|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Mr & Mrs SneedlyMr & Mrs Sneedly
Date: Nov 23, 2007 22:32
On Nov 21, 3:22�pm, "Tom Reiertsen" reiertsen.com> wrote:> Now, I'm not at all a fan of Penn & Teller, but at least they got this one
> right:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E&feature=related
>
> Tom
>
> --
> borland.public.off-topic exists as a runoff for unwanted posts in the
> technical groups. Enforcement of rules is deliberately minimal but
> Borland reserves the right to cancel posts at any time, for any
> reason, without notice.
You need the love of our Lord in your life.
|
| |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: MI5VictimMI5Victim
Date: Nov 23, 2007 22:31
Faxes Sent to British Parliament logs
During the 1998-2000 period my records indicate that I sent at least 14,480 faxes to the British Parliament
in Westminster, of which 9,138 went via TPC's email-to-fax service and 5,342 were sent via fax-modem direct from
my computer. The actual figure is obviously much higher since, for most of this period, whenever a recipient asked to
be deleted from my mailing list, I totally wiped all entries including that from the logfile.
In the records "Y" indicates successful transmission from fax-modem, "N" indicates failed transmission from fax-modem.
"E" indicates an error occurred while transmitting via fax-modem and a fax may have been only partly transmitted.
"y" and "n" indicate success or failure via TPC.
In April 2000 I changed the method of operation by recording "R" when a recipient requested removal, rather than
wiping their details from my mailing list and records; and keeping "B" records for when TPC actioned a ban on a
recipient's fax-number, but the recipient did not write to ask me to cease faxing. The purpose of these changes
was to keep more accurate and complete records, but the intention was thwarted by the police complaint.
441712190076 nnnnnynnEnnnnnnYYNNYYYYNENNNNNynynnnnnnnnnNnnnnnnnn
441712190179 yyyynnyyyYnyyyyynYYYNYYYYYYEYEEEyyyyyyynyyyynyyyyy
441712190189 yyynyyyyyYyyyyyyyYYYEYYYYYYYYYYYyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
441712190243...
|
| Show full article (14.12Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ernie PrimeauErnie Primeau
Date: Nov 23, 2007 20:22
my friends and I get together and just blow hot loads into the Turkey the
night before we cook it.Ernie
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: nuke lalouche addingtonnuke lalouche addington
Date: Nov 23, 2007 19:18
and it's going to get worse for them....
Unless you live in the thunderdome, you dont get it, sorry.
because of course, murder and torture are reprehensible, expect when
you have to torture and murder the most reprehensible murderer and
torturer ever, because he just won't stop, thinking he has all the
power in the world in his hand, and the people who could make him
stop, won't , for some unfathomable reason, so there you are, then
torture is uncool to the FOX crowd, poor babies,
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Kent WillsKent Wills
Date: Nov 23, 2007 16:13
I have it on good authority that on Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:43:16 -0800
(PST), Greegor gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 23, 12:03 pm, Tip cotse.net> wrote:>> The first wife of Keenie P. is not dead but he is desperate that no
>> one contact her. He doesn't want the REAL story to come out. Try to
>> get him to come up with an obit. Won't happen. She is alive and well
>> and isn't speaking kindly of our fatboi. http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com>
>Can you get Kent or Dan to assert this garbage?
I've been pointing out that Ken only stated one of his ex
wives is dead. That Ken hasn't stated which one it was.
Any particular reason you're acting like I haven't?
>
>Make it more interesting to prove it's a lie.
If she's alive, that part wouldn't be a lie. Of course, If
Ken meant wife number two, it would be wrong to imply Ken meant number
one.
|
| Show full article (1.82Kb) |
|
8 Comments |
|
|
Author:
Date: Nov 23, 2007 13:56
>
> "Michael" orneveien.org> wrote in message
> news:pan.2007.11.23.21.01.35.25812@orneveien.org...>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 15:02:59 -0600, Mark Earnest wrote:
>>
>>>> So, atheism can get tax exempt status, since it is a religion?
>>>
>>> Sure, why not?
>>>
>>> Tell your congressman that it's just your belief, and a belief deserves
>>> to be treated that way.
>>>
>>> You will of course have to congregate in atheist halls, that you will
>>> need
>>> to pay for, and to discuss atheist issues, like you do on the atheist
>>> groups.
>>
>> There is no god in Scientology; and they have tax exempt status. In fact,
>> thousands of groups have tax exempt status without having any religious
>> beliefs at all. ...
|
| Show full article (0.99Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author:
Date: Nov 23, 2007 13:56
Re: 72 Raisins "Crackpot Religion" Award
****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****
Nothing below should be misconstrued to have anything to do
with the topic of "angels". Like many other UseNet groups,
alt.religion.angels has its very own kook-screed troll who
alone shares whatever crazy notion of "angel" he has for
the day with the public. Thank you for your attention.
****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****
Mark Earnest wrote more bullshit:
> Trying to talk to angels can be like trying to beat your head against the
> wall, sometimes...
>
> ...unless you realize that the undercover angel has a charge, a sphere of
> energy
> that you must...
|
| Show full article (1.90Kb) |
|
2 Comments |
|
|
Author:
Date: Nov 23, 2007 13:56
>
> "Mark K. Bilbo" wrote in message
> news:F4KdnSiW2601hdvanZ2dnUVZ_vrinZ2d@giganews.com...>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:44:04 -0600, Mark Earnest wrote:
>>
>>> "Mark K. Bilbo" wrote in message
>>> news:AfqdnQUmc_YBZ9janZ2dnUVZ_vninZ2d@giganews.com...>>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 15:02:59 -0600, Mark Earnest wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You will of course have to congregate in atheist halls, that you will
>>>>> need to pay for, and to discuss atheist issues, like you do on the
>>>>> atheist groups.
>>>>
>>>> So can I get my taxes back now? I've been here almost ten years...
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe, if you can get the new law to be retroactive.
>>
>> What new law? Nobody's talking about any new law.
> ...
|
| Show full article (0.93Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author:
Date: Nov 23, 2007 13:56
>>>
>>> "Denis Loubet" io.com> wrote in message
>>> news:obednXUoiYXDetjanZ2dnUVZ_saknZ2d@io.com...>>>>>
>>>>> "> apples and oranges
>>>
>>> a-theism is not the same as a-religion
>>>
>>> It's simply a deity-less religion like Zen.
>>>
>>> Terrell ...
|
| Show full article (1.00Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
