PATRICK HUMPHREY - HOUSTON, PROCHOICE, LIBERTARIAN STALKER

Rack Jite

unread,

Sep 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM9/29/97

to

Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
stalk me at home.

Mr. Humphrey refuses to stop under any condition. Recently I
unilaterally stated that I would remove his name from my website, and
make no mention of him anywhere at all to see if he would reciprocate,
stop this battle and prove to everyone he is not the stalker I claim
him to be. The day after I publicly posted that message, he was
replying to my issue oriented messages including what he presumes my
name and where I live, and has proceeded to do so over the two weeks
since.

Though Rice University has sent me a letter of apology for the actions
of Mr. Humphrey and Rice Legal Department no longer allows him to use
his employee account as a base for stalking me, he now uses a paid
service to carry on his pyschotic obsession with me. As most anything
goes with ISPs, it leaves me few options to deal with this little
netscab. As literally thousands of liberals have been intimitated out
of the political newsgroups because of this onerous game, I am going
to fight it.

Though I cannot reply with this message every time he invades my
privacy (which would be serveral times a day more days than not), I
will post these IN CONTEXT direct quotes of his a few times a week
until he stops.

Note that these few quotes below are only about .01% of the totality
of the crap this Squealing little stalker has been so proudly posting
for what he readily admits is FOURTEEN YEARS.

I know this is irritating to many of you, but it is the only way I
have of fighting back. This issue of privacy is the central issue of
the net. All he has to do is stop and I will never address, mention or
think about him ever again. But sadly, he is obsessed to such a
degree, it is impossible for him. If this irritates you all you have
to do is tell him to stop the stalking and the squealing and it's
over.

A few direct quotes from the pro-Choice, Houston Libertarian, Squealer
and Loser Patrick Humphrey confirming his threats and stalking:

--Patrick L. 'a grandfather to be -- and any congratulations from a
sick little asshole named Peter Nyikos will be returned with a grenade
with a pulled pin' Humphrey

--PLH, and people wonder why I occasionally pedal by Dahlman's house
to give him the one-finger salute...

Oh...and you need to trim the mustache...
--Patrick L. ‘El Lago, April 9, about 14:35 remember me?’ Humphrey"

You need to clean up the toys in your driveway...
--Patrick L. "Dave can't stand that I know where he lives" Humphrey

I guess it's just an amazing coincidence, then, that the pictures on
your home page just happen to bear an uncanny resemblance to the
fellow out in front of your listed address when I came down the street
one afternoon three weeks ago...
--Patrick L. 'coming by again in two weeks' Humphrey

"I don't think so, because you don't resemble me at all...and that
much I know from personal experience, after two weekends ago.
--Patrick L. ‘it was a worthwhile 88 miles spent’ Humphrey

Be sure to understand this is about the sixth occasion this squealer
has been to what he presumes to be my home... Rack Jite

---Try *fourth* --Patrick L. 'bout time to put on the Spandex and
pedal over that way :-)’Humphrey"

The tire swing in front of your house...
--Patrick L. "still pedaling" Humphrey

Thanks to a gutless bastard in the Houston suburbs named David F.
Dahlman, you mean. And I never claimed there was a tire swing in your
front yard, liar. Your _neighbor's_ yard, yes -- and that was
something like three years ago, too. Are you going to state that your
yard is in the same state of being cluttered now as it was three years
ago?--Patrick L. "14 days, tick tick tick, heh heh" Humphrey

I've pedaled by his house three or four times, and one time, just by
dumb luck, he and his family happened to be outside.
--Patrick L. Humphrey

--Patrick L. better hide, 'Shawn' -- less than two months to my visit
to Austin :-) Humphrey

Hey, S. Shawn...now that you're in the DFW area, you'll have to hide
under your bed again, because we're going to be up there next weekend
--PLH, six days and rolling

---Sad, but true, but at least it'll be a bit easier than I thought to
encounter "Shawn" when I'm in Austin next month--Patrick L. Humphrey

---No, it's more like you're in your own little world out there in the
Houston suburbs. --Patrick L. "17 days and pedaling" Humphrey

--Patrick L. "I think I just guaranteed myself a smooth pedal down to
the Island" Humphrey

It figures a foreigner like you couldn't.... Personally, I'd just as
soon you go back to whatever underprivileged neighborhood in the U.S.
you got booted out of -- the farther away from Texas, the better.
That is _my_ opinion.
--Patrick L. and it can be yours, but it'll cost ya big time Humphrey

You lie like a rug, "Shawn". Pointing out that Dahlman lives across
town from me -- so what? ...I have NEVER posted the name on his
mailbox (another interesting claim, since you think his mailbox is on
the street, and it isn't -- no one's is, in that area, and in a LOT of
areas all over Houston), and I pointed out the appearance of his yard
*two years ago*, Get back to me when you can write something
original, "Shawn". Meanwhile, go cower under your bed, since I'm only
37 days away from being in the same city as you.
--Patrick L. "just thought I'd say that" Humphrey

Besides, I'm going to be pedaling by, less than five miles away, on
the morning of March 30

--Patrick L. "pull!" Humphrey

--PLH, I'll deal with Shawn on the 30th, heh heh heh

Better run and hide, S. Shawn. I may be in -your- neighborhood.
--PLH, I've got a Bat Attitude.

It's funny, though, that at one time, Jimbo had FOUR phone lines
listed under his name at one address -- and then, all of a
sudden, he's down to ONE line at a different address that is actually
an apartment complex. Yeah, I know a LOT of people who move an entire
family from a house to a cracker-box apartment...--PLH

---
If you are interested in where Mr. Humphrey sits at hockey games, what
intersections he passes on his bike, his obsession with stalking
liberals and Prolifers or the names of any of the little gang of
losers who defend his 14 years of stalking and squealing, just punch
his name into DEJA.

