On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:06:29 PM UTC-8, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.


Tom Gardner insisted for months that Mog and I were the same person.

There is a reason Tom Gardner ran Ohio Brush into the ground.

There is a reason Tom Gardner is now forced to live off his wife's social security.

Tom Gardner doesn't listen to or work well with others especially when they don't buy into his constant bull**** and excuses. Tom Gardner deserves what has happened to him. He lied to this group for years and pretended to be something he wasn't. I tried to help the ****bag. Tom Gardner wasn't interested because he's a know it all. The fact is that Tom Gardner knew very little about marketing or running a business and he never wanted to learn from others who had skills he clearly doesn't have. It was all an ego trip for Tom Gardner and that's why Ohio Brush is no longer.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other. Mog thinks independently. He doesn't need the kind of approval you crave because you're so weak and so lame. Mog and I have very different options on many issues but that most likely will never cause us to not get along. Unlike you, neither Mog or I need to be right all the time or experts at everything.

It's called mutual respect.

It's the same mutual respect most of the almost 2,500 members of my LinkedIn group have for me and I for them.

What I wrote will never sink in because you're far to gone. I know it. Others do as well.

In article , Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

Many news readers allow one to kill a thread. That's the closest I
know of.

Joe Gwinn

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and
mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

Of a cop's muzzle flash.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately.. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:04:41 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

"John Carroll is probably the best thing that has ever happened to
U.S. Vero" - Jon Banquer- June 16, 2001

[Jon Banquer replying to Ed Huntress]:
Ed,
The newsgroup badly needs someone who is as articulate as you are.
Keep me on my toes and correct me where ever you think it's
appropriate,as I respect what you have to say based on what you have
already posted. I will certainly take the time to think about whatever
correction, advice, etc. you post. - Jon Banquer - Jun 23, 2002
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt....I/t2qa5vNd-rQJ

Jon, you are just so fickle. g

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:28:26 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:04:41 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group.. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

"John Carroll is probably the best thing that has ever happened to
U.S. Vero" - Jon Banquer- June 16, 2001

[Jon Banquer replying to Ed Huntress]:
Ed,
The newsgroup badly needs someone who is as articulate as you are.
Keep me on my toes and correct me where ever you think it's
appropriate,as I respect what you have to say based on what you have
already posted. I will certainly take the time to think about whatever
correction, advice, etc. you post. - Jon Banquer - Jun 23, 2002
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt....I/t2qa5vNd-rQJ

Jon, you are just so fickle. g

--
Ed Huntress

Consider the fact that I outgrew you, slow eddy. While I was growing and quickly moving past you on topics like practical race engine building you were standing still and resting on your laurels. It's actually not an unusual occurrence in life but you're far too gone to realize it.

I think Mog quickly picked up on what you can't grasp and never will grasp.

Too me, it's hysterical that you constantly bull**** yourself and have to pretend that most members of my LinkedIn group don't know how outspoken I am on a wide range of topics. They know. You can't accept the fact they know and have no problem with who I am. :)

There is a reason you're a worthless, ad copywriter for pay for play metalworking rags. You're a lifelong loser who often has no clues. It's clear to many that you can't reason for yourself. Face it, you need John Carroll and others to justify how ****ed in the head you truly are. You have no idea how much I enjoy your reliance on others because you can't think independently and have no confidence in your machining or CADCAM abilities.

You're a tool and people I don't like use you as such.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:51:12 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:28:26 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:04:41 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

"John Carroll is probably the best thing that has ever happened to
U.S. Vero" - Jon Banquer- June 16, 2001

[Jon Banquer replying to Ed Huntress]:
Ed,
The newsgroup badly needs someone who is as articulate as you are.
Keep me on my toes and correct me where ever you think it's
appropriate,as I respect what you have to say based on what you have
already posted. I will certainly take the time to think about whatever
correction, advice, etc. you post. - Jon Banquer - Jun 23, 2002
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt....I/t2qa5vNd-rQJ

Jon, you are just so fickle. g

--
Ed Huntress

Consider the fact that I outgrew you, slow eddy.

