|
|
|
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 4:24 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
| |
| |
Hi Dan!
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 7:03 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
| |
| |
Greegor wrote:
[...]
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
years? I think it take all of 3 seconds at the most to type "Kent Wills"
idiot.
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
case? what case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
he has had the name for like 10 years or better,if he wasn't happy with
it I think he would change it.
Whose problem would that be?
it looks to me (and I am sure other readers would agree) that is you
that has a problem greegor.
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
to blame for what simpleton?
the stalking of Kent and members of alt.friends? that would be *YOU*
stalker.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 10:31=A0am, TNKev <TNKev...@gmail.com> wrote:
Greegor wrote:
[...]
years? I think it take all of 3 seconds at the most to type "Kent Wills"
idiot.
It only took a little longer for the WEBMASTER to
type in a list of birthdays including his own.
So what?
G > Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
TNK > case? what case?
Is this gonna be like the "singular they" confusion again Kev?
G > Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
G > himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
TNK > he has had the name for like 10
TNK > years or better,if he wasn't happy
TNK > with it I think he would change it.
Can he change this too?
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-02=
02.asp?search=3D+Kent+Wills+#_1
TNK > Whose problem would that be?
TNK > it looks to me (and I am sure other
TNK > readers would agree) that is you
TNK > that has a problem greegor.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f2=
90b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
TNK > the stalking of Kent and members of
TNK > alt.friends? that would be *YOU*
TNK >
TNK > stalker.
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-02=
02.asp?search=3D+Kent+Wills+#_1
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=3D1155768
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 2:27 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
| |
| |
Greegor wrote:
On Apr 9, 10:31 am, TNKev <TNKev...@gmail.com> wrote:
It only took a little longer for the WEBMASTER to
type in a list of birthdays including his own.
So what?
G > Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
TNK > case? what case?
Is this gonna be like the "singular they" confusion again Kev?
you are the only one that's confused.
why are you stalking the people of alt.friends?
G > Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
G > himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
TNK > he has had the name for like 10
TNK > years or better,if he wasn't happy
TNK > with it I think he would change it.
Can he change this too?
I don't why or if he would want to.
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202
TNK > Whose problem would that be?
TNK > it looks to me (and I am sure other
TNK > readers would agree) that is you
TNK > that has a problem greegor.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
It's you that has a problem with Kent's nym.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
you say that as though he has a driver's license under his usenet nym.
and you having a bug up your ass about it *is* your fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
maybe the garage burglary felon will one day come to usenet and tell you.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Kent had the nym before the alleged crime took place.
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
reverse what? has he been posting as slliW tneK?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
TNK > the stalking of Kent and members of
TNK > alt.friends? that would be *YOU*
TNK >
TNK > stalker.
stalker.
|
| |
| |
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > why are you stalking the people of alt.friends?
I'm not.
Got proof? Link / quote?
TNK > you say that as though he has a driver's license under his
usenet nym.
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
TNK > maybe the garage burglary felon will one day come to usenet and
tell you.
Anonymous socks for Kent Wills are not proof.
|
| |
| |
Greegor wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
Kent also claims it is his real identity, but
that the Felony Record is something he fabricated
and had deliberately inserted into the Iowa criminal
records database(s).
Why of Kent's lies should anyone believe?
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 10:31 am, TNKev <TNKev...@gmail.com> wrote:
Greegor wrote:
[...]
years? I think it take all of 3 seconds at the most to type "Kent Wills"
idiot.
It only took a little longer for the WEBMASTER to
type in a list of birthdays including his own.
So what?
G > Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
TNK > case? what case?
Is this gonna be like the "singular they" confusion again Kev?
G > Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
G > himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
TNK > he has had the name for like 10
TNK > years or better,if he wasn't happy
TNK > with it I think he would change it.
Can he change this too?
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
TNK > Whose problem would that be?
TNK > it looks to me (and I am sure other
TNK > readers would agree) that is you
TNK > that has a problem greegor.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills
*****That is really NOT what he claims.
You should try to understand what you read.
DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
***And it's certainly not YOUR fault that you harass him either, is it?
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
****I thought we went over this before.
Kent was using the name before the name was associated with a court case.
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
***He is? Where?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
****Who has to 'work' at 'creating' a fake ID?
It's called a NYM...we all have them...or, most of us do.
It's pretty easy, really, you just thinking up something and you type it and
VIOLA, there it is.
No work to it.
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
****No one really disputes who is responsible for the ID.
It's your stalking that is in dispute.
You think you aren't a stalker.
Your persistent look ups and posting prove different.
You stalk. That's the issue.
