On Sep 12, 8:56*am, Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
> wrote:

>
> care for his SSN?
\

Do you have it? If so, pass it on!!

On Sep 14, 12:52*am, Annie > wrote:
> On Sep 12, 8:56*am, Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
>
> > wrote:
>
> > care for his SSN?
>
> \
>
> Do you have it? *If so, pass it on!!

Shame on you.

That is encouraging actions that can result in criminal activity.

However, if the original asshole who offered it does do it, and Mark
is injured, then he can be prosecuted for criminal facilitation.

On Sep 14, 12:24*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:
\
>
> Shame on you.
>
> That is encouraging actions that can result in criminal activity.
>
> However, if the original asshole who offered it does do it, and Mark
> is injured, then he can be prosecuted for criminal facilitation.

Yes, we know about "criminal activity" and Quackwatch. It goes hand
in hand.

On Sep 14, 5:16*pm, Annie > wrote:
> On Sep 14, 12:24*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:
> \
>
>
>
> > Shame on you.
>
> > That is encouraging actions that can result in criminal activity.
>
> > However, if the original asshole who offered it does do it, and Mark
> > is injured, then he can be prosecuted for criminal facilitation.
>
> Yes, we know about "criminal activity" and Quackwatch. *It goes hand
> in hand.

Cite one criminal act by Quackwatch. Just one.

On Sep 14, 4:58*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:

> Cite one criminal act by Quackwatch. Just one.

Using the DOD in a lawsuit, and continuing to stalk them as if they
were criminals.

On Sep 14, 11:02*pm, Annie > wrote:
> On Sep 14, 4:58*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:
>
> > Cite one criminal act by Quackwatch. Just one.
>
> Using the DOD in a lawsuit, and continuing to stalk them as if they
> were criminals.

Your delusions are not criminal acts. If you contend that these are
not delusions, post some proof.

On Sep 15, 3:26*am, Mark Probert > wrote:

> Your delusions are not criminal acts. If you contend that these are
> not delusions, post some proof.

I know for a FACT, Jack!

This is not the venue for FACTS, Jack. But there will better venues
for that.

On Sep 15, 3:26*am, Mark Probert > wrote:

>
> Your delusions are not criminal acts. If you contend that these are
> not delusions, post some proof.

Why not ask your good buddy, Dr. Stephen Barrett, and Allen Hyman,
and Frankie, and better yet how about Carolyn K. Dopps Dodd down in
Mesa, Arizona?
And there ofcourse there is your buddy Ralph Nosek.....

The hits just keep on keep on....

Gosh, and all of the references to the "Mitchell Brothers"---gosh,
that would
be a dead give away.

Anyone with half a brain knows what the "Mitchell Brothers" do for a
living....
even Timmie knows what the "Mitchells" do....

Annie > wrote:

>On Sep 14, 4:58*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:
>
>> Cite one criminal act by Quackwatch. Just one.
>
>Using the DOD in a lawsuit,

How could it be a criminal act to involve a government department in a
lawsuit?

What sort of lawsuit could NCAHF be involved in that would also
involve the Department of Defense?

> and continuing to stalk them as if they
>were criminals.
>

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

On Sep 15, 2:48*pm, Peter Bowditch > wrote:

> What sort of lawsuit could NCAHF be involved in that would also
> involve the Department of Defense?
>
I am not referring to the NCAHF at all, I have no idea of what they
do,
or what they don't do.

On Sep 15, 2:48*pm, Peter Bowditch > wrote:

>
> How could it be a criminal act to involve a government department in a
> lawsuit?


It violates U.S. Title Code 18-----that activities regarding the
misuse of
that title are the criminal activities.

which include Identity Theft
stalking
theft
illegal trespass
Wire tapping
Computer Hacking
illegal electronic survelliance
harassment

If you are going to do the crime, expect to do the time.

On Sep 15, 5:48*pm, Peter Bowditch > wrote:
> Annie > wrote:
> >On Sep 14, 4:58*pm, Mark Probert > wrote:
>
> >> Cite one criminal act by Quackwatch. Just one.
>
> >Using the DOD in a lawsuit,
>
> How could it be a criminal act to involve a government department in a
> lawsuit?
>
> What sort of lawsuit could NCAHF be involved in that would also
> involve the Department of Defense?

Imaginary ones.


>
> > and continuing to stalk them as if they
> >were criminals.
>
> --
> Peter Bowditch aa #2243
> The Millenium Projecthttp://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
> Australian Council Against Health Fraudhttp://www.acahf.org.au
> Australian Skepticshttp://www.skeptics.com.au
> To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Annie > wrote:

>On Sep 15, 2:48*pm, Peter Bowditch > wrote:
>
>> What sort of lawsuit could NCAHF be involved in that would also
>> involve the Department of Defense?
>>
>I am not referring to the NCAHF at all, I have no idea of what they
>do,
>or what they don't do.
>

So in a discussion of the NCAHF you start talking about how they
conspired with the DOD, but now you say you weren't talking about the
NCAHF. Who were you talking about and what do they have to do with
what was being discussed?

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Annie > wrote:

>On Sep 15, 2:48*pm, Peter Bowditch > wrote:
>
>>
>> How could it be a criminal act to involve a government department in a
>> lawsuit?
>
>
>It violates U.S. Title Code 18-----that activities regarding the
>misuse of
>that title are the criminal activities.
>
>which include Identity Theft
>stalking
>theft
>illegal trespass
>Wire tapping
>Computer Hacking
>illegal electronic survelliance
>harassment
>
>If you are going to do the crime, expect to do the time.
>

Who did the crime, as you have now decided it wasn't the NCAHF that
everyone else was talking about?

What do any of those crimes have to do with the Department of Defense,
the apparent coconspirators with whoever it was that irked you?

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

On Sep 15, 10:57*am, Annie > wrote:
> On Sep 15, 3:26*am, Mark Probert > wrote:
>
> > Your delusions are not criminal acts. If you contend that these are
> > not delusions, post some proof.
>
> I know for a FACT, Jack!
>
> This is not the venue for FACTS, Jack. *But there will better venues
> for that.

You raise it in thei venue, thus you have chosen this venue.

Prove it.

You cannot.