################################################ Subj: Re: Blocked Field Goal Date: 09-Sep-00 15:57:51 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: DWise1@aol.com, ealpurcell@juno.com Bill Morgan wrote: "Don't beg the question. Answer mine, then I anser yours. I answered yours today twice at CS Fullerton as I taught the students everything does not come from nothing, order does not come from disorder and life does not come from non life." Bill, you can't answer my question, that's why you continually dodge it. Where/when/how did God originate? If you claim that God always existed, couldn't a scientist also speculate that the Universe always existed? Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ >From: "Mark" >To: "Bill Morgan" >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:33:42 -0500 > >Where/when/how did God originate? > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Bill Morgan >To: >Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 12:12 AM >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal > > >Life is a cellular organism with the ability to metabolize. > >How did it originate? > > > >From: "Mark" > >To: "Bill Morgan" > >CC: , > >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal > >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 22:18:22 -0500 > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > >"Don't blame me for Madeline Murray O'hare." > > > >I blame your mother for conceiving you, as does your father. > > > >"She's your role model." > > > >I enjoy Carl Sagan's lifework much, much more! > > > >"How did life originate?" > > > >What's your definition of life? Please do not point to your own pathetic > >existence as an example. > > > >Where/when/how did God originate? > > > >Mark > >The Liberator > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > >From: "Mark" > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > >CC: , > > >Subject: Re: Citizen Kane > > >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:25:24 -0500 > > > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > > > >"I think pimples are important and I am important to you." > > > > > >You are about as important as a bucket of feces. Both you and the >bucket > > >of > > >feces drum up the same amount of chuckles. > > > > > >"A pimple is an indication you have a problem; an in grown hair, too >much > > >greasy food, not enough washing. A pimple tells you to take better >care > >of > > >yourself." > > > > > >You tell me that religious idiots are great at being the brunt of >jokes. > > > > > >"You can pop the pimple, but that does not alleviate your problem. You > > >sould either wash better, pluck out the in grown hair or stop eating > >those > > >McDonald fries in the extra large size." > > > > > >Only a religious idiot could ramble on about pimples. It's as >facinating > > >as > > >the fictitious character named Jesus. > > > > > >"I am honored to be your pimple." > > > > > >Someone like you would be honored to be a zit. I'm not surprised. > > > > > >"I indicate to you you are lying to yourself and fighting a losing >battle > > >against God." > > > > > >How can I fight fiction? > > > > > >"You have richly demonstrated your fight is emotion driven and > > >intellectually driven and I really hope you come > > >to terms that cause you emotionally to deny truth and harvest fruits >that > > >are bitter." > > > > > >You couldn't receive a valid view if your life depended on it. You are >a > > >source of humor. Nothing more... > > > > > >"God is truth, truth leads to peace of mind. Don't pop pimples, be > > >thankful > > >for them and cure the root problem." > > > > > >I'm thankful for nuts like you who like to be called 'zits'. It's a >real > > >side-splitter. > > > > > >"Jesus loves you." > > > > > >I'm sure Juan, Jose and Alfredo like me too. Thanks for the laughs. > > > > > >Mark > > >The Liberator > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > >CC: , > > > >Subject: Re: JFK <<---- huh? > > > >Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:55:23 -0500 > > > > > > > >Billy wrote: > > > > > > > >< > >knows > > > >I > > > >wanted and offered to discuss science with him and he keeps talking > >about > > > >"religion." Since he is not stupid, he must be afraid to discuss > >science > > > >because he obviously can read and see where I offered to discuss > >science. > > > >Since he is not stupid, he deflects the science discussion to >religion. > > > >Don't be closed minded Mark. If your atheist faith is defendable > > > >scientifically you would not be so scared. Analyze your fears and >deal > > > >with > > > >them.>> > > > > > > > >You play the role of the typical religious zealot (alias clown) quite > > >well. > > > >Your vocabulary is centered upon the following terms: 'afraid', > > > >'closed-minded', 'scared' and 'fears'. The next thing you know >you'll > >be > > > >offering me punch at a gathering after you change your name to 'Jim > > >Jones'. > > > > > > > >Bill, you're an idiot. It's that simple. If you were a pimple on my > > >body, > > > >you would have been popped and cleansed long ago. > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > >Mark > > > >The Liberator > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > > >CC: , > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > > >to > > > > >you > > > > >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 11:21:24 -0500 > > > > > > > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > > > > > > > >"You seem to complain that I am not listening and that I do not >care, > > >yet > > > > >when I offer to meet and eat and chat you trivialize the attempts >as > >a > > > > >homosexual offer. I am not, I have never have any gay >inclinations." > > > > > > > > > >There are a number of religious people -- or at least people whom > >claim > > > >to > > > > >be religious -- who are gay. It's easy to lump you in with that > >bunch. > > > > > > > > > >"The trajedty here is your fear of seriously listening to a > >Creationist > > > >who > > > > >knows science very well. It is delightful perhaps to humiliate a > > > >Christian > > > > >who is ignorant of science, but the fear of meeting with me is > >typical. > > > >So > > > > >when you log off, and in your hearts know you fear creation and its > > > > >ramifications, you are not alone. Thousands of evolutionists share > > >your > > > > >fears." > > > > > > > > > >Bill, I dread being bored to tears by yet another religious zealot. > > >It's > > > > >nothing more than that. > > > > > > > > > >Have a good life. Be warned, if you continue to pursue religious > > > > >discussion > > > > >with me, I plan on going into insult mode. It's clear that you >have > > > > >absolutely nothing to offer except a few chuckles. > > > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > > > >The people who cling to religion are the people who need it most. > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > >The Liberator > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer > > > >to > > > > > >you > > > > > >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:03:00 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > >This guy keeps asking to meet me at Denny's, Sizzler and a number > >of > > > > >other > > > > > >places. Does he know that I'm not gay? > > > > > > > > > > > >If this keeps up, I'm going to need a restraining order. > > > > > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > > >From: Bill Morgan > > > > > >To: > > > > > >Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 10:53 AM > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer > > > >to > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >A religious leader? I never claimed such. > > > > > > > > > > > >You asked for everett to judge, he did, and you disagree. Do not > > > > > >personally > > > > > >attack me. Lets meet at Sizzler and chat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > > >To: > > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > > >offer > > > > >to > > > > > > >you > > > > > > >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:12:29 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >It's comments like the one below that convince me of Bill > >Morgan's > > > >poor > > > > > > >character. Knowing that this man claims to be a religious >leader > > >is > > > > >not > > > > > > >the > > > > > > >least of all surprising. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > >From: Bill Morgan > > > > > > >To: > > > > > > >Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 12:01 AM > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > > >offer > > > > >to > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But everett ruled in my favor. Case closed. Please be a > >gracious > > > > >loser. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > > > >To: , > > > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I >now > > > >offer > > > > > >to > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:09:41 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ><with > > > >Bill, > > > > > > >with > > > > > > > >no success. Mark has primarily been a witness to the > >three-year > > > > > > > >correspondence between Bill Morgan and myself and has only > > > > >contributed > > > > > > >his > > > > > > > >own messages a few times, mainly to express his disgust at > >Bill's > > > > > > >conduct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ><has > > >not > > > > >been > > > > > > > >professional. You believe that he is a man of integrity, but > >his > > > > > >conduct > > > > > > > >on-line almost totally lacks integrity. His standard >response > >to > > > > > > > >legitimate > > > > > > > >questions would be the "rabbit trail" trick, which he >explicit > > > > >teaches > > > > > > >his > > > > > > > >recruits to be unacceptable (see his "Witnessing Techniques >#3" > > > > > >article) > > > > > > >or > > > > > > > >to just plain ignore the questions altogether. Now his >"rabbit > > > > >trail" > > > > > >is > > > > > > >a > > > > > > > >set of false accusations against me and my character which he > >has > > > > > > > >steadfastly refused to substantiate in any way. Obviously, > >Bill > > >is > > > > >not > > > > > > > >acting in a professional manner. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >< >has > > > > > >observed > > > > > > > >how Bill conducts himself. During that time, he has seen >Bill > > >duck > > > > >one > > > > > > > >question after another. He has seen Bill avoid one question > > >after > > > > > > >another > > > > > > > >by either ignoring it or by asking another, totally unrelated > > > > >question > > > > > > > >which > > > > > > > >is intended to be unanswerable by me; you should immediately > > > > >recognize > > > > > > >that > > > > > > > >tactic as what Bill calls "rabbit trails". Mark has seen >Bill > > >make > > > > > > > >blatantly false statements. Mark has seen Bill play childish > > > >games, > > > > > >such > > > > > > > >as > > > > > > > >repeatedly demanding an answer to a question all the time > > >ignoring > > > > >the > > > > > > > >answer that had already been given the first time -- like the > > > > >childish > > > > > > >game > > > > > > > >he's playing now demanding information that I have already > >given > > > >him, > > > > > > > >twice. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ><Bill, > > >to > > > > > >which > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > >responded, is essentially correct. Bill has been playing >games > > >all > > > > > > >along. > > > > > > > >Bill wants to avoid any actual discussion of his claims or of > >the > > > > > >actual > > > > > > > >facts, so he cannot be motivated by truth. In order to avoid > >the > > > > > >facts, > > > > > > >he > > > > > > > >has a vested interest in creating chaos and in preventing the > > > > > >restoration > > > > > > > >of > > > > > > > >order, hence he would have no intention of clearing up >matters. > > > >And > > > > > >Bill > > > > > > > >has made a number of promises which he has not kept, >including > > >his > > > > > > > >agreement > > > > > > > >to an on-line debate, which casts doubt on his integrity as > >well. > > > > >His > > > > > > > >posting on his web site of misinformation that he knew to be > > >false > > > >at > > > > > >the > > > > > > > >time that he posted it, such as the "Ozone Layer" article, > >casts > > > > > >further > > > > > > > >doubt on his integrity and on the role that truth plays in >his > > > > > >actions.>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I agree entirely with this view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public >profile > >at > > > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile >at > > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yd04.mx.aol.com (rly-yd04.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.4]) by air-yd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:57:51 2000 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-yd04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:57:22 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA39004; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:57:18 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <005501c01ab1$806dffc0$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" Cc: , References: Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:58:41 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Does this apply to the Christian Myth? Date: 09-Sep-00 16:03:55 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1@aol.com, ealpurcell@juno.com Joseph Campbell's Ten Commandments for Reading Myth I Read myths with the eyes of wonder: the myths transparent to their universal meaning, their meaning transparent to its mysterious source. II Read myths in the present tense: Eternity is now. III Read myths in the first person plural: the Gods and Goddesses of ancient mythology still live within you. IV Any myth worth its salt exerts a powerful magnetism. Notice the images and stories that you are drawn to and repelled by. Investigate the field of associated images and stories V Look for patterns; don't get lost in the details. What is needed is not more specialized scholarship, but more interdisciplinary vision. Make connections; break old patterns of parochial thought. VI Resacralize the secular: even a dollar bill reveals the imprint of Eternity. VII If God is everywhere, then myths can be generated anywhere, anytime, by anything. Don't let your Romantic aversion to science blind you to the Buddha in the computer chip. VIII Know your tribe! Myths never arise in a vacuum; they are the connective tissue of the social body which enjoys synergistic relations with dreams (private myths) and rituals (the enactment of myth). IX Expand your horizons! Any mythology worth remembering will be global in scope. The earth is our home and humankind is our family. X Read between the lines! Literalism kills; Imagination quickens. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Sep 2000 19:03:55 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Sep 2000 19:03:33 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA39612; Sat, 9 Sep 2000 18:03:31 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <006401c01ab2$5efccaa0$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: Cc: , Subject: Does this apply to the Christian Myth? Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 18:04:54 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 12:42:21 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com Such anger, such hatred. You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it. Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will believe me but here is teh truth: I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL. SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP. I am barely internet literate and would not even know how to do something this obnoxiou even if I wanted to. My goal is not to harass and I scolded the person who spammed all of these people. Again I doubt you will believe me but I will somehow manage to live with that. >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:37:12 EDT > >Well, Bill, since you are still sending these messages to Mr. Purcell, my >reply must also. > > >>My succint reply is I would gladly meet these men in person; I apologize >for >not loving reading and sending marathon e mails.<< > >Immaterial and no excuse for your behavior. And another bit of "rabbit >trailing" trying to divert attention away from the real problem, which is >your unprofessional, evasive ,and dishonest conduct on-line. As well as >your acting like an idiot most of the time. > >Besides, "not sending marathon e mails"? Bill, don't you even remember >what you had done?! You had taken your 53,760-byte essay, in Word6 format, >and spammed it repeatedly over several newsgroups. Those messages were >ELEVEN SEGMENTS LONG! Because of the binary codes in the Word6 format, >they were garbled! Most of the newsgroups it was posted in were totally >unrelated. These included scientific newsgroups intended for discussion of >scientific topics by professional scientists; your essay most certainly did >not belong there and it was made clear to you that it was very unwelcome. >These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the >professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is >reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES. Then after a short >while, you would spam it yet again! With all the problems of before. And >yet again you would ignore all the responses! And you reportedly did this >repeatedly! > >Just what DO you call such irresponsible behavior? It certainly looks like >"marathon e mails" to me. > >BTW, folks, early on I informed Bill of the problems caused by the >document's Word6 format and he thanked me for the advice. Over a year >later, he was still distributing it in Word6 format. Also, on 13 Feb 1999 >I left Bill a guestbook message that there were several "typos" on his >sight, particularly on the last page of his "Weird Tour". I reminded him >of them again on 11 July 2000 and listed them explicitly, along with some >HTML problems and duplicate articles. That time, Bill thanked me and said >he would take care of it. Guess what? No corrections have been made (as >of today, 9 Sep 2000). All he did was label an existing article as new (or >else he loaded in another duplicate). > > > >>My succint reply is I would gladly meet these men in person<< > >That is a grand and totally empty gesture that. It means nothing. > >I want to see you offer to fly William Hyde [hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and >Wesley R. Elsberry [welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] from Texas, Matt >Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David Byrden >[Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person. I >definitely want to be CC:'d in those emails. > >One question I have there is why would they want to meet with you? They >have already seen that you act like an idiot. Why would they want to go >that far just to talk with an idiot? Well, David Byrden might want to use >it as an excuse for visiting sunny Southern California. > > >Please tell us, Bill. How many SKEPTICS (as you refer to us in polite >society) have actually taken you up on your offer? How did the meetings >go? AND, please put us in touch with those other skeptics so that we can >check your story against theirs. Sorry that that is necessary, but you >have demonstrated a penchant for having your imagination completely rewrite >history. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:42:21 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f85.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.85]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:41:51 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:41:49 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:41:49 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:41:49 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 19:41:49.0914 (UTC) FILETIME=[53F3F3A0:01C01C28] ################################################ Subj: Re: Fwd: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 12:44:00 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com Do you know that when you call me an idiot it does not hurt my feelings? You asked earlier why was I surprised to hear you are not in your late teens. It is because of the name calling. It really makes you look like a silly goose. >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to you >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:45:24 EDT > >You object to WHAT? You are starting to revert to your old unintelligible >monosyllabic grunts. > >Please stop acting like an idiot, Bill. Until you demonstrate consistently >that you can behave maturely and honestly, stay on-topic, respond >intelligibly, remain aware of what is happening around you, stick to the >facts, and stop hallucinating, a personal meeting is simply and completely >out of the question. > >Until you can demonstrate those qualities, do not ever issue that >invitation again. Doing so would constitute acting like an idiot and so >would immediately disqualify your offer from consideration. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc04.mx.aol.com (rly-zc04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.4]) by air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:44:00 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f23.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.23]) by rly-zc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:43:46 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:43:46 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:43:46 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:43:46 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 19:43:46.0215 (UTC) FILETIME=[99461370:01C01C28] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 12:55:21 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net I am just telling you that if you are so interested in Creation, which you are and thats great, lets meet instead of typing so much. If you never e mail me again or contact me I will not bother you. Please note, all of my e mails are replys to yours - I have no problem with that, but you keep our relationship alive. Now, here to present testimony is Mr. William Newton Bequette. A former co worker, former skeptic and antagnostic toward Christianity and the Bible. For many years we worked together and had different world views. Question to Mr. Bequeet, be honest, when you were a skeptic, was I obnoxious, rude, offensive, confrontational, boarish, snide, insulting, condenscending, brash, crude, arrogant, crass in any way shape or form when we differed on world views? Now, let me tell the court, Mr. Bequette, although formerly a skeptic, is now a born again believer in the existence and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. You see David, most people who do examine the facts objectivley with an open mind convert to the Lord. It is not the facts that keep you from Christ, it is your closed mind. >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:46:01 EDT > > >>Meeting at Dennys would have resolved it.<< > >How could it have? From what I can see, it would have only made matters >far worse. I shudder to think of what hallucinations you would have >concocted out of it. And how even more outrageous your false accusations >against me would have been. > >What reason could I possibly have for wanting to have a personal meeting >with you? Why are you so maniacally fixated on it? What PRECISELY is it >that you want to accomplish by it? > >I want references. I want to hear the testimonies of other "skeptics" who >have accepted your invitations. No "choir members", but rather those you >call "skeptics", "atheists", and "evolutionists". And I want to hear FROM >THEM, not from your own "memory" (or hallucinations based loosely >thereupon). > >AND, I want your sincerest apology to me, Mark, and Mr. Purcell for your >false accusations against me, for your obstinant obstructive behavior >during my attempts to resolve the matter, and for the acrimony that you >caused. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (rly-zd05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.229]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:55:21 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f98.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.98]) by rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:54:40 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:54:37 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:54:37 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Cc: plasma@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 19:54:37 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 19:54:37.0419 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D6BEBB0:01C01C2A] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 13:21:56 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com We can have a great time talking history. I love history and subscribe to two history magazines (when I was single I subscribed 4 history magazines). My dad was air sea rescue at the end of the war, based at Clark Air Field. He saw very little of the enemy, but was thrilled to be getting three square meals a day after the Depression. Man, we have it good today don't we? My current favorite field of study is the Russian/German mayhem of World War II. Are you well versed on that campaign? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:43:15 EDT > >Correct answers. > >The airfields were on Tinian, which was a few miles southwest of Saipan. >My father's cousin's husband was on a bomber crew, but that is another >story. > >One of the major reasons I have for taking Iwo Jima was that too many of >the damaged bombers couldn't make it back to Tinian, so we needed a base at >least half-way to rescue the downed crews. That base was Iwo Jima. > >Yes, those laws did not come into existence until the mid-50's. Something >I read recently linked them to the aftermath of the McCarthy era. > >Sadly, too much Christian Right rhetorics try to tell the public that those >things go all the way back to 1776. Rather, I had always found the >Founding Principles to be rather humanistic. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:21:56 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f144.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.144]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:21:48 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:21:47 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:21:47 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:21:47 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 20:21:47.0892 (UTC) FILETIME=[E9425B40:01C01C2D] ################################################ Subj: Re: Sizzler Date: 11-Sep-00 13:23:59 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com See, you want a typing marathon. again I apologize, I won't type for hours on end. The word you called me was idiot. The root word for idiot was not public official (as I understand it). >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Sizzler >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:46:39 EDT > > > >>Name calling!<< > >WHAT NAME DID I CALL YOU?? SHOW ME! SHOW ME EXACTLY WHAT THE NAME WAS! > >I believe that you are falsely accusing me yet again and I WILL NOT STAND >FOR IT! > >SHOW ME! > > > >>I object!<< > >Bill, I OBJECT! > >I object to your false accusations. > >I object to your refusal to support in any manner whatsoever any of your >claims, including your false accusations against me. > >I object to your constantly acting like an idiot. > >I object to your stupid, childish games. > >I object to your constant attempts at generating even more of your "rabbit >trails". > >I object to your imagining things that never happened. > >I object to your persistent refusal to deal with things that actually did >happen. > >I object to the dishonesty displayed by your behavior. > >I object to your completely ignoring my simple and very reasonable question >about your false accusations against me (ie,"what do you think I had >said?"), even though I have had to ask it about TWENTY TIMES. > >And I object most strongly that your response was to spawn yet another >"rabbit trail." > >Namely: > >>How did life originate<< > >By the book: I will answer that question later, but first I want an answer >to my questions which I have already asked you and which you have not >answered. > >ALL EIGHTY-FIVE OF THEM. > >Of course, I will give you a list of the questions and even the context for >each one as you prepare to answer them. And do keep in mind that each >answer must be an honest attempt at answering that particular question AND >it must be intelligible; I will be the judge of whether you have answered a >question. You will find me quite reasonable, but I will not tolerate any >of your games. > > >But once you have answered my questions so that I can answer yours, what >then? I have answered every single one of that class of question, that you >have asked me (ie, the ones that I have actually received, not the ones >that you imagine to have asked me). Every single time, your response has >been to either drop the subject altogether or else try to change the >subject with yet another "rabbit trail". Like when I recently answered >your question about hominid fossils. What did you do with that answer? >Did it help your research any? Or did you just ignore it? > >Obviously you are not interested in getting any answer to your questions, >so why do you keep asking them? Just what is it that you are trying to >accomplish with those questions? What are you up to, Bill? Gaining >knowledge obviously has nothing to do with it. Yet you have demonstrated >an extreme eagerness to ask those questions. Why, Bill? Why? > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:23:59 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f123.