Just how much weight did you gain, Jon? Is that soup kitchen food kind
of fattening?


I think Mog quickly picked up on what you can't grasp and never will grasp.

Yeah, I don't know much about street access to anti-psychotic drugs.
That seems to be something he's on top of. Maybe you two could share
notes.

You two should talk more to each other, Jon. We could use the
entertainment.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:00:15 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:51:12 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:28:26 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:04:41 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

"John Carroll is probably the best thing that has ever happened to
U.S. Vero" - Jon Banquer- June 16, 2001

[Jon Banquer replying to Ed Huntress]:
Ed,
The newsgroup badly needs someone who is as articulate as you are.
Keep me on my toes and correct me where ever you think it's
appropriate,as I respect what you have to say based on what you have
already posted. I will certainly take the time to think about whatever
correction, advice, etc. you post. - Jon Banquer - Jun 23, 2002
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt....I/t2qa5vNd-rQJ

Jon, you are just so fickle. g

--
Ed Huntress

Consider the fact that I outgrew you, slow eddy.

Just how much weight did you gain, Jon? Is that soup kitchen food kind
of fattening?


I think Mog quickly picked up on what you can't grasp and never will grasp.

Yeah, I don't know much about street access to anti-psychotic drugs.
That seems to be something he's on top of. Maybe you two could share
notes.

You two should talk more to each other, Jon. We could use the
entertainment.

--
Ed Huntress

You should get on your knees and blow Tom Gardner more. At least it's something you have talent for.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:02:26 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:00:15 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:51:12 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:28:26 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:04:41 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:34:21 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress


And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.

--
Ed Huntress

You are what you surround yourself with. slow eddy and Tom Gardner have many similarities.

What really drives an ignorant CADCAM moron like slow eddy insane is the facts show how full of **** he is. There is nothing like my LinkedIn group. Many of the people who comment and start discussions in my LindedIn group do so because they know I know the CADCAM programs they help write intimately. Someone as stupid and as ego driven as slow eddy can't deal with this kind of reality. The same can be said by those that use slow eddy as a tool like John Carroll does. John Carrol was forced out of the CADCAM business because he's a bull****er that can't sell. How do I know this? The owners of CADCAM companies have told me so. :) I refused to accept John Carrol's offer to hire me because I knew he was a liar and a bull****er who would never have my back. John Carroll can't stand me because I rejected him and I was smart enough to figure out he wasn't the kind of person anyone intelligent would ever work for.

"John Carroll is probably the best thing that has ever happened to
U.S. Vero" - Jon Banquer- June 16, 2001

[Jon Banquer replying to Ed Huntress]:
Ed,
The newsgroup badly needs someone who is as articulate as you are.
Keep me on my toes and correct me where ever you think it's
appropriate,as I respect what you have to say based on what you have
already posted. I will certainly take the time to think about whatever
correction, advice, etc. you post. - Jon Banquer - Jun 23, 2002
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt....I/t2qa5vNd-rQJ

Jon, you are just so fickle. g

--
Ed Huntress

Consider the fact that I outgrew you, slow eddy.

Just how much weight did you gain, Jon? Is that soup kitchen food kind
of fattening?


I think Mog quickly picked up on what you can't grasp and never will grasp.

Yeah, I don't know much about street access to anti-psychotic drugs.
That seems to be something he's on top of. Maybe you two could share
notes.

You two should talk more to each other, Jon. We could use the
entertainment.

--
Ed Huntress

You should get on your knees and blow Tom Gardner more. At least it's something you have talent for.

Jon, Jon...you should know by now that regressing to homoerotic slurs
is a sure sign that your brain is shorting out and that you have
nothing left to say.

Of course, that happened years ago. This must be a delayed reaction.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:08:59 PM UTC-8, slow eddy once again tried to deflect that fact that he's got serious issues that others notice and failed:

Snip

Nothing to respond to.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Here is how a lying ****bag like slow eddy works:

slow eddy lies.

slow eddy gets caught lying.

slow eddy lies some more.

