Sara Salzman -- criminal?
david_michael
Source: http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-10/news/feature3_2.html
<begin quote>
Salzman shot back with an e-mail message telling Ellis not to write to
her again. She also sent a copy of that letter to seark.net, along
with a note to Jim Ellis of seark.net refuting Don Ellis's claims.
Instead of helping her, Jim Ellis wrote back asking her not to spam
him with her complaints and added that "this sounds like a lover's
quarrel." As it turns out, Don Ellis's brother works at seark.net,
which would explain how he found out about Salzman's letters. Whether
Jim Ellis is Don Ellis's brother could not be determined.
Salzman soon discovered that her e-mail in-box was flooded with mail
from pornographic Web sites. Someone had put her name on eighty
gay-porn e-mail lists. She received messages like "Thanks for
subscribing to Naughty Mail, your free guide to pictures, jokes,
stories, movies, sites, special offers and more" and "*Exclusive Hot
Teen pictures* Hot & Steamy EROTIC STORIES -- a new one every day!"
Salzman turned to Mike Castro of the FBI's Domestic Terrorism Unit in
Colorado, but according to Salzman, he said there wasn't anything he
could do to help her because there were no specific threats against
her at the time. Castro refused to comment to Westword on Salzman's
situation.
On February 28, Salzman filed an incident report with the Arapahoe
County Sheriff's Office, but she says the deputy who assisted her said
that the Internet hijinks probably aren't in violation of any laws --
and that if they are, they're probably just a misdemeanor, and
Arapahoe County doesn't extradite people for misdemeanors. Nobody from
the sheriff's office would return phone calls for this story.
<end quote>
RELEVANCE OF ITEM ONE: Salzman has been making claims to the police
and the media that she has been the victim of some kind of political
hate campaign resulting from her anti-Nazi Internet activities. She
has blamed Mr Ellis for this campaign.
ITEM TWO:
http://www.bnaibrith.ca/publications/audit2001/audit2001-03.html
<begin quote>
Threats and intimidation followed Sara's announcement that she was
going to testify against a Texas racist during a pending Pennsylvania
civil action. Although Ms. Salzman has contacted authorities on
numerous occasions, (28) help has not been forthcoming, and no
criminal investigations have ensued, even in cases involving direct
threats of death.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, after an extensive and costly
investigation, could only offer the following:
"In response to your question about what I would do if I were
suffering the same harassment, I will answer you, but you won't like
it. First, I would cease reading the posts in alt.revisionism; I would
completely remove myself from that news group. Second, I would change
my telephone number and e-mail address. You shouldn't have to do these
things, of course, but the reality is that they are simple, low-cost
solutions to the problem, and a judge and jury would definitely
consider those alternatives as well. This point — that a judge and
jury would likely be unsympathetic given your decision to participate
in alt.revisionism and your ability to avoid most if not all of the
harassment by taking yourself out of the fray and changing your e-mail
address and phone number — is one of the reasons we decided not to go
forward…" (29)
What has Ms. Salzman done to warrant this sort of abuse? She has taken
a firm stand in the public forums of UseNet and confronted racist
activity at every turn, and she has defended the historiography of the
Holocaust with vigor and determination, earning the enmity of every
neo-nazi Holocaust denier and the organizations actively spreading
hatred. In addition, she has volunteered hundreds — if not thousands —
of hours of her time to produce reams of information for the Nizkor
Project, including a monumental effort to put the entire transcripts
of the first Nurenberg Tribunal online by scanning and coding the
British transcripts. (30)
<end quote>
RELEVANCE OF POINT TWO: Ms Salzman has been putting it about that
she's the victim of a 'racist' hate campaign in which she has been
alleging that Mr Ellis has been involved.
ITEM THREE
Usenet post from Sara Salzman
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:54:39 -0500
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 21:55:12 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-8D6408...@news.giganews.com
<begin quote>
No, Dr. Homeland, that's not the "oopsie" at all. Are you really as
thick as you act? The "oopsie" is that Pat Blakely worked for the CIA,
and you have now linked Blakely and Ellis together perfectly.
Got it now, Mr. Thick?
Sara
<end quote>
RELEVANCE OF ITEM THREE: Ms Salzman believed Blakely to have worked
for the CIA.
ITEM FOUR
Usenet post from Sara Salzman
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 17:29:06 -0500
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 16:29:39 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-FFE7ED...@news.giganews.com>
<begin quote>
Funny about that, isn't it? Blakely always claimed he lived in England
and worked for the CIA.
Don Ellis is a car mechanic and grease monkey.
AND a convenient screen for Pat Blakely's more offensive turns.
Thanks, Dr. Homeland, for admitting you knew about this all along. But
then, so did we.
Of course, why Ken McVay would be reading (and/or responding to) your
"exposes" in a national-anarchist group on Yahoo is quite another
question.
Sara
<end quote>
RELEVANCE OF ITEM FOUR: The words 'so did we' are extremely
significant. It is not entirely clear whether Ms Salzman is claiming
that she 'knew' all along that Blakely and Ellis were the same person
or that she 'knew' all along that they were working together. However,
she was clearly aware of a direct link between Ellis and the CIA.
CASE:
1. Ms Salzman, in an attempt to gain a reputation for herself as a
fearless anti-Nazi campaigner, has been putting it about that she's
been the victim of a racist hate campaign. She's blamed this on Ellis.
2. She has publicized this to the full, making complaints to the FBI
and police and, of course, giving interviews about it to the press.
3. However, she knew all along that Ellis was either Blakely or was
working closely with him (she seems unsure of which).
4. She believes Blakely to have been in the employ of the CIA.
5. Thus Ms Salzman has been falsely claiming to be the victim of
racists when in fact she was aware all along that her supposed
tormentor(s) were linked to the CIA (i.e. were not 'racists' at all
but agents acting on behalf of the state).
6. Knowingly making false reports of 'racist' harassment to the CIA,
FBI and other police authorities is, I believe, a criminal offence.
Of course it is entirely possible that Ms Salzman herself, who has
close links to McVay, has direct involvement with the CIA, in which
case the entire affair might be a CIA setup job to
manufacture/fabricate 'hate crimes' and thus legitimize state
repression. In this case, of course, her actions might well have been
perfectly legal.
Orac
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
> CASE:
>
> 1. Ms Salzman, in an attempt to gain a reputation for herself as a
> fearless anti-Nazi campaigner, has been putting it about that she's
> been the victim of a racist hate campaign. She's blamed this on Ellis.
>
> 2. She has publicized this to the full, making complaints to the FBI
> and police and, of course, giving interviews about it to the press.
>
> 3. However, she knew all along that Ellis was either Blakely or was
> working closely with him (she seems unsure of which).
>
> 4. She believes Blakely to have been in the employ of the CIA.
>
> 5. Thus Ms Salzman has been falsely claiming to be the victim of
> racists when in fact she was aware all along that her supposed
> tormentor(s) were linked to the CIA (i.e. were not 'racists' at all
> but agents acting on behalf of the state).
>
> 6. Knowingly making false reports of 'racist' harassment to the CIA,
> FBI and other police authorities is, I believe, a criminal offence.
>
> Of course it is entirely possible that Ms Salzman herself, who has
> close links to McVay, has direct involvement with the CIA, in which
> case the entire affair might be a CIA setup job to
> manufacture/fabricate 'hate crimes' and thus legitimize state
> repression. In this case, of course, her actions might well have been
> perfectly legal.
Geez, now I know for sure that David Michael has gone off the deep end.
What a loon.
--
Orac |"I am not interested in trying to compensate
| for your amazing lack of observation."
|
| Orac
c...@c.cc
Perhaps your analysis is in order.
>What a loon.
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com> in
alt.revisionism, on 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
David, you're an idiot.
- --
John Morris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQWNIATfbIykA6SysEQKfNgCgxjST54Zn0NGi7i7XUOTbuLFPDu4AoOuG
rTb7Vk+gEqiL+mEPGZZrEVSd
=O6fz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sara Salzman
You are the biggest lox on the Internet, Dr. Homeland. Your idiotic post
defies description.
Sara
--
-My name is not "Fatbury Scumbag" you stupid lying Jew bastard. Name call
is all a pathetic loser like you has! You have yet to prove me wrong
you dirty filthy lying Jew bastard!
-I don't rely on personal attacks as my means of posting and
the bulk of my posts prove so! You can't discern the difference.
BTW my name is not Fatboy you stupid kike.
--Scott Bradbury, who completely misses the irony of the above
Doc Tavish
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=1c0540h6tt5gd530n...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Sara Salzman's S&M Bondage-Torture Fantasies Result in Perjury!
Message-ID: <1c0540h6tt5gd530n...@4ax.com>
Date: 1 Mar 2004 01:35:09 GMT
steve wolk
"Sara Salzman" <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:catamont-FB171B...@news.giganews.com...
> > jury would likely be unsympathetic given your decision to participate
> > in alt.revisionism and your ability to avoid most if not all of the
> > harassment by taking yourself out of the fray and changing your e-mail
> > forward." (29)
> >
> > What has Ms. Salzman done to warrant this sort of abuse? She has taken
> > a firm stand in the public forums of UseNet and confronted racist
> > activity at every turn, and she has defended the historiography of the
> > Holocaust with vigor and determination, earning the enmity of every
> > neo-nazi Holocaust denier and the organizations actively spreading
With a bagel hole where his brain should be.
Your idiotic post
> defies description.
What a whackjob. David needs professional help, the kind that Dr. Salzman
can provide.
--
David Michael - he ALWAYS lies and he ALWAYS denies.
And he ALWAYS runs.
david_michael
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> In <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com> in
> alt.revisionism, on 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
>
> David, you're an idiot.
>
> - --
> John Morris
Personal abuse from Salzman's supporters but no answer. Let's go
through it again.
1. Salzman has claimed that she was the victim of a racist hate
campaign and has blamed it on Ellis.
2. She has whined about this to the media and, more to the point, to
the FBI and the police.
3. She has now stated that she believes that Blakely was CIA.
4. She has stated that she believes that Ellis was either Blakely or
working closely with him.
5. It appears therefore that she has made false claims to the FBI and
police about the alleged hate campaign against her because she seems
to have known all along about the link between Ellis and the CIA.
Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get either
a rebuttal or an explanation.
2.
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
>david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>
>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
Interesting respone to a blank like, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
illustrates your problems all too graphically.
Meanwhile, your own county's DA laughed at your assertion. We were there that
July day last year. Where were you hiding?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com> in
alt.revisionism, on 6 Oct 2004 02:32:47 -0700,
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
[snip]
> Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
> abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get
> either a rebuttal or an explanation.
Ah, so you are going into stalking mode again.
- --
John Morris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQWPNozfbIykA6SysEQK8JACfS4rXqs739eEi2sTyZw16brwZX/4AniAB
nnt9RSn71s9QVVsvRlckJ9Qf
=LTYb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Joebruno
> jury would likely be unsympathetic given your decision to participate
> in alt.revisionism and your ability to avoid most if not all of the
> harassment by taking yourself out of the fray and changing your e-mail
> forward?" (29)
>
> What has Ms. Salzman done to warrant this sort of abuse? She has taken
> a firm stand in the public forums of UseNet and confronted racist
> activity at every turn, and she has defended the historiography of the
> Holocaust with vigor and determination, earning the enmity of every
> neo-nazi Holocaust denier and the organizations actively spreading
You got one problem, Bald Eagle:Sara said what she believed, so
anything she said is not "knowingly" doing anything.
>
> Of course it is entirely possible that Ms Salzman herself, who has
> close links to McVay, has direct involvement with the CIA,
You've got to be kidding.
in which
> case the entire affair might be a CIA setup job to
> manufacture/fabricate 'hate crimes' and thus legitimize state
> repression. In this case, of course, her actions might well have been
> perfectly legal.
You've pegged the wrong spies, Wavy Davy. I'm the KGB agent, remember?
I'm the one trying to subvert your capitalist society and make you eat
AK47s and send you on a Gulag vacation.
Don't sweat the CIA, doorak. Compared to my employer, they're a bunch
of pansies.
Dasvidanya.
Sara Salzman
You won't get either, since you're obviously living in a fantasy land
where up is down, and you think your posts make any sense.
david_michael
> > jury would likely be unsympathetic given your decision to participate
> > in alt.revisionism and your ability to avoid most if not all of the
> > harassment by taking yourself out of the fray and changing your e-mail
> > forward?" (29)
> >
> > What has Ms. Salzman done to warrant this sort of abuse? She has taken
> > a firm stand in the public forums of UseNet and confronted racist
> > activity at every turn, and she has defended the historiography of the
> > Holocaust with vigor and determination, earning the enmity of every
> > neo-nazi Holocaust denier and the organizations actively spreading
Do you deny that you knowingly made false statements to the police,
the FBI and the media?
Do you deny that you claimed to them that Mr Ellis was involved in
racially harassing you when in fact you were aware all the time of his
links with the CIA?
Can we please have straight answers from you for once?
Doc Tavish
<catamont-99FEF2...@news.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>> Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
>> abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get either
>> a rebuttal or an explanation.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2.
>
>You won't get either, since you're obviously living in a fantasy land
>where up is down, and you think your posts make any sense.
>
>Sara
~~~Sara D.Salzman doesn't mind lying:
"I do not mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy." - Sara Salzman sig line
Message-ID: <schwartz-ya023180...@news.infinet.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_1 and SaraSplainsAll_2)
-------
"I made it up based on my hatred for anything related to the
Truth." - Sara Salzman
Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_15 and SaraSplainsAll_16)
Doc Tavish
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
She won't give you a straight answer but this should explain it all:
~~Sara D. Salzman confirming her character flaws for one and all?~~
"I'm a little fool and a lying bitch and a silly slut..." - Sara Salzman
verifying Matt Giwer's observations?
"I do not mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy." - Sara Salzman's sig line
Message-ID: <schwartz-ya023180...@news.infinet.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_1 and SaraSplainsAll_2)
-------
"I made it up based on my hatred for anything related to the
Truth." - Sara Salzman
Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_15 and SaraSplainsAll_16)
-------
"I am an agitator..." - Sara Salzman admitting her agenda?
Message-ID: <catamont-201...@ts006d16.den-co.concentric.net>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_9 and SaraSplainsAll_10)
~~Sara Salzman Seeking a Fix?~~
"Please let me know what drugs you're taking. They sound wonderful!" - Sara
Salzman Message-ID: <schwartz-180...@cmh-p028.infinet.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_3 and SaraSplainsAll_4)
>
>David
>http://www.nationalanarchist.com
Does anything else need to be stated? Sara is pathological liar and a perjurer.
Tavish
~~Comments on Sara D. Salzman's Appearance~~
Peter N. Kirstein
Professor of History
Saint Xavier University
<start/quote>
From: "Peter Kirstein" <kirs...@sxu.edu>
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004 6:40:58 AM America/Denver
To: Sara Salzman
Subject: Re: Thank you so very much!
Reply-To: <kirs...@sxu.edu>
Dear Ms. Salzman,
I am sorry if you are being inconvenienced by Mr Irving's posting. I
have no control what persons place on their website in the dynamic,
unfettered world of the Internet. No, I would not have drawn inferences
to your faith and appearance....
<end/quote> ^^^^^^^^^^
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Salzman Gets Spanked
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:16:06 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-0054A0...@news.giganews.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_17 and SaraSplainsAll_18)
Sara D. Salzman's appearance as depicted by this photo which is what
Professor Peter Kirstein saw:
http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-10/news/feature3_4.gif
Other comments on Sara's appearance:
"Your personality matches the person in the picture to a "T"." - Steve Talbot
Message-ID: <4162fa1b...@news20.forteinc.com>
"Isn't she wearing a Halloween mask? No one is that ugly or at
least I haven't ever seen anyone that gruesome." - James Fenimoore
Message-ID: <2sgn7aF...@uni-berlin.de>
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
law -- which the morbidly obese Shame of Belleville, WI will avoid
like the plague, given that the Findings of Fact would be confirmed
once again...
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 06:17:14 -0600,
><catamont-99FEF2...@news.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
><cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>> Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
>>> abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get either
>>> a rebuttal or an explanation.
>>You won't get either, since you're obviously living in a fantasy land
>>where up is down, and you think your posts make any sense.
>~~~Sara D.Salzman doesn't mind lying:
>"I do not mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy." - Sara Salzman sig line
>Message-ID: <schwartz-ya023180...@news.infinet.com>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_1 and SaraSplainsAll_2)
... and very clearly marked as a quote from Samuel Butler.
