"The Historian" wrote in message
...
On Nov 23, 5:23 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

...



What is this, some sort of literary fantasy? I can't quite figure out
what this is supposed to be about. The header "Dear Messrs...."
suggests direct quotation but I know that I never received anything
like this.

Larry T.

As I wrote the last time Innes dredged this up from his swimming pool
- most folks would call it a septic system - I don't recall getting
such an email.

But what will Brennan do if he is confronted with a 'recall'?

How do you propose to do that? Oh yes, your wonderful "server records"
can tell what I do and do not read. Or is that the Brattleboro FBI
keeping you informed?

What will /you/ do? I already said you will mock server records - shrug
and those are entirely objective . Yet here you are who cannot recall this
****, still offering your //disgusting// opinions about it!

pfft!

What a logical nonsense!

Kingston will either gather his whatever to his loins, or fade away, as
usual.

He will not likely authorise publication of said material because for some
reason he is embarrassed by it - no? Why else not? What possible reason can
there be for me to assert something that I could not prove, and in his own
words?

If you can answer that, without your usual spurious bile, do it - you had
200 tries already. Do not think you have the slightest credability after al
that.

This liar's culture will be resolved either by people admitting their own
part in it, or by forcibly being exposed as conspirators.

I do not care which, but certainly it will happen.

Phil Innes


Will he change
his opinion? I don;t thin so! And certainly he will be, as will Tapper.

Then they will challenge the truth of the posting, as if genius Innes

- HURL!-

could
sufficently emulate Kinston's wooden prose.

I've never denied there might BE such an email. I suggest you ask
someone who understands English, if any such person willingly
associates with a bedlam such as yourself, to read my quoted comment.
I'm sure you've sent a lot of email that never reached its
destination, or wound up in the spam filter, or was deleted unread.
It's not beyond the range of belief that an occasional email from a
sane person such as Mr. Kingston might go astray.

I admit I could maybe do it better than anyone else here, but for 20 such
messages? )

We wait for Kingston's own admission that what he wrote was indeed his,
but
also what depends on it - since his entire campaign would seem to be bust
if
he did actually conduct it.

I have no psychological need to present his material -

Because you have no material to present.

but since it is
become yet again a public matter - let him speak pubically to it:

Please, Taylor, don't!

to wit,
shall I /establish/ his dual presentation, public and private, and who he
conducted it with?

Phil Innes

On Nov 24, 4:43 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

Mr. Kingston had a previous publisher?

Yes he had a previous publisher!

Wow, previous to when? What publisher is this? What of mine did he
publish? If he owes me royalties, I wanna find out!

And remember, I
have the e-mail which you and Tapper do not recall.

Yes, you alone, Phil, of all the alleged addressees (not to mention
the alleged author!), you alone seem to "remember" this mysterious e-
mail. Tell you what -- how about you refresh my memory? Send this
"Dear Messrs. Blair, Brennen, Hanke, Innes, Manley, Tapper, and
Winter" e-mail to me -- you know the address. If it's genuine, I'll
remember it. If it's not mine, we'll know you either made it up, or
are badly confused (neither would be a surprise).
And if you refuse to send it to me, we'll know you're just blowing
hot air to conceal your transparent dishonesty and/or lunacy.

On Nov 24, 4:43 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

...



On Nov 23, 5:33 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

...

On Nov 21, 5:25 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

Okay Taylor, I will at my leisure post everything you ever wrote me.
OK?

It must be some leisure, since you've been threatening Taylor Kingston
with this disclosure for two years now, at least.

Threaten? Did you not decline to offer your own address to someone
recently
'threatening you for your own efforts? Yet you did say you'd shut up
about
it, eh?

If Kingston wants to hide under your skirts [laugh] let him!

If I translate the above drivel correctly, you think Taylor Kingston
is afraid you are going to send something to .... oh I give up. Your
'logic' defies explanation.

You [laugh] mean you don't understand? You don;t understand what logic is,
or something like that?

