|
|
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 03:07:33 GMT, "Fenris" <howl@themoon.com> wrote:
>
>" "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
>news:paj_d.13$5d2.846@news.uswest.net...
>> Fenris wrote:
>>> "Charles & Mambo Duckman" <duckman@gfy.slf> wrote in mess
|
|
|
I suppose people who join armies and get paid to be soldiers do it to
satisfy some personal desire?
" "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
news:E5a_d.62$ix1.7929@news.uswest.net...
> 26 detainees die at the hand of U.S. soldiers
|
|
|
In article <7fik311vqorh8fpenvtmsvu0gir3tr2vc7@4ax.com>, JJT <jjt@jjt.vop.com>
wrote:
> You are suing Google for archiving
> your OWN posts....??
LOL, I know, isn't that laughable that RGP is suing Google!
I can just imagine how the google L
|
|
|
found the following on a website and have modified it to cover the
issues in his case. In the event he was to sue me in Pennsylvania, the
following would be the type of filing I would use. As it may be of
interest to others here I dedided to post
|
|
|
>You are suing Google for archiving
>> your OWN posts....??...
>No, for archiving yours.
But, and I'll use real small words for ya,
my entire basis for MY opinion of you are
formed from the posts you made/tried to nuke,
that I have, with all
|
|
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
> JJT is misguided. The only reason HE is not being sued (yet) for what he
> writes about me is that GOOGLE is being sued for archiving it. If I sued
> HIM, it wouldn't do much good, as people can and do use anonymous
> remailers
|
|
|
TYpical lib, blame the conservative in power........you lost ASSHOLES!!
"Jim" <tomfiege9@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111107461.329489.100040@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Siegfriedson wrote:
>> The charges against Michael Jackson provi
|
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 04:37:31 GMT, Fenris <howl@themoon.com> wrote:
>
>Try read a dictionary, that is how atheist is defined. It is also what you
>are saying below. Seems like you need to sort out your own logic.
The dictionary defintion you poste
|
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 03:54:44 GMT, Fenris <howl@themoon.com> wrote:
>atheist
>
>adj : related to or characterized by or given to atheism; "atheist leanings"
>[syn: atheistic, atheistical] n : someone who denies the existence of god
>
Now go look
|
|
|
>JJT is misguided. The only reason HE is not being sued (yet) for what he
>writes about me is that GOOGLE is being sued for archiving it. If I sued
>HIM, it wouldn't do much good, as people can and do use anonymous remailers
>and post from other
|
|
|
In article <ooj_d.491$3c2.89390@monger.newsread.com>, "Mike"
<no.spam@please.com> wrote:
>
>What you are trying to do is totally errase the very concept of
>corroboration.
He's not erasing it. But while corroboration may be required in science
o
|
|
|
"Fenris" <howl@themoon.com> wrote in message
news:Yfr_d.51676$xX3.4101@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Believe what you will, simpleton. But dictionaries define what a word
> means.
Actually dictionaries do not define what words mean.
Dictionaries r
|
|
|
n Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:34:39 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[...]
>
>>>> "Ken, you obviously have keen insight and a sharp intellect."
>>>> -- Theodore A. Kaldis
>
>>> If only you had
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote
>"This judge is really defendant-hostile."
Then Geragos may as well concede that this 'turkey' IS going to trial.
You may as well accept it too. Think of it as your biiiiiiiig chance to
finally meet Sarah "she's no prize"
|
|
|
In article <n9cj319vea29n4agvsgk1h9fi61i1rjfdp@4ax.com>, Jon Beaver
<jbeaver@NO.com> wrote:
>
>In Anglo-American law, "prove" means to convince someone. It's not a
>logical term. It doesn't matter if it violates some logical concept
>of "petitio pr
|
|
|
n article <GXh_d.479$3c2.88071@monger.newsread.com>, "Mike"
<no.spam@please.com> wrote:
>"Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote
>
>>> We don't "take a person at his word for a crime." Bob doesn't testify
>>>> that "I saw Charlie commit murder" or "I saw Char
|
|
|
ScotMc wrote:
>>Agnosticism deals with knowledge, atheism with belief. They are orthogonal
>>and therefore not mutually exclusive.
