(OT like a mutha) Has anyone else been TOSed? What do I do?
n...@aol.com
<snipped baby crying>
Boo fucking hoo asshole! The complaints are not unfounded. You and the
rest of the jerks are way off topic. Motherfuck you!
Alex Cain
>
> have a habit of hanging out there.
And how would you know that, pray tell John?
>
> cc to ab...@pacbell.net - other RSPW readers concerned
> about this luser may simply forward this e-mail to
> ab...@pacbell.net for their edification. Personally, the
> way it acts, I wouldn't be surprised to find out it's
> Wollkook.
Once a netKKKop always a netKKKop eh John?
> -----
> This user has been harassing RSPW posters and filing
> harassing and unfounded TOS complaints for several weeks
> now. This user has never posted on-topic to RSPW, nor has
> this user contributed to the group in any meaningful way.
> This user is rude, loud, abrasive, and has absolutely no
> reason to continue being allowed access to the internet
> until it's mommy teaches it to play nice. This user has
> caused several non-abusive users to lose their access,
> because whatever address he's submitting the complaints
> through, it seems to have just enough air of legitimacy
> that an admin that's not paying close attention will react
> to it's whining. Unfortunately, this has led to an
> unfortunate situation where good, longtime users are being
> driven OUT, while 'n...@aol.com' here and idiots like him
> have carte blanche to continue abusing the newsgroup.
>
> This is a denial of service attack, by definition.
>
> PacBell, Please control your user in a manner becoming a
> professional telecommunications organization.
>
> Path: sn-us!sn-xit-
> 04!supernews.com!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!feed2.onemain.com!feed
> 1.onemain.com!cyclone-
> sf.pbi.net!206.13.28.33!news.pacbell.net.POSTED!not-for-
> mail
> Message-ID: <3AF4C6...@aol.com>
> From: n...@aol.com
> Reply-To: n...@aol.com
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win95; U)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.pro-wrestling
> Subject: Re: (OT like a mutha) Has anyone else been TOSed?
> What do I do?
> References: <xYII6.5231$t12.376706@bgtnsc05-
> news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
> <lqVI6.4189$ec.8...@news.total.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Lines: 22
> Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 20:33:37 -0700
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.202.222.195
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@pacbell.net
> X-Trace: news.pacbell.net 989120063 63.202.222.195 (Sat, 05
> May 2001 20:34:23 PDT)
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 20:34:23 PDT
> Organization: SBC Internet Services
> Xref: sn-us rec.sport.pro-wrestling:1495179
> > Burnside wrote:
> > >
> > > Jacqueline Curry wrote:
> > >
> > > > Checking my email, I'm surprised to receive a message from my ISP saying
> > > > that someone reported me for violating terms and agreements, blah, blah,
> > > > blah.
> > >
> > > You should talk to Buzzkill about that...
> > >
> > > > Excuse my naiveté, but is it possible for some asshole to get you kicked
> > > > from your ISP for no reason? Help me RSPW'ers!
> > >
> > > If the ISP is tight-assed, yes.
> > >
> >
> > Don't encourage assholes! This stupid bitch has been told over and over
> > and over again, like buzzkill was.
> >
> > It takes quite a bit to get tosed. Most isps will warn you a couple of
> > times, like this stupid cunts did. If she learns to behave, she has
> > nothing to worry about, if she keeps acting like a cunt, she's gone!
> >
>
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
Alex Cain
>
> Sun, 06 May 2001 18:15:48 GMT...
>
> > >->This user has been harassing RSPW posters and filing
> > >->harassing and unfounded TOS complaints for several weeks
> > >->now.
>
> > What is a harssing complaint?
>
> Because it's unfounded.
>
> > admins appreciate childish remarks like that.
>
> Ever read nanau?
>
> > so you know this user is submitting TOS compaints, yet you don't know
> > what address he's using.
>
> What the hell does this have to do with anything? He's
> posting through pacbell's servers and being a pain in the
> ass, to the point of DoS attacks by submitting bogus
> complaints. Turf him, what's so hard to understand?
>
> > I guess all the admins he's
> > sent these so called complaints to are clueless newbie types that are
> > tricked by the unfounded nature of the complaints, whereas you are the
> > only one who sees the whole picture.
>
> If that were the case, I would have been gone long
> ago,
(snip)
Please do.
1st_mississippi
Motherfuck you , you child molesting pervert with a tin can up its
ass, your such a queer dick dreaming about fucking your mother
while looking for ticks.
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
1st_mississippi
Alex Cain
>
>
> > >->What the hell does this have to do with anything? He's
> > >->posting through pacbell's servers and being a pain in the
> > >->ass, to the point of DoS attacks by submitting bogus
> > >->complaints. Turf him, what's so hard to understand?
>
> > what that has to do with this is it looks like you're jumping to
> > conclusions, or worse downright a liar. Here's what you said:
>
> > >-> This user has
> > >->caused several non-abusive users to lose their access,
> > >->because whatever address he's submitting the complaints
> > >->through, it seems to have just enough air of legitimacy
> > >->that an admin that's not paying close attention will react
> > >->to it's whining
>
> > He HAS caused. Direct cause. Post proof.
>
> A confession of guilt is considered enough to carry on with
> sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
> of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
> or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs.
Hey, John --- I shot President Kennedy and murdered Elvis in cold
blood. Don't forget to tell the FBI about that when you're ranting to
them in your paranoid delusional "Al Bundy" state that you're
oh-so-famous for.
>
> Your proof is available @ google.com
And yours is available directly above. I gotta tell ya, that Elvis put
up one heckuva struggle. Nearly wasn't able to make it look like death
by natural causes.
>
> > "Whatever address" you seem to know everything about these
> > complaints, yet you've never seen them.
>
> Don't make assumptions - who's to say MY admin hasn't
> gotten a share of complaints recently, many through
> anonymous remailers?
>
> > so why don't you go after the idiot admins who are yanking their
> > company's customers away for no reason?
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS fl...@arc.com tried to lay on us, back on
>
> > >->A confession of guilt is considered enough to carry on with
> > >->sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
> > >->of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
> > >->or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs.
>
> > john this is your typical mental shortcoming. You think rules like
> > that, or logic for that matter, count here at RSPW; a group dedicated
> > to a fake sport.
>
> A DoS attack is a DoS attack. 'Attack' does not imply
> 'success,' and the pacbell's TOS is not rspw-exclusive. On
> top of which the guy's a complete asshole making people
> afraid to talk as they choose - this is censorship in it's
> raw form.
HAhahahahahahhaha!!!!!!!!!1 John Henry DeJong talking about
someone else using CENSORSHIP in RSPW!!!
I just had my laughs for the next few days. :)
I'm genuinely surprised at you, flux - I thought
> you'd have understood that this guy is engaged in an all-
> out attack on freedom of speech, and reacted accordingly.
>
> I'm disappointed - I'd always considered your interest in
> free speech to be one of your few redeeming qualities. Now
> it seems that you're just like the rest - free speech is
> worth fighting for only if it's you talking.
>
> > >->Your proof is available @ google.com
>
> > proof that you may have been worked or lied to. Nothing more.
>
> Quite possibly.
>
> Just curious - what is it about this dickhead that makes
> him worth defending to you, other than the fact that I
> recommended netcopping him?
Alex Cain
>
> back on Sun, 06 May 2001 19:22:24 GMT...
>
> > > a.u.k and n.a.n.a-u added, since I know the pacbell admins
> > > have a habit of hanging out there.
>
> > And how would you know that, pray tell John?
>
>
But I thought you only 'read' books with pop-up pictures?
Optional Identity
Henry and the horse he rode in on <netbasta...@net-bastard.com>
incriminated him or her self in alt.usenet.kooks by uttering this:
>Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>back on Sun, 06 May 2001 19:22:24 GMT...
>
>> > a.u.k and n.a.n.a-u added, since I know the pacbell admins
>> > have a habit of hanging out there.
>
>> And how would you know that, pray tell John?
>
>It's called 'reading.'
That makes you guilty by association? HAHAhAhAhAHAHAh
Ya know Dink, for a guy with zero sense of humour you sure does makes
me laff lots. Well ya does der straight lines for John Henry et al.,
anyways....
