Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Frank Tanabe, 93; Casts His Last Vote for Obama ...
97 views
Skip to first unread message
Bill Schenley
Oct 25, 2012, 2:23:39 PM10/25/12
to
Frank Tanabe Dead: WWII Vet Dies At 93 After Casting Last Ballot
Photo: http://tinyurl.com/9yqn8ku
FROM: The Huffington Post ~
By By Audrey McAvoy
HONOLULU -- A World War II veteran whose effort to vote from his
deathbed inspired thousands has died a week after casting his final
ballot.
Frank Tanabe passed away peacefully Wednesday at the Honolulu home of
his daughter, where he's been in hospice treatment for the past few
weeks after being diagnosed with an inoperable cancer tumor in his
liver. He was 93.
His daughter Barbara Tanabe said she put the American flag up outside
the home to mark the day for him and their family.
"He really liked it when I put out the flag," she said.
Hundreds of thousands of Internet users saw a photo of Frank Tanabe
filling out his absentee ballot with the help of his daughter last
week, when his grandson posted the picture on the social media site
Reddit. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
The image and his determination to vote on his sick bed struck a chord
and prompted many to thank Frank Tanabe for his service and praise his
patriotism. The story spread further when The Associated Press and
other media organizations wrote about the photo and the response it
generated online.
Tanabe served in a mostly Japanese-American unit of the Military
Intelligence Service during the war, interrogating Japanese prisoners
in India and China.
He volunteered for the Army from an internment camp where the U.S.
government sent him as part of a policy to detain and isolate 110,000
Japanese-Americans after the start of the war with Japan. He spent
time in both the Tule Lake camp in California and the Minidoka camp in
Idaho.
Decades later, Tanabe explained how he felt in an interview for a
documentary tribute to Japanese-American veterans.
"I wanted to do my part to prove that I was not an enemy alien, or
that none of us were – that we were true Americans. And if we ever got
the chance, we would do our best to serve our country. And we did," he
said.
Congress gave its highest civilian honor to Tanabe and other Japanese-
American veterans of the war last year when it awarded the
Congressional Gold Medal collectively to those who served in the MIS,
the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team.
Barbara Tanabe said she told her father about the news coverage his
vote was getting, including stories that appeared in the Los Angeles
Times and on the front page of the Idaho Statesman.
"I was thinking these are the two big newspapers in Idaho and
California, where he went to camp," Barbara said. "It's just a nice
way to look back at history and say that things do turn out OK."
Honolulu elections officials say Frank Tanabe's vote will be counted
unless they receive his death certificate before the Nov. 6 election
and they're able to find his ballot from among the tens of thousands
of ballots mailed in.
This generally isn't practical, so like most cases when a voter dies
after he or she casts an absentee ballot, his ballot will likely be
counted.
His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
keep that information private.
Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father voted for – it's
the voting itself that makes a difference.
Photo: http://tinyurl.com/9yqn8ku
FROM: The Huffington Post ~
By By Audrey McAvoy
HONOLULU -- A World War II veteran whose effort to vote from his
deathbed inspired thousands has died a week after casting his final
ballot.
Frank Tanabe passed away peacefully Wednesday at the Honolulu home of
his daughter, where he's been in hospice treatment for the past few
weeks after being diagnosed with an inoperable cancer tumor in his
liver. He was 93.
His daughter Barbara Tanabe said she put the American flag up outside
the home to mark the day for him and their family.
"He really liked it when I put out the flag," she said.
Hundreds of thousands of Internet users saw a photo of Frank Tanabe
filling out his absentee ballot with the help of his daughter last
week, when his grandson posted the picture on the social media site
Reddit. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
The image and his determination to vote on his sick bed struck a chord
and prompted many to thank Frank Tanabe for his service and praise his
patriotism. The story spread further when The Associated Press and
other media organizations wrote about the photo and the response it
generated online.
Tanabe served in a mostly Japanese-American unit of the Military
Intelligence Service during the war, interrogating Japanese prisoners
in India and China.
He volunteered for the Army from an internment camp where the U.S.
government sent him as part of a policy to detain and isolate 110,000
Japanese-Americans after the start of the war with Japan. He spent
time in both the Tule Lake camp in California and the Minidoka camp in
Idaho.
Decades later, Tanabe explained how he felt in an interview for a
documentary tribute to Japanese-American veterans.
"I wanted to do my part to prove that I was not an enemy alien, or
that none of us were – that we were true Americans. And if we ever got
the chance, we would do our best to serve our country. And we did," he
said.
Congress gave its highest civilian honor to Tanabe and other Japanese-
American veterans of the war last year when it awarded the
Congressional Gold Medal collectively to those who served in the MIS,
the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team.
Barbara Tanabe said she told her father about the news coverage his
vote was getting, including stories that appeared in the Los Angeles
Times and on the front page of the Idaho Statesman.
"I was thinking these are the two big newspapers in Idaho and
California, where he went to camp," Barbara said. "It's just a nice
way to look back at history and say that things do turn out OK."
Honolulu elections officials say Frank Tanabe's vote will be counted
unless they receive his death certificate before the Nov. 6 election
and they're able to find his ballot from among the tens of thousands
of ballots mailed in.
This generally isn't practical, so like most cases when a voter dies
after he or she casts an absentee ballot, his ballot will likely be
counted.
His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
keep that information private.
Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father voted for – it's
the voting itself that makes a difference.
MWB
Oct 25, 2012, 5:43:51 PM10/25/12
to
I heard his daughter on my TV a she said they kept his vote a secret.
Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for President Obama????
GO PATRIOTS
Mark
Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for President Obama????
GO PATRIOTS
Mark
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 26, 2012, 1:38:34 AM10/26/12
to
On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:23:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>keep that information private.
Dishonest Subject line Bill.
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>keep that information private.
Message has been deleted
Bill Schenley
Oct 26, 2012, 2:10:28 AM10/26/12
to
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
"Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
boxers ...
Watch the video, retards ...
>
> > > Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
> > > voted for – it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
> > > Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
> > > voted for – it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
> > Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
> > President Obama?
>
> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
> > President Obama?
>
Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
"Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
boxers ...
Watch the video, retards ...
MWB
Oct 26, 2012, 4:27:43 PM10/26/12
to
On 10/26/2012 2:10 AM, Bill Schenley wrote:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
>>
>>>> Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
>>>> voted for � it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
>>
>>>> Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
>
>>> Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
>>> President Obama?
>>
>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>
> Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
> other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
> "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
> boxers ...
>
> Watch the video, retards ...
>
Hey Billy, I watched the video. Where in the video did you hear he voted
>>> Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
>>> President Obama?
>>
>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>
> Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
> other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
> "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
> boxers ...
>
> Watch the video, retards ...
>
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 26, 2012, 9:58:15 PM10/26/12
to
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:27:43 -0400, MWB <bic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 10/26/2012 2:10 AM, Bill Schenley wrote:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
>>>
>>>>> Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
>>>>> voted for – it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
>On 10/26/2012 2:10 AM, Bill Schenley wrote:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
>>>
>>>>> Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
>>
>>>> Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
>>>> President Obama?
>>>
>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>
>> Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
>> other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
>> "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
>> boxers ...
>>
>> Watch the video, retards ...
>>
>
>
>Hey Billy, I watched the video. Where in the video did you hear he voted
>for President Obama????
Schenley hears it while suffering with the DT's. It isn't mentioned in the
>>>> Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
>>>> President Obama?
>>>
>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>
>> Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
>> other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
>> "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
>> boxers ...
>>
>> Watch the video, retards ...
>>
>
>
>Hey Billy, I watched the video. Where in the video did you hear he voted
>for President Obama????
video. I grabbed an image snap of the ballot and the ballot isn't filled
out.
Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>GO PATRIOTS
>
>Mark
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 26, 2012, 10:32:52 PM10/26/12
to
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:00:59 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
> Bill is dishonest (and an inveterate liar) no matter what the subject
>is.
He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet. Bobby
Baby is now going to killfilter people using their MID's. Really? <smirk>
If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
kill file.
Here's a clue Feigel: Usenet MID's change with every message sent.
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
>is.
He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet. Bobby
Baby is now going to killfilter people using their MID's. Really? <smirk>
If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
kill file.
Here's a clue Feigel: Usenet MID's change with every message sent.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
BobF
Oct 27, 2012, 12:44:55 AM10/27/12
to
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:17:04 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> shouted from the
highest rooftop:
>news:ekhm88td5qg8euevv...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:00:59 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>>
>>>x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:23:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
>>>> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>>>>>keep that information private.
>>>>
>>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>>
>>> Bill is dishonest (and an inveterate liar) no matter what the subject
>>>is.
>>
>> He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet.
>
> A shame <snicker> no one is laughing with them--laughing *at* them.
>>
>>>x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:23:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
>>>> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>>>>>keep that information private.
>>>>
>>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>>
>>> Bill is dishonest (and an inveterate liar) no matter what the subject
>>>is.
>>
>> He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet.
>
>
>> Bobby Baby is now going to killfilter people using their MID's. Really?
>> <smirk>
>> If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
>> the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
>> kill file.
>
> Isn't he also one of those brain-dead weenies that still think you
>> Bobby Baby is now going to killfilter people using their MID's. Really?
>> <smirk>
>> If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
>> the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
>> kill file.
>
>are 'Ken'?
>
>> Here's a clue Feigel: Usenet MID's change with every message sent.
>
> Don't give him any artificial intelligence.
>> Here's a clue Feigel: Usenet MID's change with every message sent.
>
> Let him stay what he has always been and always remain, stupid. LOL
It's hard to choose which one of you two joined-at-the-lip love-birds
is dumber, or which dummy is pulling whose strings. But reading your
admiration society exchanges is always amusing, especially when you
both make complete fools of yourselves.
Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
based on Message IDs:
Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
Fort� Agent v6 and above can use the following filter expression:
Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
Those using nFilter:
* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
I'm sure that even a smirking, self-proclaimed Usenet expert like
Sarah/Ken can figure that one out.
--
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wax-up and drop-in of Surfing's Golden Years: <http://www.surfwriter.net>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's me Feigel@Your BFF@altObits.com
Oct 27, 2012, 3:33:00 AM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:44:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
Hello Feigel,
I'm using this set of headers this one time as a public service. You're
confused and need help on this MID versus Usenet provider nonsense.
>Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
>what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
>based on Message IDs:
Now it's " based" on Message IDs ?? Nice wiggle.
You said, " Try using its Message ID to killfile it ..."
You're not using his MID. You're filtering his Usenet Provider.
Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
<smirk>
>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
Yes, USENET PROVIDER, not MID which is unique with every message.
>and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
>Forté Agent v6 and above can use the following filter expression:
>
>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>ou are
*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
>I'm sure that even a smirking, self-proclaimed Usenet expert like
>Sarah/Ken can figure that one out.
I don't need to figure out you're an idiot Feigel. I know the difference
between a usenet provider and a MID. You still don't.
Hello Feigel,
I'm using this set of headers this one time as a public service. You're
confused and need help on this MID versus Usenet provider nonsense.
>Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
>what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
>based on Message IDs:
You said, " Try using its Message ID to killfile it ..."
You're not using his MID. You're filtering his Usenet Provider.
Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
<smirk>
>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
>and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
>
>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>ou are
*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
>I'm sure that even a smirking, self-proclaimed Usenet expert like
>Sarah/Ken can figure that one out.
between a usenet provider and a MID. You still don't.
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 27, 2012, 4:16:12 AM10/27/12
to
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:17:04 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:ekhm88td5qg8euevv...@4ax.com...
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:00:59 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>>
>>>x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:23:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
>>>> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>>>>>keep that information private.
>>>>
>>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>>
>>> Bill is dishonest (and an inveterate liar) no matter what the subject
>>>is.
>>
>> He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet.