>"I made it up based on my hatred for anything related to the
>Truth." - Sara Salzman
>Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_15 and SaraSplainsAll_16)
And where's the *rest* of the sentence, you morbidly obese liar? From
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=catamont-780E81.12485105102004%40news.giganews.com&output=gplain
<quote>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 13:48:18 -0500
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Yet Another Lie From Chris Carpenter
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:48:51 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
In article <4162981a....@news20.forteinc.com>,
Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 22:32:39 -0600,
> <catamont-6BF1FE...@news.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
> <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >In article <q184m015paqfpcuni...@4ax.com>, c...@c.cc wrote:
> >> September 30, 2004 (3:41 PM EDT)
> >>
> >> Newest MyDoom Aims Attack At Holocaust History Site
<snip copyright violation>
> >And where, pray tell, does the article say that the Denial of Service
> >attack was self-inflicted?
> All one needs to do is consider the past record of your groups and groupies.
>
> Steve
>
In other words, "I made it up based on my hatred for anything related
to the Truth."
Sorry, Sparky. Please provide any proof that the Holocaust History
project has EVER "self-inflicted" anything.
</quote>
So very clearly she was speaking from the viewpoint of chrissy, and
accurately at that.
See? Instead of just *whining* about context, I have actually *shown*
that context and explained why that context is important.
Unlike certain other posters here...
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>She won't give you a straight answer but this should explain it all:
>
> ~~Sara D. Salzman confirming her character flaws for one and all?~~
>"I'm a little fool and a lying bitch and a silly slut..." - Sara Salzman
>verifying Matt Giwer's observations?
>"I do not mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy." - Sara Salzman's sig line
>Message-ID: <schwartz-ya023180...@news.infinet.com>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_1 and SaraSplainsAll_2)
There's a little thing we big kids call "sarcasm," fatboy -- look it
up.
>"I made it up based on my hatred for anything related to the
>Truth." - Sara Salzman
>Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_15 and SaraSplainsAll_16)
Clearly speaking from the viewpoint of lying little chrissy.
>"I am an agitator..." - Sara Salzman admitting her agenda?
>Message-ID: <catamont-201...@ts006d16.den-co.concentric.net>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_9 and SaraSplainsAll_10)
Clearly identified as a quote from Jim Hightower
> ~~Sara Salzman Seeking a Fix?~~
>"Please let me know what drugs you're taking. They sound wonderful!" - Sara
>Salzman Message-ID: <schwartz-180...@cmh-p028.infinet.com>
>(Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_3 and SaraSplainsAll_4)
>Does anything else need to be stated?
Yeah 0-- the context you're always so worried about when *you* are
quoted, but which you never quite get around to supplying.
>Sara is pathological liar and a perjurer.
Speaking of lies, fatboy, what about your lie that you had $10k to
offer in exchange for proof of your morbid obesity?
Steve Talbot
Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>
>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>law
One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing of
evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What then do you call
submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil court? No wonder why
your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see those complaints before
Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That judgment was dismissed in light of the
real facts.
>-- which the morbidly obese Shame of Belleville, WI will avoid
>like the plague, given that the Findings of Fact would be confirmed
>once again...
It is my understanding the Findings of Fact were only made because neither
Tavish nor his attorney had been served and therefore did not chalenge what was
never served. Also I know Tavish has openly challenged Edeiken to re-file in
Tavish's jurisdiction. Why hasn't your mentor had the guts to re-file and why
has he gone into hiding since his agony of defeat?
By the way; what proof do you have that Tavish is morbidly obese?
Steve
Mr. Ellis
>
>
> 1. Ms Salzman, in an attempt to gain a reputation for herself as a
> fearless anti-Nazi campaigner, has been putting it about that she's
> been the victim of a racist hate campaign. She's blamed this on Ellis.
Ms. Salzman blames all her problems on Mr. Ellis.
> 2. She has publicized this to the full, making complaints to the FBI
> and police and, of course, giving interviews about it to the press.
Ms. Salzman loves playing the victim.
> 3. However, she knew all along that Ellis was either Blakely or was
> working closely with him (she seems unsure of which).
Mr. Ellis has never meet Mr. Blakely in person.
> 4. She believes Blakely to have been in the employ of the CIA.
Did the CIA ever own a bread company?
> 5. Thus Ms Salzman has been falsely claiming to be the victim of
> racists when in fact she was aware all along that her supposed
> tormentor(s) were linked to the CIA (i.e. were not 'racists' at all
> but agents acting on behalf of the state).
Ms. Salzman is always making false claims.
> 6. Knowingly making false reports of 'racist' harassment to the CIA,
> FBI and other police authorities is, I believe, a criminal offence.
Criminal offence? Nope, even the agents need a good laugh every now and then.
Sara Salzman
I have consistently given "straight answers," Dr. Homeland. It is you
who feel the need to play stupid, "misinterpret" and manufacture.
I did not make any false statements to the police, or the FBI, or the
media. If you believe I did, have me arrested.
"Someone claiming to be Don Ellis" is not necessarily the same thing as
"Don Ellis." "Don" and "Pat" often traded nyms, along with the other
hundreds of nyms he/they used. I have no idea who Pat Blakely is. I know
he CLAIMED to work for the CIA. And I know that SOMEONE calling himself
Don Ellis logged on to irc, and then immediately logged off and logged
back on as "Pat Blakely."
There is a person called Don Ellis. He was sued by David Goldman of
hatewatch.org. If he was CIA, involved in some kind of "sting," the case
would never have been allowed to proceed.
There is a person who calls himself Pat Blakely. He has also said he is
Don Ellis. He also says he worked for the CIA. He also said he was in
the courtroom at Edeiken vs. Bradbury. He said a lot of things.
And you know what, I couldn't give a rat's ass whether they are one
person, two people, or an entire lunatic asylum. I have never lied to
law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to law
enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid again?
Doc Tavish
Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:36:39 -0500, <1097073400.L2FFcsrxBFh2LlEFzD6bXA@teranews>
>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>>
>>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>>
>>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>>law
>
>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing of
>evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury.
TRUE!!
http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
Overview of noun perjury
The noun perjury has 1 sense (no senses from tagged texts)
1. perjury, bearing false witness, lying under oath -- (criminal offense of
making false statements under oath)
Examples of Yale F. Edeiken lying under oath:
>Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
>Last-Modified: 2001/02/15
>
>IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LEHIGH COUNTY
>
>CIVIL DIVISION -- LAW
>
>YALE F. EDEIKEN :
> :
>Plaintiff :
> :
>vs. : No. 99-C- 2786
> :
>
>SCOTT BRADBURY
> 24. That on December 5, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>"You only want to blow Joe
>You want to suck Joe's Aryan cock, don't you Yale?
> Doc Tavish"
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A-1."
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=1201801624195636%40unribbed.net&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: A-1Not1 and A-1Not2)
From: earlt...@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Vapor, Fatelvis, Bull Conner & B9Predator. Prepare for the worst.
Date: 1999/01/08
Message-ID: <12018016...@unribbed.net>#1/1
X-Trace: news.rdc1.ct.home.com 915759892 24.65.203.77
(Thu, 07 Jan 1999 17:44:52 PDT)
Organization: @Home Network Canada
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 17:44:52 PDT
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,alt.flame.niggers
X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net
> From: ya...@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
> Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
> Subject: Re: PIN JOE DOWN AND SUCK HIS COCK
> > Isn't strange that Yale has only two little harmless posts to offer
> >in his insane attempts to slander?
>
> If they are harmless why are your associates so upset. Indeed you
> admit that. If they were "harmless" they could not be "slander" (they
> aren't, of course).
>
> > REMEMBER: THEY ONLY SMEAR THE ONES THEY FEAR.
>
> But I neither fear you or smear you.
you only want to blow joe
you want to suck joes aryan cock dont you yale
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Not sent by me, not signed "Doc Tavish" and it's from a regular ISP too!
That is perjury submitting falsified evidence!
> 31 That on December 6, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
> "So why do you still want to suck his cock?
>Do you think you'll become a man by ingesting his manhood?
>
> Doc Tavish"
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0901801802535739%40hexer.org&output=gplain
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=0901801802535739%40hexer.org
(Archived locally as: A-7Not1 and A-7Not2)
From: Laz <hell...@home.com>
Subject: I'm targeted for what? damn.
Date: 1999/01/05
Message-ID: <09018018...@hexer.org>#1/1
X-Trace: news.rdc1.ct.home.com 915502345 24.2.101.226 (Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:12:25
PDT)
Organization: @Home Network
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:12:25 PDT
Newsgroups: alt.skinheads
X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net
> It is now 8 days since this lying nazi bragged that he would have my
> service with enter.net discontinued.
>
> My e-mail address is still ya...@enter.net,
>
> He is still a nazi.
>
> He is still a liar.
>
> He is still a punk.
>
>
> --YFE
so why do you still want to suck his cock
do you think you'll become a man by ingesting his manhood
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Yale got the author and date wrong too and the post was not signed
Doc Tavish as he claimed in his perjured statement. I also never had
an account at the regular ISP used either! CRIMINAL PERJURY!!!
> 34 That on December 8, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
>All Nizkooks need to be apprehended, interrogated, and placed in protective
>custody until a final solution can be made.
>
> Doc Tavish"
>
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A11."
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1B209C3CD.7C009BBF34A90591%40library-proxy.airnews.net&output=gplain
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1...@library-proxy.airnews.net&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: A-11Not1 and A-11Not2)
From: Pee Kitty <Pki...@mariner.cris.com>
Subject: Re: Furmanski is lame
Date: 1998/12/20
Message-ID:
<84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1...@library-proxy.airnews.net>#1/1
X-Orig-Message-ID: <20129820...@grinding.net>
NNTP-Posting-Time: Sun Dec 20 21:15:30 1998
Organization: Digital Highway (using Airnews.net!)
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library3
Abuse-Reports-To: abuse at dhc.net to report improper postings
Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.newsangels
> From: ya...@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
> Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
> Subject: Re: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Nizkook Band
> References: <19981207212932...@ng-cb1.aol.com>
> X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.170.16.148
> X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.170.16.148
> Message-ID: <366ca...@news3.enter.net>
> Date: 7 Dec 1998 22:57:39 +0500
all nizkooks need to be apprehended, interrogated, and placed in protective
custody until a final solution can be made
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Once again a post Yale admitted in a sworn statement signed "Doc Tavish"
when it is obvious another person posted it! PERJURY!!!!!
THE FOLLOWING IS THE CROWN OF MANUFACTURING EVIDENCE AND REMEMBER ALL OF THIS
FALSE TESTIMONY WAS SUBMITTED TO A CIVIL COURT AS SWORN STATEMENTS BY CRIMINAL
PERJURER NAMED YALE F. EDEIKEN OF ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA!!
The following false contrived accusation is the pinnacle of perjury or
manufacturing of evidence to be submitted as sworn testimony in a court of law
and this was done by a Plaintiff (who was his own attorney and who is an
attorney) against the Defendant; me. I will slam dunk this criminality in full
just below!
> 39 That on November 11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
>"You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
>buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
>assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
>with an ice pick Yale!"
>
> --digsig
> Authentic Doc Tavish
>
> 191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
> qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
> 4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
>
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
Positive proof 100% that the Plaintiff willfully and most maliciously lied to a
civil court with the above accusation:
Xref:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=d0ic0v81gdhrd1djqe4k4k2mnvq4c4sdi5%404ax.com&output=gplain
Message-ID: <d0ic0v81gdhrd1djq...@4ax.com>
39 That on November 11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
"You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!"
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Yale F. Edeiken
<end>
Notice what was said in an anonymous post (shown just below) and the date of the
post and compare it to what Yale F. Edeiken charges just above! Remember Yale
claimed I e-mailed the above to him and he claimed I signed it and had my
digital signature and this was done in a sworn document admitted to a civil
court of law!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=1&ic=1&selm=199902171515.KAA08970%40domains.invweb.net
(Archived locally as: AnonIcePick1 and AnonIcePick2)
From: Anonymous (nob...@openpgp.net)
Subject: Re: Joe Bellinger, Proven Liar
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Date: 1999/02/17
> > >>It is thus established that:
> > >>
> > >> - Joe Bellinger stated that he does, in fact, "post deliberate
> > >>misinformation".
> > >> - Joe Bellinger denied having made said statement.
> > >> - Joe Bellinger is, therefore, a liar.
> > >>
> > >>To coin a phrase: GAME, SET, MATCH.
> > >Did anyone expect any different result?
> > LOL! For grown men, you are all so childish.
:
> Expecting some minimal level of honesty -- a low standard which
> you seem incapable of meeting -- is hardly "childish."
>
> It frightens me that, with attitudes like this, you are raising a
> child.
>
> In article <19990112213243...@ng31.aol.com>,
> deb...@aol.com
> (Debunks) wrote: "I post deliberate misinformation . . ."
>
> --YFE
You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!
~~End of GOOGLE aka DejaCom Archive~~
Notice the above was an anonymous post. It was not an e-mail and notice that it
had no digital signature signed by me! Also notice the big difference in dates
the above was posted February 17, 1999 yet Yale accuses me: "That on November
11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an electronic communication stating in
pertinent part (the above EXACT quoted text)"
Witness this:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=6&ic=1&selm=osjdbt41kq8ov7moqagjivihjnda67vadt%404ax.com
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:07:41 -0600
Message-ID: <osjdbt41kq8ov7moq...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=96fnp3%242bar%2...@news.tht.net&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: LibelousPerjury)
From: kmc...@veritas.nizkor.org (Kenneth McVay, OBC)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.conspiracy
Subject: "ALL FACTS IN THE COMPLAINT ... ARE DEEMED ADMITTED."
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 05:00:19 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The Nizkor Project, http://www.nizkor.org/
Message-ID: <96fnp3$2bar$1...@news.tht.net>
Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
Last-Modified: 2001/02/14
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
<stop>
Crypto Kong does not insert blank lines in between "Authentic Doc Tavish"
and the crypto-text as confirmed by the software's author to both myself
and my attorney!
Here is the official reply to my inquiry:
X-Sender: jam...@shell11.ba.best.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:51:20 -0800
To: Scott Bradbury <xx...@flash.net>
From: "James A. Donald"
Subject: Re: Inquiry on Crypto-Kong Signatures
Cc: "Daylin B. Leach - Attorney at Law" <xxx...@aol.com>
--
At 0412 AM 2/23/2001 -0600, Scott Bradbury wrote
> The above forged digital signataure is verbatim and is exactly which was
> presented to the court.
To be presented to the court, it must be alleged to have signed
something. A digital signature without the text that it signed is of no
significance.
(Note: I did not include Yale's fabricated e-mail- I just sent Mr. Donald
the forged digital signature.)
> The digsig also has a blank line in between "Authentic Doc
> Tavish" and the bogus crypto-text. Your software does not do this in
> ANY example I've ever seen.
That is perfectly true. My program does not emit such blank lines, which
suggest fabrication, but not strong evidence of anything much, since the
blank line could have arisen from various accidents in transferring text
from one program to another.
> I do this for the benefit of my attorney. -)
--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
GnwV4rmsIA8faEZwt0YOXUiSSJflZjiLd/kTrWIn
4F1jg73LTqhfLPw9BVz2uDGwa7v2WYBG0wNGHSkoM
<END>
--
As for Mr. Donald's statement: "the blank line could have arisen from
various accidents in transferring text from one program to another"-
the above fabricated signature from Edeiken's complaint is verbatim in the
group of false accusations known as "ALL FACTS IN THE COMPLAINT ... ARE
DEEMED ADMITTED." Notice Mr. Donald's digsig? No spaces and blank lines!
Notice my digsig made on this paragraph alone?
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
Chyeer+xvAMg6mRtq2niuMN+bMnEkGsy0ShVPm2xATn
ejnWmIh1JCyv0DNQedTMFE/cAfXBLuqdxSAkk9w/
4O0CysIswhm2G04W2mJFeW7C7K5RHQkNr3oFBzH6X
NO BLANK LINES AND SPACES!
What are the penalties for submitting manufactured evidence?
[...]
Here is Yale making his false accusation in public forum:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3920d160.112256232%40news.flash.net&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: YalesLies)
Subject: Yale's Anonymous Post Signed By Me?! What an Oaf! aka Re: Bradbury
Caught in a Psychotic Delusional Rage
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <3920d160....@news.flash.net>
On Tue, 16 May 2000 04:12:22 GMT, "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
<GU3U4.3347$v%5.24...@newshog.newsread.com> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=GU3U4.3347%24v%255.2...@newshog.newsread.com&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: YaleLied1 and YaleLied2)
>Doc Tavish <doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:3920c22c....@news.flash.net...
[...]
>> > Perhaps you should ask your shrink about people who write anonumus
>> >notes to others like:
>> >
>> > " You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your
>> >butt buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and
>> >character assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly
>> >work you over with an ice pick Yale!"
