From: Gerry Armstrong <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: So does Gerry really not mean
it after all?
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:08:30 +0100
Organization: 1&1 Internet AG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: news.online.de 1037725692 15214 220.127.116.11 (19 Nov 2002 17:
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Nov 2002 17:08:12 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:55:09 -0500, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>In response to my allegations that the graphic capitalizing
>"OSA" was intended to accuse the people on Gerry's kooky
>hate page of being OSA, I have received any kind and number
>of ridiculous defenses claiming surely he didn't mean that.
Leaving aside your assertion that the goons' hate posts comprise a
hate page, you make here a factual assertion that you have received
any kind and number of defenses claiming that I was not accusing the
people on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page of being OSA
Please post the defenses you received.
Then show why you think each one of the defenses you received is
You'll have to pretend to be really, really stupid to do this,
I have given only one defense -- the truth -- but I know you can do
>However, someone just pointed out to me the title of the page
>that appears at the top of the browser:
><title>Gerry Armstrong--Scientology's Usenet Black PR and
>I suppose he doesn't really mean that either. Or I suppose he means
>by "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" something
>which I'm sure Gerry Jihad's apologists will be quick to confabulate
>response to this post.
© Gerry Armstrong