>
>>
>>>x-no-archive: yes
>>>
>>>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:kd8k88tkuaeek0853...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:23:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
>>>> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>His family knows which candidates he chose, but they've decided to
>>>>>keep that information private.
>>>>
>>>> Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>>>
>>> Bill is dishonest (and an inveterate liar) no matter what the subject
>>>is.
>>
>> He and Bob Feigel are two of the biggest jokes I've seen on usenet.
>
> A shame <snicker> no one is laughing with them--laughing *at* them.
>
>
>> Bobby Baby is now going to killfilter people using their MID's. Really?
>> <smirk>
>> If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
>> the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
>> kill file.
>
>> <smirk>
>> If that's Feigel's level of usenet expertise then I finally understand why
>> the dopeyfucker kept claiming I was morphing my headers to get around his
>> kill file.
>
> Isn't he also one of those brain-dead weenies that still think you
>are 'Ken'?
Yep, he is indeed a brain dead carrier of that flag. And he keeps posting
>are 'Ken'?
forged messages to back up his claim. He ought to be ashamed to be so
dishonest, but as we've seen here, he's not the sharpest blade in the
drawer when it comes to usenet.
>> Here's a clue Feigel: Usenet MID's change with every message sent.
>
> Don't give him any artificial intelligence.
> Let him stay what he has always been and always remain, stupid. LOL
He's uneducated. Feigel's convinced himself he's sharp as a tack when it
> Let him stay what he has always been and always remain, stupid. LOL
comes to usenet.
BobF
Oct 27, 2012, 5:49:59 AM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 03:33:00 -0400, "It's me Feigel@Your
B...@altObits.com" <Bob Feigel, Pompass Ass> shouted from the highest
rooftop:
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:44:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>Hello Feigel,
>
>I'm using this set of headers this one time as a public service. You're
>confused and need help on this MID versus Usenet provider nonsense.
>
>>Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
>>what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
>>based on Message IDs:
>
>Now it's " based" on Message IDs ?? Nice wiggle.
>You said, " Try using its Message ID to killfile it ..."
>You're not using his MID. You're filtering his Usenet Provider.
<su2n88d6jih9e2aa9...@4ax.com>
So do you seriously think your Usnet Provider is "4ax.com"?
No. It's the default setting on your old, outdated version for Fort�
Agent. And if you were as Usenet savvy as you THINK your are, you'd
know how to change it to reflect your actual Usenet Provider as I've
done:
Message-ID: <af175v...@mid.individual.net>
Speaking of which, your actual Usenet Provider is easynews.com via
your account with APN. And a crap Usenet Provider it is.
You are also using Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 as your Usenet newsreader.
That outdated version of Agent has been superseded by much newer
versions that ARE CAPABLE of filtering Message IDs. Funny you didn't
know that.
Of course, with your other self-proclaimed Usnet superiority, I'm sure
you'll already know that "Ctrl + H" will display my headers:
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
Sadly, you appear to know absolutely nothing about the capabilities of
newer versions of the software with which you claim to be such an
expert. But please feel free to continue to display your vast
ignorance for everyone to continue to smirk at.
>
>Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
><smirk>
Just like your smirk is different with every message.
>Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
><smirk>
But the part of the Trolls' Message ID (wieslauf.sub.de) IS able to be
used for a filter expression in more advanced versions of Agent and
with nFilter. AND ... as I stated earlier: Since ALL of the sockpuppet
nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL ALERT) are posted using the same
Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) that can be used to create a filter
in either Agent or nFilter to killfile the Troll.
Let me repeat:
Those of you using Fort� Agent v6 and above can use the following
filter expression:
Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
And since nobody else uses the provider ... well, even YOU might be
Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
able to figure it out - although it would WOOOSH right over your
soulmate's little conspiracy filled head.
>
>>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
>
>Yes, USENET PROVIDER, not MID which is unique with every message.
Again ... you clearly haven't a clue.
>>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
>
>Yes, USENET PROVIDER, not MID which is unique with every message.
>>and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
>>
>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>ou are
>>Those using nFilter:
>>
>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>
>*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
>
>You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
>filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
Since the Troll is the ONLY one using that provider and I made that
>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>ou are
>>Those using nFilter:
>>
>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>
>*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
>
>You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
>filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
perfectly clear, your comment is not relevant ... and you know it - or
should.
>>I'm sure that even a smirking, self-proclaimed Usenet expert like
>>Sarah/Ken can figure that one out.
>
>I don't need to figure out you're an idiot Feigel. I know the difference
>between a usenet provider and a MID. You still don't.
again ...
So thank you Sarah/Ken. You are a worthy soulmate and apologist for
your equal, Roy.
But you never were and never will be a worthy opponent or worthy of
respect. Which is why I ignore you.
--
"Deception is bad game for amateur." - Charlie Chan
Anglo Saxon
Oct 27, 2012, 1:31:41 PM10/27/12
to
BobF wrote:
>
>> Speaking of which, your actual Usenet Provider is easynews.com via
> your account with APN. And a crap Usenet Provider it is.
>
> You are also using Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 as your Usenet newsreader.
>
The guys over on another newsgroup caught him out using dial-up. LOL. Fat
>
>> Speaking of which, your actual Usenet Provider is easynews.com via
> your account with APN. And a crap Usenet Provider it is.
>
> You are also using Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 as your Usenet newsreader.
>
Ken, crap clear down to his connection. He's got no job, ya know. Pretty soon
he'll be sitting in strangers driveways, trying to catch a signal.
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 27, 2012, 4:01:50 PM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:49:59 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 03:33:00 -0400, "It's me Feigel@Your
>B...@altObits.com" <Bob Feigel, Pompass Ass> shouted from the highest
>rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:44:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>>
>>Hello Feigel,
>>
>>I'm using this set of headers this one time as a public service. You're
>>confused and need help on this MID versus Usenet provider nonsense.
>>
>>>Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
>>>what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
>>>based on Message IDs:
>>
>>Now it's " based" on Message IDs ?? Nice wiggle.
>>You said, " Try using its Message ID to killfile it ..."
>>You're not using his MID. You're filtering his Usenet Provider.
>
>Your Message ID is::
>
><su2n88d6jih9e2aa9...@4ax.com>
That is correct.
>
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 03:33:00 -0400, "It's me Feigel@Your
>B...@altObits.com" <Bob Feigel, Pompass Ass> shouted from the highest
>rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:44:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>>
>>Hello Feigel,
>>
>>I'm using this set of headers this one time as a public service. You're
>>confused and need help on this MID versus Usenet provider nonsense.
>>
>>>Now ... just in case anyone here actually thinks either of you know
>>>what you're talking about when it comes to killfiling or filtering
>>>based on Message IDs:
>>
>>Now it's " based" on Message IDs ?? Nice wiggle.
>>You said, " Try using its Message ID to killfile it ..."
>>You're not using his MID. You're filtering his Usenet Provider.
>
>Your Message ID is::
>
><su2n88d6jih9e2aa9...@4ax.com>
[ Usnet. One of the anonymous trolls harassing me frequently misspells
usenet as usnet. ]
>No. It's the default setting on your old, outdated version for Forté
>Agent.
"4ax.com" is easynews. Easynews is the down source server for APN. This
isn't rocket science, Feigel. These headers minus the specific MID, which
is different with every message, are in every post I send to usenet.
From: Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
Message-ID: <ekhm88td5qg8euevv...@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
X-Complaints-To: ab...@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
>And if you were as Usenet savvy as you THINK your are, you'd
>know how to change it to reflect your actual Usenet Provider as I've
>done:
>
>Message-ID: <af175v...@mid.individual.net>
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
No it's not easynews, Bob. Easynews is the down source server used by
APN.
>your account with APN. And a crap Usenet Provider it is.
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
>You are also using Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 as your Usenet newsreader.
>That outdated version of Agent has been superseded by much newer
>versions that ARE CAPABLE of filtering Message IDs.
Message -->Filters --> Add Kill Filter -->Filter Expression -->
Author: a...@mid.individual.net will filter everyone using
mid.individual.net
>Funny you didn't know that.
>Of course, with your other self-proclaimed Usnet superiority,
usenet as usnet. ]
>I'm sure you'll already know that "Ctrl + H" will display my headers:
>
>User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
the headers in every message as I load them into agent.
>Sadly, you appear to know absolutely nothing about the capabilities of
>newer versions of the software with which you claim to be such an
>ignorance for everyone to continue to smirk at.
Look around, Feigel. Everyone here already knows you're the one with the
limited and woefully inaccurate knowledge of usenet.
>>Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
>><smirk>
>
>Just like your smirk is different with every message.
>
>But the part of the Trolls' Message ID (wieslauf.sub.de)
You're filtering ONLY the usenet provider, not the MID. If you were to
actually filter the MID you would filter exactly ONE message.
Your terminology of MID versus "part of MID " is inaccurate. Both produce
very different results. After slapping you with a cluebat you've changed
from saying filtering the MID to writing, "part of the Message ID" . Pity
you've not the strength of character to admit you were wrong.
>IS able to be
>used for a filter expression in more advanced versions of Agent and
>with nFilter. AND ... as I stated earlier: Since ALL of the sockpuppet
>nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL ALERT) are posted using the same
>Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de)
Message ID.
>that can be used to create a filter
>in either Agent or nFilter to killfile the Troll.
>
>Let me repeat:
>
>filter expression:
>
>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>
>Those using nFilter:
>
>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>And since nobody else uses the provider ... well, even YOU might be
>able to figure it out - although it would WOOOSH right over your
>soulmate's little conspiracy filled head.
Your words. >Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de)
>
>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>
>Those using nFilter:
>
>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>And since nobody else uses the provider ... well, even YOU might be
>able to figure it out - although it would WOOOSH right over your
>soulmate's little conspiracy filled head.
You're filtering only the usenet provider.
>>>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>>>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
>>
>>Yes, USENET PROVIDER, not MID which is unique with every message.
>
>Again ... you clearly haven't a clue.
You're filtering only the usenet provider.
>>>and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
>>>
>>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>>ou are
>>>Those using nFilter:
>>>
>>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>>
>>*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
>>
>>You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
>>filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
>
>Since the Troll is the ONLY one using that provider and I made that
>perfectly clear, your comment is not relevant ... and you know it - or
>should.
Finally you concede your error. You're filtering ONLY the usenet provider
>>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>>ou are
>>>Those using nFilter:
>>>
>>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>>
>>*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
>>
>>You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
>>filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
>
>Since the Troll is the ONLY one using that provider and I made that
>perfectly clear, your comment is not relevant ... and you know it - or
>should.
and NOT the Message ID.
It's like trying to pull teeth, you dishonest troll.
<smirk>
[ Flush remainder of Bob Feigel's usual lunacy. ]
BobF
Oct 27, 2012, 8:58:00 PM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
Agent - regardless of your provider. Even though my Usenet provider is
individual.net, my message ID on earlier versions of Agent was
"4ax.com". I had to change it manually. Even you might be able to do
it if only you knew how.
If you don't believe me, I dare you to drag your lazy ass over to
alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent and bore them with your
ignorance. And while you're at it, take a look at some of the many
threads about filtering Message IDs.
>From: Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>Message-ID: <ekhm88td5qg8euevv...@4ax.com>
>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@easynews.com
>Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
>
>>And if you were as Usenet savvy as you THINK your are, you'd
>>know how to change it to reflect your actual Usenet Provider as I've
>>done:
>>
>>Message-ID: <af175v...@mid.individual.net>
>
>Can you read headers? This is already provided in my header field.
>Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
>
>
>>Speaking of which, your actual Usenet Provider is easynews.com via
>
>No it's not easynews, Bob. Easynews is the down source server used by
>APN.
another way, without easynews there would be no APN. And what a crap
Usenet Provider easynews is according to what's posted on
alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent.