Picture and more info on this abject loser at:
http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/squealer.htm

---
I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
--------------------------------------------
Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/

Ray Fischer

unread,

Sep 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM9/29/97

to

Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
>following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing

Are you _still_ following him around whining about how he's stalking
you? Ignore him and he'll go away.

--
Ray Fischer
r...@netcom.com

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Sep 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM9/29/97

to

In article <343053...@ihatespam.com> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> writes:

>Rack Jite wrote:

>> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
>> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
>> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
>> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
>> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
>> stalk me at home.

><spam deleted>

>How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
>Patrick, at least post something original.

What, Dave Dahlman? *original*? He hasn't had an original thing to say about
me (or anything truthful, come to think of it) for going on fourteen years,
now. Just let worldnet.att.net know about his inappropriate crossposting if
he gets obnoxious about it, even if that gives him the attention he obviously
can't get in any other way...

--PLH, Dave makes a good football in Usenet, but not much else

Lou Minatti

unread,

Sep 29, 1997, 3:00:00 AM9/29/97

to

Rack Jite wrote:
>
> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
> stalk me at home.

How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
Patrick, at least post something original.

--
Come to... the glamorous world of Michael Pollack.
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/POLLACK.HTM

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Sep 30, 1997, 3:00:00 AM9/30/97

to

In article <3440b90d....@netnews.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

>*Rack Jite wrote:

>*> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
>*> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
>*> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
>*> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
>*> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
>*> stalk me at home.
>*<spam deleted>

>*How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
>*Patrick, at least post something original.

>Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.

...or until you run away and then claim you were thrown out of this newsgroup.
(After all, this is hardly the first time you've made such "promises", Dave.)
In other words, you're admitting that you *can't* not respond to me. Thanks
for coming clean on that, so people can handle you accordingly.

So, tell me, Dave -- what are you going to do on the afternoon of October 19?
There will be something like a thousand people on bikes passing by within a
mile of your little neighborhood...should I wear Kevlar, just in case you
decide one of them is actually me? :-)

--PLH, who has a feeling that hell is about to experience a cold wave

Sunshine

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

In article <3440b90d....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
rack...@worldnet.att.net says...

>
>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...
>
>*Rack Jite wrote:
>*>

>*> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has
been
>*> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
>*> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may
live.

>*> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
>*> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
>*> stalk me at home.
>*<spam deleted>
>*
>*How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
>*Patrick, at least post something original.
>
>Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.
>

>---
> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
>of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
> --------------------------------------------
>Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/
>

Jack

I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How are
things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick on
that nice Mr. Humphery again?

Sunshine

--
Sunshine for Women (and Men Who Love Women)
http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/main.html
remove antispam. from e-mail address to reply or
just enter suns...@pinn.net

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

*Rack Jite wrote:
*>
*> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
*> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
*> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
*> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
*> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
*> stalk me at home.
*<spam deleted>
*
*How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
*Patrick, at least post something original.

Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.

---

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

In article <60shva$q...@netaxs.com> suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) writes:

(to our good buddy, Dave Dahlman :)

>Jack

>I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
>almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How are
>things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick on
>that nice Mr. Humphery again?

Don't worry -- even if he does, there's not much he could do to me in any
case. Now that it's October, though -- what *can* we get him for his
birthday? :-)

--PLH, I -would- have to be out of town on the 31st, too

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

A new garden gnome--Sparky Jr.!

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

In article <343236...@ihatespam.com> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> writes:

>Patrick L. Humphrey wrote:

>> In article <60shva$q...@netaxs.com> suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) writes:

>> (to our good buddy, Dave Dahlman :)

>> >I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
>> >almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How are
>> >things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick on
>> >that nice Mr. Humphery again?

>> Don't worry -- even if he does, there's not much he could do to me in any
>> case. Now that it's October, though -- what *can* we get him for his
>> birthday? :-)

>A new garden gnome--Sparky Jr.!

Damn. Why didn't *I* think of that?

Maybe a new garden hose, too...guess we should meet out at the Garden Ridge
Pottery out your way and do this right, eh? :-)

--PLH, of course, we could always go for a few flamingos, too...

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

In article <3432EF...@ihatespam.com> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> writes:

>Rack Jite wrote:

[...]

>> Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.

Dyslexics of the world, untie!

>So you that you're abusing Usenet, annoying others in the newsgroups you
>participate in and wasting bandwidth?

Admit it? Hell, he's PROUD of it!

--PLH, how else could he get any attention?

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/1/97

to

Rack Jite wrote:
>
> Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...
>
> *Rack Jite wrote:
> *>
> *> Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
> *> following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
> *> little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.
> *> It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of
> *> privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically
> *> stalk me at home.
> *<spam deleted>
> *
> *How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
> *Patrick, at least post something original.
>

> Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.

So you that you're abusing Usenet, annoying others in the newsgroups you

participate in and wasting bandwidth?

--

Come to... the glamorous world of Michael Pollack.
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/POLLACK.HTM

"Nah nah nah, gonna have a good time!"

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

r...@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) was saying...

*Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
*>Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
*>following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
*
*Are you _still_ following him around whining about how he's stalking
*you? Ignore him and he'll go away.
*Ray Fischer

RAY! Didn't you read the message? I just did ignore him for 10 days to
show yall that he doesn't go away! I have ignored him for months at a
time, for a year, nothing works, he replies to my messages that have
nothing to do with him, HE JUST DID IT HERE! Seldom if ever do his
replies have nothing to do with any issue other than what my name may

be and where I may live.