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.123]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:23:45 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:23:44 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:23:44 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Sizzler Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:23:44 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 20:23:44.0862 (UTC) FILETIME=[2EFA8FE0:01C01C2E] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 13:45:42 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com Wow! Like Johnnie Cochran played the race card you play the pervert card. But anything to avoid the origin of life question huh? Chicken little would be right in saying your credability is falling. Your e mails used to be amusing but the more you type the more sorry I feel for you. Really. This is sincere...have you evaluated why you are not getting the love in your life that you obviously seek? My grandma told me to be loved you must be lovable. A little peace of mind and you would never type such bitter angry nonsense again! >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:48:52 EDT > >I have included Mr. Purcell here because Bill had included him in his >message to which I am responding. > > >>I am not, I have never have any gay inclinations.<< > >Bill, it is the way you act. You are acting like a pervert. Mark's other >assumption is quite understandable. He's a male, as are you, so your >perversion must be homosexual. Though there are lots of darker ones it >could be, but we normal people don't even want to think about those things. > >Many sexual predators, perverts, and molesters make use of the Internet to >find and meet with new victims. Yes, lonely hearts also use the Internet >to find and meet with potential lovers, but there is a big difference in >how they behave. When the potential lover says "no" firmly enough, the >lonely heart usually gets the message and has the good manners to back off >from asking for a personal meeting and keep the relationship on-line. The >pervert will do what you are doing. He will not take "no" for an answer. >He will continue to insist on a personal meeting until he has worn his >victim's resistence down enough that he/she finally agrees to the personal >meeting and so seals his/her fate. > >Being a teacher, your wife should have been taught about how these perverts >are using the Internet to victimize children and what to watch for. I >believe that you will find that you fit the profile. If you don't believe >it, then ask her what she would think if, about 14 years from now, a >stranger was corresponding on-line with your child and insisting without >let-up on a personal meeting with him/her. I think that a mother's >response might tell you how you appear to the world out here. > >If you keep acting like a pervert, please don't act surprised when somebody >takes you for one. > > > >> It is delightful perhaps to humiliate a Christian who is ignorant of >science, but the fear of meeting with me is typical.<< > >Oh really? Please tell us more. > > > >>So when you log off, and in your hearts know you fear creation and its >ramifications, you are not alone. Thousands of evolutionists share your >fears.<< > >Bill, are you trying to use the Christian Death Threat on us again? Let me >tell you a little story from Nam. > >When the morter attack began, there were some born-again Christians and an >atheist in the base's rec center. As trained, they all ducked for cover >under the tables. The atheist sat there with his drink calmly waiting out >the attack; if a shell was going to hit the rec center, then he may as well >make himself comfortable waiting for it. OTOH, the born-again Christians >were all terrified at the thought of dying and even more so at the thought >of God's Judgement and that they might not measure up. > >In another story that our minister told of his act of healing, the subject >was a terminally ill patient in the hospital. He was a believing Christian >(whether born-again, I do not know) who was terrified at the prospect of >not measuring up to God's Judgement. > >We understand, Bill. Millions of Christians share your fears. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by air-zc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:45:42 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f118.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.118]) by rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:45:14 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:45:11 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:45:11 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 20:45:11 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2000 20:45:11.0784 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E0B4680:01C01C31] ################################################ Subj: Re: Blocked Field Goal Date: 11-Sep-00 15:53:31 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: ealpurcell@juno.com, DWise1@aol.com Bill Morgan , you wrote: "A scientist could claim matter is eternal but htat would violate his natural laws of science...the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Since matter and energy is a function of time (entropy) it can not be eternal (independent of time)." Bill, you are only partially correct. The laws of physics (including theories) only apply since the big bang. No one can even begin to hypothesize what, if anything, happened before that time. Did time exist pre-big bang? If so, what natural laws, if any, existed? Your theory is as good as Mother Goose's. "Do you beleive in eternal matter?" I believe that I have no idea what events transpired before the big bang. "God is eternal, God was not made." Prove it. Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ >From: "Mark" >To: "Bill Morgan" >CC: , >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal >Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:58:41 -0500 > >Bill Morgan wrote: > >"Don't beg the question. Answer mine, then I anser yours. I answered >yours >today twice at CS Fullerton as I taught the students everything does not >come from nothing, order does not come from disorder and life does not come >from non life." > >Bill, you can't answer my question, that's why you continually dodge it. >Where/when/how did God originate? If you claim that God always existed, >couldn't a scientist also speculate that the Universe always existed? > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > >From: "Mark" > >To: "Bill Morgan" > >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal > >Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 00:33:42 -0500 > > > >Where/when/how did God originate? > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Bill Morgan > >To: > >Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 12:12 AM > >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal > > > > > >Life is a cellular organism with the ability to metabolize. > > > >How did it originate? > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > >CC: , > > >Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal > > >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 22:18:22 -0500 > > > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > > > >"Don't blame me for Madeline Murray O'hare." > > > > > >I blame your mother for conceiving you, as does your father. > > > > > >"She's your role model." > > > > > >I enjoy Carl Sagan's lifework much, much more! > > > > > >"How did life originate?" > > > > > >What's your definition of life? Please do not point to your own >pathetic > > >existence as an example. > > > > > >Where/when/how did God originate? > > > > > >Mark > > >The Liberator > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > >CC: , > > > >Subject: Re: Citizen Kane > > > >Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 20:25:24 -0500 > > > > > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > > > > > >"I think pimples are important and I am important to you." > > > > > > > >You are about as important as a bucket of feces. Both you and the > >bucket > > > >of > > > >feces drum up the same amount of chuckles. > > > > > > > >"A pimple is an indication you have a problem; an in grown hair, too > >much > > > >greasy food, not enough washing. A pimple tells you to take better > >care > > >of > > > >yourself." > > > > > > > >You tell me that religious idiots are great at being the brunt of > >jokes. > > > > > > > >"You can pop the pimple, but that does not alleviate your problem. >You > > > >sould either wash better, pluck out the in grown hair or stop eating > > >those > > > >McDonald fries in the extra large size." > > > > > > > >Only a religious idiot could ramble on about pimples. It's as > >facinating > > > >as > > > >the fictitious character named Jesus. > > > > > > > >"I am honored to be your pimple." > > > > > > > >Someone like you would be honored to be a zit. I'm not surprised. > > > > > > > >"I indicate to you you are lying to yourself and fighting a losing > >battle > > > >against God." > > > > > > > >How can I fight fiction? > > > > > > > >"You have richly demonstrated your fight is emotion driven and > > > >intellectually driven and I really hope you come > > > >to terms that cause you emotionally to deny truth and harvest fruits > >that > > > >are bitter." > > > > > > > >You couldn't receive a valid view if your life depended on it. You >are > >a > > > >source of humor. Nothing more... > > > > > > > >"God is truth, truth leads to peace of mind. Don't pop pimples, be > > > >thankful > > > >for them and cure the root problem." > > > > > > > >I'm thankful for nuts like you who like to be called 'zits'. It's a > >real > > > >side-splitter. > > > > > > > >"Jesus loves you." > > > > > > > >I'm sure Juan, Jose and Alfredo like me too. Thanks for the laughs. > > > > > > > >Mark > > > >The Liberator > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > > >CC: , > > > > >Subject: Re: JFK <<---- huh? > > > > >Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 20:55:23 -0500 > > > > > > > > > >Billy wrote: > > > > > > > > > ><he > > > >knows > > > > >I > > > > >wanted and offered to discuss science with him and he keeps talking > > >about > > > > >"religion." Since he is not stupid, he must be afraid to discuss > > >science > > > > >because he obviously can read and see where I offered to discuss > > >science. > > > > >Since he is not stupid, he deflects the science discussion to > >religion. > > > > >Don't be closed minded Mark. If your atheist faith is defendable > > > > >scientifically you would not be so scared. Analyze your fears and > >deal > > > > >with > > > > >them.>> > > > > > > > > > >You play the role of the typical religious zealot (alias clown) >quite > > > >well. > > > > >Your vocabulary is centered upon the following terms: 'afraid', > > > > >'closed-minded', 'scared' and 'fears'. The next thing you know > >you'll > > >be > > > > >offering me punch at a gathering after you change your name to 'Jim > > > >Jones'. > > > > > > > > > >Bill, you're an idiot. It's that simple. If you were a pimple on >my > > > >body, > > > > >you would have been popped and cleansed long ago. > > > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > >The Liberator > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer > > > >to > > > > > >you > > > > > >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 11:21:24 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > >Bill Morgan , you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >"You seem to complain that I am not listening and that I do not > >care, > > > >yet > > > > > >when I offer to meet and eat and chat you trivialize the attempts > >as > > >a > > > > > >homosexual offer. I am not, I have never have any gay > >inclinations." > > > > > > > > > > > >There are a number of religious people -- or at least people whom > > >claim > > > > >to > > > > > >be religious -- who are gay. It's easy to lump you in with that > > >bunch. > > > > > > > > > > > >"The trajedty here is your fear of seriously listening to a > > >Creationist > > > > >who > > > > > >knows science very well. It is delightful perhaps to humiliate a > > > > >Christian > > > > > >who is ignorant of science, but the fear of meeting with me is > > >typical. > > > > >So > > > > > >when you log off, and in your hearts know you fear creation and >its > > > > > >ramifications, you are not alone. Thousands of evolutionists >share > > > >your > > > > > >fears." > > > > > > > > > > > >Bill, I dread being bored to tears by yet another religious >zealot. > > > >It's > > > > > >nothing more than that. > > > > > > > > > > > >Have a good life. Be warned, if you continue to pursue religious > > > > > >discussion > > > > > >with me, I plan on going into insult mode. It's clear that you > >have > > > > > >absolutely nothing to offer except a few chuckles. > > > > > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > > > > > >The people who cling to religion are the people who need it most. > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > > >To: "Bill Morgan" > > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > > >offer > > > > >to > > > > > > >you > > > > > > >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 11:03:00 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >This guy keeps asking to meet me at Denny's, Sizzler and a >number > > >of > > > > > >other > > > > > > >places. Does he know that I'm not gay? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >If this keeps up, I'm going to need a restraining order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >= ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > >From: Bill Morgan > > > > > > >To: > > > > > > >Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 10:53 AM > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > > >offer > > > > >to > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >A religious leader? I never claimed such. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >You asked for everett to judge, he did, and you disagree. Do >not > > > > > > >personally > > > > > > >attack me. Lets meet at Sizzler and chat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > > > >To: > > > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I >now > > > >offer > > > > > >to > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > >Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:12:29 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >It's comments like the one below that convince me of Bill > > >Morgan's > > > > >poor > > > > > > > >character. Knowing that this man claims to be a religious > >leader > > > >is > > > > > >not > > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > >least of all surprising. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > >From: Bill Morgan > > > > > > > >To: > > > > > > > >Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2000 12:01 AM > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I >now > > > >offer > > > > > >to > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But everett ruled in my favor. Case closed. Please be a > > >gracious > > > > > >loser. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Mark" > > > > > > > > >To: , > > > > > > > > >CC: , > > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I > >now > > > > >offer > > > > > > >to > > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > >Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 19:09:41 -0500 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >< >with > > > > >Bill, > > > > > > > >with > > > > > > > > >no success. Mark has primarily been a witness to the > > >three-year > > > > > > > > >correspondence between Bill Morgan and myself and has only > > > > > >contributed > > > > > > > >his > > > > > > > > >own messages a few times, mainly to express his disgust at > > >Bill's > > > > > > > >conduct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >< >has > > > >not > > > > > >been > > > > > > > > >professional. You believe that he is a man of integrity, >but > > >his > > > > > > >conduct > > > > > > > > >on-line almost totally lacks integrity. His standard > >response > > >to > > > > > > > > >legitimate > > > > > > > > >questions would be the "rabbit trail" trick, which he > >explicit > > > > > >teaches > > > > > > > >his > > > > > > > > >recruits to be unacceptable (see his "Witnessing Techniques > >#3" > > > > > > >article) > > > > > > > >or > > > > > > > > >to just plain ignore the questions altogether. Now his > >"rabbit > > > > > >trail" > > > > > > >is > > > > > > > >a > > > > > > > > >set of false accusations against me and my character which >he > > >has > > > > > > > > >steadfastly refused to substantiate in any way. Obviously, > > >Bill > > > >is > > > > > >not > > > > > > > > >acting in a professional manner. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ><Mark > > >has > > > > > > >observed > > > > > > > > >how Bill conducts himself. During that time, he has seen > >Bill > > > >duck > > > > > >one > > > > > > > > >question after another. He has seen Bill avoid one >question > > > >after > > > > > > > >another > > > > > > > > >by either ignoring it or by asking another, totally >unrelated > > > > > >question > > > > > > > > >which > > > > > > > > >is intended to be unanswerable by me; you should >immediately > > > > > >recognize > > > > > > > >that > > > > > > > > >tactic as what Bill calls "rabbit trails". Mark has seen > >Bill > > > >make > > > > > > > > >blatantly false statements. Mark has seen Bill play >childish > > > > >games, > > > > > > >such > > > > > > > > >as > > > > > > > > >repeatedly demanding an answer to a question all the time > > > >ignoring > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > >answer that had already been given the first time -- like >the > > > > > >childish > > > > > > > >game > > > > > > > > >he's playing now demanding information that I have already > > >given > > > > >him, > > > > > > > > >twice. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >< >Bill, > > > >to > > > > > > >which > > > > > > > > >you > > > > > > > > >responded, is essentially correct. Bill has been playing > >games > > > >all > > > > > > > >along. > > > > > > > > >Bill wants to avoid any actual discussion of his claims or >of > > >the > > > > > > >actual > > > > > > > > >facts, so he cannot be motivated by truth. In order to >avoid > > >the > > > > > > >facts, > > > > > > > >he > > > > > > > > >has a vested interest in creating chaos and in preventing >the > > > > > > >restoration > > > > > > > > >of > > > > > > > > >order, hence he would have no intention of clearing up > >matters. > > > > >And > > > > > > >Bill > > > > > > > > >has made a number of promises which he has not kept, > >including > > > >his > > > > > > > > >agreement > > > > > > > > >to an on-line debate, which casts doubt on his integrity as > > >well. > > > > > >His > > > > > > > > >posting on his web site of misinformation that he knew to >be > > > >false > > > > >at > > > > > > >the > > > > > > > > >time that he posted it, such as the "Ozone Layer" article, > > >casts > > > > > > >further > > > > > > > > >doubt on his integrity and on the role that truth plays in > >his > > > > > > >actions.>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I agree entirely with this view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mark > > > > > > > > >The Liberator > > > > > > > > >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > > > > > > >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > > > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public > >profile > > >at > > > > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public >profile > >at > > > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile >at > > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) by air-zd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:53:30 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:53:06 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA02245; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:52:59 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <000601c01c43$3c4deba0$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" Cc: , References: Subject: Re: Blocked Field Goal Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:54:23 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 11-Sep-00 15:59:42 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: DWise1@aol.com Bill Morgan , you wrote: "I apologize for not stoping to your level and flinging personal insults." Apologize for spreading mistruths. Your personality is far less than perfect and it is quite uninteresting. "Please accept my apology for being kind and sensitive to your obvious needs." If this EVER happened, I must have missed it as it must have been buried in a sea of your crap. "I know it hurt that Judge Purcell ruled in my favor, but the least you could do is be a gracious loser." If you ever had a clue you probably traded it for a dull penny. "How did life originate?" You claim that God is eternal. Prove it. What evidence leads you to believe such a thing? If you quote a passage from the Bible, I'll find this to be quite humorous. Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ >From: "Mark" >To: , >CC: >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:53:05 -0500 > > wrote: >"...I want your sincerest apology to me, Mark, and Mr. Purcell for your >false accusations against me, for your obstinant obstructive behavior >during >my attempts to resolve the matter, and for the acrimony that you caused." > >Bill will ignore this like he ignores everything else and ask the same >question: 'how did life originate?' > >I'm waiting for him to answer, 'where/how/when did God originate?' > >= ) > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:59:42 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:59:30 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA02831; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:59:17 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <000e01c01c44$1d3f1080$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:00:41 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 12-Sep-00 07:21:24 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com Bill, I thank you for your objective commentary. >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:52:39 -0700 > >Gentlemen, >I have known Bill for 9 years. While he is energetic in discussing his >beliefs I have always known to him to be courteous and kind. If Bill sent >inappropriate attachments I am sure it was not intentional on his part to >cause problems. Typically people who don't believe in the Lord react very >negatively when asked why they are not Christians. The discussion of >religion is a highly emotional topic that most people would care not to >discuss. But the issue of religion, and morality does need to be brought >up in today's troubled society. >Sincerely, > Bill Bequette > >----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: DWise1@aol.com > Cc: plasma@worldnet.att.net > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 12:54 PM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > I am just telling you that if you are so interested in Creation, which >you > are and thats great, lets meet instead of typing so much. If you never >e > mail me again or contact me I will not bother you. Please note, all of >my e > mails are replys to yours - I have no problem with that, but you keep >our > relationship alive. > > Now, here to present testimony is Mr. William Newton Bequette. A former >co > worker, former skeptic and antagnostic toward Christianity and the >Bible. > For many years we worked together and had different world views. > > Question to Mr. Bequeet, be honest, when you were a skeptic, was I > obnoxious, rude, offensive, confrontational, boarish, snide, insulting, > condenscending, brash, crude, arrogant, crass in any way shape or form >when > we differed on world views? > > Now, let me tell the court, Mr. Bequette, although formerly a skeptic, >is > now a born again believer in the existence and work of our Lord Jesus > Christ. You see David, most people who do examine the facts objectivley > with an open mind convert to the Lord. It is not the facts that keep >you > from Christ, it is your closed mind. > > > >From: DWise1@aol.com > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 18:46:01 EDT > > > > >>Meeting at Dennys would have resolved it.<< > > > >How could it have? From what I can see, it would have only made >matters > >far worse. I shudder to think of what hallucinations you would have > >concocted out of it. And how even more outrageous your false >accusations > >against me would have been. > > > >What reason could I possibly have for wanting to have a personal >meeting > >with you? Why are you so maniacally fixated on it? What PRECISELY is >it > >that you want to accomplish by it? > > > >I want references. I want to hear the testimonies of other "skeptics" >who > >have accepted your invitations. No "choir members", but rather those >you > >call "skeptics", "atheists", and "evolutionists". And I want to hear >FROM > >THEM, not from your own "memory" (or hallucinations based loosely > >thereupon). > > > >AND, I want your sincerest apology to me, Mark, and Mr. Purcell for >your > >false accusations against me, for your obstinant obstructive behavior > >during my attempts to resolve the matter, and for the acrimony that you > >caused. > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-za02.mx.aol.com (rly-za02.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.98]) by air-za01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:21:24 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f42.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.42]) by rly-za02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:20:56 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 07:20:43 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:20:43 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 14:20:43 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2000 14:20:43.0249 (UTC) FILETIME=[A289EE10:01C01CC4] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 12-Sep-00 19:47:39 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: DWise1@aol.com Bill Morgan , you wrote: "I would love for you to be honest and tell me why you hate God so much." How can I 'hate' fiction? It serves no purpose in MY life but if it makes you feel happy along with stories of Santa and the Easter Bunny, who am I to pop your bubble? "If my views were as idiotic as you say they are, you would be an idiot to fight them, which you are not." You're exactly right on this one. Now you're beginning to understand why I take your messages with a grain of salt. "Your faults are not stupidity, just a closed mind to seeing you were created. Please tell me why are you so emotionally charged against Creation and God." Yea... How dare I demand evidence, right? "If your answer is science tell me what a mutation is and if you beleive mutations resulted in bacteria being ancestors to whales." You still need to show me why you believe God is eternal. Where's your evidence? "One thing you have to admit, even if you hate Jesus, a tremendous body of excellent music has been writtent o glorify Him." If religious music turns you on, good for you. In general, it puts me to sleep, save for the music that mocks it like Black Sabbath. Now that's music to rock to... I wrote: <> To that you responded: "Stop running. We are having much better luck with our 2 year old in teaching her to not run where she should not than you. You supposedly are the scientist....tell me your best explanation of how and where life originated. relax, don't be scared and let your answer flow." Bill, if you can't tell me why you think God is eternal, just say so. I won't be surprised. [grin] Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (rly-yg03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.3]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:47:38 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:47:11 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA36709; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:47:07 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <002801c01d2d$1c58f660$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:48:33 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Who invented Vinegar Potato Chips? Date: 12-Sep-00 19:53:23 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: ealpurcell@juno.com, DWise1@aol.com Bill Morgan , you wrote: "Prove there was a big bang. In your answer do not ignore galaxy clusters. And include also in your answer the intruments used for measuring background radiation." Prove to me that God is eternal. "I appreciate your honesty, your are right when you say you have no idea [what happened before the 'big bang'], but please note how you assume there was a big bang." Note how you assume that God is eternal but cannot supply a shred of evidence. "Time is a property. The creator of time is outside of time." If God created the Universe and the Universe -- by definition -- means everything, how can God be seperate from everything? Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:53:23 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 22:53:02 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA37448; Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:52:53 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <002d01c01d2d$eaba8500$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" Cc: , References: Subject: Re: Who invented Vinegar Potato Chips? Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:54:20 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:39:06 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Such anger, such hatred.<< Born out of the frustration of trying to deal with somebody who insists on acting like an idiot, on refusing to deal honestly, on not answering the simplest direct questions, on creating new "rabbit trails" at every turn, on ignoring what is really happening and coming up with imaginary events, on making false accusations which he refuses to substantiate in any way, and on generating acrimony and obstructing all my efforts to resolve it. How else do you expect me to feel about the way you've been behaving? >>You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it.<< You make that sound like you are offering me a cranium full of novacaine. No thanks. Now, Bill, if your behavior is a fine example of what happens to somebody when they accept Jesus, then that would be the very last thing I would want to have happen to me. I love truth and honesty too much to become like you. Besides, I am still required to shave (meaning that I still need to look at myself in the mirror every morning). No, Bill, what would go a long way to giving me peace of mind is if I could discussion matters with you peacefully, without acrimony, with you answering honestly to what is actually being said. But for that to happen, you need to stop acting like an idiot all the time. It's in your hands, Bill. Jesus cannot do it; YOU have to do it. >>Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will believe me but here is teh truth: I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL. SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP.<< Oh, Bill, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit you on the nose. You did indeed spam your material at the very least over the following FIFTEEN newsgroups [newsgroup names truncated by DejaNews]: a.bsu.talk a.bsu.programming a.bsu.religion alc.suicide alt.atheism alt.evil alt.religion.all-worl alt.religion.barfing- alt.religion.broadcas alt.religion.christia alt.religion.christian-teen alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel alt.sex k12.ed.science school.teachers sci.anthropology.paleo In addition, you posted it on www.bio.net on 17 Mar 1997; see http://www.bio.net//hypermail/PROTEIN-ANALYSIS/proteins.199703/0113.html . You were promptly informed that it was very inappropriate. I know that YOU are the one who did it because the sender was clearly identified as "billyjack6@aol.com" which is what your email address was at the time. Now, there have also been a number of casual vectors reposting it sporadically on one or a few newsgroups at a time. But there were two, god@boy.com and lady@love.com, who were quite industrious at spamming it over 32 newsgroups [newsgroup names again truncated by DejaNews]: alt.bible.prophecy, alt.christnet, alt.christnet.bible, alt.christnet.philoso, alt.hemp, alt.magick, alt.pagan, alt.paranormal, alt.philosophy.objectivism, alt.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.christian, alt.religion.mormon, alt.religion.rabbet, alt.religion.scientology, alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, alt.romance.matureadult, alt.romance.online, alt.romance.teen, alt.satanism, alt.society.anarchy, alt.sports.football.p, alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys, alt.sports.football.pro.denver-broncos, bionet.molbio.evoluti, sci.anthropology, sci.anthropology.pale, sci.astro, sci.bio, sci.physics, talk.atheism, talk.origins. Those are the facts. Although god@boy.com and lady@love.com had definitely out-done you, the fact still remains that you personally had spammed your essay to at least FIFTEEN newsgroups. And almost all of the responses went to you, as they were instructed in your essay. Which brings us back to the real issue I was raising and which you dodged yet again, you old "rabbit-trail" maker, you. Here is it AGAIN: "These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES. Then after a short while, you would spam it yet again! With all the problems of before. And yet again you would ignore all the responses! And you reportedly did this repeatedly!" Note that I said "reportedly". It is possible that many of those repeated spammings had been performed by others, such as the forementioned god@boy.com and lady@love.com, and that was most likely the case. But the fact still remains that YOU had been the recipient of most of the responses that those spammings had generated. And the fact still remains that YOU had reportedly ignored ALL THOSE RESPONSES. THAT is the irresponsible action of which I spoke. Spam happens, but you display a clear pattern of blowing people off (ie, ignoring their legitimate inquiries and comments to your writings). THAT is the issue that I was raising. You also completely ignored the remainder of my message: whether you are really serious about wanting to meet those men in person. Well, are you serious about it? Really serious? Serious enough to offer to fly Mark [editor@liberator.net] in from Chicago? Hey, you've been bugging him lately to join you for dinner, haven't you? Just how much do you really want to make that happen? Are you serious enough to offer to fly William Hyde [hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and Wesley R. Elsberry [welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] from Texas, Matt Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David Byrden [Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person? Show us just how serious you are and be sure to CC: us in those emails. I think we know just how serious you really are. Why don't you just admit that you are grand-standing? And you made sure to avoid answering the question of how many SKEPTICS (as you refer to us in polite society) have actually taken you up on your offer. Yes, you brought in one that converted, but Mr Bequette does not fit the description. You did not meet him on-line, but rather had already met him at work and had had an opportunity to develop a working relationship with him before starting to work on him. That says nothing about going from an established on-line correspondence to a personal meeting. Here is this set of questions again in a readable format: 1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your invitation to? 2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation? 3. How did the meetings go? 4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went? For this, you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your imagination having rewritten history yet again. As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting your imagination for reality. ################################################ Subj: Re: Fwd: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:40:13 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Do you know that when you call me an idiot it does not hurt my feelings?<< First, in all my communications with you and with Mark, I have NEVER called you an "idiot". NEVER! I know that for a fact because I looked at the record! You are making yet another false accusation that is contrary-to-fact! You are yet again acting like an idiot. Here is what I had written: >You object to WHAT? You are starting to revert to your old unintelligible >monosyllabic grunts. > >Please stop acting like an idiot, Bill. Until you demonstrate consistently >that you can behave maturely and honestly, stay on-topic, respond >intelligibly, remain aware of what is happening around you, stick to the >facts, and stop hallucinating, a personal meeting is simply and completely >out of the question. > >Until you can demonstrate those qualities, do not ever issue that >invitation again. Doing so would constitute acting like an idiot and so >would immediately disqualify your offer from consideration. READ WHAT IS WRITTEN, Bill! Stop making things up! The entire problem that we are having stems from the fact that you keep accusing me of things that I have never done and that have never happened! [Note for Mr. Bequette: In our earlier correspondence, Bill had a terrible time making himself understood. He would just write "yes" or "no" or some other single syllable without any indication of what he was talking about. I had to repeatedly chide him for making "unintelligible monosyllabic grunts" to get him to finally start adding some context.] "...it does not hurt my feelings" So, what are you saying, that you actually LIKE being called an idiot? Is that why you act like one? Or is it another of your proselytizing tricks to maneuver the mark into calling you an idiot so that you put on your moral-superiority act? If so, then you are more devious than I had given you credit for. But if you don't like to be called an idiot (you do object elsewhere), I certainly wouldn't blame you. But if you keep acting like an idiot, you should at least have the common courtesy of not acting so surprised when you think that you have been called one. Here is a simple truth: if you don't want to be called an idiot, then stop acting like one. The first step in that process is to READ WHAT IS WRITTEN AND RESPOND TO THAT, not to what you imagine. How can I make that any clearer? Mr. Bequette, after you come up to speed on what's been going on, could you please explain it to Bill? >>It is because of the name calling.<< What "name calling", Bill? TELL ME! You keep accusing me, but you also keep refusing to tell me what I am supposed to have said so that I could find the offending message. I have asked you TWENTY TIMES and you have ignored that request each and every time. Mr. Bequette, this is a large part of the problem. Bill keeps accusing me of things that I have not done. I have every message saved, so I can go back and see exactly who said what, when, and to whom. But first I need to know what I was supposed to have said. I keep asking for that information (over twenty times now), but Bill absolutely refuses to provide it. I am trying to resolve this matter, but Bill refuses to let that happen. At the same time, Bill kept requesting the text of a specific message and kept claiming that I was refusing to provide it, even though I had promptly sent it to him upon the very first request and even re-sent it a second time immediately thereafter. Bill seems to be living in an entirely different universe than the rest of us; he keeps ignoring what actually happens and imagines things that are completely different from reality. The entire transcript of our corresondence is available for download at http://chiefwise.tripod.com/morgan/transcript.html in both straight text and ZIPped format. I put that page up in order to fulfill Bill's request to make the "offending messages" available for the "court". A short explanation: Mark [editor@liberator.net] has been a long-time witness to these proceedings. When Bill started going off the deep end, I brought Mark in as a witness. When Bill started going even more out of control, I included Everett Purcell, because Bill knows him and his was the only other email address I knew from that group. In a big theatrical show of martrydom (his "Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you" subject line), Bill then tried to turn the entire thing into a court case, which I played along with in the hope that we might at least get Bill to support his accusations. No such luck. Of course, I had to remind Bill that HE had made a series of accusations against ME, so he was clearly the plaintiff whereas I was clearly the defendent. Therefore, Bill the plaintiff had to present his case against me, the defendent. Well, that never happened. After a few exchanges, Mr. Purcell had no patience for such "child play", so he effectively declared Bill's lawsuit frivolous and threw the whole case out of court. Somehow, Bill tried to claim that Mr. Purcell had passed judgement in his favor, but I reminded him of the facts -- who knows what Bill believes about it now. As it now stands, Bill has not retracted his accusations against me nor has he presented any evidence to support them nor has he allowed them to be investigated. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:41:17 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net I will reply to this message with two replies, one to Bill and the other to Mr. Bequette. They will be sent to all parties named in the header of Bill's message, including Mark who is a witness who should not have been excluded. That was naughty of you, Bill First, for Mark's sake so he can see what Bill tried to sneak past him, here is the text of Bill's message. I will only do this in my reply to Bill. ### BEGIN MESSAGE ### I am just telling you that if you are so interested in Creation, which you are and thats great, lets meet instead of typing so much. If you never e mail me again or contact me I will not bother you. Please note, all of my e mails are replys to yours - I have no problem with that, but you keep our relationship alive. Now, here to present testimony is Mr. William Newton Bequette. A former co worker, former skeptic and antagnostic toward Christianity and the Bible. For many years we worked together and had different world views. Question to Mr. Bequeet, be honest, when you were a skeptic, was I obnoxious, rude, offensive, confrontational, boarish, snide, insulting, condenscending, brash, crude, arrogant, crass in any way shape or form when we differed on world views? Now, let me tell the court, Mr. Bequette, although formerly a skeptic, is now a born again believer in the existence and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. You see David, most people who do examine the facts objectivley with an open mind convert to the Lord. It is not the facts that keep you from Christ, it is your closed mind. ### END MESSAGE ### >>I am just telling you that if you are so interested in Creation, which you are and thats great, lets meet instead of typing so much.<< Bill, you know full well that you have made a personal meeting between us impossible. You complain of things that never happened and ignore those things that have happened. You make false accusations against me and about me based on imagined events which either never happened or else happened entirely differently from what you "remember". You refuse to accept responsibility for the accusations you make. You go out of your way to avoid examining the actual facts of the matter. You go out of your way to prevent others from examining the actual facts of the matter. You go out of your way to avoid answering simple direct questions. You repeatedly employ your "rabbit trails" trick of diverting attention away from the discussion, usually by asking an entirely different question which you draw from your bag of "unanswerable questions", but other times by complaining about imaginary offenses (eg, the list of false accusation you currently have leveled against me), or by insisting on having a personal meeting, or by completely ignoring the discussion. Then when I would answer one of your "unanswerable questions", you would either claim that I had not answered your question (but absolutely refused to ever answer my repeated question of why you thought that), or, most often, simply drop that line of discussion altogether and ignore all subsequent questions about it [see "BILL MORGAN'S 'UNANSWERABLE' QUESTIONS" at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/bills_questions.html]. You have established that pattern of behavior throughout our correspodence from July 1996 to August 1998 and from July 2000 to the present and have practiced it with a very high degree of consistency. I have every reason to believe that you will conduct yourself in person as you have on-line and no reason whatsoever to doubt that that would happen. The only defense I have against your false accusations and imaginative reconstruction and creation ex nihilo of past events is the written record. As long as you behave as you have been, I simply cannot meet with you in person without the iron-clad guarantee of having a complete written transcript of that meeting, completely accurate with every single word that was actually spoken, indicating by whom and to whom (a tape recording would be inadequate due to problems with garbling and background noise). >>If you never e mail me again or contact me I will not bother you. Please note, all of my e mails are replys to yours - I have no problem with that, but you keep our relationship alive.<< Oh, I'm sure that you dream of and pray for the day that I finally give up on trying to talk with you. I'm sure that you just want to drop the whole thing and walk away congratulating yourself of having defeated yet another evolutionist. Like that one at the trade show who tried to answer your question of how CFCs get into the upper atmosphere [see "BILL MORGAN'S QUESTION: THE OZONE LAYER" at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/q_ozone.html]. You wrote: "The only explanation I got was when one man I asked explained that the R-12 attaches itself to lighter than air molecules and like a balloon reaches the ozone layer. THINK! The molecule will still be denser than air! I pointed this out and he walked away." First, the record of your ability to keep track of what is going on around you and of accurately remembering past events (or even current ones) is abysmal, so we honestly do not know what had actually happened there or what he had actually said in his attempted explanation. Second, we can plainly see here how you are congratuling yourself of having shown HIM up and chalking up yet another victory. But what you did not report was what he had muttered to himself as he walked away: "What a #### idiot!" Guess what, Bill, you lost that one. And if your had made your association with Christianity and with creationism known to him, then both of those causes also lost. You may be able to brag this up to the choir as a victory, but in reality you had witnessed to everybody else at that trade show (at least those who stopped and wondered why you were asking those questions in an entirely wrong place) that Christians and creationists are idiots. No, Bill, I cannot let you off the hook. There is too much unfinished business between us. I am a religious man and I am deeply offended by the disregard your conduct demonstrates towards truth and honesty. As a religious man I am deeply offended that your conduct turns your claim of serving truth into a hypocritical lie. I seek resolution and I seek justice and I am going to get resolution and justice. But I do not seek restitution from you, only reform. You need to change your evil ways, Bill, and I am going to hold your feet to the coals to help you reform. >>Now, here to present testimony is Mr. William Newton Bequette. A former co worker, former skeptic and antagnostic toward Christianity and the Bible. For many years we worked together and had different world views.<< With all due respect, Bill, why? What question is this supposed to answer? Is this yet another of your "rabbit trails"? Now, I did ask to hear from others whom you had met on-line and who had agreed to meet with you personally. I made that request in the hope of determining if your conduct in person is indeed different from your conduct on-line. With all due respect to Mr. Bequette, he does not fit that profile. From your description of him, you had already established a face-to-face working relationship with him before you starting working on him. Also, you had plenty of legitimate other reasons for meeting with him whereas the only reason for your proposed meeting with me would be creation-evolution/your-attempt-to-proselytize. Just what relevance is that supposed to have on my question? I posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating (just in case you skim over it). Here is what I had asked: 1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your invitation to? 2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation? 3. How did the meetings go? 4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went? For this, you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your imagination having rewritten history yet again. As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting your imagination for reality. >>Question to Mr. Bequeet, be honest, when you were a skeptic, was I obnoxious, rude, offensive, confrontational, boarish, snide, insulting, condenscending, brash, crude, arrogant, crass in any way shape or form when we differed on world views?<< Bill, just what anchovi-pizza-induced nightmare did your imagination dredge those adjectives out from? Are you trying to make Mr. Bequett believe that *I* called you those things? Bill, how could you lie to him like that? First, I do not ever recall calling you a "swine"; I believe the word you wanted to use should have been "boorish", not "boarish". Now, you DID insult my wife and me with the arrogance of your statement of your own moral superiority and our inferiority. But I do not recall calling you any of the other words you list. Are THOSE the "very nasty names" that you accused me of calling you? What are you talking about here? >>Now, let me tell the court, ... << Uh, Bill, don't you remember? Your case got thrown out for being frivolous. Mr. Purcell said he had no time for such "child play". There is no court for you to address anymore. Stop your play-acting already. If you want to play the martyr, then you should at least pick a more worth-while cause than making false accusations against me. Besides which, your refusal to present any kind of case and your refusal to present much-needed evidence would have wound you up in jail for contempt of court. >>Mr. Bequette, although formerly a skeptic, is now a born again believer in the existence and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. You see David, most people who do examine the facts objectivley with an open mind convert to the Lord. It is not the facts that keep you from Christ, it is your closed mind.<< Uh, Bill, do you have any idea what has been happening here? Any idea at all? What you are saying here has nothing whatsoever to do with what is going on here. Bill, YOU are the one who keeps refusing to examine the facts. YOU accused me. *I* said that we need to examine the facts, examine what was actually written, but first we need to know what you think I had written. YOU have consistently refused to provide that information which we need to examine the facts. *I* have asked for that information over TWENTY TIMES and YOU have steadfastly ignored those requests. YOU have single-handedly prevented examination of the facts. Anybody can read the record, MORGN00B.TXT and MORGN00C.TXT at http://chiefwise.tripod.com/morgan/transcript.html, and see that that is the case. The record clearly shows which one of us has the closed mind. Now, what does the examination of the PERTINENT facts here have to do with your attempts to convert me? That has not been part of the discussion here, so why do you suddenly throw it in? It makes no sense at all, Bill. You are acting like an idiot again. Please stop acting like an idiot and start dealing with the business at hand, which is cleaning up this mess that YOU have created. Oh, by the way, thanks for yet again confirming what I have suspected all along: your only purpose in having a personal meeting with me is to try to convert me. If we do ever meet in person, one of the stipulations would be that you refrain completely from proselytizing. Another stipulation would be that my other stipulations be strictly enforced. Very strictly. >>It is not the facts that keep you from Christ, it is your closed mind.<< Bill, you do not have the slightest clue, do you? Truly a legend in your own mind. Multiple factors, but I'll clue you in on one. Look in the mirror. Your consistent witness here is a shining example. After seeing that, how could I ever want to become anything like your example here? I'm sorry, Bill, but truth, morality, and ethical conduct are all much too important to me. I could not bear to become a Christian and lose all that. Your witness has helped to teach me that and I do thank you for it. It's almost as good a vaccine against conversion as creation science is. First things first, Bill. First we clean up this horrendous mess that you have created. Then we try to work out a way to keep it from happening again. THEN AND ONLY THEN can we talk about the more interesting stuff. The sooner you start to straighten up and fly right, Bill, the sooner we can make it happen. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:42:33 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net Welcome, Mr. Bequette. I really have to apologize for the mess. Bill has been misbehaving himself rather badly and has been preventing us from cleaning it up. I sincerely hope that you will be able to view the situation objectively and help Bill come to his senses. I don't know what Bill has told you, but judging from the following question from his message, he has not told you the truth: >Question to Mr. Bequeet, be honest, when you were a skeptic, was I obnoxious, rude, offensive, confrontational, boarish, snide, insulting, condenscending, brash, crude, arrogant, crass in any way shape or form when we differed on world views?<< To be honest, I have absolutely no idea where most of that came from, but it certainly was not from me (I did inform Bill that he had insulted my wife and me by the arrogance of a highly judgemental remark he had made, but that is all) I'll try to fill you in briefly. Hopefully CC:'ing you in my other replies has helped to show you something of the situation. I have kept a record of all the messages in my correspondence with Bill which you can access and read for yourself. You will find the complete record at http://chiefwise.tripod.com/morgan/transcript.html . The first correspondence was from 1996 to 1998 and the second correspondence started on 06 July 2000. Shortly after our first correspondence had ended due to Bill's sudden disappearance, I started converting the record into a set of web pages about what had happened. The main page is at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/index.html . I would recommend that you read it in order to get a better feel for how Bill has been conducting himself on-line. I do not expect you to believe my word against Bill's, but the facts, the record of our correspondence, should speak for themselves. Here's the skinny. Bill's on-line benign behavior had always been suspect ever since he realized that I had some knowledge about the creation/evolution issue. Before that he was very effusive and then he suddenly became very reticent and evasive. He would dodge even the simplest of questions. Most he would just plain ignore, but for the rest he would try to change the subject, sometimes with a totally unrelated "unanswerable" question, like explain completely how bacteria evolved into blue whales. This year, I realized that all this time he had been employing a trick that he calls "rabbit trails" when he teaches his proselytizing trainees to not fall for when an evolutionist tries it. Ironically, it's a primary tactic for Bill. The thing is that I would answer those questions, whereupon Bill's usual response was to completely drop that discussion thread altogether and completely ignore all my follow-up questions concerning it. His other response was to ignore the fact that I had answered the question and repeat it. Of course, I would ask him why he thought I hadn't answered his question, again and again, and he would completely ignore that very reasonable question and simply repeat the original one, again and again. You can read all about it on "CREATIONISTS FILE: BILL MORGAN'S 'UNANSWERABLE' QUESTIONS" at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/bills_questions.html . Bill's other common "rabbit trail" would be to whine and complain about having to type and to insist that I call him or meet him for dinner. I am very suspicious of such requests, it would have been extremely difficult for me to do as he asked, I could see nothing that it could accomplish, and several reasons why it would be far inferior to email. I declined and explained why, but Bill would not hear of it. He would whine incessantly about typing and answer most of my messages with demands that I phone him. I always refused, explained why, and would ask him to give me convincing reasons to call him. He would almost never answer that question, but the few times he did the best he could ever come up with was that he wanted it that way. That correspondence ended in August 1998 when Bill suddenly disappeared. The main thing going on just before his disappearance was that Bill had asked me whether kids should be taught about God. I answered his question very thoughtfully; you can read it and all about it on "BILL MORGAN'S QUESTION: Should Kids be Taught About God?" at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/q_teach_kids.html . Bill pretended that I had not answered it and simply repeated the question. I told him that I had answered it and asked him why he thought I hadn't. A few more times we went through that. Then my temper flared and I demanded that he tell me why he believed that I hadn't answered his question. He send one last messages that distorted what had happened. Then within a couple weeks, his email account was closed. Bill had performed a disappearing act. He had been posting his email address regularly in the CSAOC newsletter, but no more. Within a month, I found his web page [http://www.webmecca.com/creation] which had been up since July 1998 and found his new email address. I emailed him a couple times, but he never responded. I also emailed him from another address and he did respond to those messages. It was a full year before he posted his email in the newsletter (Sep 1999) and about two years before he posted his web site URL. There are several issues left unresolved by that correspondence, including about 85 questions of mine that Bill had never answered (along with his blatantly false claim that he had answered every single one of my questions, which earned him the sarcastic nickname of "Mr. 100%" -- see "BILL MORGAN, 'Mr. 100%'" at http://members.aol.com/billyjack6/mr_100percent.html). Another issue is our agreed-upon on-line debate that Bill has been weaseling out of (Bill demanded a debate in which I could choose the place and format, so I chose on-line; Bill never officially declined and had even reported having started working on it, so I'm holding him to the deal, mainly because he needs to learn to be responsible). On 06 July 2000, we resumed our correspondence, mainly because he had forgotten who I was. He started off in pretty much the same style as before, but then it got weird. He kept insisting that I join him for dinner. For the same reasons as before and more, I refused. You see, he had misquoted me in the newsletter. It took about a half dozen times of showing him what I had actually written and insisting that he correct his mistake before he finally admitted it (unfortunately, I think it took my reminding him that he was lying to his readership). Then it took another half-dozen times of asking him what his corrective action would be before he would finally say that he would print a retraction. In his retraction, he says: "We at the Orange County Creation Science Association strive to be accurate and honest in all our reporting to you." Isn't that rich? Getting Bill to do the right thing was like pulling teeth. No, it was worse than pulling teeth. But what that incident showed me was that if Bill were to misunderstand anything that I said in a personal meeting, then he could print it and I could not possibly get him to correct it. I realized that in all my dealings with Bill I absolutely need an accurate record of exactly what had been said. That could only be accomplished in a written format. It would also be impossible to accomplish in a verbal format. I feel that I am completely justified in demanding a written record. And it's a good thing. Bill committed a howler by suggesting that my wife join us at Denny's. I explained to Bill how horrible an idea that was: my wife has a very low opinion of fundamentalist and creationists because of her family's horrifying experience when her brother converted -- it nearly tore that very close family apart and the scars still remain after 20 years. Then Bill insulted my wife and me with an arrogant display of his own moral superiority over us; I called him on it and explained why it was so insulting, but Bill was incapable of understanding. Now it gets really weird. Bill then accused me of having insulted HIS wife. That is rather curious, since I do not even recall having said anything at all about his wife. I asked him to tell me why exactly I had said, but Bill refused to. Then he followed it up with a series of other accusations, none of which I have any knowledge of having committed and several of which I simply would not have committed. Bill was accusing me of things that had never happened. And again, he ignored every one of my requests for what I was supposed to have said. Even though I have made that request more than TWENTY TIMES. Since I have the record of what was actually written, I need to know what "very nasty names" to look for. Here is a preliminary list of Bill's false accusations against me (he has piled more on in the meantime): 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd grader." 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. 7. Calling him "very nasty names." 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in Gid". 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's most sinister people". 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti religious". As I said, Bill refuses to substantiate those accusations in any manner. TWENTY TIMES I have asked him what I was supposed to have said to warrant these accusations so that I could look those messages up and see what they really say. Each time Bill has ignored my extremely reasonable requests, even though I told him almost every time how much that information is needed. He has even refused throughout this mess to tell me what "very nasty names" I was supposed to have called him. To me, that puts Bill's honesty in question, because it tells me that he knows that his accusations are false and yet he persists. Then he tried to play the martyr in a mock trial, but he got the roles completely reversed -- in reality he was the plaintiff and I was the defendent, because he had accused me, after all. But Mr. Purcell threw it out as frivolous, which Bill misinterpreted as a victory for him. It's been going rapidly downhill since then. Bill seems to have lost all touch with reality. He doesn't seem to know what we are talking about. He keeps coming up with bizaare claims of things that never happened, or shoots off on a tangent with a non sequitur. He continues making false accusations and refusing to substantiate them in any way. He misinterprets or misconstrues almost everything that we say. Well, you've seen examples of that. So you see, Mr. Bequette, Bill has caused this mess and he refuses to take responsibility for his actions. Please survey the situation here and help Bill understand what is happening and that he needs to let us try to resolve it. The first thing he needs to do is to tell us what "very nasty names" he is accusing me of having called him, so that we can finally view the facts. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:43:13 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1 >>We can have a great time talking history. I love history and subscribe to two history magazines (when I was single I subscribed 4 history magazines).<< My wife used to subscribe me to "Military History" through the school's fund-raiser, but I soon ran out of time to read it due to my technical studies (the software development field is ever growing and changing, so just playing keep-up can be a full-time job in itself). Now she complains full-time about the growing pile of computer magazines that I haven't had time to read yet. Did you ever encounter SPI's "Strategy and Tactics"? Although it was a wargaming magazine, it had excellent historical articles on specific battles as well as on entire campaigns and periods in military history. SPI went under some time in the mid-1980's and I think that Avalon Hill bought its titles. I lost track of S&T some time around 1990, but some game stores still have back issues, such as Game Towne in San Diego. You might also try Brookhurst Hobby in Garden Grove or War Horse in Long Beach. >>My current favorite field of study is the Russian/German mayhem of World War II. Are you well versed on that campaign?<< No, hardly at all. It is sad that the Second Great Patriotic War of the Motherland has gotten so little attention in this country. The largest tank battle in history (I heard that claim before the Gulf War, so I don't know if it still stands). The largest airborne assault in history. What they had to go through on the Eastern Front made the Western Front look like a walk in the park. If not for the Soviets pinning down and draining German resources for all those years, we might not have been able to defeat Germany. Another pop quiz: The Second Great Patriotic War of the Motherland was the Soviet name for their war against Germany in WWII. What was the First Great Patriotic War of the Motherland? ################################################ Subj: Re: Sizzler Date: 14-Sep-00 11:44:21 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >WHAT NAME DID I CALL YOU?? SHOW ME! SHOW ME EXACTLY WHAT THE NAME WAS!<< >Bill>>The word you called me was idiot.<< Bill, I have NEVER called you an idiot in ANY of our correspondence. NEVER! In fact, in the message in question, I HAD SAID THE EXACT OPPOSITE! READ WHAT I WROTE! > ################################################ Subj: Re: Sizzler Date: 02-Sep-00 12:40:46 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net, ealpurcell@juno.com .. And please, please stop acting like an idiot. Your choir may think you're great when you preach to them, but that's because they have not had to deal with your nonsense. I have read what others in cyberspace had to say about trying to deal with you; the consensus is that you are an idiot. If you know of one of your opponents out there who doesn't think that, then please let me know and put me in touch with him. Now Mark has also called you an idiot because of the way you have been acting. We know that you are not an idiot, so why do you insist on acting like one? Believe me, it is not cute nor is it the least bit amusing.<< Bill, try to face the facts. I said that others in cyberspace have called you an idiot. Mark has called you an idiot. But what did I say? I said, "We know that you are not an idiot". But I also said that you are acting like an idiot, which is the main reason why the consensus out there is that you are an idiot. I am telling you that you need to stop acting like an idiot. READ WHAT IS WRITTEN! STOP IMAGINING THINGS! In other words, stop acting like an idiot! Now a little background for Mr. Bequette. That message was in reply to Bill's statement: >I apologize to the court and will nto repeat for the tenth time to Mr Wise that he willnot answer my origin of matter, origin of energy, origin of life questions.<< >WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??? Bill, YOU ARE HALLUCINATING!! You've totally lost it now! "tenth time"?? There hasn't even been a FIRST time. You had NEVER EVER asked ME that question! EVER! You have asked me a lot of other questions and I answered almost all of them (about 23 out of 25 questions, or 92%). But never that one!<< That was perhaps the most flagrant and blatant case of Bill making a false accusation against me. What was Bill's response? He completely ignored the issue of his false accusation and resorted to his standard "rabbit trail" trick by asking that question. That is yet another example of the dishonesty of his behavior. And, Bill, you completely missed the point here yet again. This is yet another demonstration of your inability to keep track of reality. You imagined a new offense for me to have committed against you, even though it had never ever happened. THAT is why it is so important for me to have a WRITTEN TRANSCRIPT of every single exchange between us. Because you keep imagining things to accuse me of. Without a written record, we would have no way to prove how UTTERLY FALSE your new accusation was. I am not about to go into harm's way without some kind of protection against falsehood. I AM PERFECTLY JUSTIFIED IN DEMANDING A WRITTEN RECORD. YOU HAVE JUST DEMONSTRATED THAT NEED. Mr. Bequette, Bill has made several false accusations against me and continues to make more [accusations listed in another message]. I have no knowledge of having done anything that he accuses me of and some of them are things that I would never have do. I suspect that I might know where a few of his accusations might have come from, in which case he had completely misunderstood and misinterpreted what had been said and in which case examination of that original text should resolve the matter immediately. Where Bill got the other accusations from I have absolutely no idea. He is reporting events that never happened. They appear to be to the product of his over-active imagination. That over-active imagination has been causing us no end of problems as Bill flies off on tangents over things that were never said and that had never happened. But the major problem is that Bill then fights all attempts at resolving those misunderstandings. For example on Bill's accusations against me I have asked him TWENTY TIMES what I was supposed to have said to warrant these accusations so that I could look those messages up and see what they really say. Each time Bill has ignored my extremely reasonable requests, even though I told him almost every time why that information is needed and how important it is. Throughout our correspondence (ie, since 1996), Bill has always been very evasive. It has always been extremely difficult to get any information out of him. For example, when he didn't seem to know about the Clipboard in Windows, I offered to help him. He completely ignored my generous offer and whenever his apparent ignorance would resurface, I would extend my offer to him yet again, about a half-dozen times if I remember right, plus another half-dozen times of mentioning it as one of the scores of questions that he has never answered. THREE YEARS LATER, when we resumed our correspondence in July 2000, Bill still appeared to be unaware of the Clipboard so I extended my generous offer yet again. This time Bill replied rather nastily that, yes, he did know what it is and how to use it. It took THREE YEARS to get an answer from Bill to an extremely simple question. THREE YEARS. Hopefully, that should give you some idea of what we've been up against with Bill. >>The root word for idiot was not public official (as I understand it).<< The root means "private" or "self", as in "idiosyncratic". From the dictionary, I gather that the original meaning refered to one only interested in his own private matters. I think a recent LM Boyd column indicated that it used to refer to someone who would not be bothered to take an interest in community affairs. So the meaning has shifted from "politically deficient" to "mentally deficient". However, your behavior in the cyberspace community is also decidedly idiotic in the traditional sense. Bill, stop your "rabbit trails" and RESPOND TO MY OBJECTIONS: >I object to your false accusations. > >I object to your refusal to support in any manner whatsoever any of your >claims, including your false accusations against me. > >I object to your constantly acting like an idiot. > >I object to your stupid, childish games. > >I object to your constant attempts at generating even more of your "rabbit >trails". > >I object to your imagining things that never happened. > >I object to your persistent refusal to deal with things that actually did >happen. > >I object to the dishonesty displayed by your behavior. > >I object to your completely ignoring my simple and very reasonable question >about your false accusations against me (ie,"what do you think I had >said?"), even though I have had to ask it about TWENTY TIMES. > >And I object most strongly that your response was to spawn yet another >"rabbit trail." > >Namely: > >>How did life originate<< ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:45:33 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Wow! Like Johnnie Cochran played the race card you play the pervert card.<< Excuse me, Bill, but WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?! YOU ARE IMAGINING THINGS AGAIN! READ WHAT IS WRITTEN! Stop acting like such an idiot! Here YET AGAIN is what I wrote: >>>> >I am not, I have never have any gay inclinations.<< Bill, it is the way you act. You are acting like a pervert. Mark's other assumption is quite understandable. He's a male, as are you, so your perversion must be homosexual. Though there are lots of darker ones it could be, but we normal people don't even want to think about those things. Many sexual predators, perverts, and molesters make use of the Internet to find and meet with new victims. Yes, lonely hearts also use the Internet to find and meet with potential lovers, but there is a big difference in how they behave. When the potential lover says "no" firmly enough, the lonely heart usually gets the message and has the good manners to back off from asking for a personal meeting and keep the relationship on-line. The pervert will do what you are doing. He will not take "no" for an answer. He will continue to insist on a personal meeting until he has worn his victim's resistence down enough that he/she finally agrees to the personal meeting and so seals his/her fate. Being a teacher, your wife should have been taught about how these perverts are using the Internet to victimize children and what to watch for. I believe that you will find that you fit the profile. If you don't believe it, then ask her what she would think if, about 14 years from now, a stranger was corresponding on-line with your child and insisting without let-up on a personal meeting with him/her. I think that a mother's response might tell you how you appear to the world out here. If you keep acting like a pervert, please don't act surprised when somebody takes you for one. << Bill, did I call you a "pervert"? No, I did not! READ WHAT IS WRITTEN! I do not believe you to be a pervert, but rather I am warning you that while you believe that your behavior is innocent, it fits the cyberspace profile of a sexual predator. That means that somebody could accuse you of being a pervert and you would have a hard time clearing your name. Short of that, others will assume that you are a pervert and will avoid you accordingly and will try to warn others about you. I don't think that you would want that to happen either. Now stop acting like an idiot and READ WHAT IS WRITTEN! >>But anything to avoid the origin of life question huh? Chicken little would be right in saying your credability is falling.<< Bill, you destroyed your credibility long ago. That "question" was just yet another of your "rabbit trails" and I am applying the teaching that we must not take "rabbit trails" but rather must insist on an answer to our question first. Now, what is the problem that you have with that? In this case, you owe me answers to about 85 questions that you have dodged. Because of your outrageous behavior, I must hold your feet to the fire and insist on reasonable answers for each and every one of them (to deprive you of your usual weasel room, *I* will decide whether an answer is reasonable). BTW, Mr. Bequette, I have answered every one of that class of question that Bill has put to me in the past. Bill's reaction each time was to either ignore the answer or, most often, just drop the entire thing. He obviously has no interest in receiving an answer to his questions. Which raises questions about what he is trying to do with those questions. His actions here do not seem the least bit honest. >>Your e mails used to be amusing but the more you type the more sorry I feel for you. Really.<< Well, Bill, you deserve all the credit. You have been acting like such an idiotic jerk that I have to spend all my time and energy in trying to clear up the incredible mess that you have created! Now if you could just stop acting like an idiot, help me resolve the issues in your false accusations against me, stop playing your childish games, abandon your "rabbit trails" trick, respond to what is written and not to what you imagine, deal with actual events and not your imaginary ones, and deal with me honestly, then I would be in a much better mood and we could have fun again. But if you decide to continue acting like an idiotic jerk, then don't expect it to be any fun. My Irish side is definitely up and my Scottish side is starting to kick in (I've already asked my wife to buy me some of that blue sunscreen). You don't even want to ask about my German side (Alemannen-Sueben). It's all up to you, Bill. >>This is sincere...have you evaluated why you are not getting the love in your life that you obviously seek? My grandma told me to be loved you must be lovable.<< Hey, I am lovable and I do get all the love in my life that I seek. That is not the problem here, nor was it ever an issue. The problem here is that I am trying to get something accomplished with you and your acting like an idiotic jerk is making that excruciatingly impossible. I've already told you what the solution is. But there's something about all your talk of love and being lovable that bothers me. A little earlier, you also said that you are offering me your love. But the way that you are trying to be lovable is by insulting me and my wife, making false accusations against me, playing childish games, avoiding questions and serious issues with "rabbit trail" tricks, etc. Gee, Bill, you sure have a strange idea of what love is and how to be lovable. Just look at what I am doing as a form of "tough love". You've fallen into evil ways. Actually, I believe that you had already been travelling that path for a long time before we started our correspondence. You need to be brought back to the straight-and-narrow, which requires us to hold you responsible for your actions and not let you get away with anything. [HINT: Bill, after you had boasted that you thought my position was weak and had challenged it (which you never have done), I asked you what you thought my position was, why you thought it was weak, and in what way you had challenged it. Of course, you completely avoided answering that question. But your actions and things you have said all tell me that you have no idea what my position is.] >>A little peace of mind and you would never type such bitter angry nonsense again!<< Bill, only you can give me that peace of mind. You already know how. But what I told you was not nonsense. What you are doing is making you fit the profile of an on-line pervert. The police actually have on-line sting operations to catch the guys who fit that profile. Haven't you asked Jennifer about it yet? I mean it, ask her what she would think if, 14 years from now, your baby were to meet some strange male on-line who kept insisting on a personal meeting with him/her. Ask her. Hopefully you will hear a mother's response. In the meantime, try to be aware of how your actions would appear to most people and try to prevent serious trouble before you blunder your way into it. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 11:49:02 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: plasma@worldnet.att.net There was a glitch in the sending, so I am resending this. >>Bill, I thank you for your objective commentary.<< While I trust that Mr. Bequette did indeed try to answer honestly and objectively, a truly objective commentary would not be possible if he had not been given an honest and reasonably accurate description of the situation. You did misinform Mr. Bequette. Your question implies that I had called you several names which I have no knowledge of ever having used, as discussed in my reply to that message. Furthermore, that message misleads Mr. Bequette to believe that our dispute is over our differing world views and that I have been subbornly refusing to look at the facts. Bill, you know full well that that is not true. Our dispute is over your false accusations against me and your stubborn refusal to substantiate those accusations in any manner. Furthermore, you know full well that *I* am the one who keeps trying to get us to examine the facts of the matter whereas it is YOU who stubbornly and steadfastly refuses to allow us to examine the facts. Bill, you really need to learn to tell people the truth. I know that it is difficult for you to tell the truth, but please believe me that it is a good thing. -------- Mr. Bequette, in my other replies I have briefed you on the situation here. I am sorry that Bill Morgan had misinformed you in the manner that he had. >But the issue of religion, and morality does need to be brought >up in today's troubled society. I very much agree and probably still would even if I were not a religious man. But the problem is that that was never the question here. The problem here is that Bill routinely misconstrues and misinterprets everything that is said and then makes a number of false claims and false accusations that have nothing to do with what had been said or, more often than not, even with the topic at hand. >I have known Bill for 9 years. While he is energetic in discussing his >beliefs I have always known to him to be courteous and kind. Well, apparently the Bill that you know is not the same Bill who is on-line. Repeatedly making false accusations is not my idea of being kind. >If Bill sent >inappropriate attachments I am sure it was not intentional on his part to >cause problems. I'm sorry I have to ask this, but just what did Bill tell you? What "inappropriate attachments" are you talking about? This year Bill has never attached anything whatsoever to any of his emails to me (there might have been one or two in the 1996-1998 correspondence). What are you and/or Bill talking about there? As for his not intending to cause problems, how could he not know? Well, OK, if he really is mental and completely out of touch with reality, but I really would prefer to give him more credit than that. I have asked him more than twenty times for vital information (ie, what I was supposed to have said to lead to his numerous accusations against me) that we need to be able to check the facts and resolve the problem. I have explained almost every time why we need that information and that his refusal to provide that information is prevent that resolution. How could he not know that he is causing these problems? While the initiation of the dispute may have been unintentional, his determined prevention of a resolution has to be intentional. I'm sorry, but I cannot understand how that could be an accident. >The discussion of >religion is a highly emotional topic that most people would care not to >discuss. Yes, religion is a deeply personal matter. Therefore many people tend to perceive criticism of their religion as something of a personal attack. That is why standard social etiquette advises against discussing religion. That is also why so many people find most fundamentalist proselytizing methods so offensive, because it attacks their religious beliefs [interesting article on this subject at the site of a Canadian religious tolerance organization: "IS THERE A LINK BETWEEN CHRISTIAN PROSELYTIZING AND RELIGIOUS HATE CRIMES?" at http://www.religioustolerance.org/chi_decl.htm . It concerns the proselytizing efforts of Southern Baptists which were specifically targeting Catholics, Methodists, and other Christian denominations]. However, this had not been part of the discussion, except for Bill trying to invoke the "Christian Death Threat" again. >Typically people who don't believe in the Lord react very >negatively when asked why they are not Christians. Many people have had to endure a fundamentalist proselytizing at some time in their lives. It is not pleasant and it can be very offensive. From the forementioned article (actually the most interesting part): "Religious proselytizing is the act of attempting to convert another person to your religion. As long as it neither involves verbal harassment nor creates a disturbance, is a protected form of speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Proselytizing can take many forms: " At one extreme, the follower of one faith may simply share their religious beliefs with another person of a different religion. A dialog may develop in which the follower of both religions -- as equals -- discuss their beliefs. One goal is increased awareness of religious differences and similarities between the two faiths. Another is the hope by at least one person that the other will convert to their faith. " At another extreme, the follower of one faith approaches the other from a position of superiority. She/he assertively presents theirs as the only true religion. Other faiths, including the religion of the listener, may described as inferior, filled with errors, and even Satan-inspired. The proselytizer might state that the other will spend eternity being tortured in Hell unless they convert to the proselytizer's religion. [DWise1 NOTE: Mr. Bequette, this is what I refered to as the "Christian Death Threat", which Bill has tried to use on me twice.] "The former approach involves genuine bi-directional communication. It should lead to a greater understanding of both religions, and may increase the level of religious tolerance in the community. In the second approach, the proselytizer has a perceived position of superiority. He/she lacks respect for the other person's religion. The exchange can be expected to sometimes generate ill feeling, animosity, and conceivably even violence." Obviously, almost all proselytizers fall somewhere inbetween. The former extreme is much more preferable, but too many lean too heavily towards the latter. Is it the message itself that the people you describe are acting negatively to, or is it what sad experience has taught them to expect from the current messanger? Also, I have a slight problem with your message which Bill had distributed here. The header reads: >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:52:39 -0700 It indicates that your message was also addressed to me. However, I never received it. The address is correct as I see it written here. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 14:03:16 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: DWise1@aol.com, billyjack1@hotmail.com CC: editor@liberator.net Dear DWise1@aol.com , To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears that your extremely angry. If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then just add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his email again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses. You probably could spend your time better. Jesus loves you! Take Care! Bill B. John 3:16 ----- Original Message ----- From: DWise1@aol.com To: billyjack1@hotmail.com Cc: dwise1@aol.com ; editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:39 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Such anger, such hatred.<< Born out of the frustration of trying to deal with somebody who insists on acting like an idiot, on refusing to deal honestly, on not answering the simplest direct questions, on creating new "rabbit trails" at every turn, on ignoring what is really happening and coming up with imaginary events, on making false accusations which he refuses to substantiate in any way, and on generating acrimony and obstructing all my efforts to resolve it. How else do you expect me to feel about the way you've been behaving? >>You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it.<< You make that sound like you are offering me a cranium full of novacaine. No thanks. Now, Bill, if your behavior is a fine example of what happens to somebody when they accept Jesus, then that would be the very last thing I would want to have happen to me. I love truth and honesty too much to become like you. Besides, I am still required to shave (meaning that I still need to look at myself in the mirror every morning). No, Bill, what would go a long way to giving me peace of mind is if I could discussion matters with you peacefully, without acrimony, with you answering honestly to what is actually being said. But for that to happen, you need to stop acting like an idiot all the time. It's in your hands, Bill. Jesus cannot do it; YOU have to do it. >>Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will believe me but here is teh truth: I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL. SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP.<< Oh, Bill, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit you on the nose. You did indeed spam your material at the very least over the following FIFTEEN newsgroups [newsgroup names truncated by DejaNews]: a.bsu.talk a.bsu.programming a.bsu.religion alc.suicide alt.atheism alt.evil alt.religion.all-worl alt.religion.barfing- alt.religion.broadcas alt.religion.christia alt.religion.christian-teen alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel alt.sex k12.ed.science school.teachers sci.anthropology.paleo In addition, you posted it on www.bio.net on 17 Mar 1997; see http://www.bio.net//hypermail/PROTEIN-ANALYSIS/proteins.199703/0113.html . You were promptly informed that it was very inappropriate. I know that YOU are the one who did it because the sender was clearly identified as "billyjack6@aol.com" which is what your email address was at the time. Now, there have also been a number of casual vectors reposting it sporadically on one or a few newsgroups at a time. But there were two, god@boy.com and lady@love.com, who were quite industrious at spamming it over 32 newsgroups [newsgroup names again truncated by DejaNews]: alt.bible.prophecy, alt.christnet, alt.christnet.bible, alt.christnet.philoso, alt.hemp, alt.magick, alt.pagan, alt.paranormal, alt.philosophy.objectivism, alt.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.christian, alt.religion.mormon, alt.religion.rabbet, alt.religion.scientology, alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, alt.romance.matureadult, alt.romance.online, alt.romance.teen, alt.satanism, alt.society.anarchy, alt.sports.football.p, alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys, alt.sports.football.pro.denver-broncos, bionet.molbio.evoluti, sci.anthropology, sci.anthropology.pale, sci.astro, sci.bio, sci.physics, talk.atheism, talk.origins. Those are the facts. Although god@boy.com and lady@love.com had definitely out-done you, the fact still remains that you personally had spammed your essay to at least FIFTEEN newsgroups. And almost all of the responses went to you, as they were instructed in your essay. Which brings us back to the real issue I was raising and which you dodged yet again, you old "rabbit-trail" maker, you. Here is it AGAIN: "These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES. Then after a short while, you would spam it yet again! With all the problems of before. And yet again you would ignore all the responses! And you reportedly did this repeatedly!" Note that I said "reportedly". It is possible that many of those repeated spammings had been performed by others, such as the forementioned god@boy.com and lady@love.com, and that was most likely the case. But the fact still remains that YOU had been the recipient of most of the responses that those spammings had generated. And the fact still remains that YOU had reportedly ignored ALL THOSE RESPONSES. THAT is the irresponsible action of which I spoke. Spam happens, but you display a clear pattern of blowing people off (ie, ignoring their legitimate inquiries and comments to your writings). THAT is the issue that I was raising. You also completely ignored the remainder of my message: whether you are really serious about wanting to meet those men in person. Well, are you serious about it? Really serious? Serious enough to offer to fly Mark [editor@liberator.net] in from Chicago? Hey, you've been bugging him lately to join you for dinner, haven't you? Just how much do you really want to make that happen? Are you serious enough to offer to fly William Hyde [hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and Wesley R. Elsberry [welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] from Texas, Matt Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David Byrden [Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person? Show us just how serious you are and be sure to CC: us in those emails. I think we know just how serious you really are. Why don't you just admit that you are grand-standing? And you made sure to avoid answering the question of how many SKEPTICS (as you refer to us in polite society) have actually taken you up on your offer. Yes, you brought in one that converted, but Mr Bequette does not fit the description. You did not meet him on-line, but rather had already met him at work and had had an opportunity to develop a working relationship with him before starting to work on him. That says nothing about going from an established on-line correspondence to a personal meeting. Here is this set of questions again in a readable format: 1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your invitation to? 2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation? 3. How did the meetings go? 4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went? For this, you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your imagination having rewritten history yet again. As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting your imagination for reality. --------------------
Dear DWise1@aol.com ,
To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears that your extremely angry.  If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then just add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his email again!  Don't waste your time writing such long responses.  You probably could spend your time better.  Jesus loves you!
Take Care! Bill B. John 3:16
----- Original Message -----
From: DWise1@aol.com
To: billyjack1@hotmail.com
Cc: dwise1@aol.com ; editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Such anger, such hatred.<<  Born out of the frustration of trying to deal with somebody who insists on acting like an idiot, on refusing to deal honestly, on not answering the simplest direct questions, on creating new "rabbit trails" at every turn, on ignoring what is really happening and coming up with imaginary events, on making false accusations which he refuses to substantiate in any way, and on generating acrimony and obstructing all my efforts to resolve it. How else do you expect me to feel about the way you've been behaving? >>You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it.<< You make that sound like you are offering me a cranium full of novacaine.  No thanks. Now, Bill, if your behavior is a fine example of what happens to somebody when they accept Jesus, then that would be the very last thing I would want to have happen to me.  I love truth and honesty too much to become like you.  Besides, I am still required to shave (meaning that I still need to look at myself in the mirror every morning). No, Bill, what would go a long way to giving me peace of mind is if I could discussion matters with you peacefully, without acrimony, with you answering honestly to what is actually being said. But for that to happen, you need to stop acting like an idiot all the time.  It's in your hands, Bill.  Jesus cannot do it; YOU have to do it. >>Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will believe me but here is teh truth: I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL.  SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP.<< Oh, Bill, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit you on the nose.  You did indeed spam your material at the very least over the following FIFTEEN newsgroups [newsgroup names truncated by DejaNews]:     a.bsu.talk                a.bsu.programming         a.bsu.religion            alc.suicide              alt.atheism              alt.evil                  alt.religion.all-worl     alt.religion.barfing-     alt.religion.broadcas     alt.religion.christia     alt.religion.christian-teen     alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel     alt.sex                   k12.ed.science            school.teachers                 sci.anthropology.paleo In addition, you posted it on www.bio.net on 17 Mar 1997; see http://www.bio.net//hypermail/PROTEIN-ANALYSIS/proteins.199703/0113.html .  You were promptly informed that it was very inappropriate. I know that YOU are the one who did it because the sender was clearly identified as "billyjack6@aol.com" which is what your email address was at the time. Now, there have also been a number of casual vectors reposting it sporadically on one or a few newsgroups at a time.  But there were two, god@boy.com and lady@love.com, who were quite industrious at spamming it over 32 newsgroups [newsgroup names again truncated by DejaNews]: alt.bible.prophecy, alt.christnet, alt.christnet.bible, alt.christnet.philoso, alt.hemp, alt.magick, alt.pagan, alt.paranormal, alt.philosophy.objectivism, alt.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.christian, alt.religion.mormon, alt.religion.rabbet, alt.religion.scientology, alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, alt.romance.matureadult, alt.romance.online, alt.romance.teen, alt.satanism, alt.society.anarchy, alt.sports.football.p, alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys, alt.sports.football.pro.denver-broncos, bionet.molbio.evoluti, sci.anthropology,  sci.anthropology.pale, sci.astro, sci.bio, sci.physics, talk.atheism, talk.origins.         Those are the facts.  Although god@boy.com and lady@love.com had definitely out-done you, the fact still remains that you personally had spammed your essay to at least FIFTEEN newsgroups.  And almost all of the responses went to you, as they were instructed in your essay. Which brings us back to the real issue I was raising and which you dodged yet again, you old "rabbit-trail" maker, you.  Here is it AGAIN: "These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES.  Then after a short while, you would spam it yet again!  With all the problems of before.  And yet again you would ignore all the responses!  And you reportedly did this repeatedly!" Note that I said "reportedly".  It is possible that many of those repeated spammings had been performed by others, such as the forementioned god@boy.com and lady@love.com, and that was most likely the case.  But the fact still remains that YOU had been the recipient of most of the responses that those spammings had generated.  And the fact still remains that YOU had reportedly ignored ALL THOSE RESPONSES.  THAT is the irresponsible action of which I spoke. Spam happens, but you display a clear pattern of blowing people off (ie, ignoring their legitimate inquiries and comments to your writings).  THAT is the issue that I was raising. You also completely ignored the remainder of my message:  whether you are really serious about wanting to meet those men in person.  Well, are you serious about it?  Really serious?  Serious enough to offer to fly Mark [editor@liberator.net] in from Chicago?  Hey, you've been bugging him lately to join you for dinner, haven't you?  Just how much do you really want to make that happen?  Are you serious enough to offer to fly William Hyde [hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and Wesley R. Elsberry [welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] from Texas, Matt Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David Byrden [Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person?  Show us just how serious you are and be sure to CC: us in those emails. I think we know just how serious you really are.  Why don't you just admit that you are grand-standing? And you made sure to avoid answering the question of how many SKEPTICS (as you refer to us in polite society) have actually taken you up on your offer.  Yes, you brought in one that converted, but Mr Bequette does not fit the description.  You did not meet him on-line, but rather had already met him at work and had had an opportunity to develop a working relationship with him before starting to work on him.  That says nothing about going from an established on-line correspondence to a personal meeting. Here is this set of questions again in a readable format: 1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your invitation to? 2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation?  3. How did the meetings go?  4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went?  For this, you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your imagination having rewritten history yet again. As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting your imagination for reality.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (rly-yg03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.3]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:03:15 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.51]) by rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:02:33 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.78.33]) by mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000914210228.NVBL8992.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 21:02:28 +0000 Message-ID: <00b301c01e8e$b8e9e720$3e51480c@com> From: ".." To: , Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:59:46 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C01E54.0AE77140" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 14-Sep-00 21:34:56 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: DWise1@aol.com, billyjack1@hotmail.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net plasma@worldnet.att.net, you wrote: "To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears that your extremely angry." Well written and accurate does not equate to 'angry'. "If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then just add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his email again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses." Are you claiming we should not talk to people that look at life differently? Your view is narrowminded. "You probably could spend your time better." I suppose you think reading the Bible would be time better spent? "Jesus loves you!" It is impossible for fictitious characters to love. Numbers 15:32 Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: DWise1@aol.com To: billyjack1@hotmail.com Cc: dwise1@aol.com ; editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:39 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to see first-hand what is going on here. >>Such anger, such hatred.<< Born out of the frustration of trying to deal with somebody who insists on acting like an idiot, on refusing to deal honestly, on not answering the simplest direct questions, on creating new "rabbit trails" at every turn, on ignoring what is really happening and coming up with imaginary events, on making false accusations which he refuses to substantiate in any way, and on generating acrimony and obstructing all my efforts to resolve it. How else do you expect me to feel about the way you've been behaving? >>You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it.<< You make that sound like you are offering me a cranium full of novacaine. No thanks. Now, Bill, if your behavior is a fine example of what happens to somebody when they accept Jesus, then that would be the very last thing I would want to have happen to me. I love truth and honesty too much to become like you. Besides, I am still required to shave (meaning that I still need to look at myself in the mirror every morning). No, Bill, what would go a long way to giving me peace of mind is if I could discussion matters with you peacefully, without acrimony, with you answering honestly to what is actually being said. But for that to happen, you need to stop acting like an idiot all the time. It's in your hands, Bill. Jesus cannot do it; YOU have to do it. >>Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will believe me but here is teh truth: I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL. SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP.<< Oh, Bill, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit you on the nose. You did indeed spam your material at the very least over the following FIFTEEN newsgroups [newsgroup names truncated by DejaNews]: a.bsu.talk a.bsu.programming a.bsu.religion alc.suicide alt.atheism alt.evil alt.religion.all-worl alt.religion.barfing- alt.religion.broadcas alt.religion.christia alt.religion.christian-teen alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel alt.sex k12.ed.science school.teachers sci.anthropology.paleo In addition, you posted it on www.bio.net on 17 Mar 1997; see http://www.bio.net//hypermail/PROTEIN-ANALYSIS/proteins.199703/0113.html . You were promptly informed that it was very inappropriate. I know that YOU are the one who did it because the sender was clearly identified as "billyjack6@aol.com" which is what your email address was at the time. Now, there have also been a number of casual vectors reposting it sporadically on one or a few newsgroups at a time. But there were two, god@boy.com and lady@love.com, who were quite industrious at spamming it over 32 newsgroups [newsgroup names again truncated by DejaNews]: alt.bible.prophecy, alt.christnet, alt.christnet.bible, alt.christnet.philoso, alt.hemp, alt.magick, alt.pagan, alt.paranormal, alt.philosophy.objectivism, alt.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.christian, alt.religion.mormon, alt.religion.rabbet, alt.religion.scientology, alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, alt.romance.matureadult, alt.romance.online, alt.romance.teen, alt.satanism, alt.society.anarchy, alt.sports.football.p, alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys, alt.sports.football.pro.denver-broncos, bionet.molbio.evoluti, sci.anthropology, sci.anthropology.pale, sci.astro, sci.bio, sci.physics, talk.atheism, talk.origins. Those are the facts. Although god@boy.com and lady@love.com had definitely out-done you, the fact still remains that you personally had spammed your essay to at least FIFTEEN newsgroups. And almost all of the responses went to you, as they were instructed in your essay. Which brings us back to the real issue I was raising and which you dodged yet again, you old "rabbit-trail" maker, you. Here is it AGAIN: "These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES. Then after a short while, you would spam it yet again! With all the problems of before. And yet again you would ignore all the responses! And you reportedly did this repeatedly!" Note that I said "reportedly". It is possible that many of those repeated spammings had been performed by others, such as the forementioned god@boy.com and lady@love.com, and that was most likely the case. But the fact still remains that YOU had been the recipient of most of the responses that those spammings had generated. And the fact still remains that YOU had reportedly ignored ALL THOSE RESPONSES. THAT is the irresponsible action of which I spoke. Spam happens, but you display a clear pattern of blowing people off (ie, ignoring their legitimate inquiries and comments to your writings). THAT is the issue that I was raising. You also completely ignored the remainder of my message: whether you are really serious about wanting to meet those men in person. Well, are you serious about it? Really serious? Serious enough to offer to fly Mark [editor@liberator.net] in from Chicago? Hey, you've been bugging him lately to join you for dinner, haven't you? Just how much do you really want to make that happen? Are you serious enough to offer to fly William Hyde [hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and Wesley R. Elsberry [welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] from Texas, Matt Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David Byrden [Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person? Show us just how serious you are and be sure to CC: us in those emails. I think we know just how serious you really are. Why don't you just admit that you are grand-standing? And you made sure to avoid answering the question of how many SKEPTICS (as you refer to us in polite society) have actually taken you up on your offer. Yes, you brought in one that converted, but Mr Bequette does not fit the description. You did not meet him on-line, but rather had already met him at work and had had an opportunity to develop a working relationship with him before starting to work on him. That says nothing about going from an established on-line correspondence to a personal meeting. Here is this set of questions again in a readable format: 1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your invitation to? 2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation? 3. How did the meetings go? 4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went? For this, you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your imagination having rewritten history yet again. As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting your imagination for reality. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (rly-yd03.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.3]) by air-yd01.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:34:56 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 00:34:36 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA29391; Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:34:34 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <003c01c01ece$74dcd660$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: , , References: <00b301c01e8e$b8e9e720$3e51480c@com> Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:36:02 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 15-Sep-00 14:45:45 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net Mark brings up an excellent point on Numbers 15:32, and I want to answer it (Nubmers 15:32 has to do with killing a man who breaks the Sabbath. Let me ask you this Mark, should a man be punished for sleeping? After your answer, I will explain Numbers 15:32 to you. Your friend, Bill >From: "Mark" >To: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 23:36:02 -0500 > >plasma@worldnet.att.net, you wrote: > >"To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears >that your extremely angry." > >Well written and accurate does not equate to 'angry'. > >"If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then just add his email >address >to your email filter so you never have to see his email again! Don't waste >your time writing such long responses." > >Are you claiming we should not talk to people that look at life >differently? >Your view is narrowminded. > >"You probably could spend your time better." > >I suppose you think reading the Bible would be time better spent? > >"Jesus loves you!" > >It is impossible for fictitious characters to love. > >Numbers 15:32 > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: billyjack1@hotmail.com >Cc: dwise1@aol.com ; editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net >Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 11:39 AM >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > >Mr. Bequette, since Bill has brought you in as a consultant, you need to >see >first-hand what is going on here. > > >>Such anger, such hatred.<< > >Born out of the frustration of trying to deal with somebody who insists on >acting like an idiot, on refusing to deal honestly, on not answering the >simplest direct questions, on creating new "rabbit trails" at every turn, >on >ignoring what is really happening and coming up with imaginary events, on >making false accusations which he refuses to substantiate in any way, and >on >generating acrimony and obstructing all my efforts to resolve it. > >How else do you expect me to feel about the way you've been behaving? > > >>You need peace of mind.....Jesus can give it.<< > >You make that sound like you are offering me a cranium full of novacaine. >No thanks. > >Now, Bill, if your behavior is a fine example of what happens to somebody >when they accept Jesus, then that would be the very last thing I would want >to have happen to me. I love truth and honesty too much to become like >you. >Besides, I am still required to shave (meaning that I still need to look at >myself in the mirror every morning). > >No, Bill, what would go a long way to giving me peace of mind is if I could >discussion matters with you peacefully, without acrimony, with you >answering >honestly to what is actually being said. > >But for that to happen, you need to stop acting like an idiot all the time. >It's in your hands, Bill. Jesus cannot do it; YOU have to do it. > > > >>Now, with such bitterness, anger and hatred toward me I doubt you will >believe me but here is teh truth: > >I DID NOT SPAM MY MATERIAL. SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT IT WAS EXCELLENT DID THEY >SENT ME AN E MAIL EXPECTING PRAISE AND I TOLD THEM TO STOP.<< > >Oh, Bill, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit you on the >nose. >You did indeed spam your material at the very least over the following >FIFTEEN newsgroups [newsgroup names truncated by DejaNews]: > > a.bsu.talk > a.bsu.programming > a.bsu.religion > alc.suicide > alt.atheism > alt.evil > alt.religion.all-worl > alt.religion.barfing- > alt.religion.broadcas > alt.religion.christia > alt.religion.christian-teen > alt.religion.christian.calvary-chapel > alt.sex > k12.ed.science > school.teachers > sci.anthropology.paleo > >In addition, you posted it on www.bio.net on 17 Mar 1997; see >http://www.bio.net//hypermail/PROTEIN-ANALYSIS/proteins.199703/0113.html . >You were promptly informed that it was very inappropriate. > >I know that YOU are the one who did it because the sender was clearly >identified as "billyjack6@aol.com" which is what your email address was at >the time. > >Now, there have also been a number of casual vectors reposting it >sporadically on one or a few newsgroups at a time. But there were two, >god@boy.com and lady@love.com, who were quite industrious at spamming it >over 32 newsgroups [newsgroup names again truncated by DejaNews]: >alt.bible.prophecy, alt.christnet, alt.christnet.bible, >alt.christnet.philoso, alt.hemp, alt.magick, alt.pagan, alt.paranormal, >alt.philosophy.objectivism, alt.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.christian, >alt.religion.mormon, alt.religion.rabbet, alt.religion.scientology, >alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, alt.romance.matureadult, alt.romance.online, >alt.romance.teen, alt.satanism, alt.society.anarchy, alt.sports.football.p, >alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys, >alt.sports.football.pro.denver-broncos, bionet.molbio.evoluti, >sci.anthropology, sci.anthropology.pale, sci.astro, sci.bio, sci.physics, >talk.atheism, talk.origins. > >Those are the facts. Although god@boy.com and lady@love.com had definitely >out-done you, the fact still remains that you personally had spammed your >essay to at least FIFTEEN newsgroups. And almost all of the responses went >to you, as they were instructed in your essay. > >Which brings us back to the real issue I was raising and which you dodged >yet again, you old "rabbit-trail" maker, you. Here is it AGAIN: >"These postings generated a lot of reponses to you (especially from the >professional football newsgroups that others spammed it to), of which it is >reported that you IGNORED ALL OF THOSE RESPONSES. Then after a short >while, >you would spam it yet again! With all the problems of before. And yet >again you would ignore all the responses! And you reportedly did this >repeatedly!" > >Note that I said "reportedly". It is possible that many of those repeated >spammings had been performed by others, such as the forementioned >god@boy.com and lady@love.com, and that was most likely the case. But the >fact still remains that YOU had been the recipient of most of the responses >that those spammings had generated. And the fact still remains that YOU >had >reportedly ignored ALL THOSE RESPONSES. THAT is the irresponsible action >of >which I spoke. > >Spam happens, but you display a clear pattern of blowing people off (ie, >ignoring their legitimate inquiries and comments to your writings). THAT >is >the issue that I was raising. > > >You also completely ignored the remainder of my message: whether you are >really serious about wanting to meet those men in person. Well, are you >serious about it? Really serious? Serious enough to offer to fly Mark >[editor@liberator.net] in from Chicago? Hey, you've been bugging him >lately >to join you for dinner, haven't you? Just how much do you really want to >make that happen? Are you serious enough to offer to fly William Hyde >[hyde@rossby.tamu.edu] and Wesley R. Elsberry >[welsberr@inia.tamug.tamu.edu] >from Texas, Matt Singerman [messt66+@pitt.edu] from Pennsylvania, and David >Byrden [Goyra@iol.ie] from Ireland just so they can meet you in person? >Show us just how serious you are and be sure to CC: us in those emails. > >I think we know just how serious you really are. Why don't you just admit >that you are grand-standing? > > >And you made sure to avoid answering the question of how many SKEPTICS (as >you refer to us in polite society) have actually taken you up on your >offer. >Yes, you brought in one that converted, but Mr Bequette does not fit the >description. You did not meet him on-line, but rather had already met him >at work and had had an opportunity to develop a working relationship with >him before starting to work on him. That says nothing about going from an >established on-line correspondence to a personal meeting. > >Here is this set of questions again in a readable format: > >1. How many skeptics whom you have met ON-LINE have you extended your >invitation to? >2. How many of these invited skeptics have accepted your invitation? >3. How did the meetings go? >4. What do those skeptics have to say about how the meeting went? For >this, >you would need to put me in touch with them, so that we can bypass your >imagination having rewritten history yet again. > >As I had said before, the reason for #4 is your penchant for substituting >your imagination for reality. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:45:45 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f77.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.77]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:45:19 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:45:18 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:45:18 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:45:18 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Sep 2000 21:45:18.0488 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D75A180:01C01F5E] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 16-Sep-00 14:55:34 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: billyjack1@hotmail.com Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something about what the situation here really is. That is also why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our examination of the facts. No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to arrive at the truth. In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or neither of us. In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed made those accusations. If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right there in the record. Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against me and refuses to substantiate follows: 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd grader." 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. 7. Calling him "very nasty names." 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in Gid". 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's most sinister people". 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti religious". Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 16-Sep-00 14:56:46 Pacific Daylight Time From: DWise1 To: plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1, editor@liberator.net CC: billyjack1@hotmail.com >>To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears that= your extremely angry. If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then jus= t add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his em= ail again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses. You probably= could spend your time better. Jesus loves you!<< Yes, Bill B., I am extremely angry with Bill Morgan. But it is not about any disagreement, but rather that he has libeled/slandered me (I'm not sure which term applies to false and defamatory statements made in email) with false accusations and he is willfully preventing the resolution of the situation caused by those false accusations. I'm sorry, but if Bill M. told you that I am angry with him because our world views differ, then he has lied to you. This has nothing to do with differing world views, but with his inconscible defamation of my character and his willful and determined obstruction of my efforts to clear my good name. I'm sorry, Bill B., but I find Bill M.'s conduct in these matters to be unethical and despicable. I am determined to see my good name cleared of his false charges. I certainly could spend my time better, but if I were to simply walk away from this then Bill M. would declare a victory for himself and use it to further his cause. I will not hand that to him. I will see justice done. ################################################ Subj: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 16-Sep-00 16:10:06 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (Bill Bequette) To: DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net, billyjack1@hotmail.com Hi Dave, I am sorry that you feel Bill has slandered you. He seems pretty innocuous to me. Exactly in what way has Bill slandered you? He obviously has you upset. Bill B. > -----Original Message----- > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:57 PM > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > you > > > >>To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it > appears that= > your extremely angry. If you disagree with > billyjack1@hotmail.com then jus= > t add his email address to your email filter so you never have to > see his em= > ail again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses. > You probably= > could spend your time better. Jesus loves you!<< > > Yes, Bill B., I am extremely angry with Bill Morgan. But it is > not about any disagreement, but rather that he has > libeled/slandered me (I'm not sure which term applies to false > and defamatory statements made in email) with false accusations > and he is willfully preventing the resolution of the situation > caused by those false accusations. > > I'm sorry, but if Bill M. told you that I am angry with him > because our world views differ, then he has lied to you. This > has nothing to do with differing world views, but with his > inconscible defamation of my character and his willful and > determined obstruction of my efforts to clear my good name. > > I'm sorry, Bill B., but I find Bill M.'s conduct in these matters > to be unethical and despicable. I am determined to see my good > name cleared of his false charges. I certainly could spend my > time better, but if I were to simply walk away from this then > Bill M. would declare a victory for himself and use it to further > his cause. I will not hand that to him. I will see justice done. > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (rly-zd03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.227]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:10:06 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.46]) by rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:09:47 -0400 Received: from wbequett ([12.72.194.78]) by mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000916230946.STQO17935.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@wbequett>; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 23:09:46 +0000 From: "Bill Bequette" To: Cc: , Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:14:30 -0700 Message-ID: <000201c02033$ddb7b900$4ec2480c@wbequett> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <38.b75f89b.26f5469e@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 ################################################ Subj: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 16-Sep-00 16:23:36 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (Bill Bequette) To: DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net, billyjack1@hotmail.com Sorry, I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your name it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes in i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in God by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you all well. Take Care, Bill B. > -----Original Message----- > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > you > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > said and what was going on. > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > examination of the facts. > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > order to arrive at the truth. > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > neither of us. > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > made those accusations. > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > there in the record. > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > 2nd grader." > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > beleive in Gid". > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > world's most sinister people". > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > religious". > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zb04.mx.aol.com (rly-zb04.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.4]) by air-zb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:23:36 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.46]) by rly-zb04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 19:23:14 -0400 Received: from wbequett ([12.72.194.78]) by mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000916232312.SWEE17935.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@wbequett>; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 23:23:12 +0000 From: "Bill Bequette" To: Cc: , Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 Message-ID: <000301c02035$bdf3c940$4ec2480c@wbequett> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 17-Sep-00 06:54:01 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net (Bill Bequette), DWise1@aol.com CC: billyjack1@hotmail.com Bill Bequette , you wrote: "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his 'lifes values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes in i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in maintaining the truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due to ego but then he must come around. "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or politics." This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free exchange of information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well as current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues and opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because your status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the brink of calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal goals over group harmony. "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a difficult end but the journey is as important as the final destination. Respectfully, Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > -----Original Message----- > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > you > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > said and what was going on. > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > examination of the facts. > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > order to arrive at the truth. > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > neither of us. > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > made those accusations. > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > there in the record. > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > 2nd grader." > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > beleive in Gid". > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > world's most sinister people". > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > religious". > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc04.mx.aol.com (rly-zc04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.4]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 09:54:00 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-zc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 09:53:40 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA84591; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 08:53:31 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <003b01c020ae$e02826e0$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Bequette" , Cc: References: <000301c02035$bdf3c940$4ec2480c@wbequett> Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 08:55:00 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 17-Sep-00 12:40:58 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (Bill Bequette) To: editor@liberator.net (Mark), DWise1@aol.com CC: billyjack1@hotmail.com Well good luck to you all. I have kids, am married, worship God, have a job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you all well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion due to time constraints. Adios! Bill > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > you > > > Bill Bequette , you wrote: > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > his 'lifes > values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > believes in > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > maintaining the > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due to ego > but then he must come around. > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > politics." > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > exchange of > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well as > current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues and > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because your > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the brink of > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal goals over > group harmony. > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a > difficult end > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > Respectfully, > > Mark > The Liberator > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (rly-yd01.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.1]) by air-yd02.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 15:40:58 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.51]) by rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 15:40:42 -0400 Received: from wbequett ([12.72.76.131]) by mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000917194040.ECXK8992.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@wbequett>; Sun, 17 Sep 2000 19:40:40 +0000 From: "Bill Bequette" To: "Mark" , Cc: Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 Message-ID: <000101c020df$d3c87720$834c480c@wbequett> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <003b01c020ae$e02826e0$052a03c7@liber8r> ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 19-Sep-00 22:53:23 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: editor@liberator.net Bill: he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative names related to our Christian beliefs. I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails. But I forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. Bill, lets resolve this once and for all: what is your opinion of my wife? Is she nice? Mr. Wise: did you see my retraction in my newsletter? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT > >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the >truth. I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but rather >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter. From >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically in >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect you >to also want to serve Truth. That is all that I ask, that you honor and >apply those Christian values. > >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why I had >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something about >what the situation here really is. That is also why I told you where you >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you could >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. > >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over world-views >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am truly sorry to have to >tell you this, but Bill lied to you. World views had not had a chance to >enter into the discussion. And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully >preventing our examination of the facts. > >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered me >and I am trying to resolve that matter. He has made several false >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe various >horrible things. I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill or >about Bill in print. I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as >close as he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to >arrive at the truth. > >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually written? > I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has >steadfastly ignored those requests. Since I find it impossible to believe >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing the >Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather >that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you what I see the >situation as being. You can read the actual transcript to see whether I am >being truthful or Bill is. Or neither of us. > >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, Bill >is being intransigent. We need help. > >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince Bill to >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts. What >does he think I said to insult his wife? What "very nasty names" does he >think I called him? At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >made those accusations. > >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill to >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information. Please remind >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then we >would find them right there in the record. > >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he is >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big "rabbit >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As long as we are mired >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion. About three years of >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will do >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against me >and refuses to substantiate follows: > >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd >grader." > >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > >7. Calling him "very nasty names." > >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in >Gid". > >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's >most sinister people". > >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti religious". > >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the >timely resolution of this matter. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-ye03.mx.aol.com (rly-ye03.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.200]) by air-ye04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.15) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:53:23 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f269.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.240.47]) by rly-ye03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:52:42 2000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:52:41 -0700 Received: from 205.188.197.59 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:52:41 GMT X-Originating-IP: [205.188.197.59] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: editor@liberator.net Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:52:41 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2000 05:52:41.0516 (UTC) FILETIME=[FD5096C0:01C022C6] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 19-Sep-00 22:55:03 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: editor@liberator.net Bill: they asked a neutral party Everett Purcell to rule on this matter and he ruled in my favor. Are you the appelate court?? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:56:46 EDT > > >>To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears >that= > your extremely angry. If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then >jus= >t add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his >em= >ail again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses. You >probably= > could spend your time better. Jesus loves you!<< > >Yes, Bill B., I am extremely angry with Bill Morgan. But it is not about >any disagreement, but rather that he has libeled/slandered me (I'm not sure >which term applies to false and defamatory statements made in email) with >false accusations and he is willfully preventing the resolution of the >situation caused by those false accusations. > >I'm sorry, but if Bill M. told you that I am angry with him because our >world views differ, then he has lied to you. This has nothing to do with >differing world views, but with his inconscible defamation of my character >and his willful and determined obstruction of my efforts to clear my good >name. > >I'm sorry, Bill B., but I find Bill M.'s conduct in these matters to be >unethical and despicable. I am determined to see my good name cleared of >his false charges. I certainly could spend my time better, but if I were >to simply walk away from this then Bill M. would declare a victory for >himself and use it to further his cause. I will not hand that to him. I >will see justice done. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-za03.mx.aol.com (rly-za03.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.99]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:55:03 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f5.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.5]) by rly-za03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:54:17 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:54:17 -0700 Received: from 205.188.197.59 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:54:17 GMT X-Originating-IP: [205.188.197.59] From: "Bill Morgan" To: DWise1@aol.com, plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: editor@liberator.net Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:54:17 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2000 05:54:17.0627 (UTC) FILETIME=[3699F6B0:01C022C7] ################################################ Subj: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 19-Sep-00 22:56:46 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: >CC: , >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you >all >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:56:46 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f272.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.240.50]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:56:25 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:56:23 -0700 Received: from 205.188.197.59 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:56:23 GMT X-Originating-IP: [205.188.197.59] From: "Bill Morgan" To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:56:23 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2000 05:56:23.0769 (UTC) FILETIME=[81C9B490:01C022C7] ################################################ Subj: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 19-Sep-00 22:59:09 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: "Mark" , >CC: >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 > >Well good luck to you all. I have kids, am married, worship God, have a >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you all >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion due to >time constraints. >Adios! Bill > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill Bequette , you wrote: > > > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > > his 'lifes > > values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > > believes in > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > > maintaining the > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due to >ego > > but then he must come around. > > > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > > politics." > > > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > > anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > > exchange of > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well as > > current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues and > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because your > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the brink of > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal goals >over > > group harmony. > > > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a > > difficult end > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Mark > > The Liberator > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd02.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:59:09 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f22.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.22]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:58:33 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:58:32 -0700 Received: from 205.188.197.59 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:58:32 GMT X-Originating-IP: [205.188.197.59] From: "Bill Morgan" To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 05:58:32 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2000 05:58:32.0176 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE530F00:01C022C7] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 09:01:53 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net You wife is without a doubt a very nice Christian wife and mother. She is awesome. ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:52 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill: he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative names related to our Christian beliefs. I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails. But I forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. Bill, lets resolve this once and for all: what is your opinion of my wife? Is she nice? Mr. Wise: did you see my retraction in my newsletter? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT > >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the >truth. I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but rather >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter. From >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically in >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect you >to also want to serve Truth. That is all that I ask, that you honor and >apply those Christian values. > >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why I had >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something about >what the situation here really is. That is also why I told you where you >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you could >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. > >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over world-views >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am truly sorry to have to >tell you this, but Bill lied to you. World views had not had a chance to >enter into the discussion. And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully >preventing our examination of the facts. > >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered me >and I am trying to resolve that matter. He has made several false >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe various >horrible things. I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill or >about Bill in print. I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as >close as he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to >arrive at the truth. > >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually written? > I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has >steadfastly ignored those requests. Since I find it impossible to believe >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing the >Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather >that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you what I see the >situation as being. You can read the actual transcript to see whether I am >being truthful or Bill is. Or neither of us. > >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, Bill >is being intransigent. We need help. > >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince Bill to >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts. What >does he think I said to insult his wife? What "very nasty names" does he >think I called him? At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >made those accusations. > >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill to >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information. Please remind >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then we >would find them right there in the record. > >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he is >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big "rabbit >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As long as we are mired >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion. About three years of >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will do >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against me >and refuses to substantiate follows: > >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd >grader." > >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > >7. Calling him "very nasty names." > >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in >Gid". > >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's >most sinister people". > >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti religious". > >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the >timely resolution of this matter. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
You wife is without a doubt a very nice Christian wife and mother.  She is awesome. 
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill:  he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative names related to our Christian beliefs. I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails.  But I forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. Bill, lets resolve this once and for all:  what is your opinion of my wife?  Is she nice? Mr. Wise:  did you see my retraction in my newsletter? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >CC: <dwise1@aol.com>, <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT > >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the >truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but rather >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter.  From >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically in >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect you >to also want to serve Truth.  That is all that I ask, that you honor and >apply those Christian values. > >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why I had >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something about >what the situation here really is.  That is also why I told you where you >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you could >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. > >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over world-views >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am truly sorry to have to >tell you this, but Bill lied to you.  World views had not had a chance to >enter into the discussion.  And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully >preventing our examination of the facts. > >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered me >and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He has made several false >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe various >horrible things.  I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill or >about Bill in print.  I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as >close as he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to >arrive at the truth. > >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually written? >  I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has >steadfastly ignored those requests.  Since I find it impossible to believe >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing the >Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather >that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you what I see the >situation as being.  You can read the actual transcript to see whether I am >being truthful or Bill is.  Or neither of us. > >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter.  Unfortunately, Bill >is being intransigent.  We need help. > >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince Bill to >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts.  What >does he think I said to insult his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he >think I called him?  At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >made those accusations. > >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill to >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information.  Please remind >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then we >would find them right there in the record. > >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he is >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big "rabbit >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As long as we are mired >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion.  About three years of >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will do >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against me >and refuses to substantiate follows: > >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd >grader." > >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > >7. Calling him "very nasty names." > >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in >Gid". > >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's >most sinister people". > >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti religious". > >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the >timely resolution of this matter. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-st07.mail.aol.com (rly-st07.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.18]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:01:53 -0400 Received: from rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (rly-zb03.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.3]) by rly-st07.mail.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with ESMTP id LAA04708 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:55:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:54:34 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.106.113]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000920155430.CUOT2687.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:54:30 +0000 Message-ID: <007801c0231a$b0c694e0$716a480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:51:48 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0075_01C022E0.03213320" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 09:05:13 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Bill of course. I can't thank you enough for the last party you invited me to with my wife. What a blast! Are you gonna have a great spread of food again? Your wife is the best cook. The huge TV for the football games is way cool. Can I borrow it?? Thanks for all the great parties! Take Care, Bill!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:58 PM Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: "Mark" , >CC: >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 > >Well good luck to you all. I have kids, am married, worship God, have a >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you all >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion due to >time constraints. >Adios! Bill > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill Bequette , you wrote: > > > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > > his 'lifes > > values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > > believes in > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > > maintaining the > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due to >ego > > but then he must come around. > > > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > > politics." > > > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > > anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > > exchange of > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well as > > current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues and > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because your > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the brink of > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal goals >over > > group harmony. > > > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a > > difficult end > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Mark > > The Liberator > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Bill of course.  I can't thank you enough for the last party you invited me to with my wife.  What a blast!  Are you gonna have a great spread of food again?  Your wife is the best cook.  The huge TV for the football games is way cool.  Can I borrow it?? Thanks for all the great parties!
Take Care, Bill!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:58 PM
Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net>, <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 > >Well good luck to you all.  I have kids, am married, worship God, have a >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you all >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion due to >time constraints. >Adios! Bill > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill Bequette <plasma@worldnet.att.net>, you wrote: > > > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > > his 'lifes > > values'.  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > > believes in > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > > maintaining the > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due to >ego > > but then he must come around. > > > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > > politics." > > > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > > anti-American.  Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > > exchange of > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well as > > current events.  What you suggest is that we not talk about issues and > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because your > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the brink of > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal goals >over > > group harmony. > > > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree?  Truth is a > > difficult end > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Mark > > The Liberator > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-st06.mail.aol.com (rly-st06.mail.aol.com [172.31.34.5]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:05:13 -0400 Received: from rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (rly-zb03.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.3]) by rly-st06.mail.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with ESMTP id LAA00917 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:52:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:52:07 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.106.113]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000920155201.CTQB2687.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:52:01 +0000 Message-ID: <005d01c0231a$57c31b20$716a480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , , References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:49:19 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005A_01C022DF.AA1C32C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 09:06:01 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net No. I am nothing. ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:54 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill: they asked a neutral party Everett Purcell to rule on this matter and he ruled in my favor. Are you the appelate court?? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: >CC: , , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:56:46 EDT > > >>To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears >that= > your extremely angry. If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then >jus= >t add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his >em= >ail again! Don't waste your time writing such long responses. You >probably= > could spend your time better. Jesus loves you!<< > >Yes, Bill B., I am extremely angry with Bill Morgan. But it is not about >any disagreement, but rather that he has libeled/slandered me (I'm not sure >which term applies to false and defamatory statements made in email) with >false accusations and he is willfully preventing the resolution of the >situation caused by those false accusations. > >I'm sorry, but if Bill M. told you that I am angry with him because our >world views differ, then he has lied to you. This has nothing to do with >differing world views, but with his inconscible defamation of my character >and his willful and determined obstruction of my efforts to clear my good >name. > >I'm sorry, Bill B., but I find Bill M.'s conduct in these matters to be >unethical and despicable. I am determined to see my good name cleared of >his false charges. I certainly could spend my time better, but if I were >to simply walk away from this then Bill M. would declare a victory for >himself and use it to further his cause. I will not hand that to him. I >will see justice done. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
No.  I am nothing.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill:  they asked a neutral party Everett Purcell to rule on this matter and he ruled in my favor.  Are you the appelate court?? >From: DWise1@aol.com >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >CC: <dwise1@aol.com>, <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:56:46 EDT > > >>To be honest after reading all these email sent to me by you it appears >that= >  your extremely angry.  If you disagree with billyjack1@hotmail.com then >jus= >t add his email address to your email filter so you never have to see his >em= >ail again!  Don't waste your time writing such long responses.  You >probably= >  could spend your time better.  Jesus loves you!<< > >Yes, Bill B., I am extremely angry with Bill Morgan.  But it is not about >any disagreement, but rather that he has libeled/slandered me (I'm not sure >which term applies to false and defamatory statements made in email) with >false accusations and he is willfully preventing the resolution of the >situation caused by those false accusations. > >I'm sorry, but if Bill M. told you that I am angry with him because our >world views differ, then he has lied to you.  This has nothing to do with >differing world views, but with his inconscible defamation of my character >and his willful and determined obstruction of my efforts to clear my good >name. > >I'm sorry, Bill B., but I find Bill M.'s conduct in these matters to be >unethical and despicable.  I am determined to see my good name cleared of >his false charges.  I certainly could spend my time better, but if I were >to simply walk away from this then Bill M. would declare a victory for >himself and use it to further his cause.  I will not hand that to him.  I >will see justice done. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-st01.mail.aol.com (rly-st01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.134]) by air-yd01.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:06:01 -0400 Received: from rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (rly-yb03.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.3]) by rly-st01.mail.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with ESMTP id LAA02667 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:54:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:53:46 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.106.113]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000920155329.CUFY2687.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:53:29 +0000 Message-ID: <007001c0231a$8c4dba80$716a480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:50:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006C_01C022DF.DEA858C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 09:09:12 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: >CC: , >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you >all >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You!
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish you >all >well.  Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-st04.mail.aol.com (rly-st04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.19]) by air-yd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:09:12 -0400 Received: from rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (rly-yd02.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.2]) by rly-st04.mail.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with ESMTP id LAA25412 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:53:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:52:57 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.106.113]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000920155253.CUAR2687.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:52:53 +0000 Message-ID: <006601c0231a$76db9dc0$716a480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:50:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01C022DF.C9363C00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 17:52:27 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1@aol.com, billyjack1@hotmail.com If it's possible for fictional characters to love... ----- Original Message ----- From: .. To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: >CC: , >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you >all >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
If it's possible for fictional characters to love...
----- Original Message -----
From: ..
To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You!
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish you >all >well.  Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za03.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:52:27 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:51:34 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA54026; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:51:23 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <001601c02366$48dc3000$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: Cc: , References: <006601c0231a$76db9dc0$716a480c@com> Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C0233C.5F138AA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 20-Sep-00 20:09:20 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: editor@liberator.net, plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1@aol.com We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: .. > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > >Sorry, > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well >if > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your > >name > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes > >in > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will >ever > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe >in > >God > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe >you > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish >you > >all > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh04.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:09:20 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f104.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.104]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:08:59 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:08:59 -0700 Received: from 152.163.206.213 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:08:58 GMT X-Originating-IP: [152.163.206.213] From: "Bill Morgan" To: editor@liberator.net, plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:08:58 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2000 03:08:59.0100 (UTC) FILETIME=[491C99C0:01C02379] ################################################ Subj: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 20-Sep-00 20:15:12 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1@aol.com Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype? First the Pope tries to exorcise a woman but fails. Next a priest is trained as an exorcist. Then the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon. Coincidence? Nah.... People love fiction. It's entertaining.... Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: .. > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > >Sorry, > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well >if > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your > >name > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes > >in > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will >ever > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe >in > >God > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe >you > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish >you > >all > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zb02.mx.aol.com (rly-zb02.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.2]) by air-zb01.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:15:12 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-zb02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:14:56 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA70369; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:14:51 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <00d801c0237a$5372f940$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:16:24 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 20:16:38 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Bill.....mi casa es su casa/ We love to open up our house and warmly welcome some of our friends (as you know our humble digs could not house all of our friends...remember my birthday party? I hope to party with Mr Wise and Mr Liberal.net! >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:49:19 -0700 > >Bill of course. I can't thank you enough for the last party you invited me >to with my wife. What a blast! Are you gonna have a great spread of food >again? Your wife is the best cook. The huge TV for the football games is >way cool. Can I borrow it?? Thanks for all the great parties! >Take Care, Bill!!!!! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:58 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: "Mark" , > >CC: > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 > > > >Well good luck to you all. I have kids, am married, worship God, have >a > >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you >all > >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion >due to > >time constraints. > >Adios! Bill > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill Bequette , you wrote: > > > > > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > > > his 'lifes > > > values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > > > believes in > > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > > > > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > > > maintaining the > > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due >to > >ego > > > but then he must come around. > > > > > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > > > politics." > > > > > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > > > anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > > > exchange of > > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well >as > > > current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues >and > > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because >your > > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the >brink of > > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal >goals > >over > > > group harmony. > > > > > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > > > > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a > > > difficult end > > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Mark > > > The Liberator > > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian > >values. > > > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > > neither of us. > > > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > > there in the record. > > > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > > religious". > > > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:16:38 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f144.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.144]) by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:15:58 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:15:57 -0700 Received: from 152.163.206.213 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:15:57 GMT X-Originating-IP: [152.163.206.213] From: "Bill Morgan" To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:15:57 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2000 03:15:57.0754 (UTC) FILETIME=[42A621A0:01C0237A] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 20-Sep-00 20:18:10 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net I told you guys she is nice, you have nothing to fear from her. >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , >CC: >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:51:48 -0700 > >You wife is without a doubt a very nice Christian wife and mother. She is >awesome. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:52 PM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Bill: he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative >names > related to our Christian beliefs. > > I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails. But I > forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. > > Bill, lets resolve this once and for all: what is your opinion of my >wife? > Is she nice? > > Mr. Wise: did you see my retraction in my newsletter? > > > >From: DWise1@aol.com > >To: > >CC: , , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT > > > >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I > >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the > >truth. I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but >rather > >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter. >From > >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that > >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his > >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > >Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically >in > >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect >you > >to also want to serve Truth. That is all that I ask, that you honor >and > >apply those Christian values. > > > >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why I had > >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something >about > >what the situation here really is. That is also why I told you where >you > >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you >could > >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. > > > >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >world-views > >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am truly sorry to have >to > >tell you this, but Bill lied to you. World views had not had a chance >to > >enter into the discussion. And I have steadfastly insisted that we >examine > >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully > >preventing our examination of the facts. > > > >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered >me > >and I am trying to resolve that matter. He has made several false > >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe >various > >horrible things. I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill >or > >about Bill in print. I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his > >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as > >close as he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he >provides > >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to > >arrive at the truth. > > > >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the > >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually >written? > > I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has > >steadfastly ignored those requests. Since I find it impossible to >believe > >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if >we > >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > >information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing >the > >Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather > >that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you what I see >the > >situation as being. You can read the actual transcript to see whether >I am > >being truthful or Bill is. Or neither of us. > > > >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, >Bill > >is being intransigent. We need help. > > > >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince >Bill to > >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts. >What > >does he think I said to insult his wife? What "very nasty names" does >he > >think I called him? At the end of this message, I will repeat the list >of > >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had >indeed > >made those accusations. > > > >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill >to > >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information. Please >remind > >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then >we > >would find them right there in the record. > > > >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he >is > >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >"rabbit > >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As long as we are >mired > >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion. About three >years of > >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will >do > >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even >break > >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against >me > >and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd > >grader." > > > >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > >7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in > >Gid". > > > >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's > >most sinister people". > > > >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >religious". > > > >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge > >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for > >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the > >timely resolution of this matter. > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-ye02.mx.aol.com (rly-ye02.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.199]) by air-ye02.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:18:10 2000 Received: from hotmail.com (f104.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.104]) by rly-ye02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:17:55 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 20:17:54 -0700 Received: from 152.163.206.213 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:17:54 GMT X-Originating-IP: [152.163.206.213] From: "Bill Morgan" To: plasma@worldnet.att.net, DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 03:17:54 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2000 03:17:54.0869 (UTC) FILETIME=[88747650:01C0237A] ################################################ Subj: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 21-Sep-00 07:09:34 Pacific Daylight Time From: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) To: editor@liberator.net, plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1@aol.com I don't know about hype about exercising, I have always exercised. I have been busy watching the Olympics (really as back ground noise while doing other vital things). Do gymnasts hate their bodies? Oh the humanity! >From: "Mark" >To: "Bill Morgan" , >CC: >Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:16:24 -0500 > >Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype? First the Pope tries to >exorcise a woman but fails. Next a priest is trained as an exorcist. Then >the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon. Coincidence? Nah.... > >People love fiction. It's entertaining.... > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Bill Morgan >To: ; >Cc: >Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM >Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? > > >We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please >bring a liter bottle of your choice. > > > >From: "Mark" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > >you > >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > > > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: .. > > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: editor@liberator.net > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > > > > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and > >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Bill Morgan > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: editor@liberator.net > > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to you > > > > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many > >times > > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > > >To: > > >CC: , > > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to > > >you > > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > > > >Sorry, > > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. >Well > >if > > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered > >your > > >name > > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional > >topic and > > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his > >"lifes > > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > >believes > > >in > > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much >is > > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party >will > >ever > > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I >believe > >in > > >God > > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the > >time to > > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone > >if the > > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. >Maybe > >you > > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I >wish > >you > > >all > > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer to > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own >fundamentalist > > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at >to > > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian > >values. > > > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is >why > > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts >whereas > > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. >He > > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that >I > > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he >provides > > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for >examination > > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to > >behave? > > > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to >you > > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > > neither of us. > > > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations > > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > > there in the record. > > > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy > >society". > > > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > > religious". > > > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and >particularly > > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > http://profiles.msn.com. > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (rly-zd05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.229]) by air-zd05.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:09:33 -0400 Received: from hotmail.com (f241.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.241]) by rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:08:17 -0400 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 07:08:15 -0700 Received: from 164.45.101.11 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:08:14 GMT X-Originating-IP: [164.45.101.11] From: "Bill Morgan" To: editor@liberator.net, plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:08:14 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2000 14:08:15.0218 (UTC) FILETIME=[62653520:01C023D5] ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 21-Sep-00 08:40:58 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), DWise1@aol.com CC: editor@liberator.net What I find so awesome about her is her strength. She helps the weak and lifts their spirits. I believe she is this way due to her belief in Jesus Christ! Praise the Lord!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:17 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you I told you guys she is nice, you have nothing to fear from her. >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , >CC: >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:51:48 -0700 > >You wife is without a doubt a very nice Christian wife and mother. She is >awesome. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:52 PM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Bill: he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative >names > related to our Christian beliefs. > > I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails. But I > forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. > > Bill, lets resolve this once and for all: what is your opinion of my >wife? > Is she nice? > > Mr. Wise: did you see my retraction in my newsletter? > > > >From: DWise1@aol.com > >To: > >CC: , , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT > > > >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I > >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the > >truth. I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but >rather > >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter. >From > >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that > >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his > >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > >Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically >in > >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect >you > >to also want to serve Truth. That is all that I ask, that you honor >and > >apply those Christian values. > > > >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why I had > >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something >about > >what the situation here really is. That is also why I told you where >you > >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you >could > >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. > > > >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >world-views > >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am truly sorry to have >to > >tell you this, but Bill lied to you. World views had not had a chance >to > >enter into the discussion. And I have steadfastly insisted that we >examine > >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully > >preventing our examination of the facts. > > > >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered >me > >and I am trying to resolve that matter. He has made several false > >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe >various > >horrible things. I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill >or > >about Bill in print. I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his > >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as > >close as he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he >provides > >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to > >arrive at the truth. > > > >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the > >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually >written? > > I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has > >steadfastly ignored those requests. Since I find it impossible to >believe > >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if >we > >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > >information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing >the > >Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather > >that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you what I see >the > >situation as being. You can read the actual transcript to see whether >I am > >being truthful or Bill is. Or neither of us. > > > >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, >Bill > >is being intransigent. We need help. > > > >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince >Bill to > >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts. >What > >does he think I said to insult his wife? What "very nasty names" does >he > >think I called him? At the end of this message, I will repeat the list >of > >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had >indeed > >made those accusations. > > > >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill >to > >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information. Please >remind > >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then >we > >would find them right there in the record. > > > >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he >is > >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >"rabbit > >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As long as we are >mired > >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion. About three >years of > >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will >do > >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even >break > >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against >me > >and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd > >grader." > > > >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > >7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in > >Gid". > > > >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's > >most sinister people". > > > >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >religious". > > > >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge > >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for > >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the > >timely resolution of this matter. > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
What I find so awesome about her is her strength.  She helps the weak and lifts their spirits.  I believe she is this way due to her belief in Jesus Christ!  Praise the Lord!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