>>your account with APN. And a crap Usenet Provider it is.
>
>APN is my usenet provider. Again, clearly already in my headers.
>Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
>
>>You are also using Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 as your Usenet newsreader.
>>That outdated version of Agent has been superseded by much newer
>>versions that ARE CAPABLE of filtering Message IDs.
>
>Drop down menus are your friend,Bobby.
>
>Message -->Filters --> Add Kill Filter -->Filter Expression -->
>Author: a...@mid.individual.net will filter everyone using
> mid.individual.net
>
>>Funny you didn't know that.
>
>You're already standing in a deep ' hole of ignorance' . Stop digging.
Didn't think so ...
>>Of course, with your other self-proclaimed Usnet superiority,
>
>[ Usnet. One of the anonymous trolls harassing me frequently misspells
>usenet as usnet. ]
>>I'm sure you'll already know that "Ctrl + H" will display my headers:
>>
>>User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.00.32.1200
>
>One click on "Show All Header Fields" in the drop down menu gives me all
>the headers in every message as I load them into agent.
>
>>Sadly, you appear to know absolutely nothing about the capabilities of
>>newer versions of the software with which you claim to be such an
>>expert. But please feel free to continoe to display your vast
>>ignorance for everyone to continue to smirk at.
>
>Look around, Feigel. Everyone here already knows you're the one with the
>limited and woefully inaccurate knowledge of usenet.
>>>Did anyone clue you in that a MID is different with every message?
>>><smirk>
>>
>>Just like your smirk is different with every message.
>>
>>But the part of the Trolls' Message ID (wieslauf.sub.de)
>
>Part of the Message ID is different from the Message ID is it?
>
>You're filtering ONLY the usenet provider, not the MID. If you were to
>actually filter the MID you would filter exactly ONE message.
>
>Your terminology of MID versus "part of MID " is inaccurate. Both produce
>very different results. After slapping you with a cluebat you've changed
>from saying filtering the MID to writing, "part of the Message ID" . Pity
>you've not the strength of character to admit you were wrong.
>
>>IS able to be
>>used for a filter expression in more advanced versions of Agent and
>>with nFilter. AND ... as I stated earlier: Since ALL of the sockpuppet
>>nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL ALERT) are posted using the same
>>Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de)
>
>Usenet provider. You are filtering ONLY the usenet provider NOT the
>Message ID.
{wieslauf\.sub\.de}. You're using an outdated version of Agent that
doesn't have a Message ID filter option. Just because you're unable to
understand it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I dare you to try and
impress the experts at alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent with your
vast knowledge. I'm sure they'd get a kick out of your pretensions.
>>that can be used to create a filter
>>in either Agent or nFilter to killfile the Troll.
>>
>>Let me repeat:
>>
>>Those of you using Forté Agent v6 and above can use the following
>>filter expression:
>>
>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>
>>Those using nFilter:
>>
>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>
>>And since nobody else uses the provider ... well, even YOU might be
>>able to figure it out - although it would WOOOSH right over your
>>soulmate's little conspiracy filled head.
>
>Your words. >Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de)
>You're filtering only the usenet provider.
>>>>Since ALL of the sockpuppet nyms listed in my OP (Subject: TROLL
>>>>ALERT) are posted using the same Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de) -
>>>
>>>Yes, USENET PROVIDER, not MID which is unique with every message.
>>
>>Again ... you clearly haven't a clue.
>
>Your words. >Usenet provider (wieslauf.sub.de)
>You're filtering only the usenet provider.
>
>>>>and no other posters except those listed use it - those of you using
>>>>Forté Agent v6 and above can use the following filter expression:
>>>>
>>>>Message-ID: {wieslauf\.sub\.de}
>>>>ou are
>>>>Those using nFilter:
>>>>
>>>>* alt.obituaries drop:-gabrix- Message-ID:*wieslauf.sub.de*
>>>
>>>*wieslauf.sub.de* is the usenet provider, not the MID.
>>>
>>>You're filtering him by using his provider NOT his MID. Just as you could
>>>filter out all AOLers, Yahooers etc.
>>
>>Since the Troll is the ONLY one using that provider and I made that
>>perfectly clear, your comment is not relevant ... and you know it - or
>>should.
>
>Finally you concede your error. You're filtering ONLY the usenet provider
>and NOT the Message ID.
>
>It's like trying to pull teeth, you dishonest troll.
>
><smirk>
>
Again, you don't have a clue and are proving it again and again and
again ...
So thank you Sarah/Ken. You are a worthy soulmate and apologist for
your equal, Roy.
But you never were and never will be a worthy opponent or worthy of
more of your uninformed and malicious bullshit.
--
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
Message has been deleted
Tim J.
Oct 27, 2012, 10:23:46 PM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
wrote:
>"4ax.com" is easynews.
Uh, no, it isn't.
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 27, 2012, 10:48:04 PM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 20:54:47 -0500, "News" <m...@sb.net> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:m6fo885lkj58fh4cd...@4ax.com...
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>"Sarah Ehrett" <nine...@cox.net> wrote in message
Feigel is mentally ill. You can't reason with him.
In Message-ID: <su2n88d6jih9e2aa9...@4ax.com> I stated,
" You're filtering his Usenet Provider. " .
One hundred and twenty six mind dulling lines of bovine scatology later he
sez he's filtering the guy's usenet provider.
Jesus wept. I'll never get back the 15 minutes. I wasted on the lying old
troll.
BobF
Oct 27, 2012, 11:13:49 PM10/27/12
to
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
from the highest rooftop:
Surely it won't admit it!!!
--
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 27, 2012, 11:16:56 PM10/27/12
to
BobF
Oct 27, 2012, 11:50:55 PM10/27/12
to
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:13:49 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>
>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>
>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>
>Surely it won't admit it!!!
Surely it won't admit that I was right all along.
>
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>
>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>
>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>
>Surely it won't admit it!!!
Surely it won't apologise.
Surely ...
BobF
Oct 28, 2012, 6:28:44 PM10/28/12
to
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:50:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:13:49 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>>from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>>
>>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>>
>>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>>
>>Surely it won't admit it!!!
>
>
>>
>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>>from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>>
>>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>>
>>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>>
>>Surely it won't admit it!!!
>
>Surely it won't admit that I was right all along.
>
>Surely it won't apologise.
>
>Surely ...
Surely not.
>
>Surely it won't apologise.
>
>Surely ...
Though I suppose I should be thankful that Sarah has proven me right
once again.
But I'm beginning to think Sarah might not really be a male after all.
Because it certainly doesn't have any balls.
--
"The only difference between an asshole and a troll is
that an asshole knows when it's full of shit." - b
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 28, 2012, 8:27:28 PM10/28/12
to
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:28:44 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:50:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:13:49 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>>>from the highest rooftop:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>>>
>>>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>>>
>>>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>>>
>>>Surely it won't admit it!!!
>>
>>Surely it won't admit that I was right all along.
>>
>>Surely it won't apologise.
>>
>>Surely ...
>
>Surely not.
>
>Though I suppose I should be thankful that Sarah has proven me right
>once again.
>
>But I'm beginning to think Sarah might not really be a male after all.
>Because it certainly doesn't have any balls.
Three posts [so far ] from Bob Feigel muttering to himself [ so insecure
>
>On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:50:55 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:13:49 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not>
>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 22:23:46 -0400, Tim J. <tj6...@gmail.com> shouted
>>>from the highest rooftop:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:01:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"4ax.com" is easynews.
>>>>
>>>>Uh, no, it isn't.
>>>
>>>But Sarah/Ken is such a Usenet expert. Surely it can't be wrong!!!
>>>
>>>Surely it won't admit it!!!
>>
>>Surely it won't admit that I was right all along.
>>
>>Surely it won't apologise.
>>
>>Surely ...
>
>Surely not.
>
>Though I suppose I should be thankful that Sarah has proven me right
>once again.
>
>But I'm beginning to think Sarah might not really be a male after all.
>Because it certainly doesn't have any balls.
he needs my affirmation of his importance] begging to get my attention, to
get any sort of a response. This, after he flounced about declaring "you
never were and never will be a worthy opponent, never worthy of respect, I
ignore you and won't bother to respond..." blah blah blah ...
Mind boggling performance. Mind boggling assumptions.
I am the one choosing not to respond. *I* know Bob Feigel is a troll.
*I* know Bob Feigel is a liar. *I* know Bob Feigel is mentally ill.
Blah. Blah. Blah.
BobF
Oct 28, 2012, 11:56:15 PM10/28/12
to
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:27:28 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>Blah. Blah. Blah.
That must be the only honest thing you'v'e ever written here. Keep it
up.
--
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
Bill Schenley
Oct 30, 2012, 3:11:16 AM10/30/12
to
> > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vqxeDVFL8
>
> > > > > > Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
> > > > > > voted for it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
>
> > > > > Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
> > > > > President Obama?
>
> > > > Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>
> > > Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
> > > other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
> > > "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
> > > boxers ...
>
> > > Watch the video, retards ...
>
> > Hey Billy, I watched the video. Where in the video did you hear he voted
> > for President Obama????
>
> Schenley hears it while suffering with the DT's. It isn't mentioned in the
> video. I grabbed an image snap of the ballot and the ballot isn't filled
> out.
Like I previously wrote, "Two fucking retards."
>
> > > > > > Barbara Tanabe said it's not important who her father
> > > > > > voted for it's the voting itself that makes a difference.
>
> > > > > Tell me something Billy. How did you know he voted for
> > > > > President Obama?
>
> > > > Dishonest Subject line Bill.
>
> > > Two fucking retards. Well, at least the two of you can entertain each
> > > other ... Bickford, when you are dancing cheek-to-cheek with
> > > "Sarah" ...remember that is *not* a roll of dimes stuffed in ... *her*
> > > boxers ...
>
> > > Watch the video, retards ...
>
> > Hey Billy, I watched the video. Where in the video did you hear he voted
> > for President Obama????
>
> Schenley hears it while suffering with the DT's. It isn't mentioned in the
> video. I grabbed an image snap of the ballot and the ballot isn't filled
> out.
You might have "watched" the video but you sure the fuck didn't
listen ... What was the last line? Sheesh ... What am I asking you
for, you're too stupid to figure it out ...
"His daughter said he knew the candidates
and voted his conscience."
People who would vote for Romney don't have a conscience. Ergo, you
two halfwits, he voted for Obama.
> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
to be a Vietnam veteran [1], a veteran of Desert Storm, a CIA agent
[2], (and this was so laughable) a "Federal Marshal" [3], a high-
powered DoD employee who was called into the Pentagon after 9/11 for a
"debriefing," and a Navy veteran who can't remember his rank
designation.
Double-O retard, you are here on AO, pretending to be a woman because
you humiliated yourself to such a degree on ANTU that you are too
embarrassed to go back. You've been a Usenet plague since the
mid-90s ... 55+ thousand posts to Usenet between 1995 and 2006 [5]
under your various nyms ... Hey, drag queen, you gotta' get a life.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
[1] You were born in 1956.
[2] OMG ... Secret fucking agent. How sad.
[3] It's the United States Marshals Service and they are called Deputy
U.S. Marshals.
[4] I don't recall the rank but I remember the designation had been
gone several years before you claimed to have enlisted.
[5] According to posts I read on ANTU.
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 30, 2012, 10:07:10 PM10/30/12
to
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:11:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>"Conclusion?" Hey, Ken,
Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>"Conclusion?" Hey, Ken,
your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
"Who's your baby Daddy " segment. The original plus the founding netizens
of antU left the group and formed a private email list. That's why Ken
left, and that's why he rarely bothers to post any articles any more.
I am the person posting on AO. I am Ken's wife.