>> The above is just exactly what you said it is Yale, "anonumus" your word!
>> Just because you are a paranoid and have a psychotic dislike of me does
>> not mean every thing you imagine comes from me.
:
> It came from you
Then why didn't you show the headers which would show so Yale?
>and was signed by you.
Then why didn't you show my signature? If I signed it and it was from me
as you claim why do you call it "anonumus"? It would not be so if were
truly from me as headers would show and it actually had my signature!
What did you say in just another post about the "e-mail" above Yale? Your
own words again: "Perhaps you should ask your shrink about people who
write anonumus notes to others like:" It's ANONYMOUS Yale! You've said so!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=Ms1U4.3324%24v%255.238968%40newshog.newsread.com&rnum=1
Archived locally as: Nradbury1 and Nradbury2)
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: Re: Nradbury Goes Off the Deep End
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <Ms1U4.3324$v%5.23...@newshog.newsread.com>
(Exact quote for the record)
" I think you need a good psychiatirc examination. Perhaps you should ask
your shrink about people who write anonumus notes to others like: " You
are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt buddy
Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!""
No headers and no signature.
I guess the above is fair proof that Yale likes to forge e-mail even if it
is in his word "anonumus."
>> Your failure to do the same is noted. And will be by the judge.
>> --YFE
~~End of GOOGLE Archive Excerpt (With updated GOOGLE links)~~
PERJURY!!
REMEMBER ALL OF THE ABOVE CRIMINAL FALSIFICATION CAME FROM A SHYSTER WHO HAS
ALREADY BEEN PUBLICLY CENSURED BY THE HIGHEST COURT IN HIS STATE!!
~~Shyster Yale F. Edeiken has been black listed by a watch group~~
Citizens for Legal Responsibility
Concerning unethical attorneys and judges in the State of Pennsylvania:
http://www.clr.org/pa.html (Archived locally as: clr-org_pa)
Judicial/Attorney Misconduct in Pennsylvania
Following are some of the attorneys or judges who have been reported to have
been disciplined by the State of Pennsylvania for unethical conduct, who may be
a resident of the State of Pennsylvania but was disciplined in another
jurisdiction, transferred to inactive status, sued for malpractice,
incarcerated, whom we understand have been charged with unethical conduct, have
engaged in conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice, or to
bring the courts and the legal business into disrepute, etc.
[...]
Yale F. Edeiken --Attorney at Law - Supreme Court ID# 40290 (Allentown, PA)
<END>
Substantiated with:
~~~Famous Last Words Series-- Yale F. Edeiken~~~
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=3870...@news3.enter.net&lr=&hl=en
Archived locally as: YaleSuedTwice
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: KOOK WEBSITE
Date: 2000/01/02
Message-ID: <3870...@news3.enter.net>
"I have never been charged with any unethical activity relating to the
practice of law..."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is laughing at you big time Yale F. Edeiken!
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attdiscdcd.php?id=40290
(Link active October 29, 2003. Archived locally as: shyster_censured)
Attorney ID - 40290
Edeiken, Yale F.
^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Attorney Inquiry
Attorney ID Case County District
40290 122 DB 95 Lehigh II Public Censure Administered 10/20/98
^^^^^^^^^
<STOP>
A PDF file is available which gives a report on the above
122 DB 95 against Shyster Yale Fatso Edeiken:
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attopinion.php?case=122DB95
^^^^^^^
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/disciplinaryboard/dboardopinions/122DB95.RPT.pdf
(Link active October 28, 2003. Archived locally as: "Edeiken_Gets_His" and
122DB95.RPT)
As for Yale F.Edeiken's lying statement: "I have never been charged with any
unethical activity relating to the practice of law..."; he was not only charged
three times but he received from the Disciplinary Board of the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court the following:
1) "Private Reprimand" in 1993
2) "Informal Admonition" in 1995
3) "PUBLIC CENSURE" in 1998
(RE: PUBLIFC CENSURE in 1998: The Disciplinary Board was content to give Yale F.
Edeiken a "private reprimand" but he continued to act like the psychotic nut
case he is and defied them and refused to appear at his hearing more than once!
He was then "forced" to appear and the "private reprimand" had escalated to
"PUBLIC CENSURE" by the highest court of Pennsylvania State! Furthermore the
Disciplinary Board closed with: "It is further ORDERED that respondent [Yale F.
Edeiken] shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g),
PaR.D.E." IOW Yale had to pay the Disciplinary Board to "discipline him" AFTER
the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of Pennsylvania had to
serve numerous notices upon him and compel him to attend his disciplinary
hearing!! Yale also had to pay for all costs of the investigation too! It's all
detailed in that PDF file!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yale F. Edeiken was also charged AND convicted for assaulting a deputy sheriff
in the courthouse! All fully documented in this archive:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=s2hq10drpp50ik59v9litpvrdjr1203099%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Edeikook Follies #6 Yale F. Edeiken Goes on a Rampage at His County
Courthouse Message-ID: <s2hq10drpp50ik59v...@4ax.com>
Excerpt
CITY ATTORNEY FOUND GUILTY IN ELEVATOR CONFRONTATION
by KRISTIN CASLER, The Morning Call
Allentown attorney Yale F. Edeiken was found guilty and fined $600 plus
costs for a confrontation with a Lehigh County deputy sheriff and another
man in a courthouse elevator.
During the June 12 incident, Edeiken struck Deputy Brenda Hartman with his
briefcase and allegedly threatened the man by saying he had a gun,
according to District Justice Diane Jepsen, who heard the case. Edeiken
later was found to have a permit for and was carrying a .357 Magnum.
Jepsen ordered Edeiken, whose office is at 39 N. 5th St., to pay the fine
after a hearing Monday on charges of harassment and disorderly conduct
filed by Hartman. Jepsen said Edeiken no longer has a permit for his gun...
<end>
>What then do you call submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil court?
Roger the Dodger will dodge that simple question.
>No wonder why your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see those complaints
>before Edeiken got his stealth judgment.
On file with the same court:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=9i9740t3teigg6ghb...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Critical Updates- 1999-C-2786 How I Was Not Given My Legal Right to
Refute the Defamatory and Perjurious Accusations Made Against Me V1.1 S_0228
Message-ID: <9i9740t3teigg6ghb...@4ax.com>
Date: 1 Mar 2004 21:52:11 GMT EXCERPT BELOW:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:27:55 -0800, <c1qj2...@enews1.newsguy.com> "Ken McVay,
OBC" <spam...@nizkor.org> wrote:
>The following was accepted as factual by a Pennsylvania Court:
ONLY because I was not given my legal right of due process to get a copy of the
complaints to refute in the first place!
> REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
>
> NOW COMES Plaintiff Yale F. Edeiken and demands that, pursuant to Rule
>4014, Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Scott Bradbury
>admit or deny the truth of the following within thirty (30) days of service
>or, by failing to do so, admit the truth of the matters asserted:
For Yale F. Edeiken to have legally (and properly) served his complaints on me
he would have had to have sent them to the Sheriff's Department in my local
jurisdiction and then a Deputy would have sought me out and presented such
complaints in person and he would have required my signature! THAT IS FACT!
Docket printout to 1999-C-2786
"July 14, 2000 PLTF'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY UPON DAYLIN LEACH. AFDT OF SERVICE
ATTACHED." <<Which proves I had an attorney before July 20, 2000.>>
"July 20, 2000 COMPLAINT, NOTICE TO DEFEND. DAMAGES PRAYED FOR IN COUNTS I
THRU V. IN AMT IN EXCESS OF STATUTORY LIMIT FOR ARBITRATION TOGETHER WITH
PUNITIVE DAMAGES IN EXCESS OF STATUTORY LIMITS WITH INTEREST. COSTS & ATTY'S
FEES. AFDT OF SERVICE. EXHIBITS ATTACHED."
"August 25, 2000: PRAE TO ENTER JDGT AFGAINST DFT SCOTT BRADBURY AKA DOC
TAVISH FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND. JDGT ENTERED VS/SAID DFT IN AN AMT TO BE
ASSESSEED. IMPORTANT NOTICE, AFDT OF SERVICE EXHIBIT ATTACHED. NOTICE MLD
8/25/2000 FILED @ 9:28 AM."
I was given 30 days to refute the false accusations BUT Yale did not serve the
complaints on me by a Sheriff's Deputy nor on my attorney who is on record with
the court as stating:
Filed September 22, 2000
PETTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
COMES NOW, the defendant, Scott Bradbury, by and through his counsel Daylin B.
Leach, Esquire, to petition this honorable court for Relief from Judgment,
pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3. In support of this petition, the defendant avers
the following:
On August 25, 2000, the Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Default Judgment with
this court. A true and correct copy of which is hereto and marked as "Exhibit
A."
Since a complaint has never been filed or served, the defendant is unable to
attach a copy of preliminary objections he would file if the judgment was opened
pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.3 (a).
"[The] plaintiff engage[d] in a vendetta against the defendant... When attorney
Leach asked Mr. Edeiken for a copy of the complaint when he first becomes
involved in the case, he is told "Fuck You" via e-mail. In plain English, this
is not a lawsuit, it is a bizarre war waged by Mr. Edeiken on a man he has never
met. The court should not be a party to this."
Respectfully submitted
Daylin B. Leach Esquire
________________________________________________________________________________
Key statement from above: "Since a complaint has never been filed or served, the
defendant is unable to attach a copy of preliminary objections..." IOW I was
denied my day in court and due process by a liar and a person who manufactures
evidence to make false accusations in a civil court of law!
>That judgment was dismissed in light of the real facts.
TRUE!
CLERK OF COURTS OF LEHIGH COUNTY - CIVIL DIVISION
Lehigh County Courthouse
455 W. Hamilton Street
Allentown, PA 18101-1614
RE: Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
Partial text of letter from Judge Reibman:
<START>
Copies of this order were mailed to all counsel of record and pro se litigants.
CC: Counsel for Plaintiff (Yale F. Edeiken): Yale F. Edeiken Esq.
Counsel for Defendant (Scott Bradbury) : Daylin B. Leach Esq.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's
Petition for Relief from Judgment, filed on September 22, 2000,
Plaintiff's response thereto, and argument thereon on February 7, 2001,
IT IS ORDERED said petition is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
[...]
BY THE COURT:
(Signed) Edward J. Reibman, J.
<STOP>
Looks like the court ruled in my favor to me! Both the lawsuit and the judgment
against me were DISMISSED! Yale even lost his appeal as well! Looks like I was
victorious twice! BTW it was the judge (not me) who wrote the above with some
words in all CAPS!
<START>
September 26, 2001
Yale F. Edeiken
918 N Bayard Street
Allentown, PA 18104-3759
RE: Yale F. Edeiken, Appellant v. Scott Bradbury et al
1714 EDA 2001
Dear Mr. Edeiken:
This is to advise that the attached Order has been entered in the
above- captioned matters.
A Certified Copy of this Order together with the record will be
sent to the Prothonotary of Lehigh County in due course.
Very truly yours,
(Signed)
David A. Szewczak
Prothonotary
DAS/dag
Attachment
CC: Daylin B. Leach, Esquire
Scott Bradbury
Honorable Edward D. Reibman
The Attachment:
<Start>
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Eastern District Office
Yale F. Edeiken APPELLANT No. 1714 EDA 2001
V.
Scott Bradbury Et Al C.P. Civil Lehigh County
99-C-2786
ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of September, 2001, the within
appeal is DISMISSED for failure to file a brief."
PER CURIAM
<STOP>
The prudent question to why Yale failed to file his brief is answered in this
archive which shows his motive for legal system abuse and how serious he was NOT
in litigating me!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=sq4v2us0odig5nhq79f6crk7a2e7lsqh1s%404ax.com&rnum=6&filter=0
Subject: Why Yale F. Edeiken LOST His Appeal..
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:30:59 -0600
Message-ID: <sq4v2us0odig5nhq7...@4ax.com>
>>-- which the morbidly obese Shame of Belleville, WI will avoid
>>like the plague, given that the Findings of Fact would be confirmed
>>once again...
Then why did I post what I posted in the archive just above titled "Why Yale F.
Edeiken LOST His Appeal.."? I advised Yale through my attorney that I would NOT
fight his appeal and it was mky wish that the lawsuit start from square one
agains seeing howI finally got a copy of the complaints after the DISMISSAL by
Sara Salzman menat to defame me! Yale shortly after went into hiding and hasn't
posted since!
>It is my understanding the Findings of Fact were only made because neither
>Tavish nor his attorney had been served and therefore did not challenge what was
>never served. Also I know Tavish has openly challenged Edeiken to re-file in
>Tavish's jurisdiction. Why hasn't your mentor had the guts to re-file and why
>has he gone into hiding since his agony of defeat?
TRUE and I show the documents above.
>By the way; what proof do you have that Tavish is morbidly obese?
No he doesn't because that was another lie started by Yale F. Edeiken to defame
me. Anyone who allies themself with Yale is walking in the company ofa stupid
person.
>Steve
Roger
Talbot) wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:36:39 -0500, <1097073400.L2FFcsrxBFh2LlEFzD6bXA@teranews>
>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>>law
>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing of
>evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury.
Yes, one *does*: perjury is a legal term.
>What then do you call
>submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil court?
*If* it was proven in a court of law, there are a number of things it
*might* be perjury.
Of course, the documentation is question is neither forged nor
manufactured -- it is *fact*, found to be so by due process of law.
>No wonder why
>your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see those complaints before
>Edeiken got his stealth judgment.
"My mentor?"
And Tavish did not have an attoreny during the time span in question
-- he only actaully hired leach after the case was basically over.
And the court documents were sent where they were supposed to go, but
were returned by blubberbury. We know this because zie was also
stupid enough to boast about having done so.
>That judgment was dismissed in light of the real facts.
The judgement was overturned on the basis of a technicality regarding
jurisdiction.
Why are you lyin g about this?
>>-- which the morbidly obese Shame of Belleville, WI will avoid
>>like the plague, given that the Findings of Fact would be confirmed
>>once again...
>It is my understanding the Findings of Fact were only made because neither
>Tavish nor his attorney had been served and therefore did not chalenge what was
>never served.
Your understanding is in error. Since this has been pointed out to
you before it is obvious that you don't care about the *truth*,
preferring to lie about the situation.
>Also I know Tavish has openly challenged Edeiken to re-file in
>Tavish's jurisdiction. Why hasn't your mentor had the guts to re-file and why
>has he gone into hiding since his agony of defeat?
I should know this ... why?
If you want to know, ask Yale.
>By the way; what proof do you have that Tavish is morbidly obese?
Mire than enough to meet fatboy's fraudulent "challenge," if zie
weren't lying about the offer of $10k for such proof...
david_michael
Nonsense. I have asked you two simple questions. Why can you not give
a straight answer? What are you so afraid of? Here they are again:
Do you deny that you knowingly made false statements to the police,
the FBI and the media?
Do you deny that you claimed to them that Mr Ellis was involved in
racially harassing you when in fact you were aware all the time of his
links with the CIA?
Roger
<Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 16:56:55 GMT, <416421e6...@news20.forteinc.com>
>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) wrote:
>>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:36:39 -0500, <1097073400.L2FFcsrxBFh2LlEFzD6bXA@teranews>
>>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>>> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>>> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>>>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>>>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>>>law
>>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing of
>>evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury.
>TRUE!!
>
>http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
>
>Overview of noun perjury
>The noun perjury has 1 sense (no senses from tagged texts)
>1. perjury, bearing false witness, lying under oath -- (criminal offense of
>making false statements under oath)
>
>Examples of Yale F. Edeiken lying under oath:
<snip information which was never accepted as proof in any court of
law -- unlike the Findings of Fact.>
>>That judgment was dismissed in light of the real facts.
>TRUE!
Nope.
>CLERK OF COURTS OF LEHIGH COUNTY - CIVIL DIVISION
>Lehigh County Courthouse
>455 W. Hamilton Street
>Allentown, PA 18101-1614
>RE: Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
>
>Partial text of letter from Judge Reibman:
Of course, blubberbury will not post the *whole* thing, because it
puts the lie to zir claim that this was anything but a jurisdictional
issue.
><START>
>
>Copies of this order were mailed to all counsel of record and pro se litigants.
>CC: Counsel for Plaintiff (Yale F. Edeiken): Yale F. Edeiken Esq.
> Counsel for Defendant (Scott Bradbury) : Daylin B. Leach Esq.
> ORDER
> AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's
>Petition for Relief from Judgment, filed on September 22, 2000,
>Plaintiff's response thereto, and argument thereon on February 7, 2001,
> IT IS ORDERED said petition is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
>
>[...]
>
> BY THE COURT:
> (Signed) Edward J. Reibman, J.
