From: Jan Drew on
On Mar 20, 1:42�pm, "Peter B." <.@.> wrote:
> "Jan Drew" <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:81c12b1f-5932-4cb1-9286-08ef400d983b(a)p3g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 19, 11:30 am, Happy Oyster <happy.oys...(a)ariplex.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:32:10 -0700 (PDT), Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com>
> > wrote:
> > >Now, where are you going to get this help for me?
>
> > It is spelled p-o-l-i-c-e.
>
> LOL. �Yappy, the police do not get help. Doctors do, and it has to be
> proven I need mental help. �You have no clue.
> ==================================================
> They are the ones who pick you up and put you on a three day hold for
> observation.

Oh, really? Personal experience?
From: Peter B. on
"Jan Drew" <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote in message
news:72ee3681-bf5b-4a02-96f5-66a2ff71b519(a)b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

scummy pig

From: pautrey on
On Mar 22, 9:33 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> However you have been stalking me. The search engine cookies on your
> hard drive prove it. Oh you didn't know any Web sites you visited can
> pull all the cookies off of it?




Paranoid Firewater Babble!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 22, 9:33 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:02:19 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
>
> pautrey <rpautr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mar 22, 6:53 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >> No you don't, because no such evidence exists.
> >> However this could be evidence of you stalking people.
>
> >SkepDick,
>
> >Save your evasive tactics for a fool.
>
> You are not mistake the tactics are being used on a fool, you.
>
> You have nothing.
> Zero
>
> However you have been stalking me. The search engine cookies on your
> hard drive prove it. Oh you didn't know any Web sites you visited can
> pull all the cookies off of it?
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mar 22, 6:53 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:27:53 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
>
> >> pautrey <pautr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >On Mar 22, 4:17 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >> >> I have the Evidence to call you an abuser of usenet and the internet,
> >> >> or criminal proportion.
>
> >> >SkepDick,
>
> >> That I posted links to pictures of children? You have nothing.
> >> I don't know who you think you found but it wasn't me.
>
> >> >And I have the evidence to do the same to you,
> >> >Peter B., Happy Oyster, & Mark S. Probert.
>
> >> No you don't, because no such evidence exists.
>
> >> However this could be evidence of you stalking people.
>
> --
> Bob Officer
> Posting the truthhttp://www.skeptics.com.au- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

From: Jan Drew on

> "Jan Drew" <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote in message
>
> On Mar 21, 7:18 pm, Mark Probert-Drew <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 4:30 am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 19, 9:43 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 19, 1:32 am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 11, 11:32 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 11, 12:36 am, Jan DrewT <jdrew63...(a)aol.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > As you can see, I did not change the subject line. I left it
> > > > > > intact as
> > > > > > it demonstrates just how low you will go to attack me, my
> > > > > > religion, my
> > > > > > business, my family, including my son in a wheelchair.
>
> > > > > > Jan, you are getting sicker by the minute. Get help, or I will get
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > for you.
>
> > > > > UUMM, no I did not write that. You did.
>
> > > > Correct, it was well written and directed at you.
>
> > > > > There was no attack,
>
> > > > Only in your delusional mind. Jeffrey Dahmer thought he was doing the
> > > > right thing, just like you do.
>
> > > > just the
>
> > > > > facts,
>
> > > > Just your hallucinations.
>
> > > > and you
>
> > > > > posted about your son.
>
> > > > Which is MY right, NOT yours.
>
> > > It is my right to repost anything you posted.
>
> > You may have a technical right, but you do not have a moral one. You
> > are immoral for using children as you do.
>
> Reposting the picture of you kids is not using children, nor is it
> immoral.
>
> You, and you alone were foolish enough to post your kids pictures.
> So blame yourself.
From: Jan Drew on
On Mar 23, 5:24�am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2:37�am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 9:43 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 1:59 am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 21, 7:25 pm, Mark Probert-Drew <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 21, 4:46 am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 20, 10:32 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mar 20, 1:30 am, COUSIN Jan Drew-PROBERT <jdrew63...(a)aol.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > There is proof right there that you are a liar.
>
> > > > > What?
>
> > > > There is proof right there that you are a liar.
>
> > > What?
>
> > Read above.
>
> What?

* COUSIN Jan Drew-PROBERT*
>
>
>
> > > > snip more diversion.
>
> > > > You keep making the claim. You prove it.
>
> > > What?
>
> > Read above and stop with the disbarred lawyer act.
>
> Shove it.

0000000000000000000000000000 Forgot to read Torah again today.
>
>
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 19, 9:43 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 19, 1:32 am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 11:32 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 11, 12:36 am, Jan DrewT <jdrew63...(a)aol.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > As you can see, I did not change the subject line. I left it intact as
> > > > > > > > > > > it demonstrates just how low you will go to attack me, my religion, my
> > > > > > > > > > > business, my family, including my son in a wheelchair..
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Jan, you are getting sicker by the minute. Get help, or I will get it
> > > > > > > > > > > for you.
>
> > > > > > > > > > UUMM, no I did not write that. You did.
>
> > > > > > > > > Correct, it was well written and directed at you.
>
> > > > > > > > > > There was no attack,
>
> > > > > > > > > Only in your delusional mind. Jeffrey Dahmer thought he was doing the
> > > > > > > > > right thing, just like you do.
>
> > > > > > You are way out there. Been drinking?
>
> > > > > I do not "drink". However, you may be projecting.
>
> > > > No, see the question mark.
> > > > Learn what that means.
>
> > > It means it is a question. I answered the question.
>
> > > > > > Exactly what was the *attack*?
>
> > > > > If I have to explain it to you, I you would not understand it (which
> > > > > is the usual).
>
> > > > ZZzz.
>
> > > Once again, you are clueless.
>
> > > > Results 1 - 10 of about 5,390 for Mark Probert not understand. (0.27
> > > > seconds)
>
> > > > Now, ready to prove the *exact attack??
>
> > > YOU proved it.
>
> > Oh where? �More dancing.
>
> > Just answer the question.
>
> > Now, ready to prove the *exact attack??
>
> > �You would not understand it.

Can it Mark S Probert. Plain and simple you lied, and can not prove
t.


Snip the rest of the Probert disabarred lawyer dance.