Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Abbot the COWARD!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Abbot the COWARD!

    This post stands unrefuted!






    In article <[email protected]>,
    Diablo <[email protected]> wrote:
    The Reader's will note that Abbot (aka Jack(***), aka Raider, aka WillKill) has left the field! Randall M has left the field! The FACTS presented below stand unrefuted! Jack(***), The only one here with an OCD condition is YOU! YOUR OCD condition prevents you from seeing the TRUTH! YOUR OCD condition prevents you from acknowledging the FACTS! There is NOTHING in your latest OCD rant that is backed-up by ANY FACTS! That you continue to LIE about FACTS that are easily verifiable speaks volumes as to your agenda, Jack(***)! You truly are a JACKASS! YOU know all about slander, don't you, Jack(***)! The FACT that you created the "WillKill" persona to slander 'detaxers' is a proven FACT! Since we're on the topic of slandering, let's remind the Reader's that you felt it was alright to slander me! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Abbot ([email protected]) Subject: Re: "Government" does not build infrastructure Date: 2004-05-24 15:57:52 PST Kenneth, (a.k.a Diablo) do you care to comment on Sir Lawrence Leupol's claim that you and Philip Naudi (a.k.a Bruce Stellar a.k.a StaR) "ran off with the money at the end of 1999 and left [him] with the bill" for the legal expenses connected to his conviction? [http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...76bec8.0405241 457.6fbb41e6%40posting.google.com] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Diablo ([email protected]) Subject: Re: "Government" does not build infrastructure Date: 2004-05-24 17:06:31 PST "...Since my name is NOT Kenneth (eventhough you make that allegation), I have no comment on an issue that you are Libelously trying to attach to me! I have NEVER met Kenneth, Sir Lawrence Leupol, or Philip Naudi (a.k.a Bruce Stellar a.k.a StaR). Your comments amount to NOTHING more than an attempt to Slander me. Rayder, by all means, please continue with your LIES..."! [http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...c-diablo-73EE8 0.17062924052004%40news.va.sha wcable.net] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Abbot ([email protected]) Subject: "Government" does not build infrastructure Date: 2004-05-24 17:59:10 PST Kenneth, (a.k.a Diablo) do you care to comment on Sir Lawrence Leupol's claim that you and Philip Naudi (a.k.a Bruce Stellar a.k.a StaR) "ran off with the money at the end of 1999 and left [him] with the bill" for the legal expenses connected to his conviction? Diablo) Since my name is NOT Kenneth (eventhough you make that allegation), I have no comment on an issue that you are Libelously trying to attach to me! Abbot) Your gambit is predictable, McDiablo. We know that you detaxers assume "corporate soul" names and then try to stand bold faced before judges saying you have not been called. We know you counseled Leupol to do just this. . .so a lie given here about your name is mere child's play to an experienced liar like you. Diablo) I have NEVER met Kenneth, Sir Lawrence Leupol, or Philip Naudi (a.k.a Bruce Stellar a.k.a StaR). Abbot) The question isn't whether you "met" Leupol and Naudi (a.k.a StaR) when they where in the "persona" you could later use to deny the meeting or whether you corresponded with the poor mark, Leupol, by e-mail, thus never having met him. The question is whether you defrauded him and then "ran off with the money at the end of 1999 and left [him] with the bill" for the legal expenses connected to his conviction? In light of the mounting evidence contradicting your story it would seem you continue to lie to us. You can keep lying if you want, but I am sure Leupol would love to rat you out, considering that you stole a pile of money meant for his defence! Diablo) Your comments amount to NOTHING more than an attempt to Slander me. Rayder, by all means, please continue with your LIES! Abbot) Truth is a defense against slander. So why don't you just tell us the truth about your dealings with Leupol? [http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...76bec8.0405241 659.12219374%40posting.google.com] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Diablo ([email protected]) Subject: Re: "Government" does not build infrastructure Date: 2004-05-24 19:52:21 PST "...Rayder, Your LIES are growing tiresome! Please point out where in Eldon's FREE information found at: http://www.detaxcanada.org you would find ANYTHING that advocates assuming "corporate soul" names! By the way, Rayder, who is "WE"? As for your allegation that I, "...counseled Leupol to do just this..." is just ANOTHER LIE! I have NEVER counselled anyone. My name is NOT Kenneth. Nor have I met, corresponded, spoken with or to, contacted (verbally, orally, or written, including e-mail), had