>
><STOP>
>
>Looks like the court ruled in my favor to me!
<snip>
>>>-- which the morbidly obese Shame of Belleville, WI will avoid
>>>like the plague, given that the Findings of Fact would be confirmed
>>>once again...
>Then why did I post what I posted in the archive just above titled "Why Yale F.
>Edeiken LOST His Appeal.."?
And more importantly, why *didn't* you post the *entire* decision?
>I advised Yale through my attorney that I would NOT
>fight his appeal and it was mky wish that the lawsuit start from square one
>agains seeing howI finally got a copy of the complaints after the DISMISSAL by
>Sara Salzman menat to defame me! Yale shortly after went into hiding and hasn't
>posted since!
>>It is my understanding the Findings of Fact were only made because neither
>>Tavish nor his attorney had been served and therefore did not challenge what was
>>never served. Also I know Tavish has openly challenged Edeiken to re-file in
>>Tavish's jurisdiction. Why hasn't your mentor had the guts to re-file and why
>>has he gone into hiding since his agony of defeat?
>TRUE and I show the documents above.
>>By the way; what proof do you have that Tavish is morbidly obese?
>No he doesn't because that was another lie started by Yale F. Edeiken to defame
>me. Anyone who allies themself with Yale is walking in the company ofa stupid
>person.
Yes, he does. Escrow the $10k with appropriate instructions for
disbursal and I will document it.
You won't because your offer was fraudulent to begin with, and since
you know you *are* morbidly obese you won't take the chance that I
actually *can*.
Sara Salzman
Already answered, Dr. Homeland. Already answered.
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:36:39 -0500, <1097073400.L2FFcsrxBFh2LlEFzD6bXA@teranews>
>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>>law
>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing
>of evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What then do you call
>submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil court? No wonder why
>your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see those complaints
>before Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That judgment was dismissed in light
>of the real facts.
Oops! The case was overturned on a jurisdictional issue...which keeps the
findings of fact intact and part of the public record for all time. (Since
when is a civil court NOT a court of law?) Keep the gems coming, Bradburied!
Steve Talbot
Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
>
>>On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 09:36:39 -0500, <1097073400.L2FFcsrxBFh2LlEFzD6bXA@teranews>
>>Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>
>>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>>> someone claiming to be Doc Tavish wrote
>>> in message <u7t6m0lvbgdpoc2sd...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>>YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
>>>Of course, perjury is something which can only be proven in a court of
>>>law
>
>>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define manufacturing
>>of evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What then do you call
>>submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil court? No wonder why
>>your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see those complaints
>>before Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That judgment was dismissed in light
>>of the real facts.
Why do you keep overlooking this Patrick?
http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
Overview of noun perjury
The noun perjury has 1 sense (no senses from tagged texts)
1. perjury, bearing false witness, lying under oath -- (criminal offense of
making false statements under oath)
Examples of Yale F. Edeiken lying under oath:
>Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
<>
Yale was a criminal lying perjurer to have submitted the above to a civil court.
>
>Oops! The case was overturned on a jurisdictional issue...which keeps the
>findings of fact intact
How could there have been a truthful finding of fact seeing how Tavish and his
attroney weren't given a chance to participate in finding of fact?
Why do you persist in ignoring what Tavish posted?
>and part of the public record for all time.
What happened to Tavish is a travesty of justice and anyone who believes in fair
play sees Tavish was a victim of severe legal system abuse. Yale on the other
hand has a public record of ill repute as Tavish had posted and what you wish
would go away.
[...]
<END>
Substantiated with:
Excerpt
<end>
The above is forever in pub;lic record tooand unlike Tavish; Yale F. Edeiken was
convicted for his guilt and was disciplined three times by the highest court in
his state. Why are you mute on what Yale is? He is unfit to practice law.
>(Since when is a civil court NOT a court of law?) Keep the gems coming, Bradburied!
If anyone has been buried it is Yale seeing how he hasn't been around since he
lost his lawsuit against Tavish.
Doc Tavish is superior to you in every way.
Steve
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
In <catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com> in
alt.revisionism, on Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:01:57 -0600, Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
[snip]
> Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid
> again?
What makes you think he is playing? He has all but announced that he
intends to stalk and harass you over this, and that seems to me to be
genuinely stupid.
- --
John Morris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBQWSROzfbIykA6SysEQLJ1gCgr+QRwnulpzDV2N4qDbSnB54XMZEAniTa
ygIAtaFEOYylkT2d7Yhhe0St
=rejX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
david_michael
That would not be easy given that I am several thousand miles away and
you appear to be very well connected.
> "Someone claiming to be Don Ellis" is not necessarily the same thing as
> "Don Ellis."
Right. So we are supposed to believe that there were two Don Ellises.
One pretended to harassed you and the other was linked to the CIA.
Did you mention this to the police and the FBI?
Why did you not mention it to the media?
Why have you never mentioned it before in alt.revisionism?
I put it to you that you are lying.
> "Don" and "Pat" often traded nyms, along with the other
> hundreds of nyms he/they used. I have no idea who Pat Blakely is. I know
> he CLAIMED to work for the CIA. And I know that SOMEONE calling himself
> Don Ellis logged on to irc, and then immediately logged off and logged
> back on as "Pat Blakely."
You have asserted that you 'knew' they were the same person.
> There is a person called Don Ellis. He was sued by David Goldman of
> hatewatch.org. If he was CIA, involved in some kind of "sting," the case
> would never have been allowed to proceed.
(a) That is not necessarily true.
(b) The case did not proceed. An amicable settlement was reached.
> There is a person who calls himself Pat Blakely. He has also said
he is
> Don Ellis. He also says he worked for the CIA. He also said he was in
> the courtroom at Edeiken vs. Bradbury. He said a lot of things.
And you believed him. May I remind you of your words:
<begin quote>
The "oopsie" is that Pat Blakely worked for the CIA
<end quote>
That's a very clear assertion, Ms Salzman.
The oopsie, I suggest, is that you, believing Blakely to be Ellis and
believing Ellis to be thus linked to the CIA, nevertheless tried to
persuade the media, police and FBI that you were being a victim of a
racist hate campaign spearheaded by Ellis. In fact you and Ellis were
on the same side all the time. The whole thing was a put-up job,
right?
> And you know what, I couldn't give a rat's ass whether they are one
> person, two people, or an entire lunatic asylum.
Neither do I.
> I have never lied to
> law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to law
> enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
The material that I have presented in this thread suggests otherwise.
> Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid again?
>
> Sara
Straight as a cross-eyed snail going down a helter skelter, Ms
Salzman.
Joebruno
<deletia>
>
> Perhaps your analysis is in order.
Most everything you post is out of order.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>:
>Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message news:<catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com>...
>> I have consistently given "straight answers," Dr. Homeland. It is you
>> who feel the need to play stupid, "misinterpret" and manufacture.
>>
>> I did not make any false statements to the police, or the FBI, or the
>> media. If you believe I did, have me arrested.
>That would not be easy given that I am several thousand miles away and
>you appear to be very well connected.
In what way does she appear to be "very well connected?" In that she
can carry on conversations with officers of the court without it being
in the context of an interrogation?
>> "Someone claiming to be Don Ellis" is not necessarily the same thing as
>> "Don Ellis."
>Right. So we are supposed to believe that there were two Don Ellises.
>One pretended to harassed you and the other was linked to the CIA.
>
>Did you mention this to the police and the FBI?
>
>Why did you not mention it to the media?
>
>Why have you never mentioned it before in alt.revisionism?
No, the one that *claimed* to be linked to the CIA and the one that
harassed Sara are the same person.
One notes that the cowardly eight legged one is *still* pretending
that it is proven that any link to the CIA existed...
>I put it to you that you are lying.
And this comes from someone with much experience with lying -- but
sadly no expertise.
>> "Don" and "Pat" often traded nyms, along with the other
>> hundreds of nyms he/they used. I have no idea who Pat Blakely is. I know
>> he CLAIMED to work for the CIA. And I know that SOMEONE calling himself
>> Don Ellis logged on to irc, and then immediately logged off and logged
>> back on as "Pat Blakely."
>You have asserted that you 'knew' they were the same person.
... and?
>> There is a person called Don Ellis. He was sued by David Goldman of
>> hatewatch.org. If he was CIA, involved in some kind of "sting," the case
>> would never have been allowed to proceed.
>(a) That is not necessarily true.
>
>(b) The case did not proceed. An amicable settlement was reached.
And your proof of either of these assertions is ... ?
>> There is a person who calls himself Pat Blakely. He has also said
>> he is
>> Don Ellis. He also says he worked for the CIA. He also said he was in
>> the courtroom at Edeiken vs. Bradbury. He said a lot of things.
>And you believed him. May I remind you of your words:
>
><begin quote>
>The "oopsie" is that Pat Blakely worked for the CIA
><end quote>
>
>That's a very clear assertion, Ms Salzman.
>
>The oopsie, I suggest, is that you, believing Blakely to be Ellis and
>believing Ellis to be thus linked to the CIA, nevertheless tried to
>persuade the media, police and FBI that you were being a victim of a
>racist hate campaign spearheaded by Ellis. In fact you and Ellis were
>on the same side all the time. The whole thing was a put-up job,
>right?
< shakes head in wonderment >
>> And you know what, I couldn't give a rat's ass whether they are one
>> person, two people, or an entire lunatic asylum.
>Neither do I.
>> I have never lied to
>> law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to law
>> enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
>The material that I have presented in this thread suggests otherwise.
... if one accepts mr michael's postulates as given. Any normal
person sees that as the foolishness that it is.
>> Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid again?
>Straight as a cross-eyed snail going down a helter skelter, Ms
>Salzman.
Orac
> Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
> news:<catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com>...
> > I have never lied to
> > law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to law
> > enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
>
> The material that I have presented in this thread suggests otherwise.
All it suggests is that you're a paranoid whacko.
--
Orac |"I am not interested in trying to compensate
| for your amazing lack of observation."
|
| Orac
Sara Salzman
Now THAT is one of the funniest things I've ever read.
> > And you know what, I couldn't give a rat's ass whether they are one
> > person, two people, or an entire lunatic asylum.
>
> Neither do I.
>
> > I have never lied to
> > law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to law
> > enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
>
> The material that I have presented in this thread suggests otherwise.
No it doesn't.
>
> > Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid again?
> >
> > Sara
>
> Straight as a cross-eyed snail going down a helter skelter, Ms
> Salzman.
>
> David
> http://www.nationalanarchist.com
So tell us, Dr. Homeland, WHY did you out one of your comrades? What's
your agenda here?
Sara Salzman
John Morris <john....@telusplanet.net> wrote:
True. Of course, one has to wonder what Dr. Homeland had hoped to
achieve by "outing" Pat Blakely... I mean Don Ellis.
He DID say Ellis was CIA, didn't he? And Blakely said HE was CIA, didn't
he?
And Dr. Homeland says I'm "well-connected" and in cahoots with them!
Does that make ME CIA?
I wonder... maybe Dr. Homeland ought to be more careful about attacking
"well-connected" people?
Gord McFee
> ITEM ONE:
[drivel deleted]
Before this thread completely disintegrates, which is David's fervent
prayer, allow me to remind one and all what he is so desperately trying
to obscure with this avalanche of drivel. In an exchange the other day,
he said that Don Ellis had been a CIA operative in Britain. When I
reminded him that the only person who had ever claimed to have been a
CIA employee in Britain was Pat Blakely, David realized he had committed
a major boner and has been trying to distract people from it ever since.
Hence, this latest attempt at damage control.
I suspect David is in big trouble right about now. Pity.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Gord McFee
> John Morris <john....@telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:<8vh6m0dpllgp7458m...@4ax.com>...
>
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: SHA1
>>
>>In <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com> in
>>alt.revisionism, on 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
>>david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>
>>
>>David, you're an idiot.
>>
>>- --
>
>
>> John Morris
>
>
> Personal abuse from Salzman's supporters but no answer. Let's go
> through it again.
>
> 1. Salzman has claimed that she was the victim of a racist hate
> campaign and has blamed it on Ellis.
>
> 2. She has whined about this to the media and, more to the point, to
> the FBI and the police.
>
> 3. She has now stated that she believes that Blakely was CIA.
>
> 4. She has stated that she believes that Ellis was either Blakely or
> working closely with him.
>
> 5. It appears therefore that she has made false claims to the FBI and
> police about the alleged hate campaign against her because she seems
> to have known all along about the link between Ellis and the CIA.
>
> Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
> abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get either
> a rebuttal or an explanation.
The explanation is very simply. You outed Ellis/Blakely and are now
desperately trying to spin doctor your way out of it. You blew it, David.
Gord McFee
She had no idea of it until you posted it the other day. I hope the CIA
is not too angry at you.
Gord McFee
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> In <catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com> in
> alt.revisionism, on Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:01:57 -0600, Sara Salzman
> <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>
>>Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid
>>again?
>
> What makes you think he is playing? He has all but announced that he
> intends to stalk and harass you over this, and that seems to me to be
> genuinely stupid.
I remind everyone that the reason Michael is doing this is because *he*
outed Ellis and he is trying to cover it up.
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>On 06 Oct 2004 15:43:18 -0500, <szku0t7...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Lee
>Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
[...]
>>>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define
>>>manufacturing of evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What
>>>then do you call submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil
>>>court? No wonder why your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see
>>>those complaints before Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That judgment was
>>>dismissed in light of the real facts.
>Why do you keep overlooking this Patrick?
>http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
A Japanese website doesn't determine law in this country, dolt.
[about 200 lines of reposted Bradshite deleted]
>Yale was a criminal lying perjurer to have submitted the above to a civil
>court.
You've still got a hard-on for someone who hasn't even posted here in three
years, if not longer.
>>Oops! The case was overturned on a jurisdictional issue...which keeps the
>>findings of fact intact
>How could there have been a truthful finding of fact seeing how Tavish and his
>attroney weren't given a chance to participate in finding of fact?
>Why do you persist in ignoring what Tavish posted?
You mean because he's a delusional dolt who was too busy scribbling "RETURN TO
STALKER" on papers sent him by the court and returning them unopened?
(There's the clue you refuse to click on.)
[another 70 lines of Bradshite given the gate]
>What happened to Tavish is a travesty of justice and anyone who believes in
>fair play sees Tavish was a victim of severe legal system abuse. Yale on the
>other hand has a public record of ill repute as Tavish had posted and what
>you wish would go away.
Your hero is a sick old Nazi-hater who desperately needs a better hobby than
being the running joke of Bellville.
>The above is forever in pub;lic record tooand unlike Tavish; Yale F. Edeiken
>was convicted for his guilt and was disciplined three times by the highest
>court in his state. Why are you mute on what Yale is? He is unfit to practice
>law.
He's more fit to practice it than cretins like you will ever be.
>>(Since when is a civil court NOT a court of law?) Keep the gems coming,
>>Bradburied!
>If anyone has been buried it is Yale seeing how he hasn't been around since he
>lost his lawsuit against Tavish.
...never mind that the facts of finding weren't invalidated by the
jurisdictional-issue reversal, and thus are permanently in the court (and
public) record -- because your hero was too busy ignoring his legal
responsibilities, as describved above.
>Doc Tavish is superior to you in every way.
...if you consider classic psychosis superior. (I'm not a two-ton blob of fat
who's a few grains short of a sandbox, either. Your "hero" is, and his local
law-nforcement community are well aware of *that* fact.)
Doc Tavish
Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
>
>>On 06 Oct 2004 15:43:18 -0500, <szku0t7...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Lee
>>Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
>>>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
>
>[...]
>
>>>>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define
>>>>manufacturing of evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What
>>>>then do you call submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil
>>>>court? No wonder why your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to see
>>>>those complaints before Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That judgment was
>>>>dismissed in light of the real facts.
>
>>Why do you keep overlooking this Patrick?
>
>>http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
>
>A Japanese website doesn't determine law in this country, dolt.
No claim aas such was made.
>[about 200 lines of reposted Bradshite deleted]
It does define perjury!
http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
<>
Yale was a criminal lying perjurer to have submitted the above to a civil court.
>>Yale was a criminal lying perjurer to have submitted the above to a civil
>>court.
>
>You've still got a hard-on for someone who hasn't even posted here in three
>years, if not longer.
Because I am still being defamed and harassed because of that coward!
>>>Oops! The case was overturned on a jurisdictional issue...which keeps the
>>>findings of fact intact
>
>>How could there have been a truthful finding of fact seeing how Tavish and his
>>attroney weren't given a chance to participate in finding of fact?
>>Why do you persist in ignoring what Tavish posted?
>
>You mean because he's a delusional dolt who was too busy scribbling "RETURN TO
>STALKER" on papers sent him by the court and returning them unopened?