--
Optional Identity
Petitmorte.net (check it out)
AUK for when plonking is just not enough!
MEOW!!!!!
Optional Identity
Cain <alex...@yahoo.com> incriminated him or her self in
alt.usenet.kooks by uttering this:
>John Henry and the horse he rode in on wrote:
>>
>> Check out the BS fl...@arc.com tried to lay on us, back on
>> Sun, 06 May 2001 18:15:48 GMT...
>>
>> > >->This user has been harassing RSPW posters and filing
>> > >->harassing and unfounded TOS complaints for several weeks
>> > >->now.
>>
>> > What is a harssing complaint?
>>
>> Because it's unfounded.
Q. Why is a complaint about harassing unfounded?
A. Because it is about dink harassing complainants, for complaining
about his harassing.
>> > admins appreciate childish remarks like that.
>>
>> Ever read nanau?
Ever read your ISP's TOS? Your NNTP poasting hosts AUP? Ever had an
account you intended to have trashed as soon as they realised it was
you?
>> > so you know this user is submitting TOS compaints, yet you don't know
>> > what address he's using.
>>
>> What the hell does this have to do with anything? He's
>> posting through pacbell's servers and being a pain in the
>> ass, to the point of DoS attacks by submitting bogus
>> complaints. Turf him, what's so hard to understand?
>>
>> > I guess all the admins he's
>> > sent these so called complaints to are clueless newbie types that are
>> > tricked by the unfounded nature of the complaints, whereas you are the
>> > only one who sees the whole picture.
>>
>> If that were the case, I would have been gone long
>> ago,
>
>(snip)
>
>Please do.
The trouble with free speech is like the trouble with being innocent
until proven guilty, some of the guilty escape. Serial offenders get
caught eventually so your days is numbered dinky toy.
Optional Identity
Henry and the horse he rode in on <netbasta...@net-bastard.com>
incriminated him or her self in alt.usenet.kooks by uttering this:
>Check out the BS fl...@arc.com tried to lay on us, back on
>Sun, 06 May 2001 19:14:52 GMT...
>
>> >->What the hell does this have to do with anything? He's
>> >->posting through pacbell's servers and being a pain in the
>> >->ass, to the point of DoS attacks by submitting bogus
>> >->complaints. Turf him, what's so hard to understand?
>
>> what that has to do with this is it looks like you're jumping to
>> conclusions, or worse downright a liar. Here's what you said:
>
>> >-> This user has
>> >->caused several non-abusive users to lose their access,
>> >->because whatever address he's submitting the complaints
>> >->through, it seems to have just enough air of legitimacy
>> >->that an admin that's not paying close attention will react
>> >->to it's whining
>
>> He HAS caused. Direct cause. Post proof.
>
>A confession of guilt is considered enough to carry on with
>sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
>of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
>or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs.
>
>Your proof is available @ google.com
>
>> "Whatever address" you seem to know everything about these
>> complaints, yet you've never seen them.
>
>Don't make assumptions - who's to say MY admin hasn't
>gotten a share of complaints recently, many through
>anonymous remailers?
So what? How does this prove you are innocent? Anonymously re-mailing
your own admin to try and deflect legitimate complaints against you is
not going to save your arse. Unless your admin is as stupid as you,
and even then you are still fluxed.
>> so why don't you go after the idiot admins who are yanking their
>> company's customers away for no reason?
Alex Cain
>
> On or about Sun, 06 May 2001 19:26:53 GMT, it is alleged that Alex
> Cain <alex...@yahoo.com> incriminated him or her self in
> alt.usenet.kooks by uttering this:
>
> >John Henry and the horse he rode in on wrote:
> >>
> >> Check out the BS fl...@arc.com tried to lay on us, back on
> >> Sun, 06 May 2001 18:15:48 GMT...
> >>
> >> > >->This user has been harassing RSPW posters and filing
> >> > >->harassing and unfounded TOS complaints for several weeks
> >> > >->now.
> >>
> >> > What is a harssing complaint?
> >>
> >> Because it's unfounded.
>
> Q. Why is a complaint about harassing unfounded?
>
> A. Because it is about dink harassing complainants, for complaining
> about his harassing.
Give me a hug, snuggles.
>
> >> > admins appreciate childish remarks like that.
> >>
> >> Ever read nanau?
>
> Ever read your ISP's TOS? Your NNTP poasting hosts AUP? Ever had an
> account you intended to have trashed as soon as they realised it was
> you?
>
> >> > so you know this user is submitting TOS compaints, yet you don't know
> >> > what address he's using.
> >>
> >> What the hell does this have to do with anything? He's
> >> posting through pacbell's servers and being a pain in the
> >> ass, to the point of DoS attacks by submitting bogus
> >> complaints. Turf him, what's so hard to understand?
> >>
> >> > I guess all the admins he's
> >> > sent these so called complaints to are clueless newbie types that are
> >> > tricked by the unfounded nature of the complaints, whereas you are the
> >> > only one who sees the whole picture.
> >>
> >> If that were the case, I would have been gone long
> >> ago,
> >
> >(snip)
> >
> >Please do.
>
> The trouble with free speech is like the trouble with being innocent
> until proven guilty, some of the guilty escape. Serial offenders get
> caught eventually so your days is numbered dinky toy.
*gasp*
OH NO
NOT THAT
Guess I'd better re-confirm that flight to Mexico...
>
> --
>
> Optional Identity
>
> Petitmorte.net (check it out)
>
> AUK for when plonking is just not enough!
>
> MEOW!!!!!
--
The Unofficial "RSPW/John
Henry DeJong .Sig" courtesy of groups.google.com
---------------------------------------------------
"Why the hell am I so worried about a freaking
wrestling newsgroup anyway? I'm outta here."
--Don't let the door... John Henry DeJong
"leaves" rec.sport.pro-wrestling (again) on
December 16, 1997.
"There is no intellectual purpose to pro wrestling,
or this newsgroup."
--Bob Barnett, tape trader, professional wrestling afficiando,
describing rec.sport.pro-wrestling, January 28, 1998.
"I'm a gang of one, fucker. Try me."
--Bloods or Crypts? John Henry DeJong plays
tough guy, April 17, 1998.
"Oh, balls! Jesus, I can't believe people can be this
goddamned *dumb*. The only time I have *ever* spoken
out to or against *anyone* on this group is when they
were abusing it. That includes you, with your constant
provocation. I've already e-mailed glasscity and
mailexcite -- don't believe me, anyone, try and e-mail
this dumb fuck. Today, I'm not writing, I am *calling*
Glass City, and giving them not only a full history of
your existance on RSPW, but also one last chance to
educate you as to what is and is not proper Usenet
behavior. If they fail to respond to that, then I call
for a USP on n.a.n.-a.u. If that doesn't work, I'm left
to my own devices."
---Usenet loon and mentally disturbed schizophrenic John
Henry DeJong, playing net.cop with an enemy, in newsgroup
rec.sport.pro-wrestling on January 29, 1998.
"This isn't funny anymore, folks...that's a lie - it's
funnier than you think, you just don't realize who the
joke is on. One of you is going to cross a line at some
point and find yourselves in more hot water than you ever
thought possible. Of course, I've told you it will happen,
and like the little morons you are, you'll refuse to believe
me, and will, in fact, only redouble your efforts, pushing
harder and harder, taking more chances, until one of you
actually goes down..."
---Usenet loon and mentally disturbed schizophrenic John
Henry DeJong, playing fortune teller, June 23, 1998.
"If any of us are going to snap, I think it's you."
---'Taskmistress' Liz Michaels to John Henry DeJong
in rec.sport.pro-wrestling, June 24, 1998.
"I think that you'll find a major part of the legal
definition of a 'threat' involves stating that you
will go to the person being 'threatened.' I have
*never* done this, although I've certainly invited
a few complete losers, like you, to come and find
*me*.
---John Henry DeJong attempts to justify threats
of physical violence towards others online, August
1, 1998.
more on the way! coming soon : John as God.
