Legal Spring Logo

"Reviewing every type of legal service"
Reviewing Legal Services Online
 LEGAL SPRING
     


Google
 
Re: Bullis....



ManualInsert@DB.com
2/20/2004 4:04:48 PM


 
 
"A. Cain"
2/20/2004 5:04:48 PM




"me-not-you" <no-one@work.com> wrote in message
news:oGtZb.54846$1S1.19339@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

I had some spare time today, so I decided to finally Google up some of
your
stuff from the past.
You're one sick big piece of SHIT !
If you died instantly......... society as a whole, would be a whole lot
safer.
You're every parents & grandparents nightmare!
SUBSCRIBE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
 
"A. Cain"
2/20/2004 5:07:17 PM




"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote in message
news:c15pro013pm@enews1.newsguy.com...

me-not-you wrote:
You're entitled to your opinion.
Now look up "Alex Cain" or "Cainman" or informant xxx@yyy.zzz
You'll soon reallize that the two of them attack people for the rise they
get out of it.
People attack you because you're a disgusting @$#*head, Bullis. Not because
they get a "rise" out of it.
Why am I so attacked by whom ever? Because I dare be bold and brave enough
to voice my opinions on a topic that these witch hunters do not approve
of.
You openly admit to enjoying naked pictures of young children and have
posted fantasies about one day raping them. And you can't seem to see why
people would have a problem with that?
What specifically do you have to question me about?
I'll gladly answer any question you have, on my board, but not here.
www.richardbullis.com/boards
Those precious IP addresses always elude you, don't they Bullis?
Path:
text02!newsfeeds-atl2!news.usenetserver.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.
net!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!pln-w!spln!dex
!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1
From: "Richard" <anonymous@127.000>
Newsgroups: misc.transport.trucking
Subject: Re: Bullis....
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:16:37 -0600
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <c15pro013pm@enews1.newsguy.com>
References: <oGtZb.54846$1S1.19339@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-676.newsdawg.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-No-Archive: yes
FL-Build: Fidolook 2002 (SL) 6.0.2600.78 - 24/10/2002 21:18:29
Xref: usenetserver.com misc.transport.trucking:269631
X-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:28:33 EST (text02)
 
 
"A. Cain"
2/21/2004 4:08:41 AM




"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote in message
news:c16sru02ufg@enews1.newsguy.com...

Walker wrote:
me-not-you wrote:
I had some spare time today, so I decided to finally Google up some
of your stuff from the past.
You're one sick big piece of SHIT !
If you died instantly......... society as a whole, would be a whole
lot safer.
You're every parents & grandparents nightmare!
me-not-you
Skateboard'n
Tom
You're entitled to your opinion.
Now look up "Alex Cain" or "Cainman" or informant xxx@yyy.zzz
You'll soon reallize that the two of them attack people for the rise
they get out of it.
They address me because I am the only person they can find in common who
dared to speak up in AUK and who was once actively engaged in a so called
pedophile group.
alt.sex.children and alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen aren't exactly
"so-called" pedophile groups, Bullis.
Even though over 90% of all my posts have been pure text
posts.
Stories about people having sex with children. We know.
I moved the heated argument about me in 24hoursupport.helpdesk to AUK
because it was a more fitting group for the flames.
That is how I got acquainted with cain, informant, and the other witch
hunters.
Why do you insist on using the term witch hunters? Do you even know what
that means? Do you know the history of the term? Are you familiar under
the conditions to which it was conceived?
Why am I so attacked by whom ever? Because I dare be bold and brave
enough to voice my opinions on a topic that these witch hunters do not
approve of.
I have not said that pedophilia is natural. I have said that being naked
is
natural.
You have said that you enjoy looking at naked children and as recently as
last year publically posted your fantasies about raping a small girl and her
mother, Bullis.
You are doing precisely what informant does, takes what I say, changes a
word and claims I said it.
If the rotting trailer fits...
Yes. And many of those same art galleries proudly display those works
where
even children can see them without a second thought.
Those don't involve the molestation of children, Bullis.
I doubt seriously that the likeness was that of a real life "Mary" since
most of those famous ones were painted several hundred years after her
death. So therefor, they can only be seen as an artist's conception as to
what she looked like.
Precsiely. It is not necessary for a model to pose naked for a true
artist.
They only need the jist of the scene to put it onto canvas.
They are not MY photographs. I did not take them.
So what was all that jazz about you going to Disneyworld with a camera?
And you'd be dead wrong.
So what you're saying...is that those children...willingly posed...for
pictures...of them being sexually molested or exploited.
You're asking if they've ever done an episode of Sesame Street in which The
Count kills somebody....and then drinks their blood for sustanence....
AW RIGHTY THEN!
In the wolfpack nudism groups
The ones that you got kicked out of for posting asian pornography?
are a series of
pictures posted from time to time that begin with the two letters "SR".
"Shadow Runner" was a 10 year old girl at the time who took most of those
photos of other kids at nudist colonies. Is she a pedophile? By your
definition she is.
You still don't get it, do you Richard?
A pedophile may or may not use sexual contact. Some do, some don't.
Will you quit referring to this particular piece of crapola?
How is it "crapola," Bullis?
It was written by a crackpot.
The American Psychological Association doesn't take too kindly to being
referred to as "crackpots," Bullis.
Which is why you don't provide the link to the website because it would
only
prove my point.
And take a good close look at that last sentence. Thinking about doing
something is NOT a crime.
That's like your "will probably never" harm a child statement, right?
While you and others are so pissed off at me because I merely make my
opinions known on child nudity in film, thousands of actual children are
being seduced and routinely raped for the pleasures of real sick
pedophiles.
You are the one who posted that you wanted to take a mother and daughter out
to sea and rape them in international waters in an attempt to get away with
it, Bullis.
And what do you about it? Not a damn thing.
Right at this very moment, somebody, somewhere, perhaps in your own
neighborhood, is assaulting a child for sexual pleasures. That person
could
be your closest friend and you'd never know it.
Watch
 