Lets all hope slow eddy son fairs much better than slow eddy has in his sad, pathetic life.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:13:24 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:26:22 -0800 (PST), wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never
meet
one without a gun in my hand.
--
Ed Huntress

I thought you would be more sympathetic to those misunderstood victims
of capitalist oppression.


Like Treyvon Martin?


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:56:06 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and
mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

Of a cop's muzzle flash.

One can hope it will be a double tap


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:37:20 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Then why was your arrest record not expunged? It's automatic in
Florida, unless you've been convicted of something else, or arrested
for sexual violations. Your lawyer only had to ask, and defense
lawyers are obligated to ask on your behalf.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:14:53 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:37:20 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Then why was your arrest record not expunged? It's automatic in
Florida, unless you've been convicted of something else, or arrested
for sexual violations. Your lawyer only had to ask, and defense
lawyers are obligated to ask on your behalf.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never asked and I don't care. It's never harmed me in any way other than to point out that someone is very weak and can't use logic. Someone like you for instance. I try not to surround myself with worthless blowhards who can't think independently and are on ego trips like you are.

My lawyer was a public defender. At the time I was very sick and had been diagnosed with cancer. My mugshot clearly shows how weak and pale I was at the time. I ended up with a different public defender than I started with because it took the DA awhile to figure out I wasn't going to budge and that his witness was a liar.

It's clear you don't know as much about the law as you claim to. That would be very similar to many other topics you claim expertise in and then fall flat on your face when someone with real world experience eventually calls you out for being full of **** like I often do.

Tom Gardner fired this volley in news:m6kqju$hen$2
@speranza.aioe.org:

Mog'll come to see the light.

From what I see, Mogula is just a "sane", measured and considerate copy of
Jonqueer. I think the moniker may be an alter-ego/pseudonym. Even madmen
have a need to act sane to impress folks.

Lloyd

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:52:57 PM UTC-8, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
Tom Gardner fired this volley in news:m6kqju$hen$2
@speranza.aioe.org:

Mog'll come to see the light.

From what I see, Mogula is just a "sane", measured and considerate copy of
Jonqueer. I think the moniker may be an alter-ego/pseudonym. Even madmen
have a need to act sane to impress folks.

Lloyd



Loud has never been very sharp on many topics, just obnoxious and frequently wrong.

Loud's moronic reasoning is typical of how Mark Wieber clique of idiots think.

Loud stopped learning many years ago.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:42:07 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:14:53 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:37:20 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Then why was your arrest record not expunged? It's automatic in
Florida, unless you've been convicted of something else, or arrested
for sexual violations. Your lawyer only had to ask, and defense
lawyers are obligated to ask on your behalf.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never asked and I don't care.

You don't have to ask. Unless you specifically instruct him or her not
to, your lawyer asks.


My lawyer was a public defender. At the time I was very sick and had been diagnosed with cancer. My mugshot clearly shows how weak and pale I was at the time. I ended up with a different public defender than I started with because it took the DA awhile to figure out I wasn't going to budge and that his witness was a liar.

It's clear you don't know as much about the law as you claim to. That would be very similar to many other topics you claim expertise in and then fall flat on your face when someone with real world experience eventually calls you out for being full of **** like I often do.

What's clear is that you're bull****ting. There are three
possibiities:

One is that you had a prior conviction.

Two is that you had a prior arrest on a charge related to sexual
assault.

The third possibility is that the charges were not "dropped," but that
the case was concluded "nolle prosequi."

Because you always couch your denial as " I've never been convicted of
a felony," rather than "I've never been convicted of a crime," the
first is logically the most likely.

The third also is likely. It's common in domestic abuse cases. What it
means is that the case would remain open, but that the prosecutor
would not prosecute at this time.

That typically happens when the spouse decides not to press the case.
The state still has an interest, but it doesn't have a cooperating
witness. Knowing that most wife-beaters are repeat offenders, they'll
leave the case open to see what happens.

Domestic abuse cases don't result in an arrest and booking unless
there is some evidence -- usually, a bruised spouse or a corroborating
witness. There had to be something more than a mere claim by your
wife.

