Anthea Kerrison Reviled In Oz

In article ,
Bert Hoff wrote:

If you didn't want it brought up here, why did *you* bring it up with
your mention of "back home"?

So you're here squacking on about some sock puppet post in an australian
ski group and then I mention the supersecret codeword "back home" which
you take as open invitation to start BRAYING ON about your mensbbs
goings on? Sheesh, if only there was a website devoted to the needs on
"OVERLY SENSITIVE MEN" like you.

I didn't mention annexcafe, you did. Now you're accusing *me* of
bringing it up. Do you think you're fooling anybody?

I responded to your post, above:

Uh uh. Quite the compelling arguement paracounseler. I will stipulate
that on the night in question, you did, in fact, respond to my post...
above. Happy now?


But I've noticed neither of you seem to post much anymore, "back home."
Business slow since you went "pro" with the "victim biz?"

Now, of course, you're denying you said that.

Bert, you are quite active in the business of victimhood. You have
several sites devoted to it as well as an "enthusiastic" usenet posting
history and a couple of "vanity" groups as well. You are sort of the
"Archer-Midland-Daniels" of the victim biz. "We don't make the victim,
we make the victim worse."

Just another one of your conniving tricks.

Apperently I'm quite clever to get you all frothed up by using such
inflammatory language as "back home." Cement head.

I imagine you think you're fooling people with your hypocritical B.S.

I guess next you'll be accusing me of being a cement headed gasbag
ex-paralawyer.

I take it you are going to continue ducking the question of whether you
were being intentionally misleading or simply ignorant about the
severity of Scott's admitted repeat violations of a restraining order
against him? Or maybe you were right and he really was commiting
felonies all along.

You *could* clear this up if you liked. When Scott repeatedly
violated the restraining orders against him, was he guilty of felonies
or misdemeanors? If it turns out you were wrong about Scott committing
felonies, would you consider changing your web page to reflect your
error? If you were correct about him committing felonies don't you have
a responsibility to turn him in?

When someone gets tired of making you look even sillier than usual, do
you count that as a victory? I'll bet you do.

Dave

vern93 wrote:
In article ,
Bert Hoff wrote:


If you didn't want it brought up here, why did *you* bring it up with
your mention of "back home"?


So you're here squacking on about some sock puppet post in an australian
ski group and then I mention the supersecret codeword "back home" which
you take as open invitation to start BRAYING ON about your mensbbs
goings on?

So why did you bring it up?



I didn't mention annexcafe, you did. Now you're accusing *me* of
bringing it up. Do you think you're fooling anybody?

I responded to your post, above:


Uh uh. Quite the compelling arguement paracounseler. I will stipulate
that on the night in question, you did, in fact, respond to my post...
above. Happy now?

And your post was a reference to the Men's BBS.





I take it you are going to continue ducking the question of whether you
were being intentionally misleading or simply ignorant about the
severity of Scott's admitted repeat violations of a restraining order
against him?

You're the one ducking the question -- Anthea Kerrison's continuing
defamation of others -- with all of these red herrings.

Bert

Bob Lee wrote:
Bert Hoff wrote:


Bob Lee wrote:

Bert Hoff wrote:



Bob Lee wrote:


Bert Hoff wrote:




I don't blame you for trying to change the subject or divert people.

But that doesn't alter the fact that Anthea Kerrison does a lot of
defaming, and had to pay out a substantial sum to that optometrist / ski
instructor to settle that defamation matter.


Well Bert, you ol' top-posting recalcitrant, it sure is discouraging to
see an XxxxxCafe moderator joining in off-topic flame discussions in a
Usenet skiing newsgroup.

I, for one, have completely absorbed your message about ant having to
pay for internet defemation. But I think we can agree that there
haven't been any recent developments in that case - in fact, that was
years and years ago. ...


Not surprised you duck the issue of Anthea Kerrison's defamations.


Um, I didn't, ****cheese. See above where I say "I, for one, have
completely absorbed your message about ant having to pay for internet
defemation."?


and, of course, ducked the issue of her defaming that other guy in the
Aussie newsgroup within the last month.


Heh. That "Prophet" looked like Scott, but more to the point, I can't
find a record of that alleged discussiomn on ski.com.au. Could you
please post a link to the discussion for reference and confirmation?


No, it wasn't years ago. The message I replied to was from a guy is Oz
who was being defamed by Anthea at the time he posted, a couple of weeks
ago.

