
enlisted guy, or as a sergeant in some cases, or be discharged. You did NOT
have to be an officer first. That changed later.
MOE> You demanded I prove you were not in Nam during the war.
Maureen you made a "FACT CLAIM" that I was NEVER in Viet Nam. I asked
you to prove YOUR claim. NOW you add, "during the war" however since the WAR
in Viet Nam had been goin g on almost since the end of WW-2, IF I was in
Viet Nam BY DEFINITION it WAS, in point of FACT "during the war." NOW being
the clever little bitch they you ARE - you mean did I take part in COMBAT.
Well there were not man y Air Force INFANTRY units, Maureen. Not many Air
Force TANK units. No Air Force artillary. So since I was not a PILOT (which
we have settled as an issue) I guess I wasn't really in COMBAT as such. NOR
would I have been had my reserve unit been activated - EVEN IF they sent us
to Viet Nam.
MOE> You tried passing off the non Air Force Vietnam involvement as
including the
MOE> USAF and inferring that you could have served in Vietnam. Problem is
MOE> you changed your six years of AF " service" story regarding the amount
MOE> of time you spent in the regular and reserves AND you made an excuse
MOE> that your unit was not called for deployment. IOW you didn't serve in
MOE> the Vietnam War. And you didn't volunteer for reenlistment, even
MOE> though NOW you posture you would have.
You get easily confused even for a BRAT. Let's go over this again to
correct YOUR errors. I serevd 6 years ACTIVE DUTY. I then was discharged and
was assigned to a reserve unit. THAT unit was never called up for Viet Nam.
AND EVEN IF IT HAD BEEN called up - I would NOT have been sent ito an
INFANTRY unit. The Air Force doesn't have infantry units!!!! Maureen since
the WAR in Viert Nam was going on almost since the end of WW-2 IF you had
two working brain cells you might KNOW that had I been sent to Viet Nam ANY
time between the beginning of my enlistment and 1965 it WOULD have been
during the VIET NAM WAR! No Maureen I did NOT say I would have volunteered
for re-enlistment. I said quite the opposite. I would have gone IF I had
been ORDERED to, but as I said, I wanted to get my degree and get married. I
did BOTH. I was not a "LIFER" like you alleged DANNY. I did my time
HONORABLY. (No upgrades needed, with commendations)
MOE> You're a lying coward Kennie. You mouthed off enough about your AF
MOE> service, making claims about yourself that don't stand up to scrutiny.
Sorry Moe, that's exactly what I did NOT do. I haven't BRAGGED about my
service at all. I have given only minimal answers to a little BRAT that
obviously was never adequately spanked by her daddy. Like most BRATS you are
merely a highly opinionated spoiled child that is a pain in the ass.
Dan Sullivan
krp
Greg she is a typical military BRAT. There is a REASON that kids of
service members, particularly officers' kids are called "BRATS." They are
considered a great PAIN IN THE ASS by the troops both commissioned and
enlisted. To listen to BRATS like Moe you think the bitch PERSONALLY led the
charge up San Juan hill!
Dan Sullivan
Greegor
G > I thought he was just bored with you.
KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
G > She's too stupid to be real.
G > Is it just Kent in drag?
KRP > Greg she is a typical military BRAT. There
KRP > is a REASON that kids of service members,
KRP > particularly officers' kids are called "BRATS."
KRP > They are considered a great PAIN IN THE
KRP > ASS by the troops both commissioned and
KRP > enlisted. To listen to BRATS like Moe you
KRP > think the bitch PERSONALLY led the
KRP > charge up San Juan hill!
The grandiosity I understand but do base brats
sniff glue a lot? What explains the severe
cerebral impairment?
krp
I think they sniff each others asses.
Dan Sullivan
A new Pangborn family video, kenny boy?
whitevamp
Kent and I are different people greg.
Your obsession is making you see Kent everywhere.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Some years ago you offered your service record in jpeg format.
Apparently you were caught trying to pass off someone else's record as
your own.
I asked for specifics about your alleged AF service because you
yourself make claims about your six years that are hardly credible.
What you have claimed so far doesn't fit with what seems to be your
actual status in the AF.
As for listing people you served with who are still alive, the reason
is simple. I want to hear their experience with you, if any. Let's
face it Kennie. You lie a lot. And now that I've got you to the point
where you fear your lies about your AF service being exposed for good
( mainly because you backed yourself into a corner with your
posturings), now you change the subject to attack my religion-- and
badly at that.
You claimed you answered my questions. You did not.
You claimed to have been an " advisor". Under what capacity?
You claimed to have passed all but one of the tests to be in pilot
training. In order to qualify you have to be an officer. What officer
rank were you?
You implied that you did actually serve in Nam. Under what capacity?
None of these questions you seem capable of answering. Questions that
have come about because of your claims about yourself. I have listed
for each question reasonable reasons why you could not have actually
been what you claimed.
Was your service actually that bad that you have to hide it in your
many lies?
>
> > MOE> Paganism in its various forms did not die 1,500 years ago, no matter
> > MOE> what crap your church claims.
>
> > Moe I never used the Catholic Church as a source for the demise of
> > Paganism, but history.
>
> MOE> You claimed Paganism died out 1,500 years ago. Protestants popped up
> MOE> roughly 500 years ago. The only " Christianity" that existed 1,500
> MOE> years ago was the Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church.
> MOE> Do try to do some actual research once in awhile Kennie.
>
> Golly there you go again correcting me on the protestant reforomation
> when *I* didn't say a word about that. You're awfully busy making strawmen,
> Moe.
You claimed Paganism died 1,500 years ago Kennie. I was simply
showing a brief history of Christianity.
Don't blame me for your ignorance of history.
>
> >NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
> > Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs to
> > make a case that Paganism didn't die out.
>
> MOE> The definition of Paganism is shown in the two links below. Native
> MOE> Americans tribal beliefs are classified by anthropologists as Pagan.
> You're wrong. Again
>
> Antropologists classift lots of shit that are NOT in their field of
> knowledge.
>
Religious beliefs of various cultures ARE In their field of knowledge
Kennie. What do you THINK " anthropology" MEANS Kennie?
Are you really this dumb or just plain dishonest?
> >You just try to confuse what Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it.
>
> MOE> Kennie I know the history of Wicca. You apparently don't. I mentioned
> MOE> Gardner and Crowley, both of whom heavily influenced modern Wicca,
> MOE> both of whom you never mentioned.
>
> Must I mention EVERFY jackass who has ever had anything to do with
> Paganism???? EVERY LAST DAMN ONE?
Like you know for sure Kennie? It wasn't that long ago when you
admitted you DIDN'T know much about Paganism. NOW you wanna claim you
can list " every last damn one"?
Kennie Lardo, I've been a Pagan/Wiccan for more than two decades.
That's more than twenty years for a simpleton like you. In that time
I've seen good and bad people in Paganism. AND in Christianity,
atheism and pretty much any group. During this time I've heard of the
" famous Pagans" so your attempt to throw mud won't work with me,
Kennie. Name whatever you wish Kennie.
>
> MOE> As for me " lying" about Wicca, no I don't do that. It, like all
> MOE> religions, has some faults and I admit about those. Since you like to
> MOE> call me a " feminazi" naturally you want to link Paganism to Nazis.
> MOE> The problem with your claims Kennie is that any educated person can
> MOE> see your lies and deliberate distortions.
>
> But you indeed ARE a Faminazi extremist, Moe. I am not the one who
> linked Nasism to Paganism, blame that on Heinrich Himlet and Dolf Hitler.
> Der Fuehrer! I invited you to look at some of the images on the floors of
> the old SS headquarters - ALL "Pagan" symbols. You just toss your frigging
> SANCTIMONY at me, and I was recently reminded (History Channel) of MODERN
> Paganism's history. What does it mean? Just that YOUR CLAIMS of a pure as
> driven snow religion isn't quite entirely the truth.
I never said Paganism was " pure as the driven snow" Kennie. As for
" pagan symbols" you really should take a GOOD look at Christianity
and around you. Pagan " symbols" are all around. June ws named after
the Goddess Juno, for example. How about days of the week? Wednesday--
Wodan /Odin,. Thursday- Thor, Friday-- Freya/ Frigga. Saturday- the
god Saturn.
Any symbol can be perverted. For a long time the clockwise swastika
was considered a good symbol. The Nazis used a counterclockwise
swastika, which is a " dark" symbol. Teenage Satanists invert the
crucifix in mockery of Jesus Christ. Mary the : mother of god" is a
pale imitation of the Goddess as Great Mother.
>
> > Paganism was a specific religion in Europe.
>
> MOE> Not _A_ specific religion Kennie. Many religions in Europe, Asia,
> MOE> Africa, the Americas, the various islands and pretty much anywhere
> MOE> else humans inhabited.
>
> Now you are using Paganism as the Catholic church used it to refer to
> ALL ofher religions as "Pagan." However that was never ACCURATE. There was a
> SPECIFIC religion in Europe with tied to Nordic beliefs that was called
> "PAGANISM." (Nature worship) YOUI sdesperately try to bring all sorts of
> other religions into what *YOU* in your smokescreen want to include so you
> can confuse the issue, such as Native American religions and Africal
> religions. YOU ARE - AS USUAL - FULL OF SHIT! They are distiinct religions
> that have absolutely NOTHING to do with Paganism. Not even a good TRY,
> Maureen. A failing grade.
Aside from the almost painful deciphering of your many misspellings,
your using the Catholic Church as a " source" of your highly slanted
definition of "paganism" is akin to using the KKK as a source about
African American history.
The Nordic beliefs are a SPECIFIC branch of Paganism. They are,
however, NOT the ONLY Paganism. Your attempt to limit the definition
of Pagan and exclude all other Pagan beliefs shows your dishonesty and
your bigotry. You are so intent on attacking me ( probably because I
painted you into a corner with your own lies) you resort to this
distortion of what the word Pagan means to accomplish your hatred of
me.
