🚀 go-pugleaf

frankpoole@sympatico.ca wrote:
: >On 19 Dec 1997 15:45:51 GMT, ak955@chebucto.ns.ca (Barbara Amero)wrote:
>
>Frank Poole aka Buzz I've given many of your posts (starting last year)
>a lot of thought. And such caused me to call Mr.State to make some
>inquiries about you and what you were posting about me and also George
>Johnston.

: As usual Barbara you evade the issue and run off like a rabbit on
: another subject once confronted.  Would you like to tell me and other
: interested parties in this ng who you called?  

I told you who I called. I'm not evading the issue Buzz. At least 1 1/2
years ago, you started attacking/libeling me and my ex-husband. In your
2nd or 3rd reply to my posts, you suggested that I committed a crime
punishable by imprisonment. And you called it opinion. Such false
accusations is a type of libel that is actionable per se, i.e. one does
not have to show proof of damage. You have made slurs on my sexuality.
That is a type of libel that is actionable per se. You have stated several
times that you know more about me than I think, and comment on what I look
like. Why? How would you know? Again, given the number of men in here
who virulently attack me, saying I should be "hunted down" and now a 
report of my violent murder, is such done to intimidate me? I made a post
that exemplifies what you've been doing to me. At least, I had a smiley
beside what I wrote. You write what you do as tho' you are serious. And
I suggest that you stop doing it. If you disagree with my views, present
an argument against them. If you don't like me, if you think I am
disgusting, that my views are disgusting, I couldn't care less. But I do
care when you post bogus analyses of me and my ex-husband, keep posting
false information about me, keep posting that you know more about me than
what I think, posting that you know what I look like, etc. Stop it!
[snip]

> You posted personal information about me and also about
>George Johnston, some that would have been accesssible thru' Mr. State's
>records, after noting in other posts that you worked for Mr.State.

: If your so knowledgeable you should know that once your a public
: person, information is easily obtained for verification of facts.
: Again who is Mr State?

The information you posted was private, confidential information that
is not obtainable for verification of facts - except for those who
are privy to such information and such information is not to be made
public. Last year you made some comments about me, information that
Mr. State has and you made those comments after letting us know that
you work/worked for Mr. State, i.e. the government. So what do you
want me to think Buzz????

>After you posted the personal information about George Johnston, you told
>him to figure out how you got it and further *taunted* him about it.

: What personal information? Please clarify. Besides that is between
: George and I and has nothing to do with you.

Unless you have a memory problem, you know what I am talking about.
What is between you and George has something to do with me, if he
chooses to tell me about it. He did. And I told him who to call, if
he was concerned about the issue. Aside from that, I objected to you
*taunting* him about where you got the information. I objected to your
ridicule of his low salary relative to what you and Ken Chaddock say
your salaries are or were. It is inappropriate to ridicule posters
salaries. Just as it is inappropriate to ridicule posters for being
on welfare. And it is inappropriate to use welfare to ridicule posters
who are not on welfare. You have done all of that and more.

>As I recall, George Johnston figured it out or should I say figured out
>two possibilites and confronted you publicly and privately about how,
>where you got the information. You, of course, denied it.

: Did he?  So again how does this relate to you?

See above. I, also, want to add that such relates to anyone who objects
to what you did.

>Were you stalking me and also George Johnston?

: What's your interpretation? Are you trying to turn this around. If
: this is interpreted as "stalking" you were aware of it. My wife didn't
: even know you existed. That is the worst kind of stalker. Stalking the
: innocent.

Yes I turned it around. I made a comment similar to the comments you've
been posting for a long time about/to me. And are you saying it's ok to
stalk me because I am guilty?? If so, what am I guilty of?

>Since last year you have been posting that you know more about me than I
>think you do, (as I recall, you also said the same about George Johnston),
>you have been posting about what you say my "welfare situation" is,

: That's because you spilled your guts to all in here. It's public
: knowledge.