So, Jon, what other bull**** are you going to spin now? These points
of law I mentioned are all straightforward and well-documented, so
you'll have to come up with something else.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 5:12:11 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:42:07 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:14:53 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:37:20 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Then why was your arrest record not expunged? It's automatic in
Florida, unless you've been convicted of something else, or arrested
for sexual violations. Your lawyer only had to ask, and defense
lawyers are obligated to ask on your behalf.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never asked and I don't care.

You don't have to ask. Unless you specifically instruct him or her not
to, your lawyer asks.


My lawyer was a public defender. At the time I was very sick and had been diagnosed with cancer. My mugshot clearly shows how weak and pale I was at the time. I ended up with a different public defender than I started with because it took the DA awhile to figure out I wasn't going to budge and that his witness was a liar.

It's clear you don't know as much about the law as you claim to. That would be very similar to many other topics you claim expertise in and then fall flat on your face when someone with real world experience eventually calls you out for being full of **** like I often do.

What's clear is that you're bull****ting. There are three
possibiities:

One is that you had a prior conviction.

Two is that you had a prior arrest on a charge related to sexual
assault.

The third possibility is that the charges were not "dropped," but that
the case was concluded "nolle prosequi."

Because you always couch your denial as " I've never been convicted of
a felony," rather than "I've never been convicted of a crime," the
first is logically the most likely.

The third also is likely. It's common in domestic abuse cases. What it
means is that the case would remain open, but that the prosecutor
would not prosecute at this time.

That typically happens when the spouse decides not to press the case.
The state still has an interest, but it doesn't have a cooperating
witness. Knowing that most wife-beaters are repeat offenders, they'll
leave the case open to see what happens.

Domestic abuse cases don't result in an arrest and booking unless
there is some evidence -- usually, a bruised spouse or a corroborating
witness. There had to be something more than a mere claim by your
wife.

So, Jon, what other bull**** are you going to spin now? These points
of law I mentioned are all straightforward and well-documented, so
you'll have to come up with something else.

--
Ed Huntress

What's clear is slow eddy is a liar and that he has no idea what he's talking about on this subject or many others subjects. For many years slow eddy and others have tried and failed to use this case against me. The bottom line is slow eddy can't produce a felony or even a misdemeanor conviction in this case. The reason no one can is I have never been convicted of a felony in my entire life.

There is a reason slow eddy is a worthless, ad copy writer who works for pay for play metalworking rags. The reason is slow eddy is a lifelong failure and he knows it.

Ed Huntress wrote:
Snipped to singular point:

And on a separate note, i've heard about those soup kitchens and
the claims that authorities put expensive and controversial
prescription drugs and prison sedatives like seroquel and risperdal
into the food that they serve those people and families.

Never having been in a soup kitchen, I've never heard those stories.



Having been in a few in a local city, helping as a cook or server, I've
heard a LOT of this kind of stuff. Of course 2/3 or better of the folks
dining there are also ones who should be in mental institutions.
Basically the same folks who say that man never went to the moon, that
9/11 was an inside job and that they expect the mother ship any day now.

Only problem is that 99% of those kitchens are run by churches or
assistance groups who get nothing from the "authorities" I know I've
never added anything like that, well maybe a small amount of wine or
beer depending on the dish, I mean really, how can you serve "beer
battered fish" without adding BEER !! Braised Beef in wine sauce without
a good wine ???? (and yes we did cook like that for a couple places, we
did special meals now and then if donations worked out just right)
Normally we did the common things like grilled cheese & tomato soup,
stew, chili, basically whatever we had ingredients for worked.



--
Steve W.

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress

And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.


Depends on the reader you are using. I can set up the filters in this
antique version of T-Bird to eliminate all mention of him. It allows
filtering from header or body information. Plus you can create multiple
key filters where it may look for his info in the from header, coupled
with info in the reply header and his name in the body of the post.

So it might look like
Delete any message with a from or reply to of (it
also allows limited wildcards for the domain names) then delete if
jon_banquer is in the header or body.

But then you miss the fun.... I usually settle from blocking his direct
posts.

