Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:24:19 EST, "alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet>
> wrote:
>
> >I
>
> I thought that you would like the article. But I did say that it was OT and
> really such a long OT reply should be posted in p.ot. It is not appropriate to
> post it here. If it is possible for you to remove it, it would be better.
> A word of warning, people have been banned for trolling and it is being talked
> about in OT that is what you are doing.
>
>
> Regards
>  Stephen


ok thanx. But of course that is what they will try to do. I mean after innocent
people get killed and someone doesnt think it important enough for everyone to
understand causes, well that will show with whom or what you are dealing.

"no this isnt important" lets just ban him."
(only validating previous paragraph, they'd do better to let it go)

I have 6 isps and 40m emails, they wont ban me. I mean they can try. They should
get a life and stop taking fluorides.  Someone admitted his family has taken
fluorides, then I posted fluorine pathology. ooops not good for someone.

If they want something from me they should just ask and act like adults. There
is no way I can be silent while people for whom I care are in this kind of
danger, not just the fluorides but getting a stray bullet from someone foolish
enough to take them.

My friends listen up and wake up, let it not be you next,
aQ

Post a reply to this message