Eagle Eye: Gunloon Stalker Dude
veronica floss
My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
===
Eagle-Eye;
Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
of your posts where you are replying to me; for every one post
where I reply to you. They will find that those posts started
suddenly in October or November. They will find your reference
several months ago to the "Veronica" page on your website, since
taken down. They will find literally dozens of your posts where
you've called me a liar or racist, or directly supported others
well known to both of us, who have.
In my opinion, your attention constitutes stalking, given the
personal and confrontational content of your posts directed to
me. Where I live, stalking constitutes an assault.
Stalking used to work on political newsgroups, ten years ago.
Hell; it used to work on CB radio thirty years ago and with
Klansmen forty years ago. It doesn't work any more. It was always
inappropriate if not downright criminal.
===
My lack of a response to you does NOT constitute a silent confession
to you that you were right about your latest silly paranoid charge:
It constitutes my boredom with you.
I've seen your act before. There's no law or custom that says I'm
always supposed to answer every one of your posts. If you aren't
discussing a political issue (which is what I come here to
discuss), then I mark your krap "read" and move on. You are
absolutely NOT worth my time unless you post ideas which are
interesting or valuable to me.
===
I certainly am NOT going to discuss my ISP or give you my
personal address, as you have demanded in dozens of posts now.
You've called me a liar (and worse) too many other times for
that. I also note that you yourself carefully post from an
anonymizing "nym" address, which brands your demands directed to
me, as very hypocritical.
I also don't provide links or explanations or "proof" to people
who call me a "liar" before they've even addressed the contents
of my post.
This especially includes you. "liar" seems to be one of your
favorite words -- you seem to use it in about seventy percent of
your posts. Nice rhetorical strategy.
===
When I do answer you; I'll answer you in my own way and for my
reasons and to make my own points. I do this with a clear
conscience, because I hold you responsible for conducting your
own research into political issues we are both supposed to
discuss here.
I also expect you to deal objectively with all sides of a
Political issue; not just your favorite side. Here's a hint -- I
am not a "liar" just because you aren't bright enough to follow
my reasoning or never happened to have read my ideas before.
===
Political issues matter to me. Part of politics in a Democracy,
unfortunately, is putting up with people who don't intend to play
fair; or intend to harm others in order get their way; or just
use political discussions as an excuse to express their own
personal paranoia or hatred of others.
None of those things describe me, but some of them might describe
you. I can handle this political style, as much as I don't enjoy
it, because untoward behavior like this is also part of
discussing political issues where free speech is a respected
and important Civil Right.
---
Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
desist.
In the future, I would like you to confine your replies to me to
political issues. Stop calling me personal names and accusing me
of "lying" in every reply you post directed to me. Hold your
temper. Behave yourself.
Stop naming third parties whom you speculate might be me. They
don't deserve to have their names and addresses posted as part of
your fantasies. This list you've named has got to be twenty or
thirty people by now.
Stop demanding that I tell you my "real" name and address, as if
I don't have one. You do not have my permission to contact me,
visit me, or to annoy anyone whom you speculate might know me or
where I live. Your personal attention is unwelcome.
You should know that you and several of your friends will now be
contacted if anything unfortunate should happen to me in my
personal life.
molly
In article <200202250246...@cryptofortress.com>, Use-
Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1] says...
> In article <MPG.16e0d360d...@news.sonic.net> molly
> <mo...@fwtrib.com> wrote:
> >In article <2002021715543...@nym.alias.net>, Use-
> >Author-Address-Header@[127.1] says...
> [snip]
> >> >> >> >> Archie/cockatoo/crank/klystron/kodiak/molly/poop/rachael/ralph/
> >> >> >> >> rapmaster/veronica/waskaly/woof/xeor/whoever, you keep
> >> >> >> >> posting paranoid delusions about people trying to
> >> >> >> >> discover your real name. I've never had any interest
> >> >> >> >> in your real name or location. To prove this point, I
> >> >> >> >> will completely drop the issue of you not revealing
> >> >> >> >> under what name(s) you used to post if you tell me that
> >> >> >> >> doing so would reveal your real name and/or location
> >> >> >> >> and you stop making arguments based upon your
> >> >> >> >> eyewitness testimony as an alleged 12 year veteran of
> >> >> >> >> these groups.
> [snip]
> >Why, pardon me all to hell, EE. I didn't know you owned Usenet
>
> As I said, it's entirely your choice whether to give your previous
> identities. It's also your choice whether to talk about your
> participation in the "good ol' days" and look like a liar for
> refusing to mention your identities during the "good ol' days".
>
> Since you go into hysterics about "alcoholic rednecks" doing great
> harm to you when someone speculates about your previous identities
> (WHICH YOU KEEP MENTIONING!), I'm explaining how you can convince
> me to drop the subject.
>
> [snip]
> >I don't think I have ever had anyone so obsessed with little ole'
> >me in my life. What's it been, now, Mister Eye? Four months
> >you've been trying to surf your way to my address? Four months!
>
> You keep accusing people for no reason of wanting to track you
> down, threaten you, or do you harm. Ever hear of the boy who cried
> wolf?
>
> >And all this time, I'm not even using a nym hacker address. I'm
> >right here in utterly plain sight. Looks like you need to sharpen
> >up your self-proclaimed technical virtuosity or your embarrassed
> >hacknoid friends will pull your nym address out of embarrassment.
>
> As with the "trying to surf to my address" bit, you keep repeating
> what you know are lies.
>
> I've told you repeatedly I'm not a "hacker". You know I haven't
> proclaimed any "technical virtuosity" at hacking.
>
> >Really and seriously: I suggest you stick with discussing
> >politics and stop this obsessing about things that don't matter.
>
> Then again, YOU could quit posting libelous accusations and
> convoluted, irrational theories.
>
> =====
> EE
>
> Honorato libertam et ruat coelum.
>
>
>
Billy Beck
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> whimpered:
>Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>desist.
Drop dead, cow.
Billy
VRWC Fronteer
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/
Gandalf Grey
"Billy Beck" <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3c7bf46c...@news.mindspring.com...
>
> veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> whimpered:
>
> >Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
> >desist.
>
> Drop dead, cow.
Fuck off, asshole.
Gandalf Grey
"veronica floss" <vero...@hygene.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net...
>
> My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
> He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
Turn the asshole in, Veronica. Net stalking is against most TOS agreements.
Chris Morton
>
>
>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>
>===
>
>Eagle-Eye;
>
>Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
Nobody believes you, especially you.
--
Gun control, the theory that 110lb. women should have to fistfight with 210lb.
rapists.
msoja
posted:
<massive hysteria snipped>
LOL. *Another* lying nutcase who forgot to degauss her tinfoil beany.
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
>
>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>
>===
>
>Eagle-Eye;
>
>Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>of your posts where you are replying to me; for every one post
>where I reply to you. They will find that those posts started
>suddenly in October or November. They will find your reference
>several months ago to the "Veronica" page on your website, since
>taken down. They will find literally dozens of your posts where
>you've called me a liar or racist, or directly supported others
>well known to both of us, who have.
Don't like the spotlight, eh?
--Ace
Christopher Morton
Go burn a cross, Nathan Bedford.
--
"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
Christopher Morton
wrote:
>
>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
If you want to appologize for something, appologize for being a
witless, hapless, hopeless White supremacist coward with more aliases
than braincells.
Christopher Morton
"Net stalking" is what racist cowards like you and "her" call having
the truth told about them.
Of course cross burning dildos like "veronica" don't mind when fellow
racist curs like KKKennemur engage in email harassment in the name of
racial intimidation.
Pea...@peabrain.com
>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
He's taking BURGERKING BECKIE Lessons in stupidity
=====================================================
*Try* it, you crappy little faggot bitch. Don't just sit there:
come try it.
I'll take your fuckin' life, instantly, and sleep like a baby.
Pea...@peabrain.com
wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>
>>Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>>desist.
>
> Drop dead, cow.
You dipsoid little shit, BURGERKING
You should have more respect for cows.
After all, being a Narc for a burger outlet and all.............
****************************************************
"And the thing that has you, Roselles, and Hanson in a writhing
twist is that someone actually pointed it out to one of your victims.
Burger King does *not* run segregated serving lines -- in Alabama, or
anywhere else -- and there was no way in life I was going to sit here
and watch you lie about them for weeks on end without pointing it out
to them.
Billy "burgerking" Beck explaining why he became a Narc for BurgerKing
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
><ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Billy Beck" <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:3c7bf46c...@news.mindspring.com...
>>>
>>> veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> whimpered:
>>>
>>> >Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>>> >desist.
>>>
>>> Drop dead, cow.
>>
>>Fuck off, asshole.
>
>Go burn a cross, Nathan Bedford.
No self respecting racist would "burn a cross" on your lawn, Snorts.
You outdo even the most ardent racists around.
===================================================
"My instructor likes to tell people that I'm "a good stick" - that
I have superb skills at handling the airplane - but she also says that
I have the best head on my shoulders that she's ever seen in a
student."
Death Threat Billy Beck
(Burger King Narc)
Pea...@peabrain.com
like a right wing nut;
And you would know lying nutcases well, don't you?
Seems you kissed a lot of KnicKKKlas's ass in your time.
======================================================
From: Billy Beck (ain't...@tno.e-mail)
Subject: Re: Unequal Distribution of Wealth?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc, alt.politics,
alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.activism,
alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,
alt.society.conservatism, alt.politics.correct, alt.politics.reform
Date: 1997/02/28
nos...@spam.com (nospam) wrote:
>But all of this is just my own subjective opinion. If enough people
>agree with me (and I think they do), we will work towards those goals,
>and we'll have a pretty good society. Butit's still all subjective.
A bullet in the back of your head, in a cellar where nobody
heard it, would clarify matters for you....or perhaps your family,
since you would be quite objectively dead.
You're acting like a fool. Stop it.
Billy
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
><ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"veronica floss" <vero...@hygene.org> wrote in message
>>news:MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net...
>>>
>>> My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>> He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>>
>>Turn the asshole in, Veronica. Net stalking is against most TOS agreements.
>
>"Net stalking" is what racist cowards like you and "her" call having
>the truth told about them.
So you're saying that BurgerkIng Beck, Dana, and KnicKKKers are
"racist cowards", Snorts?
>Of course cross burning dildos like "veronica" don't mind when fellow
>racist curs like KKKennemur engage in email harassment in the name of
>racial intimidation.
We only have YOUR say so on that Snorts. MOF, you're the whitest,
racist, gunwhoringest, fuckwit I've ever read on th Usenet, Snorts.
But everyone knows the minute you dumb rightwing assholes get abused,
you start publishing personal information, making hang up calls, and
whining=== using stories and lies.
You're the worst of the lot, Snorts. And that's what Volt keep
beating you over the head about.
Ya gotta admit he did a number on your igorant ass, don'cha Snorts.
A real beautiful job.
=============================================================
fellow gunwhore of Naziboy, Beck writes :
>Buy yourself a quality pistol. (I recommend the Beretta 92F, but
>that's just me. Aesthetic considerations have been admirably served
>in my own case with the FS - stainless steel - and custom black walnut
>grips, but all that is your lookout.) Get yourself qualified to
>handle it. Make damned sure you know what you're doing. Once that's
>done, get yourself a bunch of dry-fire rounds in your caliber.
>They're usually available at any quality gun shop in bubble-packs of
>five for less than about fifteen dollars. (The ones I use are
>transparent red plastic, with the pad spring visible above the brass,
>inside.) Keeping one in the chamber at all times, never watch the
>TEEVEE without your dry-fire pistol near at hand. Whenever The Lying
>Bastard appears, exploit the opportunity and your visceral reaction
>for purposes of target acquisition training and full-grip squeeze
>conditioning.
>Billy
>VRWC Fronteer
>http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/promise.html
Pea...@peabrain.com
>wrote:
>
>>
>>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>
>If you want to appologize for something, appologize for being a
>witless, hapless, hopeless White supremacist coward with more aliases
>than braincells.
