Sir Howard Smith, MI5 chief, KGB mole
pare...@googlemail.com
have heard much about Sir Roger Hollis, who appears not to have been a
traitor, but Sir Howard Smith was identified years ago.
Janitor of Lunacy
Because nobody gives a flying fuck except you, you moron?
pare...@googlemail.com
Well I guess not. MI5 would not want this one getting too well known,
now would they?
Janitor of Lunacy
The inside info says they ain't too bothered about it. Particularly if
you're the only one saying it.
fredi...@googlemail.com
Well who is Howard Smith, when hes at home ...do tell
pare...@googlemail.com
Howard Smith was a past Director-General of MI5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Smith_(MI5_officer)
No doubt the insiders you have been talking to would not want to
acknowledge Smith's treachery, they don't want another Philby or
Bettaney type of case to gloss over, especially when the guy was the
top of his tree.
Of course I'm the only one saying it, because there is nobody else out
there with the balls to put it into the public domain. Actually it was
on one of the websites I run for about a year, and nobody even
commented on it. Just shows how you can be an MI5 Director-General,
and a KGB agent, and nobody gives a fig. This is the sort of country
you are living in Janitor - these are the sort of people you are
supporting.
Janitor of Lunacy
Possibly because nobody believed you, so nobody cared. Good way to destroy
your own argument, BTW.
Nobody commented because you presented no credible evidence to support it.
On the other hand, you can get paracetamol very cheaply from Aldi these
days, whisky likewise. It doesn't have to be good whisky, of course, no
point wasting a perfectly good suicide attempt by enjoying it, that destroys
the whole point.
>Just shows how you can be an MI5 Director-General,
> and a KGB agent, and nobody gives a fig. This is the sort of country
> you are living in Janitor - these are the sort of people you are
> supporting.
You're a self-confessed fool, and that's the end of the matter.
pare...@googlemail.com
It would be easy to answer your comments with ridicule, but I will not
sink to your level. I have made a point, and a serious one at that.
You clearly have no answer - you do not know. Perhaps it is my turn to
say I know things that you will not find anywhere on the Web.
Joe Lee
Congratulations. I always appreciate it when people answer there own
questions as I find it just saves so much time.
--
Joe Lee
Joe Lee
Yes & I do recognise that thread-drift is something which should be avoided
at all costs & to that end I must say that IMO Aldi provide excellent
quality produce at remarkably good value, for example I note they are now
offerring holidays abroad from as little as £10/pppn although despite
extensive searching I see that the Dignitas clinic is not (as yet) one of
their remarkably good value options.
Still, I live in hope.
--
Joe Lee
pare...@googlemail.com
Joe, I was hoping that you were about to make an interesting point
there, and then you fall in with the crowd who prefer to make stupid
comments. Is this group inundated with people who can only talk about
various types of medication and treatments? Surely there must be a
medial group you could join. I am interested in legal matters myself.
Joe Lee
the fact is you are nothing more than yet another MI5 obsessive notable for
the fact you share Tony Holland's (current) obsession with Stella Rimington.
You recently said "Tony Holland talks good sense. When he met Dame Stella
Rimington, Tony
could instantly see that she was not a woman of stature. It takes a
perceptive mind to see through bullshit when it is standing before you."
I rest my casel but only after pointing out that I will respond to your
"contributions" to the group as & when I see fit & in a manner of my
choosing.
--
Joe Lee
pare...@googlemail.com
Fair enough Joe, but I don't think it is true that I am an "MI5
obsessive". It might seem that way to you because that is all you see
from me, but in real life I am involved in lots of other activities,
and I don't spend very much time at all thinking about MI5 or Stella
Rimington for that matter. Another one, of what you might see as my
"Obsessions", is my desire to expose the lies told by Professor
Meirion Francis Lewis at my trial. Lewis was so hysterical when I told
his neighbours that they were living next to a liar, that he went to
the Police and caused me to be arrested for "harassment".
Unfortunately for him I wasn't harassing him, and I am currently in
the middle of a complaint to the Police for their actions in a
wrongful arrest.
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> the fact is you are nothing more than yet another MI5 obsessive notable for
> the fact you share Tony Holland's (current) obsession with Stella Rimington.
Joe I have no obsession with Rimington nor anyone else for that
matter, I just pay back anyone who is a nasty evil bastard like you,
someone who goes beyond fair comment and into the realm of pure evil,
there are quite afew folk on here who know how well I pay back, I have
no qualms of informing your employer about your extracurricular
activities or sending UK police your name and address.
Rest assure Joe, push the boundaries and you will feel the heavy hand
of a complaint, having said that, there are some notably escapees: The
Todal has so far eluded me, but he is wise enough to steer well clear
of me now how about you do the same or comment only to add not to
belittle or hurt< mike has done the hard yards, he is creating a forum
for the world to judge, not a nasty bastard like you to belittle him.
Joe Lee
The rational course of action would have been lodge an Appeal agains
conviction & seek expert opinion on bringing a case for Perverting the
Course of Justice, which could only be possible if you at least knew he lied
rather than for example, presented evidence with which you simply disagreed.
What were youcharged with incidentally /
--
Joe Lee
Janitor of Lunacy
pare...@googlemail.com
>
> The rational course of action would have been lodge an Appeal agains
> conviction & seek expert opinion on bringing a case for Perverting the
> Course of Justice, which could only be possible if you at least knew he lied
> rather than for example, presented evidence with which you simply disagreed.
> What were youcharged with incidentally /
>
> --
> Joe Lee
I was charged with four offences under the Official Secrets Act 1911:
1. communicating material to another for a purpose prejudicial to the
safety or interests of the State, between 1 January 1990 and 1 January
1991 (Section 1(1)(c));
2. communicating material to another for a purpose prejudicial to the
safety or interests of the State, between 1 January 1991 and 1 May
1992 (Section 1(1)(c));
3. making a sketch or note for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or
interests of the State, between 30 April 1992 and 8 August 1992
(Section 1(1)(b)); and
4. obtaining or collecting material for a purpose prejudicial to the
safety or interests of the State, between 30 April 1992 and 8 August
1992 (Section 1(1)(c)).
I was found guilty on Counts 1, 2 and 4, but not guilty on Count 3.
This was rather odd, because the material of counts 3 and 4 was all in
one bundle (the exhibits I was supposed to have prepared as a package
for a Russian), and if I had believed that the material of Count 4
would have been useful to an enemy, then surely I would have believed
that the material in Count 3 (which I thought was potentially more
important) must have also been useful to an enemy. This was an
irrational verdict in my opinion.
The CPS concentrated on 3 documents that they found to be most
significant in Count 4: 2 unclassified documents, and one marked
"restricted". From my interpretation, and the words of the Judge's
summing up, I believe it was the "restricted" document that the jury
relied on to convict me. That is why the evidence of Professor Meirion
Francis Lewis, the only Prosecution witness to comment on the
document's contents, makes him a key witness responsible for my
conviction.
Even the judge had to admit that Counts 1 and 2 were a little
difficult to grasp. I was alleged to have met a Russian in order to
pass material to him. There was no evidence what that material might
have consisted of (the Prosecution said it must be similar to the
exhibits in Count 3 and 4), but the claim was that it was "sensitive".
There was no evidence to identify who this "Russian" was, or even to
prove that he was a Russian. There were also no dates for these
meetings or locations where they might have taken place. It was this
uncertainty about whether any spying had taken place that prompted the
jury to ask 2 questions about why they had heard no evidence that I
had met Viktor Oshchenko, who the Prosecution had declared in their
opening statement had recruited me to the KGB.
