From: Peter Bowditch on
Tess <XXFlamingStarrXX(a)aol.com> wrote:

>On Sep 3, 8:43?am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>> Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Sep 2, 7:14?pm, Annie <SNIFFFT...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Do these Quackwatch connected individuals not have anything better to
>> >> do with their time----or do they think they are above the law?
>>
>> >You have nothing to worry about from anyone from Quackwatch. I would
>> >be more concerned with your former, and so-called, friends.
>>
>> Her true friends are the ones who visit her now. Those who are
>> prepared to go through the locked doors and past the orderlies and
>> psych nurses to get to the secure wards in the asylum. This is so
>> confronting that most people can't face it.
>>
>> --

>
>
>You know, if you are not on the receiving end of the problems that
>someone has had to endure for a long period of time then perhaps the
>best way to respond is to say nothing.
>
>Kind of that "walk a mile in my shoes".
>
>I have had "problems" with things that have happened, granted not to
>the extent or as damaging as have happened to Deb and others.
>
>In my opinion to suggest that someone is in an institution for mental
>health is on the rude side, and you wouldn't care for someone who was
>referring to you and your mental state in that manner.

1) The person in question has been posting paranoid fantasies and it
is becoming tiresome.

2) Have you ever made the effort to get past the barriers in order to
visit someone in a secure psych facility? I have.

3) Read up on metaphor and sarcasm.

--
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: Mark Thorson on
Peter Bowditch wrote:
>
> 1) The person in question has been posting paranoid fantasies
> and it is becoming tiresome.

Oh no! I want to see all of it, in full flower!

That's why when the FBI came to me and asked
who we should test the new generation of
mind-control gases on, I said "It should be
people with existing, extensive psychiatric
records, so you've got plausible deniability."
And I suggested they could find such people
on certain Internet newsgroups.

That may have been a mistake.
From: Annie on
On Sep 3, 2:15 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:

> 1) The person in question has been posting paranoid fantasies and it
> is becoming tiresome.
>
> 2) Have you ever made the effort to get past the barriers in order to
> visit someone in a secure psych facility? I have.
>
> 3) Read up on metaphor and sarcasm.
>
> --
What you post is "beyond tiresome." Paranoid fantasies, I do not
think so. Reality, pal. You, and I, and the rest of the Quackwatch
Brat Pack, know exactly what has transpired. Duh.

Only the paranoid have to use listening devices and hack computers----
because they feel the absolute need to know what you are saying about
them.





From: Annie on
On Sep 3, 3:53 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...(a)sonic.net> wrote:

>
> That's why when the FBI came to me and asked
> who we should test the new generation of
> mind-control gases on, I said "It should be
> people with existing, extensive psychiatric
> records, so you've got plausible deniability."
> And I suggested they could find such people
> on certain Internet newsgroups.
>
>

U.S. Code Title 18 prohibits intelligence against U.S. Citizens.

Exactly why where you waiting for me at the Santa Clara train station
that day of all days?

That's a question I want answered.


From: Mark Thorson on
Annie wrote:
>
> On Sep 3, 3:53 pm, Mark Thorson <nos...(a)sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > That's why when the FBI came to me and asked
> > who we should test the new generation of
> > mind-control gases on, I said "It should be
> > people with existing, extensive psychiatric
> > records, so you've got plausible deniability."
> > And I suggested they could find such people
> > on certain Internet newsgroups.
>
> U.S. Code Title 18 prohibits intelligence against U.S. Citizens.
>
> Exactly why where you waiting for me at the Santa Clara train station
> that day of all days?
>
> That's a question I want answered.

Your intracranial active RFID tag needed a software
upgrade, and that can't be done from the satellite
because the flash memory write cycles consume too much
power. It's done from portable RFID programmers,
usually disguised in a Thermos bottle, can of soda,
or a rolled up newspaper.