--
Steve W.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 5:45:40 PM UTC-8, Steve W. wrote:
Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:04:45 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 1:46 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never meet
one without a gun in my hand.

-- Ed Huntress

And here I'm getting softer toward gun control.

I think Jon should just be ignored, he never has any on-topic posts.I
don't consider his CAD/CAM on-topic because he only talks about things
that other people did and no one cares about.

That's all he knows. He gets everything from what other people have
said. The people who tracked him through the various blogs over the
years -- the ones who really know the products he talks about --
spotted him for a phony years ago. That's why a Google search on "Jon
Banquer" produces such a disgusting string of results.

I've never seen anything
he has machined or built. I'd bet he is the first entry in everybody's
kill-file. Notice how he responds to his own posts?

It's funny. I counted seven in a row one time. I don't know what he
was saying, but he sure likes talking to himself.

Unfortunately,
when other people respond to him, I see those posts. Is there a way to
filter those out? It's really quite sad, he just doesn't get it.

I don't know if there's a way to do that.


Depends on the reader you are using. I can set up the filters in this
antique version of T-Bird to eliminate all mention of him. It allows
filtering from header or body information. Plus you can create multiple
key filters where it may look for his info in the from header, coupled
with info in the reply header and his name in the body of the post.

So it might look like
Delete any message with a from or reply to of (it
also allows limited wildcards for the domain names) then delete if
jon_banquer is in the header or body.

But then you miss the fun.... I usually settle from blocking his direct
posts.

--
Steve W.

Bottom line, Steve W. reads what I post and tries to pretend he doesn't.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:04:09 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:56:06 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and
mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

Of a cop's muzzle flash.

One can hope it will be a double tap

Isn't the triple tap the new standard? Two in COM (center of mass)
and one in the head, for good measure.

--
Obstacles are those frightful things you
see when you take your eyes off your goal.
--Henry Ford

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:03:03 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:13:24 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:26:22 -0800 (PST), wrote:


Jesus. Whatever kinds of people you hang out with, I hope I never
meet
one without a gun in my hand.
--
Ed Huntress

I thought you would be more sympathetic to those misunderstood victims
of capitalist oppression.


Like Treyvon Martin?

Watch this one, but pad your desk beforehand. Your jaw will hit it
when it drops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBL6AEkvLbk
Yes, the shooter shouldn't have fired, but Crom, did you see what all
they pulled, all the while feigning innocence? The original cop did a
magnificent job with his patience.

--
Obstacles are those frightful things you
see when you take your eyes off your goal.
--Henry Ford

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:32:30 -0500, "Steve W."
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Snipped to singular point:

And on a separate note, i've heard about those soup kitchens and
the claims that authorities put expensive and controversial
prescription drugs and prison sedatives like seroquel and risperdal
into the food that they serve those people and families.

Never having been in a soup kitchen, I've never heard those stories.



Having been in a few in a local city, helping as a cook or server, I've
heard a LOT of this kind of stuff. Of course 2/3 or better of the folks
dining there are also ones who should be in mental institutions.
Basically the same folks who say that man never went to the moon, that
9/11 was an inside job and that they expect the mother ship any day now.

Only problem is that 99% of those kitchens are run by churches or
assistance groups who get nothing from the "authorities" I know I've
never added anything like that, well maybe a small amount of wine or
beer depending on the dish, I mean really, how can you serve "beer
battered fish" without adding BEER !! Braised Beef in wine sauce without
a good wine ???? (and yes we did cook like that for a couple places, we
did special meals now and then if donations worked out just right)
Normally we did the common things like grilled cheese & tomato soup,
stew, chili, basically whatever we had ingredients for worked.

I have a neighbor who donates some of his time to helping out in soup
kitchens. He's an admirable guy in many ways. And that's an admirable
thing you're doing, too, Steve.