Sure, Snorts
Just about the time you admit to being an even worse idiot, gunloon,
and usenet fuckwit.
Will that be sooner, or later, snorts?
I believe Volt asked you the same question years ago
Then proceeded to kick your ignorant ass
Handily too, I might add.
============================================================================
We didn't create racism, we pour gas on it.
We didn't invent homophobia, we just fan the flames.
We don't lynch minorities, we make the rope stronger.
We don't bomb women's clinics, we make the bombs bigger.
We didn't invent hate, we echo it across the country.
We're the Vultures of hate radio.
We're the Grand Old Fascist Party.
BartCop on the GOP, a subsidiary of ADM
=============================================================================
Pea...@peabrain.com
wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>
>>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>>
>>===
>>
>>Eagle-Eye;
>>
>>Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>
>Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
>liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
>
>Nobody believes you, especially you.
Sure, Snorts.
Just like everyone believes you're black; that Volt didn't kick your
dumb ass, and that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.
====================================================
Poor, pathetic, DIMWIT DANA, blusterers thusly:
IT PROVES YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
Hey ASSHOLE no one but you cares about this,
but it does show you are a hypocritical LOON.
Come on Roseasshole tell us what town you live in,
or are you to chicken to fight.
I am in Phoenix, and my number is listed,
come on chicken man, make your hat.
johnz~
"Gandalf Grey" <ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Hanson. How's the weather down in Portland?
JS
--
A Short History Of The United States of America:
"Laugh all you want...I'm the one goin' down in history
as the Thomas Jefferson of squirrels."
Don McGregor
veronica floss wrote:
> Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
> of your posts where you are replying to me; for every one post
> where I reply to you.
Responding to posts in a public forum that is intended to
facilitate response and discussion is hardly stalking.
> I certainly am NOT going to discuss my ISP or give you my
> personal address,
since you insist on posting under multiple aliases,
it is hardly improper for your interlocutors to
attempt to sort out which aliases actually belong
to you.
Perhaps you could stick to one gender and anonymous alias
so as to reduce the confusion.
--
Don McGregor | Osama delendo est.
|
Bear Bottoms
>
> >Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
> >desist.
>
> Drop dead, cow.
>
>
> Billy
>
h0mi
veronica floss wrote:
>
> My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
> He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>
> ===
>
> Eagle-Eye;
>
> Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
> of your posts where you are replying to me; for every one post
> where I reply to you. They will find that those posts started
> suddenly in October or November.
This tells me the earliest post of Eagle Eye's which mentions the name
"Veronica Floss" started on Jaunary 17th.
This tells me the earlist post of Eagle Eyes which mentions the name
"molly" but did not include "ivins" was identified in google on January
16th.
This "4 months of stalking" is nothing more than a deliberate distortion
of noticing that your posts appeared out of thin air sometime in
november. And is utter and complete horseshit.
> They will find your reference
> several months ago to the "Veronica" page on your website, since
> taken down.
What web site supposedly belonged to Eagle Eye?
You were asked this previously and never supplied a URL.
I'm sure the URL was a figment of your imagination, just as you
laughably treated the cliche "if you can't take the heat, get out of the
kitchen" was a threat to forcibly remove you from your home.
> They will find literally dozens of your posts where
> you've called me a liar or racist, or directly supported others
> well known to both of us, who have.
>
> In my opinion, your attention constitutes stalking, given the
> personal and confrontational content of your posts directed to
> me. Where I live, stalking constitutes an assault.
But this isn't stalking:
> I'd suggest that any increase of your stature ends once another post
> from verio.net arrives in your name.
>
(sigh).
" I know who you are ...."
" I know where you live ...."
The first two threats a vigilante always makes when he discovers
he's wrong, is too proud to admit it, and decides to snuff out
the evidence.
> Stalking used to work on political newsgroups, ten years ago.
> Hell; it used to work on CB radio thirty years ago and with
> Klansmen forty years ago. It doesn't work any more. It was always
> inappropriate if not downright criminal.
Indeed. But noone is stalking you.
> My lack of a response to you does NOT constitute a silent confession
> to you that you were right about your latest silly paranoid charge:
> It constitutes my boredom with you.
>
> I've seen your act before. There's no law or custom that says I'm
> always supposed to answer every one of your posts. If you aren't
> discussing a political issue (which is what I come here to
> discuss), then I mark your krap "read" and move on. You are
> absolutely NOT worth my time unless you post ideas which are
> interesting or valuable to me.
>
> ===
>
> I certainly am NOT going to discuss my ISP or give you my
> personal address, as you have demanded in dozens of posts now.
When has he demanded your personal address or ISP?
All he has asked was what pseudonym did you post under in the 12 or so
years that you claim to have been familiar with Morton's postings, which
would be difficult for someone who's only been posting on USENET since
November 2001.
> You've called me a liar (and worse) too many other times for
> that. I also note that you yourself carefully post from an
> anonymizing "nym" address, which brands your demands directed to
> me, as very hypocritical.
Only in your distorted view of hypocracy.
Eagle isn't attacking you for concealing your identity. Eagle is
questioning your claims of being on USENET over 6 months ago, when your
current host of nicknames did not exist.
> I also don't provide links or explanations or "proof" to people
> who call me a "liar" before they've even addressed the contents
> of my post.
>
> This especially includes you. "liar" seems to be one of your
> favorite words -- you seem to use it in about seventy percent of
> your posts. Nice rhetorical strategy.
You keep referring to Chris Morton as a survivalist and a white
supremecist, in spite of beliefs of his which are significantly
inconsistant with a survivalist or white supremecist.
> When I do answer you; I'll answer you in my own way and for my
> reasons and to make my own points. I do this with a clear
> conscience, because I hold you responsible for conducting your
> own research into political issues we are both supposed to
> discuss here.
>
> I also expect you to deal objectively with all sides of a
> Political issue; not just your favorite side. Here's a hint -- I
> am not a "liar" just because you aren't bright enough to follow
> my reasoning or never happened to have read my ideas before.
You're a "liar" because you are not stating the truth.
Noone threatened you.
h0mi
You have an odd definition of "net stalking" then.
When are you going to denounce her for her death threats, as you do
Beck?
Gandalf Grey
"h0mi" <h0...@oohay.com> wrote in message news:3C7C4988...@oohay.com...
Probably when she's been at it for the better part of a decade.
Pea...@peabrain.com
right wing nut;
>You're a "liar" because you are not stating the truth.
And you're a liar and fuckwit because you're a conservative
Silverback
<johns...@removethishome.net> wrote:
>In article <a5gt59$2lg$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>,
> "Gandalf Grey" <ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Billy Beck" <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:3c7bf46c...@news.mindspring.com...
>> >
>> > veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> whimpered:
>> >
>> > >Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>> > >desist.
>> >
>> > Drop dead, cow.
>>
>> Fuck off, asshole.
>>
>>
>
>Hi, Hanson. How's the weather down in Portland?
hows the weather in Seattle nutcase?
>
>JS
>
>--
>A Short History Of The United States of America:
>
>"Laugh all you want...I'm the one goin' down in history
>as the Thomas Jefferson of squirrels."
>
>http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/meatwagon/index.html
=====================================================
GDY Weasel
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
The Nazi Hydra in America an online book of the
fascist influence in America.
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/noon.html
===================================================
h0mi
Strange, Beck hasn't been making death threats for a decade, but you've
no qualms in denouncing him.
veronica floss
says...
> In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica says...
> >
> >
> >My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
> >He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
> >
> >===
> >
> >Eagle-Eye;
> >
> >Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>
> Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
> liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
>
> Nobody believes you, especially you.
I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
just an unfortunate part of usenet.
What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
in Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday. I still think
it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
(apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
sorry for you.
h0mi
Pea...@PeaBrain.com spewed like the jackass he is:
>
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 02:48:23 GMT, h0mi <h0...@oohay.com> wrote like a
> right wing nut;
>
> >You're a "liar" because you are not stating the truth.
>
> And you're a liar and fuckwit because you're a conservative
Correction- a "looneytarian" according to fools like yourself.
Not that it matters to you, but I'd rather make the clarification for
your future, lame attempts to insult.
Gandalf Grey
Eagle Eye
In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
Yes, I am reachable by email. I have the account "eagleeye" at
both "nym.alias.net" and "nym.cryptofortress.com". Either one
will do.
I do reserve the right to post publicly any e-mail sent to me.
>Eagle-Eye;
That's "Eagle Eye" with no dash.
>Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>of your posts where you are replying to me; for every one post
>where I reply to you. They will find that those posts started
>suddenly in October or November.
Lie #1. While you started posting under various pseudonyms
(over a dozen) in November, I never noticed you until January,
when you posted to a thread in which I was already involved.
Otherwise, cite a post of mine from October or November involving
you. For example, do this:
and you'll get this:
Your search - molly OR veronica author:Eagle author:Eye - did
not match any messages posted between 1 Sep 2001 and 31 Dec
2001.
>They will find your reference several months ago to the "Veronica"
>page on your website, since taken down.
Lie #2. I've never had a website.
Lie #3. I've never posted a reference to a "Veronica" page.
Again, if you say otherwise, you'll need to provide a cite.
>They will find literally dozens of your posts where you've called
>me a liar or racist, or directly supported others well known to
>both of us, who have.
If they look for January and February, they will find many examples
of this. I stand by every word.
You have lied about Chris, me, and several others. You constantly
post libelous accusations against us. As I'm demonstrating in this
article, most of what you say is false. (For more examples of your
dishonesty, just read my other replies to you.)
The reason I call you a racist is (1) your defense of racism
and (2) you own racist attitudes.
The first part is rather extensive, involving a clear pattern of
deception. For example, you claimed that Kennemur effectively
apologized to Chris, yet you never addressed the fact that not only
did Kennemur do nothing of the sort, he spent years posting
hundreds of messages in which he made obvious references to his
original slur. You claimed that Chris Morton was a white
supremacist as a way to deflect the heat from Kennemur. Don't
come back saying you only said you thought Chris "probably" was a
white supremacist. Look here:
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MPG.16ad6bd0e33a041198991d%40ca.news.verio.net]
From: molly<mo...@fwtrib.com>
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.bush,...
Subject: Re: Chris Morton Posting Summary
Message-ID: <MPG.16ad6bd0e...@ca.news.verio.net>
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 06:23:31 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.204.154.132
[...]
Anybody defending Christopher Morton is defending a white
supremicist who lacks the courage to be honest that even that
Nazi Alex Venge has.
Furthermore, you kept characterizing Chris' posts as supporting
racists, hurting blacks, etc.. Even after Chris answered your
"litmus test" and several posters pointed out the myriad ways in
which Chris clearly did the exact opposite of what you said, you
continued to libel him in this way.
You made clear your motivation in falsely accusing Chris of
being a white supremacist (which was part of your overall defense
of racism):
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MPG.16b03f20ca188eb0989927%40ca.news.verio.net]
From: molly<mo...@fwtrib.com>
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.bush,...
Subject: Re: Chris Morton Posting Summary
Message-ID: <MPG.16b03f20c...@ca.news.verio.net>
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 10:21:50 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.204.154.105
[...]
I think it's time we took this particular club away from
Christopher. It no longer suits me to politely accept his claim
that he is black, or that Jim Kennemur or Rack Jite or Shawn
Smith or anybody else has EVER grievously harmed him on a
newsgroup. He's a sock puppet for a Southern White Racist until
he proves otherwise.
In other words, your strategy is to "disarm" Chris (cast doubt
upon his self-identification as a black man) as a way to protect
Kennemur, Jite, etc..
[continued]
=====
EE
Honorato libertam et ruat coelum.
Eagle Eye
In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
[continued]
>I've seen your act before. There's no law or custom that says I'm
>always supposed to answer every one of your posts. If you aren't
>discussing a political issue (which is what I come here to
>discuss)
Lie #5. If you came here to discuss politics, why did you post so many
hateful, libelous attacks on Chris?