Why do you keep insisting that I returned the complaints unopened when in fact I
did not!? The court never sent me papers via Yale F. Edeiken! They send their
own papers themselves! My but you are stupid and you keep forgetting:
defendant is unable to attach a copy of preliminary objections..." IOW I was
denied my day in court and due process by a liar and a person who manufactures
evidence to make false accusations in a civil court of law!
>(There's the clue you refuse to click on.)
>
>[another 70 lines of Bradshite given the gate]
Can't deal with facts can you- you hard head?
>>What happened to Tavish is a travesty of justice and anyone who believes in
>>fair play sees Tavish was a victim of severe legal system abuse. Yale on the
>>other hand has a public record of ill repute as Tavish had posted and what
>>you wish would go away.
>
>Your hero is a sick old Nazi-hater who desperately needs a better hobby than
>being the running joke of Bellville.
Personal attacks and lies and defamation is al you have isnt it Patrick?
>>The above is forever in public record too and unlike Tavish; Yale F. Edeiken
>>was convicted for his guilt and was disciplined three times by the highest
>>court in his state. Why are you mute on what Yale is? He is unfit to practice
>>law.
>
>He's more fit to practice it than cretins like you will ever be.
Is that so?
~~Shyster Yale F. Edeiken has been black listed by a watch group~~
Citizens for Legal Responsibility
Concerning unethical attorneys and judges in the State of Pennsylvania:
http://www.clr.org/pa.html (Archived locally as: clr-org_pa)
Judicial/Attorney Misconduct in Pennsylvania
Following are some of the attorneys or judges who have been reported to have
been disciplined by the State of Pennsylvania for unethical conduct, who may be
a resident of the State of Pennsylvania but was disciplined in another
jurisdiction, transferred to inactive status, sued for malpractice,
incarcerated, whom we understand have been charged with unethical conduct, have
engaged in conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice, or to
bring the courts and the legal business into disrepute, etc.
[...]
Yale F. Edeiken --Attorney at Law - Supreme Court ID# 40290 (Allentown, PA)
<END>
---Famous Last Words Series-- Yale F. Edeiken & Sara D. Salzman:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=3870...@news3.enter.net&lr=&hl=en
Archived locally as: YaleSuedTwice
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: KOOK WEBSITE
Date: 2000/01/02
Message-ID: <3870...@news3.enter.net>
"I have never been charged with any unethical activity relating to the
practice of law..."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=catamont-564BD5.09581216092003%40netnews.attbi.com&rnum=2
(Archived locally as: SaraLibels2)
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: PSYCHOSARA SALZMAN'S HOLIDAY SURPRISE ----
Message-ID: <catamont-564BD5...@netnews.attbi.com>
"Yale Edeiken has nothing to do with whether you're an impotent slug,
Mr. Bradbury... PROVE your idiotic assertion that he has been "censured"
by the state supreme court... Sara"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is laughing at you big time Yale F. Edeiken and Sara Salzman!
>>>(Since when is a civil court NOT a court of law?) Keep the gems coming,
>>>Bradburied!
>
>>If anyone has been buried it is Yale seeing how he hasn't been around since he
>>lost his lawsuit against Tavish.
>
>...never mind that the facts of finding weren't invalidated by the
>jurisdictional-issue reversal, and thus are permanently in the court (and
>public) record -- because your hero was too busy ignoring his legal
>responsibilities, as describved above.
I WAS NEVER SERVED!!! GET IT!!??
>>Doc Tavish is superior to you in every way.
>
>...if you consider classic psychosis superior. (I'm not a two-ton blob of fat
>who's a few grains short of a sandbox, either. Your "hero" is, and his local
>law-nforcement community are well aware of *that* fact.)
Tavish
---Undeniable proof Patrick "Peeping Tom" Humphrey has a mental disorder:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=szkisiy9kt1.fsf%40fnord.io.com&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: PatrickPeepingStalker)
Sender: pat...@fnord.io.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Slander of Patrick L Humphrey resumes
References: <e73f388a.04012...@posting.google.com>
<7d18105np6d76bln5...@4ax.com>
<giipglo7ddnz.ktxl1d3td9iv$.d...@40tude.net>
<rmarkoff-E12F73...@news05.west.earthlink.net>
From: Patrick Humphrey <pat...@io.com>
Date: 26 Jan 2004 20:39:38 -0600
"Robert M." <rmar...@msn.com> writes:
>Hang in there Pat. The rest of the world is with you.
I'm not worried...how could I peep in a SECOND-STORY bathroom window?
(Despite Fatbury's delusions, I'm highly unlikely to ever be confused with
Superman.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Notice Patrick did not deny he would do such either and take note of this
confession and who he wanted to peep on!! (Another male which would make Patrick
a homosexual voyeur for sure!!!)
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=4&ic=1&selm=50ht24%24l0g%40anarchy.io.com
(Archived locally as: PatrickThePeeper)
Subject: Re: PATRICK "THE STALKER?"
Date: 1996/09/03
Message-ID: <50ht24$l...@anarchy.io.com>
references: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960808...@omni.cc.purdue.edu>
---Sad, but true, but at least it'll be a bit easier than I thought to
encounter "Shawn" when I'm in Austin next month--if I'm out at night, just look
for anyone peeking into windows... Patrick L. Humphrey
Here is what some experts say about Patrick's behavior:
http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/db/issues/99/10.28/news.peeping.html
(Archived locally as: PLH_Voyeur)
Voyeurism at root of Peeping Tom incidents
CRIME: Cases uncommon on campus; recent arrest one of seven since 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Linh Tat Daily Bruin Contributor Although everyone has heard the term
"Peeping Tom" before, most people may still be in the dark when it comes to
understanding the nature of this criminal offense. Many people may label a
person who secretly observes another undressing or in the nude as a Peeping Tom,
but they do not always consider that those who repeatedly commit this offense
may suffer from a psychological disorder.... <END>
http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2000/0responses/2000-0919.resp.html
(Archived locally as: 2000-0919)
http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2000/0responses/2000-0919.resp.pdf
(Archived locally as: 2000-0919.resp.pdf)
...In November 1997, after reviewing police reports that implicated petitioner
as a suspect in a "Peeping Tom" incident that occurred in the vicinity of the
rape, NCIS reopened its investigation. Pet. App. 23a. Thereafter, the NCIS
office in Hawaii asked NCIS Special Agent John McNutt, assigned to the NCIS
office in Memphis, Tennessee, to interrogate petitioner, who was living in
Memphis, and to ask him to provide NCIS with a sample of his blood. Id. at 24a.
After learning that petitioner was receiving medical treatment at the
Veteran's Administration (VA) Hospital in Memphis, McNutt contacted the VA and
was allowed to review petitioner's medical records. Pet. App. 24a. During that
review, McNutt learned that petitioner was being treated for diabetes and a
mental disorder.... <END>
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=4n4u10thkq0jntg82...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Patrick L. Humphrey-- A Dangerous Stalker? - How To Identify Stalkers
Info UPDATED LINKS S_0202
Message-ID: <4n4u10thkq0jntg82...@4ax.com>
Date: 3 Feb 2004 03:56:50 GMT
(EXCERPTED)
WHAT IS STALKING?
STALKING - pattern of words or conduct that is intended to cause and does cause
the targeted person to fear death, assault, bodily injury, or CSC upon the
person or member of the person's family (reasonable person standard).
HARASSMENT - pattern of intentional substantial and unreason- able intrusion
which causes the targeted person to suffer mental distress (reasonable person
standard). A suspect must be provided notice that contact is unwanted.
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND BEHAVIORAL PROFILE OF STALKERS
Simple Obsession Stalkers:
Simple obsession stalkers represent 70 to 80% of all stalking cases.
Characteristics include:
1 personality disorders.
2 emotional immaturity, jealousy and extreme insecurity.
3 inability to succeed in relationships by socially-accepted means.
4 dominating and intimidating victims in order to bolster own self-esteem.
5 biggest fear is losing the victim.
6 believing their lives have no worth without the victim.
7 turning to violence in order to control every aspect of the victim's life
STALKING BEHAVIOR PATTERNS AND CYCLES
1 Attempts at intimidation often begin in the form of an unjustified, jealous
and inappropriate intrusion into the victim's life.
2 Contacts become more numerous and intrusive over time, until such conduct
becomes a persistent pattern of harassment.
TYPES OF STALKING BEHAVIOR
1 visiting or following the victim
2 harassing telephone calls, which includes obscene calls and hang-ups
3 sending threatening mail, which is a federal felony
4 trespassing
5 vandalism
WHAT IS STALKING BEHAVIOR?
Stalking has been referred to as a "building block crime" because it usually
starts with small incidents that can get more and more serious. These incidents
can include such behaviors as:
1) following
2) watching
3) spying
4) tracking someone
==END==================================================================
Patrick Lee Humphrey: Facts about His TERMINATION From Rice University:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=jjrv10h69n06h1h60...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Message-ID: <jjrv10h69n06h1h60...@4ax.com>
Date: 3 Feb 2004 20:29:17 GMT
steve wolk
"Orac" <orac...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac_usa-C8449F...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> > Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
> > news:<catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com>...
>
> > > I have never lied to
> > > law enforcement or the media. Lying to the media is stupid. Lying to
law
> > > enforcement is a criminal offense. And I have not done either.
> >
> > The material that I have presented in this thread suggests otherwise.
>
> All it suggests is that you're a paranoid whacko.
BINGO!
--
David Michael - he ALWAYS lies and he ALWAYS denies.
And he ALWAYS runs.
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>On 06 Oct 2004 22:01:38 -0500, <szkk6u3...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Lee
>Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
>>>On 06 Oct 2004 15:43:18 -0500, <szku0t7...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Lee
>>>Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>>>Steve_...@yahoo.com (Steve Talbot) writes:
>>[...]
>>>>>One does not have to go to a court of law to be able to define
>>>>>manufacturing of evidence submitted in sworn testimony is perjury. What
>>>>>then do you call submitting forged and manufactured documents to a civil
>>>>>court? No wonder why your mentor did not want Tavish or his attorney to
>>>>>see those complaints before Edeiken got his stealth judgment. That
>>>>>judgment was dismissed in light of the real facts.
>>>Why do you keep overlooking this Patrick?
>>>http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn
>>A Japanese website doesn't determine law in this country, dolt.
>No claim aas such was made.
Why not claim that a German site for Mein Kampf asserts it, too? Neither one
would be particularly relevant to your raving.
>>[about 200 lines of reposted Bradshite deleted]
>It does define perjury!
...and I'm not going to waste 300 lines to do your work for you.
[more like 100 lines sent to the cleaners]
>Yale got the author and date wrong too and the post was not signed
>Doc Tavish as he claimed in his perjured statement. I also never had
>an account at the regular ISP used either! CRIMINAL PERJURY!!!
Whine, bitch. No one's taking you seriously.
[zap, again]
>Once again a post Yale admitted in a sworn statement signed "Doc Tavish"
>when it is obvious another person posted it! PERJURY!!!!!
Once again, Your Fatness of Bellville can't do anything but consume large
amounts of bandwidth by obsessive re-posting of crap that was thrown out long
ago.
>>>Yale was a criminal lying perjurer to have submitted the above to a civil
>>>court.
>>You've still got a hard-on for someone who hasn't even posted here in three
>>years, if not longer.
>Because I am still being defamed and harassed because of that coward!
Bullshit. Take your fat ass to court and prove it, for once in your life.
>>>>Oops! The case was overturned on a jurisdictional issue...which keeps the
>>>>findings of fact intact
>>>How could there have been a truthful finding of fact seeing how Tavish and his
>>>attroney weren't given a chance to participate in finding of fact?
>>>Why do you persist in ignoring what Tavish posted?
>>You mean because he's a delusional dolt who was too busy scribbling "RETURN
>>TO STALKER" on papers sent him by the court and returning them unopened?
>Why do you keep insisting that I returned the complaints unopened when in fact I
>did not!? The court never sent me papers via Yale F. Edeiken! They send their
>own papers themselves! My but you are stupid and you keep forgetting:
...that you're truly delusional, and were bragging in a pubblic newsgroup
about what you had done.
[another 60 lines down the dumper]
>Key statement from above: "Since a complaint has never been filed or served,
>the defendant is unable to attach a copy of preliminary objections..." IOW I
>was denied my day in court and due process by a liar and a person who
>manufactures evidence to make false accusations in a civil court of law!
...because (all together now!) you were returning the papers unopened after
leaving your droppings on them. I'm not surprised you wouldn't remember that,
as it's too inconvenient to your impotent jihad.
>>(There's the clue you refuse to click on.)
>>[another 70 lines of Bradshite given the gate]
>Can't deal with facts can you- you hard head?
Can't tolerate Jews just like your hero Adolf, eh?
>>>What happened to Tavish is a travesty of justice and anyone who believes in
>>>fair play sees Tavish was a victim of severe legal system abuse. Yale on the
>>>other hand has a public record of ill repute as Tavish had posted and what
>>>you wish would go away.
>>Your hero is a sick old Nazi-hater who desperately needs a better hobby than
>>being the running joke of Bellville.
>Personal attacks and lies and defamation is al you have isnt it Patrick?
Looking in a mirror while you post your crap is about all you appear to have.
>>>The above is forever in public record too and unlike Tavish; Yale
>>>F. Edeiken was convicted for his guilt and was disciplined three times by
>>>the highest court in his state. Why are you mute on what Yale is? He is
>>>unfit to practice law.
>>He's more fit to practice it than cretins like you will ever be.
>Is that so?
Evidently, since he's still a lawyer and you're still a raving whackjob.
>>>>(Since when is a civil court NOT a court of law?) Keep the gems coming,
>>>>Bradburied!
>>>If anyone has been buried it is Yale seeing how he hasn't been around since
>>>he lost his lawsuit against Tavish.
>>...never mind that the facts of finding weren't invalidated by the
>>jurisdictional-issue reversal, and thus are permanently in the court (and
>>public) record -- because your hero was too busy ignoring his legal
>>responsibilities, as describved above.
>I WAS NEVER SERVED!!! GET IT!!??
...for the reasons I've mentioned twice in this followup. Keep banging your
head against the wall.
>>>Doc Tavish is superior to you in every way.
>>...if you consider classic psychosis superior. (I'm not a two-ton blob of
>>fat who's a few grains short of a sandbox, either. Your "hero" is, and his
>>local law-nforcement community are well aware of *that* fact.)
>---Undeniable proof Patrick "Peeping Tom" Humphrey has a mental disorder:
Can you say a reflex that makes Pavlov's dog look completely aimless by
comparison?
[Fatbury canned spam deleted, as per SOP]
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
Mr. Ellis
haha. This is so funny. Mr. Ellis was 'outed'. haha
Mr. Ellis
>
>There is a person called Don Ellis. He was sued by David Goldman of
>hatewatch.org. If he was CIA, involved in some kind of "sting," the
case
>would never have been allowed to proceed.
>
>
> Sara
Mr. Ellis has never been sued by Mr. Goldman. In fact, Mr. Ellis'
lawyer (c.c. gibson) has on file documents where Mr. Goldman paid Mr.
Ellis $15,000 for both hatewatch domains.
Sara Salzman
m...@ccc-cable.net (Mr. Ellis) wrote:
And apparently the agreement both signed saying that they would not
disclose the amount paid has been nicely violated, eh?
Mr. Ellis
Can you explain how Dr. David is in 'big trouble' over text posted on Usenet?
Mr. Ellis
> In article <7d5407f7.04100...@posting.google.com>,
> m...@ccc-cable.net (Mr. Ellis) wrote:
>
> > Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
> > news:<catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com>...
> >
> > >
> > >There is a person called Don Ellis. He was sued by David Goldman of
> > >hatewatch.org. If he was CIA, involved in some kind of "sting," the
> case
> > >would never have been allowed to proceed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sara
> >
> > Mr. Ellis has never been sued by Mr. Goldman. In fact, Mr. Ellis'
> > lawyer (c.c. gibson) has on file documents where Mr. Goldman paid Mr.
> > Ellis $15,000 for both hatewatch domains.
>
> And apparently the agreement both signed saying that they would not
> disclose the amount paid has been nicely violated, eh?
>
> Sara
Mr. Goldman's first three offers included many agreements, but refused
by Mr. Ellis. Mr. Ellis requested $15,000 cash, no terms, only the
transfer of domain ownership.
david_michael
My agenda 'here', if you mean in this particular thread, is this.
You have stated to the media and apparently also the police and the
FBI that you were the victim of a racist hate campaign spearheaded by
Mr Ellis.
You have also stated that you believe Blakely to be CIA and Ellis and
Blakely to be either the same person or working closely.