Do show a link to the definition of Paganism that shows ONLY your
version, Kennie. I posted TWO links for the definition. Surely you can
back up your claims in your blustering yammerings with credible
sources we can look up online.
> > By the time the Romans took over Europe it had already died.
>
> MOE> And the Romans were? BTW when Rome fell, what religions were the
> MOE> conquerors, the " barbarians"?
>
> Depends on WHEN you are speaking of. For a time they believed in
> polytheism, such as Jupiter, Mars, Venus etc.. LATER they were Christians.
> The Barbarians were Germans, Vikings etc, primarily Pagans. Their last gasp.
>
> MOE> You once again failed to mention the role the Catholic Church had in
> MOE> the Third Reich because it is a shameful part of the Church recent
> MOE> history, one of many shameful things the Church has done.
>
> WW-2 was NOT the Catholic Church's finest hour. Am I supposed to be
> silenced by the FACT that many Catholic clerics in Germany were AVID NAZIS?
Nope. Just admit your religion was far more in cahoots with the Nazis
than you claim MY religion was.
So IOW your guilt by association on MY religion is acceptable but
when it applied to YOUR religion it is not acceptable ?
That's called having a double standard Kennie.
> Should I break out in a sweat because there were BAD Catholics? There were
> bad guys during the Inquisition also. Moe - sometimes you hit a home-run and
> some times you strike-out. EVERY religion is going to have some duds from
> time to time so long as HUMAN BEINGS act in the name of God. Right now Islam
> has its problems with clowns like Osama Bin Laden. Islam will survive it, I
> am sure. You see, Maureen, I don't have to hide from the truth about my
> faith. YOU DO!
I am not hiding the TRUTH about my religion Kennie. I am DENYING the
bullshit link you CLAIM is my religion is the truth.
If you are so for the TRUTH as you pretend, why do you LIE a lot?
BTW Kennie, how is that " ignoring" me thing coming along?
(( laughing))
krp
MOE> Some years ago you offered your service record in jpeg format.
MOE> Apparently you were caught trying to pass off someone else's record as
MOE> your own.
You are a LYING sack of shit. The ONLY thing I offered was a copy of my
discharge. Nobody expects YOU to ever tell the truth.
MOE> I asked for specifics about your alleged AF service because you
MOE> yourself make claims about your six years that are hardly credible.
MOE> What you have claimed so far doesn't fit with what seems to be your
MOE> actual status in the AF.
What claims? The ones YOU made up? Your strawmen?
MOE> As for listing people you served with who are still alive, the reason
MOE> is simple. I want to hear their experience with you, if any.
In other words you want to STALK. Which is WHY you'rfe not getting
anything from me.
MOE> You claimed you answered my questions. You did not.
As much as they deserved an answer Moe.
MOE> You claimed to have been an " advisor". Under what capacity?
I said "Instructor." You claimed that there were NO U.S. military in
Viet Nam until AFTER I got out. As an EDXPERT BRAT! I relied that there were
"advisors" there as far back as 1950, I did NOT say that *I* was an
"ADVISOR." I said I was a small weapons INSTRUCTOR on the colt 1910 .45
automatic. That is ALL I said. YOU write the rest of your DEMENTED SCRIPT
yourself from your own deeply tooted mental illness.
MOE> You claimed to have passed all but one of the tests to be in pilot
MOE> training.
The tests administered in 1959 to attend the training problem which YOU
confuse with today's requirements. The tests to get an appointment to the
training classes. I washed on color vision. I passed the math, general
theory etc.
MOE> In order to qualify you have to be an officer. What officer rank were
you?
The BRAT speaks!!!!! No Maureen you did NOT have to be an officer to
attend flight training in 1959. You confuse it with today. Back then a
progam allowed you to take flight school and you got your commission when
you were awarded your wings.
MOE> You implied that you did actually serve in Nam. Under what capacity?
Still making shit up in your head, Maureen as a COMBAT BRAT!
> Golly there you go again correcting me on the protestant reforomation
> when *I* didn't say a word about that. You're awfully busy making
> strawmen,
> Moe.
MOE> You claimed Paganism died 1,500 years ago Kennie. I was simply
MOE> showing a brief history of Christianity. Don't blame me for your
ignorance of history.
Maureen It DID die out 1500 years ago. Are you really SO screwed up that
you think I was unaware of the Protestant Reformation and Martin Luther???
(et al)
>
> >NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
> > Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs
> > to
> > make a case that Paganism didn't die out.
>
> MOE> The definition of Paganism is shown in the two links below. Native
> MOE> Americans tribal beliefs are classified by anthropologists as Pagan.
> You're wrong. Again
>
> Antropologists classify lots of shit that are NOT in their field of
> knowledge.
MOE> Religious beliefs of various cultures ARE In their field of knowledge
MOE> Kennie. What do you THINK " anthropology" MEANS Kennie?
They *MAY* have some knowledge of various religions, Moe, BUT that does
NOT confer expertise in comparitive religion OR a Doctor of Divinity,
EDXCEPT in OUR warped universe.
> >You just try to confuse what Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it.
>
> MOE> Kennie I know the history of Wicca. You apparently don't. I mentioned
> MOE> Gardner and Crowley, both of whom heavily influenced modern Wicca,
> MOE> both of whom you never mentioned.
> Must I mention EVERY jackass who has ever had anything to do with
> Paganism???? EVERY LAST DAMN ONE?
MOE> Like you know for sure Kennie? It wasn't that long ago when you
MOE> admitted you DIDN'T know much about Paganism. NOW you wanna claim you
MOE> can list " every last damn one"?
Not exactly what I said. I am not like YOU who claims to KNOW EVERYTHING
about EVERFYTHING. All i said was that I wasn't an "EXPERT!Q" But YOU claim
to be one!
MOE> Any symbol can be perverted. For a long time the clockwise swastika
MOE> was considered a good symbol. The Nazis used a counterclockwise
MOE> swastika, which is a " dark" symbol. Teenage Satanists invert the
MOE> crucifix in mockery of Jesus Christ. Mary the : mother of god" is a
MOE> pale imitation of the Goddess as Great Mother.
NONE of which I commented on! All I said was that modern Paganiism
(occult) got its rebirth in Germany in the 1930's. Two of its leading
adherants were Aldolph Hitler and Heinrich Himmler, the Nazi part
appropriated MANY of the symbols of Paganism.
krp
On May 4, 11:54 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> G > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
> KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
>
> She's too stupid to be real.
> Is it just Kent in drag?
MOE> Kent and I are different people greg.
There are several people who DOUBT that Moe.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:bf32bd29-0a33-4455...@r13g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> > > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> > She deludes hers elf that I am under some obligation to answer every bit
> > of
> > silly shit she posts.
>
> MOE> You made claims about yourself and your alleged AF service. I just
> MOE> wanted specifics Kennie.
>
> Look bimbo, if yopu want my TOTAL service record, send off to ST. Louis
> and get a copy.
You offered it some years ago via jpeg.
Got anything to hide Kennie?
(( laughing))
>
> MOE> You claimed to have served in the AF as an advisor. Under what
> MOE> capacity? And why wouldt hey allow an enlisted man to be in such a
> MOE> sensitive area as an advisor?
>
> Maureen In know your daddy was a 918 Star General,
Lie.I never said what officer rank he was by the time he retired. But
he was a number of things you NEVER were, including an officer, a
pilot and a VietNam veteran.
You also know there is no such thing as a 918 star general. Tell me
Kennie, does lies like that strengthen your " credibility"?
I don't NEED to be inthe military to know YOU are a liar, Kennie.
> BUT, most of the
> advisors were enlisted. Many sergeants etc. Just like most special forces
> teams today are ENLISTED ranks with an officer or two commanding the units.
> BUT I am SURE that since your DADDY was overall operations commander in
> Chief
Lie. I never said what he was. Do show a link where I said that
Kennie, or admit you are lying again.
>that he told you ALL about that. God I just LOVE - a BRAT that thinks
> she is an EXPERT on all things military.
I never said Iwas an expert Kennie. I do, however, know enough to
believe you are lying about your AF " service". And I showed numerous
times how your claims and posturings are bogus and questionable. I
don't need to actually have been in the military to show you for the
liar you are.
>
> MOE> You claimed you passed all but the color perception test in tests to
> MOE> be eligible to be an AF pilot. Problem is you never were an officer,
> MOE> which is one of the requirements to be eligible to even apply for
> MOE> being a pilot.
>
> BULLSHIT! Remember take a WAY BACK trip to 1959. You could enlist as an
> "aviation cadet" and you got your commission with your wings. If you washed
> out, depending on at what point you washed out you could serve as a regular
> enlisted guy, or as a sergeant in some cases, or be discharged. You did NOT
> have to be an officer first. That changed later.
Show a link to your source Kennie.
>
> MOE> You demanded I prove you were not in Nam during the war.
>
> Maureen you made a "FACT CLAIM" that I was NEVER in Viet Nam. I asked
> you to prove YOUR claim. NOW you add, "during the war" however since the WAR
> in Viet Nam had been goin g on almost since the end of WW-2, IF I was in
> Viet Nam BY DEFINITION it WAS, in po int of FACT "during the war."
Nice attempt at evasion Kennie. By that " logic" everyone who was 4F
during WW II in America " served during the war" as much as those who
actually WENT to the battles and suffered.
The point is, COWARD, you DIDN"T serve in battle in Nam. How DARE you
compare your sneaking around out of the line of fire to those who
actually risked their LIVES?
You didn't reenlist so you could be there at Nam during the fighting
Kennie. You had your chance to prove your posturings but you cowered
and excused your way around the FACT that you NEVER served a TOUR OF
DUTY IN NAM.
Instead, a disgusting piece of shit like you is alive while good men
died in your place.
>NOW being
> the clever little bitch they you ARE
Thank you for admitting I am CLEVER.
> - you mean did I take part in COMBAT.
> Well there were not man y Air Force INFANTRY units, Maureen. Not many Air
> Force TANK units. No Air Force artillary. So since I was not a PILOT (which
> we have settled as an issue) I guess I wasn't really in COMBAT as such. NOR
> would I have been had my reserve unit been activated - EVEN IF they sent us
> to Viet Nam.
