"Pepperoni" <wastebasketbot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:ipadnU6w6IIlE6rVnZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvreiman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:VsGdnTgk18RjG6rVnZ2dnUVZ_tPinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Doug Says: No one asked you to pay a fee you cheapo. And I will
>> provide him with your "evidence" above and my rebuttal to it.
>> Moreover, I am confident your self-serving confidence and knowledge
>> is not based upon fact nor reason nor evidence, it is based upon
>> ridiculous irrelevant bull****, but that will be something for the
>> experts to decide not me nor you.
>>
>> As a case in point, you are posting things that Chip said that
>> neither my typist nor I heard him say nor read. Your posts above
>> prove that I never had anything to do with his comments, no reply to
>> his comments came from me, not even once. So how can something I
>> (nor my typist) could not possibly know have anything to do with
>> what we thought he was trying to say in his post? If he had a
>> conversation with his wife the Sunday before he wrote what he wrote
>> and in that conversation told his wife he had the purple heart medal,
>> would you also claim that conversation was something we should have
>> known and considered before we replied to him? The real and rational
>> world does not have crystal balls like you seem to claim to have Mr.
>> Brooks.
>>
>> Another point is you omitted all those times BEFORE the 2003 post
>> that I said I did not have a purple heart medal, and all those times
>> after, which occurred long before you said a word about this post
>> that was discarded into my waste basket due to its error. (Remember
>> I submitted a 1998-1999 statement to the court providing a brief
>> autobiography of my military service - no purple heart medal was
>> mentioned in that re****t). I also stated in 2004 no purple heart
>> medal, and about a dozen times thereafter. So if, like you claim, it
>> was my intention to deceive everyone into believing I had a purple
>> heart medal then why on Earth would I say I did not have that medal
>> before and after the erred post about a dozen times?
>>
>> The post was written wrong by my typist Brooks, and when the error
>> was detected it was removed and discarded as it should have been, and
>> Google was told the precise reason it was being removed, because the
>> word "Cards" was missing and the post could be thereby misconstrued.
>>
>> You are claiming that a post that was long discarded was an
>> intentional post and the replacement post that corrected the error
>> was false. Do you know how irrational that sounds to an independent
>> expert Mr. Brooks?
>>
>> In fact you and Tom Rau agreed in a post in 2005 that I did not have
>> nor ever claimed I had a purple heart medal. Yet in 2006 based upon a
>> long removed ambiguous post maliciously dug out of my electronic
>> waste basket by one of your smear gang members for the obvious and
>> deliberate purpose to forge the context of that discarded post to
>> defame and smear, you contradicted your own statements about this
>> issue.
>>
>> You also ignored the fact that you offered to retract your claim the
>> post was about Medals and in fact was about Cards if I posted the
>> fact that Chip did not have a purple heart medal nor any combat
>> ribbons. When I agreed to post that proof, you then backpedaled from
>> your offer to retract. You failed to mention that fact in your new
>> evidence above also Mr. Brooks.
>>
>> You also ignored that within weeks of when my typist posted that
>> erred post someone asked me if I was referencing a purple heart medal
>> in that very post, and I responded with "that claim is a complete
>> distortion and false innuendo of what was written" or words to that
>> effect. So if I intended to deceive everyone with a claim I
>> possessed that medal, why would I deny the allegation that is what I
>> meant the first time it was mentioned way back in 2003?
>>
>> You also lied and said when you first brought up this discarded post
>> that was maliciously retrieved from my waste basket by SteveL (Google
>> is investigating this issue as I write this and they are pissed about
>> it) back in 2006 I never replied.
>>
>> You said I never said it was about Cards and not Medals when you
>> first brought it up, and because I did not respond then it could not
>> have been about Cards. Yet by your own admission you just proved it
>> WAS about Cards and not medals and your above stated conclusion to
>> the contrary is completely false and preposterous. Why? Because the
>> Google archive evidence shows that not only did I immediately respond
>> to your 2006 post and say I had removed an erred posts about Purple
>> Heart Cards, I also, in the same post mentioned that someone else
>> wrote the post that was removed. So here is irrefutable confirmation
>> that (1) someone other than me wrote the post and (2) the post was
>> removed due to an error which means it obviously was not intentional,
>> and (3) the post was intended to be about cards and not medals.
>>
>> If you disagree with any of my rebuttal above, and wish to provide
>> evidence anything I said is wrong or incorrect or misleading, then
>> please do so before May 30, 2008, as that weekend I will resubmit
>> your claims and new evidence and my rebuttal and proof of it to the
>> expert for his review and opinion.
>
> >>
>> OH, BTW, about my wounds and injuries, I have FINALLY received a copy
>> of the morning re****t that shows I was hospitalized in the 36th Evac
>> after being med-evacuated from Can Tho. There is a reason the NPRC
>> could not find these records after years of searching which I will
>> not elaborate on at this time.
