ISAC SUED BY WWASP/BOB LITCHFIELD

[Antigen]

Well what is it you think you know about "this case"? How do you know it? What is this supposed truth about ISAC that you say is leaking out that, evidently, only you and your friends know? When you hear a rumor that a Lichfield is suing ISAC, Occams razor demands that you assume it's got something to do w/ what ISAC does very publicly, not some deep dark secret that no one (but you) ever suspected.

For myself, I do not believe in any revelation. As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities.
--Charles Robert Darwin, English naturalist

[Anonymous]

Think the Sudweeks may have those kids on the big bus off to Mexico.... not sure, but think so.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 18:33:00, Antigen wrote:

"Well what is it you think you know about "this case"? How do you know it? What is this supposed truth about ISAC that you say is leaking out that, evidently, only you and your friends know? When you hear a rumor that a Lichfield is suing ISAC, Occams razor demands that you assume it's got something to do w/ what ISAC does very publicly, not some deep dark secret that no one (but you) ever suspected.

For myself, I do not believe in any revelation. As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities.
--Charles Robert Darwin, English naturalist

"

Medieval Philosophy, Great Goddess of Free Speach?  It's late and I'm rusty on this, but, if I remember Occam's Razor (which I thought was spelled differently) you are trying to say that I am assuming to much, making this overly complicated and, in general, not keeping it simple.  How about 2005 way post medieval philosophy - HELLO, what I'm saying is that there is a brutal lack of civility on this website and, for some, it gets a little annoying when something important is thrown out there, like major litigation, and everyone talks with this nasty and imperious attitude, instead of just talking it through.  Who knows why these lawsuits have been filed?  Maybe it's because WWASP is just gearing-up again after its most recent defeat.  Why does everyone just assume that Sue Scheff is responsible for everything that's wrong on every subject up for discussion on this website.  It's not possible.  All of the parties involved here have big mouths, WWASP is now forcing all of you to back it up, and it's that simple.  It's not going away by trashing Sue Scheff and making nutty conclusions of law which most people here are not qualified to do.

In other words, D E A L!

Simple enough Ginger?

[Devlin]

the appeals you are talking about have already been argued why dont you listent to them yourself!


http://8cc-www.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio ... 042434.ram
[ This Message was edited by: Devlin on 2005-03-18 19:39 ]

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 19:30:00, Devlin wrote:

"the appeals you are talking about have already been argued why dont you listent to them yourself!



http//www.ca8.uscourts.gov%2FOAaudio%2F2005%2F3%2F042434.ram



Just so you know if you are a WWASPIE were coming for you! Since WWASP is now affiliuated with Bethel Academy your fair game! If your with PURE if you keep up the way you currently heading you are next.



 Just rember what happend to Mountain Park Academy and Palm Lane Academy.[ This Message was edited by: Devlin on 2005-03-18 19:31 ]"

Listen up Devlin, after apeal there is Certiorari (certification) to the next highest Court, which your comments have nothing to do with.  Again, you have brought useless information in a very weak attempt to cover for your previous post.  In other words, what you know is not current and is poorly researched.  The appeals process is not complete, even after the Court of Appeals there are at least two more appeals to go.  Also, did you pay attention about the case not being parallel you moron?

As far as you coming for anyone - ooh, I'm scared.  Go suck on some eggs or something.

[Cayo Hueso]

On 2005-03-18 19:24:00, Anonymous wrote:

Medieval Philosophy, Great Goddess of Free Speach?

Speech

It's late and I'm rusty on this, but, if I remember Occam's Razor (which I thought was spelled differently)

Occam's (smart ass :grin: ) Razor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Occam's Razor (also Ockham's Razor or any of several other spellings), is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham that forms the basis of methodological reductionism, also called the principle of parsimony.

In its simplest form, Occam's Razor states that one should not make more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. A charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

Who knows why these lawsuits have been filed?  

Well, it appears that Sue and Co. came on here running there mouths, attempting to taunt people with promises of the suits so it's only logical that we would be asking.

Why does everyone just assume that Sue Scheff is responsible for everything that's wrong on every subject up for discussion on this website.

I don't think anyone's saying that.  Before the lawsuit talk came up a lot of us were asking questions of Sue/PURE that weren't being answered.  Some pretty relavent and forthright questions.