This was to show you that it just happened RIGHT HERE in front of yer
nose. And you still deny it. This is what I mean, everyone who has
come to the defense of this shitcan little squealing stalker has been
a whinney little netscab LOSER, like you...

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

In article <34381b83...@netnews.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
>r...@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) was saying...

>*Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>*>Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
>*>following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing

>*Are you _still_ following him around whining about how he's stalking
>*you? Ignore him and he'll go away.
>*Ray Fischer

>RAY! Didn't you read the message? I just did ignore him for 10 days to
>show yall that he doesn't go away! I have ignored him for months at a
>time, for a year, nothing works, he replies to my messages that have
>nothing to do with him, HE JUST DID IT HERE! Seldom if ever do his

>replies have nothing to do with any issue other than what my name may

>be and where I may live.

I reply to posts of yours that have nothing to do with me? Oh, the humanity.
Did it ever occur to you, Dave, that you don't determine who responds to what
you post? That's a pretty pathetic excuse -- even for you. While we're on
that tack, though, if you've ignored me for such long periods of time, how is
it I was supposedly "following" you around? That's an interesting claim to
make, if for no other reason than that I made my first post to a Usenet
newsgroup five years before you showed up. (Please cut out the patent
bullshit about what your name *may* be, and just own up to the fact that you
can't stand having someone around who was present when you, for once, had
enough guts to actually use your real name. You've wasted fourteen years
tilting at a non-existent windmill -- are you proud of that?)

>This was to show you that it just happened RIGHT HERE in front of yer
>nose. And you still deny it. This is what I mean, everyone who has
>come to the defense of this shitcan little squealing stalker has been
>a whinney little netscab LOSER, like you...

That's really funny, Dave -- from what I've seen, people weren't standing up
for me, just asking you why you're so obsessed with me you can't see
straight. I'm sure you've really chastised Ray, though -- after all, he's
only been around here since a few years before you showed up, so it's only
natural that you'd assume he's in league with me.

Oh, well...have fun on the 19th. I'll be sure and wave at you from atop the
bridge. :-)

--PLH, one of the thousand-plus on bikes who will be pedaling through the area
that day

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

In article <343c96c7...@netnews.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

>*> *How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about

>*> *Patrick, at least post something original.

>*> Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.

>*So you that you're abusing Usenet, annoying others in the newsgroups you
>*participate in and wasting bandwidth?

>Because at present, with the squealing, stalking and invasion of
>privacy laws being mostly ineffective (though that is changing) I have
>no other way of fighting you little netscab losers on USENET.

How am I invading your privacy, Dave? All I've done is state what you
yourself provided, and what is a matter of public record. Your whole "privacy
for me but not for anyone who disagrees with me!" shtick is pure bullshit.
Face it -- you want to silence me because I remember you posting under your
real name fourteen years ago.

>And for every message of mine you claim is wasting bandwidth, you, the
>Stalker and your little gang of losers waste more bandwidth in reply
>than I do in posting... So you don't give a rats ass about that at all
>do ya Lou. What you care about is when my birthday is, where I live,
>what my name may be, when Humphrey is coming by my home again and
>reenforcing your little gang of netscab squealers... It's so cool...
>Yer so cool... :)

You're a goddamned idiot, Dave. I couldn't care less who you are or what you
are -- but the fact that you're so paranoid about anyone knowing who you are,
that it's driven you to lie, and lie, and keep on lying for fourteen years,
until you've reached the point where you're proud of your lying, gives me a
little incentive to merely mention simple public facts about you and watch you
jerk your knee so hard you knock some more of your own teeth loose.
Meanwhile, out here in reality, the cold, hard facts are: there is no little
gang of "netscab squealers" -- that exists soloely in your diseased
imagination, Dave; no one gives a damn about you or your mental problems, at
least not as far as Usenet is concerned; and since when did I say I'd be
stupid enough to be coming by your house? I stated the fact that there will
be quite a few people pedaling through in your vicinity on the 19th -- but
where did I state that the ride route would be right down your little street?
I didn't. (Maybe that's because it isn't, eh?) Come on, Dave -- you make
noises about shooting me (or who you think is me) if you see me pedaling by,
and you think I'm going to pedal down a street on which a lunatic like *that*
lives?

October 19 is 17 days away, Dave. With any luck, maybe you'll be living in
Rusk by then.

--PLH, who's out to pedal, not dodge bullets

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

*> *How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
*> *Patrick, at least post something original.
*>
*> Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.
*
*So you that you're abusing Usenet, annoying others in the newsgroups you
*participate in and wasting bandwidth?

Because at present, with the squealing, stalking and invasion of
privacy laws being mostly ineffective (though that is changing) I have
no other way of fighting you little netscab losers on USENET.

And for every message of mine you claim is wasting bandwidth, you, the

Stalker and your little gang of losers waste more bandwidth in reply
than I do in posting... So you don't give a rats ass about that at all
do ya Lou. What you care about is when my birthday is, where I live,
what my name may be, when Humphrey is coming by my home again and
reenforcing your little gang of netscab squealers... It's so cool...
Yer so cool... :)

---

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) was saying...

*I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
*almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How are
*things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick on
*that nice Mr. Humphery again?

Why do you and the Stalker care when my birthday is, how old I am,
what my name may be or where I live? Why do you think you and the
Stalker spend most of your time posting that information while I don't
care one wit what your real name may be, where you live, how old you
may be or when your birthday is?