Or do you divert because someone offered to prosecute your arse? Right
I know - so let's not be coy about things, a-la-Kingston!

This is another Innes oddity Philsy's shopped around for a few years.
In 2004 it was "three people have offered to sue him this week." I
must be a third of the poster I once was. Then again, this nutter
thinks the FBI is monitoring my newsgroup posts....

He should be threatened by his negative aspersions. The last outing on
his
representation of Winter's theft of copyright was not even backed up by
his
[previous] publisher.

Mr. Kingston had a previous publisher? And how does that relate to
whatever lies about Edward Winter you are shopping around this week?

Yes he had a previous publisher! And yes, as to his lies, why, why indeed
don't you address the issue - your ex-fat git? Instead of 5 years of
stalking, uttering inane questions, which are only about you, and your level
of perception? If you do not recall you cannot discount! And remember, I
have the e-mail which you and Tapper do not recall.

Actually, it's the email that NO ONE recalls.

Is this your request I publish it?

It's not mine to grant or deny. I'm not the alleged author.

What would happen if I did?

The mountains would heave and bring forth a silly little mouse.

What
consequence to you and Tapper and Kingston?

About as much a consequence as if you have published one of those
'please help me' emails that ask to use my bank account to hold funds
for the Nigerian government. You would prove I have an email address.
Don't expect the world to be shocked, Philsy.

How does it /relate/, indeed?!

And you - you might consider losing as much intellectual fatuousity, as
you
have lost physical fat - which is what, 50%? Upon any intellectual basis
of
writing, that is still a very losing statistic. Who do you think you are
kidding?

My weight loss really bothers you, Philsy, doesn't it?

no! I always thought the main reason for your stalking is that I am an
alpine climber, and you don't get any [live] fat-arses up there, and since
it seems someone of your 'condition' could hardly make it on foot to the
bus-stop, I inferred a certain animus. But in your usual terms, you invert
the circumstance

It must hurt
not to be able to criticize my physical appearance.

Really? I rather thought I called you fatuous, as in fat-head - a figure of
speech, doncha know?

Anyway, thank you for casting your usual shadow over proceedings. Nothing
was revealed.

Phil Innes

Yes, you are a waste of my time, little man. Indeed, that's hardly a
revelation.

On Nov 24, 5:11 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

...



On Nov 23, 5:23 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
"The Historian" wrote in message

...

What is this, some sort of literary fantasy? I can't quite figure out
what this is supposed to be about. The header "Dear Messrs...."
suggests direct quotation but I know that I never received anything
like this.

Larry T.

As I wrote the last time Innes dredged this up from his swimming pool
- most folks would call it a septic system - I don't recall getting
such an email.

But what will Brennan do if he is confronted with a 'recall'?

How do you propose to do that? Oh yes, your wonderful "server records"
can tell what I do and do not read. Or is that the Brattleboro FBI
keeping you informed?

What will /you/ do? I already said you will mock server records - shrug
and those are entirely objective . Yet here you are who cannot recall this
****, still offering your //disgusting// opinions about it!

Please attempt to explain why server records prove something about an
alleged email sent by Mr. Kingston, but don't in the case of alleged
identity theft by Paul Truong. (This should be amusing, folks. If he
doesn't snip, that is.)

pfft!

What a logical nonsense!

Kingston will either gather his whatever to his loins, or fade away, as
usual.

He will not likely authorise publication of said material because for some
reason he is embarrassed by it - no? Why else not? What possible reason can
there be for me to assert something that I could not prove, and in his own
words?

If you can answer that, without your usual spurious bile, do it - you had
200 tries already. Do not think you have the slightest credability after al
that.

This liar's culture will be resolved either by people admitting their own
part in it, or by forcibly being exposed as conspirators.

I do not care which, but certainly it will happen.

Phil Innes

Will he change
his opinion? I don;t thin so! And certainly he will be, as will Tapper.