Now given that the CIA is not, presumably, prone to conducting racist
hate campaigns against fairly insignificant Jewish anti-racist
activists, your statements are clearly incompatible. Ellis cannot be
BOTH a CIA associate and someone who is harassing you racially as part
of a racist hate campaign.
If you were sincere in your belief that Blakely is CIA and that Ellis
is Blakely or working closely with him then you appear to have made a
false statement to the police, FBI and the media in an attempt to gain
sympathy and prestige in the Jewish world by fabricating hate crimes.
In other words you appear to have committed a fairly serious criminal
offence.
Now you might simply have been lying when you said that you knew these
things about Blakely and Ellis. If that is the case, perhaps you
should admit it now.
As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
Orac
> As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
No, the only one you're outing here is yourself. You're outing yourself
as a complete paranoid whacko...
Gord McFee
> Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message news:<catamont-03D5DD...@news.giganews.com>...
[...]
>>So tell us, Dr. Homeland, WHY did you out one of your comrades? What's
>>your agenda here?
>
> My agenda 'here', if you mean in this particular thread, is this.
[rubbish deleted]
No, your agenda in this thread is to deflect everyone's attention from
the fact that you have outed the Ellis/Blakely entity. I would imagine
such a serious breach on your part has you in very big trouble. Care to
comment on that, or do you plan to run away again?
Gord McFee
> In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
>>As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
>
> No, the only one you're outing here is yourself. You're outing yourself
> as a complete paranoid whacko...
Big time. I suspect he is in very big trouble. As usual, he has
screwed it up with yet another "organization".
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>[...]
>[rubbish deleted]
He can always hitch a ride with Mr. Irving on his next tour de farce across
North America...assuming they'll let Mr. Irving in, of course.
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be david_michael wrote
in message <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>:
>My agenda 'here', if you mean in this particular thread, is this.
>
>You have stated to the media and apparently also the police and the
>FBI that you were the victim of a racist hate campaign spearheaded by
>Mr Ellis.
>
>You have also stated that you believe Blakely to be CIA and Ellis and
>Blakely to be either the same person or working closely.
No. She has stated, quite correctly, that Blakely *claimed* to be
CIA. Do you really not see the difference?
>Now given that the CIA is not, presumably, prone to conducting racist
>hate campaigns against fairly insignificant Jewish anti-racist
>activists, your statements are clearly incompatible. Ellis cannot be
>BOTH a CIA associate and someone who is harassing you racially as part
>of a racist hate campaign.
Which is why her first reaction was that Ellis could not be CIA, your
claim to the contrary notwithstanding.
>If you were sincere in your belief that Blakely is CIA and that Ellis
>is Blakely or working closely with him then you appear to have made a
>false statement to the police, FBI and the media in an attempt to gain
>sympathy and prestige in the Jewish world by fabricating hate crimes.
>In other words you appear to have committed a fairly serious criminal
>offence.
>
>Now you might simply have been lying when you said that you knew these
>things about Blakely and Ellis. If that is the case, perhaps you
>should admit it now.
>
>As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
Nup.
Sara Salzman
Oh yeah. You "outed" me, Dr. Homeland. I'm terrified. I'm going to have
to flee the US because I'm so frightened that your suppositions,
assumptions, "appears to," "seems" and other assinine guesses and
moronic conclusions have "outed" me.
Do you really believe your own myth of self-importance? Do you really
believe that anyone other than the most brain-dead of contributors here,
like Carpenter, Bradbury and his little fan club, give you any more than
a cursory giggle and the occasional taunt?
In the 5 paragraphs above, Dr. Homeland, you use the words:
apparently
believe
presumably
appear
perhaps
I'm sure the FBI will be as fascinated by this as you are.
Not.
Sara
david_michael
The phrases containing those qualifiers were:
'You have stated to the media and apparently also the police and the
FBI'
'the CIA is not, presumably, prone to conducting racist hate
campaigns'
'you have also stated that you believe Blakely to be CIA'
'you appear to have committed a fairly serious criminal offence'
'If that is the case, perhaps you should admit it now.'
I don't see much beating about the bush there, Ms Salzman. I can
restate the case without any of those qualifiers. Look:
1. You have said that you told the police and the FBI -- and you have
certainly told the media -- that you were the victim of a race hate
campaign spearheaded by Mr Ellis.
2. You have also said that you knew Ellis was Blakely and that Blakely
was CIA.
3. It is no part of the normal operational function of the CIA to
engage in race hate campaigns against insignificant anti-racist Jewish
activists.
4. You therefore either lied when you said that you knew that Ellis
was Blakely and that Blakely was CIA or you lied to the police, FBI
and media (i.e. committed a serious crime).
Which is it, Ms Salzman? Did you lie to the authorities or did you lie
to the readers of alt.revisionism? You sure as hell have been lying to
someone.
david_michael
Yes, I'll comment on that. My comment is this.
I find it utterly incomprehensible that a grown man who is employed as
a senior civil servant and purports -- evidently falsely -- to be a
Christian should take the side of a person who has confessed to a
rather serious crime -- namely fabricating hate crimes and making
false reports to the police and the CIA.
Salzman has told the police, FBI and media that she was the victim of
a race hate campaign for which she has blamed Mr Ellis.
Salzman has stated that she knew Ellis was Blakely and that Blakely
was CIA.
It is no part of the function of the CIA to conduct hate campaigns
against insignificant Jewish anti-racist activists.
Therefore this person either lied to alt.revisionism or lied to the
authorities.
This is what you and your colleagues wish to cover up with your spam
and your trolling.
Every time you post here you spit in the face of your god.
Sara Salzman
You really have your knickers in a twist, Dr. Homeland. You've set up
this fantasy, and now you're demanding answers from me, attacking Gord
McFee's religious beliefs, and practically frothing at the mouth.
Your idiocy above has been answered and answered. I've answered it,
others have answered it, and yet you're still demanding answers to
questions that have already been answered. I'd say you're a little
unhinged here. Are the bad boys you outed really that scary?
1. You've made up the phrase "race hate campaign." I never said it. I
also was very clear about "someone claiming to be Don Ellis," or
"appearing to be from Don Ellis."
2. This entire fantasy is yours. I didn't know "Ellis was Blakely" for
certain until YOU outed him. As for "was CIA," I only know that Blakely
bragged about being in the CIA. YOU are the one who made the definitive
statement.
3. Again, this is part of your fantasy. I'll try to say this in little
words so you can understand it: the fact that someone works for a
person or a company doesn't mean that every single thing they
do is done as a representative of that person or company.
Pat Blakely said he USED to work for the CIA. Are you seriously stating
here that every single thing Pat Blakely ever did was done "as a CIA
agent"? Don't people have spare time? Don't people do things AFTER they
retire from a job?
You are a phenomenal idiot.
4. And finally, you seem to have caught Mr. Bradbury's insanity about
things written in Usenet and things sworn to in court. For one thing, I
NEVER said "Blakely was CIA." I said Blakely was an idiot, a liar, a
harasser, a lunatic, and HE SAID he was ONCE a CIA employee.
I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
you.
Now go and crawl back under your rock and maybe your handlers will
eventually forgive you for your oopsie.
Mr. Ellis
Please explain how Dr. David is in very big trouble?
Mr. Ellis
Joe Bruno
game-player whose only talent appears to be nagging people about stupid
things to get a reaction. When I told him off, he insisted I was being paid
by someone to disrupt newsgroups so that revisionists could not make their
views heard. I finally got tired of being asked who paid me, so I told him
I was a KGB agent out to disrupt conversations between Capitalists so that
the USSR could come back and establish worldwide dominance.
I told him my pay is 100 rubles a month. I think he gave up because he
realized I would not take his games seriously.(he couldn't irritate me). If
you take his foolishness seriously, you're gonna end up on the Funny Farm.
"Sara Salzman" <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:catamont-524FEE...@news.giganews.com...
c...@c.cc
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
[cut]
>You really have your knickers in a twist, Dr. Homeland. You've set up
>this fantasy, and now you're demanding answers from me, attacking Gord
>McFee's religious beliefs, and practically frothing at the mouth.
Tis you, thou frothy pig-faceds trumpet
>Your idiocy above has been answered and answered. I've answered it,
>others have answered it, and yet you're still demanding answers to
>questions that have already been answered. I'd say you're a little
>unhinged here. Are the bad boys you outed really that scary?
>
>1. You've made up the phrase "race hate campaign." I never said it. I
>also was very clear about "someone claiming to be Don Ellis," or
>"appearing to be from Don Ellis."
>
>2. This entire fantasy is yours. I didn't know "Ellis was Blakely" for
>certain until YOU outed him. As for "was CIA," I only know that Blakely
>bragged about being in the CIA. YOU are the one who made the definitive
>statement.
Let's see. You call him a liar, repeatedly. Then you say: " I didn't
know "Ellis was Blakely" for certain until YOU outed him"
Now you believe him, right? You are being selective and quitee
disingenuous.
>3. Again, this is part of your fantasy. I'll try to say this in little
>words so you can understand it: the fact that someone works for a
>person or a company doesn't mean that every single thing they
>do is done as a representative of that person or company.
Back peddling as fast as you can.
>Pat Blakely said he USED to work for the CIA. Are you seriously stating
>here that every single thing Pat Blakely ever did was done "as a CIA
>agent"? Don't people have spare time? Don't people do things AFTER they
>retire from a job?
Defending Mr. Blakely, are we?
>You are a phenomenal idiot.
He's not, but you are.
>4. And finally, you seem to have caught Mr. Bradbury's insanity about
>things written in Usenet and things sworn to in court. For one thing, I
>NEVER said "Blakely was CIA." I said Blakely was an idiot, a liar, a
>harasser, a lunatic, and HE SAID he was ONCE a CIA employee.
And now you know for certain, as you stated above.
>I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
>the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
>you.
Thanks for the new sig!
>Now go and crawl back under your rock and maybe your handlers will
>eventually forgive you for your oopsie.
>
>Sara
Sara, you're pathetic. Just can't win, can you?
"I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
you." Sara Salzman 10/08/04
c...@c.cc
wrote:
>Personally, I doubt that David is sincere in any of this.
Proof?????????????
> He is a childish
>game-player whose only talent appears to be nagging people about stupid
>things to get a reaction.
If that's the case it seems to be working.
> When I told him off, he insisted I was being paid
>by someone to disrupt newsgroups so that revisionists could not make their
>views heard. I finally got tired of being asked who paid me, so I told him
>I was a KGB agent out to disrupt conversations between Capitalists so that
>the USSR could come back and establish worldwide dominance.
>I told him my pay is 100 rubles a month. I think he gave up because he
>realized I would not take his games seriously.
He pulling your leg just like everybody does, dimwit. He only stopped
because he was tired of playing with you.
>(he couldn't irritate me).
Everybody sets you off, that's why we do it. L@U
> If you take his foolishness seriously, you're gonna end up on the Funny Farm.
She blows herself up all the time at the Bac-O-Bits Ranch. The Funny
Farm is next door, where she posts from.
[cut]
--
"I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
you." Sara Salzman 10/08/04
Sara Salzman
Thanks for the new sig, Chris. I appreciate your validation of my
honesty.
Joe Bruno
Notice that the idiot Chris cannot read. I said I suspected something which
cannot be proved and he asked me for proof.
Notice also that he provided no proof of his other claims.
He's still full of bullshit.
Gassen Burnham
> In article <b7fe1abc.0410080415.45570efe@
Oh for Christ sake, Hog Gal, you are more of an obsessive compulsive
than Tandy.
The problem with you is that your neurosis is compunded by PMS and the
convoluted persecution complex you manifest, for fuk sake, get old
Leon to give you a grease and oil change.
You routinely post grubby accusations against anyone who fails to
yeild to your dominatrix persona, you are a sick, ugly, useless
pervert who is nothing but a child bearing machine designed to burden
the welfare system.
Please go and live your totally unproductive life in the obscurity you
deserve and cease foisting your 300 pounds of useless lard on the long
suffering gentiles in AR.
Gassen Burnham
> Personally, I doubt that David is sincere in any of this. He is a childish
> game-player whose only talent appears to be nagging people about stupid
> things to get a reaction.
ROTFLMFAO... Looks like the Dago from San Diego has done a little
introspectionprojection, pinning the results on David... it's so much
easier than facing 'Tatonka' alone, isn't it, shitstain?
> When I told him off, he insisted I was being paid
> by someone
Yes.... Social Security, you useless, worthless, manic, wog turd.
> to disrupt newsgroups so that revisionists could not make their
> views heard.
Well, he's been around here longer than most of us, I suppose he has
tired of your repitoir of lunacy.
> I finally got tired of being asked who paid me, so I told him
> I was a KGB agent out to disrupt conversations between Capitalists so that
> the USSR could come back and establish worldwide dominance.
And the sad fact is, you probably believe this story, seek help!
> I told him my pay is 100 rubles a month. I think he gave up because he
> realized I would not take his games seriously.
Liar, Liar, pants on fire!
> (he couldn't irritate me).
ROTFLMFAO.... All he had to do is drop the SHITSTAIN nym a couple of
times and you would have been a foaming, spluttering maniac, instead
of a mediocre basket case.
> If
> you take his foolishness seriously, you're gonna end up on the Funny Farm.
>
Sharing a ward with you, I suppose, shitstain?
david_michael
<snip old stuff>
> You really have your knickers in a twist, Dr. Homeland.
> You've set up
> this fantasy, and now you're demanding answers from me, attacking Gord
> McFee's religious beliefs, and practically frothing at the mouth.
> Your idiocy above has been answered and answered. I've answered it,
> others have answered it, and yet you're still demanding answers to
> questions that have already been answered. I'd say you're a little
> unhinged here.
> Are the bad boys you outed really that scary?
> 1. You've made up the phrase "race hate campaign." I never said it.
Utterly pathetic, Ms Salzman. What 'phrase' you used doesn't interest
me in the least -- you made the allegation that you were on the
receiving end of such a campaign. Here:
http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-10/news/feature3_1.html
> I
> also was very clear about "someone claiming to be Don Ellis," or
> "appearing to be from Don Ellis."
Actually you weren't. Most of the time when you made your allegations
you used no such qualifiers.
From: cata...@concentric.net (Sara Salzman)
Subject: Re: Where's Fergus?
Date: 2000/03/02
Message-ID: <catamont-010...@ts003d36.den-co.concentric.net>#1/1
<begin quote>
It is interesting to note that Mr. Ellis is now posting my home
address
and phone number to two other newsgroups as well:
alt.politics.nationalism.white, and alt.politics.white-power. There
can be
no possible reason to cross-post to those groups except to encourage
those
who post there to harass me.
Sara
<end quote>
From: cata...@concentric.net (Sara Salzman)
Subject: Ellis' new target
Date: 2000/03/12
Message-ID: <catamont-120...@ts002d44.den-co.concentric.net>#1/1
<begin quote>
Well, Joel, looks like Ellis decided I was too difficult to go after,
so
he's moved on to you.
Just settle down, relax, and archive everything for a few days. He'll
realise he can't affect you either, and find some other person to
harass.
Sara
<end quote>
From: cata...@concentric.net (Sara Salzman)
Subject: Re: Hello Sara
Date: 2000/03/13
Message-ID: <catamont-120...@ts009d13.den-co.concentric.net>
<begin quote>
It never occured to me that soneone (or something) would try to use
those
names to harass and frighten me. Therefore, after Mr. Ellis posted
them, I
asked Ken to remove their names from the Nizkor page.
Of course, Mr. Ellis then posted the original page on his website, so
it
doesn't really matter.
Sara
<end quote>
From: cata...@concentric.net (Sara Salzman)
Subject: Re: Ellis Pleads Ignorance: His Usual State
Date: 2000/03/24
Message-ID: <catamont-240...@ts003d10.den-co.concentric.net>#1/1
<begin quote>
I don't advise you to harass him, though. On the other hand, please
do.
I'm sure he'd be delighted to hear from an Ellis sock-puppet,
especially
since he has all the e-mails in which you and Ellis discuss reporting
me
to Child Welfare services.
Sara
<end quote>
And so forth. There are dozens of examples.
You were accusing Ellis of harassing you. Not 'someone claiming to be'
Ellis. Ellis.
> 2. This entire fantasy is yours. I didn't know "Ellis was Blakely" for
> certain until YOU outed him. As for "was CIA," I only know that Blakely
> bragged about being in the CIA. YOU are the one who made the definitive
> statement.
Again, your own words betray you.
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 17:29:06 -0500
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 16:29:39 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-FFE7ED...@news.giganews.com>
<begin quote>
Funny about that, isn't it? Blakely always claimed he lived in England
and worked for the CIA.
Don Ellis is a car mechanic and grease monkey.