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

Rack Jite wrote:
>
> Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...
>
> *> *How many times are you gonna post this? If you're gonna whine about
> *> *Patrick, at least post something original.
> *>
> *> Unitl either the squealing stalker walks away or hell feezes over.
> *
> *So you that you're abusing Usenet, annoying others in the newsgroups you
> *participate in and wasting bandwidth?
>
> Because at present, with the squealing, stalking and invasion of
> privacy laws being mostly ineffective (though that is changing) I have
> no other way of fighting you little netscab losers on USENET.

I think you're just spamming for your website. Fill those orders, Sue! I
find it interesting that Patrick hadn't posted a thing to you on
houston.general for almost 2 weeks, then all of a sudden here comes
another robo-spam from you. At least make your robo-spams original.

> And for every message of mine you claim is wasting bandwidth, you, the
> Stalker and your little gang of losers waste more bandwidth in reply
> than I do in posting... So you don't give a rats ass about that at all
> do ya Lou. What you care about is when my birthday is, where I live,
> what my name may be, when Humphrey is coming by my home again and

What do you mean what it "may" be? Your real name is the worst-kept
secret on Usenet.

> reenforcing your little gang of netscab squealers... It's so cool...
> Yer so cool... :)

And yer spamming schtick is so boring.

Ray Fischer

unread,

Oct 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/2/97

to

Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>r...@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) was saying...
>*Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>*>Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
>*>following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
>*

>*Are you _still_ following him around whining about how he's stalking
>*you? Ignore him and he'll go away.
>*Ray Fischer
>
>RAY! Didn't you read the message? I just did ignore him for 10 days to
>show yall that he doesn't go away! I have ignored him for months at a
>time, for a year, nothing works, he replies to my messages that have
>nothing to do with him, HE JUST DID IT HERE!

Which doubtless explains why I've seen several threads started by you
complaining about Humphrey.

--
Ray Fischer
r...@netcom.com

Sunshine

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

In article <343b95a2...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
rack...@worldnet.att.net says...

>
>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

>suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) was saying...
>
>
>*I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
>*almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How
are
>*things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick
on
>*that nice Mr. Humphery again?
>
>Why do you and the Stalker care when my birthday is, how old I am,

>what my name may be or where I live?

I just thought you'd like your net friends to help you celebrate the
annual milestone in your life. I enjoy getting birthday greetings from
my friends. Why don't you like getting birthday greeting about yours?
Are you sensitive about your age or something?

> Why do you think you and the
>Stalker spend most of your time posting

Really, I don't spend "most of my time posting" anything about you,
Jack.

> that information while I don't
>care one wit what your real name may be, where you live, how old you
>may be or when your birthday is?
>

Does this mean you aren't sending me birthday greeting for my birthday?

>---
> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
>of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
> --------------------------------------------
>Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/
>

Sunshine

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

r...@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) was saying...

*Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
*>r...@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) was saying...

*>*Rack Jite <rack...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
*

*>*>Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been
*>*>following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing
*>*

*>*Are you _still_ following him around whining about how he's stalking

*>*you? Ignore him and he'll go away.
*>*Ray Fischer
*>
*>RAY! Didn't you read the message? I just did ignore him for 10 days to
*>show yall that he doesn't go away! I have ignored him for months at a
*>time, for a year, nothing works, he replies to my messages that have
*>nothing to do with him, HE JUST DID IT HERE!
*
*Which doubtless explains why I've seen several threads started by you
*complaining about Humphrey.
*
*--
*Ray Fischer
*r...@netcom.com

Yer so screwed up you glow Ray... :)
Yer a shoe in for the netscab crowd though hey?

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

*I think you're just spamming for your website. Fill those orders, Sue! I
*find it interesting that Patrick hadn't posted a thing to you on
*houston.general for almost 2 weeks, then all of a sudden here comes
*another robo-spam from you. At least make your robo-spams original.

Thats a lie and you are a liar.

*> And for every message of mine you claim is wasting bandwidth, you, the
*> Stalker and your little gang of losers waste more bandwidth in reply
*> than I do in posting... So you don't give a rats ass about that at all
*> do ya Lou. What you care about is when my birthday is, where I live,
*> what my name may be, when Humphrey is coming by my home again and

*What do you mean what it "may" be? Your real name is the worst-kept
*secret on Usenet.

*> reenforcing your little gang of netscab squealers... It's so cool...
*> Yer so cool... :)

*And yer spamming schtick is so boring.

If you really gave a damn about spam Lou, you wouldn't perpetuate it
by replying to every single instance of it to keep it going.
Would ya? And if its so boring why are you not only reading it,
quoting it, but replying to it? Are you really as stupid as you
present yourself to be?

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Gotta keep the thread going...
Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor plant.

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) was saying...

*In article <343b95a2...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
*rack...@worldnet.att.net says...
*>
*>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
*>suns...@antispam.pinn.net (Sunshine) was saying...
*>
*>
*>*I'm so glad you are back. This ng has been without a flame war for
*>*almost a week! Imagine that. And with your birthday coming up. How
*are
*>*things at conservatively incorrect? I hope you are not going to pick
*on
*>*that nice Mr. Humphery again?
*>
*>Why do you and the Stalker care when my birthday is, how old I am,
*>what my name may be or where I live?
*
*I just thought you'd like your net friends to help you celebrate the
*annual milestone in your life. I enjoy getting birthday greetings from
*my friends. Why don't you like getting birthday greeting about yours?
*Are you sensitive about your age or something?
*
*> Why do you think you and the
*>Stalker spend most of your time posting
*
*Really, I don't spend "most of my time posting" anything about you,
*Jack.
*
*
*> that information while I don't
*>care one wit what your real name may be, where you live, how old you
*>may be or when your birthday is?
*>
*
*Does this mean you aren't sending me birthday greeting for my birthday?
*
*>---
*> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
*>of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
*> --------------------------------------------
*>Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/
*>
*
*Sunshine
*
*--
*Sunshine for Women (and Men Who Love Women)
*http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/main.html
*remove antispam. from e-mail address to reply or
*just enter suns...@pinn.net
*

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

Lou Minatti <slar...@concentric.net> was saying...

*Rack Jite wrote:
*>
*> Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

*> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...
*>
*> *I think you're just spamming for your website. Fill those orders, Sue! I
*> *find it interesting that Patrick hadn't posted a thing to you on
*> *houston.general for almost 2 weeks, then all of a sudden here comes
*> *another robo-spam from you. At least make your robo-spams original.
*>
*> Thats a lie and you are a liar.

*2. Patrick has indeed been silent for almost 2 weeks on houston.general,
*until you came along and posted your robo-spam. Others have also
*commented on this.

That is the lie. I did this specifically to show all of you little
netscabs that he would not stay silent that he would reply to any
issue oriented message I posted with his squealing and he did sp right
here in front of all of you. You are a liar.

heres are two that I saved just in case you would lie about this:

---
Path:
wn7!bgtf2!worldnet.att.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news.maxwell.syr.edu!mr.net!news.eden.com!news.io.com!not-for-mail
From: pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Newsgroups: houston.general
Subject: Re: Ron Paul
Date: 20 Sep 1997 02:34:32 -0500
Organization: Illuminati Online
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <szkn2l8...@xanadu.io.com>
References: <5vvqcc$4...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xanadu.io.com
X-Trace: nntp-2.io.com 874741628 1431 (None) 199.170.88.6
X-Complaints-To: use...@io.com
In-reply-to: rack...@worldnet.att.net's message of Sat, 20 Sep 1997
06:28:06
GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1

In article <5vvqcc$4...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>The much ballyhooed move of Representative Greg Laughlin from the
>Democrats to the Republicans after the Gingrich Revolution began, has
>now become reminiscent of X-Governor Buddy Roemer of Louisiana who
>showed that becoming a political traitor does not always bode well
>with the voters.

It obviously doesn't sit well with one Dave Dahlman of the greater
Houston
area. I don't think you're too interested in Laughlin's troubles,
though,
given your track record:

>Last month Laughlin lost the GOP primary here in Texas to Ron Paul.

Last month? The GOP primary was in May 1996 -- 16 months ago. What
planet
*are* you living on, Dave?

>Even though both father and son Shrubs of Texas, Noot, and the GOP
>loudly backed Laughlin. Remember Ron Paul? Another political traitor
>who quit Congress in the late 80's (because he thought the GOP too
>liberal) to become the presidential candidate of the Libertarian
>Party. Indeed, how could Texans pass on a guy who is a rabid pro-Life
>libertarian (strange as that may seem to those not schooled in LP
>irrationality) and all around right-wing bigoted moron.

Still sticking to your lies, Dave? What was Paul's position on
abortion,
anyway? He made no bones about being pro-life -- but did he favor
using the
power of the state to forbid it to women, or was that his *personal*
opinion?
Let's see if you have the balls to honestly answer that question, eh?

>My favorite crap from Ron Paul is his accusation that President
>Clinton is a "cocaine addict" which he says "explains a lot about
>him." No Ron, that kind of flat out libel explains more about you
than
>it does anyone else.

Would you mind providing a cite for this alleged quote? Anyone can
put a few
words between CHR$(34)s and claim someone said something...so where's
your
proof?

>Here are a few of this Libertarian Republican's views on race:

Libertarians aren't Republicans, Dave, no matter how desperately you
want to
have us believe they are.

>"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how
>unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

Do you have an actual cite for this alleged quote?

>"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks
>have sensible political opinions, i.e., support the free market,
>individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."

Once again, do you have a cite for this alleged quote?

>"Politically sensible blacks are outnumbered as decent people... I
>think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that
>city [Washington] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

Once again, do you have a cite for this alleged quote?

>"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of
>23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been
>raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big,
>strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated
>as such."

Once again, do you have a cite for this alleged quote?

>"By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the
>Israeli government and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to
>stifle criticism."

(All together now!) Once again, do you have a cite for this alleged
quote?

>Paul's district is so mud dumb conservative, he won the seat easily.
>Appendum: Paul's district covers Brazoria County which made national
>headlines lately with the video showing the abuse of prisoners.

It also poked its way into YOUR part of Harris County before the
re-districting...could that be why you're trotting out this particular
canned
rant again, 16 months later?

>(c)Conservatively Incorrect #38 July '96

Great timeliness, Dave. I can see why the Harris County Public
Library System
subsvcribes to your rag. (Or at least so you claim.) But, tell
me...why did
you post this to houston.general, and the same identical canned rant
separately to three other newsgroups? Worried that your ISP might
start
looking into your net abuse?

--PLH, sometimes, you gotta wonder
---
Number 2
---
Path:
wn5!worldnet.att.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!192.48.96.126!in2.uu.net!news.eden.com!news.io.com!not-for-mail
From: pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Newsgroups: houston.general
Subject: Re: Hispanic? was:LEE BROWN, a mayoral candidate in Houston
**
Date: 28 Sep 1997 07:34:10 -0500
Organization: Illuminati Online
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <szk67rl...@bermuda.io.com>
References: <33EE72...@neosoft.com> <341845...@flash.net>
<MPG.e82291f3...@news.texas.net>
<3418EF...@flash.net>
<5vc46p$ith$7...@news01.deltanet.com> <3419B9...@flash.net>
<341c293d...@news.dhc.net>
<5vi30m$a...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>
<01bcc3ee$7ee52330$c00e6dce@tendo_dojo>
<342180...@worldnet.att.net> <342404...@hal-pc.org>
<342B1...@ihatespam.com>
<34311883...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bermuda.io.com
X-Trace: nntp-2.io.com 875450872 9864 (None) 199.170.88.7
X-Complaints-To: use...@io.com
In-reply-to: rack...@worldnet.att.net's message of Sat, 27 Sep 1997
14:57:08
GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1

In article <34311883...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>
rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

>*We end up with these quandries when governments get in the business
of
>*counting people based on inconsequential things such as skin color.
It's
>*meaningless, but it gives bureaucrats something to do.