>>
>> I also have contacted both Sp4 Olson and Sp5 Nelson and records,
>> spoke to some other people that were also on that patrol, (and on
>> others) and more about that patrol and what happened on it is coming,
>> including specific information about Sp4 Olson and Sp5 Nelson's
>> purple heart medals and what happened to Sp4 Olson after he was
>> med-evacuated. (When I reference wounds I am assuming you agree that
>> concussions are considered "wounds" even if they are minor ones -
>> and all bleeding wounds that are minor are rarely taken to an aid
>> station or hospital if a band aid will do the trick).
>>
>> Hint, it is almost impossible to be walking directly in front of two
>> men that were severaly wounded in an abused patrol without receiving
>> at least some minor wounds and a minor concussion from the multiple
>> incoming explosions. And that was long before Can Tho.
>>
>> Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
> Well, yeah; I'm glad you asked.
>
> Chip's reference to having a "CAR" obviously referred to a Combat
> Action Ribbon.
> You could submit the original post and your "rewrite" to your expert
> for comparison. To Me, the meaning and intent of *both* posts is
> clear, obvious and simply evident to an average reader. For
> convenience, I present both posts side-by-side.
> http://tinyurl.com/4sd8ob
>
> Over the years you have misrepresented your awards, time in service,
> time in country, and "eye witness" accounts. I am not surprised that
> the average reader would doubt your veracity on any *fact* that you
> would claim or present.
>
> Pepperoni
> Mr. Huxton
Doug's Rebuttal to the Fraud and False accusations posted by Mr. Huxton:
First, Chip does not have a Combat Action Ribbon so your claim that was
his reference was something that I nor my typist could have ever known.
You claim you have read his mind and you know he was claiming something
he did not have and said and confirmed he did not have? BWHAHAHAHA.
Well, mind reader, read my mind right now, at what degree do I find
contemptible and unethical your false and fraudulent claims about me?
From 1-10, with ten being the highest possible contempt and disgust for
someone like you, please, mind reader, which number am I thinking right
now? (If you are going to claim mind reading you might as well be
prepared to provide some demonstrations of your mind reading skills).
The truth of the matter is it does not matter what Chip was thinking
when he wrote his post, what matters is what my typist thought he was
referencing when she read his post to me. And as far as she was
concerned he was trying to talk about Cards and not Medals as she nor I
had ever heard of a Car. . And of course this fact is clearly evidenced
by the last sentence of my typist's reply when she says he is claiming a
purple heart not awarded in combat, and we all know that a purple heart
medal MUST be awarded in Combat. The only possible Purple Heart
anything that she could have been referencing that was not awarded in
combat was the Purple Heart Card that was issued by the VA at that time
for service connected disabilities.
Even the original erred post proves irrefutably she was not referencing
purple heart medals and experts have already agreed that fact is
obvious - and your posting history proves you are a smear merchant that
regularly uses fraud, false accusations and forgeries to smear and
defame, so I am sure the "average reader" would find your self-serving
conclusions and preposterous claims just as fraudulent and deliberately
defaming as I and the independent experts find them.
Mr. Huxton, your fraud and false accusations above are a complete lie
and falsehood and you know it. You and your smear gang members have
been caught several times conning the group with such fraud and false
accusations, and you have been told to cease and desist your
cyberstalking and false accusations several times. I hope you abide by
this notice to do so and do not require me to take legal action against
you in Michigan or elsewhere. However, since I have offered all smear
gang members which of course you are a leading member to provide
evidence of their accusations about me and I will provide that evidence
and my rebuttal evidence to highly respected third party experts on the
law and on military service, I will extend this same offer to you this
one time.
Time to walk the walk Mr. Huxton. If you believe you have evidence of
your ridiculous and obviously false accusations above, post the evidence
or admit you are lying, one or the other.
Moreover, to juxtapose a post that was removed for error with its
corrected post, and then claim the post removed for error was the
intentional post and the corrected copy was not, is beyond rational
understanding even for a smear merchant. No one is stupid enough to
believe that nonsense - anyone rational that is.
Moreover, retrieving/hacking/using code to hack/ and then reposting a
post from my waste basket which was removed from USENET due to error by
Google and authenticated as removed for that error by Google, represents
malicious interference in my computer processes and Google's services.
and becuase two or more are involved in this hacking, represents a
conspiracy, I strongly suggest you stop digging posts out of my waste
basket and reproducing them and trying to pan off those discarded and
erred posts as intentional or accurate. You will look less like a fraud
merchant if you do, and you also will not be conspiring to maliciously
interfere with Google's processes and my computer systems. Cease and
desist such malicious interference Mr. Huxton and immediately and cease
and desist your conspiracy with other gang members to perpetrate such
overt acts. This issue will probably go to the legal mat with SteveL
Mr. Huxton, and if you want to be involved with him then you are a
bigger fool that I thought (if that is possible). But your call, you
have been notified to cease and desist.
However, with that said, I will await some evidence of your false and
clearly fraudulent claims about my "misrepresentations" above. I won't
however, hold my breath, as the last thing any fraud merchant has is
"evidence" to back up his fraud accusations.
This will be my last response and rebuttal to your fraud unless you
provide some evidence to back up your claims.
Doug Grant (Tm)
|