And yet you could have volunteered Kennie, as support for the pilots.
Not all of those in the AF who actually served in Nam were pilots
Kennie.
You didn't volunteer for reenlistment even though you CLAIM you were
a " weapons instructor" and an " advisor". You didn't reenlist because
you knew your were facing actual physical risks. You chickened out
Kennie, You turned coward and retreated.
And all your yowling to me isn't going to change that.
>
> MOE> You tried passing off the non Air Force Vietnam involvement as
> including the
> MOE> USAF and inferring that you could have served in Vietnam. Problem is
> MOE> you changed your six years of AF " service" story regarding the amount
> MOE> of time you spent in the regular and reserves AND you made an excuse
> MOE> that your unit was not called for deployment. IOW you didn't serve in
> MOE> the Vietnam War. And you didn't volunteer for reenlistment, even
> MOE> though NOW you posture you would have.
>
> You get easily confused even for a BRAT. Let's go over this again to
> correct YOUR errors. I serevd 6 years ACTIVE DUTY. I then was discharged and
> was assigned to a reserve unit. THAT unit was never called up for Viet Nam.
No your TOTAL service years were SIX years Kennie.Not six THEN "
reserves".
Hell you dumbass you even SAID it last week!!
> AND EVEN IF IT HAD BEEN called up - I would NOT have been sent ito an
> INFANTRY unit. The Air Force doesn't have infantry units!!!!
I never said infantry, Kennie. I said AF service. My father served.
You didn't. The AF would need cooks and dishwashers. You don't have
to be a pilot for that Kennie.
> Maureen since
> the WAR in Viert Nam was going on almost since the end of WW-2 IF you had
> two working brain cells you might KNOW that had I been sent to Viet Nam ANY
> time between the beginning of my enlistment and 1965 it WOULD have been
> during the VIET NAM WAR! No Maureen I did NOT say I would have volunteered
> for re-enlistment. I said quite the opposite.
Your excuse was your unit was not recalled, There was nothing to
prevent you from personally reenlisting.
> I would have gone IF I had
> been ORDERED to, but as I said, I wanted to get my degree and get married.
Married men served in Nam Kennie. Since you were on the GI Bill you
could have your mail order " cum laude" degrees after your Vietnam
service.
> I
> did BOTH. I was not a "LIFER" like you alleged DANNY.
Danny?
Do you mean Sullivan?When did I claim anything about his military
service, Kennie. DO show a link to a post I made about Sullivan's
military service. Or admit you lied -- again.
>I did my time
> HONORABLY. (No upgrades needed, with commendations)
So you claim. Maybe you were an : honorable" dishwasher.
>
> MOE> You're a lying coward Kennie. You mouthed off enough about your AF
> MOE> service, making claims about yourself that don't stand up to scrutiny.
>
> Sorry Moe, that's exactly what I did NOT do. I haven't BRAGGED about my
> service at all.
Like hell you haven't! Even when you were using your AOL account
( before AOL terminated your account for abuse) you were bragging
about your military service.
Quit lying Kennie.
> I have given only minimal answers to a little BRAT that
> obviously was never adequately spanked by her daddy. Like most BRATS you are
> merely a highly opinionated spoiled child that is a pain in the ass.
Sorry I don't want to touch your fat ass but thank you for admitting
I am giving you some problems with my questions about your alleged AF
service.
BTW, AVOIDANCE of my questions noted.
Hiding anything Kennie? You make too much noise for this to be a
simple disagreement.
whitevamp
> "Greegor" <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Actually the term :"military brat" is not a derrogatory term, no
matter how much you wish it were in my case. It is the same as " crumb
cruncher" or " rug rat".
Deride me all you want Kennie. You still are avoiding my questions
like the coward you are. Calling me a " bitch" only lowers your
credibility and your temper tantrums cast doubt in your capacity as an
"advisor" and a "weapons instructor".
whitevamp
Unlike you Greg,I never did drugs or sniff glue.
Your excuse?
krp
On May 5, 7:46 am, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> AKA lying asshole wrote:
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:bf32bd29-0a33-4455...@r13g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> > > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> > She deludes hers elf that I am under some obligation to answer every bit
> > of
> > silly shit she posts.
>
> MOE> You made claims about yourself and your alleged AF service. I just
> MOE> wanted specifics Kennie.
>
> Look bimbo, if yopu want my TOTAL service record, send off to ST. Louis
> and get a copy.
MOE> You offered it some years ago via jpeg
I had a JPEG of my DISCHARGE NOT my service record. Maureen you are a
PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!
krp
On May 5, 7:48 am, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Greegor" <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4273a37f-6fa1-4593...@r3g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> > G > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> > KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
> > KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
>
> > She's too stupid to be real.
> > Is it just Kent in drag?
>
> Greg she is a typical military BRAT. There is a REASON that kids of
> service members, particularly officers' kids are called "BRATS." They are
> considered a great PAIN IN THE ASS by the troops both commissioned and
> enlisted. To listen to BRATS like Moe you think the bitch PERSONALLY led
> the
> charge up San Juan hill!
MOE> Actually the term :"military brat" is not a derrogatory term, no
MOE> matter how much you wish it were in my case. It is the same as " crumb
MOE> cruncher" or " rug rat".
No Maureen it IS a derogatory term. "BRATS" meaning little SPOILED
ANNOYING CHILDREN who THINK they know it all because daddy is in. It means
to active duty personnel "PAIN IN THE ASS."
krp
On May 5, 11:38 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> G > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
> KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
>
> G > She's too stupid to be real.
> G > Is it just Kent in drag?
>
> KRP > Greg she is a typical military BRAT. There
> KRP > is a REASON that kids of service members,
> KRP > particularly officers' kids are called "BRATS."
> KRP > They are considered a great PAIN IN THE
> KRP > ASS by the troops both commissioned and
> KRP > enlisted. To listen to BRATS like Moe you
> KRP > think the bitch PERSONALLY led the
> KRP > charge up San Juan hill!
>
> The grandiosity I understand but do base brats
> sniff glue a lot? What explains the severe
> cerebral impairment?
MOE> Unlike you Greg,I never did drugs or sniff glue.
Well there goes THAT explanation for your condition.
whitevamp
On May 6, 5:22 pm, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
OOHH OOOHH Temper temper Kennie Lardo!! Are you getting into a hissy
fit again Kennie?
Guess so!!
(( laughing))
So tell me again how such a cool and calm guy like you got to be a "
weapons instructor".
(( laughing))
>The ONLY thing I offered was a copy of my
> discharge. Nobody expects YOU to ever tell the truth.
Projection noted,.You lie so much yo don't know what the truth IS
Kennie.
>
> MOE> I asked for specifics about your alleged AF service because you
> MOE> yourself make claims about your six years that are hardly credible.
> MOE> What you have claimed so far doesn't fit with what seems to be your
> MOE> actual status in the AF.
>
> What claims? The ones YOU made up? Your strawmen?
No the claims you made about your AF service.
Having memory problems of what you actually posted, Kennie? I can see
why you would. You are backed into a corner and you know I've exposed
you for the posturing liar you are, so you resort to this temper
tantrum.
>
> MOE> As for listing people you served with who are still alive, the reason
> MOE> is simple. I want to hear their experience with you, if any.
>
> In other words you want to STALK. Which is WHY you'rfe not getting
> anything from me.
No not stalk Kennie. Stalking is your doggie Greg Hanson's specialty.
Just show what a liar you are. If you actually were what you claimed
you were, you would have no problem of those who served with you
confirming your claims, In fact you would welcome it.
The fact that you AREN'T is quite telling Kennie. Maybe because
anyone you served with wold tell a different story than the crap you
are claiming online.
BTW why is it okay for your doggie Greg to stalk Kent while you get
all upset if someone checks out your story?
>
> MOE> You claimed you answered my questions. You did not.
>
> As much as they deserved an answer Moe.
You didn't answer.Because you are a liar and I was showing how you
lied.
>
> MOE> You claimed to have been an " advisor". Under what capacity?
>
> I said "Instructor."
You said weapons instructor AND advisor as two separate functions.
Quit lying Kennie.
>You claimed that there were NO U.S. military in
> Viet Nam until AFTER I got out. As an EDXPERT BRAT! I relied that there were
> "advisors" there as far back as 1950, I did NOT say that *I* was an
> "ADVISOR." I said I was a small weapons INSTRUCTOR on the colt 1910 .45
> automatic. That is ALL I said. YOU write the rest of your DEMENTED SCRIPT
> yourself from your own deeply tooted mental illness.
>
> MOE> You claimed to have passed all but one of the tests to be in pilot
> MOE> training.
>
> The tests administered in 1959 to attend the training problem which YOU
> confuse with today's requirements. The tests to get an appointment to the
> training classes. I washed on color vision. I passed the math, general
> theory etc.
>
> MOE> In order to qualify you have to be an officer. What officer rank were
> you?
>
> The BRAT speaks!!!!! No Maureen you did NOT have to be an officer to
> attend flight training in 1959. You confuse it with today. Back then a
> progam allowed you to take flight school and you got your commission when
> you were awarded your wings.
Show your sources Kennie. Your word has no value.
>
> MOE> You implied that you did actually serve in Nam. Under what capacity?
>
> Still making shit up in your head, Maureen as a COMBAT BRAT!
I never said I was a " combat brat"
Quit lying Kennie.
>
> > Golly there you go again correcting me on the protestant reforomation
> > when *I* didn't say a word about that. You're awfully busy making
> > strawmen,
> > Moe.
>
> MOE> You claimed Paganism died 1,500 years ago Kennie. I was simply
> MOE> showing a brief history of Christianity. Don't blame me for your
> ignorance of history.
>
> Maureen It DID die out 1500 years ago. Are you really SO screwed up that
> you think I was unaware of the Protestant Reformation and Martin Luther???