 
Robert Buchanan
2/21/2004 9:18:07 AM


alt.usenet.kooks, allow me to present the incomparable A. Cain!


"Richard" <anonymous@127.000> wrote in message
news:c16sru02ufg@enews1.newsguy.com...

alt.sex.children and alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen aren't
exactly "so-called" pedophile groups, Bullis.
Bullis can't be bothered with these trivial details!
Even though over 90% of all my posts have been pure text
posts.
Stories about people having sex with children. We know.
And terrible, terrible advice.
I moved the heated argument about me in 24hoursupport.helpdesk to AUK
because it was a more fitting group for the flames.
That is how I got acquainted with cain, informant, and the other
witch hunters.
Why do you insist on using the term witch hunters? Do you even know
what that means? Do you know the history of the term? Are you
familiar under the conditions to which it was conceived?
One assumes that Bullis actually thinks pedophilia will go mainstream
someday.
Why am I so attacked by whom ever? Because I dare be bold and
brave enough to voice my opinions on a topic that these witch
hunters do not approve of.
Would this topic be Pedophilia? And how you insist that Pedophilia
is natural?
I have not said that pedophilia is natural. I have said that being
naked
is
You have said that you enjoy looking at naked children and as recently
as last year publically posted your fantasies about raping a small
girl and her mother, Bullis.
He said that pedophilia was natural, *not* that he had a problem with it.
You are doing precisely what informant does, takes what I say,
changes a word and claims I said it.
If the rotting trailer fits...
















You could also use "godforsaken hellhole with a poorly-crafted porch."
HTH
<snip>
are a series of
pictures posted from time to time that begin with the two letters
"SR". "Shadow Runner" was a 10 year old girl at the time who took
most of those photos of other kids at nudist colonies. Is she a
pedophile? By your definition she is.
You still don't get it, do you Richard?
One of these days, Richard really is going to meet Bubba. May his anus rue
the day.
<snip>
While you and others are so pissed off at me because I merely make my
opinions known on child nudity in film, thousands of actual children
are being seduced and routinely raped for the pleasures of real sick
pedophiles.
You are the one who posted that you wanted to take a mother and
daughter out to sea and rape them in international waters in an
attempt to get away with it, Bullis.
I hate to be a bother, but could you post the MID to this for posterity?
And what do you about it? Not a damn thing.
Right at this very moment, somebody, somewhere, perhaps in your own
neighborhood, is assaulting a child for sexual pleasures. That person
could
no
together?
Quit whining, pedophile.
He wasn't whining. He was turning himself on.
What *You* have described so many times...acting upon these urges,
is known as "Child Molestation".
That is the legal term. It matters not that a person is pedophile. A
pedophile is a person who has a history of "child molestation".
Wrong-o.
So *that's* st00pid's rationale! Well, that explains it.
[alt.stupid.idiots added because Bullis is always on-topic there]
--
Robert Buchanan
http://home.ripway.com/2004-1/55797/
 