Chad Bryant
> > Hey, John --- I shot President Kennedy and murdered Elvis in cold
> > blood. Don't forget to tell the FBI about that when you're ranting to
> > them in your paranoid delusional "Al Bundy" state that you're
> > oh-so-famous for.
>
> I've never called the FBI for any reason. Yet another
> psychotic delusion from the 'mind' of Dink.
>
> But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
Except for the fact that JFK was shot about 12 years before Dink was ever
born. Dink's parents were merely cousins at that point.
--
Chad Bryant
ch...@chadbryant.cjb.net
www.chadbryant.cjb.net
"I read RSPW about as much as AutoDaFe reads the Bible."
-Mr. 420
"If i could read Google on the can, I'd never stop pooping."
-Greasyfries
n...@aol.com
Hey Johnny boy, with all the off topic shit you post here, you got a lot
of nerve telling me about off topic posting!
BTW, hows the wife and kid?
I'll bet she's not even yours!
All the grief you have suffered over a bastard!
Alex Cain
>
> back on Mon, 07 May 2001 03:05:28 GMT...
>
> > Hey, John --- I shot President Kennedy and murdered Elvis in cold
> > blood. Don't forget to tell the FBI about that when you're ranting to
> > them in your paranoid delusional "Al Bundy" state that you're
> > oh-so-famous for.
>
> psychotic delusion from the 'mind' of Dink.
Did I SAY in that post that you had called the FBI before, John??
You stated :
"A confession of guilt is considered enough to carry on with
sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs."
And, of course we all KNOW you're a legal expert, what with
all the jail time, restraining orders, et.al.
So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
of the twentieth century.
According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
of a "confession."
Best hurry and go now. I think they close up for the night
shift soon.
>
> But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
*The SS* John?!!?!
Wtf?!?!!?
Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
Considering I was born some 20 years after the assassination,
I must be a smarter bastard than I thought.
Damn, I'm good.
Alex Cain
>
> John Henry wrote:
>
> > > Hey, John --- I shot President Kennedy and murdered Elvis in cold
> > > blood. Don't forget to tell the FBI about that when you're ranting to
> > > them in your paranoid delusional "Al Bundy" state that you're
> > > oh-so-famous for.
> >
> > I've never called the FBI for any reason. Yet another
> > psychotic delusion from the 'mind' of Dink.
> >
> > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> Except for the fact that JFK was shot about 12 years before Dink was ever
> born. Dink's parents were merely cousins at that point.
>
the assassination --- I confessed to it, hence, by his definition, I'm
guilty.
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > > It's called 'reading.'
>
> > But I thought you only 'read' books with pop-up pictures?
>
A college education?
lar...@iname.com
>In article <MPG.15604de2d...@corp.supernews.com>, John Henry
>and the horse he rode in on <netbasta...@net-bastard.com> wrote:
>
>> Check out the BS optional...@petitmorte.net tried to
>> lay on us, back on Mon, 07 May 2001 18:05:10 +1000...
>>
>> > >> "Whatever address" you seem to know everything about these
>> > >> complaints, yet you've never seen them.
>>
>> > >Don't make assumptions - who's to say MY admin hasn't
>> > >gotten a share of complaints recently, many through
>> > >anonymous remailers?
>>
>> > So what? How does this prove you are innocent? Anonymously re-mailing
>> > your own admin to try and deflect legitimate complaints against you is
>> > not going to save your arse. Unless your admin is as stupid as you,
>> > and even then you are still fluxed.
>>
>> You obviously have me mistaken for someone else. Given the
>> fixated, obsessive nature of people like Dink, flux, and
>> others, the last thing in the world *I* would need to do is
>> fake a TOS complaint.
>>
>> And I sure as hell wouldn't send one through an anonymous
>> remailer.
>
>If you say so, but the point was that people could do this, flood their
>own ISP's with frivelous complaints to deflect attention from one or two
>legit ones. I was addressing flux, not you, sorry my bad.
You should be very afraid.
1st_mississippi
Dave Korn
>
>A DoS attack is a DoS attack.
Actually, spurious tos complaints are known as a 'Wollkook' attack.
DaveK
--
They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Copernicus. They laughed at
Columbus. But remember, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
Dave Korn
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > "A confession of guilt is considered enough to carry on with
> > sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
> > of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
> > or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs."
>
> > And, of course we all KNOW you're a legal expert, what with
> > all the jail time, restraining orders, et.al.
>
Sure you haven't.
>
> > So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
> > of the twentieth century.
>
> > According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
> > of a "confession."
>
> Not my definition.
Then why did you post it? One would assume that you would still GO BY
IT, thus my point would stand. Are you backpedalling, John?
> I'm just pointing out what any good
> defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> inpossible to overcome in open court.
And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> > > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> > *The SS* John?!!?!
>
> > Wtf?!?!!?
>
> > Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
>
> Surely you've heard of the Secret Service?
I thought you were referring to the 'SS' as it related to German
authority, oh mentally unstable one. But if you mean the Secret
Service coming to arrest me for confessing to a murder that took
place years before I was born---you are even stupider than I first
thought.
> They're part of
> the Treasury Department. It's their job, among other
> things, to guard the life of the President,
Wow aren't you the observant one!
> and if you had
> participatory information regarding a situation in which a
> prsident was killed, I'd have to think they'd be
> interested.
Sure, John, Sure. I know who did it. It was ELVIS PRESLEY.
>
> If there was a snowball's chance in hell of you having
> actually *been* involved, you might not be sitting here
> giggling about it.
Uh-huh.
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
--
The Unofficial "RSPW/John
Henry DeJong .Sig" courtesy of groups.google.com
---------------------------------------------------
"Why the hell am I so worried about a freaking
wrestling newsgroup anyway? I'm outta here."
--Don't let the door... John Henry DeJong
"leaves" rec.sport.pro-wrestling (again) on
December 16, 1997.
"There is no intellectual purpose to pro wrestling,
or this newsgroup."
--Bob Barnett, tape trader, professional wrestling afficiando,
describing rec.sport.pro-wrestling, January 28, 1998.
"I'm a gang of one, fucker. Try me."
--Bloods or Crips? John Henry DeJong plays
Alex Cain [reposted because of rogue cancel]
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
> > of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
> > or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs."
>
> > And, of course we all KNOW you're a legal expert, what with
> > all the jail time, restraining orders, et.al.
>
Sure you haven't.
>
> > So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
> > of the twentieth century.
>
> > According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
> > of a "confession."
>
> Not my definition.
Then why did you post it? One would assume that you would still GO BY
IT, thus my point would stand. Are you backpedalling, John?
> I'm just pointing out what any good
> defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> inpossible to overcome in open court.
And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> > > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> > *The SS* John?!!?!
>
> > Wtf?!?!!?
>
> > Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
>
> Surely you've heard of the Secret Service?
I thought you were referring to the 'SS' as it related to German
authority, oh mentally unstable one. But if you mean the Secret
Service coming to arrest me for confessing to a murder that took
place years before I was born---you are even stupider than I first
thought.
> They're part of
> the Treasury Department. It's their job, among other
> things, to guard the life of the President,
Wow aren't you the observant one!
> and if you had
> participatory information regarding a situation in which a
> prsident was killed, I'd have to think they'd be
> interested.
Sure, John, Sure. I know who did it. It was ELVIS PRESLEY.
>
> If there was a snowball's chance in hell of you having
> actually *been* involved, you might not be sitting here
> giggling about it.
Uh-huh.
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
--
The Unofficial "RSPW/John
Henry DeJong .Sig" courtesy of groups.google.com
---------------------------------------------------
"Why the hell am I so worried about a freaking
wrestling newsgroup anyway? I'm outta here."
--Don't let the door... John Henry DeJong
"leaves" rec.sport.pro-wrestling (again) on
December 16, 1997.
"There is no intellectual purpose to pro wrestling,
or this newsgroup."
--Bob Barnett, tape trader, professional wrestling afficiando,
describing rec.sport.pro-wrestling, January 28, 1998.
"I'm a gang of one, fucker. Try me."
--Bloods or Crips? John Henry DeJong plays
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!skynet.be!news.tele.dk!147.230.50.100!csnews.vslib.cz!not-for-mail
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: cz.net.abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
Control: cancel <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
Date: 17 May 2001 09:42:21 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Approved: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Distribution: cz
Message-ID: <02682...@preemptive.cancels.fail.to.prevent.this>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.145.149.97
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990092366 9570 203.145.149.97 (17 May 2001 09:39:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:39:26 +0000 (UTC)
Preemptive Cancels? Guido, that don't work: <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > John Henry and the horse he rode in on wrote:
>
> > > I've never been in jail, Dink.
> >
> > Sure you haven't.
>
Did I say you had? You're the one reading into that statement John.
>
> > > > So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
> > > > of the twentieth century.
>
> > > > According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
> > > > of a "confession."
>
> > > Not my definition.
>
> > Then why did you post it? One would assume that you would still GO BY
> > IT, thus my point would stand. Are you backpedalling, John?
>
> No,
Are you quite sure about that?
>it's a point of fact that in cases where the defendant
> has confessed, the conviction rate is much higher than
> average, even if that defendant recants. Ask Barnett.
No thanks. He's too busy slapping around Pete.
>
> That has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I 'go by.'
OF course it doesn't. What you 'go by' is generally a consortium
of your delusions and paranoia.
>
> > > I'm just pointing out what any good
> > > defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> > > inpossible to overcome in open court.
>
> > And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> On criminal charges? None.
Evidence?
>
> > > > > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > > > > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > > > > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > > > > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> > > > *The SS* John?!!?!
>
> > > > Wtf?!?!!?
>
> > > > Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
>
> > > Surely you've heard of the Secret Service?
>
> > I thought you were referring to the 'SS' as it related to German
> > authority
>
> See what happens when you think?
More than what happens when *you* do. Given your history and behavior
that was the first thing that came to mind.
> Only you would associate
> a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> associations in the US.
Given your rampaging behavior, your complete loss of mental facilities,
the descriptions of Alicia Snow, and everything else you've ever done
and are doing, and that was the first thing that came to mind. Blame
yourself, not me.
>
> YHBT.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, John Henry DeJong. If it makes him
look like an idiot, if it doesn't make sense, and it's said by him, if
it implies in any way loss of his mental abilities --- it is a "work" or
a "troll," and you shouldn't believe otherwise.
Damn John no wonder Bogus Sting and flux both tear you a new one. It's
just oh-so-EASY to do so!
>
> > oh mentally unstable one. But if you mean the Secret
> > Service coming to arrest me for confessing to a murder that took
> > place years before I was born---you are even stupider than I first
> > thought.
>
> > > If there was a snowball's chance in hell of you having
> > > actually *been* involved, you might not be sitting here
> > > giggling about it.
>
> > Uh-huh.
>
> Fine then, Dink, I'll tell you what.
Yessssssssssss Johnny boy?
> I challenge you to
> assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
Alex Cain [reposted because of rogue cancel] [reposted because of rogue cancel]
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > sentencing in every western legal framework that I'm aware
> > of, unless the confession was coerced, given under duress,
> > or given under the influence of mind-altering drugs."
>
> > And, of course we all KNOW you're a legal expert, what with
> > all the jail time, restraining orders, et.al.
>
Sure you haven't.
>
> > So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
> > of the twentieth century.
>
> > According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
> > of a "confession."
>
> Not my definition.
Then why did you post it? One would assume that you would still GO BY
IT, thus my point would stand. Are you backpedalling, John?
> I'm just pointing out what any good
> defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> inpossible to overcome in open court.
And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> > > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> > *The SS* John?!!?!
>
> > Wtf?!?!!?
>
> > Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
>
> Surely you've heard of the Secret Service?
I thought you were referring to the 'SS' as it related to German
authority, oh mentally unstable one. But if you mean the Secret
Service coming to arrest me for confessing to a murder that took
place years before I was born---you are even stupider than I first
thought.
> They're part of
> the Treasury Department. It's their job, among other
> things, to guard the life of the President,
Wow aren't you the observant one!
> and if you had
> participatory information regarding a situation in which a
> prsident was killed, I'd have to think they'd be
> interested.
Sure, John, Sure. I know who did it. It was ELVIS PRESLEY.
>
> If there was a snowball's chance in hell of you having
> actually *been* involved, you might not be sitting here
> giggling about it.
Uh-huh.
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
--
The Unofficial "RSPW/John
Henry DeJong .Sig" courtesy of groups.google.com
---------------------------------------------------
"Why the hell am I so worried about a freaking
wrestling newsgroup anyway? I'm outta here."
--Don't let the door... John Henry DeJong
"leaves" rec.sport.pro-wrestling (again) on
December 16, 1997.
"There is no intellectual purpose to pro wrestling,
or this newsgroup."
--Bob Barnett, tape trader, professional wrestling afficiando,
describing rec.sport.pro-wrestling, January 28, 1998.
"I'm a gang of one, fucker. Try me."
--Bloods or Crips? John Henry DeJong plays
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!skynet.be!news.tele.dk!147.230.50.100!csnews.vslib.cz!not-for-mail
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: cz.net.abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
Control: cancel <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
Date: 17 May 2001 09:42:21 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Approved: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Distribution: cz
Message-ID: <02682...@preemptive.cancels.fail.to.prevent.this>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.145.149.97
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990092366 9570 203.145.149.97 (17 May 2001 09:39:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:39:26 +0000 (UTC)
Preemptive Cancels? Guido, that don't work: <3B037A...@yahoo.com>
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsengine.sol.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.tele.dk!147.230.50.100!csnews.vslib.cz!not-for-mail
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com> [reposted because of rogue cancel]
Newsgroups: sk.net.abuse,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <2$-_-$$%$$%%_%_-_$@news.noc.cabal.int>
Control: cancel <2$-_-$$%$$%%_%_-_$@news.noc.cabal.int>
Date: 18 May 2001 13:01:00 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Distribution: sk
Message-ID: <8432...@hey.guido.repost.this>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.122.7.24
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990178044 26101 203.122.7.24 (18 May 2001 09:27:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:27:24 +0000 (UTC)
Do you think reposting really makes things better? <2$-_-$$%$$%%_%_-_$@news.noc.cabal.int>
Alex Cain [reposted because of rogue cancel]
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
>
> > > I've never been in jail, Dink.
> >
> > Sure you haven't.
>
Did I say you had? You're the one reading into that statement John.
>
> > > > So, I confessed to murdering two of the most popular figures
> > > > of the twentieth century.
>
> > > > According to you, that means I'm guilty, via your definition
> > > > of a "confession."
>
> > > Not my definition.
>
> > Then why did you post it? One would assume that you would still GO BY
> > IT, thus my point would stand. Are you backpedalling, John?
>
> No,
Are you quite sure about that?
>it's a point of fact that in cases where the defendant
> has confessed, the conviction rate is much higher than
> average, even if that defendant recants. Ask Barnett.
No thanks. He's too busy slapping around Pete.
>
> That has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I 'go by.'
OF course it doesn't. What you 'go by' is generally a consortium
of your delusions and paranoia.
>
> > > I'm just pointing out what any good
> > > defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> > > inpossible to overcome in open court.
>
> > And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> On criminal charges? None.
Evidence?
>
> > > > > But careful about that 'I shot kennedy' stuff. There's no
> > > > > statute of limitations on murder - and stupider things have
> > > > > happened than the febbies or the SS showing up as a reasult
> > > > > of what some idiot thought was a joke when he posted it.
>
> > > > *The SS* John?!!?!
>
> > > > Wtf?!?!!?
>
> > > > Have you lost control of your senses --- again?
>
> > > Surely you've heard of the Secret Service?
>
> > I thought you were referring to the 'SS' as it related to German
> > authority
>
> See what happens when you think?
More than what happens when *you* do. Given your history and behavior
that was the first thing that came to mind.
> Only you would associate
> a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> associations in the US.
Given your rampaging behavior, your complete loss of mental facilities,
the descriptions of Alicia Snow, and everything else you've ever done
and are doing, and that was the first thing that came to mind. Blame
yourself, not me.
>
> YHBT.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, John Henry DeJong. If it makes him
look like an idiot, if it doesn't make sense, and it's said by him, if
it implies in any way loss of his mental abilities --- it is a "work" or
a "troll," and you shouldn't believe otherwise.
Damn John no wonder Bogus Sting and flux both tear you a new one. It's
just oh-so-EASY to do so!
>
> > oh mentally unstable one. But if you mean the Secret
> > Service coming to arrest me for confessing to a murder that took
> > place years before I was born---you are even stupider than I first
> > thought.
>
> > > If there was a snowball's chance in hell of you having
> > > actually *been* involved, you might not be sitting here
> > > giggling about it.
>
> > Uh-huh.
>
> Fine then, Dink, I'll tell you what.
Yessssssssssss Johnny boy?
> I challenge you to
> assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.sol.net!spool0-milwwi.newsops.execpc.com!spool0-chcgil.newsops.execpc.com!newspump.sol.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.tele.dk!147.230.50.100!csnews.vslib.cz!not-for-mail
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sk.net.abuse,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B049D...@yahoo.com>
Control: cancel <3B049D...@yahoo.com>
Date: 18 May 2001 12:46:28 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Distribution: sk
Message-ID: <3765...@hey.guido.repost.this>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.122.7.24
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990177172 26101 203.122.7.24 (18 May 2001 09:12:52 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:12:52 +0000 (UTC)
Do you think reposting really makes things better? <3B049D...@yahoo.com>
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > John Henry and the horse he shot and ate for food wrote:
> > >
> > > Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
> > > back on Thu, 17 May 2001 07:17:56 GMT...
> > > > Sure you haven't.
> > > Evidence?
>
> > Did I say you had? You're the one reading into that statement John.
>
> been in jail.
Yes, I did, because given your online and offline behavior, I would
assume that you have indeed been incarcerated.
> If you have evidence which supports your
> challenge, then up with it.
If I did, I'd sit on it to let you stew :)
> If you don't, then you have no
> business coming off with this 'sure you haven't' crap.
I'll say what I want, John. If you don't like me making deragatory
statements about you, that's tough. You're not one to complain as
much as you make deragatory statements about me and others.
> Don't try to play my games, Dink - it takes a mind.
Which you don't have.
>
> > > > > I'm just pointing out what any good
> > > > > defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> > > > > inpossible to overcome in open court.
>
> > > > And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> > > On criminal charges? None.
>
> > Evidence?
>
> I'm an eyewitness with the best possible access to the
> relevant corroborating information.
Mentally ill people are generally hard to use in court, John.
> If you have evidence
> to the contrary, produce it.
No thanks. It's more fun to let you stew.
>
> > > Only you would associate
> > > a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> > > associations in the US.
>
> > Given your rampaging behavior,
>
> "Rampaging?" what, precisely, am I "rampaging" about?
Pretty much everything over the past 4 years.
>
> > your complete loss of mental facilities,
>
> And without any mental facilities whatsoever, I'm still
> able to think circles around you, as evidenced by your
> complete inability to keep up.
Awww...nice IKYWABAI.
>
> > the descriptions of Alicia Snow,
>
> Which ones?
Where she calls you a "fucked-up redneck alcoholic," or something to
that effect.
> And how are they at odds with the truth? Do
> you have evidence of this discrepancy?
I would consider Alicia a good source since you and her have actually
met.
>
> > > YHBT.
>
> > it is a "work" or
> > a "troll," and you shouldn't believe otherwise.
>
> "Trolling" is the act of posting something in order to get
> a predefined response. My predefined response that I'm
> looking for is for you to start spouting bullshit, 'proof'
> of this and that 'event' that never happened in the first
> place, whenever I post some stupid bullshit that nobody
> with a brain would believe in the first place. Because I
> like watching you make yourself look really stupid.
Nice DeJong speak of backpedalling away from my definition of DeJong.
>
> YHBT.
>
You'd like to believe that, wouldn't you?
> > > I challenge you to
> > > assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> > > your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> > > forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
>
> > I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
>
> So you concede my point: your posturing claim of firsthand
> knowledge of events that occurred over a decade before your
> born as a way to demonstrate that the federal government
> has no interest in the rantings and ravings of net.kooks
> like you is meaningless.
No, it's not, John.
> Your fear of the government
> reading and responding to your words proves my original
> position on this point, which you disputed. Thanks.
There is no 'fear' involved John. I'm just not as stupid as you.
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > > You questioned the veracity of my assertion that I have not
> > > been in jail.
>
> > Yes, I did, because given your online and offline behavior, I would
> > assume that you have indeed been incarcerated.
>
> idiot.
Oh I think I can fill in the blanks.
> The fact that you think you do belies your
> obsession and clear difficulty in percieving reality.
When are you going to get off this 'obsession' kick of yours John? First
it was because my .sig made you look like the schoolyard bully and a
mental nutcase and now it's because I think that in real life you're a
loser. Does EVERYTHING associate through your paranoia schizohrenia or
just a few certain things?
>
> You know how to tell the best lies, Dink?
Let you or Chad say them?
> Tell the whole
> truth except for one little bit. The thing about my
> daughter for instance. Completely true, down to the name
> of the guy that did it...but it wasn't my daughter.
>
> No, I don't mean, 'It wasn't my daughter because I was
> playing a role,' I mean, 'It wasn't my daughter because
> that didn't happen to my daughter.' It happened, to
> someone else's daughter, and I knew about it when it
> happened, many many years prior to my telling (the victim
> was my age) and weaved it in to the tapestry. I integrated
> my own feelings of outrage considering the inherent
> vulnerability of my own child, and all children, to such
> sick fuckers, into the 'work.'
blah blah blah blah blah. So more "Netbastard" workings then?
Give it up, John, it's over, the cows have been milked, and you're
still an asshole either way for using that sort of story to get yourself
attention. Only a complete prick would use the rape and molestation of
a three-year old to get himself attention over the Internet.
Besides, we all know that it's true, that it was your daughter, and that
it all really happened. You can whine "BUT IT WASN'T ME IT WAS A
NETBASTARD WORK DAMMIT" until the cows come home and nobody is really
going to give much of a shit.
>
> A common technique of actors and others that attempt to
> emulate emotion is to draw on *real* emotion to enhance
> the quality and 'realism' of their performance.
But you are not an actor, and you barely classify as an "other."
Damn John...you are REALLY, REALLY, REALLY going off of the deep end
here. I suppose you would be in the depressive stage of manic
depression right now, am I correct? Or are you merely cycling through
bipolar? Enlighten me.
>
> I had no idea when I did that anyone would attempt to
> associate me, the real live human being, with 'me,'
Too many "me's" in there John. Your schizophrenia is shining through
quite nicely.
> the guy
> posting on a newsgroup about pro-wrestling. I had no idea
> someone would take the pieces of my 'work' and try to use
> them against me, the real live human being sitting here
> typing this. I underestimated the gullibility of people
> like you, and I underestimated just how far an asshole like
> you would go. How truly obsessed you can be. You make up
> your own facts and repeat them until you think they're
> true. You can't remember what I've made up and what you've
> made up anymore.
>
Blah blah blah blah blah. John, face it, I'm not "obsessed,"
you're a paranoid schizophrenic with bipolar disorder who suffers
from delusions of grandeur and dimentia, and you are one of the
biggest jackasses this side of Chad Bryant. I love how you're
backpedalling and all that other crap you posted above, but it's
simply not working in your favor. Wonder if Bogus Sting is lurking
and laughing his ass off at all of this?
> Her ma was pissed because she thought I hadn't told her
> something.
But you just said it wasn't your daughter, John. Can't you at
least TRY to keep your lies straight?
> *That* is why she was making noise about trying
> to restrict visitation (as if being 1000 miles away isn't
> 'restriction' enough...)
She should restrict visitation because you belong in the loony bin,
John. I hope that she knows this by now.
>
> > > If you don't, then you have no
> > > business coming off with this 'sure you haven't' crap.
> >
> > If you don't like me making deragatory
> > statements about you, that's tough.
>
> 'Derogatory statements' I have no problem with.