> (et al)
No I think you are so screwed up you won't admit that Pagan
religions in various parts of the world DIDN'T die out 1,500 years
ago. I showed some examples to discount your claim. Instead of being
an honorable man and admitting your error, you do this act.to
Since you refuse to acknowledge such an obvious error, how can anyone
believe you in other subjects?
>
>
>
> > >NOW in your DESPERATION you are trying to carp into
> > > Paganism EVERY little religion you can, such as Native American beliefs
> > > to
> > > make a case that Paganism didn't die out.
>
> > MOE> The definition of Paganism is shown in the two links below. Native
> > MOE> Americans tribal beliefs are classified by anthropologists as Pagan.
> > You're wrong. Again
>
> > Antropologists classify lots of shit that are NOT in their field of
> > knowledge.
>
> MOE> Religious beliefs of various cultures ARE In their field of knowledge
> MOE> Kennie. What do you THINK " anthropology" MEANS Kennie?
>
> They *MAY* have some knowledge of various religions, Moe, BUT that does
> NOT confer expertise in comparitive religion OR a Doctor of Divinity,
> EDXCEPT in OUR warped universe.
So you're the expert now? Where is your " Doctorr of Divinity" in
your CV Kennie?
Anthropology is the study of cultures Kennie. That includes their
religious beliefs and practices.
I have met a number of Christian ministers who don't know squat
about other religions because actual understanding of other beliefs
removes the dogma that other religions are false.
>
> > >You just try to confuse what Paganism (WICCA) is so you can lie about it.
>
> > MOE> Kennie I know the history of Wicca. You apparently don't. I mentioned
> > MOE> Gardner and Crowley, both of whom heavily influenced modern Wicca,
> > MOE> both of whom you never mentioned.
> > Must I mention EVERY jackass who has ever had anything to do with
> > Paganism???? EVERY LAST DAMN ONE?
>
> MOE> Like you know for sure Kennie? It wasn't that long ago when you
> MOE> admitted you DIDN'T know much about Paganism. NOW you wanna claim you
> MOE> can list " every last damn one"?
>
> Not exactly what I said. I am not like YOU who claims to KNOW EVERYTHING
> about EVERFYTHING.
Liar. I never said that. Show me the link to my post where I
supposedly said that about me, or admit you are lying.
>All i said was that I wasn't an "EXPERT!Q" But YOU claim
> to be one!
Gee for being a Pagan for more that twenty years, you'd think I would
know what my religion is and isn't , dontcha?
But thank you for admitting you don't know squat about my religion.
>
> MOE> Any symbol can be perverted. For a long time the clockwise swastika
> MOE> was considered a good symbol. The Nazis used a counterclockwise
> MOE> swastika, which is a " dark" symbol. Teenage Satanists invert the
> MOE> crucifix in mockery of Jesus Christ. Mary the : mother of god" is a
> MOE> pale imitation of the Goddess as Great Mother.
>
> NONE of which I commented on! All I said was that modern Paganiism
> (occult) got its rebirth in Germany in the 1930's. Two of its leading
> adherants were Aldolph Hitler and Heinrich Himmler, the Nazi part
> appropriated MANY of the symbols of Paganism.
Paganism in other parts of the world never died out Kennie. I've
explained why your extremely narrow "definition" of Paganism is wrong
and I shouldn't have to repeat myself to show how you are wrong.
Why must you constantly lie?
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Prove it.
whitevamp
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
You didn't bother looking the term up, did you Kennie?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_brat_(U.S._subculture)
(( begin C&P))
A "military brat" (and various brat derivatives)[1] is a term for a
person whose parent or parents have served full-time in the armed
forces during the person's childhood. In conventional usage, the word
"brat" used alone may be pejorative; in modern, especially American,
usage; however, "military brat" is often not considered to be a
derogatory term (and may in fact be seen as a term of endearment
(( end C&P))
You were saying.....?
(( laughing))
whitevamp
Begin C&P
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.veterans/msg/8a14c2c6122949a1?hl=en&dmode=source
Message from discussion Ken pangborn FAQ
View parsed - Show only message text
From: Anonymous <nob...@replay.com>
Subject: Ken pangborn FAQ
Date: 1999/06/01
Message-ID: <1999060113...@mail.replay.com>
X-Deja-AN: 484457668
Organization: mail2n...@nym.alias.net
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmas...@nym.alias.net
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...@replay.com>.
Newsgroups: alt.mens-rights,alt.dads-
rights.unmoderated,soc.men,utah.general,nashville.general,wi.general
Q: Who is Ken Pangborn?
A: Ken is an AOL user who has been abusing the online community for
several years.
After being kicked off of FIDONet, Mercopus and Compuserve, Ken
increased his abuse
volume exponentially when he joined AOL.
Q: How, exactly, does Ken abuse the internet?
A: First of all, Ken's posts are rarely on topic for the newsgroups
they appear in.
Rather, they are flames, or personal attacks. Actual studies of Ken's
posting
habits have been done, and have concluded that less than 10% of his
postings
bear any relevance to the groups he posts them in. The other 90% are
typically
attacks against other members of the newsgroups, usually because they
have offered
an opinion which Ken disagrees with.
Second, Ken constantly attacks and defames others. He uses the
internet to spread
vicious lies about people whom he has "marked". These lies are easily
recognized,
as Ken is always at a loss to provide substantiating proof for them.
Third, Ken's postings are usually laced with profanity, which is a
violation of
America Online's Terms of Service.
Fourth, Ken has published a user's Social Security Number to the
internet--a form
of blatant harassment.
Q: If this is so, why has America Online not dealt with this problem?
A: Actually, AOL has taken disciplinary action against Ken on three
separate
occasions, suspending his usenet privileges each time. Unfortunately,
these
actions did nothing to rehabilitate Ken, as he went right back to his
abuse
tactics each time he got his privileges back.
Ken has also bragged that an AOL Community Action Team member, Scott
Crain, is
protecting him, and is filtering out and deleting any complaints about
Ken which
are sent to AOL.
Q: Why does Ken have difficulty spelling simple words like "You",
"the", "I",
etc.?
A: According to Ken, this is caused by back problems which he suffers
from.
Q: What effect has Ken had on usenet?
A: Ken has effectively ruined many of the newsgroups. He does this
by posting
hundreds of off-topic messages, which disrupt the newsgroup and draw
focus away
from the theme of the newsgroup.
Q: What types of disruptive messages does Ken post?
A: Ken's posts typically fall into one of five categories. (1)
Flames. These
are attacks which Ken makes upon other members of the newsgroup,
usually unprovoked.
These flames take the form of defamatory lies, profanity, name calling
or racist
hate-speech. (2) Trolls. These are posts which Ken makes, either
from his own
email address or anonymously, which are made for the express purpose
of provoking
other users and fostering flamewars. (3) Spam. Ken will often post
the same message,
or a segment of a particular message, many times over many
newsgroups. This fits the
definition of a spam. (4) Unwanted advertising. Ken runs a business
of questionable
reputation and integrity, and often posts advertisements for the
business. These posts
often include flames or attacks on competitors, and are usually in
violation of the
charter of the newsgroup they are posted on. (5) Forgery. Often, to
generate support
for himself, Ken will forge a posting to make it seem that one of his
opponents wrote it.
He usually does this with messages from anonymous remailers. It is
suspected that Ken is
responsible for authoring some anonymous messages for this purpose.
Q: What newsgroups has Ken ruined?
A: Ken has severely damaged soc.men, milw.general, soc.veterans, and
alt.psychology with
his usenet abuse.
Q: What is the deal with "Stacy" and "David"?
A: Stacy and David are two individuals whom Ken has targeted most for
harassment.
David was targeted because he authored a father's rights web page,
which Ken
thought was a threat to his own page, and has repeatedly tried to have
David's
page torn down. David has also outten Ken on a few of his lies. Ken
has stated
that his "hobby" is to have David thrown in jail for posting against
him on
usenet. He also has accused David of being the author of numerous
postings made
through anonymous remailers, despite the fact that the posts are
untraceable. On
several occasions, Ken was caught forging David's name and email
address into the
anonymous posts.
Stacy has been targeted because she posts opinions which are radically
different
from Ken's. Ken also believes that Stacy does not have the right to
post in what
he considers to be "his" newsgroups, namely soc.men, milw.general,
wi.general and
alt.psychology. Ken has declared that his "mission" is to get Stacy
banned from
usenet. He has also threatened to arrange to have her raped.
Q: When did Ken make this threat?
A: This threat was made on December 8, 1997, and is archived at
http://members.tripod.com/~freedom23/racism.html
Q: Why can't I find this post in Dejanews?
A: Ken invoked the "nuke" feature of Dejanews to have this post
removed from the
archive. He did this because this post is obviously very
incriminating. He now
claims that the post is a forgery.
Q: How do we know it isn't a forgery?
A: Ken has been challenged regarding this post for several months.
He never
denied having written it up until the day he nuked it from the
Dejanews archive.
Prior to nuking it, he had acknowledged that he had made the post, but
explained
it away as "sarcasm" and "ridicule" of Stacy Alexander. These posts
are still
available in Dejanews. If the post was truly a forgery, Ken would
have denied
ownership of it from day one.
Q: What else has Ken lied about?
A: A question that would take less time to answer would be, what
hasn't Ken lied
about?
According to Ken, a man named Michael Newton claimed to be an incest
survivor,
and posted this claim to a listserv. However, Mr. Newton denies this,
and Ken
has not produced any evidence to back up his claim. Ken claims that
the post
exists in the archives of the listserv, but that it will take some
time for the
listserv's administrator to track it down. Ken also stated that "a
lot of people
remember", but refused to give any names of such people. Finally, Ken
boasted that
Dean Tong, a men's activist, "remembered". However, Dean never came
forward to
support this claim. One can only conclude that Ken lied.
Ken also made a similar statement about Stacy Alexander (again without
proof).