And for the record Bill, according to posts I've read about you on AO
you're an ex-con, a druggie, and were involved in a murder scheme back in
the 1970's. You're a life long con man and just the sort of criminal scum
Ken tracked down as a Federal Marshal.
I'm going to address these issues for the final time.
>*you're* the pathetic asshole who pretended to be a Vietnam veteran [1],
stopped you in your tracks. The Vets analyzed the discussion after seeing
Ken's picture in uniform and began interrogating you scumbags. One demand
they made was, "show us your creds". When they received no response from
any of you that was good enough for them.
>a veteran of Desert Storm,
to do bomb damage assessment during Desert Storm. He spent 4 mos. attached
to a Marine division in Riyadh.
> a CIA agent [2],
evidence that Ken ever made either statement.
>(and this was so laughable) a "Federal Marshal"
federal cases, federal courts, and federal prisoners. Ken chased down
federal fugitives, criminals and ex-cons like you Schenley.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Federal+marshal
Every state has a US Marshal, appointed to the position by the Governor.
He/she works on the state level. State US Marshals can and often do
request assistance from the Federal Marshal's and vice versa. Ken was
involved in such a situation in Baltimore. He was looking to re-arrest an
ex-con on federal drug charges. Sounds just like you, Schenley. A
Baltimore police detective knew the guy and he assisted Ken on where to
find the guy and they both went to get him.
>[3], a high-powered DoD employee who was called into the Pentagon after 9/11 for a
>"debriefing,"
Ken had been scheduled to attend the 10am BRIEFING in the CNO-IP on
9/11/01. Intel briefings are held every morning involving various members
of the Intel Community. On the morning of 9/11 Ken and 2 others from ONI
were on their way by car to their meeting when the Pentagon was hit. Ken's
former boss at ONI, CDR. Dan Shanower , the Officer in Charge of the CNO-IP
was killed instantly along with everyone else in the CNO-IP.
http://navintpro.net/?page_id=354
In 1999, CDR Shanower reported to the Office of Naval Intelligence in
Washington, DC. In August 2000, he was selected as the Officer-in-Charge of
the CNO Intelligence Plot. There he was responsible for the provision of
current intelligence support to the Navy Secretariat, Chief of Naval
Operations staff, and the Director of Naval Intelligence. In December 2000,
he was promoted to the rank of Commander. CDR Shanower was killed in the
attack on the Pentagon on 11 September 2001.
Two images of the memorial for those from Naval Intelligence lost in the
Pentagon on that morning.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June2009.jpg
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June20092.jpg
This memorial garden is on the grounds of the NMIC [since renamed NMIO ]
which is located in the Federal Center in Suitland Maryland. The pictures
above were taken during Family Day 2009 in the Memorial Garden. For
obvious reason cameras, other recording devices, and cell phones are never
allowed in the facility. However due to Ken's friendship with CDR
Shanower, and because he was scheduled to retire later that year, we were
granted special permission, with provisions, to take pictures of Ken with
the memorial. Ken retired from federal service in Dec. 2009.
Here is an image snap of the Memorial Garden from NMIC's website.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/NMICMemorialGarden.jpg
>and a Navy veteran who can't remember his rank designation.
Are you struggling to say his RATING?
Here's a picture of Ken taken when he was at FISC-Westpack in 1980.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/FISC-Westpac1980-82.jpg
The left sleeve shows his rank and rating. His RANK is Second Class Petty
Officer. His RATING is IS - Intelligence Specialist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_Specialist_
(United_States_Navy_ratings)
I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
he's received over the years. I've learned not to waste my time with lying
scumbags. My photo of Ken receiving an award from VADM Murrett, brought
nothing but vile comments directed at the VADM and claims that the photo
had been photoshopped. The truth be damned that it was an official US Navy
photograph.
Again, the conclusion is you're a liar Schenley.
Anyone with even a modicum of common sense who looking objectively at the
amount of evidence and facts [photographic evidence plus internet cites]
and compares it to your uncited and unfounded allegations, will quickly
realize who is telling the truth.
Anglo Saxon
Oct 30, 2012, 11:06:40 PM10/30/12
to
Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:11:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>
>>"Conclusion?" Hey, Ken,
>
> Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left >>
-snip puppet-babble
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:11:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
> <b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>
>>"Conclusion?" Hey, Ken,
>
> Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left >>
Ken, go lay down. There's no marriage, no Pentagon life, no "intel", no
nothing. It's just you and your dial-up connection, wandering usenet like
blind worm.
You spent your entire life in a small government room with linoleum floors and
no windows, filing pieces of papers in cabinets that were taken away and
replaced with empty ones that you filled up again. That's it. Finito. Your
actual worth was as a Weeble over on antu, making us all die laughing. Good
old days they were, but you lost the plot, got outed, and ran away screaming
and crying and now here you are as SarahSableBogartMrs.KenCezpiel, irritating
these nice people.
Where is poor Bill these days? Still lurking on the Kansas City Chiefs group?
BobF
Oct 30, 2012, 11:36:11 PM10/30/12
to
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment. The original plus the founding netizens
>of antU left the group and formed a private email list. That's why Ken
>left, and that's why he rarely bothers to post any articles any more.
Can anyone enlighten me what this maniac is ranting on about this
>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment. The original plus the founding netizens
>of antU left the group and formed a private email list. That's why Ken
>left, and that's why he rarely bothers to post any articles any more.
time? Like what is this "antU" I'm supposed to have trolled?
--
The material posted here may or may not be factual.
The author is following the example set by
Senator Jon Kyl (R, AZ) who was caught citing
false statistics, after which his staff stated
that his comments were "not intended to be factual."
Anglo Saxon
Oct 31, 2012, 12:40:07 AM10/31/12
to
BobF wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
> shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
>>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment. The original plus the founding netizens
>>of antU left the group and formed a private email list. That's why Ken
>>left, and that's why he rarely bothers to post any articles any more.
>
> Can anyone enlighten me what this maniac is ranting on about this
> time? Like what is this "antU" I'm supposed to have trolled?
>
A miserable little flame-group buried in the backwaters of the backwaters of
>
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
> shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
>>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment. The original plus the founding netizens
>>of antU left the group and formed a private email list. That's why Ken
>>left, and that's why he rarely bothers to post any articles any more.
>
> Can anyone enlighten me what this maniac is ranting on about this
> time? Like what is this "antU" I'm supposed to have trolled?
>
usenet. Ken considered himself quite the swordsman there and as luck would
have it, he caught the attention of a few witty guys who spun him up like a
top and Ken finally melted down, got all his socks mixed up and they rolled
him in flour, stuck him on the wet spot and he ended up floundering off like
a, well, flounder.
It was fun. But you can see how damaged it left Ken... he thinks you were
there. His level of paranoia is so deep now that he actually sees ghosts...
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 31, 2012, 8:37:42 PM10/31/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 05:33:08 -0700, Terry del Fuego
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
xxxxxx Add Quote xxxxxx
>You were one of the trolls during that sad episode that Cmeak got
>involved with and yet you lie and deny it.
"What on earth are you talking about? Of course I participated.
Gleefully. Repeatedly. How would it even be *possible* to deny it
and why would I bother to do so? " - Terry Del Fuego Mon, 23 Jan 2012
xxxxx End Quote xxxxx
>you continually-lying sack of motherfucking shit.
"This, by the way, is the point where you need to call me "a piece of
shit" or something similar because you won't be able to use facts to
refute what I've just said." - Terry del Fuego Sun, 22 Jan 2012
>It is entirely possible that I failed to trim groups while posting a
>follow-up(s) from here, but suggesting that I intentionally hung
>around there is, like most of what you write, unsupported by reality.
You're the source. I take you at your word.
" Of course I participated. Gleefully. Repeatedly. "
There is no other conclusion, you're a lying troll.
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
>>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment.
>
>I have never intentionally posted to that newsgroup,
>>Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill. Ken left antU long ago when you along with
>>your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
>>trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
>>wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury Povich
>>"Who's your baby Daddy " segment.
>
xxxxxx Add Quote xxxxxx
>You were one of the trolls during that sad episode that Cmeak got
>involved with and yet you lie and deny it.
"What on earth are you talking about? Of course I participated.
Gleefully. Repeatedly. How would it even be *possible* to deny it
and why would I bother to do so? " - Terry Del Fuego Mon, 23 Jan 2012
xxxxx End Quote xxxxx
>you continually-lying sack of motherfucking shit.
"This, by the way, is the point where you need to call me "a piece of
shit" or something similar because you won't be able to use facts to
refute what I've just said." - Terry del Fuego Sun, 22 Jan 2012
>It is entirely possible that I failed to trim groups while posting a
>follow-up(s) from here, but suggesting that I intentionally hung
>around there is, like most of what you write, unsupported by reality.
You're the source. I take you at your word.
" Of course I participated. Gleefully. Repeatedly. "
There is no other conclusion, you're a lying troll.
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 31, 2012, 10:07:53 PM10/31/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:04:46 -0700, Terry del Fuego
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:37:42 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>Which, you motherfucking puddle of pus,
LOL. Wow. What an outburst.
Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
>in no way has anything to do with your initial fantasy that I deliberately posted to any group
>other than alt.obituaries.
I said " trolled a once vibrant international flame group ".
Never said "deliberately posted " . That is your construct.
>AO is where I saw the flame war and where I gleefully participated.
And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>I suspect that you *know* that, which makes your outburst not just bullshit,
>but senselessly bizarre bullshit.
Now I'm supposed to edit your newsgroup line. Uh huh.
>alt.nuke.the.usa is not currently and never has been one of my
>subscribed newsgroups in the only Usenet client I have used for the
>last 15+ years. Period.
Never said " subscribed". Another of your constructs.
>> There is no other conclusion, you're a lying troll.
>
>Norman, coordinate!
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:37:42 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>"What on earth are you talking about? Of course I participated.
>>Gleefully. Repeatedly. How would it even be *possible* to deny it
>>and why would I bother to do so? " - Terry Del [sic] Fuego Mon, 23 Jan 2012
>>Gleefully. Repeatedly. How would it even be *possible* to deny it
>
>Which, you motherfucking puddle of pus,
LOL. Wow. What an outburst.
Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
>in no way has anything to do with your initial fantasy that I deliberately posted to any group
>other than alt.obituaries.
I said " trolled a once vibrant international flame group ".
Never said "deliberately posted " . That is your construct.
>AO is where I saw the flame war and where I gleefully participated.
And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>I suspect that you *know* that, which makes your outburst not just bullshit,
>but senselessly bizarre bullshit.
Now I'm supposed to edit your newsgroup line. Uh huh.
>alt.nuke.the.usa is not currently and never has been one of my
>subscribed newsgroups in the only Usenet client I have used for the
>last 15+ years. Period.
Never said " subscribed". Another of your constructs.
>> There is no other conclusion, you're a lying troll.
>
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Oct 31, 2012, 11:22:16 PM10/31/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:50:42 -0700, Terry del Fuego
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:07:53 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>in your world having a problem with *you* is the same as hating all
>women because, hey, you're the center of the universe.
You're a gay man and you have a filthy mouth. I believe you hate women.
And you didn't deny it.
>>I said " trolled a once vibrant international flame group ".
>>
>>Never said "deliberately posted " . That is your construct.
>
>So, in your world, one can *accidentally* troll. Again, just...wow.
Who's fault but yours could it be if you xposted AO flame posts to another
newsgroup?
>>And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>
>On that we agree.
How do you resolve that it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts?
>>>alt.nuke.the.usa is not currently and never has been one of my
>>>subscribed newsgroups in the only Usenet client I have used for the
>>>last 15+ years. Period.
>>
>>Never said " subscribed". Another of your constructs.