Now wait. Plumper will show up and claim you're making people
dependent and helpless. g

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:26:38 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 5:12:11 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:42:07 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:14:53 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:37:20 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:55:34 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:17:27 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 2:07:10 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:00:57 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 1:55:08 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 12:48:19 -0800 (PST), jon_banquer
wrote:

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:29:01 PM UTC-8, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0500, Tom Gardner
wrote:

On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

I don't know. It sounds like they're made of the same material, but
mog has a different emotional condition.

--
Ed Huntress

Mog and I respect each other....It's called mutual respect.

Something like mobsters, eh? Or, in this case, mutual recognition of
emotional abnormalities.

I don't see you talking to him much. Omertá, maybe...

--
Ed Huntress


When you understand someone often times you don't need to talk.

Right. I guess it's the microchip they implanted in your molar.


The more you play amateur head shrinker, the more you show others how insecure you are with yourself.

Well, you're an interesting case, Jon. The manic side of your bipolar
disorder seems to be suppressed more than it was ten years ago.

I wish I knew more about it; it looks like you're locked in a
permanent depressive-fight mode; probably because you're such a prick.

As for me, I'm so secure I could just take a nap before dinner. Maybe
I will. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I treat people like the deserve to be treated. In your cause it's with as much disgust and contempt as I can muster.

That seems to include everyone on this NG except for mog. It's
probably a matter of shared values: You've both been arrested; you've
both beaten women; and he, at least, seems to have more than a passing
familiarity with anti-pyschotic drugs. Perhaps you share that, too.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never beaten a woman. I was falsely accused of it by a woman with serious mental heath issues who refused to treat those issues. All charges against me were dropped and the DA apologized to me. I've never been convicted of a felony in my entire life. These facts deeply troubles lying sleazeballs like slow eddy.

Then why was your arrest record not expunged? It's automatic in
Florida, unless you've been convicted of something else, or arrested
for sexual violations. Your lawyer only had to ask, and defense
lawyers are obligated to ask on your behalf.

--
Ed Huntress

I've never asked and I don't care.

You don't have to ask. Unless you specifically instruct him or her not
to, your lawyer asks.


My lawyer was a public defender. At the time I was very sick and had been diagnosed with cancer. My mugshot clearly shows how weak and pale I was at the time. I ended up with a different public defender than I started with because it took the DA awhile to figure out I wasn't going to budge and that his witness was a liar.

It's clear you don't know as much about the law as you claim to. That would be very similar to many other topics you claim expertise in and then fall flat on your face when someone with real world experience eventually calls you out for being full of **** like I often do.

What's clear is that you're bull****ting. There are three
possibiities:

One is that you had a prior conviction.

Two is that you had a prior arrest on a charge related to sexual
assault.

The third possibility is that the charges were not "dropped," but that
the case was concluded "nolle prosequi."

Because you always couch your denial as " I've never been convicted of
a felony," rather than "I've never been convicted of a crime," the
first is logically the most likely.

The third also is likely. It's common in domestic abuse cases. What it
means is that the case would remain open, but that the prosecutor
would not prosecute at this time.

That typically happens when the spouse decides not to press the case.
The state still has an interest, but it doesn't have a cooperating
witness. Knowing that most wife-beaters are repeat offenders, they'll
leave the case open to see what happens.

Domestic abuse cases don't result in an arrest and booking unless
there is some evidence -- usually, a bruised spouse or a corroborating
witness. There had to be something more than a mere claim by your
wife.

So, Jon, what other bull**** are you going to spin now? These points
of law I mentioned are all straightforward and well-documented, so
you'll have to come up with something else.

--
Ed Huntress

What's clear is slow eddy is a liar and that he has no idea what he's talking about on this subject or many others subjects. For many years slow eddy and others have tried and failed to use this case against me. The bottom line is slow eddy can't produce a felony or even a misdemeanor conviction in this case. The reason no one can is I have never been convicted of a felony in my entire life.

Well, there we go. Jon has gone from claiming he's "never been
convicted of a felony" to, we can't produce a felony or "even a
misdemeanor conviction IN THIS CASE."

That makes it pretty much a slam-dunk that you had a prior conviction,
in some other case.

I was hoping you'd clear that up for us, Jon, because it seemed
obvious that you must have had a prior conviction, or you wouldn't
have couched your words with "felony."