Ken also attacked David Moore in a veteran's newsgroup, claiming that
he didn't
have the right to post there because he had been discharged from the
Marine Corps
under "other than honorable" conditions. As his source, Ken cited
"paperwork"
which he claimed to have obtained from publicly available records. He
also cited
a "mystery source" (an oft employed tactic for Ken), in this case an
unnamed
Sergeant who had supposedly served with Moore in the Corps. When
challenged, Ken
refused to reveal the identity of the "mystery Sergeant", supposedly
to protect
the Sergeant from Moore. Ken posted several different variations of
his claim
about Moore's discharge, and many of the claims contradict one
another. Moore has
documented this rather well on his website at http://members.tripod.com/~freedom23.
When challenged with these contradictions, Ken claimed that some of
them were
forgeries, just as he did with the Stacy Alexander rape post. When
pressed about
Moore's discharge papers even further, Ken attempted to evade his lie
by referring
to Moore's divorce papers, which supposedly contained proof that he
had been
given a "general discharge for medical reasons". However, the
following facts
prove Ken a liar:
(a) Moore filed for divorce in the summer of 1994, over a full year
prior to his
discharge from the Marine Corps in October of 1995. Both items
are public
record.
(b) Moore was honorably discharged. This is public record.
(c) Ken's own posts to usenet on the subject, with their numerous
discrepancies,
demonstrate a malicious attempt to smear Moore.
Q: Ken is abusing me. What can I do to stop this?
A: Complaints about Ken should be forwarded to ab...@aol.com.
The vast majority of what Ken posts is in direct violation of America
Online's
Terms of Service.
##############################
whitevamp
http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/Faculty/murphy/419/419www.htm
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O101-Anthropologyofreligion.html
What were you saying about anthropologists and religion again.....?
(( laughing))
Billzz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_brat_(U.S._subculture)
(( begin C&P))
(( end C&P))
You were saying.....?
(( laughing))
****************************************
I was just passing by, in soc.veterans (and my left-hand carets are not
working for some reason) but anyway, I spent twenty-six years in the army,
from private to colonel, and raised three sons (two of them spent their
entire childhood on military bases) and anyone who had a career knows that
"military brat" is almost a distinguished title. I do not know how many
times my sons went for jobs, while in school, and the manager (I always
interviewed first) was very happy to get a "brat." They are always more
worldly-wise, and more inclined to hard work, than the average. They are
used to getting up early, moving often, making new friends, etc.
One story. We were touring Switzerland from Germany, with my wife's mother
(who is particular) and we ordered bratwurst (you have to) and she wanted
mustard. In an instant, our oldest son said, "I'll get it!" and he was
gone. Now he hardly spoke German, had never been in the place, but returned
within a few minutes with mustard (Senf, in German.)
Another story. We moved our second son, in his senior year of high school
(which every sociologist seems to think is wrong) and he quickly made
friends, had more than they required, so took theatre arts, so he could go
to NYC to see the shows (the teacher was connected.) He came back to be an
actor, went to UTexas, got a BFA, went to LA, got several jobs, met
Sigourney, Mel, most of the others, decided to return to Austin where he can
do what he wants. He writes, directs, produces, and acts in commercials.
Has always made nothing but friends no matter where he goes.
Anyway, if you are a military brat then you are more sophisticated, more
urbane, more flexible, more resistant to disease, more physically fit, and
better able to withstand rejection, and more helpful to others, than the
average bear.
But why you are talking to the person to whom you are talking, I do not
know.
Sometimes you can't help, you know.
****************************************************
Greegor
G > I thought he was just bored with you.
KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
G > She's too stupid to be real.
G > Is it just Kent in drag?
Moe > Kent and I are different people greg.
Moe > Your obsession is making you see Kent everywhere.
SCANS are definitive proof?
Who is REALLY that stupid?
Who is motivated to try to foist such insane BS?
Greegor
""signature"" without quotation marks. So you went to all that
trouble to anonymize
and yet didn't fix the quotation marks?
And you've been posting heavily and for a LONG time,
yet still haven't fixed your quotation marks?
14501 messages yet you still haven't fixed that??
Billzz
> billzzstring: It's very off putting that you quoted Moe's
> ""signature"" without quotation marks. So you went to all that
> trouble to anonymize
> and yet didn't fix the quotation marks?
>
> And you've been posting heavily and for a LONG time,
> yet still haven't fixed your quotation marks?
>
> 14501 messages yet you still haven't fixed that??
I do not even know what you are talking about. As far as being a long time
poster, I am 71 years old and inherited one of the original DARPA node
workstations, at Rockwell-Collins, so I am pretty old. 14501 messages is
nothing compared to what I posted before Google was even born. I was also a
visiting researcher at the Rockwell Science Center so 14501 messages is
nothing compared to those, non-public messages. Not to mention the
classified projects, like the Mobile MX, or KE-ASAT, which was thousands per
day. I'm sure I have over a million posts on many networks, just none that
you would be included in.
I am posting from soc.veterans, and would never subscribe to any of the
other groups in the masthead.
You seem to have nothing to say about the substance, only the form. You are
some kind of European Bureaucrat?
Dan Sullivan
> billzzstring: It's very off putting that you quoted Moe's
> ""signature"" without quotation marks. So you went to all that
> trouble to anonymize
> and yet didn't fix the quotation marks?
grag, you've been caught numerous times misattributing statements.
And yet you're "off put" by missing quotation marks!
LOL!!!
Greegor
> "Greegor" <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:220bd1a6-14a1-49e6...@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>
> > billzzstring: It's very off putting that you quoted Moe's
> > ""signature"" without quotation marks. So you went to all that
> > trouble to anonymize
> > and yet didn't fix the quotation marks?
>
> > And you've been posting heavily and for a LONG time,
> > yet still haven't fixed your quotation marks?
>
> > 14501 messages yet you still haven't fixed that??
>
> I do not even know what you are talking about. As far as being a long time
> poster, I am 71 years old and inherited one of the original DARPA node
> workstations, at Rockwell-Collins, so I am pretty old.
So what?
The point was that you had time to fix the quoting issue.
> 14501 messages is
> nothing compared to what I posted before Google was even born. I was also a
> visiting researcher at the Rockwell Science Center so 14501 messages is
> nothing compared to those, non-public messages. Not to mention the
> classified projects, like the Mobile MX, or KE-ASAT, which was thousands per
> day. I'm sure I have over a million posts on many networks, just none that
> you would be included in.
I thought Starband was a Hughes thing.
You advertise classified projects? LOL
> I am posting from soc.veterans, and would never subscribe to any of the
> other groups in the masthead.
>
> You seem to have nothing to say about the substance, only the form. You are
> some kind of European Bureaucrat?
Cedar Rapids, Iowa resident.
You jumped into a LONG standing feud between
a self proclaimed "base brat" and a veteran she hates
and wants to discredit.
Maureen McAllister is so incredibly stupid that
she claims an electronic SCAN of legal documents
is better proof than the documents ON the official
state (Iowa) web sites.
For years Moe has been trying to disprove three
different Official Iowa web sites plus the printed
law books and their online form.
Her online Garage Burglar friend Kent Wills
has her wrapped around his little finger.
He's a two time Felon (Iowa) but lives in
Rogers Arkansas and LIES on usenet profusely.
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 Felony Garage Burglar used teen as
accomplice
TWO of Kent Wills' usenet newsgroup identities:
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services, misc.legal,
soc.men, alt.support.foster-parents, alt.adoption
From: "Kent Wills" <compu...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:06:14 -0600
KW > Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
KW > (DOB 05/22/1959)
KW > CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
KW > 04/10/1996 Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
Kent posted a FRAUD that I had an OWI (Drunk Driving).
I've only tried to get drunk once in my entire life.
Except for that and a few Rum/Pepsi (social drinks)
I do not drink alcohol.
Of course, I never had any accusation, charge
or conviction for OWI.
Like your Vodka there comrade Willenski?
WILLS, KENT B [ Collected March 7, 2009]
Age: 40
Rogers, AR
Ankeny, IA
Marshalltown, IA
Bartlett, IL
Villa Park, IL
And from another source: Hanover Park, IL
WILLS, FREDERICK ALFRED (Kent's Dad 65 )
WILLS, MICHAEL A (Kent's son ??)
WILLS, JANET RAE (Kent's Mom 62 )
HARTWIG,TIFFANY JEANNE (Wills) (Kent's sister )
From another source: Kelly M Wills Kent's wife ?? )
( Samantha T Wills, Kathleen M Wills, James Wills )
--------------------------------------------------------
Pay close attention to past owners of 202 NW College Ave.
Kent made affirmative claims about the property online.
Kent's folks sold it in 1994 while Kent lived there!
On 03/30/1999 Sweeney's filed on Kent for UNPAID RENT!
GeoParcel 8024-15-452-029 District/Parcel 181/00392-048-000
[ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Seller: WILLS, FRED A. & JANET R.
Buyer: THE SWEENEY REVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST
04/26/1994 135,000 D/Deed 7010/188
-
Seller: SHELDAHL, ERIC A.
Buyer: WILLS, FRED
01/02/1990 130,500 D/Deed 6189/972
A Larger photo:
http://www.assess.co.polk.ia.us/cgi-bin/seephoto/photosize.cgi?gp=802415452029&size=Large
Notice that name SWEENEY above?
Check this out!
Iowa Courts Docket and Disposition web site
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click
Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection
Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >
Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT ******
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
A list of case numbers will be presented.
Click on the SWEENEY case, 4th one down.
