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.

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

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

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.

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

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

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
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?

Asslicker is just demonstrating his parrot harry routine.......it is a
symptom of his FAS.


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

P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
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?

Asslicker is just demonstrating his parrot harry routine.......it is
a
symptom of his FAS.

Please show what evidence you have that I have FAS. Be specific. On the
contrary, Paul, if you knew anything about FAS, you'd know that one of
the symptoms of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, is childish behavior. Is that
why you continue to call childish names? Or is it just because you need
to bolster your pathetic ego since you don't have the fortitude to
raise a child, or keep a wife?

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=20

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

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*ere. His
name is Harry Krause. Others may make errors. Krause just br*azenly
lies.
John H

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

Nothing erroneous there, except punctuation.

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

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.