>
> Belief and knowledge are not completely orthogonal.
> They are related.
> One of the formal uses of "believe"
|
|
|
Polygamous police chief could lose badge
03/17/2005
ST. GEORGE, Utah (AP) -- The police chief in the polygamous border town of
Colorado City, Ariz., faces loss of his badge in Utah for having multiple
wives.
Chief Sam Roundy a
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote
>"Solar, that's BEAUTIFUL! Poor Ted Kaldiscredited was at a
Kaldistinct Kaldisadvantage, but now, he's in total Kaldisarray. It's
just another USENET Kaldisaster. :) "
Perhaps Kaldisclosing the autopsy would help his position.
|
|
|
ScotMc wrote:
>>However, since theism means belief in gods, then atheism by definition
>>means non-belief in gods. I honestly don't know of what use could your
>>application of the word atheism be... Atheism as "belief that there is no
>>god"???
|
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:35:24 -0800, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Ken Smith wrote:
>
>> Uh, that's not the point he's making, Ted. Rather, with you arguing for
>> Cam's innocence with such startling ineptitude, one hardly
|
|
|
Stephen M.H. Lawrence wrote:
> Whoops, repost, edited to change subject line.
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7222711/
>
> I've said it before, folks: Stock up.
>
> *********************************
> Charging smokes over the Net? Not anymore
>
|
|
|
oliver wrote:
> Isn't that the timber company out of Redding? Wow, how did you know
> they were the state's biggest land owner?
Trivia. Who's the biggest private land owner in the country?
Ted Turner.
|
|
|
Paul, you are right..but..
The only thing one needs to defend against
grp-ie's fantasy is the truth. I base MY entire
defense <chuckle> with every word he has posted.
There is only ONE (1) reason grp-ie doesn't sue me.
I AM CALLING him a chi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fenris wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>Those who fervently believe that god does not exist are no more
>>>>>>>correct
>>>>>>>that those that fervently believe that he does. They are both
>>>>>>>fundies,
>>>>>>>true believers. I don't believe god exists, bu
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Ken Smith wrote:
>>>>>>> There are only two possible explanations for these indisputable
>>>>>>> facts: either the father was as dumb as a kumquat, or he murdered his
>>>>>>>daughter.
>>>>>> Okay
|
|
|
Example case has 2 very bad crimes , but also 1 supposed crime that
wasnt even a crime or just got dismissed since it was just a
miscommunication or minor error. Might there *possibly* been used, that
example case to defend a client since he didnt do b
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Ken Smith wrote:
> [snipped Ted's old and tired personal invective]
WHAT "personal invective"? There was no personal invective in the material
you snipped.
------------- BEGIN RESTORED MATERIA
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> "Ken, you obviously have keen insight and a sharp intellect."
> -- Theodore A. Kaldis
Unfortunately, I'd be hard-pressed to prove that on the basis of what you've
been writing lately.
--
Theodor
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Ken Smith wrote:
>>> Uh, that's not the point he's making, Ted. Rather, with you arguing for
>>> Cam's innocence with such startling ineptitude, one hardly needs a
>>> prosecutor. :)
>> Quit be
|
|
|
In article <VBr_d.51681$xX3.29930@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"Fenris" <howl@themoon.com> wrote:
> " "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
> news:paj_d.13$5d2.846@news.uswest.net...
> > Fenris wrote:
> >> "Charles & Mambo Duckman" <duck
|
|
|
Solar wrote:
> Prof. Jonez wrote:
>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>> I don't think it's ever going to come to that. Even Geragos is dubious
>> Nice butchery of English, though apropos.
The usage is correct. There is no "butchery" here.
