From: carole on

"Bob Officer" <bobofficers(a)127.0.0.7> wrote in message
news:8r5b56d2s14rk4r6sdg8ml2v280a5d698d(a)4ax.com...
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:33:17 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
> Jan Drew <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
>>On Aug 1, 12:26 am, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:06:59 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
>>>
>>> Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>Mark Stanley Probert
>>Peter Bowditch
>>Peter B
>>Peter Moran
>>Martin Rady
>>Bob Officer
>>Andrew Kingoff
>>DC Sessions
>>Ken Flakey
>>Steelclaws
>>Happy Oyster
>
> Yes, Jan that's the partial list of people you have harassed and
> stalked.
>
> How long did you have to stalk Mark before you discovered his middle
> name, and why would it matter to you?
>
> You do know your article is a admissible to court as evidence if not
> proof of your stalking Mark. Remember the federal Courts take a dim
> view of stalkers.

And her techniques work to an extent.
I notice she has almost gotten rid of Peter Moran and happy oyster.

carole
www.conspiracee.com

>
>
> --
> Bob Officer
> Posting the truth
> http://www.skeptics.com.au


From: Mark Probert-Drew on
On Aug 1, 6:07 pm, "carole" <hubbca2...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> "Bob Officer" <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote in message
>
> news:8r5b56d2s14rk4r6sdg8ml2v280a5d698d(a)4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:33:17 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
> > Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Aug 1, 12:26 am, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:06:59 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
>
> >>> Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>Mark Stanley Probert
> >>Peter Bowditch
> >>Peter B
> >>Peter Moran
> >>Martin Rady
> >>Bob Officer
> >>Andrew Kingoff
> >>DC Sessions
> >>Ken Flakey
> >>Steelclaws
> >>Happy Oyster
>
> > Yes, Jan that's the partial list of people you have harassed and
> > stalked.
>
> > How long did you have to stalk Mark before you discovered his middle
> > name, and why would it matter to you?
>
> > You do know your article is a admissible to court as evidence if not
> > proof of your stalking Mark. Remember the federal Courts take a dim
> > view of stalkers.
>
> And her techniques work to an extent.
> I notice she has almost gotten rid of Peter Moran and happy oyster.

By "gotten rid of" do you mean silenced and suppressed? If so, why do
you support silencing and suppressing of only some people?