Then they will challenge the truth of the posting, as if genius Innes

- HURL!-

could
sufficently emulate Kinston's wooden prose.

I've never denied there might BE such an email. I suggest you ask
someone who understands English, if any such person willingly
associates with a bedlam such as yourself, to read my quoted comment.
I'm sure you've sent a lot of email that never reached its
destination, or wound up in the spam filter, or was deleted unread.
It's not beyond the range of belief that an occasional email from a
sane person such as Mr. Kingston might go astray.

I admit I could maybe do it better than anyone else here, but for 20 such
messages? )

We wait for Kingston's own admission that what he wrote was indeed his,
but
also what depends on it - since his entire campaign would seem to be bust
if
he did actually conduct it.

I have no psychological need to present his material -

Because you have no material to present.

but since it is
become yet again a public matter - let him speak pubically to it:

Please, Taylor, don't!

to wit,
shall I /establish/ his dual presentation, public and private, and who he
conducted it with?

Phil Innes

wrote in message
...

FATUOSITY

If Kingston wants to hide under your skirts [laugh] let him! He should be
threatened by his negative aspersions. The last outing on his
representation of Winter's theft of copyright was not even backed up by
his [previous] publisher. And you - you might consider losing as much
intellectual fatuousity, as you have lost physical fat - which is what,
50%? -- Phil Innes to Neil Brennen

My weight loss really bothers you, Philsy, doesn't it? It must hurt
not to be able to criticize my physical appearance. -- Neil Brennen
to Phil Innes

Neil Brennen wonders whether it injures Phil Innes because he can no
longer call him a big, fat slob. I don't think it injures Phil in the
least, but it does injure me.

I never called The Historian a fatbod, though I did call him a
fathead. So why the
injury?

Because one always wishes to have options. Too, when The Historian
used to killfile me every few days, he argued that I was ruining his
breakfast. And what
historic, heroic breakfasts they must have been. Rashers of bacon so
numerous as to wobble the Chicago commodities market when he cut back
some mornings;
pots of coffee so vast as to have their own wave charts; loaves of
bread so abundant as to threaten America's surplus in storage, thus
killing off a few thousand African natives in Burkina Faso who thereby
went without American food aid; eggs in thousands of dozens, prompting
Easter panic-buying by hysterical mothers fearing for their egg hunts;

Why not the famous Philly cheese-steak for beakfast, Elevenses, and Luch
too? Who made him do it? Ray Keene?

stacks of flapjacks so stratospheric as to beggar Jack's mean
beanstalk; and, one suspects the real reason for Phil's understandable
disgust with Neil, rivers of maple syrup that drove the price higher
than the Green Mountains.

The point is that this writer ruined it for The Historian -- or so he
himself claimed.

Phil: an interesting angle is to get Tapperman and The Historian in
battle if the latter ever reverts to past eating habits. Tapperman
has always wanted to camp in your front yard in Brattleboro and
partake of healthy New England living -- as opposed to gnawing ightly
on pork knuckles down in his Deliverance country.

No - you are wrong here, it was S. Dowd who wanted the woodsmoke. Did not
want it... eventually we distance-shared it.

Perhaps we might
hint that Tapperman could get an invite except that The Historian is
once again threatening food supplies, as in the eponymous work by
Justice William O. Douglas, beyond the high Himalayas.

The Hysterian, as he is /so/ proud to be called, reminds one of a Dickensian
character, who ...

....who is not appreciated as anything much by readers. But he is called
'hysterian' for a reason, and so, let sleeping minds lie?

The trouble being, that the lying is /en pure perte/ :: to no other purpose
than his [its] own gain, ///always/// at the expense of other others, and
some similar /coda/ as practiced by varieties of Bots, Kingston's or
Winter's, who can scarce write a word without deprecating others, in public
and Lordy, Lordy! in private!

This, methinks, if the cause of the current rash of enthusiasm, lest one be
attached to something discreditable and get oneself dirty, always a
tribulation to such people, and virgins.

Heuch! Such Saxon wurds!

Phil

Yours, Larry

On Nov 24, 5:20 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 24, 4:43 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

"The Historian" wrote in message
Mr. Kingston had a previous publisher?
Yes he had a previous publisher!

Wow, previous to when? What publisher is this? What of mine did he
publish? If he owes me royalties, I wanna find out!

Please let me know too. I'm always looking for new markets.

And remember, I
have the e-mail which you and Tapper do not recall.

Yes, you alone, Phil, of all the alleged addressees (not to mention
the alleged author!), you alone seem to "remember" this mysterious e-
mail. Tell you what -- how about you refresh my memory? Send this
"Dear Messrs. Blair, Brennen, Hanke, Innes, Manley, Tapper, and
Winter" e-mail to me -- you know the address. If it's genuine, I'll
remember it. If it's not mine, we'll know you either made it up, or
are badly confused (neither would be a surprise).
And if you refuse to send it to me, we'll know you're just blowing
hot air to conceal your transparent dishonesty and/or lunacy.

Hot air from the large bowel in his neck?

On Nov 24, 6:24 pm, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

...





FATUOSITY

If Kingston wants to hide under your skirts [laugh] let him! He should be
threatened by his negative aspersions. The last outing on his
representation of Winter's theft of copyright was not even backed up by
his [previous] publisher. And you - you might consider losing as much
intellectual fatuousity, as you have lost physical fat - which is what,
50%? -- Phil Innes to Neil Brennen

My weight loss really bothers you, Philsy, doesn't it? It must hurt
not to be able to criticize my physical appearance. -- Neil Brennen
to Phil Innes

Neil Brennen wonders whether it injures Phil Innes because he can no
longer call him a big, fat slob. I don't think it injures Phil in the
least, but it does injure me.

I never called The Historian a fatbod, though I did call him a
fathead. So why the
injury?

Because one always wishes to have options. Too, when The Historian
used to killfile me every few days, he argued that I was ruining his
breakfast. And what
historic, heroic breakfasts they must have been. Rashers of bacon so
numerous as to wobble the Chicago commodities market when he cut back
some mornings;
pots of coffee so vast as to have their own wave charts; loaves of
bread so abundant as to threaten America's surplus in storage, thus
killing off a few thousand African natives in Burkina Faso who thereby
went without American food aid; eggs in thousands of dozens, prompting
Easter panic-buying by hysterical mothers fearing for their egg hunts;

Why not the famous Philly cheese-steak for beakfast, Elevenses, and Luch
too?

Luch? Is that British, or Andean?

On Nov 24, 6:02 pm, The Historian wrote:
On Nov 24, 5:20 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:

On Nov 24, 4:43 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

"The Historian" wrote in message
Mr. Kingston had a previous publisher?
Yes he had a previous publisher!

Wow, previous to when? What publisher is this? What of mine did he
publish? If he owes me royalties, I wanna find out!

Please let me know too. I'm always looking for new markets.

And remember, I
have the e-mail which you and Tapper do not recall.

Yes, you alone, Phil, of all the alleged addressees (not to mention
the alleged author!), you alone seem to "remember" this mysterious e-
mail. Tell you what -- how about you refresh my memory? Send this
"Dear Messrs. Blair, Brennen, Hanke, Innes, Manley, Tapper, and
Winter" e-mail to me -- you know the address. If it's genuine, I'll
remember it. If it's not mine, we'll know you either made it up, or
are badly confused (neither would be a surprise).
And if you refuse to send it to me, we'll know you're just blowing
hot air to conceal your transparent dishonesty and/or lunacy.

