"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:J7WdnXmfibNm7p3YnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>
>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>
>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>
>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe this
>>> nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no, not
>>> here........
>>>
>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that any
>> story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not inconceivable
>> the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who provoked a self
>> defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz Aldrin did.
>>
>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>> says at face value.
>>
>> --
> Maybe the bail was high, but the couple were able to make bail. Being
> provoked is the oldest line in the book from wife-beaters. Hopefully
> a judge would not even consider that this behavior was called for,
> whether they were provoked or not. The tape never stopped rolling.
> The reporter did not provoke her. She was absolutely crazy.
>
You have no way of knowing what happened before the tape started, or
after it finished. Obviously, at least to anyone who isn't a retard. And
you obviously don't live in California. My comment was specific to
confrontations in California, southern California especially, that
involve members of the press. Nobody in the press gets taken at face
value in this state, because they are usually the problem.

Plus, the judge has to have a damned good reason to deny bail, or even
set it particularly high. If you don't like the Constitution, move to a
country without one.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:9umdndQhtNri6Z3YnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>
>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>
>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>
>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe this
>>> nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no, not
>>> here........
>>>
>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that any
>> story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not inconceivable
>> the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who provoked a self
>> defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz Aldrin did.
>>
>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>> says at face value.
>>
>> --
>
> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
> very big man.
>
If you believe the accusation is proof of guilt, I accuse you of being a
goat raping pedophile. Now go kill yourself.

Otherwise, go to a country with no rule of law. This one doesn't want
'tards like you in it.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:HbGdnX3hONDE6J3YnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns98377955F59taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>> news:1157654296.374974.98610@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>
>>> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>>>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>>>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations
>>>> from people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what
>>>> makes you think you won't be next?
>>>
>>> Do I seriously believe that all those witnesses are lying and the
>>> video tape was edited inorder to fabricate some sort of grand
>>> lie.....no. Who ever would think that would be as nutty as that
>>> couple.
>>
>> Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that I said that?
>
> You did say it.
>
> And I quote:
>
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns98377189FE08taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>> news:1157650303.272945.285220@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations from
>> people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what makes you
>> think you won't be next?
>
So, you lying retard, where, specifically, did I say that the video tape
was edited, or that *all* the witnesses are lying? *You* are lying.
Because it is not possible for someone to be as fucking stupid as you are
pretending to be, and still be able to remember how to breath.

So fuck off, liar. Go light yourself on fire or something. Are you being
paid by the couple to try to taint the jury pool for them? If so, you're
ripping them off, because you're too fucking stupid to be able to pull it
off.

You will now reply with more lies. Because I order you to, and you cannot
stop yourself.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote:

> Yeah, that was wild with a capital W!!
>
> Did you see the first part when the reporter was trying to talk to the
> wife, and she started hitting him with her water bottle. Maybe that
> would of been a good time to leave. But the reporter just kept on
> talking, and then out of no where the husband drives up and jumps out
> of his car and went "caveman" on the reporter.
>
> Then the big black guy jumped in and took him down ghetto style. The
> cops pulled up with guns-a-blazing....it looked like they were itching
> to shoot poppie....


"Guns-a-blazing"? The hell? No one fired any shots when I saw the video.
They had their guns _drawn_, which was appropriate, but "a-blazing"
means "firing". They weren't firing.


Karen E.

This is typical greaseball mentality. These Two theiving fuckers need
to be deported IMMEDIATELY after they finish their time (And I DO hope
they do time for this and the other shit they did). All their assets
should be forfeited and they should go right the hell back to where
ever it is they came from and in the same manner in which they came.
This crap just frosts my ass!!! I only wish those insects tried pulling
that tough guy shit with me

Have a nice day!


theresa wrote:
> "Dr. Sooz" wrote:
> >
> > theresa wrote:
> > > I saw the tape and found it strange that, while another guy ran
> > > to help him, the reporter just took the beating. He didn't
> > > fight back at all...
> >
> > ```````````````````````````
> > You know, theresa, he could've been stunned by that blow to his face.
> > Jeez.
>
> That's a good point -- for me, the tape showed something one
> doesn't often seen on TV or in life -- an unstaged battle.