You apparantly do, since you go nutzo over anything posted about you
that's negative.
> You don't
> engage in 'derogatory statements,' you engage in out
> and out lies, slander, stalking, and attempted
> terrorism against anyone that dares suggest that a
> guy that can post 700 individual unique messages to a
> single newsgroup in a single week might have a few issues.
*spit take*
ATTEMPTED TERRORISM??????????????????
Hol-lee fooking SHEE-ITE. John Henry DeJong has just hit a new high in
his insane ramblings.
Congratulations, John! Give yourself a pat on the back! Don't bother
to take the knife out of your hand first. How'd I know you were holding
one? Call it a hunch.
And don't even get me started on the whole "few issues" thing.
*snicker*
>
> > You're not one to complain as
> > much as you make deragatory statements about me and others.
>
> You can start complainng about me when I take the same
> attitude toward your poor parents, who you used to support
> your dead ass so you could play a few more free years of
> slapass on a newsgroup, that you take toward my 'daughter.'
I didn't use my parents to get myself attention in the role as their
son, John. YOU used your role as a father to your child, your very own
DAUGHTER, to get yourself attention on RSPW. If you can't live with
that, then take your own life. Follow-up on that suicide threat you
made long ago.
>
> > > If you have evidence
> > > to the contrary, produce it.
>
> > No thanks. It's more fun to let you stew.
>
> = "I can't."
= "It's more fun watching you stew."
>
> > > > > Only you would associate
> > > > > a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> > > > > associations in the US.
>
> > > > Given your rampaging behavior,
>
> > > "Rampaging?" what, precisely, am I "rampaging" about?
>
> > Pretty much everything over the past 4 years.
>
> My 'rampages' are as real as my 'daughter's' 'assault.'
Now, now. We've already been through on your backpedalling issues.
>
> > > > your complete loss of mental facilities,
>
> > > And without any mental facilities whatsoever, I'm still
> > > able to think circles around you, as evidenced by your
> > > complete inability to keep up.
>
> > Awww...nice IKYWABAI.
>
> Resorting to cute acronyms only works if what they stand
> for is relevant to the portion of conversation being
> commented on, Dink.
They do, John, they do. It's not my fault you've so completely lost it
that you're unwilling to recognize that they do.
>
> > > And how are they at odds with the truth? Do
> > > you have evidence of this discrepancy?
>
> > I would consider Alicia a good source since you and her have actually
> > met.
>
> LOL When was this? did she tell you this? *I* sure as
> hell didn't! LOLOLOL. Never happened, Dinkster. Nobody
> here has ever, ever claimed it did.
'Tis a shame, I'd love to hear how she kneed you in the groin.
>
> > > > > I challenge you to
> > > > > assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> > > > > your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> > > > > forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
>
> > > > I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
>
> > > So you concede my point: your posturing claim of firsthand
> > > knowledge of events that occurred over a decade before your
> > > born as a way to demonstrate that the federal government
> > > has no interest in the rantings and ravings of net.kooks
> > > like you is meaningless.
>
> > No, it's not, John.
>
> Then you maintain that the secret service would have no
> interest in you if you claimed to have direct knowledge of
> a current attempt or planned attempt on the life of the
> president?
You're manipulating the facts again, John as YOU choose to do.
>
> IOW, you maintain that if your posturing had the simple
> additional attribute of being remotely believable, nobody
> would care. Your ORIGINAL point was that a confession is
> worthless as evidence of a crime. To prove it you
> 'confessed' to knowing who shot Kennedy - an event that you
> obviously could not have direct knowledge of. I challenge
> your proof by saying "If your confession was believable,
> you'd have a real problem on your hands. Put up or shut up
> - confess to something REAL, that you MIGHT have done...and
> see how easy it is to change your mind later." You say
> "I'm not that stupid," implying that to make such a
> confession would be to create a huge legal problem for
> you...which was my original point in the first place.
>
> Therefore, your posture is meaningless, unless you count
> that it supports my original assertion.
>
Ran through Babelfish and found more interesting translated into
Spanish. More coherant, too.
> > > Your fear of the government
> > > reading and responding to your words proves my original
> > > position on this point, which you disputed. Thanks.
>
> > There is no 'fear' involved John. I'm just not as stupid as you.
>
> What would make it stupid if there was nothing to be afraid
> of in doing it, dink?
Because it came from you.
Alex Cain [reposted because of rogue java dummy cancel]
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > John Henry and the horse he shot and ate for food wrote:
> > >
> > > Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
> > > back on Thu, 17 May 2001 07:17:56 GMT...
> > > > Sure you haven't.
> > > Evidence?
>
> > Did I say you had? You're the one reading into that statement John.
>
> been in jail.
Yes, I did, because given your online and offline behavior, I would
assume that you have indeed been incarcerated.
> If you have evidence which supports your
> challenge, then up with it.
If I did, I'd sit on it to let you stew :)
> If you don't, then you have no
> business coming off with this 'sure you haven't' crap.
I'll say what I want, John. If you don't like me making deragatory
statements about you, that's tough. You're not one to complain as
much as you make deragatory statements about me and others.
> Don't try to play my games, Dink - it takes a mind.
Which you don't have.
>
> > > > > I'm just pointing out what any good
> > > > > defense attorney knows - a defendant confession is almost
> > > > > inpossible to overcome in open court.
>
> > > > And how many times have YOU been in court, John?
>
> > > On criminal charges? None.
>
> > Evidence?
>
> I'm an eyewitness with the best possible access to the
> relevant corroborating information.
Mentally ill people are generally hard to use in court, John.
> If you have evidence
> to the contrary, produce it.
No thanks. It's more fun to let you stew.
>
> > > Only you would associate
> > > a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> > > associations in the US.
>
> > Given your rampaging behavior,
>
> "Rampaging?" what, precisely, am I "rampaging" about?
Pretty much everything over the past 4 years.
>
> > your complete loss of mental facilities,
>
> And without any mental facilities whatsoever, I'm still
> able to think circles around you, as evidenced by your
> complete inability to keep up.
Awww...nice IKYWABAI.
>
> > the descriptions of Alicia Snow,
>
> Which ones?
Where she calls you a "fucked-up redneck alcoholic," or something to
that effect.
> And how are they at odds with the truth? Do
> you have evidence of this discrepancy?
I would consider Alicia a good source since you and her have actually
met.
>
> > > YHBT.
>
> > it is a "work" or
> > a "troll," and you shouldn't believe otherwise.
>
> "Trolling" is the act of posting something in order to get
> a predefined response. My predefined response that I'm
> looking for is for you to start spouting bullshit, 'proof'
> of this and that 'event' that never happened in the first
> place, whenever I post some stupid bullshit that nobody
> with a brain would believe in the first place. Because I
> like watching you make yourself look really stupid.
Nice DeJong speak of backpedalling away from my definition of DeJong.
>
> YHBT.
>
You'd like to believe that, wouldn't you?
> > > I challenge you to
> > > assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> > > your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> > > forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
>
> > I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
>
> So you concede my point: your posturing claim of firsthand
> knowledge of events that occurred over a decade before your
> born as a way to demonstrate that the federal government
> has no interest in the rantings and ravings of net.kooks
> like you is meaningless.
No, it's not, John.
> Your fear of the government
> reading and responding to your words proves my original
> position on this point, which you disputed. Thanks.
There is no 'fear' involved John. I'm just not as stupid as you.
> --
> John Henry
> http://www.net-bastard.com
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: csnews.vslib.cz!more.work.for.guido
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sk.net.abuse,cz.net.abuse.misc,mn.test,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B0598...@yahoo.com>
Control: cancel <3B0598...@yahoo.com>
Date: 19 May 2001 06:06:58 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <80515...@more.work.for.guido>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.122.7.24
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990252187 6958 203.122.7.24 (19 May 2001 06:03:07 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 06:03:07 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: csnews.vslib.cz control.cancel:135822
more work for guido: <3B0598...@yahoo.com>
Alex Cain [reposted because of rogue java dummy cancel]
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > > You questioned the veracity of my assertion that I have not
> > > been in jail.