Under the "Filings" tab:
JUDGEMENT DEFAULT BRANDT GREGORY D 08/25/1999 09/01/1999 09/01/1999
Comments: $156.25 7.244% FROM 03/30/99
COMPUTER GENERATED NOTICE 05/11/1999 05/11/1999 05/11/1999
Comments: Notice of Proof of Claim
RETURN OF ORIGINAL NOTICE 04/21/1999 04/23/1999 04/23/1999
Comments: 4/10/99 KENT PERS
37.60
VERIFICATION OF ACCT HAS BEEN FILED 03/30/1999 03/30/1999
03/30/1999
SMALL CLAIMS ORIGINAL NOTICE SWEENEY RENTALS 03/30/1999 03/30/1999
03/30/1999
Comments: UNPAID RENT
Under the "Financial" Tab:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 98.60 31.00 67.60
FINE 0.00 0.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 238.46 0.00 238.46
-----------
$337.06 $31.00 $306.06
SUPPORT/ALIMONY N/A 0.00 N/A
-------------------------------------
Do It Yourself Instructions to look up Kent's record
Iowa Department of Corrections records for Kent
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
Name Kent Bradley Wills [ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Offender Number 1155768
Sex M
Birth Date 01/08/1969
Age 40
Location
Offense
County Of Commitment
Commitment Date
Duration
TDD/SDD *
* TDD = Tentative Discharge Date
* SDD = Supervision Discharge Date
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 12/16/2008
Probation C Felony Polk 12/16/2008
Supervision Status Offense Class County of Commitment End Date
Probation Aggravated Misdemeanor Polk 11/25/2003
Iowa Courts Docket and Disposition web site
http://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/
Iowa Courts
Online Search
< Start A Case Search Here! > click
Iowa Courts Online Search
Search Selection
Under Trial Court < click on Case Search >
Wills Kent B
02401 ESPR015146 INA J WILLS ESTATE
05771 FECR145250 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 FECR176876 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
05771 SCSC310505 SWEENEY RENTALS VS KENT
05771 SCSC335210 CITI FINANCIAL VS KENT
05771 SCSC374163 SFI F SCHERLE PRES VS KENT
05771 SCSC374164 SFI F SCHERLE III PRES VS KENT
05771 STAN201670 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 STAN210929 IOWA vs [ KENT ] 01/08/1969
05771 SWCR177169 STATE VS KENT 01/08/1969
A list of case numbers will be presented.
Two on that list have the code "FE" in them.
One of the two ends in the two digits "76".
Click that case number.
A case caption will appear.
Tabs available to the public include
"Criminal Charges", "Filings" and "Financial".
Use the "back" button on your browser to move among them
or just hit the various tab buttons.
(See filings text if attached further down below)
IN PRINTED LAW BOOKS
West's North Western Reporter
Second Series
A Unit of the National Reporter System
Volume 696 N.W.2d
Cite as 696 N.W.2d 20 (Iowa 2005)
Kent's Appeal
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?Printable=true
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ia&vol=sc%5C20050506%5C04-0202&invol=1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA
No. 31 / 04-0202
Filed May 6, 2005
STATE OF IOWA,
Appellee,
vs.
KENT BRADLEY WILLS,
Appellant.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk
County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.
Defendant appeals claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender,
and Tricia Johnston, Assistant State
Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kevin
Cmelik, Assistant Attorney General, John P.
Sarcone, County Attorney, and John Judisch,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
WIGGINS, Justice.
Kent Wills appeals his conviction for
second-degree burglary contending that
an attached garage is a separate occupied
structure from that of the living quarters
of the residence. In this appeal, we must
determine whether trial counsel was
ineffective for (1) failing to move for
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to convict Wills
of second-degree burglary when he entered
an attached garage of a residence when no
persons were present in the garage, but
when persons were present in the living
quarters; and (2) failing to object to a
jury instruction based on this same
argument. Because we find there was no
legal basis for the motion for judgment
of acquittal or the objection to the jury
instruction, Wills' trial counsel was not
ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the
judgment of the district court.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings.
Around 1 a.m., an Ankeny resident called
the local police to report that a car
alarm sounded in the resident's
neighborhood. The city dispatched a police
officer to the location. Observing nothing
unusual, the officer left the area, only
to be stopped a couple of blocks later
by a person who informed the officer he
had witnessed someone running from the
area of the car alarm. As the officer
started driving back to the area of the
car alarm, he noticed a person walking
on the sidewalk. The officer asked the
person, a minor, if he had noticed anybody
running from the area. The minor answered
that he had not. While the officer and
another officer were speaking to the minor,
another resident of the neighborhood
arrived in her car and informed the
officers that she had observed two people,
one of whom was heavy set with a blinking
light on his back pocket, walking in the
area of her neighbor's residence. She
observed the heavier-set individual, later
identified as Wills, enter her neighbor's
attached garage through an unlocked service
door. She further observed a smaller
individual standing by a van parked in
the neighbor's driveway.
The officers eventually let the minor leave
even though they found a large amount of
coins, a flashlight, and an electronic
pocket organizer in his pockets. After
releasing the minor, the police officers
drove to the residence where the neighbor
observed the two suspicious people and
woke the owner. The owner, his wife,
and two daughters were in the residence
sleeping at the time. After a search
of his vehicles, the owner discovered
change and an electronic pocket organizer
were missing from the vehicles. The
owner's daughter reported a diamond ring
and some change were missing from her
vehicle. The officers then contacted
the minor's parents, who informed the
officers the minor was with Wills. After
the officers questioned the minor again,
he admitted his involvement in the theft
and implicated Wills in the burglary.
Although Wills denied involvement in the
burglary, the officers arrested him.
The State filed a trial information
charging Wills with second-degree
burglary. The State later amended the
information to include two additional
charges of burglary in the third degree
and using a juvenile to commit an
indictable offense.
The jury returned a verdict finding Wills
guilty of the crimes of burglary in the
second degree, burglary in the third
degree, and using a juvenile to commit
an indictable offense. Wills appeals his
conviction for second-degree burglary
claiming ineffective assistance of
counsel.
II. Scope of Review.
Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel
are derived from the Sixth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 684-86, 104 S.
Ct. 2052, 2063-64, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 691-93
(1984). Our review for a claim involving
violations of the Constitution is de novo.
State v. Fintel, 689 N.W.2d 95, 100
(Iowa 2004). We normally preserve
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
for postconviction relief actions. State
v. Carter, 602 N.W. 2d 818, 820 (Iowa 1999).
However, we will address such claims on
direct appeal when the record is sufficient
to permit a ruling. State v. Artzer,
609 N.W.2d 526, 531 (Iowa 2000). The
appellate record in the present case is
sufficient to allow us to address Wills'
ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims
on direct appeal.
In order for a defendant to succeed on a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel,
the defendant must prove: (1) counsel
failed to perform an essential duty and
(2) prejudice resulted. Id. Prejudice
results when "there is a reasonable
probability that, but for the counsel's
unprofessional errors, the result of the
proceeding would have been different."
State v. Hopkins, 576 N.W.2d 374, 378
(Iowa 1998) (quoting Strickland, 466
U.S. at 694, 104 S. Ct. at 2068,
80 L. Ed. 2d at 698). Wills' arguments
also raise issues of statutory
interpretation, which we review for
correction of errors at law. State v.
Wolford Corp., 689 N.W.2d 471, 473 (Iowa 2004).
III. Analysis.
To find Wills guilty of burglary in the
second degree, the State had to prove
Wills perpetrated a burglary "in or
upon an occupied structure in which one
or more persons are present . . . ." Iowa
Code § 713.5(2) (2003) (emphasis added).
In this appeal, Wills first contends his
trial counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal on
the basis there was insufficient evidence
to support a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage, there were persons
present in or upon the occupied structure.
Wills concedes the garage was an occupied
structure, but argues the living quarters
and the attached garage are separate and
independent occupied structures; therefore,
the jury could not have found there were
people present in the attached garage
at the time of the burglary.
The Code defines an "occupied structure" as:
[A]ny building, structure, appurtenances
to buildings and structures, land, water
or air vehicle, or similar place adapted
for overnight accommodation of persons,
or occupied by persons for the purpose of
carrying on business or other activity
therein, or for the storage or safekeeping
of anything of value. Such a structure
is an "occupied structure" whether or not
a person is actually present.
Id. § 702.12.
Wills relies on State v. Smothers, 590
N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999), to argue the
garage and the living quarters are separate
and independent occupied structures. In
Smothers, two separate and distinct
businesses connected by interior fire doors
were operated in the same structure.
590 N.W.2d at 723. We held the defendant
committed two burglaries by entering each
business because "[t]he facility's
construction history and physical make-up
demonstrate that the portions are
independent working units which constitute
'[a] combination of materials to form a
construction for occupancy [or] use.'" Id.
Smothers is not at odds with the present
case because the living quarters and the
garage are not separate or independent
units of the residence.
Our review of the record reveals the garage
in question was a three-car attached garage
separated from the living quarters by a
door. The same roof covered the garage as
the rest of the residence. The living
quarters surrounded the garage on two sides.
It was structurally no different from any
other room in the residence.
The garage was a functional part of the
residence. On the night of the incident,
the door was unlocked. The owner of the
residence used two stalls in the garage to
park the family vehicles. The owner used
the third stall for his motorcycle. As
such, the garage and the living quarters
are a single "structure" or "building"
functioning as an integral part of the
family residence. Thus, the residence
including the garage is a single
"occupied structure" under section 702.12.
See, e.g., People v. Ingram, 48 Cal. Rptr.
2d 256 (Ct. App.1995) (holding defendant's
entry into an attached garage constituted
first-degree burglary because the garage
was attached to the house; therefore,
burglary of the garage was burglary of
an inhabited dwelling house); People v.
Cunningham, 637 N.E.2d 1247, 1252 (Ill.
App. Ct. 1994) (holding "ordinarily an
attached garage is a 'dwelling' because
it is part of the structure in which
the owner or occupant lives");
State v. Lara, 587 P.2d 52, 53
(N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (holding "burglary
of the [attached] garage was burglary of
the dwelling house because the garage was
a part of the structure used as living
quarters"); People v. Green, 141 A.D.2d
760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988) (holding
"[s]ince the garage in the present case
was structurally part of a building
which was used for overnight lodging of
various persons, it must be considered
as part of a dwelling"); White v. State,
630 S.W. 2d 340, 342 (Tex. Ct. App. 1982)
(holding an attached garage under the
same roof as the home would be considered
a habitation within the purview of the
penal code because the garage is a
structure appurtenant to and connected
to the house); State v. Murbach, 843 P.