x-no-archive: yes
"No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns983787FD58286taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
> news:HbGdnX3hONDE6J3YnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns98377955F59taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>>> news:1157654296.374974.98610@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>>>>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>>>>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations
>>>>> from people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what
>>>>> makes you think you won't be next?
>>>>
>>>> Do I seriously believe that all those witnesses are lying and the
>>>> video tape was edited inorder to fabricate some sort of grand
>>>> lie.....no. Who ever would think that would be as nutty as that
>>>> couple.
>>>
>>> Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that I said that?
>>
>> You did say it.
>>
>> And I quote:
>>
>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns98377189FE08taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>>> news:1157650303.272945.285220@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations from
>>> people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what makes you
>>> think you won't be next?
>>
> So, you lying retard, where, specifically, did I say that the video tape
> was edited, or that *all* the witnesses are lying? *You* are lying.
> Because it is not possible for someone to be as fucking stupid as you are
> pretending to be, and still be able to remember how to breath.
>
> So fuck off, liar. Go light yourself on fire or something. Are you being
> paid by the couple to try to taint the jury pool for them? If so, you're
> ripping them off, because you're too fucking stupid to be able to pull it
> off.
>
> You will now reply with more lies. Because I order you to, and you cannot
> stop yourself.
>
> --
> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
> -- William Hyde
> Terry Austin

I am going to assume you are the wife that was on camera since the rest of
us saw what really happened.

You order me to? Alrighty then. I think I would like to keep about a city
width apart from you.

x-no-archive: yes
"No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9837876DA9E8Etaustingmail@216.168.3.64...
> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
> news:J7WdnXmfibNm7p3YnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>>
>>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe this
>>>> nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no, not
>>>> here........
>>>>
>>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that any
>>> story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not inconceivable
>>> the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who provoked a self
>>> defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz Aldrin did.
>>>
>>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>>> says at face value.
>>>
>>> --
>> Maybe the bail was high, but the couple were able to make bail. Being
>> provoked is the oldest line in the book from wife-beaters. Hopefully
>> a judge would not even consider that this behavior was called for,
>> whether they were provoked or not. The tape never stopped rolling.
>> The reporter did not provoke her. She was absolutely crazy.
>>
> You have no way of knowing what happened before the tape started, or
> after it finished. Obviously, at least to anyone who isn't a retard. And
> you obviously don't live in California. My comment was specific to
> confrontations in California, southern California especially, that
> involve members of the press. Nobody in the press gets taken at face
> value in this state, because they are usually the problem.
>
> Plus, the judge has to have a damned good reason to deny bail, or even
> set it particularly high. If you don't like the Constitution, move to a
> country without one.
>
> --
> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
> -- William Hyde
> Terry Austin

Hey, us retards cannot compete with you. You are just too darned clever.
Besides that, I think you are going to hit all of us and throw bottles at
us. Maybe you will even get your gun.

Must be great being in a world where you are the only smart person and you
have to put up with the rest of us retards. You are one lucky secretary to
be smarter than your boss.

x-no-archive: yes
"Dr. Sooz" <penhall98@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1157658111.043850.111520@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Kathy M. wrote:
>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and the
>> camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a very big
>> man.
>
> ````````````````````````
> And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight. They
> don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after them with a
> full bottle of water and a paperweight.
>

That's for sure. She was scaring me and I wasn't even near her. ;)

x-no-archive: yes
"No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98378796365D1taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
> news:9umdndQhtNri6Z3YnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>>
>>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe this
>>>> nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no, not
>>>> here........
>>>>
>>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that any
>>> story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not inconceivable
>>> the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who provoked a self
>>> defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz Aldrin did.
>>>
>>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>>> says at face value.
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
>> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
>> very big man.
>>
> If you believe the accusation is proof of guilt, I accuse you of being a
> goat raping pedophile. Now go kill yourself.
>
> Otherwise, go to a country with no rule of law. This one doesn't want
> 'tards like you in it.
>
> --
> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
> -- William Hyde
> Terry Austin

That is such a terrific argument. Even I think they are innocent now.
Forget what I saw. I was probably dreaming it.

Off to romance my pre-school goat.

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:Y4mdnZjUVo5SB53YnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns983787FD58286taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
>> news:HbGdnX3hONDE6J3YnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns98377955F59taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>>>> news:1157654296.374974.98610@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>>>>>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>>>>>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations
>>>>>> from people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what
>>>>>> makes you think you won't be next?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do I seriously believe that all those witnesses are lying and the
>>>>> video tape was edited inorder to fabricate some sort of grand
>>>>> lie.....no. Who ever would think that would be as nutty as that
>>>>> couple.
>>>>
>>>> Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that I said that?
>>>
>>> You did say it.
>>>
>>> And I quote:
>>>
>>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns98377189FE08taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in
>>>> news:1157650303.272945.285220@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>> Do you believe in the rule of law? If you genuinely believe that
>>>> people should be routinely locked up based solely on accusations
>>>> from people who have incentive to exaggerate, or just lie, what
>>>> makes you think you won't be next?
>>>
>> So, you lying retard, where, specifically, did I say that the video
>> tape was edited, or that *all* the witnesses are lying? *You* are
>> lying. Because it is not possible for someone to be as fucking stupid
>> as you are pretending to be, and still be able to remember how to
>> breath.
>>
>> So fuck off, liar. Go light yourself on fire or something. Are you
>> being paid by the couple to try to taint the jury pool for them? If
>> so, you're ripping them off, because you're too fucking stupid to be
>> able to pull it off.
>>
>> You will now reply with more lies. Because I order you to, and you
>> cannot stop yourself.
>>
>> --
>> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
>> -- William Hyde
>> Terry Austin
>
> I am going to assume

Since you are too stupid to actually know. Anything.

> you are the wife that was on camera since the
> rest of us saw what really happened.

You were there?
>
> You order me to? Alrighty then. I think I would like to keep about a
> city width apart from you.
>
You did, in fact, reply, because you could not restrain yourself.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:182dnX3SxuQXBp3YnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9837876DA9E8Etaustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
>> news:J7WdnXmfibNm7p3YnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>>>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>>>
>>>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe
>>>>> this nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no,
>>>>> not here........
>>>>>
>>>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that
>>>> any story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not
>>>> inconceivable the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who
>>>> provoked a self defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz
>>>> Aldrin did.
>>>>
>>>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>>>> says at face value.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> Maybe the bail was high, but the couple were able to make bail.
>>> Being provoked is the oldest line in the book from wife-beaters.
>>> Hopefully a judge would not even consider that this behavior was
>>> called for, whether they were provoked or not. The tape never
>>> stopped rolling. The reporter did not provoke her. She was
>>> absolutely crazy.
>>>
>> You have no way of knowing what happened before the tape started, or
>> after it finished. Obviously, at least to anyone who isn't a retard.
>> And you obviously don't live in California. My comment was specific
>> to confrontations in California, southern California especially, that
>> involve members of the press. Nobody in the press gets taken at face
>> value in this state, because they are usually the problem.
>>
>> Plus, the judge has to have a damned good reason to deny bail, or
>> even set it particularly high. If you don't like the Constitution,
>> move to a country without one.
>>
>> --
>> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
>> -- William Hyde
>> Terry Austin
>
> Hey, us retards cannot compete with you.

Good of you to realize it. Finally.

> Must be great being in a world where you are the only smart person and
> you have to put up with the rest of us retards. You are one lucky
> secretary to be smarter than your boss.
>
Indeed.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:_MedneV7D_q3AZ3YnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "Dr. Sooz" <penhall98@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:1157658111.043850.111520@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> Kathy M. wrote:
>>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
>>> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
>>> very big man.
>>
>> ````````````````````````
>> And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight. They
>> don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after them with
>> a full bottle of water and a paperweight.
>>
>
> That's for sure. She was scaring me and I wasn't even near her. ;)
>
Sign of low intelligence on your part, I suppose.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

"Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:zPidnbRXfMYAAZ3YnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@giganews.com:

> x-no-archive: yes
> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns98378796365D1taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>> "Kathy M." <tresjoli@pacbell.net> wrote in
>> news:9umdndQhtNri6Z3YnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>>
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> "No 33 Secretary" <terry.notaniceperson@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns983761ACFE8B7taustingmail@216.168.3.64...
>>>> evening_blu@yahoo.com wrote in news:1157646559.320606.214260
>>>> @e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Karen wrote:
>>>>>>Worse yet, they are out on bail.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, don't you just love our Judges.
>>>>>
>>>>> You would think after the Judge saw the video tape and the badly
>>>>> beaten reporter, he would've come to the conclusion "hey, maybe
this
>>>>> nutty couple might be a menance to oursociety"...... but no, not
>>>>> here........
>>>>>
>>>> This is a California court, where judges never, ever assume that any
>>>> story told by a newsie is true or complete. It's not inconceivable
>>>> the judge thought the report was a stalkerazzi who provoked a self
>>>> defense resposne, the way the guy stalking Buzz Aldrin did.
>>>>
>>>> By and large, judges are correct to not accept anything a reporter
>>>> says at face value.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
>>> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
>>> very big man.
>>>
>> If you believe the accusation is proof of guilt, I accuse you of being
a
>> goat raping pedophile. Now go kill yourself.
>>
>> Otherwise, go to a country with no rule of law. This one doesn't want
>> 'tards like you in it.
>>
>> --
>> "So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
>> -- William Hyde
>> Terry Austin
>
> That is such a terrific argument.

What is there to argue with? You've already admitted you can't answer
anything I've said. You've already admitted I won.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin

Dr. Sooz wrote:
> Kathy M. wrote:
>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
>> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
>> very big man.
>
> ````````````````````````
> And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight. They
> don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after them with
> a full bottle of water and a paperweight.

No kidding. I always tell my students, "If you get in a lot of fights, you
are doing something wrong." This reporter most likely was not accustomed to
fighting -- note his possession of a real job. People in positions of
responsibility don't spend their time fighting and acting like idiots. This
reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned by what
happened and had no idea what to do.
--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

 
theresa wrote:
> I still think it was strange that the reporter didn't fight
> back. The guy who came to his aid gave as good as he got, but
> through it all the reporter seemed oddly passive for one getting
> so obviously pummelled.


That reporter is a total pussy. And too bad the camera was on. It's
about time those fake "investigative reporters", who are really nothing
but obnoxious assholes paid to trespass and scream stupid questions,
get what they got coming. I'd like to see someone turn a big fat hose
on one of them. hahaha. Maybe a few loaded diapers from the diaper
bucket launched at their heads.

callycoyote@gmail.com wrote:
> theresa wrote:
>> I still think it was strange that the reporter didn't fight
>> back. The guy who came to his aid gave as good as he got, but
>> through it all the reporter seemed oddly passive for one getting
>> so obviously pummelled.
>
>
> That reporter is a total pussy. And too bad the camera was on. It's
> about time those fake "investigative reporters", who are really
> nothing but obnoxious assholes paid to trespass and scream stupid
> questions, get what they got coming. I'd like to see someone turn a
> big fat hose on one of them. hahaha. Maybe a few loaded diapers from
> the diaper bucket launched at their heads.

Funny. All my anger is at the people who made themselves into a news story
when they stole the identities of others and then assaulted the man who was
assigned to cover it. Who knows why the guy didn't fight back -- maybe he
was stunned, maybe he is a pacifist, maybe whatever. That doesn't bother
me. What bothers me is the criminals who rob from people, screw up the
financial lives of their victims, and then assault innocent people.

--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

"nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dr. Sooz wrote:
>> Kathy M. wrote:
>>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
>>> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
>>> very big man.
>>
>> ````````````````````````
>> And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight. They
>> don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after them with
>> a full bottle of water and a paperweight.
>
>No kidding. I always tell my students, "If you get in a lot of fights, you
>are doing something wrong." This reporter most likely was not accustomed to
>fighting -- note his possession of a real job. People in positions of
>responsibility don't spend their time fighting and acting like idiots. This
>reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned by what
>happened and had no idea what to do.

Reporters like to play dumb. This guy had been spending a good chunk
of time stalking these low lifes, following them around and sticking
microphones and cameras in their faces. What did he expect? Did he
think they were going to bake him a chocolate cake and give him a hug?

If you spend your life getting in the face of dangerous creatures,
don't be surprised when they attack you.

Oh, and telling someone you've pissed off to have a nice day? Typical
passive-aggressive bullshit. At that point you're asking for it. The
people who attacked him are scum, but at that point I started rooting
for the crazy woman.

 
nimue wrote:
> Dr. Sooz wrote:
> > Kathy M. wrote:
> >> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape and
> >> the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and not a
> >> very big man.
> >
> > ````````````````````````
> > And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight. They
> > don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after them with
> > a full bottle of water and a paperweight.
>
> No kidding. I always tell my students, "If you get in a lot of fights, you
> are doing something wrong." This reporter most likely was not accustomed to
> fighting -- note his possession of a real job. People in positions of
> responsibility don't spend their time fighting and acting like idiots. This
> reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned by what
> happened and had no idea what to do.


I'll bet knowing the whole thing was being taped helped restrain him.

mc

>> This
> > reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned by what
> > happened and had no idea what to do.


Pussy dork. He can dish it out, but when the shit hits the fan, he
puts his hands up like a baby girl and goes limp. He's the rotten
bottom of the gene pool. I'd send him down to Compton to harass some
gang-bangers at midnight. heh hehhh. "waaaaa! Me so hurt!" waaaaaaa.
Funny he didn't faint.

x-no-archive: yes
<callycoyote@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157671640.582053.220340@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>> This
>> > reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned by
>> > what
>> > happened and had no idea what to do.
>
>
> Pussy dork. He can dish it out, but when the shit hits the fan, he
> puts his hands up like a baby girl and goes limp. He's the rotten
> bottom of the gene pool. I'd send him down to Compton to harass some
> gang-bangers at midnight. heh hehhh. "waaaaa! Me so hurt!" waaaaaaa.
> Funny he didn't faint.
>

Half of his head was covered in blood. You obviously did not see the tape.
He was being very calm with the woman and she flew into a rage and then her
husband comes out of nowhere and jumped on this skinny little reporter. He
was sent out to get the story, he did it calmly. Is he not supposed to do
his job?

mc wrote:
> nimue wrote:
>> Dr. Sooz wrote:
>>> Kathy M. wrote:
>>>> He did not need to accept it at face value. It is there on tape
>>>> and the camera never quit rolling. The reporter was very meek and
>>>> not a very big man.
>>>
>>> ````````````````````````
>>> And, believe it or not, some people have never BEEN in a fight.
>>> They don't know what to do when a wild, crazed woman comes after
>>> them with a full bottle of water and a paperweight.
>>
>> No kidding. I always tell my students, "If you get in a lot of
>> fights, you are doing something wrong." This reporter most likely
>> was not accustomed to fighting -- note his possession of a real job.
>> People in positions of responsibility don't spend their time
>> fighting and acting like idiots. This reporter is probably just a
>> decent guy who was absolutely stunned by what happened and had no
>> idea what to do.
>
>
> I'll bet knowing the whole thing was being taped helped restrain him.

Good point. No one can charge him with assault.
>
> mc

--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

 
Kathy M. wrote:
> Half of his head was covered in blood. You obviously did not see the tape.
> He was being very calm with the woman and she flew into a rage and then her
> husband comes out of nowhere and jumped on this skinny little reporter. He
> was sent out to get the story, he did it calmly. Is he not supposed to do
> his job?


I saw the tape, yes. It pleased me no end to see the wanker get
clobbered. I hope more people start doing it. They killed Diana.
Let's get a few of them back.

callycoyote@gmail.com wrote:
>>> This
>>> reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned
>>> by what happened and had no idea what to do.
>
>
> Pussy dork. He can dish it out,

He didn't. He didn't hit anyone.

>but when the shit hits the fan, he
> puts his hands up like a baby girl and goes limp. He's the rotten
> bottom of the gene pool.

Why? Because he didn't fight? Because he is smart enough not to fight when
he's being filmed?

>I'd send him down to Compton to harass some
> gang-bangers at midnight. heh hehhh. "waaaaa! Me so hurt!" waaaaaaa.
> Funny he didn't faint.

You have problems.


--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

x-no-archive: yes
<callycoyote@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157673875.117171.52840@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Kathy M. wrote:
>> Half of his head was covered in blood. You obviously did not see the
>> tape.
>> He was being very calm with the woman and she flew into a rage and then
>> her
>> husband comes out of nowhere and jumped on this skinny little reporter.
>> He
>> was sent out to get the story, he did it calmly. Is he not supposed to
>> do
>> his job?
>
>
> I saw the tape, yes. It pleased me no end to see the wanker get
> clobbered. I hope more people start doing it. They killed Diana.
> Let's get a few of them back.
>

It is a little different. This man and woman are accused of a crime (real
estate fraud, stealing identities) and the reporter was on a lawn, not in a
car. He is not a paparazzi. Diana was an innocent victim.

Kathy M. wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
> <callycoyote@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1157671640.582053.220340@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>>> This
>>>> reporter is probably just a decent guy who was absolutely stunned
>>>> by what
>>>> happened and had no idea what to do.
>>
>>
>> Pussy dork. He can dish it out, but when the shit hits the fan, he
>> puts his hands up like a baby girl and goes limp. He's the rotten
>> bottom of the gene pool. I'd send him down to Compton to harass some
>> gang-bangers at midnight. heh hehhh. "waaaaa! Me so hurt!"
>> waaaaaaa. Funny he didn't faint.
>>
>
> Half of his head was covered in blood. You obviously did not see the
> tape. He was being very calm with the woman and she flew into a rage
> and then her husband comes out of nowhere and jumped on this skinny
> little reporter. He was sent out to get the story, he did it calmly.
> Is he not supposed to do his job?

I just watched the tape (which I should have done first) and I am shocked
that anyone thinks the reporter was a pussy. I thought he was a gentleman.
He was doing his job; that's all. When that slimy woman wacked him in the
face with her water bottle, he kept his cool -- always hard to do, much
harder than fighting -- and said, "That's not appropriate." He didn't hit a
woman. He didn't even verbally assault her. His actions impressed me.
Then her husband grabbed him from the side, threw him off balance, then had
him in a bear hug from the back while his camera man jumped in to save him.
What could he have done? Physically, with the guy on his back and the
cameraman behind the guy, his range of motion would have been limited and I
am sure the whole thing was absolutely confusing. I thought the reporter
handled the situation quite well, and I wish more people would learn to
behave as well as he.

--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah