news:9dGdnTbg57yBQ7PM...@giganews.com...
> On 2/27/2013 5:23 PM, Ray Keller wrote:
>> You just hate to be exposed as the commie liar you are.
>
> See? You're already trying to dodge the question, Ray.
>
> Calling me names is all well and good, but it isn't an answer to the
> question I asked.
>
> To a dull-witted regressive like you, the world and the infobahn must seem
> full of "commie liars," and and Lord knows there are plenty of other people
> online have have flamed you, mocked you, belittled you, etc, because your
> odious online persona naturally invites such responses. So, out of all
> those supposed "commie liars" and the legion of posters who have, shall we
> say, responded to your posts unkindly over the years, you haven't explained
> why you are obsessed with me, personally, especially after so many years.
>
>> What are you going to do about it, stamp your feet and throw a tantrum?
>
> No. You grossly over-estimate your impact. You're of no consequence to
> me. Your pathetically obvious obsession with me does naturally make me
> curious, but that's all there is to it.
>
>> I'm still waiting for you to come "teach me some manners".
>
> What the heck are you babbling about? Although you could certainly benefit
> from an object lesson in good online manners, are you now claiming that
> I've threatened you in the past? If so, let's see it.
>
> Once, years ago, IIRC, I offered to meet you in person since I was going to
> be traveling out your way on business. You were not only being at that
> time, IIRC, your usual obnoxious self, but were also ridiculously trying to
> sound all tough and macho.
>
> But, knowing that you aren't too bright, and possess an unmatched ability
> to get even simple things all wrong, I was at great pains to repeatedly
> make perfectly clear to you that I was in no way threatening you, and would
> never touch a hair on your goofy little head without your express voluntary
> consent, while offering you the opportunity, only if you so chose, to take
> out your anger and to prove whether you were really as tough as you were
> trying to pretend to be.
>
> Specifically, I suggested we meet and have a mutual demonstration and trial
> of self defense techniques, a topic we both expressed interest in,
> videotaped for posting online. But, again, only if you wanted to and gave
> your free and voluntary consent.
>
> Of course, you declined my offer, behind a screen of your usual hogwash,
> trying not to look like the coward you were being, and, IIRC, that was the
> end of that.
>
> But if you mistook THAT as my somehow threatening you, then you are either
> paranoid, or just a remarkable physical coward. In any case, that was how
> many years ago? So that still doesn't explain your obvious and ongoing
> obsession with me now.
>
> And you still haven't answered my question.
>
>> Like you said, if you dont like the respons to your posts...quit posting.
>
> You first, or be prepared for a very long wait.
>
> And you still haven't answered my question.
>
>> I happen to like playing Whack a Mole.....every time you stick your poinyy
>> head up................;
>
> Bullshit, Ray. There are plenty of people online who view you with great
> scorn and don't mind saying so, that you could play your silly little games
> on, instead of or in addition to me, especially since I've had you
> killfiled and therefore ignored for many years. So, don't try to pretend
> you are anything other than obsessed with me, which is now an indisputable
> fact, probably due to mental illness; either that, or you're really exactly
> the sort of extremely immature little twit you appear to be.
>
> And you still haven't answered my question
>
>> How bout all your posts get forwarded to the fl bar?
>
> Oh, by all means, Ray. You go right ahead. Please do. In fact, I think
> that it would likely prove very helpful to us both.
>
>> You can lie all you want...The Florida State Bar only lists one Jeff
>> McCann
>> and he is disbarred so you are a lier either way...you were never a lawyer
>> in
>> the first place or you are disbared.
>
> Wrong again, lying nitwit. As I previously explained, I had a brain injury
> with a lot of health problems several years ago, possibly related to my
> work at the WTC after 9/11, from a toxic or heavy metal exposure. The worst
> physical symptoms abated eventually, but my memory is still screwed up in
> some aspects, and is being very slow to recover, to the extent that I still
> can't effectively practice law. It is also why I no longer teach college,
> except for one healthcare law class they repeatedly asked me to teach
> again. After all, I can't practice law very well if I have trouble
> remembering things like evidence or testimony, or remembering described
> events accurately and in the correct sequence, and am generally prone to
> occasionally forgetting things at random.
>
> But the Bar was extremely helpful, supportive and understanding of me
> through my health crisis, for which I am extremely grateful, and placed me
> on inactive-disability status a few years ago. Medical Disability is not
> disbarment, and I haven't been disciplined or suspended, either, Ray, you
> lying little twit. I am free to to return to active status whenever I fell
> ready, and all I need to do is basically provide a medical exam report from
> my doctors, plus some paperwork.
>
> But I am enjoying being a firefighter/paramedic, which was my original
> career and first love before law school, and my work for the National
> Disaster Medical System, way too much to go back and put in all the work,
> long hours and stress necessary to re-build a law practice like I had
> before from the ground up. Possibly when I retire from this, and have the
> financial security of my pension, I'll do some pro bono legal work and
> consulting for other attorneys in my areas of expertise. But I don't ever
> think I'll go back to a traditional law office practice.
>
> Now, that's far more explaining than I'm accustomed to, and far more than a
> pathetically obsessed stalker nutcase like you deserves. But I thought you
> could use a practical demonstration of how a question is answered honestly,
> something you apparently don't know how to do.
>
> So here it is again, Ray: You are unmistakably fixated on or obsessed with
> me, and that's now an undeniable fact. Can you explain to the various NGs
> you've been annoying with your spam posts, and to me, why you are behaving
> in this way?
>
>> Are you now denying that you claimed to be a lawyer?
>
> Not in the least, but I certainly haven't claimed that since I went on
> inactive status. Here's the link to the FL Bar page that proves what a
> liar you really are in claiming it didn't exist. You'll note that it is
> marked "disability," not suspended or disbarred, and that the discipline
> section states "none." You see, Ray, you're not even any good at lying.
>
>
http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/0/73AAF62107C50F3385256A8300134547?OpenDocument
>
> And you still haven't answered my question.
>
>> Sucks to be you, doesn't it.
>
> No, it doesn't. I'm having a great life, one you're quite likely very
> envious of. But your mental illness and obsession with me must be making
> your life very unpleasant for you.
>
> And you still haven't answered my question.
>
>> I'm sure other lawyers are interested in your answer as well, (There are a
>> few lurking <GRIN>)
>
> Yeah, sure. Idiotic comments like that are why some people think you are a
> Gunner sock puppet. They'd be the first people to see through your lies,
> recognize your mentally ill obsession with me, and dismiss you as an
> obvious loon.
>
> Now, since we've already established that you've been lying all along,
> intentionally and with malicious intent, I could easily sue you for
> defamation, if I chose to. I'm confident I'd win, too, since it would be a
> slam dunk case. Ask your imaginary lurking lawyer buddies about that.
> It's called libel per se, Ray, and it means that I wouldn't even have to
> show I was financially damaged by your intentional, malicious lies to win a
> judgement against you.
>
> But, unlike you, I don't get off on being a jackhole and trying to cause
> others grief just because of some silly, pointless newsgroup squabble that
> happened years ago. Unlike you, normal people are capable of brushing off
> such meaningless exchanges and keeping such things in their proper
> perspective, without veering into obsessively deranged online stalking
> behavior many years later.
>
> I actually pity you, Ray, because I've always felt a special concern for
> the mentally ill or disturbed, which is why I've been somewhat indulgent
> toward you. Moreover, there's no real reason to sue, since I am confident
> pretty much everybody who has seen your lies will readily dismissed you as
> an obvious and pathetic troll, if they hadn't already, based on your prior
> odious posts.
>
> Face facts, Ray, although you've been stalking me online, you can't do me
> any real harm, no matter how desperately you want to, for whatever sick
> reasons you imagine you have. The best you can do is to reinforce my
> contempt for you while annoying everybody else on the NGs and gaining only
> my pity for your pathetic state.
>
> What it comes down to is that you're just an angry, but ultimately
> insignificant little man, and you just don't matter, not to me, and not to
> anybody I know. My idle curiosity about your obsession with me isn't reason
> enough to make all the time and effort involved in such litigation
> worthwhile. I'm also confident you lack the financial means to pay the
> inevitable judgment against you, anyway. Although you have been unarguably
> engaging in intentional and malicious defamation against me, I have nothing
> to gain by hauling your lying ass into court, and wasting valuable judicial
> resources and my time just to score some meaningless brownie points and
> make your life far more expensive and miserable for you than it already
> must be. I'd rather see you just get the mental health care you obviously
> need, instead. So relax. You're safe, on that account at least.
>
> But, having been a healthcare attorney, I do understand how the legal and
> mental health systems operate. I know that many obsessed stalkers like you
> do get caught up in the mental health system eventually, if not
> voluntarily, then by continuing to do stalker-type stuff until it causes
> them to be brought into it involuntarily. In my judgment, you're a very
> good candidate for just that sort of thing, so I'd advise you to exercise
> caution with who else and how you stalk, Ray. You might be surprised by
> how quickly your aberrant behavior can be turned against you.
>
> And you still haven't answered my question.
>
>> My advice is to go crawl back under your rock and keep a low profile.
>
> And my advice to you is to get the professional psychiatric help you
> obviously require, or at least to get over your pathetic little obsession
> with me and start behaving like an adult before it bites you hard in the
> ass.
>
> As I predicted, you either couldn't or wouldn't answer my question
> honestly, and just ducked and weaseled to avoid it, instead.
>>> in this way? Do you even know why, yourself? I think it would be in