Of course, you'd want to duck that and do your usual twisting around of
facts, saying it was years ago.

Bert, You're full of ****. I didn't duck any issue - I've acknowedged
your tiresomely repetitive point. The optometrist judgement you refer
to was *years* ago. Please post a citation to prove otherwise.

You're ducking it again! You acknowledged the bit about her paying that
settlement years ago, but completely ducked the issue of ANthea Kerrison
having defamed another guy in the Aussie newsgroup within the last month.


Bert, your childish evasions and clumsy snipping are the sign of
severely limited wit and intelligence...not to mention that you can't
come with a response that doesn't make you look like amoron. You don't
fool anyone, and I'm (still, after all this time) surprised that you're
not embarassed.

You're the ass doing the childish evasions, in this thread about Anthea
Kerrison's defaming people. You're the ass standing there waving that
red herring.


Just in case you haven't noticed, this is an entirely different thread
from the one about ant. Now nut up bud, and see if you can't come up
with some excuse or reasoning or *anything* about why you wrote that
Scott would be commiting a felony for posting to rsa when under a court
order prohibiting that. I'll be taking your evasion as admission that
you realize Scott is a felon.

I get it! You're just showing what a monumentally stupid ass you are!

This thread is your response about my post, about Anthea Kerrison
defaming people.

You just tried to avoid the topic, evade the issue, bu waving around
your red-herring and trying to rename the thread "Anthea Kerrison
Reviled in Oz."

Bert

In article ,
Bert Hoff wrote:

I take it you are going to continue ducking the question of whether you
were being intentionally misleading or simply ignorant about the
severity of Scott's admitted repeat violations of a restraining order
against him?

You're the one ducking the question -- Anthea Kerrison's continuing
defamation of others -- with all of these red herrings.

That's not a question. Bert Hoff is a cement head and a gasbag. That's
not a question either. Gosh oh golly, you're a dope Bert.

Dave

"Bert Hoff" wrote in message
...
I don't blame you for trying to change the subject or divert people.

But that doesn't alter the fact that Anthea Kerrison does a lot of
defaming, and had to pay out a substantial sum to that optometrist / ski
instructor to settle that defamation matter.

But you have posted that many times before. What we want to hear now is
your opinion of Scott's admitted crime: felony or misdemeanor?

We also want to know what you knew about his criminal actions, and when you
knew it.

"Bert Hoff" wrote in message
...

Why isn't trunky allowed on menswad anymore?

Another ass heard from ... another ass trying to distract people and
avoiding talking about Anthea Kerrison's long-standing track record of
defaming people.

Another ass waving round that red herring.

Gee, I don't see an actual _answer_ to the question in there anywhere.

"Bob Lee" wrote in message
...

Bert, your childish evasions and clumsy snipping are the sign of
severely limited wit and intelligence...not to mention that you can't
come with a response that doesn't make you look like amoron. You don't
fool anyone, and I'm (still, after all this time) surprised that you're
not embarassed.

The embarrassment gland is removed in the third year at all the better law
schools.

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 15:58:40 -0700, Bert Hoff
wrote this crap:


And Bert actually taught a class about usenet. Ha Ha Ha! That's only
one reason he was fired.


"Inflatable" Horvath, the guy with the inflatable rubber yacht and
virgin inflatable Hooters girls, also wants to duck any talk about
defamation, after posting that I was in jail for child molestation and
other defamatory garbage.

Do you still sodomize your step son with mayonaise? Do you still have
your crack whore wife working the truck stops? Did the genital warts
ever heal?

Dance for me, Bertrude.





My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
ultimate power in the universe."

Richard Henry wrote:
"Bert Hoff" wrote in message
...

I don't blame you for trying to change the subject or divert people.

But that doesn't alter the fact that Anthea Kerrison does a lot of
defaming, and had to pay out a substantial sum to that optometrist / ski
instructor to settle that defamation matter.


But you have posted that many times before. What we want to hear now is
your opinion of Scott's admitted crime: felony or misdemeanor?

Convenient that you left out part of my message ... that she is still at
it, having defamed another Aussie in an Aussie newsgroup within the last
month.

Bert

Olaf Timandahaff wrote:

Point of ordure!

Someone else who wants to defuse the conversation about Anthea Kerrison
defaming people, by doing your own defaming.

Bert