>The foremost lie from the Right. Done well too, twice there!

Hey, Dave, here's something different for you to do: demonstrate that
Lou's
opinion is a lie. (After all, you're known for being a rabid fan of
such
quixotic challenges.)

>Race has been the driving negative force in this nation's past and
>present. Our greatest war with more men dying than any other
concerned
>it. Slavery and Apartheid have been the single most immoral factor of
>American history.

Could it be possible that that's not exactly fact, but rather the
interpretation of one Dave Dahlman?

>We complain about public schools... Which schools, attended by mostly
>what color students? We talk about poverty... Where is it most
>pervasive and what color are they? We complain about crime, violence
>and drivebys... Where is that happening and what color are both the
>victims and perpetrators?

Why don't you tell us what you think the answers to all of your
"questions"
are first, Dave. After all, you're not known for asking any questions
you
haven't already assumed the answer for. Some of us know that well,
from
experience. (Just as a clue: what about the public schools in places
like,
say, Sioux Falls? What color predominates in the public-school
population
there? Careful...I *know* what the answer is. I'm not too sure
you'll admit
to the right answer in this instance, though.) Why are YOU so
preoccupied
with color, anyway? Most people I rub elbows with on a daily basis
have
learned to find more important things to be concerned with than what
color
someone is. I know it hasn't meant a whole lot to me for quite a few
years.
(Given your penchant for distortions, I'll say that I'm *not* saying
that
people of any given color don't mean much to me, but then, only
someone with a
set agenda like yours would be willing to interpret it that way,
anyway.)

>When the doorbell rings at a white door and it opens to a black face,
>what is the first word that comes to mind? "black". When the doorbell
>rings at a black door and it opens to a white face, what is the first
>word that comes to mind? "white"

Uh, Dave...did it ever occur to you that maybe that's just YOU that
reacts
that way? We don't all share your particular obsessions, thank "Bob".

>Race is 'meaningless' and race is 'inconsequential'.
>What a yuck...

That's what you usually say to anything that's too laden with common
sense for
you to accept.

>There are two overriding problems in America today. Racism and the
>growing disparity of wealth. And the conservatives and republicans
>RIGHT UP FRONT MAKING NO BONES ABOUT IT are in the business of making
>both worse. Proud of it too hey? :)

The increasingly uneven distribution of wealth may be a problem, but
what's
your solution? Take it away from those who have, and give to those
who
haven't? When you do that, what happens to the incentive to do
better?
As for racism, it's not dead yet, but it's a whole lot less virulent
than it
was in my childhood 30-odd years ago, I'd say. Attitudes that were
far too
common when I was growing up in Oklahoma would be met with outrage
today --
and I think that's a good thing.
As for "conservatives and republicans" allegedly doing their best to
make both
problems worse, you might want to try offering a little actual
evidence for
once. People are wise to your tactics by now, Dave.

>250 years of slavery, 100 years of Aparthied... Putting blacks way
>behind the starting line whites are at. How to compensate?
>Reperatations? 40 acres and a mule? Balkanization in to black
>homelands? No, a simple thing to try and move them up so they are on
>the same starting point. Affirmative Action for example.

...which in effect states that discrimination is fine and dandy *if*
it's
directed at one particular race. You're for ending discrimination --
by using
even *more* discrimination? I hate to tell you, Dave, but that's what
I'd
call a classic example of a counterproductive solution.

>But no, we are hellbent on removing AA and replacing it with NOTHING.
>Results? Less black faces in colleges, less black faces in law
>schools, less black faces in medical schools, less black faces in
>federal, state and local government jobs, less black faces vying for
>contracts...

Why not wait and see, rather than assuming your answer so you can
berate us
ahead of time, Dave?

>Race is meaningless and inconsequential??!!!
>Geez... What planet do you live on? Yeah, Rightwinglandia... :)

No, I'm in the 20th Century about 75 klicks away from you across town,
Dave.
Of course, you live in one of those little incorporated suburbs that's
historically been just about 100% white -- so would you welcome
non-whites
moving into *your* little enclave?

--PLH, wondering why Dave doesn't live in MY neighborhood, if he's so
concerned about what color people are...he'd find all he wants over
here in
Sharpstown.

--PLH, somehow, I have the feeling he'd rather vote Republican than
live
anywhere *in* the city limits of Houston...
--------

There you are Lou. Proof you are lieing and that you are a liar.
But not good enough for ya is it? :) Extended headers, the whole smear
and you are going to play around it some way or other arent you? :)
So this is that game. VERIFY! FOOTNOTE! EXTENEDED HEADERS YOU NETSCABS
SCREAM! Even if one bothers with it you will still deny it wont you?
So why bother in the first place? Just keep repeating your lies long
enough and they become true hey? Where did ya learn that? Yeah...
You little netscabs are such a yuck...

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

In article <343809f1...@netnews.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

>Lou Minatti <slar...@concentric.net> was saying...

[...]