>
> > Yes, I did, because given your online and offline behavior, I would
> > assume that you have indeed been incarcerated.
>
>
> > > If you don't, then you have no
> > > business coming off with this 'sure you haven't' crap.
> >
> > If you don't like me making deragatory
> > statements about you, that's tough.
>
> 'Derogatory statements' I have no problem with.
You apparantly do, since you go nutzo over anything posted about you
that's negative.
> You don't
> engage in 'derogatory statements,' you engage in out
> and out lies, slander, stalking, and attempted
> terrorism against anyone that dares suggest that a
> guy that can post 700 individual unique messages to a
> single newsgroup in a single week might have a few issues.
*spit take*
ATTEMPTED TERRORISM??????????????????
Hol-lee fooking SHEE-ITE. John Henry DeJong has just hit a new high in
his insane ramblings.
Congratulations, John! Give yourself a pat on the back! Don't bother
to take the knife out of your hand first. How'd I know you were holding
one? Call it a hunch.
And don't even get me started on the whole "few issues" thing.
*snicker*
>
> > You're not one to complain as
> > much as you make deragatory statements about me and others.
>
> You can start complainng about me when I take the same
> attitude toward your poor parents, who you used to support
> your dead ass so you could play a few more free years of
> slapass on a newsgroup, that you take toward my 'daughter.'
I didn't use my parents to get myself attention in the role as their
son, John. YOU used your role as a father to your child, your very own
DAUGHTER, to get yourself attention on RSPW. If you can't live with
that, then take your own life. Follow-up on that suicide threat you
made long ago.
>
> > > If you have evidence
> > > to the contrary, produce it.
>
> > No thanks. It's more fun to let you stew.
>
> = "I can't."
= "It's more fun watching you stew."
>
> > > > > Only you would associate
> > > > > a german authority from WWII with current law enforcement
> > > > > associations in the US.
>
> > > > Given your rampaging behavior,
>
> > > "Rampaging?" what, precisely, am I "rampaging" about?
>
> > Pretty much everything over the past 4 years.
>
> My 'rampages' are as real as my 'daughter's' 'assault.'
Now, now. We've already been through on your backpedalling issues.
>
> > > > your complete loss of mental facilities,
>
> > > And without any mental facilities whatsoever, I'm still
> > > able to think circles around you, as evidenced by your
> > > complete inability to keep up.
>
> > Awww...nice IKYWABAI.
>
> Resorting to cute acronyms only works if what they stand
> for is relevant to the portion of conversation being
> commented on, Dink.
They do, John, they do. It's not my fault you've so completely lost it
that you're unwilling to recognize that they do.
>
> > > And how are they at odds with the truth? Do
> > > you have evidence of this discrepancy?
>
> > I would consider Alicia a good source since you and her have actually
> > met.
>
> LOL When was this? did she tell you this? *I* sure as
> hell didn't! LOLOLOL. Never happened, Dinkster. Nobody
> here has ever, ever claimed it did.
'Tis a shame, I'd love to hear how she kneed you in the groin.
>
> > > > > I challenge you to
> > > > > assert your position and make a threat of violent death at
> > > > > your hand against the currently sitting president in this
> > > > > forum. Let's see if the SS is interested.
>
> > > > I'm not that stupid, John. YOU probably are, but I'm not.
>
> > > So you concede my point: your posturing claim of firsthand
> > > knowledge of events that occurred over a decade before your
> > > born as a way to demonstrate that the federal government
> > > has no interest in the rantings and ravings of net.kooks
> > > like you is meaningless.
>
> > No, it's not, John.
>
> Then you maintain that the secret service would have no
> interest in you if you claimed to have direct knowledge of
> a current attempt or planned attempt on the life of the
> president?
You're manipulating the facts again, John as YOU choose to do.
>
> IOW, you maintain that if your posturing had the simple
> additional attribute of being remotely believable, nobody
> would care. Your ORIGINAL point was that a confession is
> worthless as evidence of a crime. To prove it you
> 'confessed' to knowing who shot Kennedy - an event that you
> obviously could not have direct knowledge of. I challenge
> your proof by saying "If your confession was believable,
> you'd have a real problem on your hands. Put up or shut up
> - confess to something REAL, that you MIGHT have done...and
> see how easy it is to change your mind later." You say
> "I'm not that stupid," implying that to make such a
> confession would be to create a huge legal problem for
> you...which was my original point in the first place.
>
> Therefore, your posture is meaningless, unless you count
> that it supports my original assertion.
>
Ran through Babelfish and found more interesting translated into
Spanish. More coherant, too.
> > > Your fear of the government
> > > reading and responding to your words proves my original
> > > position on this point, which you disputed. Thanks.
>
> > There is no 'fear' involved John. I'm just not as stupid as you.
>
> What would make it stupid if there was nothing to be afraid
> of in doing it, dink?
Because it came from you.
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: csnews.vslib.cz!more.work.for.guido
From: Alex Cain <alex...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sk.net.abuse,cz.net.abuse.misc,mn.test,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: cmsg cancel <3B0615...@yahoo.com>
Control: cancel <3B0615...@yahoo.com>
Date: 19 May 2001 07:04:11 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Liberec
Lines: 1
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <64735...@more.work.for.guido>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.122.7.24
X-Trace: morticia.kit.vslib.cz 990255621 7239 203.122.7.24 (19 May 2001 07:00:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@morticia.kit.vslib.cz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 07:00:21 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: csnews.vslib.cz control.cancel:137068
more work for guido: <3B0615...@yahoo.com>
Alex Cain
>
> Check out the BS alex...@yahoo.com tried to lay on us,
>
> > John Henry and the horse he rode in on wrote:
> > > You haven't the slightest idea what I'm like offline, you
> > > idiot.
>
> > Oh I think I can fill in the blanks.
>
Only in your little world, John. Only in your little world.
>
> > Give it up, John, it's over, the cows have been milked, and you're
> > still an asshole either way for using that sort of story to get yourself
> > attention. Only a complete prick would use the rape and molestation of
> > a three-year old to get himself attention over the Internet.
>
> Only an idiot like you would be unable to realize that IT
> NEVER HAPPENED, dink.
John --- I know you love revisionist history and all --- but the
fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if the rape and molestation
of a three-year-old actually happened or not. The fact of the matter
is, you used those very facts to get yourself attention. So, I stand
by my point, only a complete prick, such as yourself, would use the
rape and molestation of a three-year old, true or not, to get himself
attention online. Besides, nobody believes your bullcrap anyway, but
may I just say you're doing a lovely job on your revisionist history
in an attempt to stay sane. It's NOT WORKING, but it's a courageous
gesture nonetheless.
> I may as well have picked a name of
> a convicted abuser from the newspaper.
You probably tried, but thought people wouldn't believe you as much.
> Maybe that's what I
> *did*, and my 'friend' is yet another work.
*yawn* More of this 'work' shit. Revisionist history 101 from John
Henry "Schizphrenia" DeJong.
>
> > > A common technique of actors and others that attempt to
> > > emulate emotion is to draw on *real* emotion to enhance
> > > the quality and 'realism' of their performance.
>
> > But you are not an actor
>
> As relates to anything I post on RSPW, I am always acting,
...like an ass. Yes, I know.
> to some degree.
>
> > > I had no idea when I did that anyone would attempt to
> > > associate me, the real live human being, with 'me,'
>
> > Too many "me's" in there John. Your schizophrenia is shining through
> > quite nicely.
>
> I bet you refer to actors by the names of their characters
> too, don't you?
Only when they're good at it. But you will never achieve that level.
Ever. Period. For eternity. End of story!
>
> > Blah blah blah blah blah. John, face it, I'm not "obsessed,"
> > you're a paranoid schizophrenic with bipolar disorder who suffers
> > from delusions of grandeur and dimentia,
>
> That's like the 8th time you've misspelled that word in
> this thread.
Spelling it improperly does not make it untrue. By the way that
was a lovely deflection there, I congratulate you on your attempt
at doing so.
> Please support the above assertions with
> evidence or retract it immediately.
Your own postings, your paranoia-fueled rantings, your very nature is
all the evidence I need, John.