Soon after the Criminal Cases Review Commission was founded I sent in
an application to have my conviction reviewed. It was officially
lodged with the CCRC in October 1998, but they didn't finally conclude
their investigation until July 2008, when they rejected my
application. The interesting thing for me about the CCRC was that they
only looked at items I had raised with them, they didn't try to find
out anything new about my case. For example, it was not until October
2007 that I discovered that the "restricted" document was obsolete in
1984 - the CCRC could have found that out very easily with their
access to the MoD. This made me suspicious that a cover-up of sorts
had been applied to my case, because Andrew Mackinlay MP asked a
question in the House of Commons in January 2006 specifically asking
when the document had been made obsolete, but the MoD refused to
answer that question on the basis that the CCRC were investigating
it !! Clearly they were not, because if I hadn't discovered it became
obsolete in 1984, I don't believe the CCRC would have mentioned it in
their report.
My Junior Barrister, Gary Summers, worked pro bono on my case between
my Appeal in 1995 until September 2006. But as soon as he realised I
was discovering new evidence that demonstrated that my trial had been
unfair, then Mr Summers told me he could not represent me any longer,
and I was left to fend for myself. Likewise, when I informed Mr Rock
Tansey QC, my Defence Counsel, about the new evidence I had found, he
also refused to talk to me on the phone or answer any correspondence I
sent him. It seems that my Defence barristers must have known
something was wrong with my trial at the time, otherwise why wouldn't
they be interested to know I had found evidence that could have
affected the verdicts?
I don't know all the answers, but I intend to find out. All I can
assume is that if I overturned my conviction it would expose people
within MI5 and the MoD to answer why evidence had been withheld from
my Defence team. As usual with the Official Secrets Act, it is used to
hide official embarrassment, rather than to protect real national
interests.
Joe Lee
> On 11 Apr, 04:17, "Joe Lee" <inva...@no.address> wrote:
>
>>
>> the fact is you are nothing more than yet another MI5 obsessive
>> notable for the fact you share Tony Holland's (current) obsession
>> with Stella Rimington.
>
> Joe I have no obsession with Rimington nor anyone else for that
> matter,
well let's take a look shall we.
Since 26th feb. you have started no less than twenty two totally separate
threads on the subject of Stella Rimington! I fully accept your inability to
recognise your obsessional nature, but I feel sure all those of a reasonable
disposition will have no hesitation in labelling your behaviuor as being a
fixation & obsessional.
> I just pay back anyone who is a nasty evil bastard like you,
> someone who goes beyond fair comment and into the realm of pure evil,
> there are quite afew folk on here who know how well I pay back,
i think you will find mine is fair comment tony so I don't see where your
idea of "pay back" or that I am a "nasty evil bastard" comes from.
> I have
> no qualms of informing your employer about your extracurricular
> activities or sending UK police your name and address.
>
> Rest assure Joe, push the boundaries and you will feel the heavy hand
> of a complaint, having said that, there are some notably escapees: The
> Todal has so far eluded me, but he is wise enough to steer well clear
> of me now how about you do the same or comment only to add not to
> belittle or hurt< mike has done the hard yards, he is creating a forum
> for the world to judge, not a nasty bastard like you to belittle him.
I suggest you direct your threats somewhere else, or better still quit your
incredibly childish behaviour altogether.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> > Joe I have no obsession with Rimington nor anyone else for that
> > matter,
>
> well let's take a look shall we.
Indeed lets take another look shall we....preferably at content NOT
the number of threads, if the content is obsessive then of course what
you say is fair comment, but, if the content contains new facts then
26 or 30 or even 100 new facts about the wrong doings of a high
official is fair comment. As usual your input relies on half truths
and lies Joe or probably in your case a lack of intellect at
distilling content from number.
>
> i think you will find mine is fair comment tony so I don't see where your
> idea of "pay back" or that I am a "nasty evil bastard" comes from.
There is no fair comment in being sarcastic or pretending you know or
understand certain matters that have been central to apersons life,
you dont know about me, you dont about Mike Smith you make genaral
assertions and then go on to suggest hurtful stupid solutions, add be
all means when you can add something that you have knowledge about,
dont fabricate or lie about matters you have no knowlegde of.
Joe Lee
You're full of bullshit Tony. You made the threats & now we see just how
rapidly you back away as soon as you are challenged.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> You're full of bullshit Tony. You made the threats & now we see just how
> rapidly you back away as soon as you are challenged.
