LaDonna's 99 FBI files are uploaded RE Apollo

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...

Who are you trying to convince? Nobody on this NG is stupid enough to
fall
for your "right back at ya" tactic.

Again: do you have the slightest concern for your credibility? **** like
this doesn't help you *at all*

Hedrick is not WORTH a "real" answer. He's proven himself to have the
mental and emotional age of about three, and I am insulting
three-year-olds by saying so.
LaDonna

then if you don't think Hedrick is "reliable", then howsabout you post your
verification for all the other "reliable" people on this ng who are still
waiting for any validation *whatsoever* of *any* of your claims?

If you're just refusing to reply because you've fixed on one (of many)
people asking for your references and you have decided that they aren't
"reliable", then you are just trying to wriggle off the hook.

I think you'll find that this ng is full of very very patient, very very
relentless fishermen.

Again: where are your verifiable sources for all your claims?

--
Terrell Miller


"Married men live longer than single men, but married men are a lot more
willing to die."
Proverb

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
I am insulting

What did Gus ever do to you?

"Terrell Miller" wrote in message ...
"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...

Who are you trying to convince? Nobody on this NG is stupid enough to
fall
for your "right back at ya" tactic.

Again: do you have the slightest concern for your credibility? **** like
this doesn't help you *at all*

Hedrick is not WORTH a "real" answer. He's proven himself to have the
mental and emotional age of about three, and I am insulting
three-year-olds by saying so.
LaDonna

then if you don't think Hedrick is "reliable", then howsabout you post your
verification for all the other "reliable" people on this ng who are still
waiting for any validation *whatsoever* of *any* of your claims?

If you're just refusing to reply because you've fixed on one (of many)
people asking for your references and you have decided that they aren't
"reliable", then you are just trying to wriggle off the hook.

I think you'll find that this ng is full of very very patient, very very
relentless fishermen.

Again: where are your verifiable sources for all your claims?

Have you looked at what's already been posted? Have you "verified"
those sources? If not, then what's the point of giving you more?
Try doing what Daniel has been doing, and spend some time reviewing
what I've given you so far. When you've done that, you'll be in a
position to speak intelligently about what's already up, and to ask
for more. Those who haven't reviewed the 150 pages that are already
up are NOT going to be bothered to check anything else I say.
LaDonna

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
Have you looked at what's already been posted?

Yes.

Have you "verified"
those sources?

Yes. They don't support your claims.

spend some time reviewing
what I've given you so far.

I'm waiting to review the names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement
personnel you contacted over Apollo 1.

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message . ..
"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
Have you looked at what's already been posted?

Yes.

Have you "verified"
those sources?

Yes. They don't support your claims.

spend some time reviewing
what I've given you so far.

I'm waiting to review the names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement
personnel you contacted over Apollo 1.

Now I get to use the word: Liar.

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
Now I get to use the word: Liar.

Yes, you *should* be used to it. It's a clear description of you.

I'll be more than happy to discuss what you've posted _after_ I can verify
your claims about contacting law enforcement personnel about Apollo 1.