>
>So, to review: In your universe, I "trolled" a newsgroup to which I
>never subscribed and never intentionally posted.
You're responsible if you don't check your xpost list. Your AO flames go
to every newsgroup listed. That's a fact. Intent and whether you're
subscribed or not has no effect on that fact. Get it?
> Got it.
Good.
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:07:53 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
>
>Really? "Duhh...you're a fag!" Just...wow. But I can understand how
>
>in your world having a problem with *you* is the same as hating all
>women because, hey, you're the center of the universe.
You're a gay man and you have a filthy mouth. I believe you hate women.
And you didn't deny it.
>>I said " trolled a once vibrant international flame group ".
>>
>>Never said "deliberately posted " . That is your construct.
>
Who's fault but yours could it be if you xposted AO flame posts to another
newsgroup?
>>And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>
How do you resolve that it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts?
>>>alt.nuke.the.usa is not currently and never has been one of my
>>>subscribed newsgroups in the only Usenet client I have used for the
>>>last 15+ years. Period.
>>
>>Never said " subscribed". Another of your constructs.
>
>never subscribed and never intentionally posted.
You're responsible if you don't check your xpost list. Your AO flames go
to every newsgroup listed. That's a fact. Intent and whether you're
subscribed or not has no effect on that fact. Get it?
> Got it.
Good.
Message has been deleted
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 1, 2012, 9:21:14 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:20:35 -0700, Terry del Fuego
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 23:22:16 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>tells me all I need to know about you that you think it would
>*matter*.
>self-centered insanity that makes you think my feelings run broader
>than that. Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't fun to get an
>implied lecture about bigotry from someone who thinks she's made An
>Important Point when she leads with "You're a gay man".
>doesn't mean it wasn't made at all.
Au contraire.
My point is made when you go to the trouble to change my headers to
Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>.
You don't bother me, Terry. I'm laughing. I've raised 3 sons. I've
heard all the dirty words. One of the things I know from raising children
is when you resort to name calling and foul language you've lost control.
You don't have the upper hand. These are not words uttered by someone in
control. You're furious. And it shows in your writing.
" continually-lying sack of motherfucking shit. "
" you motherfucking puddle of pus "
LOL.
I recognize the difference between comments used in a flame war and genuine
anger.
>>>>And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>>>
>>>On that we agree.
>>
>>How do you resolve that it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts?
>
>Total fuckup on my part. I managed to mentally insert "not" between
>your "it's" and "my". To be clear, I agree that it's not your fault I
>posted where I didn't intend to. However, only a liar would claim
>there's no difference between "accident" and "trolling".
You want to put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't an accident. I
never said you intentionally posted to antU. I never said you subscribed
to antU. If you didn't trim your posts and antU was in the newsgroup
line, all your flames on AO were going to antU. You were flaming in all
those newsgroups.
>Oh well, I've let you pull my strings enough for this week. Good job!
Enjoy your weekend Terry.
<t_del...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 23:22:16 -0400, Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>You're a gay man
>
>It makes me smile to think that you may actually believe that. It
>
>tells me all I need to know about you that you think it would
>*matter*.
>
>>and you have a filthy mouth.
>
>Yes. I enjoy it.
>>and you have a filthy mouth.
>
>
>>I believe you hate women.
>
>I think you *personally* are a blot on reality. It's only your
>>I believe you hate women.
>
>self-centered insanity that makes you think my feelings run broader
>than that. Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't fun to get an
>implied lecture about bigotry from someone who thinks she's made An
>Important Point when she leads with "You're a gay man".
>
>>And you didn't deny it.
>
>The fact that the point was made too subtly for an idiot to get it
>>And you didn't deny it.
>
>doesn't mean it wasn't made at all.
Au contraire.
My point is made when you go to the trouble to change my headers to
Ku Klux Kunt <nine...@cox.net>.
You don't bother me, Terry. I'm laughing. I've raised 3 sons. I've
heard all the dirty words. One of the things I know from raising children
is when you resort to name calling and foul language you've lost control.
You don't have the upper hand. These are not words uttered by someone in
control. You're furious. And it shows in your writing.
" continually-lying sack of motherfucking shit. "
LOL.
I recognize the difference between comments used in a flame war and genuine
anger.
>>>>And it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts.
>>>
>>>On that we agree.
>>
>>How do you resolve that it's my fault if you failed to check your xposts?
>
>your "it's" and "my". To be clear, I agree that it's not your fault I
>posted where I didn't intend to. However, only a liar would claim
>there's no difference between "accident" and "trolling".
You want to put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't an accident. I
never said you intentionally posted to antU. I never said you subscribed
to antU. If you didn't trim your posts and antU was in the newsgroup
line, all your flames on AO were going to antU. You were flaming in all
those newsgroups.
>Oh well, I've let you pull my strings enough for this week. Good job!
Enjoy your weekend Terry.
Bill Schenley
Nov 2, 2012, 4:49:17 AM11/2/12
to
> >> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>
>
> > Hey, Ken,
>
> Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill.
You and Roy Lieberman are the two most sexually confused people on
>
> Ken isn't posting to AO, Bill.
Usenet, Ken.
> Ken left antU long ago when
> you along with your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel,
Of course you're posting, Ken. Usenet is the only life you have.
And I don’t post to ANTU, and I doubt Bob even knows what it is. I
lurked there while you were egging on an AO flame war from a few years
ago that was cross-posted. I never saw TdF post there, either. More
bullshit from you, Ken.
> > *you're* the pathetic asshole who pretended to be a Vietnam
> > veteran [1],
>
> Never. When the issue was posted on the Vietnam Veterans group
> they stopped you in your tracks.
phony claim. And this if the first time I have ever brought this up.
It’s not someone else’s fault, Ken. You wrote:
"Register this you lame slant eyed dog eater.
I should have shot you in Camn Ranh Bay
when I had the chance.”
- Ken Ehrett –
The inference was clear, Ken. Unless of course, you meant Cam Ranh
Bay, Maryland. If that’s the case, then I will apologize.
In an effort to weasel out of what you wrote, you put your wig on,
along with that awful patterned hose, and pretended to be Sarah …
“Name the Americans near Cam Ronh Bay
during the war in Vietnam that were NOT
in the US military. We'll wait.”
- Sarah Ehrett –
“Will you answer me this time when I ask what
Americans other than military were in Vietnam
during our war there …”
- Sarah Ehrett -
You were pretending to be a civilian employee - perhaps Naval
Intelligence, huh? ... So, you were like ... an ...11 or 12-years-old
when you started your long career in secret agenting? Sheesh ...
> > a veteran of Desert Storm,
>
By Desert Storm you had already been arrested on a weapons charge.
> > a CIA agent [2],
>
>Never. You scum have also claimed Ken in the “Secret Service".
How sad.")
> (and this was so laughable) a "Federal Marshal"
>
> > Ken was a Federal Marshal. He worked at the federal level, working with
> > federal cases, federal courts, and federal prisoners. Ken chased down
> > federal fugitives, criminals and ex-cons like you Schenley.
> > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Federal+marshal
"[3] it’s the United States Marshals Service and they
are called Deputy U.S. Marshals." You typed in "federal marshal" and
you got a redirect. What the fuck is wrong with you?
At any rate, I don't think the "Federal Marshals" hire retards with a
weapons conviction.
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/processDisclaimer.jis
Case # 00008221P3
When this arrest was showcased on ANTU ... you wrote: (N' I gotta'
tell you, Ken ... This is my second favorite lie of yours)
"It was some rookie trooper trying to get points.
The gun was in a case on the back seat floor."
- Ken Ehrett -
As you donned your wig and hose again:
Ken had quit the 'Federal" Marshall's' job only
a few months before. He used the gun as a backup
when he was a 'Federal Marshall.'"
- Sarah Ehrett -
Kenny, Kenny, Kenny ... What are we going to do with you? A "rookie
mistake," huh? When you got to the station house in cuffs, was the
SOG also a "rookie?" How about the IOC, was he a "rookie," too? The
fingerprint guy? The jailer? When they carted you in for your
arraignment, was the DA a rookie? The Judge, he a rookie, too?
Did no one scream out:
"Hey! That's secret agent Kenneth Ehrett,
he's a goddamn legend in the Marshal's
Service, the CIA, and Naval Intel. What the
hell is he doing here? Who made this rookie
mistake; I'll have the SOB's badge!"
And how about the biggest "rookie mistake" of all ... You. Plead.
Guilty!
Charge No: 001 Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON: CARRY/WEAR
Statute: 27.36B.(b)Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON
Amended Date: CJIS Code:1 5212MO/PLL:Probable Cause:
Incident Date From: To: Victim Age:
Disposition
Plea: GUILTY
> > Sounds just like you, Schenley.
together during transport ... You fucking idiot ...
> > [3], a high-powered DoD employee who was called into the Pentagon after 9/11 for a
> > "debriefing,"
>
Only one retard was "Briefed" after 9/11 ... and his name was George
W. Bush. You were way too busy on alt.gossip-celebrities and ANTU to
be bothered with by the Pentagon.
> http://navintpro.net/?page_id=354
> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June2009.jpg
> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June20092.jpg
> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/NMICMemorialGarden.jpg
These links have *nothing* to do with you, you sad little trooper.
> and a Navy veteran who can't remember his rank designation.
> Rank designation?
>
> Are you struggling to say his RATING?
you are dodging your initial claim. You railed against everyone who
was laughing at you, screaming about the pay grade being the same ...
> I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
> truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
Bob and TdF have nothing to do with this post, knobflap. Try to
focus. And you have no photographic evidence.
> I've learned not to waste my time with lying scumbags.
11-year period (1995-2006) and I'd guess you are over 60 thousand by
now. Wasting your time is all you know.
Kenneth, here is the thing ... Secret agents, Naval Intel guys, US
Deputy Marshals (and even those rogue "Federal Marshals) ... they're
not on Usenet to the tune of 60 thousand posts and they sure the fuck
don't advertise to the degree you have. Your home address, your phone
numbers have all been posted over dozens of newsgroups ... You just
gotta' be the worst fucking spy in the world.
> > My photo of Ken receiving an award from VADM Murrett, brought
> > nothing but vile comments directed at the VADM and claims that the photo
> > had been photoshopped. The truth be damned that it was an official US Navy
> > photograph.
you think. Notwithstanding the guy looked like Stringbean from
HeeHaw ... Only my liberal sense of decency keeps me from embarrassing
you any further, you valueless douche bag.
You are here on AO to cause as much disruption as possible. You're
pushing poor halfwit Roy the same way you pushed the other retard a
few years ago. You were run out of AGC and ANTU because of your silly
lies and your pathetic fantasy life and you have nowhere else to go
and no real life to live. You are trying to reinvent yourself on AO.
I guess you need a flame war to make you feel whole.
> Anyone with even a modicum of common sense who looking objectively at the
> amount of evidence and facts [photographic evidence plus internet cites]
> and compares it to your uncited and unfounded allegations, will quickly
> realize who is telling the truth.
Bill Schenley
Nov 2, 2012, 4:55:14 AM11/2/12
to
> You're a gay man and you have a filthy mouth. I believe you hate women.
> And you didn't deny it.
You, Ken, are the one with gender identification problems. All anyone
> And you didn't deny it.
has to do is Google your name - they don't even need to add a key
word. The sorrid story of your silly fantasy life is there for all to
see. And as far as a "filthy mouth" goes ... You spent *years*,
fucking *years* calling one woman a "cunt" all over Usenet.
> > > I said " trolled a once vibrant international flame group ".
Bill Schenley
Nov 2, 2012, 4:59:26 AM11/2/12
to
> LOL. Wow. What an outburst.
Like 340,000 lines you wrote to me?
> Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
sexuality is, you don't even know his name. That "gay" is an issue
with you is more telling than you probably want ...
BobF
Nov 2, 2012, 5:24:10 AM11/2/12
to
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:40:07 +0000 (UTC), Anglo Saxon
<inv...@invalid.invalid> shouted from the highest rooftop:
it made about Usenet and filtering User IDs - is proven wrong, and
then lashes out with some other absurd claims in yet another
transparent attempt to draw attention away from its latest lie. And
the Roy/Sarah and Ken wheel goes round and round ...
* * * * * * *
Many women are just as rational and calm as men.
- From "The Sayings of Roy"
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 2, 2012, 1:15:50 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 01:59:26 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
>
>He laughs at you like so many others. And you have no idea what his
>sexuality is, you don't even know his name.
LOL back atcha. He's a misogynistic gay man. Don't care to know.
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Terry del Fuego - misogynistic gay man who can't control his temper.
>
>He laughs at you like so many others. And you have no idea what his
>sexuality is, you don't even know his name.
>That "gay" is an issue with you is more telling than you probably want ...
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 2, 2012, 1:16:06 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 01:55:14 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>You spent *years*, fucking *years* calling one woman a "cunt" all over Usenet.
Who would that be?
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>You spent *years*, fucking *years* calling one woman a "cunt" all over Usenet.
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 2, 2012, 1:26:17 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 01:49:17 -0700 (PDT), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>>
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Conclusion: Schenley lies. What else is new?
>>
>> http://navintpro.net/?page_id=354
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June2009.jpg
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June20092.jpg
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/NMICMemorialGarden.jpg
>
>These links have *nothing* to do with you, you sad little trooper.
I understand photographic evidence always sparks temper tantrums and
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June2009.jpg
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/June20092.jpg
>> http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/NMICMemorialGarden.jpg
>
>These links have *nothing* to do with you, you sad little trooper.
uncontrollable twitching. It's an inconvenient truth and you're forced to
counter by ramping up the lies.
It is comforting to know that as a convicted felon, you would never be
allowed inside the Federal Center let access to the NMIC or ONI.
Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
conviction just keeps growing and growing.
1. Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED
2.Disposition: NOLLE PROSEQUI
Your criminal attorney can explain why there is no conviction or criminal
record associated with this case.
>> and a Navy veteran who can't remember his rank designation.
>> Rank designation?
>>
>> Are you struggling to say his RATING?
>
>Yeah, call it whatever. But you remember what I am referring to
possibly mean.
> and you are dodging your initial claim. You railed against everyone who
>was laughing at you, screaming about the pay grade being the same ...
In the Navy your rating and your pay grade are different things. Rating is
your specialty. Pay grade includes your rank and the amount you are paid.
>Kenneth, here is the thing ... Secret agents, Naval Intel guys, US
>Deputy Marshals (and even those rogue "Federal Marshals) ... they're
>not on Usenet to the tune of 60 thousand posts and they sure the fuck
>don't advertise to the degree you have.
briefing and debriefing.
>Your home address, your phone numbers
>have all been posted over dozens of newsgroups ...
Why would Ken and I be concerned about our address and phone number being
public? Neither of us were the ones who *mad* it public. But once it was
revealed what's the big deal? It's always been in the phone book. Even
you might have been able to use Google and white pages.
And how would it be a problem anyway? You clowns are always saying we
aren't who we say we are.
>You just gotta' be the worst fucking spy in the world.
>> > My photo of Ken receiving an award from VADM Murrett, brought
>> > nothing but vile comments directed at the VADM and claims that the photo
>> > had been photoshopped. The truth be damned that it was an official US Navy
>> > photograph.
>
>The photo you are referencing was laughed at, but not for the reasons
>you think.
And that presents another inconvenient truth for you.
People on usenet including Vietnam veterans compare my cites and pictures
to your lies and claims and wonder what festering super bug did Ken stuff
up your asses all those years ago.
YHANW Bill.
Anglo Saxon
Nov 2, 2012, 2:29:29 PM11/2/12
to
this fellow's belt buckle.
And I give Bill credit for being more civilized that I am about that
ridiculous picture of you and the career desk-jockey who gave you the Hall
Janitor of the Week award: and that is, unfortunately, you look exactly like
you have a profound case of Down's Syndrome.
You would have had a lot happier life if you were Down's. The world rather
likes Down's people... and the world has always detested you.
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 2, 2012, 5:05:08 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 18:29:29 +0000 (UTC), Anglo Saxon
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> You can't reach far enough up to hammer your little fat fists on
>this fellow's belt buckle.
LOL. Murrett is as tall as a small forward in the NBA. He has that
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> You can't reach far enough up to hammer your little fat fists on
>this fellow's belt buckle.
effect on *everyone*.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/TallVADMMurrett.jpg
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/ninety7gt/2.jpg
[ flush your usual crackpot comments]
BobF
Nov 2, 2012, 5:38:23 PM11/2/12
to
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>he's received over the years.
I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>he's received over the years.
you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett,
supposedly taken 32 years ago - plus links to photos of someone else,
a memorial to other people, an article about someone else and a
generic Wiki article - can possibly be the "mountain" of photographic
evidence that somehow proves that this Ken Ehrett was ever a Federal
Marshal AND worked in the Office of Naval Intelligence?
Two things: One, the photos prove nothing.
Two, can anyone imagine the Office of Naval Intelligence employing
someone with a nutcase "wife" and/or alter-ego who blathers away about
his work on Usenet?
Don't they do background checks that would easily uncover your obvious
mental instability, disassociation with reality and total lack of
judgment?
********
What are the symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder?
In many cases, people with narcissistic personality disorder:
* Are self-centered and boastful
* Seek constant attention and admiration
* Consider themselves better than others
* Exaggerate their talents and achievements
* Believe that they are entitled to special treatment
* Are easily hurt but might not show it
* Might take advantage of others to achieve their goals
Other common traits of narcissistic personality disorder include the
following:
* Preoccupation with fantasies that focus on unlimited success,
power, intelligence, beauty, or love
* Belief that he or she is *special* and unique, and can only be
understood by other special people
* Expectation that others will automatically go along with what he
or she wants
* Inability to recognize or identify with the feelings, needs, and
viewpoints of others
* Envy of others or a belief that others are envious of him or her
* Hypersensitivity to insults (real or imagined), criticism, or
defeat, possibly reacting with rage, shame, and humiliation
* Arrogant behavior and/or attitude
- From "The Symptoms of Roy"
Anglo Saxon
Nov 2, 2012, 6:59:20 PM11/2/12
to
BobF wrote:
>
> > Two, can anyone imagine the Office of Naval Intelligence employing
> someone with a nutcase "wife" and/or alter-ego who blathers away about
> his work on Usenet?
>
>
To say nothing of Ken's overt and graphic racism, where he publicly and openly
>
> > Two, can anyone imagine the Office of Naval Intelligence employing
> someone with a nutcase "wife" and/or alter-ego who blathers away about
> his work on Usenet?
>
>
refers to people from the Middle East as "sand n****s", people from SE Asia as
"slant-eyes", and brags incessantly about his house being full of weapons and
ammunition..... then posts the phone number of the local police department to
turn him in.
And pictures of him holding assault rifles in his white-trash back yard, in a
coat covered like a circus clown with plastic medals and badges from the local
army surplice store.
Just what our high-level security intel/defense force is looking for in an
employee.
heehee. He's the gift that never stops giving.
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 3, 2012, 1:57:50 PM11/3/12
to
On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:38:23 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>he's received over the years.
>
>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
The photo in question is the second one of Ken in which he is wearing a US
>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>he's received over the years.
>
>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
Navy uniform, with name tag and his rank and rating clearly visible.
It is no longer my problem if you don't believe your lying eyes.
The facts bore out that you lack the ability to do critical analysis of
photographic evidence and come to a logical conclusion.
Should you continue to cast aspersions on my husband we can start
discussing *your* family "issues".
BobF
Nov 3, 2012, 7:23:44 PM11/3/12
to
On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:57:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
shouted from the highest rooftop:
>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:38:23 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>>he's received over the years.
>>
>>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
>
>The photo in question is the second one of Ken in which he is wearing a US
>Navy uniform, with name tag and his rank and rating clearly visible.
After copying your photo I took it into Photoshop so I could zero in
>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:38:23 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>>he's received over the years.
>>
>>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
>
>The photo in question is the second one of Ken in which he is wearing a US
>Navy uniform, with name tag and his rank and rating clearly visible.
on that name tag. Yes, the name is clear enough to decipher, but it is
blurry. What's printed underneath is also blurry and had you not
already mentioned "Westpack" I wouldn't have guessed that one of the
words appears to be "Westpac." What the word is before that is
anyone's guess.
But what's clear is that they're not "clearly visible."
What IS clearly visible, however, are the insignia on the left
shoulder. And those indicate that the man in the photo is an
intelligence specialist with a rank of petty officer second class.
>It is no longer my problem if you don't believe your lying eyes.
>
>The facts bore out that you lack the ability to do critical analysis of
>photographic evidence and come to a logical conclusion.
mountain of inconvenient truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry,
etc."
Not that I really care, but all you provided is a link to a 32 year
etc."
old photo of K.A. Ehrett that proves he was once an intelligence
specialist with a rank of petty officer second class.
That one, solitary photo can hardly be considered "all this
photographic evidence ..." that he was a "Federal Marshal," "a
CIVILIAN imagery analyst working at ONI who went to Saudi Arabia to do
bomb damage assessment during Desert Storm. He spent 4 mos. attached
to a Marine division in Riyadh" or "scheduled to attend the 10am
bomb damage assessment during Desert Storm. He spent 4 mos. attached
BRIEFING in the CNO-IP on9/11/01."
You also claimed that "Anyone with even a modicum of common sense who
looking objectively at the amount of evidence and facts [photographic
evidence plus internet cites] and compares it to your uncited and
unfounded allegations, will quickly realize who is telling the truth."
Who knows? You may have been telling the truth all along. But I don't
evidence plus internet cites] and compares it to your uncited and
unfounded allegations, will quickly realize who is telling the truth."
think that you, or anybody else, can rationally believe that a
solitary photo taken 32 years ago can possibly be the kind of
overwhelming "evidence" that proves anything other than K.A. Ehrett's
rank and rating at the time.
>Should you continue to cast aspersions on my husband we can start
>discussing *your* family "issues".
>
your trailer trash friends including Bob Feigel, and "Terry del Fuego"
trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury
Povich "Who's your baby Daddy " segment. "
Since I know how you like to twist things and make allegations you
trolled a once vibrant international flame group and turned it into a
wasteland of mediocrity and personal attacks on par with a Maury
Povich "Who's your baby Daddy " segment. "
can't - or won't - back up with facts, I checked my records and, sure
enough, I did post the following reply to a crossposted message
regarding a troll by one "Sarah Czepiel" in 2008 But to claim that it
"trolling" and accuse me of having participated in a flamewar and
personal attack on Ken in soc.veterans, alt.nuke.the.usa or
alt.war.vietnam is a twist too far - even for you.
As far as casting "aspersions on my husband," I think you'll find that
questioning your claims about Ken Ehrett's his career path and the
so-called proof you've provided so far is actually casting aspersions
on Sarah Ehrett.
* * * * * * *
Newsgroups:soc.veterans,alt.obituaries,alt.nuke.the.usa,alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: FORGERY ALERT - Re: Me and my two retarded friends. Re:
Ken Shoots A 600 Nitro Express
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:21:57 +1200
Organization: www.surfwriter.net
Message-ID: <hjr984p45j51n7iq4...@4ax.com>
References: <g5v96...@drn.newsguy.com>
<9nd684948bqkq7hns...@4ax.com>
<g5vg0...@drn.newsguy.com>
<12756467-5033-440d...@h17g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
<g615vj$qi$1...@aioe.org> <q49984p14ih15crcl...@4ax.com>
<5V2hk.129065$102.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
[Default] On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:35:13 GMT, "Maryland Menace"
<kens...@mechanicsville.nut> magnanimously proffered:
>Folks....this is yet another example of Sarah Czepiel (who is really Ken
>Ehrett) forging other posters' nyms.