Oh dear Joe, you're getting paranoid again, no one is backing down,
certainly not me, Im writing in plain English using a reasonable
argument that you are interpreting many threads in your own highly
differential way, a way I might add which outside this newsgroup is
regarded as highly peculiar, odd, and certaly boarding on abnormal
mental processes, in short Joe, Im calling a sick sad nut case, want
me to prove it.
Joe Lee
My guess is that you omitted the word "you", but no matter.
I simply note you have abandoned your threatening mode in favour of
obfuscation as, when push comes to shove, you're more than one card short of
a pack.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> I simply note you have abandoned your threatening mode in favour of
> obfuscation as, when push comes to shove, you're more than one card short of
> a pack.
Hey Joe, my dyslexia is well known, and many folk have made fun about
it, still it didnt stop me from becomeing a mulitimillion did it, now
what are you, a welder, aproduction manager, soon to be un employed.
I'll take my life anyday over what I know about you, whats it like to
be afailure...do tell me
pare...@googlemail.com
situation, which I thought you were going to comment on, you just
brushed it aside. If you are not going address the issues, but prefer
to attack the person instead, then why did you bother asking me about
my convictions?
fredi...@googlemail.com
Joe Lees problem Mike is that he came into the group full of ideas
about helping folk and was shot down in flames for the mediocre way he
went about it, hes not alawyer, but now pretends to legal ways often
quoting a legal phrase or two, poor guy, to say hes an *an adequate*
would not do him justice, he will often go with the better writers in
the group to try and belittle a newcomer.
pare...@googlemail.com
Thanks for the information Tony. I thought Joe was making the right
noises, but clearly I have been taken in by his comments, and actually
he has nothing to say.
Janitor of Lunacy
Matthew 15:12-14 has some pertinent comments on this situation.
pare...@googlemail.com
I don't read the bible, I prefer the gospel according the Richard
Dawkins.
Joe Lee
If you recall I asked what you were charged with. You could have replied
with "Four Offences under The Oddiciao Secrets Act". I did not ask that you
spend any amount of time writing a precis of the case.
Alternatuvely you could have linked to the wiki page (which JoL kindly
provided). It was whilst reading that page I recalled having previously read
of the case (on this group I believe) some time ago.
IIRC I had no comment to make on it at the time & have not since read
anything further which causes me to change my position.
--
Joe Lee
pare...@googlemail.com
OK Joe, but most of the important court papers are now published on
Cryptome, so I am trying to make my case as accessible as possible to
anybody who cares to read about the details.
Joe Lee
I made no reference to your dyslexia - so please don't issue your empty
threats & at the same time claim you're being victimised because of your
disability.
--
Joe Lee
Janitor of Lunacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_fail#Internet_meme
Unless, of course, the word "care" should be followed by "in the community"?
pare...@googlemail.com
I think sporting a tin-foil hat would make the wearer vulnerable to
electric chair syndrome, i.e. people who are afraid of execution.
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> I made no reference to your dyslexia - so please don't issue your empty
> threats & at the same time claim you're being victimised because of your
> disability.
My disability...you've got to be joking, who the fuck cares about
dyslexia, certainly not me, if I miss words out, so what, bank on it I
can add and subtract very well indeed as to empty threats do me
afavor, post the place where you work give me 1/2 min and the go and
have a chat to your boss, if he hasnt called you in. Go on be brave,
you know you wnat to Joey boy.
Janitor of Lunacy
Then you clearly have failed to understand that a tinfoil hat is intended to
be a primitive form of Faraday cage, a conscpt with which you should be
familiar. It does help if you follow the links and references I post, since
you appear superficially at least to be possessed of some intelligence and
nous (which is where you divert from Tony Holland). In other words, it's
typical of single-issue campaigners (and I use that word in your case in the
loosest possible sense), that they will resolutely ignore that which does
not suit their purpose. However, I do have some phlogiston for sale; perhaps
you'd be interested in some?
fredi...@googlemail.com
Hi Janitor, do you prefer to go under your real name Philip Nash or is
that too embarssing for you and your family since they expect you to
be nutty
pare...@googlemail.com
I do have a qualification in electronic engineering you know. As an
experiment I would ask you to walk into any high voltage area,
preferably at about 1,000,000 Volts, wearing your tinfoil hat, and see
if you can use it like a Faraday Cage. I expect your charred remains
would qualify for a cremation.
