From: Annie on 30 Sep 2008 17:36
On Sep 30, 12:20 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> I don't deny the truth of "the entire matter", just the parts you made
> up. As that is only about 99.73% it is not "the entire matter".
And what parts would those be, Peter?
From: Annie on 30 Sep 2008 20:05
On Sep 30, 12:17 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> As your email address invites people to "sniff this", perhaps your
> choice of "medication" is taken through the nose.
Spay Neuter Its For Furry Friends. --- This
In order words I support animal population control.
Got the picture, or are you a Grateful Dead Fan, and need me to draw
you a picture.
If it was "SNIFF" ----(which it is not) you might be able to add
something bizarre to it.
It was spelled this way on purpose.
From: Mark Probert on 30 Sep 2008 21:11
On Sep 30, 12:53 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 29, 7:02 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> >> But you called me a liar three times for suggesting that you knew
> >> them. You really should try to keep track of what you say, or is your
> >> continual snipping of all context when you reply an indication of the
> >> way your memory works?
> >I'm dedicating songs to you, and the rest of your friends here that in
> >ever so humble opinion fit your agenda.
> >Quackwatch supports pharmaceuticals....so here's Mothers Little
> And again you snip all context before replying. Is this some sort of
> mental disorder, or do you just lack any sense of good manners?
I believe that Debbee does this so she can respond and look "smart",
since she probably realizes that she is semantically challenged.
> Restoring context - Debbie accused me three times of lying that she
> had a connection to Paul Revere and the Raiders and then told me that
> she did have a connection.
Typical of her antics.
From: Mark Probert on 30 Sep 2008 21:16
On Sep 29, 10:50 pm, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 7:12 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> > Which judge? And are you suggesting that judges never lie?
> There are two more appropriate venues for this topic coming up.
> The AAPS case in Texas which should be a real "barn buster"
> if you get my sense of humor.
No, you do not have a sense of humor. The only one you have is
> It would appear that you and the rest of the QW lot would like me
> to quit posting as it seems to be getting under your collars.
You are gravely mistaken. First, there is no "QW lot" here. Second, if
there were, they would want you to continue to post, since your posts
are the best evidence of your being what you are. and
> I do not want to be accused of RICO, so I'm laying it all out here.
No you haven't. Every time you are asked a direct answer, you weasel
and slither to avoid answering, and say that thee are better venues.
> After all, everyone should know everything, right?
Good idea. Let us know when you reach the first thing.
From: Mark Probert on 30 Sep 2008 21:19
On Sep 30, 1:06 am, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 10:00 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> > I saw the Rolling Stones when Brian was still alive and with the band.
> > What do they have to do with your mental illness? Did you take too
> > many illicit pharmaceuticals while you were consorting with a pop
> > band?
> > --
> No mental illness here. I've never knowingly taken anything at all.
> I was at a party once and got something in a drink, but that was long
> ago, and far away.
> I resent, and note the retaliation claiming "mental illness," thus in
> feeble attempt to deny the truth of this entire matter.
Resent to your hearts content. It is not retaliation by any stretch of
And, you have yet to post an iota of truth.