>then I mark your krap "read" and move on. You are
>absolutely NOT worth my time unless you post ideas which are
>interesting or valuable to me.
If you don't read my articles, then quit complaining about the
content (which you obviously haven't seen, unless you're lying).
>I certainly am NOT going to discuss my ISP or give you my
>personal address, as you have demanded in dozens of posts now.
Lie #6. I have never demanded any such thing.
>You've called me a liar (and worse) too many other times for
>that. I also note that you yourself carefully post from an
>anonymizing "nym" address, which brands your demands directed to
>me, as very hypocritical.
Lie #7. I have never made any demands or criticisms which could
be called hypocritical. I don't make arguments based upon
my life experience or upon some undocumented decade-long presence
in a newsgroup. You do.
>I also don't provide links or explanations or "proof" to people
>who call me a "liar" before they've even addressed the contents
>of my post.
Either you can justify your accusations and theories, or you
can't. Don't act like a Queen, demanding that others appease
you before you will do so.
The burden of proof rests squarely on your shoulders, no matter
if other people call you a "liar" or not. When you fail to
meet your burden, I'm only too happy to point out this fact.
In fact, every time you run away, I smile knowing that I've
crushed your arguments yet again.
[snip]
>When I do answer you; I'll answer you in my own way and for my
>reasons and to make my own points.
In other words, you'll ignore the hard questions and continue
to nitpick, distort, and repeatedly pound out the same old lies.
>I do this with a clear conscience, because I hold you responsible
>for conducting your own research into political issues we are both
>supposed to discuss here. I also expect you to deal objectively
>with all sides of a Political issue; not just your favorite side.
Your aristocratic expectations and demands mean nothing to me.
I hold myself to high ethical standards, even if whole hordes of
weezils, trolls, partisans, etc. infest the newsgroups, spewing
endless propaganda and other lies.
I don't expect you to display any integrity at this point. You're
a free person and I can't make you do anything. The only thing I
can do is to illustrate your ethical failings and try to keep
the truth on the table. Eventually, you'll tire of looking like
a fool and run off to use a new nickname.
>Here's a hint -- I am not a "liar" just because you aren't bright
>enough to follow my reasoning or never happened to have read my
>ideas before.
Your reasoning is puerile. Just look at your theory that white
supremacists want to arm black people. A child could follow
your "reasoning" and see the gaping holes.
I call you a liar because I see you lying. You lie about Kennemur,
Chris, Ayn Rand, Billy Beck, libertarians, the WTC, me, etc..
>Political issues matter to me.
(Repeat of Lie #5.)
That's why you devoted weeks to pounding on Chris Morton, doing
little more than posting hateful propaganda about him?
>Part of politics in a Democracy,
>unfortunately, is putting up with people who don't intend to play
>fair; or intend to harm others in order get their way; or just
>use political discussions as an excuse to express their own
>personal paranoia or hatred of others.
>
>None of those things describe me,
Lie #8. You have expressed extreme paranoia. On several occassions,
you have implied or directly asserted that your opponents wanted to
do you physical harm, with absolutely no basis. Of course, I
think this is feigned, that you're merely throwing out a red herring
to derail the debates and attempting to demonize your opponents.
You have expressed clear hatred for Chris and others. Why else
would you so obsessively accuse a man YOU KNOW to be black of
being a white supremacist?
>but some of them might describe you.
I won't hold my breath waiting for you to demonstrate any part of
that. You include "might" as an escape hatch, but it's clear
your intention is to impugn my character, much in the way that you
accuse Chris Morton of being a white supremacist.
>I can handle this political style, as much as I don't enjoy
>it, because untoward behavior like this is also part of
>discussing political issues where free speech is a respected
>and important Civil Right.
Lie #9. At the top of this article, you accuse me of actually
stalking you merely by posting criticisms of your public remarks.
You don't believe in free speech when it involves criticism of
you.
Eagle Eye
In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
[continued]
>Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>desist.
<laugh>
Does anyone ever take you seriously?
You know exactly where you can put your "formal request" to
squash my freedom of speech.
>In the future, I would like you to confine your replies to me to
>political issues. Stop calling me personal names and accusing me
>of "lying" in every reply you post directed to me. Hold your
>temper. Behave yourself.
You post dozens of messages attacking Chris Morton with the
most vile and irrational accusations, then you have the temerity
to ask ME to behave?
You're a pathetic joke.
>Stop naming third parties whom you speculate might be me.
You could be Gail Thaler, Rack Jite, Jim Kennemur, or Milton Brewster.
You sound most like Gail and Milton.
>They don't deserve to have their names and addresses posted as
>part of your fantasies.
Lie #10. Nobody has posted any addresses.
I'm only posting the names or nicknames they themselves used in
public forums.
>This list you've named has got to be twenty or thirty people by
>now.
Lie #11. I've mentioned only a few names, less than 10. (Only 5,
if memory serves.)
>Stop demanding that I tell you my "real" name and address, as if I
>don't have one.
(Repeat of Lie #6.) I never demanded any such thing.
>You do not have my permission to contact me, visit me, or to annoy
>anyone whom you speculate might know me or where I live.
Irrelevant. I have absolutely no interest to do so.
>Your personal attention is unwelcome.
Your lies and racism are unwelcome.
>You should know that you and several of your friends will now be
>contacted if anything unfortunate should happen to me in my
>personal life.
Whatever.
Eagle Eye
In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
[continued]
The second reason I call you a racist is your own racist viewpoints.
Some examples:
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MPG.16a99fada64664d3989902%40ca.news.verio.net]
From: molly<mo...@fwtrib.com>
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.bush,...
Subject: Re: House N*ggers
Message-ID: <MPG.16a99fada...@ca.news.verio.net>
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 10:07:28 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.204.154.12
[...]
I know blacks who are gun owners and are even members of the NRA.
Some are conservative; some are very radical. They don't post or
talk the way CM does.
In other words, you judge an individual based upon an observed trend
of a group. You, in effect, argue that there is a "black way" to post.
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MPG.16ab6683111d2f69989911%40ca.news.verio.net]
From: molly<mo...@fwtrib.com>
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.politics.bush,...
Subject: Christopher Morton: Ghost Buster
Message-ID: <MPG.16ab66831...@ca.news.verio.net>
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 18:32:29 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.204.191.31
I suspect Christopher Morton is a white supremicist who has been
passing himself off as a completely crazy black man on Usenet for
six years or more. Probably to have some fun with Liberals, and
probably to make black people look bad along the way: Sort of a
backwards "race" card.
Here you argue that an individual who acts "crazy" makes all
individuals of that race look bad. Not to mention you assert,
without any evidence or rational argument, that Chris behaves
"crazy".
Any criticism you make of Chris, based in fact, would apply to
dozens of people in these groups, most of whom have far worse
faults. Yet, you don't argue that these posters are trying to make
"whites" or "liberals" look bad. Hell, Glen Yeadon alone could
damn the entire white race, or all "liberals", if your argument
were valid.
Furthermore, in your ludicrous theory that white supremacists want
to arm blacks, you argue that blacks cannot be trusted to own guns,
that they don't have the moral, intellectual, or emotional control
necessary to handle weapons responsibly. You describe cartoonish
scenarios in which every disagreement becomes a shooting match.
Well, I've got news for you, black people are capable of reason,
just like every other human being.
This is why I call you a racist liar. If you don't like it, quit
posting racist crap and lies.
>In my opinion, your attention constitutes stalking,
>given the personal and confrontational content of your posts
>directed to me.
You could hold the opinion that my breathing constitutes assault,
but it would be just as delusional.
>Where I live, stalking constitutes an assault.
That's nice. Where I live (in the real universe), criticism in a
public forum is free speech. If you don't want anyone to criticize
what you wrote, perhaps Usenet is not the place for you, you pathetic
crybaby.
[snip]
>My lack of a response to you does NOT constitute a silent confession
>to you that you were right about your latest silly paranoid charge:
>It constitutes my boredom with you.
Lie #4. No, you told lies and made absurd, irrational arguments. When
confronted by comprehensive arguments with documented facts and
solid rational arguments, you were helpless. What you wanted to
do was to provoke, to make your opponents angry, and thus lower
the level of debate to name-calling.
Here are two posts to which you dare not respond:
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020217151220.23034.qmail%40nym.alias.net]
[news:2002021715122...@nym.alias.net]
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020217151210.7206.qmail%40nym.alias.net]
[news:200202171512...@nym.alias.net]
[continued]
Christopher Morton
>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:37:27 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:02:29 -0800, "Gandalf Grey"
>><ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Billy Beck" <wj...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3c7bf46c...@news.mindspring.com...
>>>>
>>>> veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> whimpered:
>>>>
>>>> >Nevertheless, this is my formal request to you to cease and
>>>> >desist.
>>>>
>>>> Drop dead, cow.
>>>
>>>Fuck off, asshole.
>>
>>Go burn a cross, Nathan Bedford.
>
>No self respecting racist would "burn a cross" on your lawn, Snorts.
Well, certainly none with an urge to self-preservation.
>You outdo even the most ardent racists around.
Go burn a cross, Nathan Bedford.
--
"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
"Everyone but you knows the jews were behind 9-11." - Judy Diarya
Christopher Morton
>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:40:51 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:03:10 -0800, "Gandalf Grey"
>><ganda...@infectedmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"veronica floss" <vero...@hygene.org> wrote in message
>>>news:MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net...
>>>>
>>>> My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>>> He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>>>
>>>Turn the asshole in, Veronica. Net stalking is against most TOS agreements.
>>
>>"Net stalking" is what racist cowards like you and "her" call having
>>the truth told about them.
>
>So you're saying that BurgerkIng Beck, Dana, and KnicKKKers are
>"racist cowards", Snorts?
So, you been sharing the sterno with Yeadon?
>>Of course cross burning dildos like "veronica" don't mind when fellow
>>racist curs like KKKennemur engage in email harassment in the name of
>>racial intimidation.
>
>We only have YOUR say so on that Snorts. MOF, you're the whitest,
>racist, gunwhoringest, fuckwit I've ever read on th Usenet, Snorts.
We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of
time, then reappeared with a new ISP. KKKennemur screams "nigger" at
me because he thinks I'm WHITE. Sure.
Keep lying to yourself.
>But everyone knows the minute you dumb rightwing assholes get abused,
>you start publishing personal information, making hang up calls, and
>whining=== using stories and lies.
Gee, the ones I see posting personal information are your pals in the
National Alliance. Of course you don't mind that they post death
threats and maps to my house. That kind of thing's traditional for
you. Me shooting back however, ISN'T.
>You're the worst of the lot, Snorts. And that's what Volt keep
>beating you over the head about.
Uh, no. KKKennemur DOESN'T keep "beating me over the head". He
doesn't do ANYTHING in usenet. He's NOT HERE. I ran the coward away,
REMEMBER?
>Ya gotta admit he did a number on your igorant ass, don'cha Snorts.
Yeah, just like the Volkssturm did a number on Patton.
You Nazis are all retarded.
--
"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
"Everyone but you knows the jews were behind 9-11." - Judy Diarya
Christopher Morton
>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:39:18 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 20:34:54 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>>
>>If you want to appologize for something, appologize for being a
>>witless, hapless, hopeless White supremacist coward with more aliases
>>than braincells.
>
>Sure, Snorts
That's a start, Adolf.
>Just about the time you admit to being an even worse idiot, gunloon,
>and usenet fuckwit.
You want me to appologize for your being a racist liar? That's a
better job for you.
>Will that be sooner, or later, snorts?
It'll be right about the time you stop being a racist.
>I believe Volt asked you the same question years ago
I believe KKKennemur screamed "nigger" at me. I believe he's not here
anymore. : )
>Then proceeded to kick your ignorant ass
Funny, if he kicked MY ass, how come he's not HERE anymore???
