On Thu, 22 May 2008 03:11:08 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
<dgvreiman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>"Mac" <NoSpamToday@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:eec734phnnd6qc3v8kl07t2ulfpdkdvgkb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Tue, 20 May 2008 15:41:11 -0400, Sharky <sharky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Messrs: Stevel/Paul Carrier/Dennis McDonnell, including all other
>>>false
>>>names you may use, you are hereby once again notified to cease and
>>>desist your cyberstalking such as reposting forged FBI do***ents about
>>>me, and cease and desist your intentional copyright infringements and
>>>violations or face legal action.
>>
>> ========== ====
>> Go pound sand...
>> Apparently you have had a relapse.
>> Once again you are claiming that several different people are one
>> person.
>> When next you talk to those "legal-experts" to whom you present a
>> very one-sided, biased discussion, ask them to help you read simple
>> HEADERS....
>> Jeez!
>> --Mac
>
>Doug's Rebuttal:
>
>Mr. McDonnell, are you claiming that you have not posted under fake
>names in respect to posts about or directed to me? BWHAHAHAHAHAHA.
>
>Moreover, you were already offered the op****tunity to provide any and
>all evidence you wished to present to the INDEPENDENT legal and military
>experts I have retained to justify your volumes of false accusations
>about me and my service. So far you have ignored that offer and snipped
>it out of your replies.
Doug. They are not "independent" if you control access to them. Do you
really not see that?
>
>If you post your evidence to back up your accusations about me you can
>be sure the experts will receive it and will consider it before they
>render an opinion, and they will reconsider their opinion if they have
>already rendered an opinion, especially if the evidence is new.
>
> They are NOT going to get involved with a gang of smear merchants on
>USENET that are not interested in the truth, and use several fake names
>to further their fraud and cyberstalking.
Since that is exactly what they are expected to arbitrate on, your
claim that they will not become "involved" is classic Begging the
Question illogical insanity.
Are you happy demonstrating your stupidity in every post?
> But they will read all sides
>of an issue before they render their opinion.
Given that what they have seen so far of "our side" is your bizarre
renditions of the "gangs" posts and most definitely not the posts
themselves I very much doubt they will ever see all sides.
> Obviously your claim of
>me presenting them with a biased discussion is a lie, if you disagree,
>please provide your evidence.
Who to? Give me their contact details.
>
>Those experts have a reputation, they will not lie for you nor for me.
Not knowingly. But having seen the pack of lies you presented to the
experts on the web-site I have little confidence you would tell the
other supposed experts anything different.
<snip>
>
>
>"Mac" <NoSpamToday@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:scq934dsv28u97f95d4jste1eiq22jntn2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 21 May 2008 19:51:13 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>> <dgvreiman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mac" <NoSpamToday@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:eec734phnnd6qc3v8kl07t2ulfpdkdvgkb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Tue, 20 May 2008 15:41:11 -0400, Sharky <sharky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>
>> *************************************************
>> From the manner in which you headed your assinine epistle, you are
>> claiming that I am "Steve", that I am "Paul Carrier", etc., etc., etc.
>
>Doug Says: No, your conclusion in that regard is false and idiotic. I
>made no such claim. I believe that you and Mr. Carrier and SteveL are
>all different people
On the contrary Doug I have numerous examples of you going off half
cocked and claiming that I am MAC, MAC is me, I am tankfixer,
tankfixer is me etc.
Care to apologize for your earlier false accusations?
|