Spilled my guts? If that's what you think, then clearly you don't know
very much about me. If I did spill my guts there'd be a fuklot of men
across Canada right some upset. For e.g, if I told the story about the man
in the community I grew up in exposing himself to me and my friend in my
own home when I was a kid and published his name, he'd be a liddle upset.
What he did is a crime today; I don't think it was a crime then - at least
legally. No, Buzz, I've not spilled my guts, but there's likely some men
who are afraid I might.

I discuss issues in here that I think are important, such as divorce
and what happens to women, especially middle-class women and use examples
from my life. Many men in here bash divorced women who are punished by
our society for the job our society expects women to do. I've discussed
having been sexually assaulted. The legal eagle for Dal, a man, said that
I shouldn't be making posts about having been sexually assaulted. I'll bet
a lot of men think so and don't want names mentioned! Ditto for being
physically assaulted. I can see that women on the 'net have got men right
some worried! I've been in other newsgroups where women use their real
names and talk about their ex-husbands and other men having abused them,
etc.

What is public knowledge is that men have been posting that I am on
welfare and I have been posting that I am not on welfare. I am not
on welfare and would not meet the criteria to be on welfare. Gary
Stewart (DukeNuken, whatever his real name is) after saying that he'd
talked to his father's lawyer posted a public apology to me for
persistently posting that I am on welfare. You know that and yet you
keep posting the same. Why?

:>that I have a certain certificate,

: In WS? You said that.

That is a lie. I have never said that. I don't even know what a WS
certificate is. You posted that I have a WS certificate. What is it?

:>you made comments about me being a single mother etc.,

: Again, right back at you. You spilled the beans.

Spilled what beans? I have never been a single mother. Why are you
posting false information about me????

:> you have been posting that you say you know what I look like,
:>where I walk. Why are you mentioning the names of streets I walk on?

: Ask Quinn? You told it all to him in several posts. Again you sounds
: like your stalking yourself.

Produce such posts. I've never made posts telling Quinn what I look like.
I recall making posts after he was verbally attacked (with obscene
physical gestures made) by a man on the street who'd been reading the
posts in here. I posted that if I see that man (or anyone) attacking him
on the street that I would defend him and if they physically attack him
that they won't walk away.

Again not only are you lying, you are avoiding the issue. The issue is why
are *you* posting it??? And why did you post it in the way you did???

:>And where are you getting the above information about me that you've
:>been posting???

: See above. Open your life like a book and it gets read.

You must be reading the wrong book. I am not on welfare and I have
never been a single mother.

:>Frank Poole aka Buzz, how do you know all that you say you know?

: I understand what I read, I don't see the owrld through dark glasses,

Then why are you posting lies about me?

: I don't try to twist or ruin people's lives, like that Christie guy
: you attacked through his employment. There was also Glen Hart. I have
: a feeling you may have dug a hole for yourself this time and your
: trying to climb out on the "rungs" of your own verbal garbage.

I don't try to twist or ruin people's lives. Don Christie fooled around
with my account using Mr.State's equipment/time/money to do so. And he 
attacked/libeled me for more than 6 months often at the tax payers
expense. And you, Buzz, support that while bashing the poor who you say
don't want to work. Glenn Hart used Halifax Regional School Board in
his sig. when making posts about me and another poster. That is 
inappropriate, as was his public attack on me, until Mr.State put a
stop to it. Why are you supporting Don Christie who used the tax payers
money to fool around with my account??? I posted the headers of some
of his email that landed in my mailbox.

>Have you been stalking me?? Perhaps not, since most of what you post
>about me is false information. Why are you posting false information
>about me? To libel me???

: These are conflicting statements. 

No they aren't. I said most, not all, of what you posted. Read it!

: The information posted (if false) is of your own doing. 

I didn't post the information you posted that I am concerned about.
There's *many* posts made by me stating that I am not on welfare. I know
you have seen these posts because you've made follow-up posts and you keep
making posts about my welfare situation. I just posted that I've never
been a single mother and you reply indicating that I've posted such. Why?

: Do you understand the ramifications of libel? Do you know what it is to
: libel someone? If you do, read your own posts and take a reasonable look
: at whether the shoe fits you.

Yes I do. I have some hard copy info and info on my hard drive that
I downloaded from the 'net. And I've talked to lawyers about it --
one who is knowledgeable of Internet 'stuff'. But I don't think you know
what it is or the ramifications. You noted some time ago that a libelous
statement about me was opinion. Well, Buzz, your opinions can be slander
if spoken and libel if published. And only one other person need hear
it or see it.

>Perhaps you've not actually been stalking me, just making me think you are?

: What do you think? Do you think I would stalk you? Do I think you
: would stalk, or have someone stalk my wife? To the latter, Yes. All due
: to the way you attack people like Christie, Hart and Michelle and even
: George Johnston. The "Hell's Angel" threat, employer threats, the RCMP
: etc. etc.

Why didn't you answer my question? I wouldn't stalk your wife. But I
don't know if you would stalk me or not. You keep posting that you know
more about me than what I think. You've been attacking me for about
1 1/2 years. So what should I think??

Again, Christie attacked/libeled me for more than 6 months, often at
the tax payers expense and fooled with my internet account at the
tax payers expense. And Mr.State did not approve of what Hart was doing.
Michelle's first post to me was an attack, as are all her posts. I don't
turn the other cheek. George has attacked me privately and I don't agree
with him calling women on the 'net bimbos or with the other derogatory
remarks he's made about women, etc. You, Christie, George, and the list of
men goes on, lie like cheap rugs. I didn't make a Hell's Angel threat. 
I did not threaten to go to anyone's house with a member of the Hell's
Angels as men keep posting. I don't make employer or RCMP threats. If 
I have reason to call someone's employer or the RCMP, I will do so. 
And I have had reason to do so. 

>You recently posted that I have Red hair. Why did you post
>that I have Red hair?

: Wild guess? A pun? You said so? Whatever you want to think.

Why are you guessing??? No, I didn't say so. What difference does it
make what colour my hair is?? So what do you want me to think Buzz? That
you are spying on me, have someone spying on me? Why would you want me to
think that you know what I look like?? Why do you want me to think that
you know more about me than I think you do? Stop evading the questions Buzz.

:> How would you know I have Red hair?

: Do you? If you do not, then you are answering your own question.

Buzz, the issue is why are you posting what I look like?? And why is
what I look like important, an issue?

> Have you been stalking me or getting someone else to? Perhaps not. I
> don't have Red hair.  You have made many posts about my appearance, what
> I look like. Why?

: Can I reverse that question as it relates to appearance *and*
: intelligence? Anyway, remarks about your appearance were made more to
: describe your written word. Does that make you feel better?

My appearance does not relate to my intelligence. You are a disgusting,
despicable, repulsive, repugnant, ignorant man. You have used the
physcial characteristics of women to ridicule me. In doing that you
are ridiculing all women with such characteristics. You are disgusting.

>: What do you people think?

>I think I'd like to have a chat about all of this F2F with you. I'd
>be willing to meet you at the following address (inside, of course):
>
>1975 Gottingen Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

: When? But you will have to make it soon. I will check the place out
: before of course, as it could be HQ for Hell's Angels.

>Feel free to bring other people along with you.

:i.e. Legal Counsel. My lawyer is in a wheel-chair and it has to be
:wheel-chair assessible. I'm not being facetious on this fact either.
:I suggest you do the same (bring a lawyer). That way there will be no
:twisting of facts and words said.

>Barbara A. Amero

Buzz

I don't need or want your suggestions. And you are the one who twists
fact and words and posts lies about me being on welfare, being a single
mother, about my appearance, about my education, etc. You do the same
about researhers I quote, i.e. saying they are all the "strongest"
of feminists (whatever that means). You don't know enough to know when
I'm quoting men or women and you've never heard of most of the feminists
I quote. You wouldn't know a feminist theory if it, to use George's 
expression, bit you on the ass. A recent post suggests that you don't even
know that the research paper I did on female complicity in sexual
victimization was in favour of men. IOW you are a dullard, as another
poster called you. Go read a book instead of making posts about what I
look like!