>Handily too, I might add.
I see you've switched the topic to his maturbatory practices.
Bye.
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>No self respecting racist would "burn a cross" on your lawn, Snorts.
>
>Well, certainly none with an urge to self-preservation.
You ignorant fuck, Snorts
There ain't nothing in your character or intellect to make someone
afraid of you.
Just like your Batshit buttboy Beck, you're as worthless a coward
as it gets.
Another gunwhore braggart.
That's why, when I see the faces of people like Randy Weaver when
they're led off, whipped and beaten, I laugh at your kind of nuttery.
*****************************************************
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
Arms, shall not be infringed."
The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
Federal interference with State militia and not as a guarantee of an
individual's right to keep or carry firearms. The argument that the Second
Amendment prohibits all State or Federal regulation of citizen's ownership
of firearms has no validity whatsoever.
The controversy over the meaning of the Second Amendment exists only in
the public debate over gun control. Few issues have been more distorted
and cluttered by misinformation than this one. There is no confusion in the
law itself. The strictest gun control laws in the nation have been upheld
against Second Amendment challenge, including local bans on handguns.
The Supreme Court enunciated in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174
(1939) what, over fifty years later, remains clearly the law of this country --
that the scope of the people's right to bear arms is limited by the
introductory phrase of the Second Amendment regarding the necessity of a
"well regulated militia" for the "security of a free State." In Miller, the Court
held that the "obvious purpose" of the Amendment was "to assure the
continuation and render possible the effectiveness of..." the state militias
and cautioned that the Amendment "must be interpreted and applied with
that end in view."
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of
>time, then reappeared with a new ISP
WE DO?
Are you using the tried and tested method of "saying it long enough
will make it true" most notably a rightwing character trait?
msoja
posted:
<snips>
>I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday.
The great thing about Stupidity like yours, is that it renders you
incapable of assessing how truly broad and deep it is.
No charge.
Mike
Eagle Eye
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
>In article <a5gsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, cmo...@newsguy.com
>says...
>> In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica
>> says...
>> >My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to
>> >Eagle-Eye. He reads and posts in this group and is not
>> >see a ratio of fifteen
>> Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a
>> sham, a fraud, and a liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he
>> can masquerade as a female.
>>
>> Nobody believes you, especially you.
>I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
>folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
>just an unfortunate part of usenet.
Are you emotionally challenged when you call Chris Morton names,
like "white supremacist", "quisling", several variations of "race
traitor", "survivalist", "gun-nut", "crazy black man", etc.?
>What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment in
>Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
>talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
>business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
Nobody is doing a damned thing to you but rebutting your posts to a
PUBLIC FORUM in the PUBLIC FORUM. Plenty of other people engage in
debates and flamewars without acting like some insecure child who
cries every time someone looks at him cross-eyed.
>I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday.
You should have been. I would have been humiliated to actually
argue that someone was ASSAULTING me by merely criticizing my posts
to a PUBLIC FORUM, exercising his right to free speech.
>I still think it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few
>posters here (apparently including you and EE) are going beyond
>the bounds of newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree
>with in their real private lives.
That's not true, not one bit.
In fact, the only one even bringing up "real private lives" is you,
every time you drop a suggestion about lawsuits or "stalking" laws
because you can't handle newsgroup debates.
You're a pathetic joke.
=====
Chris Morton
>In fact, the only one even bringing up "real private lives" is you,
>every time you drop a suggestion about lawsuits or "stalking" laws
>because you can't handle newsgroup debates.
>
>You're a pathetic joke.
A pathetic *racist* joke.
--
Gun control, the theory that 110lb. women should have to fistfight with 210lb.
rapists.
Chris Morton
As the saying goes, Were "veronica" even slightly less stupid than "she" is,
she'd know just HOW stupid "she" is.
AntisDoLie
> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
> Federal interference with State militia
Cite.
Jim
Pea...@peabrain.com
like a right wing nut;
*****************************************************
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
Arms, shall not be infringed."
The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
Chris Morton
says...
I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
answer....
la...@peabrain.net
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:54:30 -0500, Christopher Morton
> <chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>
>>We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of time,
>>then reappeared with a new ISP
>
> WE DO?
>
> Are you using the tried and tested method of "saying it long enough
> will make it true" most notably a rightwing character trait?
If that's true then YOU, pussyFlaccidWit, are the rightest of the right.
You think if you say Clinton's innocent long enough we'll believe it.
You think if you say Reagan is guilty long enough SOMEONE will believe you.
You think if you say you can STILL get it up with Diane we'll believe you.
Actually, you're when you're not threatening to shoot people you're LAUGH
material.
la...@peabrain.net
> That's why, when I see the faces of people like Randy Weaver when
> they're led off, whipped and beaten, I laugh at your kind of nuttery.
The kind of nuttery that thinks you have a right to shoot people who
disagree with you?
The kind of nuttery that calls people you disagree with "nazi partisans"
and threatens them with shooting?
That kind of hypocritical nuttery, pussyfartwit?
Christopher Morton
>In article <a5gsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, cmo...@newsguy.com
>says...
>> In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica says...
>> >
>> >
>> >My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>> >He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>> >
>> >===
>> >
>> >Eagle-Eye;
>> >
>> >Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>>
>> Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
>> liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
>>
>> Nobody believes you, especially you.
>
>I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
>folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
>just an unfortunate part of usenet.
Apparently the only kind of namecalling you DON'T mind is "nigger".
>What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
>in Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
>talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
>business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
Hey dipshit, I'm the VICTIM of such behavior, by Jim KKKennemur and
your fellow Nazis of the National Alliance.
I bought a LOT of .30-06 armor piercing for my Garand because of your
fellow Aryans.
>I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday. I still think
You should be embarassed to post ALL of the racist hate-mongering you
post.
>it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
>(apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
>newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
>real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
>sorry for you.
Don't be sorry for me. Be sorry for your pedophile pals in the
National Alliance if they ever DO show up.
Isandlhwana, bitch. Isandlhwana.
Christopher Morton
>On 26 Feb 2002 12:51:03 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica says...
>>>
>>>
>>>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>>>
>>>===
>>>
>>>Eagle-Eye;
>>>
>>>Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>>
>>Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
>>liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
>>
>>Nobody believes you, especially you.
>
>Sure, Snorts.
Damned sure, Nathan Bedford Forrest.
>Just like everyone believes you're black; that Volt didn't kick your
>dumb ass, and that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.
You crossburning freaks wouldn't call me a "nigger" if you didn't
think I was Black.
As for that piss swilling coward, KKKennemur, it must be damned hard
to kick somebody's ass if you're hiding under your bed, AFRAID even to
post to usenet.
Emerson says the 2nd Amendment's an individual right, Adolf.
Good enough for me.
h0mi
His remarks are no different from veronica/molly's.
Except unlike Beck, noone was actually threatening to go to her house
and make her do anything.
h0mi
veronica floss wrote:
>
> In article <a5gsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, cmo...@newsguy.com
> says...
> > In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica says...
> > >
> > >
> > >My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
> > >He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
> > >
> > >===
> > >
> > >Eagle-Eye;
> > >
> > >Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
> >
> > Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
> > liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
> >
> > Nobody believes you, especially you.
>
> I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
> folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
> just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>
> What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
> in Real Life.
No argument from me.
Are you going to denounce people who are harassing, threatening (and
threatening with assaults) all people on Usenet, or only the people
supposedly doing this to your "cliquie"?
Are you going to stop treating the cliche "if you can't take the heat,
get out of the kitchen" as a threat to forcibly remove you from your
kitchen?
Are you going to stop assuming that a person who does not agree with you
or disputes what you say is your "enemy"?
Are you going to stop treating the mentioning of the ISP or newsserver
you use, which is readily available for anyone who can figure out how to
read the headers in a news post, as if it were "vigilantism"?
If you are unwilling to stop any or all of these things, your doing
nothing more than lying about other people's actions, and distorting
what is transpiring.
> Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
> talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
> business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
Show me where Eagle Eye has threatened anyone on Usenet.
> I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday.
You ought to be. You demonstrated a lack of understanding that is truly
amazing, that you'd treat a well known and often used cliche as a
personal threat.
> I still think
> it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
> (apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
> newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
> real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
> sorry for you.
Except Morton and Eagle Eye aren't doing this.
I've seen Morton's address posted on USENET more times than I've seen
any threats against you.
Pea...@peabrain.com
wrote like a right wing nut;
>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>answer....
>
If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
made, Snorts.
====================================================
Poor, pathetic, DIMWIT DANA, blusterers thusly:
IT PROVES YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
Hey ASSHOLE no one but you cares about this,
but it does show you are a hypocritical LOON.
Come on Roseasshole tell us what town you live in,
or are you to chicken to fight.
I am in Phoenix, and my number is listed,
come on chicken man, make your hat.
Gandalf Grey
"h0mi" <h0...@oohay.com> wrote in message news:3C7D6C27...@oohay.com...
I see you've looked back in the archives.
Michael Ejercito
So that means we the people can bear any weapons the militia bears.
Michael
Christopher Morton
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>[part 1/4]
>
>In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>
>veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
>>My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>>He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>
>Yes, I am reachable by email. I have the account "eagleeye" at
>both "nym.alias.net" and "nym.cryptofortress.com". Either one
>will do.
>
>I do reserve the right to post publicly any e-mail sent to me.
Likewise, although I never post anything other than threats of
violence against me.
And I've seen simps who actually think they have some sort of right to
threaten my life in secrecy.
Christopher Morton
>On 27 Feb 2002 13:15:22 -0800, jame...@aol.com (AntisDoLie) wrote
>like a right wing nut;
>>Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote in message news:<3c7ce61a...@news.enetis.net>...
>>
>>> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
>>> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
>>> Federal interference with State militia
>>
>>Cite.
>>
>>Jim
>
>*****************************************************
>
>"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
>of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
>Arms, shall not be infringed."
>
> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
> Federal interference with State militia and not as a guarantee of an
> individual's right to keep or carry firearms. The argument that the Second
That's a lie, but then you're a liar. Go figure.
Christopher Morton
>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>answer....
>>
>
>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>made, Snorts.
Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
him.
Christopher Morton
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:54:30 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>
>>We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of
>>time, then reappeared with a new ISP
>
>WE DO?
Yes, WE DO.
Silverback
>
>
>Gandalf Grey wrote:
>>
>> "h0mi" <h0...@oohay.com> wrote in message news:3C7C4988...@oohay.com...
>> >
>> >
>> > Gandalf Grey wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "veronica floss" <vero...@hygene.org> wrote in message
>> > > news:MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net...
>> > > >
>> > > > My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
>> > > > He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
>> > >
>> > > Turn the asshole in, Veronica. Net stalking is against most TOS
>> agreements.
>> >
>> > You have an odd definition of "net stalking" then.
>> >
>> > When are you going to denounce her for her death threats, as you do
>> > Beck?
>>
>> Probably when she's been at it for the better part of a decade.
>
>Strange, Beck hasn't been making death threats for a decade, but you've
>no qualms in denouncing him.
and yer a lying asshole. Death threat beck has been making death
threat all along.
=====================================================
GDY Weasel
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
The Nazi Hydra in America an online book of the
fascist influence in America.
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/noon.html
===================================================
Silverback
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:49 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>
>>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>>answer....
>>>
>>
>>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>>made, Snorts.
>
>Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
>him.
wrong again snorts. I'm right here kicking yer stupid racist
revisionist ass.
>--
>
>"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
>
>"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Everyone but you knows the jews were behind 9-11." - Judy Diarya
=====================================================
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:04:22 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:54:30 -0500, Christopher Morton
>><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>
>>>We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of
>>>time, then reappeared with a new ISP
>>
>>WE DO?
>
>Yes, WE DO.
A known Usenet braggart and coward, a moronic congenital idiot,
and insipid fuckwit equals "we", MORTONLOON
That's not impressive at all
johnz~
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
> In article <a5gsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, cmo...@newsguy.com
> says...
