On Mar 18, 4:57*pm, NYOB wrote:
On 3/17/11 4:11 PM, *e#c wrote:









On Mar 16, 6:11 pm, *wrote:
On 3/16/11 2:36 PM, *e#c wrote:

On Mar 16, 1:45 pm, * *wrote:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-
world/20110316/EU.Netherlands.Pedophile.Ring/

" Article is no longer available"

Fail.....

The only person who failed is you. *The link is working, if you know how
to use it.

" Normally "...one clicks on the link. If that isnt " using it
properly"..I don't want to know how, dork.

Nope, if the link is too long for one line, and it wraps around to the
2nd line, most people understand that you have to cut and paste the link
into the address bar. *It is obvious if the link is not complete unless
the entire link is highlighted in blue or red.

I guess since you still have no idea about Usenet headers, it makes
sense that you have no idea about links.

Well, the way I receive the **** you trolls post, I don't see the
Headers. I only see certain Headers.

Besides, that link wasn't long enough to wrap around your pea-sized
head, therefore your theory is pure ****.

Oh yeah...have a nice day, ****head.

On 3/20/11 5:43 PM, *e#c wrote:
On Mar 18, 4:57 pm, wrote:
On 3/17/11 4:11 PM, *e#c wrote:









On Mar 16, 6:11 pm, wrote:
On 3/16/11 2:36 PM, *e#c wrote:

On Mar 16, 1:45 pm, wrote:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-
world/20110316/EU.Netherlands.Pedophile.Ring/

" Article is no longer available"

Fail.....

The only person who failed is you. The link is working, if you know how
to use it.

" Normally "...one clicks on the link. If that isnt " using it
properly"..I don't want to know how, dork.

Nope, if the link is too long for one line, and it wraps around to the
2nd line, most people understand that you have to cut and paste the link
into the address bar. It is obvious if the link is not complete unless
the entire link is highlighted in blue or red.

I guess since you still have no idea about Usenet headers, it makes
sense that you have no idea about links.

Well, the way I receive the **** you trolls post, I don't see the
Headers. I only see certain Headers.

Besides, that link wasn't long enough to wrap around your pea-sized
head, therefore your theory is pure ****.

Oh yeah...have a nice day, ****head.

Well the link worked for everyone else so I guess you must be very
"special".

PS if you knew how to use your newsreader or how to use Google, you
could read ALL the headers.

On Mar 20, 9:11*pm, NYOB wrote:
On 3/20/11 5:43 PM, *e#c wrote:









On Mar 18, 4:57 pm, *wrote:
On 3/17/11 4:11 PM, *e#c wrote:

On Mar 16, 6:11 pm, * *wrote:
On 3/16/11 2:36 PM, *e#c wrote:

On Mar 16, 1:45 pm, * * *wrote:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-
world/20110316/EU.Netherlands.Pedophile.Ring/

" Article is no longer available"

Fail.....

The only person who failed is you. *The link is working, if you know how
to use it.

" Normally "...one clicks on the link. If that isnt " using it
properly"..I don't want to know how, dork.

Nope, if the link is too long for one line, and it wraps around to the
2nd line, most people understand that you have to cut and paste the link
into the address bar. *It is obvious if the link is not complete unless
the entire link is highlighted in blue or red.

I guess since you still have no idea about Usenet headers, it makes
sense that you have no idea about links.

Well, the way I receive the **** you trolls post, I don't see the
Headers. I only see certain Headers.

Besides, that link wasn't long enough to wrap around your pea-sized
head, therefore your theory is pure ****.

Oh yeah...have a nice day, ****head.

Well the link worked for everyone else so I guess you must be very
"special".

PS if you knew how to use your newsreader or how to use Google, you
could read ALL the headers.

When its from a ****head troll like you...why bother? You add zero to
this NG, just like your character...zero.