BTW...when you want to piss and moan about how Kane, et al, took over this
newsgroup and destroyed it you should really think hard about whether or not
you are projecting.
TNK > the stalking of Kent and members of
TNK > alt.friends? that would be *YOU*
TNK >
TNK > stalker.
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
|
| |
| |
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
Simple question, Greg. Why does it matter to you so much?
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > why are you stalking the people of alt.friends?
I'm not.
Got proof? Link / quote?
TNK > you say that as though he has a driver's license under his
usenet nym.
http://www.doc.state.ia.us/InmateInfo.asp?OffenderCd=1155768
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
TNK > maybe the garage burglary felon will one day come to usenet and
tell you.
Anonymous socks for Kent Wills are not proof.
|
| |
| |
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Once again tjab is lying.
He did claim to have seen the original documents in a thread about the
original documents located at the courthouse.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Why do you think hanging out in the bathroom while a six-year-old girl
is showierng is reasonable?
Why do you think forcing a six-year-old to go dumpster diving is
reasonable?
Why do you think locking a six-year-old girl out of the house with no
coat or shoes in the middle of an Iowa winter is reasonable?
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
Why? My life hasn't changed.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
When has anyone claimed it is?
Is there a specific reason you try to defend yourself against charges
that were never made? Is it so that you can continue to dishonestly claim
to be a victim?
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
I'll try, once again, to dumb it down to your level.
To trap a stalker. And it worked.
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Over years?
It was set up over a matter of seconds, dullard. I wasn't even there
when the Kent name was chosen.
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Only you think the time it takes to enter four letters (a few seconds)
would equate to years.
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
The one trying to prove something.
In this instance, that would be you.
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
I'm having a rather happy life.
Well, the sun burn I got while in Hawaii didn't make me real happy.
But other than that, my life is pretty good.
Whose problem would that be?
Must be yours, since you're the one complaining about it.
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
That your life sucks will most probably be your fault. You made the
choices and committed the acts that lead to the life you have.
Once again I ask, why are you stalking and harassing past and current
members of alt.friends? You've only managed to play the avoidance game when
I've asked. Please answer the question now.
--
"Jek rat, jek jakha, jek dji, jek porh, jek baht."
Romani: [We are of the] Same blood, the same eyes,
the same soul, the same belly, and of one happiness.
|
| |
| |
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
I love to spam 'alt.support.child-protective-services'
(.(*. .*).)
.KUNT.
(.(.* *.).)
Pervert!
Number One
|
| |
| |
[...]
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
Simple question, Greg. Why does it matter to you so much?
Because I hold Greg to the same standards he holds to others. He
doesn't like that one bit.
--
"Jek rat, jek jakha, jek dji, jek porh, jek baht."
Romani: [We are of the] Same blood, the same eyes,
the same soul, the same belly, and of one happiness.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 10:31 am, TNKev <TNKev...@gmail.com> wrote:
Greegor wrote:
[...]
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
years? I think it take all of 3 seconds at the most to type "Kent Wills"
idiot.
It only took a little longer for the WEBMASTER to
type in a list of birthdays including his own.
I have no idea how long it took Vijay to write out all the birthdays.
It took less than five seconds for me to C&P them and add my own when I took
over.
So what?
Yes, Greg. So what does the birthdates of past and current members of
alt.friends have to do with anything? Why, exactly, are you stalking past
and current members of alt.friends?
G > Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
TNK > case? what case?
Is this gonna be like the "singular they" confusion again Kev?
What singular they?
Oh, do you mean when I mentioned that I ask a friend (singular) who is
a retired Rabbi (still singular) and you called him "them"?
G > Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
G > himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
TNK > he has had the name for like 10
TNK > years or better,if he wasn't happy
TNK > with it I think he would change it.
Can he change this too?
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20050506/04-0202.asp?search=+Kent+Wills+#_1
Yes.
TNK > Whose problem would that be?
Why are you claiming Kevin wrote that which YOU wrote?
How deeply rooted is your psychological NEED to lie?
TNK > it looks to me (and I am sure other
TNK > readers would agree) that is you
TNK > that has a problem greegor.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
I fail to see what relevance tjab's latest misadventure with truth has
to do with anything.
[snip of stuff Greg C&P from another of his posts]
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
Who is assigning blame?
TNK > the stalking of Kent and members of
TNK > alt.friends? that would be *YOU*
TNK >
TNK > stalker.
Greg, why are you stalking and harassing past and current members of
alt.friends?
--
"Jek rat, jek jakha, jek dji, jek porh, jek baht."
Romani: [We are of the] Same blood, the same eyes,
the same soul, the same belly, and of one happiness.
|
| |
| |
[snips for brevity]
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills
*****That is really NOT what he claims.
You should try to understand what you read.