any association with, or been an acquaintance of, "Kenneth" or any other names he may be known under, as expressed by you, and insinuated by you. I have never met, corresponded, spoken with or to, contacted (verbally, orally, or written, including e-mail), had any association with, or been an acquaintance of, anyone known as Sir Lawrence Leupol or any other names he may be known under...". [http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...c-diablo-935E3 E.19521924052004%40news.va.shawcable.net] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just look in the mirror, Jack(***)! Your actions are the very definition of the word slander! Jack(***), are you truly this obtuse? Are you now claiming that Randall M is really Major (P) Randall K. Brown? [http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Depts/M...le/brown.html] Why would any sane man assume that they are the same person? "... Major (MAJ) Promotable (P) Randall K. Brown is the Professor of Military Science at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Worcester, MA as well as the Bay State Battalion Commander...". Randall M has not acknowledged being the author of the piece in question! Until he does and proves that he IS the author, your personal attack is slanderous itself! You'd do well to get a brain cell that actually works before you post again! Going back, Jack(***) (aka Abbot) made the absurd claim that there was an, "...absent proof of the usefulness of detaxing...". -[Abbot-Mar 25, 2005 1:32am] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is the comment that started this entire discussion, Jack(***)! In typical fashion, Jack(***), you tried numerous times to manipulate this FACT into a claim that I was saying something else. I have been clear from the outset that the documents you claim to uphold and the United States of America, the country YOU call home, were all founded by "detaxers", NOT that all the framers/Founders were 'detaxers'! You ALWAYS have to resort to these LIES because you can't respond honestly! Jack(***), the bottom line is you have said NOTHING in this latest post. You have gone on a personal attack, and that's it! YOUR LIES and BULL**** prove nothing! The reason you go on this diatribe is to draw attention away from your latest mistake! It was pointed out to you that The Boston Tea Party was one such example that busts your original claim wide open. You couldn't handle the FACTS, and instead enlisted help from Rookard, Fred, and Randall M. Randall M made outrageous claims that YOU, Jack(***), endorsed! Randall M made the claim that The Boston Tea Party happened, "...because the British REMOVED a tax...". Neither of you have had the guts to back up your assertions! You tried, unconvincingly, to claim that the Tea Act of 1773 was the proof! You neglected to remind the Reader's that the tax on tea provision was still in effect as part of the Townshend Act! That blows your theory right out of the water! "...The Boston Tea Party was one of the most effective pieces of political theater ever staged. John Adams, no fan of mob action, wrote of the dumping of the tea: "There is a dignity, a majesty, a sublimity, in this last effort of the patriots that I greatly admire." About 50 members of the political organization, The Sons of Liberty, boarded 3 ships in BostonHarbor. Some were dressed, not very convincingly, as Mohawk Indians. In a very orderly and quiet fashion, they plunked [sterling ] 9,659 worth of Darjeeling into the sea. The Boston Tea Party was a protest of British tax policies. It came in the midst of a boycott of English tea during which the East India Company, which owned the tea, had seen its profits plummet in the wake of a boycott of tea in the colonies. Consumption in the colonies had fallen from 900,000 lbs. in 1769 to 237,000 lbs. just 3 years later...". [http://www.pbs.org/ktca/liberty/chro...ston1774.html] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- In 1770 the British Parliament repealed most provisions of the Townshend Acts, which taxed imports to the American colonies. However, Parliament retained the duty on tea to demonstrate its power to tax the colonies. Thereafter, Americans mostly bought tea smuggled from Holland. While the Tea Act of 1773 was designed to help the nearly bankrupt East India Company by eliminating any tax on tea the company exported to America, the companys tea was STILL subject to the Townshend tax. Even though tea from the East India Company was now cheaper than the smuggled Dutch tea most Americans drank, the colonists resisted buying it, for it meant accepting the British tax. The real problem Jack(***), is your ignorance prevents you from seeing the TRUTH! That's alright! The Reader's here and those who have an open mind have seen the TRUTH, and know that you will do anything to maintain your LIES!
The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
Working...
X