From: Jan Drew on

"Mark Probert" <mark.probert(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ee70dcb-7590-4ff0-991a-472dc3048feb(a)c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 6, 9:48 am, "D. C. Sessions" <d...(a)lumbercartel.com> wrote:
> Mark Probert wrote:
> > Orac only blocks one poster, namely John Best, someone who even YOU
> > would not defend.
>
> I've found it unwise to make predictions like that.

I am confident that these critters will not defend someone who makes
death threats against people.

Of course, they can feel free to prove me wrong.
--------------------------------

Um. NO. YOU. Mark Seth Probert make the claim. YOU prove it.

From: Peter Bowditch on
Citizen Jimserac <Jimserac(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>as you know Citizen Jimserac
>is merely a curious fellow who is learning things.

Kook alert! Poster referring to himself in the third person.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
From: D. C. Sessions on
Peter Bowditch wrote:
> Citizen Jimserac <Jimserac(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>as you know Citizen Jimserac
>>is merely a curious fellow who is learning things.
>
> Kook alert! Poster referring to himself in the third person.

Andy lying to boot. It's quite clear that "learning" is
not on his agenda. (One trusts that "curious" is true only
in the secondary definition.)

--
| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs(a)lumbercartel.com> -+
From: D. C. Sessions on
Mike wrote:
> David Wright wrote:

>> Labelling someone a "pharma shill" is a cheesy attempt to discount
>> what that person says, just because it doesn't toe the altie party
>> line. Unless you can demonstrate (cancelled checks would be good)
>> that the object of your ire is indeed being paid by the pharma
>> industry, put a sock in it.
>
> U.S.Government with all its legal and law-enforcement powers could not
> track the income of Al Capone, do you think I can pull such a trick???

That's a pretty flattering picture, actually. Imagine David Wright
going full-on Mafia to disguise his clandestine earnings as a secret
poster for Big Pharma. All the paper-bag drops of used bills, the
money laundering, the anonymous foreign bank accounts, the forged
Federal tax returns ...

I really do admire your tinfoil hat, Dude.

--
| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs(a)lumbercartel.com> -+
From: Mike on
D. C. Sessions wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>> David Wright wrote:
>
>>> Labelling someone a "pharma shill" is a cheesy attempt to discount
>>> what that person says, just because it doesn't toe the altie party
>>> line. Unless you can demonstrate (cancelled checks would be good)
>>> that the object of your ire is indeed being paid by the pharma
>>> industry, put a sock in it.
>> U.S.Government with all its legal and law-enforcement powers could not
>> track the income of Al Capone, do you think I can pull such a trick???
>
> That's a pretty flattering picture, actually. Imagine David Wright
> going full-on Mafia to disguise his clandestine earnings as a secret
> poster for Big Pharma. All the paper-bag drops of used bills, the
> money laundering, the anonymous foreign bank accounts, the forged
> Federal tax returns ...
>
> I really do admire your tinfoil hat, Dude.
>
You are not Al Capone, and I am not US Government.
And non-disclosed payments from interested businesses to supposedly
uninterested individuals are a matter of record (e.g. Richard Doll,
though you are not like him either) - nothing loony here.