> > In article <MPG.16e5911cd...@news.sonic.net>, veronica says...
> > >
> > >
> > >My apologies for top-posting this off-topic message to Eagle-Eye.
> > >He reads and posts in this group and is not reachable via email.
> > >
> > >===
> > >
> > >Eagle-Eye;
> > >
> > >Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
> >
> > Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud,
> > and a
> > liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
> >
> > Nobody believes you, especially you.
>
> I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
> folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
> just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>
> What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
> in Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
> talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
> business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
>
> I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday. I still think
> it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
> (apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
> newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
> real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
> sorry for you.
When and where has either Morton or "Eagle Eye" ever harassed you in
your "real private life"? When and where have they "gone beyond the
bounds of newsgroup postings"?
Of course, why bother to ask? You won't provide any evidence, any
specific examples - not even the URL of the so-called "Veronica" page
you claim existed. You're just another lying weezil, convinced that
you're lying in a righteous cause - just like your glorious leader, the
despicable Richard Hanson.
There's only one truth you've inadvertantly revealed here, "veronica" -
and that truth is that you would like to see your critics silenced by
law, that you equate free speech on USENET with "harassment" and
"assault" - i.e. crimes. You feel justified in spewing slanderous lies
but want anyone who reacts to your slanderous lies to worry about legal
retribution. That's typical of weezils - and more to the point, it
reflects the authoritarian, repressive spirit of "Clintonism" itself.
You and your slimy friends, with your cowardice, your dishonesty, your
malice and your fascist desire to suppress by law any opinion except
your own simple-minded agitprop - you really are Clinton's most
appropriate monument.
JS
--
A Short History Of The United States of America:
"Laugh all you want...I'm the one goin' down in history
as the Thomas Jefferson of squirrels."
Christopher Morton
(Silverback) wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:05:31 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:49 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>>
>>>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>>
>>>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>>>answer....
>>>>
>>>
>>>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>>>made, Snorts.
>>
>>Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
>>him.
>
>wrong again snorts. I'm right here kicking yer stupid racist
>revisionist ass.
Says Judy the Jew Hater's best pal.
Christopher Morton
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:56 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:04:22 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:54:30 -0500, Christopher Morton
>>><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>>
>>>>
>>>>We ALL know that KKKennemur disappeared for an extended period of
>>>>time, then reappeared with a new ISP
>>>
>>>WE DO?
>>
>>Yes, WE DO.
>
>A known Usenet braggart and coward, a moronic congenital idiot,
>and insipid fuckwit equals "we", MORTONLOON
Anyone who can read, retard.
And speaking of COWARDS, is KKKennemur the KKKoward still hiding under
his bed?
Eagle Eye
johnz~ <johns...@removethishome.net> wrote:
>In article <MPG.16e6118c4...@news.sonic.net>,
> veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
>> I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
>> folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
>> just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>>
>> What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
>> in Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
>> talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
>> business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
>>
>> I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday. I still think
>> it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
>> (apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
>> newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
>> real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
>> sorry for you.
>When and where has either Morton or "Eagle Eye" ever harassed you in
>your "real private life"? When and where have they "gone beyond the
>bounds of newsgroup postings"?
Never and never.
But molly/veronica has repeatedly made warnings about taking us to
court over this, thus threatening to involve our "real private li[ves]."
(Not that any court would hear such a case, mind you.)
>Of course, why bother to ask? You won't provide any evidence, any
>specific examples - not even the URL of the so-called "Veronica" page
>you claim existed. You're just another lying weezil, convinced that
>you're lying in a righteous cause - just like your glorious leader, the
>despicable Richard Hanson.
Molly/veronica could very well be the Queen Lying Socialist Weezil
herself, Gail Thaler. The arguments and posting styles show some
definite similarities.
>There's only one truth you've inadvertantly revealed here, "veronica" -
>and that truth is that you would like to see your critics silenced by
>law, that you equate free speech on USENET with "harassment" and
>"assault" - i.e. crimes. You feel justified in spewing slanderous lies
>but want anyone who reacts to your slanderous lies to worry about legal
>retribution.
Speaking of legal retribution:
[http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=350b8ae0.18039745%40news.newsguy.com]
From: Le...@commiemartyrs.edu (George Tyrebiter, Jr.)
Subject: Re: McCurry Lied Again
Date: 1998/03/12
Message-ID: <350b8ae0...@news.newsguy.com>
You know, maybe you have been locked in a castle, married or
something, unaware of the inner wild-weaselly Gail, and
something might happen to you - like going to law school -where
the pressures are so great, and the colleagues so demented, that
a need for release will soften you up to their maniac corrupting
influence.
A weezil, emboldened by taking a few courses in law school, might
get the idea that she can throw around some legalese as a scare
tactic.
[snip]
johnz~
Eagle Eye <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't remember Thaler being either this
obnoxious or this paranoid. Doesn't really sound like Thaler at all.
>
> >There's only one truth you've inadvertantly revealed here, "veronica" -
> >and that truth is that you would like to see your critics silenced by
> >law, that you equate free speech on USENET with "harassment" and
> >"assault" - i.e. crimes. You feel justified in spewing slanderous lies
> >but want anyone who reacts to your slanderous lies to worry about legal
> >retribution.
>
> Speaking of legal retribution:
>
> [http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=350b8ae0.18039745%40news.newsguy.com]
> From: Le...@commiemartyrs.edu (George Tyrebiter, Jr.)
> Subject: Re: McCurry Lied Again
> Date: 1998/03/12
> Message-ID: <350b8ae0...@news.newsguy.com>
>
> You know, maybe you have been locked in a castle, married or
> something, unaware of the inner wild-weaselly Gail, and
> something might happen to you - like going to law school -where
> the pressures are so great, and the colleagues so demented, that
> a need for release will soften you up to their maniac corrupting
> influence.
>
> A weezil, emboldened by taking a few courses in law school, might
> get the idea that she can throw around some legalese as a scare
> tactic.
JS
>
> [snip]
>
> =====
> EE
>
> Honorato libertam et ruat coelum.
>
--
Chris Morton
Was there anyone EVER as paranoid as David Dahlman of Seabrook, Texas (Rack
Jite)? Go to alt.support.chronic-pain in Google for a few hints.
He's not man enough to come here under even the Rack Jite alias, and he's the
king of concurrent sock puppets.
AntisDoLie
> On 27 Feb 2002 13:15:22 -0800, jame...@aol.com (AntisDoLie) wrote
> like a right wing nut;
> >Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote in message news:<3c7ce61a...@news.enetis.net>...
> >> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
> >> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
> >> Federal interference with State militia
> >Cite.
> >
> >Jim
> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
> Federal interference with State militia
No they haven't.
Jim
Jeffrey C. Dege
>
>> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
>> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
>> Federal interference with State militia
>
>No they haven't.
A number of US Appeals Courts have interpeted the amendment in this way,
with no support whatsoever from SCOTUS.
The start of all of this was with a pair of decisions called Cases and
Tott, one of which said that if they followed Miller, they wouldn't
be able to regulate firearms, so they were going to ignore it, and the
other which basically said everybody has always known that the second
doesn't protect an individual right, backed up by a couple of poorly
written law journal articles that said nothing of the sort.
Yes, there have been decisions interpreting the second in this way
over the last sixty years, but to claim that there is a consistent
interpretation is either an error or an intentional lie.
--
The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem.
- Milton Friedman
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:05:31 -0500, Christopher Morton
><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:49 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>>
>>>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>>
>>>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>>>answer....
>>>>
>>>
>>>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>>>made, Snorts.
>>
>>Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
>>him.
>
>wrong again snorts. I'm right here kicking yer stupid racist
>revisionist ass.
I always smile when I envision idiots like Yeadon kicking themselves
in the ass while thinking it's someone else's ass.
--Ace
Chris Morton
I envision Yeadon as a man with no arms trying to find his ass with both
hands....
Silverback
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 05:15:19 GMT, gdy5215...@spiritone.com
>(Silverback) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:05:31 -0500, Christopher Morton
>><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:49 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>>>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>>>
>>>>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>>>>answer....
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>>>>made, Snorts.
>>>
>>>Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
>>>him.
>>
>>wrong again snorts. I'm right here kicking yer stupid racist
>>revisionist ass.
>
>Says Judy the Jew Hater's best pal.
yer lying again snorts since I don't know any judy
>--
>
>"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
>
>"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Everyone but you knows the jews were behind 9-11." - Judy Diarya
=====================================================
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>A known Usenet braggart and coward, a moronic congenital idiot,
>>and insipid fuckwit equals "we", MORTONLOON
>
>Anyone who can read, retard.
So you're saying that simply because you put it there to "read", it's
"Truth"?
Any idea why you're lauged at, Mortonloon?
>And speaking of COWARDS, is KKKennemur the KKKoward still hiding under
>his bed?
Seems you're more afraid of him than anyone, Snorts.
Would that be because he just beat the shit outta you day after day?
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
wrote:
Hahahaha, yeah, I get the picture..
--Ace
Pea...@peabrain.com
Ejercito) wrote like a right wing nut;
> So that means we the people can bear any weapons the militia bears.
>
No, but I see your confusion.
See, YOU don't get to interpret what the 2nd Amendment "means", or for
that matter what the constitution, "means".
Things go a lot smoother, if you remember that the USSC is the ONLY
one who gets to do that.
And THEY have determined and upheld a "principle" or "doctrine" that
an individuals "rights" emanate from the right of the State to defend
it's citizens, which is made up of "individuals". The Federal
government may not "infringe" upon the "right" of the STATE to defend
it'self from attacks, hostiles, etc. Absent a standing army, given
the frontier, rural, agrarian society in 1790, I should think that's
"self evident"
With the advent of a federal army, that task was unburdened from the
states and every major doctrine has related "gunwhoring" as central to
the "state", not the individual. It WAS extremely important that the
individual be required to "bear arms" to defend the state. It is not
presently.
Eagle Eye
I agree that the tone is completely different. The posts by
molly/veronica are far more shrill and humorless than those posted
by Gail.
And yet, and yet, "MH" didn't sound like Erb, either, at least not
on the surface. (Well, Erb did use many phrases and curious
(mis)spellings, which Zepp kindly pointed out. Bear in mind that
Erb hasn't shown nearly the same ability as Gail for subtlety and
guile. He's just not very bright, despite his education.)
Molly/veronica has mentioned several times that she/he has been
participating in these groups for a dozen years and bore witness
to the Kennemur vs. Morton feud. Certainly, if this is true,
then any number of weezils might be behind the molly/veronica
posts. Gail is my first guess, but (to quote Dr. Hg) I could
be wrong.
While there are several reasons to doubt that molly/veronica is
Gail, I still get a feeling of deja vu when reading her/his
posts. Gail had a way of blithely meandering away from the point
of a discussion; making "mistakes" about what an opponent actually
said consistently enough to suggest this was a (semi-)deliberate
tactic; emphasizing geographic stereotypes of behavior and viewpoints;
running defense for weezils (particularly Kennemur); giving loyalty
to clique/party/group greater importance than positions on particular
issues when assigning political labels; portraying herself and her
clique as heroic champions, fighting thoroughly evil foes (Gail
once mentioned that Milton Brewster had a cross burned on his lawn,
while molly/veronica claimed to have had a cross burned on his/her
lawn, claimed to have the scars from racist southern cops trying
to stop her/him in a civil rights march); etc..
Curiously enough, I noticed that molly/veronica separates portions
of an article with punctuation, such as "=========", in the same
manner as Milton Brewster. But, Milton didn't post much about
the Kennemur vs. Morton feud.
On the other hand, molly has referred to veronica (or vice versa) in
the third person. So, a Gail/Milton tag team operation could even be
a better explanation. They used to use the same account to post
(scri...@best.com).