A Faraday Cage is a metal box that encloses you, and which conducts
the electricity around you, so that you would not receive a fatal
electric shock. But wearing a tinfoil hat is more likely to conduct
electricity through your body, which is not a good idea I believe.
I wish I was a single issue campaigner. Life would be so much simpler
if I were. I have a number of issues I am campaigning on, and each one
involves a different set of problems.
Joe Lee
> On 12 Apr, 06:31, "Joe Lee" <inva...@no.address> wrote:
>
>>
>> I made no reference to your dyslexia - so please don't issue your
>> empty threats & at the same time claim you're being victimised
>> because of your disability.
>
> My disability...you've got to be joking, who the fuck cares about
> dyslexia, certainly not me, if I miss words out, so what, bank on it I
> can add and subtract very well indeed
The ability to do simple arithmetic is something you should rightly be proud
of as not everyone is blessed with such skills, but it doesn't therefore
follow that you should be so ashamed of being dyslexic! After all, you
didn't actually choose the disability but rather, the disability chose you.
There are many worse afflictions you could suffer from & FWIW I feel sure
the majority of those who read your posts have no difficulty in
comprehending what it is you are attempting to convey.
Given your acknowledged disability I find it commendable that you struggle
to overcome it by spending so much of your valuable time engaged in
conversation in this text based format.
I hope you have explored the numerous sites on the web wjere you can find
advice & support on coping with your particular disability.
So, don't feel ashamed of yourself, just remember there are many others who
suffer to one degree or another from the same disability.
--
Joe Lee
Janitor of Lunacy
None of which, apparently, has achieved any success, otherwise you'd have
used it to your advantage here.
Have you read Stephen Pile's "Book of Heroic British Failures"? I'm sure
he'll find room for you in the next edition.
Unfortunately the award for "conspicuous failure to achieve support for a
loopy theory in uk.legal" has already been co-awarded to Tony Holland and
Noel O'Gara for their competely unsupported conspiracy theories about the
Yorkshire Ripper.
Never mind, at least you came third. There must be some website that will
recognise this. Unfortunately, your own doesn't qualify as "the disjointed
ramblings of a self-interested party".
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> Never mind, at least you came third. There must be some website that will
> recognise this. Unfortunately, your own doesn't qualify as "the disjointed
> ramblings of a self-interested party
So why not create on Philip, for as the song goes, to reach the
impossible star, to fight the unbeatable foe, this is my quest..go for
it.
pare...@googlemail.com
Unlike you, I am not a negative person. Neither do I go around looking
for conspiracy theories (unless you believe that evidence can be
fabricated - which I suppose is another conspiracy theory in your
mind).
It is true that we can learn from failure, either our own or other
peoples', but that is no reason to glory in the spectacle of failure.
Perhaps you like to read about failure, and look for cases that you
can ridicule, but in doing that you are only drawing attention to your
own inadequacies.
I myself am driven by success, and I have accomplished many
achievements in my life. People I have been employed by have
complimented me on my work, even as recently as last month, and so I
don't have a problem with people making idle comments about "failure"
to me - they are wrong. You don't know me, or what I am capable of,
but your repeated attempts to pass judgement on me only demonstrate
your own weaknesses
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> > Never mind, at least you came third. There must be some website that will
> > recognise this. Unfortunately, your own doesn't qualify as "the disjointed
> > ramblings of a self-interested party".
