More on Betty Brod.erick
Michael Newton
>
> >From: Michael Newton <eyeo...@worldnet.att.net>
> >Newsgroups: alt.true-crime
>
> >> 1. That I am a Catholic.
>
> >Although a separate post from Kenny denied he is a Christian.
>
> Yes Mikey in the PROTESTANT
You've never denied being "PROTESTANT," Kenny ... although I take that
for granted if you claim to be Catholic. Your statement was: "Me a
Christian? NO WAY!!!!"
> >> C. That among other things my first wife CONCEALED from me that her first >
> marriage HAD been in the church,[sic] she [sic]lied and told me it was a civil
> marriage.
>
> Love those little {sic}'s... even when inappropriate. Who can't spell?
That would be you, Idiot Kenny. In the sentence above, however, I
highlight not your "spelling," but rather your ignorance of proper
punctuation, capitalization [amazing, given your obsession with
HYSTERICAL CAPS!!!!], and complete vs. run-on sentences. Of course,
you *prove* your stupidity by thinking I had marked misspelled words.
What a hoot!
> But the
> point is that I said that the reason my first wife and I had not been married
> in the church was because SHE had previously been married, NOT me...
Yada yada, Kenny? When did I ever say you were "previously married"?
Another irrelevant lie, thrown in, apparently, for the sheer love of
shoveling BS.
> Eve the scumbag Mikey.
Thanks for the pointless observation, Kenny. Is that the official
Catholic view? What about Adam? Or, in your delightfully autistic way,
have you now discovered scripture claiming I am "Eve the scumbag"?
> >Well, let's start by correcting this repeated lie from you. Kenny. Lanning
> never at any time worked at the "FBI laboratory."
>
> Oh? Only the "Behavioral Sciences Unit."
> Gee Mikey, it is AT the FBI lab at Quantico. Oooops there I go with FACTS
> again...
No, Kenny, you screwed them up again...as usual. The FBI Lab is and
has always been in Washington, DC. The FBI *Academy* is and has always
been in Quantico. Moreover, the Behavioral Science Unit changed its
name years ago. If you could read, you'd know that, too. Maybe you can
get it straight next time around. What will that be ... the tenth or
twelfth time I've corrected your foolish error?
mn
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.true-crime,soc.men
Crossposter Newton SAID:
What Newton QUOTED:
>> >Although a separate post from Kenny denied he is a Christian.
>> Yes Mikey in the PROTESTANT
What *I* actually said:
"Yes Mikey in the PROTESTANT sense of word, the Born Again Christian."
Now let's also place this back within the CONTEXT that Dishonest Mike took it
OUT of so he could MISREPRESENT it...
Namely a discussion dating back over a year almost 2 where I denied being a
"Christian" (as in a Fundamentalist) within the context of beliefs on a
specific moral issue. That I as a Catholic did not happen to share in that
instance with Fundies. In
that situation I was using the term "Christian" in the sense it was being used
in that thread, refering to the beliefs of Christian Fundamentalists.
We could debate who is and who is NOT a "Christian." If one reads the books
of the Reverend Walter A. Martin, by HIS classification Catholics are not
Christians in ANY sense of the word. Of course, neither are Episcopalians,
Methodists, Mormons, and so on.
>You've never denied being "PROTESTANT," Kenny ... although I take that for
granted if you claim to be Catholic. Your statement was: "Me a Christian? NO
WAY!!!!"
That's right Mikey. I am NOT a "Christian Fundamentalist." I am a
Catholic.And a fairly liberal one at that.
>> But the point is that I said that the reason my first wife and I had not
been
married in the church was because SHE had previously been married, NOT me...
>When did I ever say you were "previously married"? Another irrelevant lie,
thrown in, apparently, for the sheer love of
shoveling BS.
Oh Mikey... You claimed that *I was a "Philanderer." And you made NO bones
about it. The issue is that according to Church LAW, I could NOT be married to
my FIRST wife (meaning that *I* had never been married previously) because in
the eyes of the Church, SHE was still married to her first husband. And shad
LIED and told me she was married in a civil ceremony to her first husband. And
that as soon as it could be cleared we would get married in the church.
Throughout this discussion, Newton, you have continually misrepresented what
has been said. Which is a rather revealing portrait of YOUR CHARACTER for the
WORLD to see!
>Moreover, the Behavioral Science Unit changed its name years ago.
Small points:
1. Not at the time of your book inquestion.
2. Not at the time of Lanning's paper on Satanic Ritual abuse YOU
misrepresented.
Something of a HABIT of yours Mikey!
>What will that be ... the tenth or
twelfth time I've corrected your foolish error?
Not even close, it's maybe the 50th time you have LIED about this, either to
me or in answer to William's complete trouncing of you on your
misrepresentations regarding Lanning and the FBI.