Hot air from the large bowel in his neck?

send it to me

On Nov 24, 11:47 am, The Historian
wrote:
On Nov 24, 10:12 am, " wrote:



FATUOSITY

If Kingston wants to hide under your skirts [laugh] let him! He should be threatened by his negative aspersions. The last outing on his representation of Winter's theft of copyright was not even backed up by his [previous] publisher. And you - you might consider losing as much intellectual fatuousity, as you have lost physical fat - which is what, 50%? -- Phil Innes to Neil Brennen

My weight loss really bothers you, Philsy, doesn't it? It must hurt
not to be able to criticize my physical appearance. -- Neil Brennen
to Phil Innes

Neil Brennen wonders whether it injures Phil Innes because he can no
longer call him a big, fat slob. I don't think it injures Phil in the
least, but it does injure me.

I never called The Historian a fatbod, though I did call him a
fathead. So why the
injury?

Because one always wishes to have options. Too, when The Historian
used to killfile me every few days, he argued that I was ruining his
breakfast. And what
historic, heroic breakfasts they must have been. Rashers of bacon so
numerous as to wobble the Chicago commodities market when he cut back
some mornings;
pots of coffee so vast as to have their own wave charts; loaves of
bread so abundant as to threaten America's surplus in storage, thus
killing off a few thousand African natives in Burkina Faso who thereby
went without American food aid; eggs in thousands of dozens, prompting
Easter panic-buying by hysterical mothers fearing for their egg hunts;
stacks of flapjacks so stratospheric as to beggar Jack's mean
beanstalk; and, one suspects the real reason for Phil's understandable
disgust with Neil, rivers of maple syrup that drove the price higher
than the Green Mountains.

The point is that this writer ruined it for The Historian -- or so he
himself claimed.

Phil: an interesting angle is to get Tapperman and The Historian in
battle if the latter ever reverts to past eating habits. Tapperman
has always wanted to camp in your front yard in Brattleboro and
partake of healthy New England living -- as opposed to gnawing ightly
on pork knuckles down in his Deliverance country. Perhaps we might
hint that Tapperman could get an invite except that The Historian is
once again threatening food supplies, as in the eponymous work by
Justice William O. Douglas, beyond the high Himalayas.

Yours, Larry

Very amusing, Larry. However, a small correction - I don't drink
coffee, I favor tea. Earl Grey or English Breakfast for black tea, but
I usually drink green teas or herbals.

I disagree with you on the matter of Phil's pain over my weight loss,
for indeed it is pain Mr. Innes shows in his postings. He's referred
to my appearance often enough to prove it has some importance to him.
But enough of this. It's 40 degrees out, the sun is shining, and I
have miles of bike riding to get in before nightfall. (Take that,
Philsy!)

A nippy 24 miles this afternoon. I stopped at my bike shop halfway and
had tea (English Breakfast, one lump of sugar) with the owner. She's
installed a flat screen TV on one wall of the store to show cycling
DVDs during store hours. From there it was to my gym for some upper
body lifting, and then home. I may need to stop wearing my Specialized
MTB shoes during winter - my feet were far too cold. I think I'll wear
my hiking boots on tomorrow's ride.

On Nov 24, 7:16 pm, Rob wrote:
On Nov 24, 6:02 pm, The Historian wrote:



On Nov 24, 5:20 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:

On Nov 24, 4:43 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

"The Historian" wrote in message
Mr. Kingston had a previous publisher?
Yes he had a previous publisher!

Wow, previous to when? What publisher is this? What of mine did he
publish? If he owes me royalties, I wanna find out!

Please let me know too. I'm always looking for new markets.

And remember, I
have the e-mail which you and Tapper do not recall.

Yes, you alone, Phil, of all the alleged addressees (not to mention
the alleged author!), you alone seem to "remember" this mysterious e-
mail. Tell you what -- how about you refresh my memory? Send this
"Dear Messrs. Blair, Brennen, Hanke, Innes, Manley, Tapper, and
Winter" e-mail to me -- you know the address. If it's genuine, I'll
remember it. If it's not mine, we'll know you either made it up, or
are badly confused (neither would be a surprise).
And if you refuse to send it to me, we'll know you're just blowing
hot air to conceal your transparent dishonesty and/or lunacy.

Hot air from the large bowel in his neck?

send it to me

I don't have anything to send you.