Mike I lost track of the bits in this thread, are we talking about
that idiot Joe Lee...or the schizophrenic Philip Nash, (aka, the
janitor of lunacy) neither are much cop, but both can be used as
cannon fodder to express further material thru.
pare...@googlemail.com
Tony, I don't understand either of these guys, Joe Lee and Philip
Nash. I have tried to answer their questions as fully as possible, but
they don't seem satisfied and just carry on with their previous
opinions. I think you are probably right, and that neither of these
two are going to make any useful contributions. At least we are
getting the points out there, and somebody with some legal nous will
read our words someday.
pare...@googlemail.com
Janitor of Lunacy
> Is this the Philip Nash we are discussing Tony?
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-435505/Mother-devastated-teenage-daughters-marriage-50-year-old-biker.html
Any suggestion that it is will be met by the immediate service of
proceedings, which I know you cannot afford to defend. But it isn't.
And why are you now sucking up to Holland, having lambasted him in a post
within the past 24 hours? Make your mind up.
pare...@googlemail.com
>
> Any suggestion that it is will be met by the immediate service of
> proceedings, which I know you cannot afford to defend. But it isn't.
> And why are you now sucking up to Holland, having lambasted him in a post
> within the past 24 hours? Make your mind up.
OK, that clears that one up then.
I am not 'sucking up to Holland' as you put it. Tony has been very
helpful to me, and has offered me some sound advice over the past few
years. It is natural that I should have respect for Tony, despite what
you say about him and your crude insults. I think you must have
misread my posts, because I am not aware that I have 'lambasted' Tony
in the past 24 hours.
fredi...@googlemail.com
> I am not 'sucking up to Holland' as you put it. Tony has been very
> helpful to me, and has offered me some sound advice over the past few
> years. It is natural that I should have respect for Tony, despite what
> you say about him and your crude insults. I think you must have
> misread my posts, because I am not aware that I have 'lambasted' Tony
> in the past 24 hours.
Fun isnt it Mike, I too am not aware of any misunderstandings between
you and I, or for that matter any problems what so ever....By the way
for whats its worth, I think that story is about Philip Nash and for
aguy who is over 50 to be marring a 16 yr old sorta tells you the kind
of guy he is....not just a regualr looney, but a real sickoe.
Joe Lee
> On Apr 13, 12:50 am, frediesm...@googlemail.com wrote:
>> On 13 Apr, 00:57, parel...@googlemail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Never mind, at least you came third. There must be some website
>>>> that will recognise this. Unfortunately, your own doesn't qualify
>>>> as "the disjointed ramblings of a self-interested party".
>>
>> Mike I lost track of the bits in this thread, are we talking about
>> that idiot Joe Lee...or the schizophrenic Philip Nash, (aka, the
>> janitor of lunacy) neither are much cop, but both can be used as
>> cannon fodder to express further material thru.
>
> Tony, I don't understand either of these guys, Joe Lee and Philip
> Nash. I have tried to answer their questions as fully as possible, but
> they don't seem satisfied and just carry on with their previous
> opinions. I think you are probably right, and that neither of these
> two are going to make any useful contributions.
I have stated my position & purposefully couched it in moderate terms, if
you are dissatisfied with that, I will happily appraise you with my more
concise & blunt opinon of you if that's what you require.
BTW who is Philip Nash ?
I think you will one day discover you are being manipulated - perhaps not
for the first time in your life though !!
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
.
>
> BTW who is Philip Nash ?
> I think you will one day discover you are being manipulated - perhaps not
> for the first time in your life though !!
See Joe, a healthy paranioa is ok, it becomes un healthy when you dont
realise that this is not the real world, let me tell you something
this is only a forum, it allows a message to be got out, and mentally
disturbed folk like you and the many names others use is of no
concern, both sides get a high, some clown from thinking hes having
fun with chickens who dont know whats happening and the other side
from getting the message out.....hope this helps you understand, look
upon me as a God Joe, you'll feel better.
Joe Lee
> On 13 Apr, 00:57, parel...@googlemail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Never mind, at least you came third. There must be some website
>>> that will recognise this. Unfortunately, your own doesn't qualify
>>> as "the disjointed ramblings of a self-interested party".