Get a decent newsreader and killfile each needy nym-shift as
is it emerges from the sociopathic slime. With a decent newsreader
it's as easy as hitting stationary ducks in an honest shooting
gallery.
* * * * * * *
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 3, 2012, 10:54:23 PM11/3/12
to
On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 12:23:44 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>
>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:57:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:38:23 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>>
>>>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>>>he's received over the years.
>>>
>>>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>>>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
>>
>>The photo in question is the second one of Ken in which he is wearing a US
>>Navy uniform, with name tag and his rank and rating clearly visible.
>
>After copying your photo I took it into Photoshop so I could zero in
>on that name tag. Yes, the name is clear enough to decipher, but it is
>blurry. What's printed underneath is also blurry and had you not
>already mentioned "Westpack" I wouldn't have guessed that one of the
>words appears to be "Westpac." What the word is before that is
>anyone's guess.
FISC WESTPAC
>
>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:57:50 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:38:23 +1300, BobF <b...@surfwriter.net.not> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 22:07:10 -0400, Sarah Ehrett <nine...@cox.net>
>>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>>
>>>>I know all this photographic evidence is just a mountain of inconvenient
>>>>truth for you, Bill, and Bob, and Terry, etc....so I won't bother you with
>>>>pictures of Ken's Shellback certificate, earned while he was on the
>>>>Enterprise. I won't bother you with any more pictures of any of the awards
>>>>he's received over the years.
>>>
>>>I wouldn't want to get this wrong, so let me ask: Does anyone, besides
>>>you, seriously think that one photo, supposedly of Ken Ehrett
>>
>>The photo in question is the second one of Ken in which he is wearing a US
>>Navy uniform, with name tag and his rank and rating clearly visible.
>
>After copying your photo I took it into Photoshop so I could zero in
>on that name tag. Yes, the name is clear enough to decipher, but it is
>blurry. What's printed underneath is also blurry and had you not
>already mentioned "Westpack" I wouldn't have guessed that one of the
>words appears to be "Westpac." What the word is before that is
>anyone's guess.
FISC - Fleet Intelligence Support Center.
WESTPAC - Western Pacific.
Can this be proven. Of course.
I'm done giving you anything.
>As far as casting "aspersions on my husband," I think you'll find that
>questioning your claims about Ken Ehrett's his career path and the
>so-called proof you've provided so far is actually casting aspersions
>on Sarah Ehrett.
Ehrett are a distinction without a difference.
I've told you the consequences if you continue this.
Choomy
Nov 4, 2012, 1:45:40 AM11/4/12
to
Choomy
Nov 4, 2012, 1:49:00 AM11/4/12
to
here. He made his scrotum into a hairy pencil cup for is desk and had an
gaping open wound created where is willy used to be.
Not sure whether he had dentures made for the gaping maw he had the
doctor design for him.
Choomy
Nov 4, 2012, 1:51:06 AM11/4/12
to
Bill Schenley
Nov 4, 2012, 4:03:16 AM11/4/12
to
> >These links have *nothing* to do with you, you sad little trooper.
>
> I understand photographic evidence always sparks temper tantrums and
> uncontrollable twitching. It's an inconvenient truth and you're forced to
> counter by ramping up the lies.
>
> It is comforting to know that as a convicted felon, you would never be
> allowed inside the Federal Center let access to the NMIC or ONI.
>
> Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
> conviction just keeps growing and growing.
found it, I just read it on ANTU. And it wasn't closed without
judgement. What the hell is wrong with you?
> 1. Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED
You selectively edited out the "Plea: Guilty" part. That would mean,
halfwit, you were convicted. You. Plead. GUILTY.
> 2.Disposition: NOLLE PROSEQUI
The second count was not prosecuted because you plead guilty to the
first count. That was the deal they ADA made with you. The only
reason they doubled-up on you was to get your guilty plea to the first
charge ... I would think a "Federa ..." <I can't even type that
again ...> I would think a US Deputy Marshal like you would have known
that strategy.
> Your criminal attorney can explain why there is no conviction or criminal
> record associated with this case.
confused? Here, let me help you out, because I'm thoughtful and I
care I'm going to give you the name and up-to-date contact information
of a woman who can explain everything to you in detail ...
Georgia J. Perry
14330 Old Marlboro Pike
Prince George, MD 20772
301.627.9017
gpe...@pgcba.com
http://tinyurl.com/atgurp4
You remember her, right, Ken? She was your probation officer.
> In the Navy your ... <Blah, blah, blah ...>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbIcfFD30Ms
> >Kenneth, here is the thing ... Secret agents, Naval Intel guys, US
> >Deputy Marshals (and even those rogue "Federal Marshals) ... they're
> >not on Usenet to the tune of 60 thousand posts and they sure the fuck
> >don't advertise to the degree you have.
>
> That's funny coming from someone who don't know the difference between a
> briefing and debriefing.
> >You just gotta' be the worst fucking spy in the world.
>
> Point out what you think is a secret. Ken retired in 2009.
Ken ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iaR3WO71j4
> >> > My photo of Ken receiving an award from VADM Murrett, brought
> >> > nothing but vile comments directed at the VADM and claims that the photo
> >> > had been photoshopped. The truth be damned that it was an official US Navy
> >> > photograph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bwZXO3l5P8
> People on usenet including Vietnam veterans compare my cites and pictures
> to your lies and claims and wonder what festering super bug did Ken stuff
> up your asses all those years ago.
I didn't post to ANTU. You're just throwing shit on the wall and
pretending it sticks ... I had nothing to do with all of your problems
on ANTU, that was all you, all the time. When you go deep into your
Sarah character, Kenneth, do you put make-up on? Are you holding a
pair of scissors while you type?
I'm telling you, you just had to be the worst fucking secret spy in
the world.
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 4, 2012, 11:27:37 AM11/4/12
to
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 01:03:16 -0800 (PST), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
>> conviction just keeps growing and growing.
>
>It's not *my* arrest, Ken. It's *yours*. I'm not even the one who
>found it, I just read it on ANTU. And it wasn't closed without
>judgement.
Yes it was, you druggie, ex-con, convicted felon.
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
>> conviction just keeps growing and growing.
>
>It's not *my* arrest, Ken. It's *yours*. I'm not even the one who
>found it, I just read it on ANTU. And it wasn't closed without
>judgement.
*You* of anyone should be able to read court papers, right? :)
[ Apparently not as we shall see... ]
>> 1. Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED
http://www.enlawyers.com/1554/attorney-information/pbj-maryland-lawyer-explains-probation-before-judgement/
Probation before Judgment is essentially being placed on probation BEFORE
THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED. That means you have not been found guilty of the
crime.
>> 2.Disposition: NOLLE PROSEQUI
>
>The second count
In Maryland, the State’s Attorney has the power to enter a “Nolle Prosequi”
or “Nol Pros” in a criminal case. You may have heard of this term, or maybe
heard that your case was “Nol Prossed.” These terms all mean the same
thing–that the State has essentially dropped the charges in the case.
>> Your criminal attorney can explain why there is no conviction or criminal
>> record associated with this case.
>
>... Didn't *your* public defender explain that to you?
>No? Still confused?
*I'm* not the one who's confused, Bill.
>Here, let me help you out, because I'm thoughtful and I
>care I'm going to give you the name and up-to-date contact information
>of a woman who can explain everything to you in detail ...
>
>Georgia J. Perry
>14330 Old Marlboro Pike
>Prince George, MD 20772
>301.627.9017
>gpe...@pgcba.com
>
>http://tinyurl.com/atgurp4
Nice image snap of a speeding ticket. Seventy two in a fifty five.
Schenley, you horse's ass.
[ Flush remaining nonsense ]
Message has been deleted
Bill Schenley
Nov 5, 2012, 4:41:18 AM11/5/12
to
> > > Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
> > > conviction just keeps growing and growing.
The only one who is lying, Kenneth, is you ... PBJ is an acronym for
> > > conviction just keeps growing and growing.
Probation Before Judgement, it does *not* mean probation *without*
judgement.
> > It's not *my* arrest, Ken. It's *yours*. I'm not even the one who
> > found it, I just read it on ANTU. And it wasn't closed without
> > judgement.
>
> Yes it was, you druggie, ex-con, convicted felon.
> *You* of anyone should be able to read court papers, right? :)
than Judge Judy, which is why I know *exactly* what happened ....
(For the confused, click on the link and C&P the case # at the bottom
of the page)
Charge No: 001 Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON: CARRY/WEAR
Statute: 27.36B.(b)Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON
Amended Date: CJIS Code:1 5212MO/PLL:Probable Cause:
Incident Date From: To: Victim Age:
Disposition
Plea: Guilty
Statute: 27.36B.(b)Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON
Amended Date: CJIS Code:1 5212MO/PLL:Probable Cause:
Incident Date From: To: Victim Age:
Disposition
"Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty." It does not
say something else, Ken. It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
> [ Apparently not as we shall see... ]
>
> >> 1. Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED
>
>
> Probation before Judgment is essentially being placed on probation BEFORE
> THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED. That means you have not been found guilty of the
> crime.
Yeah, kind'a ... PBJ is offered in every state and there is only one
> Probation before Judgment is essentially being placed on probation BEFORE
> THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED. That means you have not been found guilty of the
> crime.
way to get it - plead guilty. Not by pleading not guilty, but by
pleading *guilty*. Not guilty by reason of insanity, not guilty
because I'm-a-woman-trapped-in-man's-body don't work. The marshal's
office didn't show up and get you PBJ; the admiral didn't help out ...
If you don't plead guilty, you get this thingy called ... a trial.
PBJ is offered to first-time offenders and sometimes low level
offenders, and you are guilty until you have completed your probation.
Isn't that right, Kenneth?
After you plead guilty to this weapons charge, you had to stand in
front of the court and make a complete allocution. [1] In other
words, you didn't just get to plead guilty, you had to take complete
responsibility for your crime. You had to give details as to why you
were driving around with a loaded weapon in your car. <I hope the fuck
you didn't say, "But your honor, Commissioner Gordon said it was
okay ..."> Mrs. Moneypenny or Q didn't come to your rescue; Perry
White didn't write a letter of support for you. Neither did Sgt. Rock
or Underdog. The fantasy world you live in, Ken, didn't play a part
in you getting probation before judgement. You were just another
petty criminal to the court.
> >> 2.Disposition: NOLLE PROSEQUI
>
> >The second count
They didn't drop the second count because you were a secret agent.
They dropped the second count because you plead guilty to the first
count. Remember, more times than Judge Judy ...
> >> Your criminal attorney can explain why there is no conviction or criminal
> >> record associated with this case.
arrested for the first time, is offered. You didn't receive PBJ
because you were close personal friends with Matt Dillon.
> >Here, let me help you out, because I'm thoughtful and I
> >care I'm going to give you the name and up-to-date contact information
> >of a woman who can explain everything to you in detail ...
>
> >Georgia J. Perry
> >14330 Old Marlboro Pike
> >Prince George, MD 20772
> >301.627.9017
> >gpe...@pgcba.com
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/atgurp4
>
> This is too funny.
>
> Nice image snap of a speeding ticket. Seventy two in a fifty five.
>
> Schenley, you horse's ass.
the ticket.