I must admit, neither Gail nor Milton ever posted such thoroughly
irrational tripe. If it is one (or both) of them, the only
explanations I can think of (beyond brain damage or an onset of
some personality disorder) are that it (to keep it simple) took off
it's mask when it thought it was hidden behind a pseudonym a la
Erb's "MH" (though, why would it mention being a newsgroup
veteran?), it's engaging in a targetted propaganda effort, and/or
it is deliberately acting different to avoid discovery.
I have considered Kennemur and Jite, but there are even more
deficiencies in those particular theories. I am open to
suggestions from the peanut gallery.
As I've said before, I doubt we can determine with any certainty
who this person(s) is(are) unless he/she reveals his/her former
identity. (This is assuming he/she wouldn't implicate a fellow
weezil as a ruse.) The bottom line is that molly's eyewitness
testimony of twelve years of newsgroup participation is nothing but
the proverbial bragging about one's SAT scores so long as no one
can find her/his old articles in google.
>> >There's only one truth you've inadvertantly revealed here,
>> >"veronica" - and that truth is that you would like to see your
>> >critics silenced by law, that you equate free speech on USENET
>> >with "harassment" and "assault" - i.e. crimes. You feel
>> >justified in spewing slanderous lies but want anyone who reacts
>> >to your slanderous lies to worry about legal retribution.
>>
>> Speaking of legal retribution:
>>
>> [http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=350b8ae0.18039745%40news.newsguy.com]
>> From: Le...@commiemartyrs.edu (George Tyrebiter, Jr.)
>> Subject: Re: McCurry Lied Again Date: 1998/03/12 Message-ID:
>> <350b8ae0...@news.newsguy.com>
>>
>> You know, maybe you have been locked in a castle, married or
>> something, unaware of the inner wild-weaselly Gail, and
>> something might happen to you - like going to law school
>> -where the pressures are so great, and the colleagues so
>> demented, that a need for release will soften you up to their
>> maniac corrupting influence.
>>
>> A weezil, emboldened by taking a few courses in law school,
>> might get the idea that she can throw around some legalese as a
>> scare tactic.
=====
Pea...@peabrain.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>*****************************************************
>>
>>"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
>>of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
>>Arms, shall not be infringed."
>>
>> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
>> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
>> Federal interference with State militia and not as a guarantee of an
>> individual's right to keep or carry firearms. The argument that the Second
>
>That's a lie, but then you're a liar. Go figure.
Coming from a loon like you, I can see why you'd conclude that
After being ridiculed, spanked, abused, beaten, whipped, and shat upon
for years, even a dumb bastard like you ought to be "gettin it" by
now. But it explains why you still probably don't
The claim is from a preeminent legal site, (findlaw) and I seriously
doubt even you can spin that as being bogus.
But feel free to try. After all, nuts like you who gobble up Nazi
Rifle Association crap so eagerly, probably think everyone's stupid.
=====================================================
Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980)
In Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980), the Court ruled that
restrictions contained in the Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibiting felons
from owning firearms were constitutional. Using a "rational basis"
standard, the Court held that the restrictions "do not trench upon any
constitutionally protected liberties." Further, the Court reaffirmed the
position first established in U.S. v. Miller that "the Second Amendment
guarantees not right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have ‘some
reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated
militia’".
Eagle Eye
Don McGregor <bo...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>veronica floss wrote:
>> Anyone looking through Google can readily see a ratio of fifteen
>> where I reply to you.
>Responding to posts in a public forum that is intended to
>facilitate response and discussion is hardly stalking.
Some people who know a little bit about the law like to try
to intimidate others with threats of litigation.
>> I certainly am NOT going to discuss my ISP or give you my
>> personal address,
>since you insist on posting under multiple aliases,
>it is hardly improper for your interlocutors to
>attempt to sort out which aliases actually belong
>to you.
>Perhaps you could stick to one gender and anonymous alias
>so as to reduce the confusion.
But, confusion is her/his goal.
veronica floss
chr...@ameritech.net says...
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:41:50 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
> wrote:
[snip]
> >>
> >> Anyone looking through Google can readily see that you're a sham, a fraud, and a
> >> liar. You're a racist dolt who thinks he can masquerade as a female.
> >>
> >> Nobody believes you, especially you.
> >
> >I expect namecalling. there will always be emotionally challenged
> >folks around on political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
> >just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>
> Apparently the only kind of namecalling you DON'T mind is "nigger".
>
> >What I won't put up with; are threats, assaults and harrassment
> >in Real Life. Neither you, nor Eagle Eye, nor anyone on
> >talk.politics.guns, nor anyone else posting to Usenet, has any
> >business doing anything like that in Real Life to anyone.
>
> Hey dipshit, I'm the VICTIM of such behavior, by Jim KKKennemur and
> your fellow Nazis of the National Alliance.
>
> I bought a LOT of .30-06 armor piercing for my Garand because of your
> fellow Aryans.
>
> >I was embarrassed to post what I did yesterday. I still think
>
> You should be embarassed to post ALL of the racist hate-mongering you
> post.
>
> >it's necessary to alert readers here, that a few posters here
> >(apparently including you and EE) are going beyond the bounds of
> >newsgroup postings, to harrass people you disagree with in their
> >real private lives. It is public now, as it needs to be. I am
> >sorry for you.
>
> Don't be sorry for me. Be sorry for your pedophile pals in the
> National Alliance if they ever DO show up.
>
> Isandlhwana, bitch. Isandlhwana.
Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
Christopher; you don't get to whine about being called a nigger,
when you 1) post responses like this in political newsgroups, 2)
were never called a nigger in the first place, and 3) are just
posing as a black man anyway.
VeeVee
veronica floss
V > I expect namecalling. there will always be
V > emotionally challenged folks around on
V > political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
V > just an unfortunate part of usenet.
V >
V > What I won't put up with; are threats,
V > assaults and harrassment in Real Life.
>
> No argument from me.
>
> Are you going to denounce people who are harassing, threatening (and
> threatening with assaults) all people on Usenet, or only the people
> supposedly doing this to your "cliquie
I've raised this off-topic issue here because I am being
harrassed off-usenet for the posts I make in Usenet newsgroups.
This isn't all right with me, and I've decided to make it public.
If you don't want problems with the posters you are referring to,
then I suggest you do not call them names or harrass them in
their private lives, in the first place. Confine yourself to
political issues and you will probably be fine.
I am not a member of the weasels, or any other "cliquie." In
fact, I don't think I have ever met anyone posting here.
>
> Are you going to stop treating the cliche "if you can't take the heat,
> get out of the kitchen" as a threat to forcibly remove you from your
> kitchen?
No. Almost this same phrase turned up in a "secret squirrel"
email to me that that my web admin found to be threatening. He
turned it over to his local Police in his even before he showed
it to me.
Be warned: At least some ISP Admins apparently view at least some
"secret squirrel" emails before posting them to recipient
mailboxes.
> Are you going to stop assuming that a person who does not agree with you
> or disputes what you say is your "enemy"?
I don't. But there are a half-dozen of you here that post replies
that are so devoid of relevant political content and are so
beligerantly personal, that they certainly qualify you as a "non-
friend" to your receipients. The question you should be asking,
is: What do I consider to be an "enemy (your term)," and how do I
intend to treat them?
> Are you going to stop treating the mentioning of the ISP or newsserver
> you use, which is readily available for anyone who can figure out how to
> read the headers in a news post, as if it were "vigilantism"?
No, and neither are the Cops. You can not engage in suspicious
behavior and not be suspected.
In this case, my ISP and the Detective they contacted brought
this to MY attention -- not the other way around. In THEIR
opinion, at least one of you (probably Eagle Eye) is going out of
his/her way to discover my home address and other personal
information with the intent to harrass me.
The problem isn't so much with namecalling Usenet posts (which
are still childish), but with other exploits involving anonymous
emails, phoney ISP abuse complaints and at least one odd
phonecall all enquiring what my name and address is.
I'm telling you straight and I'm telling you publicly. I suggest
you just read this reply carefully before childishly snipping it
apart and trying to spin it to death. This whole problem has gone
beyond rhetoric.
[snip]
>
> I've seen Morton's address posted on USENET more times than I've seen
> any threats against you.
Yes. I have seen what purports to be his address. It was wrong to
post it, and it might have been incorrect anyway. .... but I have
also seen others' addresses posted here with whom you disagree.
Do you denounce the posting of what purports to be Roselle's,
Yeadon's, Zepp's, Gandalf's, Kennemur's, Dahlman's (and others')
addresses? That was all wrong, too, and I don't see you
denouncing any of it.
Publishing a person's address is harmless until you remember that
this is standard Klan behavior. The Klan would post names and
addresses of blacks and Liberal Whites they didn't like,
intending to encourage third parties to commit vandalism on their
property, or harrass them in their private lives.
This behavior has spilled over into many social venues over the
years, including CB and Ham radio. It's been rampant on certain
Usenet newsgroups for years. Also consider that many other people
(especially women) do not want their phone numbers and addresses
to become public knowledge for obvious reasons, and do not care
to receive unsolicited emails or phone calls.
In my opinion, Christopher Morton starts at least 90% of the
problems he encounters, and certainly started the n*gger problem
he's whining about these days. You don't get to play the victim
when you throw the first punch.
Consider what Christopher does. How many times has he called me
(and others) a racist (and worse) in the last two months? What do
you suppose my responses to him would have been, if I had been
the infamous and apparently still scarey Jim Kennemur?
To this day, the police believe that publishing someones' address
can be used as an harrassment technique, and they often use that
behavor to corroborate charges brought against Defendants in
relevant court cases.
---
I don't expect any of you to admit anything, and that isn't why I
posted what I did. I'm just a strong believer in shining lights
under rocks. A little publicity can sometimes stop nefarious
deeds in their tracks and a little advance warning can squelch an
unfortunate incident before it takes place. In my case, it would
not be a good idea to come to my address unannounced. I am a bad
sport who gets very focused when she sees an angry face on her
doorstep.
I think it's also good to show readers here, the lengths to which
some of you Conservative posters will go to squelch opinions you
don't like. Welcome to Unset, where Hate-Talk radio learns
everything it knows.
Whoever is doing what they are doing, has read all this by now.
They should be reconsidering what they thought they wanted to do.
That is a good thing, and it is worth these embarrassing off-
topic posts of mine if all this comes to pass.
VeeVee
righ...@scumbag.com
wrote like a right wing nut;
>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
Funny.
He never mentions you kicking his ignorant ass.
Or Volt's abuse of him for years.
MOF, he's in denial about most everything.
===================================================
"In modern society, the right to armed self-defense has
become attenuated as we rely almost exclusively on organized
societal responses, such as the police, to protect us from harm.
The possession of firearms may therefore be regulated, even
prohibited, because we are "compensated" for the loss of that
right by the availability of organized societal protection."
- U.S. v. Gomez, (9th Cir. 1996)
Eagle Eye
veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
>In article <3C7D6E3F...@oohay.com>, h0...@oohay.com says...
>V > I expect namecalling. there will always be
>V > emotionally challenged folks around on
>V > political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
>V > just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>V >
>V > What I won't put up with; are threats,
>V > assaults and harrassment in Real Life.
>> No argument from me.
>>
>> Are you going to denounce people who are harassing, threatening (and
>> threatening with assaults) all people on Usenet, or only the people
>> supposedly doing this to your "cliquie
>I've raised this off-topic issue here because I am being
>harrassed off-usenet for the posts I make in Usenet newsgroups.
No you're not.
>This isn't all right with me, and I've decided to make it public.
>
>If you don't want problems with the posters you are referring to,
>then I suggest you do not call them names or harrass them in
>their private lives, in the first place. Confine yourself to
>political issues and you will probably be fine.
Posts made to a PUBLIC forum about people posting to a PUBLIC
forum are not "in their private lives".
>I am not a member of the weasels, or any other "cliquie." In
>fact, I don't think I have ever met anyone posting here.