Greg's view is consistent with that of most eight to nine year olds.
They often read what they want into things, then get upset when their error
is shown.
[...]
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
***And it's certainly not YOUR fault that you harass him either, is it?
He's stalking AND harassing. Not just me. Past and current members of
alt.friends as well.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
****I thought we went over this before.
Kent was using the name before the name was associated with a court case.
Since 1993, actually. That's when the "B" Prodigy account was set up
for me.
Given the amount of time Greg has spend searching out my old posts, I'm
certain he's aware of this. Sadly, he's not able to be honest about it.
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
***He is? Where?
Greg is lying, of course. If I wanted to alter it in any way, it would
be realy easy to do. I could post with my real first name, or make up a new
one.
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
****Who has to 'work' at 'creating' a fake ID?
It's called a NYM...we all have them...or, most of us do.
It's pretty easy, really, you just thinking up something and you type it
and VIOLA, there it is.
No work to it.
In my case, I didn't have to do any work. It was chosen for me. A
joke that only two people understood. And it wasn't all that funny anyway.
[...]
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
****No one really disputes who is responsible for the ID.
It's your stalking that is in dispute.
No it's not. Greg stalks people.
He may have been able to intimidate people in the past with his
stalking, but he'll soon learn he can't intimidate me.
You think you aren't a stalker.
Your persistent look ups and posting prove different.
You stalk. That's the issue.
BTW...when you want to piss and moan about how Kane, et al, took over this
newsgroup and destroyed it you should really think hard about whether or
not you are projecting.
Greg wouldn't be the first to try and destroy alt.friends. Doc failed,
and he put in one heck of an effort.
He then sent Peter Hucker. He tried, but he also failed.
We get the odd troll now and again who will try to destroy the group.
Everyone has failed every time.
--
"Jek rat, jek jakha, jek dji, jek porh, jek baht."
Romani: [We are of the] Same blood, the same eyes,
the same soul, the same belly, and of one happiness.
|
| |
| |
[...]
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
Kent also claims it is his real identity, but
Liar.
that the Felony Record is something he fabricated
and had deliberately inserted into the Iowa criminal
records database(s).
Why of Kent's lies should anyone believe?
Could you write that again? In English?
--
"Jek rat, jek jakha, jek dji, jek porh, jek baht."
Romani: [We are of the] Same blood, the same eyes,
the same soul, the same belly, and of one happiness.
|
| |
| |
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
I love to spam 'alt.support.child-protective-services'
(.(*. .*).)
.KUNT.
(.(.* *.).)
Pervert!
Number One
|
| |
| |
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
I love to spam 'alt.support.child-protective-services'
(.(*. .*).)
.KUNT.
(.(.* *.).)
Pervert!
Number One
|
| |
| |
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
I love to spam 'alt.support.child-protective-services'
(.(*. .*).)
.KUNT.
(.(.* *.).)
Pervert!
Number One
|
| |
| |
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
I love to spam 'alt.support.child-protective-services'
(.(*. .*).)
.KUNT.
(.(.* *.).)
Pervert!
Number One
|
| |
| |
Greegor wrote:
stalker.
|
| |
| |
Kent Wills wrote:
[...]
Once again I ask, why are you stalking and harassing past and
current members of alt.friends? You've only managed to play the
avoidance game when I've asked. Please answer the question now.
|
| |
| |
Kent Wills wrote:
[...]
Greg, why are you stalking and harassing past and current members of
alt.friends?
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 04:10:35 +0100, Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
TNK > to blame for what simpleton?
The hypothetical FAKE ID.
****No one really disputes who is responsible for the ID.
It's your stalking that is in dispute.
No it's not. Greg stalks people.
He may have been able to intimidate people in the past with his
stalking, but he'll soon learn he can't intimidate me.
Greg wouldn't be the first to try and destroy alt.friends. Doc f=
ailed,
and he put in one heck of an effort.
He then sent Peter Hucker. He tried, but he also failed.
Rubbish. I just don't know whether to believe you or Doc.
We get the odd troll now and again who will try to destroy the gr=
oup.
Everyone has failed every time.
-- =
This message has been brought to you by nuclear power. Please don't tel=
l the neighbours.
http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.insanevideoclips.com http:=
//www.petersphotos.com
_\/
.-'.'`)
.-' .'
. .-' `-. __\/
\. . |, _.-' -:````) _.-'.'``)
\`. |\ | \.-_. `._ _.-' .'`
__) )__\ |! )/ \_. _.-' `.
_.-'__`-' =3D`:' /.' / | _.-' -:`````)
__.--' ( (@> )) =3D \
`'. |_. .-' `.
