|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#881
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... I have found no evidence to support that assertion. There's no reason to believe he'd be interested in insertion around you. |
#882
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
Really? Well, this is some diatribe coming from someone who doesn't have the guts to reveal his identity. Next, if you keep throwing a certain person's name around, you are going to become subject to a lawsuit, or didn't your drinking buddy tell you this person is rather private about his information? Finally, Daniel is the ONLY person on this news group who has taken the time to get the Congressional Record and LOOK at the facts. Yet you want to chastise him? He at least has proven (for now) that he cares about the truth. In the end though, if we do not agree on Apollo 1, it won't mean I don't care about the truth. He's actually reading, which is far more than I can say for the rest of you. You assume that those documents are easier to get a hold of than they actually are IMO. I would wager that most of the people who have been to my website to download the witness statements, have already read them or are at least a fair way through them. When they are available people will read them. Interestingly, the Apollo One report by Bill Hill and its associated photographs is downloaded far more often than any of my Challenger MPEGs. Either reveal your sorry self, or shut up. Ghost writers have no credibility whatsoever. If you have something to say, have the intestinal fortitude to use your identity, or don't say anything. Never been burned using your real full name on the internet? Daniel |
#883
|
|||
|
|||
"Charleston" wrote in message news:nP1Jc.530$gQ2.395@okepread03...
wrote: Really? Well, this is some diatribe coming from someone who doesn't have the guts to reveal his identity. Next, if you keep throwing a certain person's name around, you are going to become subject to a lawsuit, or didn't your drinking buddy tell you this person is rather private about his information? Finally, Daniel is the ONLY person on this news group who has taken the time to get the Congressional Record and LOOK at the facts. Yet you want to chastise him? He at least has proven (for now) that he cares about the truth. In the end though, if we do not agree on Apollo 1, it won't mean I don't care about the truth. He's actually reading, which is far more than I can say for the rest of you. You assume that those documents are easier to get a hold of than they actually are IMO. I would wager that most of the people who have been to my website to download the witness statements, have already read them or are at least a fair way through them. When they are available people will read them. Interestingly, the Apollo One report by Bill Hill and its associated photographs is downloaded far more often than any of my Challenger MPEGs. Either reveal your sorry self, or shut up. Ghost writers have no credibility whatsoever. If you have something to say, have the intestinal fortitude to use your identity, or don't say anything. Never been burned using your real full name on the internet? Daniel That's the price you pay when you're honest. This gutless-wonder thrives on posting derogatory messages while hiding behind a fake moniker. I have absolutely no respect for that whatsoever. LaDonna |
#884
|
|||
|
|||
"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message om... That's the price you pay when you're honest. Which explains why you haven't paid a thing. This gutless-wonder thrives on posting derogatory messages while hiding behind a fake moniker. At least he's posted the names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement officers he spoke to about Apollo 1 when asked. |
#885
|
|||
|
|||
Scott, are you even old enough to drink???? This person with his
pseudonyms has never once posted anything but his retarded so-called analyses on Apollo One. Name ONE person this moron has talked to with regard to the fire. He cannot, and neither can you. Why? Because this idiot, like Scott, wants to just spew out soundbites, responsibility be damned, and they don't want to have to act like real people with a real responsibility to the facts. It is NO surprise you would be sucked into this game; you have NO CLUE how to deal with real life. You've got your "F" keys, and that is all your grade-school teacher taught you. LaDonna |
#886
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Scott, are you even old enough to drink???? "scott" is supposedly old enough to fly commercial planes, so it's likely he's legally old enough to drink. Name ONE person this moron has talked to with regard to the fire. You won't give us the names of anyone you've talked to. Why are you talking in the third person? Because this idiot, like Scott, wants to just spew out soundbites, responsibility be damned, and they don't want to have to act like real people with a real responsibility to the facts. Well, then, change your behavior. Learn to be responsible for your actions. Talking in the third person isn't a good start. |
#887
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message .. .
wrote in message ... Next, if you keep throwing a certain person's name around, you are going to become subject to a lawsuit, or didn't your drinking buddy tell you this person is rather private about his information? Coo coo cachoo. He's actually reading, which is far more than I can say for the rest of you. I'm waiting to read the names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement personnel you spoke to about Apollo 1. I'm also waiting to read the names of your "teammates". please, donīt hold your breath......she has nothing but b.s. |
#888
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
Scott, are you even old enough to drink???? What kind of question is that? This person with his pseudonyms has never once posted anything but his retarded so-called analyses on Apollo One. You realize you cite no one for us to connect your post to, yet you are critical of Scott? Name ONE person this moron has talked to with regard to the fire. He cannot, and neither can you. How do you know? Why? Because this idiot, like Scott, wants to just spew out soundbites, responsibility be damned, and they don't want to have to act like real people with a real responsibility to the facts. This is rich. Would you please go back and actually respond to a post so we can at least have some remote clue who you are talking about? It is NO surprise you would be sucked into this game; you have NO CLUE how to deal with real life. Uh, I am thinking Scott flies a big plane to far away real places and then flies the big plane back with real packages in his plane. That sounds like real life to me. You've got your "F" keys, and that is all your grade-school teacher taught you. There are not very many highly skilled pilots who stopped at the sixth grade education level. Perhaps you could enlighten us since you are a Junior in college, IIRC. I do fail to see how negative personal posts directed at Scott place you in the apparently highly respected position of being an ally of Scott's. Daniel |
#889
|
|||
|
|||
"Charleston" wrote in message news:RT0Kc.8074$%p4.4337@okepread04...
wrote: Scott, are you even old enough to drink???? What kind of question is that? This person with his pseudonyms has never once posted anything but his retarded so-called analyses on Apollo One. You realize you cite no one for us to connect your post to, yet you are critical of Scott? Name ONE person this moron has talked to with regard to the fire. He cannot, and neither can you. How do you know? Why? Because this idiot, like Scott, wants to just spew out soundbites, responsibility be damned, and they don't want to have to act like real people with a real responsibility to the facts. This is rich. Would you please go back and actually respond to a post so we can at least have some remote clue who you are talking about? It is NO surprise you would be sucked into this game; you have NO CLUE how to deal with real life. Uh, I am thinking Scott flies a big plane to far away real places and then flies the big plane back with real packages in his plane. That sounds like real life to me. You've got your "F" keys, and that is all your grade-school teacher taught you. There are not very many highly skilled pilots who stopped at the sixth grade education level. Perhaps you could enlighten us since you are a Junior in college, IIRC. I do fail to see how negative personal posts directed at Scott place you in the apparently highly respected position of being an ally of Scott's. Daniel OK, Daniel, I see you didn't keep up with the context of the post to which you are responding. That was directed at Hedrick, who has suddenly decided he is best friends with that anonymous "buddy" of Scott Grissoms. That was the conversation you apparently intercepted. I believe I posted that reply directly to a post by Scott Hedrick; I'm surprised you didn't see it. LaDonna |
#890
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, this is rich. Scott Grissom becoming buds with Scott Hedrick? WHO
"has nothing but b.s.?" lmao! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|