2d 551, 553 (Wash. Ct. App 1993)
(holding the definition of a dwelling
under Washington's burglary statute
included an attached garage).
Had Wills' trial counsel moved for a
judgment of acquittal on the basis there
was insufficient evidence to support
a finding that at the time Wills
entered the garage there were no persons
present in or upon the occupied
structure, it would have been overruled
by the court because the owner and his
family were present in the residence at
the time of the burglary.
Wills also claims his counsel was
ineffective for failing to object to
the jury instruction used by the district
court on the same ground; that the
living quarters were a separate and
independent occupied structure from the
attached garage. The instruction as
given stated:
The State must prove all of the following
elements of Burglary in the Second
Degree as to Count I:
1. On or about the 12th day of August,
2003, the defendant or someone he aided
and abetted broke into or entered the
residence at . . . .
2. The residence at . . . was an occupied
structure as defined in Instruction No. 29.
3. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did not have permission or
authority to break into the residence at ...
4. The defendant or the person he aided
and abetted did so with the specific
intent to commit a theft therein.
5. During the incident persons were present
in or upon the occupied structure.
If the State has proved all of the elements,
the defendant is guilty of Burglary in the
Second Degree. If the State has failed to prove
any of the elements, the defendant is not
guilty of Burglary in the Second Degree and
you will then consider the charge of
Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree
explained in Instruction No. 21.
(Emphasis added.)
Wills' claim is without merit. As we have
discussed, the residence is the one and
only "occupied structure" under the facts
of this case. Had Wills' trial counsel
made this objection to the instruction,
it would have been overruled.
Therefore, Wills' trial counsel is not
ineffective for failing to move
for a judgment of acquittal or objecting
to the instruction because there was no
legal basis for the motion or objection.
See State v. Hochmuth, 585 N.W.2d 234,
238 (Iowa 1998) (holding trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise an
issue that has no merit).
IV. Disposition.
We affirm the judgment of the district
court because Wills' trial counsel was
not ineffective for failing to raise
meritless issues.
AFFIRMED.
-----------------------------------
[ As Collected March 7, 2009 ]
Filings
Title: STATE VS KENT BRADLEY WILLS
Case: 05771 FECR176876 (POLK)
Citation Number:
Event Filed By Filed Create Date Last Updated Action Date
ORDER OF DISCHARGE OVROM ELIZA 12/16/2008 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
Comments: FROM PROBATION
OTHER EVENT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
12/16/2008
Comments: FIELD DISCHARGE REPORT
OTHER ORDER OVROM ELIZA 12/16/2008 12/16/2008 12/16/2008
Comments: REVOCATION HEARING SET FOR 1/07/2009 IS CANCELLED
DEFENDANT HAS NOT PAID IN FULL FINANCIAL
OBLIGATIONS
ORDER FOR PROBATION REVOCATION HEARING MOISAN CYNTHIA M 12/05/2008
12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: ON 1/7/09 AT 9:30AM RM204
PROBATION REVOCATION 12/05/2008 12/05/2008 12/05/2008
Comments: REPORT OF VIOLATIONS FILED BY JAN HORNOCKER
FORMAL PROBATION HUTCHISON ROBERT A 01/25/2006 01/26/2006
01/26/2006
Comments: EXTENDED TO 01/16/09 OR UNTIL CONDITIONS ARE MET
COURT ORDERED PAYMENT PLAN 01/13/2006 01/13/2006 01/13/2006
[ ... ]
Dan Sullivan
Billzz
********************************
Starband satellite has nothing to do with Hughes satellite. And all of the
classified projects were cancelled when the cold war contracts were
cancelled.
> I am posting from soc.veterans, and would never subscribe to any of the
> other groups in the masthead.
>
> You seem to have nothing to say about the substance, only the form. You
> are
> some kind of European Bureaucrat?
Cedar Rapids, Iowa resident
************************************
Home of Arthur Collins, the founder of Collins Radio, now Rockwell/Collins.
Been there.
You jumped into a LONG standing feud between
a self proclaimed "base brat" and a veteran she hates
and wants to discredit
***************************************
So why do you not take this out of soc veterans? I will now plonk you and
anyone else who has some personal argument. I do not care.
Greegor
G > a self proclaimed "base brat" and a veteran she hates
G > and wants to discredit
billzzstring > So why do you not take this out of soc veterans?
Moe crossposted it there for her reasons.
billzzstring > I will now plonk you and anyone else who
billzzstring > has some personal argument. I do not care.
Welcome to the internet! LOL
krp
MOE> Topic header as Kennie wrote it shows his misogyny and crudeness.
Just stating a FACT, Moe. Your worldview is one LONG "vagina monologue."
MOE> OOHH OOOHH Temper temper Kennie Lardo!! Are you getting into a hissy
fit again Kennie?
MOE> Guess so!!
MOE> So tell me again how such a cool and calm guy like you got to be a "
weapons instructor".
By firing in the top 1% of the people in the AF in matches, Maureen.
krp
On May 6, 5:23 pm, "krp" <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "whitevamp" <fvrn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2145cd3b-7f64-40ea...@g19g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
> On May 4, 11:54 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Moe > SQUIRM all you want Kennie.
>
> > G > I thought he was just bored with you.
>
> > KRP > She deludes herself that I am under some
> > KRP > obligation to answer every bit of silly shit she posts.
>
> > She's too stupid to be real.
> > Is it just Kent in drag?
>
> MOE> Kent and I are different people greg.
>
> There are several people who DOUBT that Moe.
MOE> Prove it.
Would you like a "SCAN" of it, Moe?
krp
>
> >
>
> Q: Who is Ken Pangborn?
>
> A: Ken is an AOL user who has been abusing the online community for
> several years. After being kicked off of FIDONet, Mercopus and Compuserve,
> Ken
> increased his abuse volume exponentially when he joined AOL.
SMALL PROBLEM, Moe. I was never "KICKED OFF" Fidonet, Mercopus OR
CompUserve. That is a FICTON puit out by your pal Moore.
> Q: If this is so, why has America Online not dealt with this problem?
> A: Actually, AOL has taken disciplinary action against Ken on three
> separate
> occasions, suspending his usenet privileges each time.
Not THREE times but ONE. And the offending posts were FORGERIES from
DAVID MOORE, and AOL restored my account when they SAW two facts.
1. I was in the hospital at the time undergoing surgery.
2. That the offending posts did NOT originate at AOL - BUT were posted
(FORGED)_ via an ANONYMOUS REMAILER.
> Q: What newsgroups has Ken ruined?
> A: Ken has severely damaged soc.men, milw.general, soc.veterans, and
> alt.psychology with his usenet abuse.
And YET - what remains interesting is that MOORE and his pal Stacy
Alexander who were BARRED from Milwaukee General and Davey's RESPONSE? Davey
started a one man organization \HE called the MGLF (Milwaukee General
LIBERATION FRONT) Moore loves to see himself as a "FREEDOM FIGHTER" hence
the various ID's he has used over the years to afix to himself; "FREEDOM"
and "LIBERTY" and "JUSTICE" in variations. Moore's views that HE can do as
he wished because of his RIGHT oif free speech, however, thoser who disagree
with him are "ABUSIVE" if they do. THEY in Davey's world do NOT have ANY
free speech rights at all.
> Q: Ken is abusing me. What can I do to stop this?
>
> A: Complaints about Ken should be forwarded to ab...@aol.com.
> The vast majority of what Ken posts is in direct violation of America
> Online's Terms of Service.
The above BULLSHIT quoted from the Moore web site. Amazing that Moe
isn't bright enough to resolve OBVIOUS conflicts in Moore's claims. On the
SAME PAGE Moore claims that I had been "kicked off AOL for abuse" and yet he
closes the page by asking people to complain TO AOL. Yet I kept my master
account under MY NAME through the start of 2005. IF, as Moore asserts to be
a FACT - that I had been kicked off AOL - WHY would he be trying to recruit
people to complain to AOL about me? Moore isn't bothered by the FACT that
there are posts from me into 2005 well AFTER he claims AOL had terminated
me.
krp
>
> http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/Faculty/murphy/419/419www.htm
>
> http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O101-Anthropologyofreligion.html
>
> What were you saying about anthropologists and religion again.....?
About as simplistic as I expected from ANTHROPOLOGISTS.
THAT is your BEST SHOT?
freedom
On Thu, 07 May 2009, krp <kr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>"whitevamp" <fvr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:2e2aad8a-1c97-4436...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >
>>
>> Q: Who is Ken Pangborn?
>>
>> A: Ken is an AOL user who has been abusing the online community for
>> several years. After being kicked off of FIDONet, Mercopus and Compuserve,
>> Ken
>> increased his abuse volume exponentially when he joined AOL.
>
> SMALL PROBLEM, Moe. I was never "KICKED OFF" Fidonet, Mercopus OR
>CompUserve. That is a FICTON puit out by your pal Moore.
>
>
>
>> Q: If this is so, why has America Online not dealt with this problem?
>
>> A: Actually, AOL has taken disciplinary action against Ken on three
>> separate
>> occasions, suspending his usenet privileges each time.
>
> Not THREE times but ONE. And the offending posts were FORGERIES from
>DAVID MOORE, and AOL restored my account when they SAW two facts.
They never restored your PangK account.
But not from your Pa...@aol.com account. That one was terminated for abuse
in July 2000. You then signed up again under another account....
You even whined about the PangK account being terminated, and went into
detail as to why.
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
The truth about Kenneth Pangborn, who supports convicted child sex
criminals
"[I have] [n]ever had [any] standing in the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyer's
Association or AN Y connection to them."
- --Ken Pangborn in a usenet post on January 1, 2009, denying affiliation
with the TCDLA, to whom he provided bogus educational credentials. His lie
is disproved here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060822021821/www.tcdla.com/secure/experts/inde
x.shtml
"Some photo of some girl without even any documentation on THAT only proves
that YOU are a PSYCHO! A really STUPID one at that!"