>*2. Patrick has indeed been silent for almost 2 weeks on houston.general,
>*until you came along and posted your robo-spam. Others have also
>*commented on this.

>That is the lie. I did this specifically to show all of you little
>netscabs that he would not stay silent that he would reply to any
>issue oriented message I posted with his squealing and he did sp right
>here in front of all of you. You are a liar.

Right, Dave. I guess you know for a fact that Scott saw either one of those
articles. Trouble is, he might not have. There are some articles that I see
here at io.com that don't show up at rice.edu, and vice versa. But, since he
said I didn't post them but I did, you *know* he's lying?

Thanks for demonstrating once again that you're the one who's got the
obsession problem.

[remaining 330 lines of Dahlman's "proof", deleted]

--PLH, having fun watching Dave contine to haul himself up the gallows

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Rack Jite wrote:
<snip>

> *> *I think you're just spamming for your website. Fill those orders, Sue! I
> *> *find it interesting that Patrick hadn't posted a thing to you on
> *> *houston.general for almost 2 weeks, then all of a sudden here comes
> *> *another robo-spam from you. At least make your robo-spams original.
> *>
> *> Thats a lie and you are a liar.

Sell those bumperstickers and subscriptions. Did you get any book offers
yet?

> *2. Patrick has indeed been silent for almost 2 weeks on houston.general,
> *until you came along and posted your robo-spam. Others have also
> *commented on this.
>
> That is the lie. I did this specifically to show all of you little
> netscabs that he would not stay silent that he would reply to any
> issue oriented message I posted with his squealing and he did sp right
> here in front of all of you. You are a liar.
>
> heres are two that I saved just in case you would lie about this:

The first message you posted was indeed 2 weeks old. As for the second
post, yeah, that was from the 28th. He used your real name. Big deal.
Patrick asked some valid questions. That's the one where you said, "When

the doorbell rings at a white door and it opens to a black face, what is

the first word that comes to mind? "black"." Maybe in the "negro"-free
neighborhood you live in. Maybe in your household. But not in mine. Why
don't you just ignore Patrick if he bothers you so much, instead of
sending the same old tired robo-spams? If he's as bad as you say he is,
I'm sure everyone's on your side of this issue. Right?

BTW, why bother saving those posts when you can just go to Dejanews?

And did you get around to answering Patrick's question: Can you verify
those quotes you posted?

> There you are Lou. Proof you are lieing and that you are a liar.
> But not good enough for ya is it? :) Extended headers, the whole smear
> and you are going to play around it some way or other arent you? :)

Sue's getting ready to wet his panties... here it comes....

> So this is that game. VERIFY! FOOTNOTE! EXTENEDED HEADERS YOU NETSCABS
> SCREAM! Even if one bothers with it you will still deny it wont you?
> So why bother in the first place? Just keep repeating your lies long
> enough and they become true hey? Where did ya learn that? Yeah...
> You little netscabs are such a yuck...

I hope you feel better now.

> ---
> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
> of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
> --------------------------------------------
> Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/

Keep on selling those products! <g>

--
The Sonnier Brothers Band:
http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/SONNIER.HTM

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Rack Jite wrote:
>
> Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

> Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

>
> *I think you're just spamming for your website. Fill those orders, Sue! I

> *find it interesting that Patrick hadn't posted a thing to you on

> *houston.general for almost 2 weeks, then all of a sudden here comes

> *another robo-spam from you. At least make your robo-spams original.
>

> Thats a lie and you are a liar.

Which point is a lie?

1. You sell your products via your web site - bumperstickers and
newsletters.

2. Patrick has indeed been silent for almost 2 weeks on houston.general,

until you came along and posted your robo-spam. Others have also

commented on this.

> *> And for every message of mine you claim is wasting bandwidth, you, the
> *> Stalker and your little gang of losers waste more bandwidth in reply
> *> than I do in posting... So you don't give a rats ass about that at all
> *> do ya Lou. What you care about is when my birthday is, where I live,
> *> what my name may be, when Humphrey is coming by my home again and
>
> *What do you mean what it "may" be? Your real name is the worst-kept
> *secret on Usenet.
>
> *> reenforcing your little gang of netscab squealers... It's so cool...
> *> Yer so cool... :)
>
> *And yer spamming schtick is so boring.
>
> If you really gave a damn about spam Lou, you wouldn't perpetuate it
> by replying to every single instance of it to keep it going.

I never thought I'd see you admitting that your posts are spams. Well,
at least you're honest about it.

> Would ya? And if its so boring why are you not only reading it,
> quoting it, but replying to it? Are you really as stupid as you
> present yourself to be?

Over the years you and I have corresponded, I'll wager more people have
asked you that question.

Lou Minatti

unread,

Oct 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/3/97

to

Sunshine wrote:
>
> In article <343881df....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> rack...@worldnet.att.net says...

> >
> >Gotta keep the thread going...
> >Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor plant.
>

> The sentence just above this line is utterly incoherent.

Yup, that's a head-scratcher, alright.

Sunshine

unread,

Oct 4, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/4/97

to

In article <343881df....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
rack...@worldnet.att.net says...
>
>Gotta keep the thread going...
>Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor plant.

The sentence just above this line is utterly incoherent.

Sunshine

PS. Does this mean I don't get birthday greetings?

>
>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

>---
> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
>of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
> --------------------------------------------
>Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/
>

--

Sunshine for Women (and Men Who Love Women)

http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/main.html

remove antispam. from e-mail address to reply or

just enter suns...@pinn.net

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 4, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/4/97

to

Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was

Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

*Sunshine wrote:
*>
*> In article <343881df....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
*> rack...@worldnet.att.net says...
*> >
*> >Gotta keep the thread going...
*> >Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor plant.
*>
*> The sentence just above this line is utterly incoherent.
*
*Yup, that's a head-scratcher, alright.
*
*--
*The Sonnier Brothers Band:
*http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/SONNIER.HTM
*"Nah nah nah, gonna have a good time!"