You said you've been posting here for 12 years. There's no
mistaking the fact that you hit the ground running with your
defense of Kennemur, just like an old veteran.
Sure you're not a weezil.
[snip]
>> Are you going to stop treating the mentioning of the ISP or newsserver
>> you use, which is readily available for anyone who can figure out how to
>> read the headers in a news post, as if it were "vigilantism"?
>No, and neither are the Cops. You can not engage in suspicious
>behavior and not be suspected.
>
>In this case, my ISP and the Detective they contacted brought
>this to MY attention -- not the other way around. In THEIR
>opinion, at least one of you (probably Eagle Eye) is going out of
>his/her way to discover my home address and other personal
>information with the intent to harrass me.
Did these "detectives" go by the name of Sipowitz and Medavoy?
Or was it Columbo?
Have you taken any psychedelic drugs recently?
>The problem isn't so much with namecalling Usenet posts (which
>are still childish), but with other exploits involving anonymous
>emails, phoney ISP abuse complaints and at least one odd
>phonecall all enquiring what my name and address is.
I know how it goes. Just today I had a bomb put under my car,
I got a buttload of anthrax in the mail, and some awful woman
stuck her tongue out at me. Boo hoo hoo!
>I'm telling you straight and I'm telling you publicly. I suggest
>you just read this reply carefully before childishly snipping it
>apart and trying to spin it to death. This whole problem has gone
>beyond rhetoric.
Shut up! Nobody cares where you live or what your number is.
Nobody is calling you or sending you any e-mail.
This "problem" is nothing but rhetoric: YOUR RHETORIC. You're
crying wolf.
And, in the microscopic chance that you're not, then get the police
or get a lawyer and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
>[snip]
>> I've seen Morton's address posted on USENET more times than I've seen
>> any threats against you.
>Yes. I have seen what purports to be his address. It was wrong to
>post it, and it might have been incorrect anyway. .... but I have
>also seen others' addresses posted here with whom you disagree.
>
>Do you denounce the posting of what purports to be Roselle's,
>Yeadon's, Zepp's, Gandalf's, Kennemur's, Dahlman's (and others')
>addresses? That was all wrong, too, and I don't see you
>denouncing any of it.
I've denounced every single one of those which I've seen. Check
Google if you don't believe me.
[snip]
>In my opinion, Christopher Morton starts at least 90% of the
>problems he encounters, and certainly started the n*gger problem
>he's whining about these days.
How dare he be born black! That started the problem of Jim Kennemur
calling him a "nigger." It's all Chris' fault.
Funny how you blame the target of racial slurs and praise the one
calling him names. Jim Kennemur is a bloody saint in your book
who crusaded for righteousness and truth...
...by flinging random accusations of child molestation, racism,
violence, etc. ad nauseum.
>You don't get to play the victim when you throw the first punch.
Cite one single example of Chris ever calling anyone a racial slur.
>Consider what Christopher does. How many times has he called me
>(and others) a racist (and worse) in the last two months?
You ARE a racist. You think there's a "black way" to post. You
think black people owe you something for being a so-called "liberal".
You think black people lack the intelligence, ethics, or self-control
to own firearms. You think that a black man who behaves badly makes
ALL black people look bad. And, worst of all, you've been going like
a bat out of hell trying to spread the lie that Chris is not black,
but really a white supremacist, just to cover up a racial slur made
years ago that you could just as easily have said was wrong and
moved on.
[snip]
>To this day, the police believe that publishing someones' address
>can be used as an harrassment technique, and they often use that
>behavor to corroborate charges brought against Defendants in
>relevant court cases.
So don't post anyone's address.
>I don't expect any of you to admit anything, and that isn't why I
>posted what I did. I'm just a strong believer in shining lights
>under rocks. A little publicity can sometimes stop nefarious
>deeds in their tracks and a little advance warning can squelch an
>unfortunate incident before it takes place. In my case, it would
>not be a good idea to come to my address unannounced. I am a bad
>sport who gets very focused when she sees an angry face on her
>doorstep.
Good for you. If you kill someone who is trying to hurt you, I'll
buy you a big trophy. Seriously. More people need to use effective
self-defense.
Just quit claiming or implying that I'm doing anything but
responding to your PUBLIC messages in this PUBLIC forum.
>I think it's also good to show readers here, the lengths to which
>some of you Conservative posters will go to squelch opinions you
>don't like.
You mean like threatening to file defamation suits? Like calling
Usenet posts "stalking" and "assault"? Oh, those were YOUR attempts
to squelch opinions you don't like. Hmm, are you a Conservative?
I don't know about h0mi, but I'm no "conservative". I'm a
libertarian, which means I think you can do and say whatever the
hell you want so long as you don't hurt anyone else.
[snip]
>Whoever is doing what they are doing, has read all this by now.
>They should be reconsidering what they thought they wanted to do.
>That is a good thing, and it is worth these embarrassing off-
>topic posts of mine if all this comes to pass.
And now, the imaginary stalkers can dissapate into your head once
again until you need them for another hysterical idiot post.
RD Thompson
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:07 -0500, Christopher Morton
> <chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>>*****************************************************
>>>
>>>"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
>>>of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
>>>Arms, shall not be infringed."
>>>
>>> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
>>> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition
>>> against Federal interference with State militia and not as a
>>> guarantee of an individual's right to keep or carry firearms. The
>>> argument that the Second
>>
>>That's a lie, but then you're a liar. Go figure.
>
> Coming from a loon like you, I can see why you'd conclude that
>
> After being ridiculed, spanked, abused, beaten, whipped, and shat upon
> for years, even a dumb bastard like you ought to be "gettin it" by
> now. But it explains why you still probably don't
>
> The claim is from a preeminent legal site, (findlaw) and I seriously
> doubt even you can spin that as being bogus.
You should have put the whole statement in your post not a selected portion
of it.
> But feel free to try. After all, nuts like you who gobble up Nazi
> Rifle Association crap so eagerly, probably think everyone's stupid.
OK. Here is the REAL quote from findlaw:
In spite of extensive recent discussion and much legislative action with
respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of
firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of
firearms, there is no definitive resolution by the courts of just what
right the Second Amendment protects. The opposing theories, perhaps
oversimplified, are an ''individual rights'' thesis whereby individuals are
protected in ownership, possession, and transportation, and a ''states'
rights'' thesis whereby it is said the purpose of the clause is to protect
the States in their authority to maintain formal, organized militia units.1
Whatever the Amendment may mean, it is a bar only to federal action, not
extending to state2 or private3 restraints. The Supreme Court has given
effect to the dependent clause of the Amendment in the only case in which
it has tested a congressional enactment against the constitutional
prohibition, seeming to affirm individual protection but only in the
context of the maintenance of a militia or other such public force.
In United States v. Miller,4 the Court sustained a statute requiring
registration under the National Firearms Act of sawed-off shotguns. After
reciting the original provisions of the Constitution dealing with the
militia, the Court observed that ''[w]ith obvious purpose to assure the
continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the
declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be
interpreted with that end in view.''5 The significance of the militia, the
Court continued, was that it was composed of ''civilians primarily,
soldiers on occasion.'' It was upon this force that the States could rely
for defense and securing of the laws, on a force that ''comprised all males
physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense,'' who,
''when called for service . . . were expected to appear bearing arms
supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.''6
Therefore, ''[i]n the absence of any evidence tending to show that
possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in
length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation
or efficiency of a well- regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second
Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.
Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of
the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the
common defense.''7
Since this decision, Congress has placed greater limitations on the
receipt, possession, and transportation of firearms,8 and proposals for
national registration or prohibition of firearms altogether have been
made.9 At what point regulation or prohibition of what classes of firearms
would conflict with the Amendment, if at all, the Miller case does little
more than cast a faint degree of illumination toward an answer.
Care to comment?
> =====================================================
>
> Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980)
>
> In Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980), the Court ruled
> that restrictions contained in the Gun Control Act of 1968
> prohibiting felons from owning firearms were constitutional. Using
> a "rational basis" standard, the Court held that the restrictions
> "do not trench upon any constitutionally protected liberties."
> Further, the Court reaffirmed the position first established in
> U.S. v. Miller that "the Second Amendment guarantees not right to
> keep and bear a firearm that does not have ‘some reasonable
> relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated
> militia’".
>
Here, even your quoted text shows that Miller was about whether or not a
FIREARM had a Second Amendment guarantee.
--
Sleep well tonight.........
RD (The Sandman)
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/rdsandman
Whether a gun is used to save a life or to illegally
take one, the only difference is whose hands are
in control of that gun. The gun itself is neutral.
Christopher Morton
wrote:
>> Don't be sorry for me. Be sorry for your pedophile pals in the
>> National Alliance if they ever DO show up.
>>
>> Isandlhwana, bitch. Isandlhwana.
>
>
>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
You left out that you're an historically illiterate, White supremacist
troll.
>Christopher; you don't get to whine about being called a nigger,
I don't whine. I tell the truth. You whine BECAUSE I tell the truth.
>when you 1) post responses like this in political newsgroups, 2)
>were never called a nigger in the first place, and 3) are just
>posing as a black man anyway.
I've proved that I'm a Black man. Of course I've also proved that
you're a moronic White supremacist liar.
The insane claim that I was never called a "nigger" is just frosting
on the cake.
Of course if you don't like my "whining", you can always try to do
something about it, dude.
Maybe unlike your fellow Aryans in the National [Pedophile] Alliance,
you'll have enough balls to actually DO something.
But I doubt it.
Christopher Morton
>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 20:59:12 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
>wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
>
>Funny.
>
>He never mentions you kicking his ignorant ass.
>
>Or Volt's abuse of him for years.
All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
supremacist he is.
And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
Christopher Morton
wrote:
>I've raised this off-topic issue here because I am being
>harrassed off-usenet for the posts I make in Usenet newsgroups.
>This isn't all right with me, and I've decided to make it public.
Until you prove otherwise I'm going to presume that you're just a
lying, White supremacist troll.
>If you don't want problems with the posters you are referring to,
>then I suggest you do not call them names or harrass them in
>their private lives, in the first place. Confine yourself to
>political issues and you will probably be fine.
But it's ok for KKKennemur to mailbomb my postmaster and me, RIGHT?
>I am not a member of the weasels, or any other "cliquie." In
>fact, I don't think I have ever met anyone posting here.
Try to tell at least a PLAUSIBLE lie, dipshit.
>> Are you going to stop treating the cliche "if you can't take the heat,
>> get out of the kitchen" as a threat to forcibly remove you from your
>> kitchen?
>
>No. Almost this same phrase turned up in a "secret squirrel"
>email to me that that my web admin found to be threatening. He
>turned it over to his local Police in his even before he showed
>it to me.
Gee, I used to get the same sort of email from your friends in the
National [Pedophile] Alliance.
>> Are you going to stop treating the mentioning of the ISP or newsserver
>> you use, which is readily available for anyone who can figure out how to
>> read the headers in a news post, as if it were "vigilantism"?
>
>No, and neither are the Cops. You can not engage in suspicious
>behavior and not be suspected.
"Suspicious behavior"? To Judy "The Jew Hater" Diarya that includes
being a Jew. Doubtless you agree.
>In this case, my ISP and the Detective they contacted brought
>this to MY attention -- not the other way around. In THEIR
>opinion, at least one of you (probably Eagle Eye) is going out of
>his/her way to discover my home address and other personal
>information with the intent to harrass me.
Gee, you lie in a way most reminiscent of that coward David Dahlman of
Seabrook, Texas (Rack Jite).
Have you ever scared your kids with a shotgun?
>The problem isn't so much with namecalling Usenet posts (which
>are still childish), but with other exploits involving anonymous
Obviously you don't consider "nigger" namecalling.
But then what White supremacist does?
>I'm telling you straight and I'm telling you publicly. I suggest
You're as straight veracity-wise as a cork screw. You're a LIAR.