AND a convenient screen for Pat Blakely's more offensive turns.
Thanks, Dr. Homeland, for admitting you knew about this all along. But
then, so did we.
Of course, why Ken McVay would be reading (and/or responding to) your
"exposes" in a national-anarchist group on Yahoo is quite another
question.
Sara
<end quote>
You did not, and still do not, know 'for certain' whether Blakely and
Ellis are the same person, but you 'knew all along' (your phrase) that
they were at the very least extremely closely associated.
> 3. Again, this is part of your fantasy. I'll try to say this in little
> words so you can understand it: the fact that someone works for a
> person or a company doesn't mean that every single thing they
> do is done as a representative of that person or company.
>
> Pat Blakely said he USED to work for the CIA. Are you seriously stating
> here that every single thing Pat Blakely ever did was done "as a CIA
> agent"? Don't people have spare time? Don't people do things AFTER they
> retire from a job?
>
> You are a phenomenal idiot.
There's a flaw in that argument. The CIA doesn't employ just anyone.
It vets its employees very closely (as does our own MI5).
http://www.cia.gov/employment/apply.html
<begin quote>
Personal Integrity
A career in intelligence can be enormously rewarding. It also demands
the very best of the men and women who comprise the Agency's
workforce. To meet the requirements of the work itself, intelligence
professionals must be highly competent in their fields. To safeguard
some of the nation's most sensitive information, CIA officers must be
highly reliable and trustworthy. Woven through all aspects of their
performance is the imperative to adhere to the highest standards of
integrity. To be selected for a position of such trust and
responsibility, one must be granted a security clearance . . .
The Clearance Process
The clearance process, which is strictly governed by rules and
regulations derived from Federal statute and executive orders, begins
when you accept a conditional offer of employment from the Agency. It
involves a thorough examination of your life history and fitness to
safeguard the nation's secrets. Think of this process as the first
step in building a bridge of trust between you and the Agency. Candor
is an essential ingredient in the establishment of that trust.
The investigation addresses comprehensively one's loyalty to the
United States, strength of character, trustworthiness, honesty,
reliability, discretion, and soundness of judgment. In addition, it
examines one's freedom from conflicting allegiances, potential for
coercion, and willingness and ability to abide by regulations
governing the use, handling and protection of sensitive information.
The Agency uses a polygraph to check the veracity of information that
bears upon the areas listed above. CIA's polygraph examiners are
highly trained security professionals, among the world's best in their
field. They work closely and carefully with applicants to ensure that
the information upon which clearance decisions are based is as
accurate as it can be and is guarded with the strictest confidence.
The clearance process can be lengthy. Since the Agency actively
recruits people who have expert knowledge of foreign languages and
cultures, it is not unusual for our applicants to have numerous
foreign contacts. In these cases the investigation must cover more
ground, which usually takes more time. Candor is critical to the
timely completion of this process.
The hiring process also entails a thorough medical examination of
one's mental and physical fitness to perform essential job functions.
<end quote>
Now you are suggesting that the person whom you claimed harassed you
got through THAT level of security clearance without them picking up
on his propensity to harass a supposedly innocent person for no
reason?
> 4. And finally, you seem to have caught Mr. Bradbury's insanity about
> things written in Usenet and things sworn to in court. For one thing, I
> NEVER said "Blakely was CIA." I said Blakely was an idiot, a liar, a
> harasser, a lunatic, and HE SAID he was ONCE a CIA employee.
Once again, your own words expose your lies:
<begin quote>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:54:39 -0500
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 21:55:12 -0600
Message-ID: <catamont-8D6408...@news.giganews.com
<begin quote>
No, Dr. Homeland, that's not the "oopsie" at all. Are you really as
thick as you act? The "oopsie" is that Pat Blakely worked for the CIA,
and you have now linked Blakely and Ellis together perfectly.
Got it now, Mr. Thick?
Sara
<end quote>
There it is as plain as day -- 'Pat Blakely worked for the CIA'.
> I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
> the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
> you.
I am very, very sorry, Ms Salzman, but the above refutes your claim.
> Now go and crawl back under your rock and maybe your handlers will
> eventually forgive you for your oopsie.
>
> Sara
For someone who supposedly never lies it is strange how you impute
'handlers' to me. I'm willing to bet that you're not going to name
these 'handlers', much less provide evidence of their existence as
such.
c...@c.cc
Burnham) wrote:
That's her lot in life; building anti-Semites the old fashioned way -
one at a time.
--
"I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
you." Sara Salzman 10/08/04
Gord McFee
<catamont-524FEE...@news.giganews.com>, Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
[...]
> I have, Dr. Homeland, NEVER lied to anyone. Not in this forum, not to
> the police, not to the media, not even to someone as beneath contempt as
> you.
>
> Now go and crawl back under your rock and maybe your handlers will
> eventually forgive you for your oopsie.
And that is it in a nutshell. He is terrified of the whoopsie he
committed. He must be in real big doo-doo.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Visit the Holocaust History Project
http://www.holocaust-history.org
Gord McFee
> On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 09:45:23 -0600, Sara Salzman
> <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> >You really have your knickers in a twist, Dr. Homeland. You've set up
> >this fantasy, and now you're demanding answers from me, attacking Gord
> >McFee's religious beliefs, and practically frothing at the mouth.
>
> Tis you, thou frothy pig-faceds trumpet
Is that it, Chris? You were called in to try and bail Michael out of
his mistake? God, they must be desperate.
Gord McFee
> Gord McFee <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message news:<YeidnYJRfKO...@rogers.com>...
> > On 10/6/2004 8:43 PM, John Morris wrote:
> >
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > In <catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com> in
> > > alt.revisionism, on Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:01:57 -0600, Sara Salzman
> > > <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >
> > >>Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid
> > >>again?
> > >
> > > What makes you think he is playing? He has all but announced that he
> > > intends to stalk and harass you over this, and that seems to me to be
> > > genuinely stupid.
> >
> > I remind everyone that the reason Michael is doing this is because *he*
> > outed Ellis and he is trying to cover it up.
>
> haha. This is so funny. Mr. Ellis was 'outed'. haha
David Michael doesn't seem to be laughing. I wonder why? He's
probably erasing his hard drive as we speak.
Gord McFee
<b7fe1abc.0410...@posting.google.com>,
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
> Gord McFee <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message news:<h5CdnWd5HYt...@rogers.com>...
> > On 10/7/2004 9:48 PM, david_michael wrote:
> >
> > > Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message news:<catamont-03D5DD...@news.giganews.com>...
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >>So tell us, Dr. Homeland, WHY did you out one of your comrades? What's
> > >>your agenda here?
> > >
> > > My agenda 'here', if you mean in this particular thread, is this.
> >
> > [rubbish deleted]
> >
> > No, your agenda in this thread is to deflect everyone's attention from
> > the fact that you have outed the Ellis/Blakely entity. I would imagine
> > such a serious breach on your part has you in very big trouble. Care to
> > comment on that, or do you plan to run away again?
>
> Yes, I'll comment on that. My comment is this.
As I thought. You ran away again.
[...]
The fact of the matter is that you screwed up again, and you are
desperately - and I might add unsuccessfully - to deflect attention
away from it. Are you that afraid?
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Visit the Holocaust History Project
http://www.holocaust-history.org
Gord McFee
> Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message news:<catamont-524FEE...@news.giganews.com>...
>
> <snip old stuff>
[rubbish deleted]
Why are you so afraid, David? Have they threatened you?
Ralph Gordon
> In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> > John Morris <john....@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
> > news:<8vh6m0dpllgp7458m...@4ax.com>...
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > alt.revisionism, on 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
> > > david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > David, you're an idiot.
> > >
> > > - --
>
> > > John Morris
> >
> > Personal abuse from Salzman's supporters but no answer. Let's go
> > through it again.
> >
> > 1. Salzman has claimed that she was the victim of a racist hate
> > campaign and has blamed it on Ellis.
> >
> > 2. She has whined about this to the media and, more to the point, to
> > the FBI and the police.
> >
> > 3. She has now stated that she believes that Blakely was CIA.
> >
> > 4. She has stated that she believes that Ellis was either Blakely or
> > working closely with him.
> >
> > 5. It appears therefore that she has made false claims to the FBI and
> > police about the alleged hate campaign against her because she seems
> > to have known all along about the link between Ellis and the CIA.
> >
> > Now you can try to distract attention from that by posting personal
> > abuse but I'll just keep putting the point forward until we get either
> > a rebuttal or an explanation.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2.
>
> You won't get either, since you're obviously living in a fantasy land
> where up is down, and you think your posts make any sense.
>
> Sara
According to David Michael in the first post in this thread: "In
addition, she has volunteered hundreds — if not thousands —
of hours of her time to produce reams of information for the Nizkor
Project, including a monumental effort to put the entire transcripts
of the first Nurenberg Tribunal online by scanning and coding the
British transcripts." If Salzman is an ardent anti-revisionist then
what is the point of doing that? -- I would presume that she is not
really interested in the truth concerning the "Holocaust", but is
merely interested in propagating the Zionist cause, either for the
sake of ideological delusion and/or personal profit. From what I have
read of the testimonies enunciated at the Nuremburg Tribunal, these
are only likely to raise doubts about the exterminationist thesis,
since, as is normally to be expected from serious historical research
(contrary to the assertions of the more dogmatic revisionists and
exterminationists), the whole issue merges into shades of grey, rather
than being a black and white issue -- consider, for instance, the
issues concerning Pearl Harbour. It is very interesting to read what
Hermann Goering had to say at Nuremburg, for instance, which certainly
contradicts the exterminationist thesis, although he can be depicted
as a ruthless totalitarian leader. Thus, if someone is really
interested in learning what the "Holocaust" was all about, then they
should read what transpired at Nuremburg, which is one serious aspect
of the whole question.
Sara Salzman
ralph...@mail.com (Ralph Gordon) wrote:
"The point" of putting trial transcripts online is twofold:
1. it makes it possible for those without access to the printed
transcripts to read them;
2. it make searching a whole lot easier.
Ralph Gordon
> On 6 Oct 2004 06:18:00 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> >> > CASE:
> >> >
> >> > 1. Ms Salzman, in an attempt to gain a reputation for herself as a
> >> > fearless anti-Nazi campaigner, has been putting it about that she's
> >> >
> >> > 2. She has publicized this to the full, making complaints to the FBI
> >> > and police and, of course, giving interviews about it to the press.
> >> >
>
> ~~Sara D. Salzman confirming her character flaws for one and all?~~
> "I'm a little fool and a lying bitch and a silly slut..." - Sara Salzman
> verifying Matt Giwer's observations?
> "I do not mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy." - Sara Salzman's sig line
> Message-ID: <schwartz-ya023180...@news.infinet.com>
> (Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_1 and SaraSplainsAll_2)
> -------
> "I made it up based on my hatred for anything related to the
> Truth." - Sara Salzman
> Message-ID: <catamont-780E81...@news.giganews.com>
> (Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_15 and SaraSplainsAll_16)
> -------
> "I am an agitator..." - Sara Salzman admitting her agenda?
> Message-ID: <catamont-201...@ts006d16.den-co.concentric.net>
> (Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_9 and SaraSplainsAll_10)
> ~~Sara Salzman Seeking a Fix?~~
> "Please let me know what drugs you're taking. They sound wonderful!" - Sara
> Salzman Message-ID: <schwartz-180...@cmh-p028.infinet.com>
> (Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_3 and SaraSplainsAll_4)
>
> >
> >David
> >http://www.nationalanarchist.com
>
> Does anything else need to be stated? Sara is pathological liar and a perjurer.
>
> Tavish
>
> ~~Comments on Sara D. Salzman's Appearance~~
> Peter N. Kirstein
> Professor of History
> Saint Xavier University
> <start/quote>
> From: "Peter Kirstein" <kirs...@sxu.edu>
> Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004 6:40:58 AM America/Denver
> To: Sara Salzman
> Subject: Re: Thank you so very much!
> Reply-To: <kirs...@sxu.edu>
>
> Dear Ms. Salzman,
>
> I am sorry if you are being inconvenienced by Mr Irving's posting. I
> have no control what persons place on their website in the dynamic,
> unfettered world of the Internet. No, I would not have drawn inferences
> to your faith and appearance....
> <end/quote> ^^^^^^^^^^
> From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
> Subject: Re: Salzman Gets Spanked
> Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:16:06 -0600
> Message-ID: <catamont-0054A0...@news.giganews.com>
> (Archived locally as: SaraSplainsAll_17 and SaraSplainsAll_18)
> Sara D. Salzman's appearance as depicted by this photo which is what
> Professor Peter Kirstein saw:
> http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-10/news/feature3_4.gif
> Other comments on Sara's appearance:
> "Your personality matches the person in the picture to a "T"." - Steve Talbot
> Message-ID: <4162fa1b...@news20.forteinc.com>
> "Isn't she wearing a Halloween mask? No one is that ugly or at
> least I haven't ever seen anyone that gruesome." - James Fenimoore
> Message-ID: <2sgn7aF...@uni-berlin.de>
I should have mentioned this before but I would think that Ms Salzman
should follow the example of Adolf Hitler and become a vegetarian,
since all the photos show him as fairly trim -- in modern-day times it
would, in fact, be feasible to be a vegan, but that is fairly
expensive compared to a more simple vegetarian diet. In that recent
film shown in Germany, "The Downfall", I read that there is reference
to Hitler's vegetarian cook -- and I would presume that the film will
eventually be shown with English subtitles, although the influence of
the "ZOG" could forestall this. Thus, if Ms Salzman wants to
consistently lose weight she should undoubtedly follow a vegetarian
diet, in which low fat dairy products should constitute the only
animal protein. I would doubt, however, that Ms Salzman would be able
to muster the psychological willpower to be able to forsake the need
to stuff her body with animal protein in order to compensate for her
perverse adherence to the apparently lost Zionist cause! (The only
problem with Salzman becoming a vegetarian, however, is what is likely
to happen to the futures market for food stocks!?)
Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo
david_michael wrote:
> Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:<catamont-03D5DD...@news.giganews.com>...
>
>>In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
>> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
>>>news:<catamont-B02256...@news.giganews.com>...
>>>
>>>>In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
>>>> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:<catamont-FB171B...@news.giganews.com>...
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>,
>>>>>> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>of hours of her time to produce reams of information for the
Nizkor
>>>>>>>Project, including a monumental effort to put the entire
transcripts
>>>>>>>of the first Nurenberg Tribunal online by scanning and coding the
>>>>>>>British transcripts. (30)
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>><end quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>RELEVANCE OF POINT TWO: Ms Salzman has been putting it about that
>>>>>>>she's the victim of a 'racist' hate campaign in which she has
been
>>>>>>>alleging that Mr Ellis has been involved.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>ITEM THREE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Usenet post from Sara Salzman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:54:39 -0500
>>>>>>>From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
>>>>>>>Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
>>>>>>>Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
>>>>>>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 21:55:12 -0600
>>>>>>>Message-ID: <catamont-8D6408...@news.giganews.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><begin quote>
>>>>>>>No, Dr. Homeland, that's not the "oopsie" at all. Are you
really as
>>>>>>>thick as you act? The "oopsie" is that Pat Blakely worked for the
>>>>>>>CIA,
>>>>>>>and you have now linked Blakely and Ellis together perfectly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Got it now, Mr. Thick?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sara
>>>>>>><end quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>RELEVANCE OF ITEM THREE: Ms Salzman believed Blakely to have
worked
>>>>>>>for the CIA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>ITEM FOUR
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Usenet post from Sara Salzman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 17:29:06 -0500
>>>>>>>From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
>>>>>>>Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
>>>>>>>Subject: Re: Background info on Kenny McVay
>>>>>>>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 16:29:39 -0600
>>>>>>>Message-ID: <catamont-FFE7ED...@news.giganews.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><begin quote>
>>>>>>>Funny about that, isn't it? Blakely always claimed he lived in
>>>>>>>England
>>>>>>>and worked for the CIA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Don Ellis is a car mechanic and grease monkey.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>AND a convenient screen for Pat Blakely's more offensive turns.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks, Dr. Homeland, for admitting you knew about this all
along.
>>>>>>>But
>>>>>>>then, so did we.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of course, why Ken McVay would be reading (and/or responding to)
your
>>>>>>>"exposes" in a national-anarchist group on Yahoo is quite another
>>>>>>>question.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sara
>>>>>>><end quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>RELEVANCE OF ITEM FOUR: The words 'so did we' are extremely
>>>>>>>significant. It is not entirely clear whether Ms Salzman is
claiming
>>>>>>>that she 'knew' all along that Blakely and Ellis were the same
person
>>>>>>>or that she 'knew' all along that they were working together.