>
> Mike I lost track of the bits in this thread,
Don't worry about it Tony, it's not at all unusual for dyslexics (such as
yourself) to be unable to follow even the simplest of discussions within a
text based medium such as this.
Once you recognise & accept your disability, then you should be able to work
within the confines of it & learn not to overstretch yourself.
Failing that your disability will come to totally dominate your life & lead
you to continually stumble along as you are doing now.
The good news though is that once you are able to accept your handicap there
is no reason why you should not to be able to express yourself clearly.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> The good news though is that once you are able to accept your handicap there
> is no reason why you should not to be able to express yourself clearly.
Thats why I like you Joe, youre so disturbing intelligent, not for you
the humdrum life of a pleb eh, you re my knight in shining armor,
riding to the rescue of those less intellectually endowed than
yourself, can I ask one little question though, have you really found
anyone who is less intellectually able than yourself...pls keep me
inform of your progress.
Joe Lee
Given your handicap you would do better to express yourself in words of one
syllable Tony, at least then you might become comprehensible.
I realise you're trying to be a high achiever but you need to work within
the constraints of your disability.
--
Joe Lee
Joe Lee
It's nothing to do with intellect Tony - it's all to do with having a
disabilty - but then you can't seem to grasp that you are actually
habdicapped.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
>
> Given your handicap you would do better to express yourself in words of one
> syllable Tony, at least then you might become comprehensible.
> I realise you're trying to be a high achiever but you need to work within
> the constraints of your disability.
Oh dear Joe...and heres me thinking you are an honourable ethical man,
you know decent, kind and caring, and instead here you are openly
mocking disability, sorta says alot about you Joe and why you work
*night shift* of the top of my head is it possible that your near and
dear ones dont like you anywhere near them and everyone is happy when
they dont see very much of you. As for me, I love you , and I forgive
you, I understand that you have something wrong with you, but, hey,
I'll humor you.
Joe Lee
> On 13 Apr, 13:22, "Joe Lee" <inva...@no.address> wrote:
>
>>
>> Given your handicap you would do better to express yourself in words
>> of one syllable Tony, at least then you might become comprehensible.
>> I realise you're trying to be a high achiever but you need to work
>> within the constraints of your disability.
>
> Oh dear Joe...and heres me thinking you are an honourable ethical man,
Well, at least you got that right.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
I did...wow, can u tell me how.
pare...@googlemail.com
both Joe and the Janitor appear to have a streak in them of wanting to
kick a man when he's down. I've always wanted to help when I can, as
we should feel good about what we are doing in this world - otherwise
what's the point of getting involved with other people.
fredi...@googlemail.com
As you say Mike....Joe Lee mocks a disability, and Philip Nash (aka
The jaunitor) well who can understand him, cept of course his rants
about being a secret agent, a member of the royal family, abarrister
an MP and the list goes on, but lets face who really cares what he
say, lets humor him, or pity him.
Joe Lee
Certainly, you have moments of aberration as when just a few days ago you
said I was "a nasty evil bastard", but then you recognise just how badly you
over-reacted to the most Innocouos comments & finally settle upon what you
know to be my true disposition.
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
I can hardly wait,can you enlighten me Joe and tell me what i am
supposed to know...about *your true disposition*
Joe Lee
No, only you can be held to account for yourself.
HTH
--
Joe Lee
fredi...@googlemail.com
Your shy Joe, dont be, I dont have my white coat on today, so feel
free to tell me all your dreams and fantasies, who knows maybe I can
make some of them come true
pare...@googlemail.com
of this thread. I thought somebody would have picked up on the point
that as Howard Smith was working for the KGB he would have helped me
to regain my security clearance, if I had also been working for the
KGB.
Alternatively, was it possible that Stella Rimington had played some
part in enabling me to get that job at EMI Electronics in 1976, and
access to secret material - could she have been working for the KGB?
Or was it simple bungling by her and her team?
pare...@googlemail.com
No replies ??? I guess that means that both Howard Smith and Stella
Rimington were KGB assets!
pare...@googlemail.com
Seems like I won that argument then.