: @ `
=3D=3D \
`. |< `.
VvvvvvvvVvvvv) =3D ;
;_/ : -:``````)
(
=3D =3D=3D | ; \. : `.
(( `-----------. =3D=3D |
;_/ : `.
/\ /=3D=3D / : \. : _..--``````)
__\ \_ ; =3D=3D /
:_/ : `.
<__ _```---.._/ =3D=3D=3D=3D/
: \. : `.
/ / `._
;=3D=3D /
:/ . `.
\/ (( `._ / =3D=3D=3D /
`.' _.--`````)
(( /\ ;=3D=3D=3D /
.' `.
__\ \_ : =3D=3D=3D |
/ `.
<__ _``--...__.-'
/
`.
/ / `._
.' .--`````) .--..
\/ :=3D`--...____.-'
.___.-'| .' .--.`. (
(( | =3D=3D=3D \ `.|__. ;
: `.'=
)
: =3D=3D=3D=3D \
`. | ; `; =
`../__
.-'\=3D=3D=3D=3D \ .
`.|___. ;
`;=
\
.-' : =3D=3D=3D \.-'
`. | ;
`;=
)
.-'
\=3D=3D=3D=3D .-'
`.|___. ; =
; (
.-'
:=3D.-'
`. | ; ;
..'
.-'
;_/__. ;
;
:
.-'
; ; | ; ;
:
.-'
_.-'
;_/ ;
;
:
.' _.-"
; \. ;
;
`.
:
__.--" ;_/ ; ;
`.
: __.--"\
; \ ;
;
`-.:
___.---"\ =3D=3D=3D \
;_/'
=
;
``.
`. `\=3D=3D=3D \
=
;
`.
`. `-. =3D=3D\
;
_`-._ `. `\=3D \
;
__..--'' _`-._
`. `-.`\
;
(-(-(-(-(--'' `-._
`. `\`\
.'
__..---'' `._ `-.
.'
__..---'' ___....---'`-`) `---...____..---'
(-(-(-(-(---'' '
|
| |
| |
KW > Greg wouldn't be the first to try and destroy
KW > alt.friends. =A0Doc failed, and he put in one
KW > heck of an effort. He then sent Peter Hucker.
KW >=A0He tried, but he also failed.
PH > Rubbish. =A0I just don't know whether to believe you or Doc.
Uh Oh! Trouble in Wills World?
|
| |
| |
On Apr 10, 7:51 pm, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
| |
| |
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/0f290b9d168728ca
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
|
| |
| |
On Apr 11, 4:51=A0am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/...
Moe > Silence me, Tjab by showing me
Moe > scanned copies of the actual court
Moe > documents at the courthouse. You
Moe > said you actually saw the court
Moe > documents yourself. =A0Shall I get the
Moe > google URL of YOUR OWN WORDS,
Moe > Tjab, or are you going to deny you
Moe > actually posted that?
tjab > Yes, and yes, liar.
Moe, As for silencing you by proving that the
Supreme Court of Iowa did not lie, I'd like
to know why you think that is reasonable.
Considering Kent has claimed that he ""set up""
Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969 as a false
identity for himself, WHY do you think that
the burden of proof rests with people who
say he IS Kent Bradley Wills DOB Jan 8 1969?
Either way, it Kent's problem.
If as he claims, it's a FAKE ID, then it's
certainly not my fault.
In the real world, it's easy to see why the
Garage Burglary Felon would want to deny it.
Why would somebody adopt the FAKE ID of
a Garage Burglary Felon at all?
Hypothetically, If it is a FAKE ID that
Kent so carefully set up over YEARS,
then why is he now trying to reverse it?
Why would somebody work SO HARD and for
years to create a FAKE ID and then try to reverse it?
Who should carry the burden of proof in that case?
Hypothetically, If Kent really made a FAKE ID for
himself then why isn't he happy to live with it?
Whose problem would that be?
If that were the case, then Who is to blame?
You tell me, STALKER.
Moe
Eternal FOREVER KNIGHT fan
" A vampire cop? REALLY?"
http://www.boblarsonfanclub.tk/
|
| |
| |
Greegor wrote:
KW > Greg wouldn't be the first to try and destroy
KW > alt.friends. Doc failed, and he put in one
KW > heck of an effort. He then sent Peter Hucker.
KW > He tried, but he also failed.
PH > Rubbish. I just don't know whether to believe you or Doc.
Uh Oh! Trouble in Wills World?
Why can't you just reply?
why add your stupid attributions like that?
idiot.
|
| |