Either you or Sunshine got anything to talk about but me there Lou?
Sunshine is at the 100% Rack Jite level, you are only at about 88%.
You need to do some catching up Lou!

Let me try that statement again for yall...

Gotta keep the thread going...

Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor mole.

Max

unread,

Oct 4, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/4/97

to

Sunshine wrote:

> >Let me try that statement again for yall...
> >
> >Gotta keep the thread going...
> >Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor mole.
> >
>

> Actually, I just try to keep the conversation to a level that you can
> understand.

> PS. Does this mean I don't get any birthday greetings?

>
> Sunshine for Women (and Men Who Love Women)
> http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/main.html
> remove antispam. from e-mail address to reply or
> just enter suns...@pinn.net

Checked out your homepage, Sunshine. Very attractive. I am stumped by
one entry under Feminist Forefathers. How does one become more equal?

Max

Sunshine

unread,

Oct 4, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/4/97

to

In article <615gvi$6...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
rack...@worldnet.att.net says...

>
>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...
>
>*Sunshine wrote:
>*>
>*> In article <343881df....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>*> rack...@worldnet.att.net says...
>*> >
>*> >Gotta keep the thread going...
>*> >Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor plant.
>*>
>*> The sentence just above this line is utterly incoherent.
>*
>*Yup, that's a head-scratcher, alright.
>*
>*--
>*The Sonnier Brothers Band:
>*http://www.concentric.net/~slaroche/SONNIER.HTM
>*"Nah nah nah, gonna have a good time!"
>
>Either you or Sunshine got anything to talk about but me there Lou?
>Sunshine is at the 100% Rack Jite level, you are only at about 88%.
>You need to do some catching up Lou!
>

>Let me try that statement again for yall...
>
>Gotta keep the thread going...
>Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor mole.
>

Actually, I just try to keep the conversation to a level that you can
understand.

Sunshine

PS. Does this mean I don't get any birthday greetings?

>---

> I suppose I can understand the selfish callous disregard
>of conservatives, it's their pride in it that passes me by.
> --------------------------------------------
>Conservatively Incorrect http://www.dragonfire.net/~RJ/
>

--

Sunshine

unread,

Oct 5, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/5/97

to

In article <343724...@hal-pc.org>, maxt...@hal-pc.org says...

>
>Sunshine wrote:
>
>> >Let me try that statement again for yall...
>> >
>> >Gotta keep the thread going...
>> >Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor mole.
>> >
>>
>> Actually, I just try to keep the conversation to a level that you
can
>> understand.
>

>> PS. Does this mean I don't get any birthday greetings?
>>

>> Sunshine for Women (and Men Who Love Women)
>> http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/main.html
>> remove antispam. from e-mail address to reply or
>> just enter suns...@pinn.net
>

>Checked out your homepage, Sunshine. Very attractive. I am stumped
by
>one entry under Feminist Forefathers. How does one become more equal?
>
>Max

Thanks for the nice words. I hope you enjoyed feminist forefathers as
well as the rest of the cite.

Sunshine

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 5, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/5/97

to

In article <34398255....@netnews.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

[...]

>If you really gave a damn about spam Lou, you wouldn't perpetuate it
>by replying to every single instance of it to keep it going.

>Would ya? And if its so boring why are you not only reading it,
>quoting it, but replying to it? Are you really as stupid as you
>present yourself to be?

Not anywhere as near as stupid as you are, Dave -- you just in effect admitted
that you *are* spamming four newsgroups. I wonder how many copies of this
will be finding their way to ab...@worldnet.att.net?

If you gave a goddamn about anything but your own hallucinations, Dave, you'd
shut up and sell your computer. You're too stupid to do that, though, I
think. Therefore, accept your fate: you're going to silence yourself.
Keep it up, so you can achieve an entry in the Global Killfile...:-)

--PLH, having fun watching Dahlman destroy what's left of his credibility

Patrick L. Humphrey

unread,

Oct 5, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/5/97

to

In article <615gvi$6...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> rack...@worldnet.att.net (Rack Jite) writes:

>Comes Rack Jite's conservatively incorrect reply to whatever it was
>Lou Minatti <slar...@ihatespam.com> was saying...

>Either you or Sunshine got anything to talk about but me there Lou?

Dave, you really *are* getting tiresome with your arrogance -- if you don't
want people responding to your posts, why do you post in the first place?

>Sunshine is at the 100% Rack Jite level, you are only at about 88%.
>You need to do some catching up Lou!

You need to burn your computer, Dave, and go out and live in the real world.
(And quit spamming four newsgroups with your scam designed to rake in a few
pennies for your toilet-paper rag.)

>Let me try that statement again for yall...

>Gotta keep the thread going...
>Boy are you either the dumbest broad is what am, or a poor mole.

That's really a crushing indictment, coming from the most blatant hypocrite,
liar, and generally worthless bastard I've encountered in fourteen years
online.

I'm gonna have *fun* with you the 19th, schmuck.

--PLH, kicking the timber out from under the gallows

Rack Jite

unread,

Oct 6, 1997, 3:00:00 AM10/6/97

to

Understand the purpose here. For 14 years this abject loser has been

following me around to every BBS and network I have been on doing

little else than squealing what my name may be and where I may live.

It is a probably the most classic case on the net of invasion of

privacy and cyberspace stalking which has lead to him physically

stalk me at home.