For the record, I never claimed you did. Nor did I ever say I was
certain you were convicted of anything. But you just clarified it.

Also for the record, your case was nolle prossed on June 12, 2000. So
your claim that "All charges against me were dropped" is a damned lie.
The charges weren't dropped. The prosecutor just chose not to
prosecute at that time, probably because your wife declined to press
charges. Regardless, the prosecutor kept the case open.

That alone would keep you from getting your arrest expunged. But from
your own words, it appears you had two strikes against you on that
account. Your attorney probably told you to forget trying to get the
arrest expunged because you would be denied on two counts of Florida
law.


There is a reason slow eddy is a worthless, ad copy writer who works for pay for play metalworking rags. The reason is slow eddy is a lifelong failure and he knows it.

Actually, your arrest is not of much interest to me. What is of some
interest is the repeated examples of your lying -- specifically
because you keep accusing me of it, without a single example or proof.

People who do that generally are trying to cover up their own lies.
And you've left so many droppings of that type around the Web that
people have actually compiled lists of them, for entertainment.

So your chances of getting away with it are about zero. Maybe you
should go back to claiming that pushrod engines are more "advanced"
than overhead cams. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 9:00:40 PM UTC-8 slow eddy continued to show that I've driven him to the edge of insanity.

Snipped slow eddy bull**** speculation and his usual lies.

slow eddy can't deal with facts. It's a fact that the charge against me was dropped. That's why slow eddy can't show either a felony or even a misdemeanor conviction. It's also why I have never failed any background check ever done on me. slow eddy thinks he is much smarter than all the companies that have done background checks on me. This is typical slow eddy behavior.

Watching slow eddy be driven to madness is the best gift he could ever give me. I completely own slow eddy. He's my bitch :)

On 12/14/2014 7:52 PM, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
Tom Gardner fired this volley in news:m6kqju$hen$2
@speranza.aioe.org:

Mog'll come to see the light.

From what I see, Mogula is just a "sane", measured and considerate copy of
Jonqueer. I think the moniker may be an alter-ego/pseudonym. Even madmen
have a need to act sane to impress folks.

Lloyd


Well, I see Jon is in his glory...people are posting about him. He's
like a dog that so craves attention that being kicked is enjoyed It's
really sad! I give Ed a lot of credit for putting up with Jon's
incoherent ranting.

I hope Mog begins to understand what Jon is and this thread shows Jon
true to form.

On 12/14/2014 5:08 PM, Ed Huntress wrote: something you have talent for.

Jon, Jon...you should know by now that regressing to homoerotic slurs
is a sure sign that your brain is shorting out and that you have
nothing left to say.

Of course, that happened years ago. This must be a delayed reaction.


Maybe he should try Autoerotic asphyxiation.

On 12/14/2014 8:45 PM, Steve W. wrote:
Depends on the reader you are using. I can set up the filters in this
antique version of T-Bird to eliminate all mention of him. It allows
filtering from header or body information. Plus you can create multiple
key filters where it may look for his info in the from header, coupled
with info in the reply header and his name in the body of the post.

So it might look like
Delete any message with a from or reply to of (it
also allows limited wildcards for the domain names) then delete if
jon_banquer is in the header or body.

But then you miss the fun.... I usually settle from blocking his direct
posts.



I'll research some more. His rants are all the same, maybe if he had
some new material...

On 12/14/2014 10:57 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Now wait. Plumper will show up and claim you're making people
dependent and helpless. g


Is his plumpness due to his Coprophagia condition?

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 19:32:29 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 16:04:09 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:56:06 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 12/14/2014 2:55 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, there's another good reason not to make assumptions. g

These two characters are victims only of themselves. But Jon and
mog
at last have found each other. I'm happy for them.


Mog'll come to see the light.

Of a cop's muzzle flash.

One can hope it will be a double tap

Isn't the triple tap the new standard? Two in COM (center of mass)
and one in the head, for good measure.

Ammo prices are coming down...but one COM and one to the brain cage is
cost effective at the moment. Shrug


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke