JohnH wrote:
On 31 Jan 2005 09:49:03 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 31 Jan 2005 07:38:57 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:23:14 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 12:02:22 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On 28 Jan 2005 08:14:06 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


JohnH wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:41:13 -0500, "JimH"

wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
news On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:34:34 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:00:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


JohnH wrote:

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:07:20 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:



JohnH wrote:


Krause stated he identified bodies in Vietnam.
The
identification of
remains is a mission of military mortuary
units.
Krause
stated he was
not in a mortuary unit (hell, he probably
doesn't
even
know
what one
is).

The valid conclusion is that Krause has no
credibility.
He
is
a liar.
There are other examples. Search for yourself
if
you
missed
them.

John H


No, Tuukbrain, I did not say I identified
bodies.
I
said
I
was
part of
a
group that helped locate them, *start* an
indentification
process, and
arrange for retrieval.

Keep trying to think, Tuukbrain. Sooner or
later,
you'll
probably
stumble across the name of the outfit for which
I
worked.


You're a liar, Krause.

John H

You're a pathetic failure.


Krause, I'd rather have attempted something and
failed
than
attempted
nothing and lied about it.

You're a ****ing liar, Krause.

John H


You never attempted anything, Herring. You were a
failure
in
life,
got
drafted, and stayed in the Army.

You think your opinion matters, you ****ing liar?
I'm
glad
not
to
held
highly in your esteem. You're despicable, Krause.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is
feasible
and
necessary to
resolve it."
Rene Descartes

John, why bother with Krause? He is worthless.
Killfile
him
and
move on.
No need wasting more time with the fool.


I honestly feel that Krause deserves an appropriate
response
to
every
post he makes. An appropriate response to a Krause
post
is,
"You're a
****ing liar, Krause."

He has earned that response.He deserves the same ****
he
dishes
out.
He shouldn't be deprived of seeing his name in print,
even
if
it's
just to read that he's a ****ing, despicable liar.

He is *worthy* of that comment.

[Note: What more can I say? If you see my name
following
up
a
Krause
post, just don't look. I will not be engaging him in
anything
meaningful, because he is not worthy of meaningful
discussion.
He
is
a
liar.]

John H

Speaking of liars, John, please show where Harry said
that
he
"identified bodies" in VietNam.

You're absolutely correct. Krause *is* a ****ing liar.
Glad
you've
finally unplugged your head and seen the light.


John H

John, would you say that, if someone posted here that
someone
said
something, and that someone NEVER said that, that the
poster
was
a
liar?

Someone who made an "error" would recant their story, a liar
would
not.

Who made the error?

John H

John, has booze made your brain THAT bad? YOU said that YOU made
an
error.

Where?

John H

Right here, John. You stated that you WEREN'T a liar, then said
this:

There you go again, talking about Harry. There is one liar h=ADere.
His
name is Harry Krause. Others may make errors. Krause just br=ADazenly
lies.
John H

So, which is it, you are either a liar, or made an error.

Nothing erroneous there, except punctuation.

Prove it then. If you don't think you were in error, then please post
where Harry said that he "identified bodies in VietNam", as you have
stated.