All of the parties involved here have big mouths, WWASP is now forcing all of you to back it up, and it's that simple.

Back WHAT up?  What have Ginger or ISAC said that they have NOT backed up??

It's not going away by trashing Sue Scheff and making nutty conclusions of law which most people here are not qualified to do.

I'm not trashing her, I'm inquiring as to how she deems the programs she refers to "safe"...among other things.  What is the problem with ANSWERING that question?  

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
--Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 19:37:00, Cayo Hueso wrote:

"

On 2005-03-18 19:24:00, Anonymous wrote:


Medieval Philosophy, Great Goddess of Free Speach?

Speech

It's late and I'm rusty on this, but, if I remember Occam's Razor (which I thought was spelled differently)

Occam's (smart ass :grin: ) Razor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Occam's Razor (also Ockham's Razor or any of several other spellings), is a principle attributed to the 14th century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham that forms the basis of methodological reductionism, also called the principle of parsimony.



In its simplest form, Occam's Razor states that one should not make more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. A charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam's Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

Who knows why these lawsuits have been filed?  

Well, it appears that Sue and Co. came on here running there mouths, attempting to taunt people with promises of the suits so it's only logical that we would be asking.

Why does everyone just assume that Sue Scheff is responsible for everything that's wrong on every subject up for discussion on this website.

I don't think anyone's saying that.  Before the lawsuit talk came up a lot of us were asking questions of Sue/PURE that weren't being answered.  Some pretty relavent and forthright questions.

All of the parties involved here have big mouths, WWASP is now forcing all of you to back it up, and it's that simple.

Back WHAT up?  What have Ginger or ISAC said that they have NOT backed up??

It's not going away by trashing Sue Scheff and making nutty conclusions of law which most people here are not qualified to do.

I'm not trashing her, I'm inquiring as to how she deems the programs she refers to "safe"...among other things.  What is the problem with ANSWERING that question?  

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
--Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright

"

Cayo, please don't start with me over one typo.  I've been schooling you and your fellow retards all evening.  Forgive me the typo.

You have plenty to say, but who says my comment was directed solely to you?  The comments were general  and in this case I was answering Ginger.  Unlike the likes of you, who probably did some sort of google on the subject I was drawing from actual information on the subject.  Obviously, I did pretty well.

[Cayo Hueso]

On 2005-03-18 19:46:00, Anonymous wrote:


Cayo, please don't start with me over one typo.

I only pointed it out the absurdity of you pointing a an error that Ginger made (NOT) while you can't spell a very simple word.  "Speach" is not something you 'typo'.

You have plenty to say, but who says my comment was directed solely to you?  The comments were general  and in this case I was answering Ginger.

OK, well I was making a comment and asking a question...mmmkay?

Unlike the likes of you, who probably did some sort of google on the subject I was drawing from actual information on the subject.

I've been around here for quite a while.  I don't claim to know all of what's going on, but that's why I'm asking questions.
 

Obviously, I did pretty well.

That's highly debatable.  

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you recognize a mistake when you make it again.
-- F. P. Jones

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 19:53:00, Cayo Hueso wrote:

"

On 2005-03-18 19:46:00, Anonymous wrote:



Cayo, please don't start with me over one typo.

I only pointed it out the absurdity of you pointing a an error that Ginger made (NOT) while you can't spell a very simple word.  "Speach" is not something you 'typo'.

You have plenty to say, but who says my comment was directed solely to you?  The comments were general  and in this case I was answering Ginger.

OK, well I was making a comment and asking a question...mmmkay?

Unlike the likes of you, who probably did some sort of google on the subject I was drawing from actual information on the subject.

I've been around here for quite a while.  I don't claim to know all of what's going on, but that's why I'm asking questions.

 

Obviously, I did pretty well.

That's highly debatable.  

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you recognize a mistake when you make it again.
-- F. P. Jones

"

Cayo, I'm typing from a PDA, with a "thumb keyboard" and it was a typo.  I'll go through all of your posts if you like and I'll be glad to point out what words you can't spell.  Did you even get the point Cayo, or are you just looking for a way to top me? Gheeez, (a) it's pointless and (b) better ass-wipes than you have tried.

[Cayo Hueso]

Like I said, the only reason I pointed it was...well, I already explained that.

Are you going to address any of the questions?

To regard Christ as God, and to pray to him, are to my mind the greatest possible sacrilege.
--Leo Tolstoy, Russian revolutionary

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 20:01:00, Cayo Hueso wrote:

"Like I said, the only reason I pointed it was...well, I already explained that.



Are you going to address any of the questions?

To regard Christ as God, and to pray to him, are to my mind the greatest possible sacrilege.
--Leo Tolstoy, Russian revolutionary

"
[/quot

Cayo, the first poster gave you an Index or Case Number, so the suit is not fictional.  How is anyone taunting anyone?  It's a real issue.  But here, when people don't like what they hear, then they just attack.  As far as Ginger's questions about leaks, I don't even know what she's talking about.  Where have I posted about any leaks?  What other questions do you have?  Also, who says I'm part of a group, perhaps I'm just a passer-by observing and commenting.  I don't think I mentioned anything about placing a bet on this situation with OTB?  Based on what I've seen though, I probably would bet on the likes of people that can afford to prosecute legitimate civil claims against those who just ran their mouths without any regard for the probable outcome of that type of recklessness.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-03-18 20:01:00, Cayo Hueso wrote:

"Like I said, the only reason I pointed it was...well, I already explained that.



Are you going to address any of the questions?

To regard Christ as God, and to pray to him, are to my mind the greatest possible sacrilege.
--Leo Tolstoy, Russian revolutionary

"

Well Cayo Hueso, a spelling expert is needed in the Karen B thread.  You had better jump on that!

[Cayo Hueso]

On 2005-03-18 20:07:00, Anonymous
Cayo, the first poster gave you an Index or Case Number, so the suit is not fictional.  How is anyone taunting anyone?  It's a real issue.  

I'm not saying its not a real issue, you guys (whoever you are, its hard to tell with all of you being anon so I never know who I'm addressing when on any given subject) just seemed to be reveling in it.  You don't post here in how long, and then come dancing around.  I'm not personally offended by it, I'm considering the source. I was just commenting on it.

What other questions do you have?

for starters
 http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=20#88965


http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=20#88968


 

Also, who says I'm part of a group, perhaps I'm just a passer-by observing and commenting.

 :rofl:  :rofl:

 

Based on what I've seen though, I probably would bet on the likes of people that can afford to prosecute legitimate civil claims against those who just ran their mouths without any regard for the probable outcome of that type of recklessness."

Ran their mouths about what??  

When we talk to god, it's prayer. When god talks to us, it's schizophrenia.
--Lily Tomlin, American actress

[Anonymous]

Got an email today from a friend, the first one in awhile. That email led me to this board where apparently I was mentioned.

To whoever it is let me state this as bluntly as possiable.
First - If you have something to say to me and you know who you are you have my email say it to me.
Second - I do not involve myself with the WWASP issues or the Sue issues. I know that the ladder of those seems to be an ever present topic of debate.
I have distanced myself from these issues for this reason too much he said , she said, no real ACTION. I do not chose to waste my time with petty gossip battles.
I do what I can when I can to help.
I prefer getting results not posting here or seeing how much inaction I can accomplish. Just ask Miller and Mel.
So, Anonymous whoever you are, Leave me out of your juvenile games. If that anonymous who posted my name is in fact Sue, please stop hiding. You got something to say to me say it in an email. I unlike you do not chose to hide behind anonymous post. NEVER HAVE.
I am curios though, what on earth makes you rejoice at a survivor ANY survivor being sued. Do you not see how obvious that makes you to everyone? If I am remember right that same survivor who you seem so happy is getting sued is the same one that helped you with your lawsuit are they not? The same one that came to the aide of all the parents that were listed on the suit. The same one who helped you more times than you could count and yet your happy they are being sued. Man, blue chair time.

Doesn't mean I will respond to your email as these posting games that are non ending with some people are not and NEVER have been my style.

I think this will be interesting , I seem to remember another survivor that got sued , the suers took the bait and found themselves avoiding depositions. The survivor , I am assuming, had them in just the right position. Has anyone thought that maybe ISAC baited them into suing them. Penis Pump. Interesting thought isn't it. I would be willing to bet we don't know the whole story.
 

Glad I left Florida When I Did

Marti H.
Survivor

[The Butcher]