From: Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. on
Flapper Jones wrote:
> Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> > On Aug 1, 2:33 am, Flapper Jones <Flap...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> >>
> >>> You will not get and we have NEVER got a factual answer from Proby.
> >> You'll never get the truth from Wholeflaffers...
> >
> > Proby (and his sock-puppets) CANNOT answer a simple question
>
> not can't.
> won't.

Same thing, won't because you can't. Simply put, Proby is a #1) liar
- porven by Jan; #2) harasser of women - proven by Ilena and #3) a
crack-pot proven by Linda. The jury finds Proby discredited, proven
by being disbarred. Case dismissed.
From: Flapper Jones on
Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> Same thing, won't because you can't.

Nope. Not the same thing.
There's enough proof been posted already.
You've been shown to be Dr. Richard X. Frager, a liar.
That's all the proof that's required.

Verdict: Wholeflaffers = Liar

Buh bye, Jerry! :-D


From: Flapper Jones on
Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> The jury finds Proby discredited, proven
> by being disbarred. Case dismissed.

Get a script for haldol and start taking it immediately.

You're way off your rocker.
From: Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. on
Flapper Jones wrote:
> Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> > Same thing, won't because you can't.
>
> Nope. Not the same thing.

Nice try, but again false. What's the big deal about providing the
dates of said e-mail responses?
Even a disbarred lawyer, I mean liar would know the significance of
providing details.
Wait, you are both of them! Ha-ha.

Question to Proby: why the sock-puppets?
From: art on
Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A. wrote:
> What's the big deal about providing the
> dates of said e-mail responses?

Do your own homework.