- --Ken Pangborn, admitting to being a "stupid" "psycho" in message-ID
<jOp3l.292$Es4...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>
"The FACT is that [my mail-order wife Barbara Sanciprian] and I were
introduced in the FORMAL Spanish tradition by mutual friends, and were
married first in Cuba after 2 year courtship."
- --Ken Pangborn, admitting that he began cheating on his wife Peggy on
September 28, 2001, nearly two years before she separated from him
"I'm David Moore and I am insane!"
- --Ken Pangborn posting to alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, attempting to claim
that his name is David Moore
"If you call the police, I'll knock out all of your teeth, I'll cripple
you. I may go to prison for it, but when I get out, I'll be able to walk,
but you will still be a cripple."
- --Pangborn puppet Greg Hanson of alt.support.child-protective-services **,
in a verbal threat to his girlfriend
** - this conclusion was reached via applying Ken and Greg's logic
Keywords: false allegations,sexual abuse,marital rape, date rape, sexual
harassment,child abuse,domestic violence,rape allegations,false allegations
of child abuse,false rape allegations,false abuse accusations,false
accusations,recovered memories,child sexual abuse,abuse child,sexual
assault,child molestation,reactive attachment disorder,penile
plethysmograph,polygraph,attorneys,divorce,visitation,pedophiles
More-keywords: KRP CONSULTING. False allegations of child abuse, false
abuse accusations, false domestic violence allegations help, false rape
allegations, abuse child, sexual abuse, child sexual abuse, false
allegations, false accusations, recovered memories, sexual assault, child
molestation, child sexual abuse, reactive attachment disorder, penile
plethysmograph, polygraph, trial consulting, jury consulting, jury
selection, jury voire dire, wrongful allegations, false child sexual abuse
allegations. Wrongful child sexual abuse allegations. Domestic Violence.
Rape. Marital rape. Date Rape. Confidence Rape.
Yet-more-keywords: ken pangborn,kenneth pangborn,barbara pangborn,barbara
sanciprian,palm harbor,tampa,attorneys,florida lawyers,florida
attorneys,tampa lawyers,tampa attorneys,trial consultant,trial
consulting,dui,domestic violence,vawa,abuse,3648 cockatoo,new port
richey,ernesto sanciprian,ernesto miguel blanco sanciprian,blanco
sanciprian,bryce carter,holguin,julio aguilar,yudith bacallao,raimundo
cabrera,ana hernandez chi,lixandro cordero,leandis diaz,al faisbuker,wendy
gil,armando capo ramos,george riveron,reinaldo rodriguez,lexis ross,liana
yisell alvarez silveira,madelyn tamayo,manuel toledo,thais valdes
Extra-keywords: Julito Sainz,craig clawson,lia yisell
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBSgLMeSjl4QPoqs6fEQLqQgCeIcsgfYuNfrqyixnll6p4FqjovCsAoObD
haTeiYhHvoe0GDrk3hwRCpyT
=xwzL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
krp
"freedom" <about...@aboutISkenApangbornFRAUD.com> wrote in message
news:0a4a72ad691179d9...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>>> Q: Who is Ken Pangborn?
>>>
>>> A: Ken is an AOL user who has been abusing the online community for
>>> several years. After being kicked off of FIDONet, Mercopus and
>>> Compuserve,
>>> Ken
>>> increased his abuse volume exponentially when he joined AOL.
>>
>> SMALL PROBLEM, Moe. I was never "KICKED OFF" Fidonet, Mercopus OR
>>CompUserve. That is a FICTON puit out by your pal Moore.
No real answer for the truth, eh Davey?
>>> Q: If this is so, why has America Online not dealt with this problem?
>>
>>> A: Actually, AOL has taken disciplinary action against Ken on three
>>> separate
>>> occasions, suspending his usenet privileges each time.
>>
>> Not THREE times but ONE. And the offending posts were FORGERIES from
>>DAVID MOORE, and AOL restored my account when they SAW two facts.
> They never restored your PangK account.
No Davey - I stopped using it in an agreement with AOL. I KEPT my MASTER
account all tghe way to 2005, not for the lack of OU pestering gthe dogshit
out of gthe people at AOL.
>>1. I was in the hospital at the time undergoing surgery.
>>2. That the offending posts did NOT originate at AOL - BUT were posted
>>(FORGED)_ via an ANONYMOUS REMAILER.
Again no denial of the TRFUTH by the internet's LEADING bullshit artist,
DAVID D. MOORE!
>>> Q: What newsgroups has Ken ruined?
>>
>>> A: Ken has severely damaged soc.men, milw.general, soc.veterans, and
>>> alt.psychology with his usenet abuse.
>> And YET - what remains interesting is that MOORE and his pal Stacy
>>Alexander who were BARRED from Milwaukee General and Davey's RESPONSE?
>>Davey
>>started a one man organization HE called the MGLF (Milwaukee General
>>LIBERATION FRONT) Moore loves to see himself as a "FREEDOM FIGHTER" hence
>>the various ID's he has used over the years to afix to himself; "FREEDOM"
>>and "LIBERTY" and "JUSTICE" in variations. Moore's views that HE can do as
>>he wished because of his RIGHT oif free speech, however, thoser who
>>disagree
>>with him are "ABUSIVE" if they do. THEY in Davey's world do NOT have ANY
>>free speech rights at all.
Again NO DENIAL from DIPHIT Moore. Say, Davey, whatever happened to
hyour MGLF? You said that *I* ruined it and yet YOUR ass was blocked from
posting and you had a childish little TANTRUM forming your MGLF! Pathetic
little boy.
>>> Q: Ken is abusing me. What can I do to stop this?
>>>
>>> A: Complaints about Ken should be forwarded to ab...@aol.com.
>>> The vast majority of what Ken posts is in direct violation of America
>>> Online's Terms of Service.
>>
>> The above BULLSHIT quoted from the Moore web site. Amazing that Moe
>>isn't bright enough to resolve OBVIOUS conflicts in Moore's claims. On
>>the
>>SAME PAGE Moore claims that I had been "kicked off AOL for abuse" and yet
>>he
>>closes the page by asking people to complain TO AOL. Yet I kept my master
>>account under MY NAME through the start of 2005. IF, as Moore asserts to
>>be
>>a FACT - that I had been kicked off AOL - WHY would he be trying to
>>recruit
>>people to complain to AOL about me? Moore isn't bothered by the FACT that
>>there are posts from me into 2005 well AFTER he claims AOL had terminated
>>me.
> But not from your Pa...@aol.com account.
Davey I continues to post from my MASTER AOL account and YOU being the
childish little prick you ARE kept TRYING (unsuccessfully) for YEARS to get
it closed with your constant WHINING like a little baby! POOR PICKED ON
DAVEY MOORE! POOR POOR DAVEY MOORE. (group cry for Davey.) He wants his
MOMMY!!
Keywords: david daniel moore pathological liar, david daniel moore
calumet city, illinois, david daniel moore internet psychopath,
david daniel moore stalker, stalker, real estate agents, david daniel moore
pathological liar, david daniel moore, pervert, abusive real estate agents,
david daniel moore coward, david daniel moore computer hacker,
david daniel moore criminal, internet stalkers david daniel moore,
internet harassment david daniel moore, david daniel moore
internet libel, david daniel moore website of lies,janet moore,
850 buffalo avenue, calumet city,illinos, dui, linda boss, ACT, Lotus,
david daniel moore malicious use of employers computers,
david daniel moore sara lee corporation, never employ david
daniel moore, internet psychopaths, david daniel moore, david kojack, moore,
chicagoland pansies, internet addiction, internet stalking, woman hater,
tara moreland, janet more, dawn moore, alias dustin calloway, alias
david miller, alias david boss, alias jeff johnson, blackmailer, sexual
harassment,sexual blackmail, david moore bbs blackmail, david moore usmc, 29
palms california,linda boss, david moore child abuser, anonymous remailer
stalkers, anonymous remailer abusers, basement dwellers,off shore website,
new zealand, malaysia website,employer hotel/casino,computer abuse, office
disruption,
obsessive compulsive disorder, four winds,calumet city drag queen,
transvestite,
sexual disorders, mglf, milwaukee general liberation front,punks, putz,
cowardice, forger, mommys basement, skinheads, forgeries, willian rainey
harper college,
coalition forces, buffalo, michigan, david moore coalition supreme allied
commander,
anonymous remailer stalkers, david moore womanizer, david daniel moore drag
queen,
lotus programs, IT contractors, david d. moore aryan nations member.
whitevamp
I argue with Kenneth Pangborn because he's an obvious faker and
poser, and to be honest, he's a discredit to anyone who was or is in
the military. His assorted name calling me doesn't bother me. I do,
however have him in this thread to the point where he's cornered in
his lies about his alleged AF service.
You are right about us military brats. It wasn't easy going from
school to school every two years or so. I did think my strong
immunity system was because I'm a " mutt" though. :-)
whitevamp
Greg as long as you want to nitpick why do';t you get on your master
Kennies case for his atrocious spelling and his responding to some
posts with " bad quotation marks" as you call it?
Double standard again Greg?
whitevamp
More like a woman abuser who was caught fondling a seven year old
girl ( the daughter of his GF ) in the bathroom, claiming he was
"washing the pee off of her"-- with his bare hands.
Greg Hanson is a loser in a number of ways.
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
"http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/blies.htm
>
>
>
> >http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=Ay1BmBkAAAC1bA...
whitevamp
> G > You jumped into a LONG standing feud between
> G > a self proclaimed "base brat" and a veteran she hates
> G > and wants to discredit
>
> billzzstring > So why do you not take this out of soc veterans?
>
> Moe crossposted it there for her reasons.
Look again Greg. Kennie did the FIRST post in the trhead with " See I
TOLD YOU SO". Since my argument with Kennie is about his alleged AF
service, naturally soc.veterans is a good place for the thread.
The reason why it was crossposted to the other groups is because
KENNIE did it, not me, greg.
>
> billzzstring > I will now plonk you and anyone else who
> billzzstring > has some personal argument. I do not care.
>
> Welcome to the internet! LOL