> Please include your
> qualifications as a doctor of psychiatry.
Sure! I have a PhD from Harvard, a DDS from Yale, and a PCP from Home
Depot.
>
> Or are you just trying to sound important by running a
> bunch of big words that you can barely pronounce together
> again?
No, I'm pretty much describing your mental state as it currently stands.
>
> > > Her ma was pissed because she thought I hadn't told her
> > > something.
>
> > But you just said it wasn't your daughter, John. Can't you at
> > least TRY to keep your lies straight?
>
> Jesus you're an idiot.
Oh, I don't know about that, John. I always felt Jesus was a pretty
intelligent guy. After all, guy's been dead for over 2,000 years and
he's STILL got people kissing his ass.
>
> > > *That* is why she was making noise about trying
> > > to restrict visitation (as if being 1000 miles away isn't
> > > 'restriction' enough...)
>
> > She should restrict visitation because you belong in the loony bin,
> > John. I hope that she knows this by now.
>
> Please provide your qualifications to make any judgement or
> public pronouncement on my fitness as a freely-acting
> member of society at large.
All of your postings for the past four years dictating veiled and direct
threats of physical violence, the way you've constantly, without fail,
shown yourself to have emotional and mental ties to RSPW, your threat of
suicide in 1999, and too much mentally-fueled paranoid rantings and
revisionist history from your person to count, without the use of
Google.
> Or are you just making up
> bullshit again because you woudln't know the truth if it
> fucked you in the ass?
No bullshit is involved, John, only your own words and rantings.
>
> > > > If you don't like me making deragatory
> > > > statements about you, that's tough.
> > >
> > > 'Derogatory statements' I have no problem with.
>
> > You apparantly do, since you go nutzo over anything posted about you
> > that's negative.
>
> Like made-up diagnoses based on a fucking fictional
> construct, that idiots like you actually believe is real?
When made-up diagnoseses occur, yes. However, there is nothing
yet to be made-up.
> No, I don't 'go nutzo,' dink -
You merely 'go Netbastard.' Same damn thing.
> I just have a vested
> interest in making damn sure that nobody, ever, believes
> the bullshit you spout.
Hmmmmmm that sounds a tad OBSESSIVE to me, wouldn't you say?
>
> > > You don't
> > > engage in 'derogatory statements,' you engage in out
> > > and out lies, slander, stalking, and attempted
> > > terrorism against anyone that dares suggest that a
> > > guy that can post 700 individual unique messages to a
> > > single newsgroup in a single week might have a few issues.
>
> > *spit take*
>
> > ATTEMPTED TERRORISM??????????????????
>
> Threatening to destroy a man's family if he doesn't
> cooperate with you would fall under the label of
> 'terrorism' to me, dink.
I never did that, John. Only your paranoid views and your
pseudo-revisionist history believe that I have. I merely
stated that I wanted your daughter to know just how big of
an asshole her father had been as it pertained to her alleged
assault...which you're now using revisionist history to claim
never happened and you SAID never happened.
>
> > I didn't use my parents to get myself attention in the role as their
> > son, John. YOU used your role as a father to your child, your very own
> > DAUGHTER,
>
> That is an absolute out and out lie.
So she's NOT your daughter? Your crack-addicted, stripper-whore
pleased the entire bar that night?
> I made up a story
> to sound like a badass, because that's the persona I was
> projecting at the time.
No, you told the truth, it bit you on the ass, now you're backpedalling
and trying to convince yourself more than others that what you did never
happened. The sad fact is, you're so far gone mentally that eventually
you'll do exactly that and in your mind you will never have posted those
things.
> No more, no less. Save for the
> fact that I came up with a real name in case anyone
> bothered to check on it,
Which you should never have done to begin with.
>it may as well have been a TV
> show.
Uh-huh.
> A story that bears no relationship to reality
At least, none that you're willing to recognize. See above for my
related comments.
> whatsoever, beyond the extent to which I drew on my life
> experiences to create the story.
Just more proof that you need serious mental help.
> Why can't you get that
> through your head?
Because you're lying and using revisionist history in an attempt to
convince yourself that you never did what you did.
> Why do you STILL insist that this has
> something to do with my child?
Because you used her as the main character in your little "story" John.
Duh.
> Are you an idiot, Dink?
No, but it appears you might be, for even considering using your own
daughter to get your fucked-up ego attention for yourself.
> Are you even sure I *have* a child?
Yea, pretty much, hard as it is to believe, but then you have fully
admitted that the night she was conceived, the crack-addicted whore
that passes as her mother was drunk and probably didn't have much of
an idea what she was doing or who she was doing it with.
> Are you SURE you're
> sure?
Yep. 100%.
>
> > They do, John, they do. It's not my fault you've so completely lost it
> > that you're unwilling to recognize that they do.
>
> I'm not the idiot winning awards for being such a Dink,
Wow. Text on a screen posted by hypocritical bigots with anger problems
(something I'm sure seems familiar to you). Voted on by a whopping dozen
people, no less. I'm crushed.
> Dink.
Jackass.
>
> > > > I would consider Alicia a good source since you and her have actually
> > > > met.
>
> > > LOL When was this? did she tell you this? *I* sure as
> > > hell didn't! LOLOLOL. Never happened, Dinkster. Nobody
> > > here has ever, ever claimed it did.
>
> > 'Tis a shame, I'd love to hear how she kneed you in the groin.
>
> Notice above there? You lie your ass off, make something
> up completely off the top of your head,
Sound familiar? It should. You do it all the time. And I said 'to
hear how she kneed you in the groin.' What part of a lie is that? I was
under the impression you two had met, you said you hadn't, I couldn't
find anything at that time to prove you had, so I simply stated what I
would love to hear had you two done so.
Now where's the lie in that, John?
> and try to pass it
> off as truth.
Exactly what you do all the time, by your own admittance within this
post. Is it painful being as big of a hypocrite as you are, or have
you developed a shield-like precision to keep yourself from all the
hypocricy that comes your way?
> Then when you're called on it, you buzz
> right by like you don't even see it.
Oh, you mean "pulling a Chad?"
>
> > > Then you maintain that the secret service would have no
> > > interest in you if you claimed to have direct knowledge of
> > > a current attempt or planned attempt on the life of the
> > > president?
>
> > You're manipulating the facts again, John as YOU choose to do.
>
> Do you or do you not maintain this position?
What position? Patting my head and rubbing my stomach at the same time?
>
> > > IOW, you maintain that if your posturing had the simple
> > > additional attribute of being remotely believable, nobody
> > > would care. Your ORIGINAL point was that a confession is
> > > worthless as evidence of a crime. To prove it you
> > > 'confessed' to knowing who shot Kennedy - an event that you
> > > obviously could not have direct knowledge of. I challenge
> > > your proof by saying "If your confession was believable,
> > > you'd have a real problem on your hands. Put up or shut up
> > > - confess to something REAL, that you MIGHT have done...and
> > > see how easy it is to change your mind later." You say
> > > "I'm not that stupid," implying that to make such a
> > > confession would be to create a huge legal problem for
> > > you...which was my original point in the first place.
>
> > > Therefore, your posture is meaningless, unless you count
> > > that it supports my original assertion.
>
> > Ran through Babelfish and found more interesting translated into
> > Spanish. More coherant, too.
>
> = "Oops."
= "John Henry's at it again, folks."
>
> > > > > Your fear of the government
> > > > > reading and responding to your words proves my original
> > > > > position on this point, which you disputed. Thanks.
>
> > > > There is no 'fear' involved John. I'm just not as stupid as you.
>
> > > What would make it stupid if there was nothing to be afraid
> > > of in doing it, dink?
>
> > Because it came from you.
>
> This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever
So take the Darvon or Prozac or Xantax or whatever it is you're pilling
this time.
> in the context of
> the conversation. As usual. Your obsession is having an
> obviously detrimental effect on your comprehensive
> abilities.
There is no obsession, John. Besides, you're the one who just
said, and I quote:
" I just have a vested interest in making damn sure
that nobody, ever, believes the bullshit you spout."
Gee, that sounds, oh, I don't know...obsessive, maybe?