 
"A. Cain"
2/21/2004 5:31:39 AM




"Robert Buchanan" <?????????@?????????.???> wrote in message
news:4037224e$0$4216$ad3619e8@news.netcarrier.net...

alt.usenet.kooks, allow me to present the incomparable A. Cain!
Bullis can't be bothered with these trivial details!
Even though over 90% of all my posts have been pure text
posts.
And terrible, terrible advice.
I moved the heated argument about me in 24hoursupport.helpdesk to AUK
because it was a more fitting group for the flames.
That is how I got acquainted with cain, informant, and the other
witch hunters.
One assumes that Bullis actually thinks pedophilia will go mainstream
someday.
Why am I so attacked by whom ever? Because I dare be bold and
brave enough to voice my opinions on a topic that these witch
hunters do not approve of.
Would this topic be Pedophilia? And how you insist that Pedophilia
is natural?
I have not said that pedophilia is natural. I have said that being
naked
He said that pedophilia was natural, *not* that he had a problem with it.
You are doing precisely what informant does, takes what I say,
changes a word and claims I said it.
















You could also use "godforsaken hellhole with a poorly-crafted porch."
HTH
<snip>
are a series of
pictures posted from time to time that begin with the two letters
"SR". "Shadow Runner" was a 10 year old girl at the time who took
most of those photos of other kids at nudist colonies. Is she a
pedophile? By your definition she is.
One of these days, Richard really is going to meet Bubba. May his anus rue
the day.
<snip>
While you and others are so pissed off at me because I merely make my
opinions known on child nudity in film, thousands of actual children
are being seduced and routinely raped for the pleasures of real sick
I hate to be a bother, but could you post the MID to this for posterity?
My pleasure!
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=auol97023d7%40enews2.newsguy.com&oe=UTF
-8&output=gplain
( also at : http://tinyurl.com/295sg )
From: "John Smith for example" <sendspam@ltaylor.loves.bubba>
Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks
Message-ID: <auol97023d7@enews2.newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Hey Richard Bullis! Want a young girl for your very own?
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 23:22:38 -0600
"If I, or you, take a 10 year old girl, and mother, out on a fishing trip,
and 50 miles from shore, drug them into submission, there is not a damn
thing any state can do about it.
The probability of me doing such a thing is about a
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000:1
But I can state it all I want."
And he used the "X-No, Archive-Yes" header in the post that caused the
original mayhem, but his exact words were:
now did you mean little as in a child? Just put me on a boat in
international waters and I'll do with her as I damn well please. Momma and
her sisters.
As seen in the thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&c2coff=1&
threadm=qNKWLiKYchF%2BEw95%40btinternet.com&rnum=24&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Drape%
2B%2522international%2Bwaters%2522%2Bgroup:alt.usenet.kooks%26hl%3Den%26lr%3
Dlang_en%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26c2coff%3D1%26scoring%3Dd%26selm%3DqNKWL
iKYchF%252BEw95%2540btinternet.com%26rnum%3D24
(trunucated to : http://tinyurl.com/2npax )
Sick little monkey, isn't he?
And what do you about it? Not a damn thing.
Right at this very moment, somebody, somewhere, perhaps in your own
neighborhood, is assaulting a child for sexual pleasures. That person
He wasn't whining. He was turning himself on.
What *You* have described so many times...acting upon these urges,
is known as "Child Molestation".
That is the legal term. It matters not that a person is pedophile. A
pedophile is a person who has a history of "child molestation".
So *that's* st00pid's rationale! Well, that explains it.
 
 
Report this post for offensive content


site map |  disclaimer |  privacy
All Rights Reserved, Legal Spring, Inc. 2004