Clinton to Goskinem, 1 yr. ago: "I want no panic among populace, nor in financial markets. Whatever happens on the 1st, I want it to roll over on a complacent, sleepy, happy population."

Goskinem to Clinton: "You got it sir."

-- Count Vronsky (vronsky@anna.lit), October 29, 1999

Answers

Count,

That sounds libelous, I would not go around being proud that you wrote that if I were you. If it weren't totally obvious that you just pulled this post out of your nether regions I would comment further.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

Looks like a pretty good paraphrase of Paula Gordon's most recent white paper installment.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), October 29, 1999.

Goskinem to John Rendon: Make it so, number 2.

John: Aye, Captain.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), October 29, 1999.

Foolio to (_@_._): "Don't forget between the toes!"

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), October 29, 1999.

F@t, dumb, @nd h@ppy, @nd not to sn@ppy, posts @re @ll the s@me, just cr@ppy!

Hows th@t for libelous?

Kookmeister!

-- Y2Kook (Y2Kook@usa.net), October 29, 1999.

Sounds like insults, not a libel suit. Calling someone names is not considered libel, but implying that political leaders are corrupt very much is libel, and were you to say what Count said in person, in public, I bet you'd be getting calls from several law firms.

But thanks for the time and thought, I know both must be very scarce for you.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

(_@_._),

You posted,

[snip garbage]

"But thanks for the time and thought, I know both must be very scarce for you."

It is obvious that you speak from a life long experience.

-- (+@+.+), October 29, 1999.

Impoissible, I haven't known you that long.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

(_@_._),

Thank you for substantiating my observation.

-- (+@+.+), October 29, 1999.

Poor dumb @:

All those months' worth of lies related to his misleading testimony and the related fine for misleading testimony, and @ still appears to believe that BC isn't corrupt. ROFL

-- haha (haha@haha.com), October 29, 1999.

+,

Substantiating your observation? Does your mommy know you've been playing around with the Dictionary again?

And what would be what? That you seem to be short on time and thought, and that I made note?

hahahah,

I never said that...

I said saying a politician is corrupt is libel. I never defended BC's rep in any way. But thank you for making a typical Doomer out of yourself and proving my point, again, that Doomers can't stand the truth, so they change it into whatever is handy.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

--@--- How come you are posting on almost every thread I read? Don't you have anything better to do? I know you feel it's your job to make sure nobody prepares and panics, because Y2K isn't a problem, it's the people preparing that's the problem. How much is that corrupt Bill Clinton paying you anyway, to spend your time being shot down over and over and over.

The only rational explanation for you still being here is that you are being paid.

-- Gregg (g.abbott@starting-point.com), October 29, 1999.

-- you don't have the first clue as to the nature of the law.

Nor to court decisions bearing on cases involving public figures.

You have no business here hemorrhaging like this on others.

-- snooze button (alarmclock_2000@yahoo.com), October 29, 1999.

No, I feel it is everyone's job to make sure that we don't panic.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

Snooze,

Come on now, you of all people should be open to the possibility that it can happen. There is a first time for everything (y2k) right?

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

And futhermore, if I went around the NEWS curcuit saying that __________________ (insert famous personality here), was a child molestor, don't you think I might be facing a defamation lawsuit?

Not that it's got anything to do with the subject, but it seemed relevant to what you are saying.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

@.

Panic will be lead by government-media mismanagement of the situation.

-- -- (@ .), October 29, 1999.

(..@.),

Since I've been here a lot longer than you, how about giving yourself a NAME since your e-mail address looks like MY name, and I really don't care to be mistaken for you.

Now you say,

"implying that political leaders are corrupt very much is libel"

There are very few examples left in our government where this would hold any water, because if the corruption actually exists then it is not libel.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 29, 1999.

Oh really?

Got proof? Then prosecute.

Obviously you are just painting a bleak picture make it look like everybody in politics is a snake.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

There are many ways to skin a cat, and "Go skin em baby" knows them all. Don't you feel your about to lose something very valuable.

-- thinkIcan (thinkIcan@make.it), October 29, 1999.

Attention all @'s:

Can we all agree to use lose the @'s in our names as I am sure many are getting confused with all the different @ people.

-- @>@>@>@>@> (@@@.@@@@@.com), October 29, 1999.

--@., (or whoever the @ is that is causing trouble)

Why is that you are so upset? Are you angry? Why do you come here to bother people and to harass them.

Thanks

-- the Virginian (1@1.com), October 29, 1999.

See, he is paid by Clintonistas or Koskinum - probably doesn't know what a computer is. Just like Koskinum. (by default - if this bogus @ moron - prevents someone from preparing, and things turn out to be bad, he is morally commiting a crime and if possible should be legally prosicuted. The same for every other Polly posting here in this ridiculous manner, and of course all the Politicians. )

-- Gregg (g.abbott@starting-point.com), October 29, 1999.

No man, it's not like that at all. How do you harass someone over a bulletin board? You harass someone who doesn't want to have anything to do with you. If these people didn't want to have anything to do with me they could just not respond.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

Let's get something straight right now. My name is @ and I have always posted my name and e-mail in the exact fromat you see here.

Please do not confuse me with this jerk who is not using a name.

Moderators, please delete posts by those who do not use a UNIQUE name, this would solve a lot of problems.

Thank You.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 29, 1999.

Right Gregg,

I don't know what a computer is. And I also don't know what a keyboard is, or an ISP, or a phone jack, or a modem.

ya.

And I find it very humorous that you guys think I'm being paid to be here. I won't mention it again for fear of "doth protesting too much".

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

underscore @ underscore dot underscore IS unique.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

@ .

Let me try again. Forget the harassment. Why are you posting here. Are you angry or upset with us? If so, why?

-- the Virginian (1@1.com), October 29, 1999.

I am baffled how so many people can believe what could possibly amount to a ghost story.

But I am upset that you people (who have every right to think what you want) feel that you have to covert newbies to your Apocalyptic way of thinking. They have no idea... they aren't techies... and if they trust you they will probably fall right into your way of thinking without EVER QUESTIONING IT.

I see stories all the time about how you guys are having so much trouble convinving "DWGI's" into "GI's". Sounds like you are trying to brainwash people who already know better. I think that warrants a little debunking. Or alot, in some cases.

-- (_@_._), October 29, 1999.

YOU FUCKING JERK!

That does it, your ass is deleted unless you choose a NAME, not just an e-mail address.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 29, 1999.

Easy killer

-- How'd this be? (_@_._._@_._), October 29, 1999.

@@@.@,

Not to worry. The vast majority of those who peruse this forum would never mistake the cretin (_@_._) for you.

-- (+@+.+), October 29, 1999.

Ok, fair enough __@__.

Have at it.

-- the Virginian (1@1.com), October 29, 1999.

@

How did I prove I can't stand the truth? Duh. Maybe I am a typical doomer. And perhaps you are a typical attention-seeking no-life loser polly. Poor little baby....mommy will pay more attention to you. Just whine. That should do it.

-- haha (haha@haha.com), October 29, 1999.

hahaha,

Where in the Doomer Handbook does it say that you have to counter a reasonably docile post with a litany of childish insults? I'd really like to see what page that is on.

-- (_@_._@_._@), October 29, 1999.

(_@_._@_._@),

Where in ANY handbook did you learn (?) to become such a pathetic, infantile moron? Cretins of your magnatude can only be the result of genetics.

-- (+@+.+), October 29, 1999.

Um.... goodbye.

-- (_@_._._._@_.), October 29, 1999.

That means I don't want to talk to you anymore, just in case you don't understand cretin.

-- [ ahhh-jerk.... ahhhh-jerk....] (bless@you.com), October 29, 1999.