XPost: alt.conspiracy, alt.conspiracy.new-world-order   
      
   On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 10:00:52 -0400, "Dogchain"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   > wrote in message   
   >news:t173239ainu020i59o0ab08a9bcvo6iuh7@4ax.com...   
   >> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:06:16 -0400, "Dogchain"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> wrote in message   
   >>>news:k31b1359245kkdfm30o8krkhk6iv727kct@4ax.com...   
   >>>> On 5 Apr 2007 02:23:13 -0700, "Day Brown"  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>More to the point is that the group think about 911 is breaking down.   
   >>>>>I really would like to see the evidence, but the only place to present   
   >>>>>*evidence* is in a legal proceeding where the witnesses have to   
   >>>>>present their credentials to prove they are who they say, and swear   
   >>>>>under oath and penalty of perjury.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Anyone can post anything on the net and claim to be whatever they   
   >>>>>think will improve their credibility. The problem with not having a   
   >>>>>court or congressional hearing is that these posted reports are   
   >>>>>gradually increasing and damaging the credibility of those in   
   >>>>>government, both Republicans and Democrats.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>I dont claim to know what happened on 911. In fact, I claim *NOT* to   
   >>>>>know, and I'd like to get this issue settled so we can quit wasting   
   >>>>>space on ad hominum and move on to some of the other issues that need   
   >>>>>to be dealt with.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>If Col Razer has a case, then surely he can find some citizen of New   
   >>>>>York city who suffered damages on 911 to bring a civil case against   
   >>>>>Silverstein. With all the 911 websites, why havnt any of them already   
   >>>>>done this to prove they are right? Didnt Silverstein receive billions?   
   >>>>>Isnt there *money* to be made by smart lawyers? Arent there any smart   
   >>>>>lawyers in New York city? If the 911 websites are correct, then isnt   
   >>>>>there the *EVIDENCE* to present in a class action civil suit?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Hello? Why are we talking about this here, when there are millions to   
   >>>>>be made by smart lawyers in New York? WTF?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Because the "smart lawyers" know that there isn't a case.   
   >>>   
   >>>Or perhaps looking at the law...getting the ducks in a row.   
   >>   
   >> Or not.   
   >   
   >Because out here on Usenet you, wussyboi, are a structural engineer, tax   
   >lawyer, civil attorney with Krekin-like abilities. bwahahahahah   
      
   Maybe you should point out where I've ever claimed any of the above,   
   coward.  But then you're just a cowardly liar.   
      
   >>>I've already said anytime (@ your convenience) ...just let me know.   
   >>>   
   >>>Isn't that right, wussyboi?   
   >>   
   >> Name a date and time, coward.   
   >   
   >What part of the original conversation "anytime (@ your convenience) ...just   
   >let me know" don't you wanna understand, wussyboi?   
      
   You're the one who said:   
      
    "It be useful if you gave me a time so I can be @ this address and   
   not one of my others.  I am very busy at certain times of the month."   
      
   Name a date and time, coward.   
      
   If you're so brave, why don't you name a date and time, coward?   
      
   >>>Perhaps you'd like to contact a "smart lawyer", wussyboi?   
   >>   
   >> You're the one who probably needs a lawyer, coward.   
   >   
   >Not so sure about this one are you, wussuboi?   
      
   Yep, I'm pretty sure about it.  Maybe you've had such contact back   
   when you were a druggie, Bryan Steven Pataky....   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)