misc.legal

>Ken Smith wrote >>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote ">> So order it. But I've already said they've tampered with it. Nevertheless, there's still nothing there that undermines my case." ">But yet, a few supposed minor changes to an autopsy report is s

"indigent" <none@indigent.com> wrote in message news:r1IBd.36188$wD4.25587@fe1.texas.rr.com... > I was convicted of a felony (3rd degree) a couple of years ago. The very > same act in a number of other states would be a misdemeanor--period. I was

>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote ">And in a week from Thursday, you will be eligible to reapply to the Bar in Colorado. What measures have you taken to assure that you will be able to get past the Bar Examiners this time?" Maybe Ken can hire Mark Gera

>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote >"jls" wrote: >> McGyver wrote: >>> It's admissable. >> Uh, no. It's admissible. >Got nothing better to do than spelling flames? Why not 'F****** the dictionary definition of' spelling, Ted ??!!! --------

>Ken Smith wrote > Whats Cam's defense *then* ?? Why, THE FORMAL RULES OF LOGIC, of course !!!!!!! Bwahahahahahahaaahahhhhhahhha. Leonard Nimoy is not Spock and neither is Ted "dictionary f****er" Kaldis... <g> -------- have a GREAT day

>Ken Smith wrote ">None whatsoever. You probably don't see it in a.f.b-l, but Solar has put this question to rest. Even if it *was* Lauren's idea, it is still Cam's fault -- "Look, Daddy! Mr. Tiger has a very sharp set of teeth... can I see. plll

I'm a total, utter novice when it comes to business issues, so please bear with me! I'm from state A, currently living in state B, planning to return to state A this year. I have a web site that I use for selling various items; I own its domain

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:20:26 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: >I didn't write in misc.survivalism -- I never even read that group. If my >response happened to be cross-posted into that group by virtue of where the >origi

Tom Dorsch use to kick your A$$ on this NG Sammy, looks like his boot prints left a mark on your ego ! -- Ask your ISP to add the following newsgroups: alt.war.world-war-one alt.war.world-war-two alt.war.world-war-three alt.war.napoleonic al

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: >>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>Ken Smith wrote: >>>>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>>>RH wrote: >>>> >>>>>>We live in a world being pillaged by the institutions of global >>>>>>capitalism to enrich the few

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070808070301070204050303 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: > > >> Exactly what part

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > "jls" wrote: >>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>"jls" wrote: >>>>McGyver wrote: >>> >>>>>It's admissable. >>>> >>>>Uh, no. It's admissible. >>> >>>Got nothing better to do than spelling flames? >> >>Not a flame, > >

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 01:05:10 GMT, PMDavis <pmdlandarch@earthlink.net> wrote: >On 1 Jan 2005 09:47:12 -0600, cobalt@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote: > >>On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:53:13 GMT, Asmodeus >><asmodeus@REMOVEinsightbb.com> wrote: >> >>>"Mark K. B

Sneechres <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote: >Ray Fischer wrote: >> Sneechres <sneechres@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> > However, >> >> >> >the ones that are enumerated as specifically protected do in >fact >> >> >give >> >> >> >the citizenry the right t

>>Enjoy your rude awakening in HELL. >You present yourself as a christian, however, the effect is ruined when >you start acting like a two year old throwing a tantrum when your >opinions are disagreed with.. Yea he is quite the demented looser, h

In our last episode <0t7dt0d0jc4ok49m09ugs6tccbv7f4jgsg@4ax.com>, PMDavis lept out of the bushes shouting: > an impeachment conviction in the House No, the House does not have that power. The House has the power to impeach which is the rough equiv

Sam Stone wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: > >>>> Wanna bet? What makes you think the First Amendment still >>>> protects us from anything? >>> >>> What makes you think it doesn't? >> >> Nonpublication rules, Unk. Ever read Judge Bork's "Coerci

Kent Wills wrote: > I see that on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 15:48:03 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> > wrote: >>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>"jls" wrote: >>> >>>>Poor Ted. He's soooo transparent, such a glaring conspicuous fraud. >>> >>>Guess again. >> >

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: >>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>RH wrote: >> > >>>>We live in a world being pillaged by the institutions of global >>>>capitalism to enrich the few at the expense of the many. [...] >>> >>>It's not ca

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > Kent Wills wrote: >>Ken Smith wrote: >>>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>>"jls" wrote: >>>>>What snakes are in that autopsy, Ted, that you dare not let them crawl >>>>>out? >>>> >>>>As you said, it's a public document.