>>>
|
|
|
Fenris wrote:
> " "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
> news:paj_d.13$5d2.846@news.uswest.net...
> > Fenris wrote:
> > > "Charles & Mambo Duckman" <duckman@gfy.slf> wrote in message
> > > news:ioudnc5lJ6hNaarfRVn-qQ@comcast.com...
>
|
|
|
duke wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 10:29:46 -0700, " \"- Prof. Jonez©\""
> <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote:
>
> > > My understanding of the word is that atheist believe that god
> > > does not exist.
>
> > That's incorrect, as you've been told numerous time
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> ienjball@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> With the acquittal of Robert Blake, you and your attorneys can go to
>>> Steve Cooley. You can tell Cooley that his office just bombed in a
>>> splashy trial. Who kno
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Cam Brown is every bit the victim of circumstance
> The "circumstance" of knocking up a woman not his wife? [...]
No, the circumstance of running afoul of a 44-year-old p*ssing match. And
what
|
|
|
"- Prof. Jonez=A9" wrote:
UP YOURS, YOU POMPOUS FUCKING ASSHOLE
STAY THE FUCK OUT OF ALT.TRUE-CRIME
|
|
|
heodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
[snipped Ted's old and tired personal invective]
>>Either Cam Brown is a cold-blooded killer, or he flunked out of "slow
>>class."
>
> Cam Brown is every bit the victim of circumstance
The "c
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000607030505060201020609
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
[snip]
>>Besides,
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010000050209090000090505
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
>
>
>>Uh, that's not the
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
>>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>>Jon Beaver wrote:
>>>>Ken Smith wrote:
>>>
>
>>>>>But the judge won't hear any of it,
>>>>
>>>>Here's where you get weak. "Won't hear any of it" is hyperbole. It's
>>
|
|
|
But the war isn't the biggest thing sucking the money out . . . the tax cuts
(to the rich) are about twice what the war costs.
"Jim" <tomfiege9@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111107461.329489.100040@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Siegfrieds
|
|
|
I thought the tort reform bill changed the rules that class action
plaintiffs used to destroy diversity ... thus, if the defendant is
diverse with any plaintiff, removal to federal court is appropriate and
you cannot pack the case with a single plainti
|
|
|
Florida Effort to Keep Terri Schiavo "Alive" Hits Roadblock
By Samantha Gross | The Associated Press
Posted March 17, 2005, 6:28 PM EST
TALLAHASSEE -- Working on at least four fronts,
lawmakers and lawyers in Florida and in Washington
raced t
|
|
|
sgallagher@rogers.com wrote in news:1111077457.677003.146920
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> (snip)
>
>> Assume, for a moment, that H.R. 698 ends up becoming law. And then
>> suppose a child is born in the US to illegal alien parents, and that
|
|
|
"- Prof. Jonez©" wrote:
> Sam Bam wrote:
>
>> "- Prof. Jonez©" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Juries will subconsciously be more at ease sending a younger
>>>man to prison than a very old man,
>>
>>Like the the Martha Stewart case?
>>
>>Bernie Ebbers?
>
>
|
|
|
" "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
news:c3j_d.12$5d2.847@news.uswest.net...
> JokingYouU wrote:
>> Exactly what standard are you applying? \
>
> How about the Geneva Convention for starters you
> top-posting retard?
Prejudi
|
|
|
"Jon Beaver" <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote in message
news:n9cj319vea29n4agvsgk1h9fi61i1rjfdp@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:08:06 GMT, "Mike" <no.spam@please.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Larry" <larry@x.com> wrote
>>
>>>> We don't "take a person at his wo
|
|
|
aozotorp@aol.com wrote:
> Sam Bam wrote:
>
>>aozotorp@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Much like Caplis and Silverman, he puts himself up as the
>>>
>>>definitive
>>>
>>>
>>>>>American!
>>>>
>>>>I've never heard him say that.
>>>>
>>>>cite?
>>>
|