>> I've seen Morton's address posted on USENET more times than I've seen
>> any threats against you.
>
>Yes. I have seen what purports to be his address. It was wrong to
>post it, and it might have been incorrect anyway. .... but I have
>also seen others' addresses posted here with whom you disagree.
Have you seen maps to their houses? How about death threats?
Oh yeah, when it's aimed a a Black man, that's just what your kind
calls "justice".
>In my opinion, Christopher Morton starts at least 90% of the
>problems he encounters, and certainly started the n*gger problem
>he's whining about these days. You don't get to play the victim
>when you throw the first punch.
Of course. Any time a White man calls a Black man a "nigger", it's
OBVIOUSLY the Black man's fault, RIGHT? "Uppity" and all, RIGHT?
>Consider what Christopher does. How many times has he called me
>(and others) a racist (and worse) in the last two months? What do
And just because you ARE a racist!
>you suppose my responses to him would have been, if I had been
>the infamous and apparently still scarey Jim Kennemur?
Apparently you'd have run away and hid... the way HE did.
>I don't expect any of you to admit anything, and that isn't why I
I don't expect you to tell the truth. You're a lying, racist cur.
>Whoever is doing what they are doing, has read all this by now.
>They should be reconsidering what they thought they wanted to do.
>That is a good thing, and it is worth these embarrassing off-
>topic posts of mine if all this comes to pass.
Nobody's doing anything, you lying piece of shit. Well, except for
you. You're lying.
Christopher Morton
Christopher Morton
>>And speaking of COWARDS, is KKKennemur the KKKoward still hiding under
>>his bed?
>
>Seems you're more afraid of him than anyone, Snorts.
How come I'm still here and he ISN'T???
Clearly he's terrified of me... but then he IS a coward, ISN'T he?
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:47 GMT, righ...@scumbag.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 20:59:12 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>>>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>>>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>>>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
>>
>>Funny.
>>
>>He never mentions you kicking his ignorant ass.
>>
>>Or Volt's abuse of him for years.
>
>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>supremacist he is.
>
>And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
Either that or he's in prison somewhere..
--Ace
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
wrote:
>In article <3C7D6E3F...@oohay.com>, h0...@oohay.com says...
>
>V > I expect namecalling. there will always be
>V > emotionally challenged folks around on
>V > political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
>V > just an unfortunate part of usenet.
>V >
>V > What I won't put up with; are threats,
>V > assaults and harrassment in Real Life.
>>
>> No argument from me.
>>
>> Are you going to denounce people who are harassing, threatening (and
>> threatening with assaults) all people on Usenet, or only the people
>> supposedly doing this to your "cliquie
>
>I've raised this off-topic issue here because I am being
>harrassed off-usenet for the posts I make in Usenet newsgroups.
>This isn't all right with me, and I've decided to make it public.
<chuckle> As if anyone would bother to harass you. You're a damned
good example of what the loony left-wing is all about. People read
your posts and say, "Wow, the lefties are weirder than we thought.
--Ace
righ...@scumbag.com
>
>>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 20:59:12 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>>>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>>>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>>>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
>>
>>Funny.
>>
>>He never mentions you kicking his ignorant ass.
>>
>>Or Volt's abuse of him for years.
>
>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>supremacist he is.
and kick your dumb ass.
----------------------------------------------------
All PeaBoy2 posts can be accessed through Google Search by using
either 'crai...@hotmail.com,' or PeaBoy2...
Viewing message <01bd213a$dc74bde0$50b400d0@seufert>
From: PeaBoy2 (crai...@hotmail.com)
Subject: WARNING! Spice Girls Alert!
Newsgroups:alt.tv.nickelodeon
Date: 1998/01/17
Spice Girls are "hosting" Nick at Night this Sat. nite. Do as George
Harrison does. Turn the sound on the TV down (at least until the show
comes on).
righ...@scumbag.com
<thepa...@dont.tread.on.me> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>>supremacist he is.
>>
>>And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
>
>
>Either that or he's in prison somewhere..
Why would anyone go to prison for calling a fuckwit exactly what he
is?
===================================================
"My instructor likes to tell people that I'm "a good stick" - that
I have superb skills at handling the airplane - but she also says that
I have the best head on my shoulders that she's ever seen in a
student."
Death Threat Billy Beck
(Burger King Narc)
righ...@scumbag.com
<chr...@ameritech.net> wrote like a right wing nut;
>(Silverback) wrote:
>
>>>Says Judy the Jew Hater's best pal.
>>
>>yer lying again snorts since I don't know any judy
>
>Says Judy the Jew Hater's best pal.
I have no idea who "Judy" is, don't care
I DO know a Usenet moron like you because I've been
laughing for years, at the way Volt kicked your ignorant ass day in
and day out
"Course, It doesn't take much
You gunwhores are pretty much all hot air.
============================================================================
We didn't create racism, we pour gas on it.
We didn't invent homophobia, we just fan the flames.
We don't lynch minorities, we make the rope stronger.
We don't bomb women's clinics, we make the bombs bigger.
We didn't invent hate, we echo it across the country.
We're the Vultures of hate radio.
We're the Grand Old Fascist Party.
BartCop on the GOP, a subsidiary of ADM
=============================================================================
Michael Ejercito
> On 27 Feb 2002 18:22:55 -0800, meje...@marvelonline.net (Michael
> Ejercito) wrote like a right wing nut;
>
> > So that means we the people can bear any weapons the militia bears.
> >
>
> No, but I see your confusion.
>
> See, YOU don't get to interpret what the 2nd Amendment "means", or for
> that matter what the constitution, "means".
> Things go a lot smoother, if you remember that the USSC is the ONLY
> one who gets to do that.
> an individuals "rights" emanate from the right of the State to defend
> it's citizens, which is made up of "individuals". The Federal
> government may not "infringe" upon the "right" of the STATE to defend
> it'self from attacks, hostiles, etc. Absent a standing army, given
> the frontier, rural, agrarian society in 1790, I should think that's
> "self evident"
> states and every major doctrine has related "gunwhoring" as central to
> the "state", not the individual. It WAS extremely important that the
> individual be required to "bear arms" to defend the state. It is not
> presently.
>
Michael
Michael Ejercito
> On 28 Feb 2002 06:43:45 -0800, AntisDoLie <jame...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts have
> >> consistently interpreted this Amendment only as a prohibition against
> >> Federal interference with State militia
> >
>
> A number of US Appeals Courts have interpeted the amendment in this way,
> with no support whatsoever from SCOTUS.
>
> The start of all of this was with a pair of decisions called Cases and
> Tott, one of which said that if they followed Miller, they wouldn't
> be able to regulate firearms, so they were going to ignore it, and the
> other which basically said everybody has always known that the second
> doesn't protect an individual right, backed up by a couple of poorly
> written law journal articles that said nothing of the sort.
>
> Yes, there have been decisions interpreting the second in this way
> over the last sixty years, but to claim that there is a consistent
> interpretation is either an error or an intentional lie.
These judges should be impeached! How could judges do such a
flagrant violation of their oath?
Michael
Steve Canyon (The Patriot)
>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:52:59 GMT, "Steve Canyon (The Patriot)"
><thepa...@dont.tread.on.me> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
>>>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>>>supremacist he is.
>>>
>>>And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
>>
>>
>>Either that or he's in prison somewhere..
>
>Why would anyone go to prison for calling a fuckwit exactly what he
>is?
In didn't say why the stupid fool was in prison, I just speculated
that he might be there. His disappearance from net and the staff of
the high school where he'd been teaching came at the same time and
very suddenly. He apparently wasn't expecting it because he had just
bragged about how he was going to be around harassing people on
usenet.
--Ace
righ...@scumbag.com
<thepa...@dont.tread.on.me> wrote like a right wing nut;
>On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 01:43:22 GMT, righ...@scumbag.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:52:59 GMT, "Steve Canyon (The Patriot)"
>><thepa...@dont.tread.on.me> wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>>>>supremacist he is.
>>>>
>>>>And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
>>>
>>>
>>>Either that or he's in prison somewhere..
>>
>>Why would anyone go to prison for calling a fuckwit exactly what he
>>is?
>
>In didn't say why the stupid fool was in prison, I just speculated
>that he might be there. His disappearance from net and the staff of
>the high school where he'd been teaching came at the same time and
>very suddenly. He apparently wasn't expecting it because he had just
>bragged about how he was going to be around harassing people on
>usenet.
>
And you've "concluded" that because he's not "here", your litany is
probably true?
I don't suppose you see how stupid that sounds.
Inferring things from some "facts" seems to be the cottage industry
of right wing conservatism and Usenet loonies.
Silverback
>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:47 GMT, righ...@scumbag.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 20:59:12 GMT, veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org>
>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>
>>>Let's see. You called me a dipshit, something pretty nasty in
>>>Swahili (sp), a bitch, a racist, and a transgendered person who
>>>is a member of the National alliance and who knowingly associates
>>>with pedophiles. Did I leave anything out?
>>
>>Funny.
>>
>>He never mentions you kicking his ignorant ass.
>>
>>Or Volt's abuse of him for years.
>
>All KKKennemur the Koward ever did was prove what an ignorant White
>supremacist he is.
>
>And now he's hiding under his bed, TERRIFIED to confront me.
madening delusions of grandeur by an idiot
>--
>
>"sure an a nigger is going to use denigrate." - Glen Yeadon
>
>"Who gives an FF what anyone says about the jooz." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Jews mean nothing to me." - Judy Diarya
>
>"Everyone but you knows the jews were behind 9-11." - Judy Diarya
=====================================================
GDY Weasel
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
The Nazi Hydra in America an online book of the
fascist influence in America.
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/noon.html
===================================================
Silverback
wrote:
>In article <vtas7ugo5faf89hu3...@4ax.com>, "Steve says...
>>
>>On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 05:15:19 GMT, gdy5215...@spiritone.com
>>(Silverback) wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:05:31 -0500, Christopher Morton
>>><chr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:06:49 GMT, Pea...@PeaBrain.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 27 Feb 2002 13:45:50 -0800, Chris Morton <cmo...@newsguy.com>
>>>>>wrote like a right wing nut;
>>>>>
>>>>>>I only wish that Glen Yeadon would hold his breath while you wait for an
>>>>>>answer....
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If he only has to wait long enough for you to act stupid, he's got it
>>>>>made, Snorts.
>>>>
>>>>Retard Yeadon is turning blue even as I type this. You should join
>>>>him.
>>>
>>>wrong again snorts. I'm right here kicking yer stupid racist
>>>revisionist ass.
>>
>>I always smile when I envision idiots like Yeadon kicking themselves
>>in the ass while thinking it's someone else's ass.
>
>I envision Yeadon as a man with no arms trying to find his ass with both
>hands....
>
more madening delusions of grandeur snorts? You should envision me
with my foot kicking yer stupid ass.
>
>--
>Gun control, the theory that 110lb. women should have to fistfight with 210lb.
>rapists.
h0mi
Eagle Eye wrote:
>
> In article <MPG.16e825baf...@news.sonic.net>
> veronica floss <vero...@hygene.org> wrote:
> >In article <3C7D6E3F...@oohay.com>, h0...@oohay.com says...
> >V > I expect namecalling. there will always be
> >V > emotionally challenged folks around on
> >V > political newsgroups who resort to that. That's
> >V > just an unfortunate part of usenet.
> >V >
> >V > What I won't put up with; are threats,
> >V > assaults and harrassment in Real Life.
> >> No argument from me.
> >>
> >> Are you going to denounce people who are harassing, threatening (and
> >> threatening with assaults) all people on Usenet, or only the people
> >> supposedly doing this to your "cliquie
> >I've raised this off-topic issue here because I am being
> >harrassed off-usenet for the posts I make in Usenet newsgroups.
>
> No you're not.
Help.
Veronica's message isn't on my newsserver. Can someone post a google URL
to it?