[nabbed this beaut from alt.true-crime] Mardy wrote: > CHICO — Whether Scott Peterson's lawyer breached a contract with a > consultant in the double-murder case might be decided Feb. 28, a judge > said Thursday. > That will be three days after anot

jls wrote: > "Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > news:41D6E572.8498425@worldnet.att.net... > > same old drooling stupidity. > > Poor cowardly Teddie, afraid to publish the other pages of the damning > autopsy; what a

[took this gem from alt.true-crime] john wrote: > In article <09jis0t0apei9sdgncssnflnspuipkhqbo@4ax.com>, > jkrhia@sbcglobal.net says... [Commenting on Geragos' request for endorsements: Someone had the bright idea of getting corporate spon

"Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote in message news:o66ja2-2fk.ln1@dhcpdns2.ddsoho.com... > stoney wrote: >> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:49:03 GMT, dangett <dangett@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >>>Such disrepect to our commander in chief dur

There is nothing to preven you from forming a cooperative, employee owned venture to produce wealth without exploitation. Nor anything to prevent the re-investment of profits for the benefit of expanding your model globally. all you need is rati

Ken Smith wrote: >>> Wanna bet? What makes you think the First Amendment still protects >>> us from anything? >> >> >> What makes you think it doesn't? > > > Nonpublication rules, Unk. Ever read Judge Bork's "Coercing Virtue?" No,

(i will tell you my story and then give you my background) after being on rsdi social security disabiity for many years due to a w/c injury...my son was a junior and I needed money to move and save for his growing needs...I went to work for a pizza p

In misc.survivalism Theodore A. Kaldis <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > Capitalism isn't "brutal". Capitalism functions on the basis of agreement. > You airhead. But laissez-faire capitalism can result in some entities being able to dictate th

In misc.survivalism Willcox <not_giving@you.my.address.com> wrote: > RH <halcon7roho@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Under global capitalism the world is ruled by a global financial > > casino staffed by faceless bankers, money managers, and hedge fund > > sp

In article <cr6o7g010mg@news2.newsguy.com>, Richard <Anonymous@127.001> wrote: >Then take it to the next level. Inform the United States Secret Service of >her activity, They will investigate her thoroughly. >Why the Secret Service? Because as a part o

Mark K. Bilbo wrote: > In our last episode <Xns95568A3E49CACdann@151.164.30.48>, dangett lept out > of the bushes shouting: > > >>Such disrepect to our commander in chief during wartime would be >>unprecedented. Just shows how low the democrats w

I see that on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:26:25 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: >Ken Smith wrote: > >> Exactly what part of this do you not understand? > >The part I understand best is why you refused to submit to that psycho

I see that on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 20:16:55 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >jls wrote: >> "Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message >> news:41D6E572.8498425@worldnet.att.net... >> >> same old drooling stupidity. >> >>

I see that on Sat, 1 Jan 2005 14:59:08 -0500, " jls" <jls1016@bellsouth.net> wrote: > >"Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message >news:41D6E572.8498425@worldnet.att.net... > >same old drooling stupidity. > >Poor cowardly Te

I see that on Sat, 01 Jan 2005 10:01:22 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: >Kent Wills wrote: > >> Ken Smith wrote: >>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: >>>> "jls" wrote: > >>>>> What snakes are in that autopsy, Ted, that you

>> You could publish the same book without the names of the opponents. > If >> Bobby Fischer in hiding were in that group, his name would be adding > the >> value to the book. >> > Surely I could, but that is not responsive. To include my 1955 game

> You clearly display your ignorance. Still seeking revenge against the kids from the schoolyard? Poor BOY. >A newspaper does not need permission > from the league to publish a factual account of a game. Actually, they may. The league has

>> News is not. > > A chess game IS news. The fact that a game was played is news. The entire gamescore is not.

Please advise?

Kent Wills wrote: > I see that on Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:35:16 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> > wrote: > > [...] > >>>>And we haven't even gotten underway here on this case yet. >>> >>> Which I find real annoying! >> >> As I've said before, havi

Kent Wills wrote: > I see that on Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:32:40 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> > wrote: > > [...] > > >>> Actually, a valid question. We all know Lauren was a bastard. I >>>don't see the what this has to do with anything. >> >>

Kent Wills wrote: > I see that on Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:58:18 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis" > <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > >>He WAS asked to submit to a psychological examination by the Colorado Bar >>Examiners' Board, after all. >> >>Ken Smith

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > RH wrote: > > >>We live in a world being pillaged by the institutions of global capitalism >>to enrich the few at the expense of the many. [...] > > It's not capitalism, but rather a form of mercantilism. You moron.

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > "jls" wrote: > >>Poor Ted. He's soooo transparent, such a glaring conspicuous fraud. > > Guess again. Thank you, Alex. What is, "He's got the intelligence of a kumquat? I'll take 'Freaks of Nature' for 2,000, A

Kent Wills wrote: > I see that on Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:45:28 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis" > <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > >>There's really nothing more to say here. Look at the bright side, Kent: Even if you *were* an ignoramus, you would

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote: > There's really nothing more to say here. You mean, apart from "Ted is losing the argument badly, and even he knows it?"

Sam Stone wrote: Did you marry Sharon Stone, and not tell us about it? She'd obviously wear the pants in that family.... :) > Ken Smith wrote: > >> Wanna bet? What makes you think the First Amendment still protects >> us from anything?

"Theodore A. Kaldis" <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:41D6E572.8498425@worldnet.att.net... same old drooling stupidity. Poor cowardly Teddie, afraid to publish the other pages of the damning autopsy; what a yellow-striped wuss.