"Related Person Information
Name: Perry, Georgia
Connection: Probation Officer"
Kenneth, you and I both know that when you are on probation, each and
every contact with LEOs, no matter how mundane, is noted by your
probation officer. That's why the police officer who cited you for
speeding forwarded a copy of the ticket to Georgia Perry, your
probation officer.
See, Ken, when you get PBJ and, in your case, one year of unsupervised
probation, you have to stay out of trouble for ... one year. In your
case, you should have discharged off probation 21 March 1991. It is
after that date that you can technically say you have never been
convicted of a crime - that your guilty plea is expunged. [2]
Your record - you weapons conviction - is still on the books in
Maryland. That's why anyone can look it up. The information as to
your innocuous speeding ticket was sent to Georgia Perry, your
probation officer ... over twenty years later. That makes a person
wonder ... You couldn't still be on probation for the weapons
conviction so you must have been arrested on some other charge or
charges between 1991 and 2011. Why else would you still be on
probation? Why else would your weapons conviction still appear on the
state of Maryland's website?
I'm not the one who did this investigation on you. This was all done,
as you know, in ANTU, by one of the many ... *friends* ... you seem to
have made there. However, it seems whoever it was was unable to
bridge your weapons conviction with your current probation problems.
What have you done, Ken? Did it involve more guns, or you dressing
in drag? If it's none of my business, Ken, just tell me to go fuck
myself.
[1] "Allocution is sometimes required of a defendant
who pleads guilty to a crime in a plea bargain in exchange
for a reduced sentence. In this instance, allocution can
serve to provide closure for victims or their families.
In principle, it removes any doubt as to the exact nature
of the defendant's guilt in the matter.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expungement
Black's Law Dictionary defines expungement of record as the process by
which the record of a criminal conviction is destroyed or sealed.
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 5, 2012, 1:36:33 PM11/5/12
to
On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 01:41:18 -0800 (PST), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
>> > > conviction just keeps growing and growing.
>
>The only one who is lying, Kenneth, is you ... PBJ is an acronym for
>Probation Before Judgement, it does *not* mean probation *without*
>judgement.
That's *exactly* what it means. I gave you the exact quote. It's the
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Your porkie over a gun charge that was closed without judgment or
>> > > conviction just keeps growing and growing.
>
>The only one who is lying, Kenneth, is you ... PBJ is an acronym for
>Probation Before Judgement, it does *not* mean probation *without*
>judgement.
reason you are not found guilty of the crime.
http://www.enlawyers.com/1554/attorney-information/pbj-maryland-lawyer-explains-probation-before-judgement/
"Probation before Judgment is essentially being placed on probation BEFORE
THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED. That means you have not been found guilty of the
crime. "
>(For the confused, click on the link and C&P the case # at the bottom
>of the page)
>http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/processDisclaimer.jis
> Case # 00008221P3
>
>Charge No: 001 Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON: CARRY/WEAR
>Statute: 27.36B.(b)Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON
>Amended Date: CJIS Code:1 5212MO/PLL:Probable Cause:
>Incident Date From: To: Victim Age:
>Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED
>of the page)
>http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/processDisclaimer.jis
> Case # 00008221P3
>
>Charge No: 001 Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON: CARRY/WEAR
>Statute: 27.36B.(b)Description:HANDGUN ON PERSON
>Amended Date: CJIS Code:1 5212MO/PLL:Probable Cause:
>Incident Date From: To: Victim Age:
>
>Plea: Guilty "Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty."
>It does not say something else, Ken.
>It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
No it doesn't. You're lying, Schenley.
>Plea: Guilty "Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty."
>It does not say something else, Ken.
>It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
It says, "Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED"
>> Probation before Judgment is essentially being placed on probation BEFORE
>> THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED. That means you have not been found guilty of the
>> crime.
>
>Yeah, kind'a ...
>PBJ is offered in every state and there is only one way to get it - plead guilty.
Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED.
No Judgment was ever entered. All clearly stated in the court record.
>> >Here, let me help you out, because I'm thoughtful and I
>> >care I'm going to give you the name and up-to-date contact information
>> >of a woman who can explain everything to you in detail ...
>>
>> >Georgia J. Perry
>> >14330 Old Marlboro Pike
>> >Prince George, MD 20772
>> >301.627.9017
>> >gpe...@pgcba.com
>>
>> >http://tinyurl.com/atgurp4
>>
>> This is too funny.
>>
>> Nice image snap of a speeding ticket. Seventy two in a fifty five.
>>
>> Schenley, you horse's ass.
>
>It's not the speeding ticket, you "horse's ass." It's the bottom of
>the ticket.
>"Related Person Information
>Name: Perry, Georgia
>Connection: Probation Officer"
Director of the PG County Bar Association.
http://www.pgcba.com/The%20PGCBA/ContactUs.aspx
The Prince George's County Bar Association
Established 1902
Marlborough Professional Park
14330 Old Marlboro Pike
Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20722
Phone: (301) 952-1442
Fax: (301) 952-1429
******Executive Director: Georgia J. Perry
******Email: gpe...@pgcba.com
Do you really think Ms Perry who is the Executive Director of the PG County
Bar Association is playing Parole Officer and interviewing drugged out
jailbirds like you, Schenley? Seriously?
>Kenneth, you and I both know that when you are on probation, each and
>every contact with LEOs, no matter how mundane, is noted by your
>probation officer.
PBJ UNSUPERVISED. Remember? UNSUPERVISED. Do you understand what
UNSUPERVISED means? There WAS NO Probation Officer.
As far as Ms. Perry ? You'll have to ask her why her name is on the
records. There aren't any dates for any probation on the speeding ticket.
>Why else would you still be on probation?
probation. Ken pled guilty and paid the fine.
Speed Limit: 55 Convicted Speed: 072
Costs: Fine: 54.5 CourtCost: 33
Case Status: Closed.
It was a $ 90 speeding ticket. The Judge also reduced the fine to $54.50.
Why do you think that happened? :)
Your "one friend" can't make any connection because there isn't one.
People with your record don't hold security clearances.
>I'm not the one who did this investigation on you. This was all done,
>as you know, in ANTU, by one of the many ... *friends* ... you seem to
>have made there.
obviously bad gouge. This "one friend" has single handedly made you into
a complete horse's ass on alt.obituaries. That's going to happen when you
listen to idiots.
Anglo Saxon
Nov 5, 2012, 7:49:54 PM11/5/12
to
Sarah Ehrett wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 01:41:18 -
--
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 01:41:18 -
Ken, it's over. That was the most thorough beat-down you have ever received
and you've gotten thousands.
And it's rendered you totally, completely, forever irrelevant. But still fun
to watch, in a grisly way.
Bill Schenley
Nov 6, 2012, 4:08:01 AM11/6/12
to
> >(For the confused, click on the link and C&P the case # at the
bottom
> >of the page)
> >
bottom
> >of the page)
> >
> >Plea: Guilty "Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty."
> >It does not say something else, Ken.
> >It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
>
> No it doesn't. You're lying, Schenley.
>
> It says, "Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED"
It says under Disposition: "Plea: Guilty."
> >It does not say something else, Ken.
> >It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
>
> No it doesn't. You're lying, Schenley.
>
> It says, "Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED"
> > Kenneth, you and I both know that when you are
> > on probation, each and every contact with LEOs,
> > no matter how mundane, is noted by your
> > probation officer.
>
> Schenley, where do you get that Ken ever had a Probation
> Officer ? PBJ UNSUPERVISED. Remember? UNSUPERVISED.
> Do you understand what UNSUPERVISED means?
> There WAS NO Probation Officer.
Of course there was/is a probation officer. Why the fuck do you think
> > on probation, each and every contact with LEOs,
> > no matter how mundane, is noted by your
> > probation officer.
>
> Schenley, where do you get that Ken ever had a Probation
> Officer ? PBJ UNSUPERVISED. Remember? UNSUPERVISED.
> Do you understand what UNSUPERVISED means?
> There WAS NO Probation Officer.
they call it probation. If there was no probation officer they'd call
it Go-Do-Whatever-The-Fuck-You-Want. If there was no probation
officer who would violate you if you didn't meet the conditions of
your probation? Here, ya' dumbass, read about unsupervised
probation ...
"The reality is that if a probation officer elects
to revoke unsupervised probation, the consequences
can be serious and there is always at least some risk
of incarceration."
http://www.ehow.com/about_5390896_unsupervised-probation.html
> >It's not the speeding ticket, you "horse's ass." It's the bottom of
> >the ticket.
>
> This is *indeed* too funny.
>
> >"Related Person Information
> >Name: Perry, Georgia
> >Connection: Probation Officer"
>
> A simple Google search reveals that Georgia Perry is the Executive
> Director of the PG County Bar Association.
when you were terrorizing the streets of Mechanicsville with your ...
Say ... What kind of weapon were you wildly pointing at your
neighbors?
Once again:
This is all up-to-date contact information. Call her. Find out.
> ... interviewing drugged out jailbirds like you, Schenley?
You know, if I didn't know any better, I'd think you were trying to
hurt my feelings ...
You remember when all of this was first posted on ANTU and you went
all Net KoOk on everyone and threatened to sue Usenet, ANTU and
whoever it was who posted your arrest record? Well, why don't you sue
the state of Maryland? You know, for saying you plead "Guilty" to a
weapons charge, for not expunging your criminal activity, for claiming
you are still on probation ... twenty years later. Seriously, don't
you think Maryland has deeper pockets than ANTU?
> Your "one friend" can't make any connection because there isn't one.
> People with your record don't hold security clearances.
lurk at ANTU. I don't know anyone there. These links are all over the
Internet and I had nothing to do their discovery. Your buffoonery
cannot be blamed on me.
As to "security clearances." That's the one claim you've made that I
absolutely believe. I believe you had a security clearance. After
all, every civilian employee at a military Installation has to have a
clearance, so I believe you when you say you had a clearance. A
clearance to enter rooms other employees were not privilege to enter.
The rooms where they kept the TidyBowl, Industrial Strength Lime-Away,
Stone-Tech Polishing Powder, the Urinal Scented Para Blocks, the Pumie
Scouring Sticks. You probably miss all that now that you're retired,
huh?
I'm going to leave you now, Ken. I'm going to leave you with all the
craziness in your head, all your Secret Agent, Fed ... er ...US
Marshal, Vietnam veteran, Nava ... uh ...navel Intelligence stories,
your fishnet stockings, that god-awful wig you wear while posting as
Sarah ... But I have one last question, and if it is classified
information, you don't have to tell me, I'll understand ...
Did you get a decoder ring when you joined the CIA, little trooper?
That would be so cool ...
Sarah Ehrett
Nov 6, 2012, 10:23:16 AM11/6/12
to
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 01:08:01 -0800 (PST), Bill Schenley
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >(For the confused, click on the link and C&P the case # at the
>bottom
>> >of the page)
>> >
>
>> >Plea: Guilty "Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty."
>> >It does not say something else, Ken.
>> >It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
>>
>> No it doesn't. You're lying, Schenley.
>>
>> It says, "Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED"
>
>It says under Disposition: "Plea: Guilty."
disposition :
<b.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >(For the confused, click on the link and C&P the case # at the
>bottom
>> >of the page)
>> >
>
>> >Plea: Guilty "Plea: Guilty," Ken. "Guilty." "Guilty." "Guilty."
>> >It does not say something else, Ken.
>> >It says, "Disposition: Plea: Guilty."
>>
>> No it doesn't. You're lying, Schenley.
>>
>> It says, "Disposition: PBJ UNSUPERVISED"
>
>It says under Disposition: "Plea: Guilty."
b : final arrangement : settlement <the disposition of the case>
The disposition is the judges ruling, not your plea.
But thanks for this .... !
> uh ...navel Intelligence
Too funny.
0 new messages