>>>>>>>However,
>>>>>>>she was clearly aware of a direct link between Ellis and the CIA.
>>>>Is that straight enough for you, or are you gong to play stupid
again?
>>>>
>>>>Sara
>>>
>>>Straight as a cross-eyed snail going down a helter skelter, Ms
>>>Salzman.
>>>
>>>David
>>>http://www.nationalanarchist.com
>>
>>So tell us, Dr. Homeland, WHY did you out one of your comrades? What's
>>your agenda here?
>
>
> My agenda 'here', if you mean in this particular thread, is this.
>
> You have stated to the media and apparently also the police and the
> FBI that you were the victim of a racist hate campaign spearheaded by
> Mr Ellis.
>
> You have also stated that you believe Blakely to be CIA and Ellis and
> Blakely to be either the same person or working closely.
>
> Now given that the CIA is not, presumably, prone to conducting racist
> hate campaigns against fairly insignificant Jewish anti-racist
> activists, your statements are clearly incompatible. Ellis cannot be
> BOTH a CIA associate and someone who is harassing you racially as part
> of a racist hate campaign.
>
> If you were sincere in your belief that Blakely is CIA and that Ellis
> is Blakely or working closely with him then you appear to have made a
> false statement to the police, FBI and the media in an attempt to gain
> sympathy and prestige in the Jewish world by fabricating hate crimes.
> In other words you appear to have committed a fairly serious criminal
> offence.
>
> Now you might simply have been lying when you said that you knew these
> things about Blakely and Ellis. If that is the case, perhaps you
> should admit it now.
>
> As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
>
> David
> http://www.nationalanarchist.com
More 'bollox braying' I would say! I'd wager that a decent percentage of
folks, regardless of 'side', believe the above stuff to be a protracted
'bit' but when they see it's supposed to be 'serious', I can only
imagine the assorted guffaws more so than 'any' bit by 'any' scribbler
could muster! Well, it does prove an old chestnut, 'Only in Usenet!'
I must say, David, you come off sounding like a sort of 4 in 1 amalgam
of the collective wares of Ragland, Phillips, Bruno and Carpenter! In
effect, the thing ranges from sheer basket case conjectures to the
J'accuse by way of the equally conjectured glue sniff, vein pop or snout
snort as it were! Whew! I've haven't seen you 'this' obsessed and bent
out of shape since your 'Cuddles' nym was blown ... by your
'self-outing' ...or so the story goes anyway.
Is the Osama/Limonov and/or white separatist 'island' seeking nirvana
hawking(s) going 'that' poorly over at the NA [*not to be confused with
the 'other' NA [National Alliance] , to wit, KAS doing the Doc Pierce
from Valhalla dog and pony show thing... ] --- anyway, the NA [National
Anarchist] website that utter boredom for hearers or hopeful recruits
[or PAYPAL email announcing an actual 'contribution'] causes you to come
up with this latest haul to AR in re 'conspiracy' and 'criminal charges
should apply' gem?
Why the elaborate facade? If you're simply bored, why not do a simple
one to one with Sara and let the assembled decide the outcome? The
'criminal charges' thing [again] makes you look the fool ... and your
having, shall we say, multiple 'episodes' against imagined/conjectured
bogeymen ...and women. Gord says you made a horrendous faux pas and
are trying desperately to cover it up! True? It wouldn't be the first
time though. The Cuddles 'episode' notwithstanding.
Doc Tony
;-)
[suddenly.... and if only to add to the farce .... ]
[Flick CAMEO!]
'Kicking Bird' : "DEM ohhh-wa-chee eh pic-ay-ello no-wa koo-nah so-wa-la
'Tatonka' ® ohh-wa-chee --eyya-- 'Basket Case' ® ohh-wa-chee ...
na-ka-soo'-ee [slight bow, right hand upwards] ka-NOCK'-sigh eeeyehhh
'Cuddles' ohh-wa-chee !"
DEM: "OK, OK, I'll play it out .... Means?"
Doc Tony: "'KB' [Kicking Bird] says, in essence, and in rather excellent
Sioux, you're friggin' crackers!"
DEM: "Crackers? Means?"
Doc Tony: "You're a sort of [as translated] 'balmy wacko'...[read:
Psycho®] if you will! And, as per KB, far and away 'ahead' of the
duly mentioned nut jobs which 'KB' mentions by their 'nick-moniker'
as it were ."
[and then ...]
Bruno: "Who the frig is 'Kicking Bird' supposed to be? And big friggin'
deal that Mr. Ellis or 'whoever' he is -- was or is with the, ehhhh,
'AFL-CIO' [!!??] ...what, some 'union' [!] schlep is some kind of big
shot now? I was a LTJG in the Navy! So then I'm a big shot too, right?"
Matthews: "Schmuck! Not 'CIO' --- 'CIA' ... Central Intelligence Agency!
You know, the 'company' ... from 'DC' ....'Spookville' [sic] and all
points 'S E W N -UP' ....as various and sundry like to say."
Bruno: "Ohhhhhhh! Them same fellahs with the ties and Ray-Ban shades who
talk into their shoe [!] and what flew poor 'Dumbo' [!] the elephant
back to his village in the 'Pond [RVN] ?"
[Funny flick, that one. ["Operation Dumbo"] Look for Richard Phillips
playing the corpulent VC Colonel...avec appropriate RVN-SEA accent
therein. Reportedly quipped Phillips: "Well, hey, it was after all a
'speaking' part anyway and so I made more shekels than my non-speaking
cameo role in 'Amadeus' ... ." [*Phillips was the guy in his, shall we
say, original birthday suit within the full-body iron cage when the good
Padre went to visit Salieri ... in the nut house. ]
Matthews: [<GROAN>] "Ehhh, something like that, Joe."
;-)
[and then .... to AR surprise .... in decent Sioux to boot! ]
DEM: " [actually miffed!] 'Cuddles' ohh-wa-chee ka-nock-sigh
'OH-WA-NOCK-A-SOO'-EEE' eyy 'Tatonka'® ohh-wa-chee!"
Bruno: "Huh? I know I'm in that [!] somewhere but what did DEM say?"
Matthews: "Short version, Joe ... you're still a Palefaced schmuck!"
Bruno: "Huh? Proof?????????????????????????????"
;-)
Note to Bruno: 'Careful now, Joe! This is a trap! But I want you to
think [!] it out because you 'did' make with the killfile gambit so,
well, you know, you want to 'avoid' the assembled having you pegged,
inter alia, for a 'fibber' [read: liar] as well! Think [!] it out, Joe!
Call it a 'test' if you will. And let me know when you're ready for the
regression therapy to bring/force 'Tatonka®' to the fore! And what's
this business about calling out [to allegedly 'meet you' and 'settle'
matters ] Allan Matthews? As you often bray, Joe,
"Proof?????????????????????" ;-)
Other:
Last 4 days ... 'Class A' and 'Class C' field living ...anyone for that
bit of a riddle? Great folks....mixed bag...but duly helpful. Hint: From
'canvas' for two to Class 'A' bennies. With an "A" fireplace and "4
sliders" no less! Whew! ;-)
NF: "Vicodin? Worked for my leg! Now I take it for my fingers and
individual hair follicles! Just in case, you see!"
[Passing note to NF: Did you find Zappa's 'Suzy Creamcheese' yet?]
Szaki: "Yo, NF, you got a 'water bong', man?"
Chris Carpenter: [hears the word 'bong' and automatically breaks into
song!] "Ohhhhhhhhh....no stems, no seeds, that you don't neeeeeeeeeeed
.... Ahhhhhhhhhh-capulco Gollllllldddddd is ..... [interrupted!]
Alex Vange: [on the 'pipe' and thoroughly ripped ... ] "Baaaaadddddd
Asssssssss Weeeeeeeeeeeeeed !"
Ahhhhh! The revisionist 'brain trust' at their finest!
Doc Tony
;-)
[The 'nod' to 'Cheech and Chong' ... for Carpenter's 'tune'. And
"Dances With Wolves" [1990] for the flick.... and 'Kicking Bird' ]
Bruno: "Just WHO is this Kicking Bird 'poster' [!] supposed to be?"
[CAMEO!]
Doc Laura Finsten: [does a quick Mary 'Stands With A Fist' McDonnell
impression... ] "A holllllllllllll-leyyyyyyyyyyyy man!"
Bruno: "You mean like a 'Rebbe' to the 'Tribe' kind of thing?"
Ross: [adjusting his new 'hat' ...] "Muhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!"
Gord McFee: [dead serious ... catches Ross's attention... ] "That's MY
hat .... [pauses] .... it's MY hat."
[Ohhh-Ohhh!]
;-) [Helps if you savvy the flick ...]
david_michael
Would you care to summarize your point in one sentence?
Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo
david_michael wrote:
> "Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo" <doc...@localnet.com> wrote in message news:<416D8E81...@localnet.com>...
>>Sure! You're a Psycho®! But then, that's 'always' been a given!
>
>
> Ho well -- I knew it would be too difficult for you.
>
Difficult'? It's both a pleasure and a done deal! The very name
'Psycho®' is now wholly synonymous with your name! What, to remind you
of my assessment of you is 'difficult' ? Nahhhh. And you demonstrate and
hence prove that assessment every time you show up!
Doc Tony
;-)
[suddenly .....]
Chris Carpenter: "Hahahahahahahaha! Sorry to laugh, Dave, but that looks
like the classic 'reverse whammy' thing that Doc Tony said to watch....
[interrupted!}
DEM: [VERY angry!] "SHUT UP! 'I would put it to you' , Mr. Carpenter,
that you're not doing very well yourself!"
Ross: "Muhahahahahahahahahahaha!"
DEM: "Nor 'you' either, Mr. Cummins!"
Ross: "It's like this, Davey-mate, we each have out own thing but hey,
while I may not be Mr. Popularity around here and could care less either
way, YOU are the one that's pegged the psychotic! Doing 'Osama' and the
Commie guy [!] is just not my thing .... leads to bad vibes, that, and
can actually hurt my routines!"
Carpenter: "Yeah! Hahahahahaha! Good one, Ross! That's why I start
umpteen threads and then beat feet outta' there! It drives certain
posters bananas but I love it! Hey! One poster even keeps 'stats' on me!
Can you beat that? Stats!"
DEM: "Then join with me and we'll take on Doc Tony and hence bring a
great victory to the revisionist cause! Well?"
[Silence.... ]
DEM: "May the glorious deeds and words of Osama and Limonov bring you
and yours much needed enlightenment!"
[and then ... a lone 'response' ..... ]
From a certain 'Retreat': "You're fighting a losing battle, Mr.
Michael, and one which I know from personal experience can not be won!"
DEM: "ET TU, Mr. Bellinger?"
Bellinger: "I now confine myself, Mr.Michael, to Biblical and Talmudic
interpretations [Ohhhh yes!] and let others become the 'tools' of their
betters. Amen, Amen I say to you .... he that troubleth his own
house... shall inherit the wind! If you'll pardon me for a moment
please, 'Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiippppppppppppppppp! ®"
Gord McFee : "Ahhhh! Yet another 'demon' duly 'expelled' by Joe
Bellinger!"
;-)
> David
> http://www.nationalanarchist.com
>
> <snip tedious blabberings>
Gord McFee
> david_michael wrote:
[...]
> > As for 'outing' people -- you're the one I'm 'outing' here.
> >
> > David
> > http://www.nationalanarchist.com
>
> More 'bollox braying' I would say! I'd wager that a decent percentage of
> folks, regardless of 'side', believe the above stuff to be a protracted
> 'bit' but when they see it's supposed to be 'serious', I can only
> imagine the assorted guffaws more so than 'any' bit by 'any' scribbler
> could muster! Well, it does prove an old chestnut, 'Only in Usenet!'
>
> I must say, David, you come off sounding like a sort of 4 in 1 amalgam
> of the collective wares of Ragland, Phillips, Bruno and Carpenter! In
> effect, the thing ranges from sheer basket case conjectures to the
> J'accuse by way of the equally conjectured glue sniff, vein pop or snout
> snort as it were! Whew! I've haven't seen you 'this' obsessed and bent
> out of shape since your 'Cuddles' nym was blown ... by your
> 'self-outing' ...or so the story goes anyway.
That is exactly the point.
Derek Bell
> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>
> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
> Interesting respone to a blank like, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys' worth. They
got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
> Meanwhile, your own county's DA laughed at your assertion. We were there that
> July day last year. Where were you hiding?
Behind his sofa? :-)
Derek
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message news:<szkllek...@fnord.io.com>...
>> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
>> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>> >>
>> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>> Interesting response to a blank line, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
>> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
>When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys' worth. They
>got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
For some unfathomable reason, none of those several continents' worth of
villages seem to be arguing over which is more entitled to claim him. ;-)
>> Meanwhile, your own county's DA laughed at your assertion. We were there
>> that July day last year. Where were you hiding?
>Behind his sofa? :-)
The one near the broken upstairs window, I presume? ;-)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)
Orac
Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
> derek_...@yahoo.com (Derek Bell) writes:
>
> >Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
> >news:<szkllek...@fnord.io.com>...
> >> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>
> >> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
> >> ><b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
> >> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> >> >>
>
> >> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
> >> Interesting response to a blank line, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
> >> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
>
> >When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys' worth.
> >They
> >got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
>
> For some unfathomable reason, none of those several continents' worth of
> villages seem to be arguing over which is more entitled to claim him. ;-)
Nor will any of them ever, I suspect. ;-)
--
Orac |"I am not interested in trying to compensate
| for your amazing lack of observation."
|
| Orac
Derek Bell
> derek_...@yahoo.com (Derek Bell) writes:
>
> >Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message news:<szkllek...@fnord.io.com>...
> >> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>
> >> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
> >> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> >> >>
>
> >> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
> >> Interesting response to a blank line, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
> >> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
>
> >When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys' worth. They
> >got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
>
> For some unfathomable reason, none of those several continents' worth of
> villages seem to be arguing over which is more entitled to claim him. ;-)
Hell, they're probably just bribing people to make sure that the Bane
of Bellville stays away from them and near their enemies!! Makes you
wonder what the folks of Bellville have done to deserve him!
> >> Meanwhile, your own county's DA laughed at your assertion. We were there
> >> that July day last year. Where were you hiding?
>
> >Behind his sofa? :-)
>
> The one near the broken upstairs window, I presume? ;-)
Where else? ;-)
Derek
Derek Bell
> In article <szk7jp2...@fnord.io.com>,
> Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
> > derek_...@yahoo.com (Derek Bell) writes:
> >
> > >Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
> > >news:<szkllek...@fnord.io.com>...
> > >> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>
> > >> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700,
> > >> ><b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
> > >> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> > >> >>
>
> > >> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>
> > >> Interesting response to a blank line, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
> > >> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
>
> > >When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys' worth.
> > >They
> > >got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
> >
> > For some unfathomable reason, none of those several continents' worth of
> > villages seem to be arguing over which is more entitled to claim him. ;-)
>
> Nor will any of them ever, I suspect. ;-)
Indeed!
BTW, very good signature quote - aimed at the benighted one of
Bellville, perhaps? ;-)
Derek
Orac
derek_...@yahoo.com (Derek Bell) wrote:
Oh, it's aimed at many people, him included. I also hang out in
misc.health.alternative to debunk the quacks that live there. ;-)
Patrick Lee Humphrey
>Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message news:<szk7jp2...@fnord.io.com>...
>> derek_...@yahoo.com (Derek Bell) writes:
>> >Patrick Lee Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message news:<szkllek...@fnord.io.com>...
>> >> Doc Tavish <Doc_T...@Tavish-Central01.net> writes:
>> >> >On 5 Oct 2004 15:50:44 -0700, <b7fe1abc.04100...@posting.google.com>
>> >> >david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >YES! Perjury is a criminal offense!
>> >> Interesting response to a blank line, Village Idiot of Bellville. It
>> >> illustrates your problems all too graphically.
>> >When Bellville got Bradbury as its' idiot, they got their moneys'
>> >worth. They got an idiot worth several continents of villages.
>> For some unfathomable reason, none of those several continents' worth of
>> villages seem to be arguing over which is more entitled to claim him. ;-)
>Hell, they're probably just bribing people to make sure that the Bane
>of Bellville stays away from them and near their enemies!! Makes you
>wonder what the folks of Bellville have done to deserve him!
It's making the people of Bellville wonder what they did to deserve this state
of affairs -- but they're good people, in general. They'll outlast him and
his charade.
>> >> Meanwhile, your own county's DA laughed at your assertion. We were there
>> >> that July day last year. Where were you hiding?
>> >Behind his sofa? :-)
>> The one near the broken upstairs window, I presume? ;-)
>Where else? ;-)
Down the street at the Dairy Queen? ;-)