I told you guys she is nice, you have nothing to fear from her. >From: ".." <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: "Bill Morgan" <billyjack1@hotmail.com>, <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <editor@liberator.net> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:51:48 -0700 > >You wife is without a doubt a very nice Christian wife and mother.  She is >awesome. >   ----- Original Message ----- >   From: Bill Morgan >   To: DWise1@aol.com ; plasma@worldnet.att.net >   Cc: editor@liberator.net >   Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:52 PM >   Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > >   Bill:  he refused to meet my wife and I for dinner calling us negative >names >   related to our Christian beliefs. > >   I told Mr Wise I am unlike him that I don't save all the emails.  But I >   forgive him for denegrating our character for being Christians. > >   Bill, lets resolve this once and for all:  what is your opinion of my >wife? >   Is she nice? > >   Mr. Wise:  did you see my retraction in my newsletter? > > >   >From: DWise1@aol.com >   >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >   >CC: <dwise1@aol.com>, <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >   >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to >   >you >   >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 17:55:34 EDT >   > >   >Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, but I >   >would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from seeking the >   >truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against your friend, but >rather >   >that you side with the cause of determining the truth of this matter.  >From >   >my own fundamentalist Christian training, I remember being taught that >   >Christians at to serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his >   >published writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >   >Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed radically >in >   >the past few decades (besides the heavy politization), I would expect >you >   >to also want to serve Truth.  That is all that I ask, that you honor >and >   >apply those Christian values. >   > >   >In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why I had >   >CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn something >about >   >what the situation here really is.  That is also why I told you where >you >   >could find copies of the correspondence between Bill and me, so you >could >   >see for yourself what had been said and what was going on. >   > >   >Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >world-views >   >and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am truly sorry to have >to >   >tell you this, but Bill lied to you.  World views had not had a chance >to >   >enter into the discussion.  And I have steadfastly insisted that we >examine >   >the facts whereas Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully >   >preventing our examination of the facts. >   > >   >No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has libelled/slandered >me >   >and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He has made several false >   >accusations against me, saying that I had said or that I believe >various >   >horrible things.  I am sure that I had never said such things to Bill >or >   >about Bill in print.  I have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his >   >accusations, at the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as >   >close as he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he >provides >   >that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in order to >   >arrive at the truth. >   > >   >In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to examine the >   >facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what had I actually >written? >   >  I have repeatedly called for examination of the facts and Bill has >   >steadfastly ignored those requests.  Since I find it impossible to >believe >   >that he could have missed over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if >we >   >include references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >   >information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully opposing >the >   >Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? >   > >   >As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but rather >   >that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you what I see >the >   >situation as being.  You can read the actual transcript to see whether >I am >   >being truthful or Bill is.  Or neither of us. >   > >   >In either case, we still need to resolve this matter.  Unfortunately, >Bill >   >is being intransigent.  We need help. >   > >   >The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to convince >Bill to >   >relinguish his information so that we can finally examine the facts.  >What >   >does he think I said to insult his wife?  What "very nasty names" does >he >   >think I called him?  At the end of this message, I will repeat the list >of >   >accusations Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had >indeed >   >made those accusations. >   > >   >If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to get Bill >to >   >explain to you why he refuses to divulge that information.  Please >remind >   >him that if I had truly done the things that he had accused me of, then >we >   >would find them right there in the record. >   > >   >Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he why he >is >   >afraid to have the facts examined in this case. >   > >   >Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >"rabbit >   >trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As long as we are >mired >   >in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful discussion.  About three >years of >   >correspondence with Bill has taught me that he is very evasive and will >do >   >almost anything he can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even >break >   >one of the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. >   > >   >A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made against >me >   >and refuses to substantiate follows: >   > >   >1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" >   > >   >2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". >   > >   >3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". >   > >   >4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling 2nd >   >grader." >   > >   >5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. >   > >   >6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. >   > >   >7. Calling him "very nasty names." >   > >   >8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who beleive in >   >Gid". >   > >   >9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the world's >   >most sinister people". >   > >   >10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. >   > >   >11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >religious". >   > >   >Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else acknowledge >   >that they are false and offer a most sincere apology to all parties for >   >having made those accusations and particularly for having prevented the >   >timely resolution of this matter. >   > > >   >_________________________________________________________________________ >   Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > >   Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >   http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:40:58 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.52]) by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:40:12 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.81.83]) by mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000921154008.KXE14966.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:40:08 +0000 Message-ID: <002d01c023e1$d71a1b40$5351480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:24:25 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C023A5.5A602400" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 21-Sep-00 08:41:07 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), editor@liberator.net, DWise1@aol.com Hey that would be cool! We should all get together and party! We can get together when a good football game is on and eat chips and salsa. Your dog is always trying to mooch the chips you nut!!! Did you teach her that? Let's do it!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:15 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill.....mi casa es su casa/ We love to open up our house and warmly welcome some of our friends (as you know our humble digs could not house all of our friends...remember my birthday party? I hope to party with Mr Wise and Mr Liberal.net! >From: ".." >To: "Bill Morgan" , , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:49:19 -0700 > >Bill of course. I can't thank you enough for the last party you invited me >to with my wife. What a blast! Are you gonna have a great spread of food >again? Your wife is the best cook. The huge TV for the football games is >way cool. Can I borrow it?? Thanks for all the great parties! >Take Care, Bill!!!!! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:58 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: "Mark" , > >CC: > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 > > > >Well good luck to you all. I have kids, am married, worship God, have >a > >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you >all > >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion >due to > >time constraints. > >Adios! Bill > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] > > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM > > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com > > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill Bequette , you wrote: > > > > > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish > > > his 'lifes > > > values'. You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > > > believes in > > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." > > > > > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in > > > maintaining the > > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due >to > >ego > > > but then he must come around. > > > > > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or > > > politics." > > > > > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be > > > anti-American. Our society is based on open dialogue and a free > > > exchange of > > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well >as > > > current events. What you suggest is that we not talk about issues >and > > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because >your > > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the >brink of > > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal >goals > >over > > > group harmony. > > > > > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." > > > > > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree? Truth is a > > > difficult end > > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Mark > > > The Liberator > > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net > > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian > >values. > > > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > > neither of us. > > > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > > there in the record. > > > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > > religious". > > > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Hey that would be cool!  We should all get together and party! We can get together when a good football game is on and eat chips and salsa.  Your dog is always trying to mooch the chips you nut!!! Did you teach her that?  Let's do it!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill.....mi casa es su casa/  We love to open up our house and warmly welcome some of our friends (as you know our humble digs could not house all of our friends...remember my birthday party? I hope to party with Mr Wise and Mr Liberal.net! >From: ".." <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: "Bill Morgan" <billyjack1@hotmail.com>, <editor@liberator.net>, ><DWise1@aol.com> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:49:19 -0700 > >Bill of course.  I can't thank you enough for the last party you invited me >to with my wife.  What a blast!  Are you gonna have a great spread of food >again?  Your wife is the best cook.  The huge TV for the football games is >way cool.  Can I borrow it?? Thanks for all the great parties! >Take Care, Bill!!!!! >   ----- Original Message ----- >   From: Bill Morgan >   To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; editor@liberator.net ; DWise1@aol.com >   Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:58 PM >   Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > >   Are you going to be able to come to my Monday Night Football Party Bill? > > >   >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >   >To: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net>, <DWise1@aol.com> >   >CC: <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >   >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to >   >you >   >Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:45:26 -0700 >   > >   >Well good luck to you all.  I have kids, am married, worship God, have >a >   >job, maintain a house and a lot of other responsibilities so I wish you >all >   >well but I really don't want to take part anymore in this discussion >due to >   >time constraints. >   >Adios! Bill >   > >   > > -----Original Message----- >   > > From: Mark [mailto:editor@liberator.net] >   > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 6:55 AM >   > > To: Bill Bequette; DWise1@aol.com >   > > Cc: billyjack1@hotmail.com >   > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to >   > > you >   > > >   > > >   > > Bill Bequette <plasma@worldnet.att.net>, you wrote: >   > > >   > > "...even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish >   > > his 'lifes >   > > values'.  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >   > > believes in >   > > i.e. his entire personality and vice versa." >   > > >   > > If Morgan's personality and thought structure was rooted in >   > > maintaining the >   > > truth, their might be a short moment when he rejects the truth due >to >   >ego >   > > but then he must come around. >   > > >   > > "I don't believe much is accomplished in discussing religion, or >   > > politics." >   > > >   > > This statement is completely false and it can be considered to be >   > > anti-American.  Our society is based on open dialogue and a free >   > > exchange of >   > > information even and it pertains to philosophical discussion as well >as >   > > current events.  What you suggest is that we not talk about issues >and >   > > opinions which would certainly do our society greater harm because >your >   > > status quo model would cause our society to degenerate past the >brink of >   > > calm discussion and enter into extremism to accomplish personal >goals >   >over >   > > group harmony. >   > > >   > > "Neither party will ever agree with the other in most cases." >   > > >   > > Who says that the parties involved have to agree?  Truth is a >   > > difficult end >   > > but the journey is as important as the final destination. >   > > >   > > Respectfully, >   > > >   > > Mark >   > > The Liberator >   > > E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >   > > Web Site: http://liberator.net/ >   > > >   > > >   > > > -----Original Message----- >   > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] >   > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM >   > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net >   > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com >   > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer >   >to >   > > > you >   > > > >   > > > >   > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, >   > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from >   > > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against >   > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of >   > > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist >   > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to >   > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published >   > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >   > > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed >   > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy >   > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. >   > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >   >values. >   > > > >   > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why >   > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn >   > > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also >   > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence >   > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been >   > > > said and what was going on. >   > > > >   > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >   > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am >   > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. >   > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. >   > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas >   > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our >   > > > examination of the facts. >   > > > >   > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has >   > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He >   > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had >   > > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I >   > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I >   > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at >   > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as >   > > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides >   > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in >   > > > order to arrive at the truth. >   > > > >   > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to >   > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what >   > > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination >   > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. >   > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed >   > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include >   > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >   > > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully >   > > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? >   > > > >   > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but >   > > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you >   > > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual >   > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or >   > > > neither of us. >   > > > >   > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. >   > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. >   > > > >   > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to >   > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can >   > > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult >   > > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? >   > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations >   > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >   > > > made those accusations. >   > > > >   > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to >   > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that >   > > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the >   > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right >   > > > there in the record. >   > > > >   > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he >   > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. >   > > > >   > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >   > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As >   > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful >   > > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has >   > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he >   > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of >   > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. >   > > > >   > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made >   > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: >   > > > >   > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" >   > > > >   > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". >   > > > >   > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". >   > > > >   > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling >   > > > 2nd grader." >   > > > >   > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. >   > > > >   > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. >   > > > >   > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." >   > > > >   > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who >   > > > beleive in Gid". >   > > > >   > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the >   > > > world's most sinister people". >   > > > >   > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. >   > > > >   > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >   > > > religious". >   > > > >   > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else >   > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology >   > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly >   > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. >   > > > >   > > >   > > >   > > >   > > >   >_________________________________________________________________________ >   Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > >   Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >   http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:41:06 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.52]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:40:26 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.81.83]) by mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000921154022.KYZ14966.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:40:22 +0000 Message-ID: <002e01c023e1$df6ab520$5351480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , , References: Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:26:05 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C023A5.95A0E720" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 21-Sep-00 08:41:23 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: editor@liberator.net (Mark), billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan) CC: DWise1@aol.com Everybody can bring their wives also. We can play trivial persuit also. Each team is two couples? Are we all game!? ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark To: Bill Morgan ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:16 PM Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype? First the Pope tries to exorcise a woman but fails. Next a priest is trained as an exorcist. Then the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon. Coincidence? Nah.... People love fiction. It's entertaining.... Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: .. > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > >Sorry, > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well >if > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your > >name > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes > >in > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will >ever > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe >in > >God > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe >you > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish >you > >all > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Everybody can bring their wives also.  We can play trivial persuit also.  Each team is two couples?  Are we all game!?
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark
To: Bill Morgan ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: DWise1@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about?
Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype?  First the Pope tries to exorcise a woman but fails.  Next a priest is trained as an exorcist.  Then the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon.  Coincidence?  Nah.... People love fiction.  It's entertaining.... Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan <billyjack1@hotmail.com> To: <editor@liberator.net>; <plasma@worldnet.att.net> Cc: <DWise1@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff.  Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net> >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >CC: <DWise1@aol.com>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... >   ----- Original Message ----- >   From: .. >   To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com >   Cc: editor@liberator.net >   Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM >   Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > >   Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! >   Bill >     ----- Original Message ----- >     From: Bill Morgan >     To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com >     Cc: editor@liberator.net >     Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM >     Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > >     Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times >     and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. > >     Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) > > >     >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >     >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >     >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >     >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to >     >you >     >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 >     > >     >Sorry, >     >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well >if >     >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your >     >name >     >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and >     >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes >     >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes >     >in >     >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >     >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will >ever >     >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe >in >     >God >     >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to >     >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the >     >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe >you >     >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish >you >     >all >     >well.  Take Care, Bill B. >     > >     > > -----Original Message----- >     > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] >     > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM >     > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net >     > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com >     > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to >     > > you >     > > >     > > >     > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, >     > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from >     > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against >     > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of >     > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist >     > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to >     > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published >     > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >     > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed >     > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy >     > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. >     > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. >     > > >     > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why >     > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn >     > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also >     > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence >     > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been >     > > said and what was going on. >     > > >     > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >     > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am >     > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. >     > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. >     > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas >     > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our >     > > examination of the facts. >     > > >     > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has >     > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He >     > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had >     > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I >     > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I >     > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at >     > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as >     > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides >     > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in >     > > order to arrive at the truth. >     > > >     > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to >     > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what >     > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination >     > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. >     > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed >     > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include >     > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >     > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully >     > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? >     > > >     > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but >     > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you >     > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual >     > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or >     > > neither of us. >     > > >     > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. >     > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. >     > > >     > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to >     > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can >     > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult >     > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? >     > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations >     > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >     > > made those accusations. >     > > >     > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to >     > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that >     > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the >     > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right >     > > there in the record. >     > > >     > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he >     > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. >     > > >     > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >     > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As >     > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful >     > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has >     > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he >     > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of >     > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. >     > > >     > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made >     > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: >     > > >     > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" >     > > >     > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". >     > > >     > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". >     > > >     > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling >     > > 2nd grader." >     > > >     > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. >     > > >     > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. >     > > >     > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." >     > > >     > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who >     > > beleive in Gid". >     > > >     > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the >     > > world's most sinister people". >     > > >     > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. >     > > >     > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >     > > religious". >     > > >     > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else >     > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology >     > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly >     > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. >     > > >     > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >     Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > >     Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >     http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (rly-yc05.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.37]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:41:23 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.52]) by rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:40:40 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.81.83]) by mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000921154035.LBF14966.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:40:35 +0000 Message-ID: <002f01c023e1$e7475780$5351480c@com> From: ".." To: "Mark" , "Bill Morgan" Cc: References: <00d801c0237a$5372f940$052a03c7@liber8r> Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:27:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C023A5.C3123420" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 21-Sep-00 08:41:26 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: editor@liberator.net (Mark) CC: DWise1@aol.com, billyjack1@hotmail.com Buddy!!! Come to the party!!!! Bring your family :) ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark To: plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:52 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you If it's possible for fictional characters to love... ----- Original Message ----- From: .. To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: >CC: , >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you >all >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Buddy!!! Come to the party!!!!  Bring your family :)
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
If it's possible for fictional characters to love...
----- Original Message -----
From: ..
To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You!
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish you >all >well.  Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yb01.mx.aol.com (rly-yb01.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.1]) by air-yb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:41:25 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.52]) by rly-yb01.mx.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:41:08 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.81.83]) by mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000921154104.LFS14966.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:41:04 +0000 Message-ID: <003101c023e1$f86ed240$5351480c@com> From: ".." To: "Mark" Cc: , References: <006601c0231a$76db9dc0$716a480c@com> <001601c02366$48dc3000$052a03c7@liber8r> Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:28:22 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01C023A5.E7B44160" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 21-Sep-00 08:41:40 Pacific Daylight Time From: plasma@worldnet.att.net (..) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), editor@liberator.net CC: DWise1@aol.com I will bring 7-up because I no like theee caffeine! ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:08 PM Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" >To: >CC: , >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: .. > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bill Morgan > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > Cc: editor@liberator.net > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > >Sorry, > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well >if > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your > >name > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes > >in > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will >ever > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe >in > >God > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe >you > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish >you > >all > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to > > > you > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > neither of us. > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > there in the record. > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > religious". > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
I will bring 7-up because I no like theee caffeine!
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: DWise1@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:08 PM
Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about?
We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff.  Please bring a liter bottle of your choice. >From: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net> >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >CC: <DWise1@aol.com>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... >   ----- Original Message ----- >   From: .. >   To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com >   Cc: editor@liberator.net >   Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM >   Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you > > >   Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! >   Bill >     ----- Original Message ----- >     From: Bill Morgan >     To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com >     Cc: editor@liberator.net >     Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM >     Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to you > > >     Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many >times >     and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. > >     Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) > > >     >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >     >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >     >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >     >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to >     >you >     >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 >     > >     >Sorry, >     >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well >if >     >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered >your >     >name >     >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional >topic and >     >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his >"lifes >     >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he >believes >     >in >     >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >     >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will >ever >     >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe >in >     >God >     >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the >time to >     >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone >if the >     >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe >you >     >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish >you >     >all >     >well.  Take Care, Bill B. >     > >     > > -----Original Message----- >     > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] >     > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM >     > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net >     > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com >     > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer to >     > > you >     > > >     > > >     > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, >     > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from >     > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against >     > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of >     > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist >     > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to >     > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published >     > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve >     > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed >     > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy >     > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. >     > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian >values. >     > > >     > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why >     > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn >     > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also >     > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence >     > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been >     > > said and what was going on. >     > > >     > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over >     > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am >     > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. >     > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. >     > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas >     > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our >     > > examination of the facts. >     > > >     > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has >     > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He >     > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had >     > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I >     > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I >     > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at >     > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as >     > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides >     > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in >     > > order to arrive at the truth. >     > > >     > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to >     > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what >     > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination >     > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. >     > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed >     > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include >     > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his >     > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully >     > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to >behave? >     > > >     > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but >     > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you >     > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual >     > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or >     > > neither of us. >     > > >     > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. >     > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. >     > > >     > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to >     > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can >     > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult >     > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? >     > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations >     > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed >     > > made those accusations. >     > > >     > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to >     > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that >     > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the >     > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right >     > > there in the record. >     > > >     > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he >     > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. >     > > >     > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big >     > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As >     > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful >     > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has >     > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he >     > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of >     > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. >     > > >     > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made >     > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: >     > > >     > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" >     > > >     > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy >society". >     > > >     > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". >     > > >     > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling >     > > 2nd grader." >     > > >     > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. >     > > >     > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. >     > > >     > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." >     > > >     > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who >     > > beleive in Gid". >     > > >     > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the >     > > world's most sinister people". >     > > >     > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. >     > > >     > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti >     > > religious". >     > > >     > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else >     > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology >     > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly >     > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. >     > > >     > > >     >_________________________________________________________________________ >     Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > >     Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >     http://profiles.msn.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by air-yg03.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:41:40 -0400 Received: from mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.52]) by rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:40:54 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore ([12.72.81.83]) by mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000921154050.LDR14966.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@gunsgalore>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:40:50 +0000 Message-ID: <003001c023e1$f01510a0$5351480c@com> From: ".." To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:27:50 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C023A5.D485FA20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: 21-Sep-00 09:03:58 Pacific Daylight Time From: billbeq@mediaone.net (Media One Mail) To: billyjack1@hotmail.com (Bill Morgan), editor@liberator.net CC: DWise1@aol.com Bill have you ever noticed how unhappy some people are? Why is that? Bill your real happy most the time! I think I know why!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 7:08 AM Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? I don't know about hype about exercising, I have always exercised. I have been busy watching the Olympics (really as back ground noise while doing other vital things). Do gymnasts hate their bodies? Oh the humanity! >From: "Mark" >To: "Bill Morgan" , >CC: >Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:16:24 -0500 > >Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype? First the Pope tries to >exorcise a woman but fails. Next a priest is trained as an exorcist. Then >the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon. Coincidence? Nah.... > >People love fiction. It's entertaining.... > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Bill Morgan >To: ; >Cc: >Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM >Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? > > >We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff. Please >bring a liter bottle of your choice. > > > >From: "Mark" > >To: > >CC: , > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > >you > >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > > > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: .. > > To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: editor@liberator.net > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > > > > > > Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and > >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Bill Morgan > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > > Cc: editor@liberator.net > > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > > Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to you > > > > > > Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many > >times > > and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. > > > > Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) > > > > > > >From: "Bill Bequette" > > >To: > > >CC: , > > >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to > > >you > > >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > > > > > >Sorry, > > >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. >Well > >if > > >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered > >your > > >name > > >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional > >topic and > > >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his > >"lifes > > >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > >believes > > >in > > >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much >is > > >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party >will > >ever > > >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I >believe > >in > > >God > > >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the > >time to > > >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone > >if the > > >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. >Maybe > >you > > >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I >wish > >you > > >all > > >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer to > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own >fundamentalist > > > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at >to > > > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian > >values. > > > > > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is >why > > > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > > > said and what was going on. > > > > > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts >whereas > > > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > > > examination of the facts. > > > > > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. >He > > > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that >I > > > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he >provides > > > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for >examination > > > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to > >behave? > > > > > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to >you > > > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > > > neither of us. > > > > > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations > > > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > > > made those accusations. > > > > > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > > > there in the record. > > > > > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy > >society". > > > > > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > > > 2nd grader." > > > > > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > > > beleive in Gid". > > > > > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > > > world's most sinister people". > > > > > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > > > religious". > > > > > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > > > to all parties for having made those accusations and >particularly > > > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > > http://profiles.msn.com. > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
Bill have you ever noticed how unhappy some people are?  Why is that?  Bill your real happy most the time!  I think I know why!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: editor@liberator.net ; plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: DWise1@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 7:08 AM
Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about?
I don't know about hype about exercising, I have always exercised.  I have been busy watching the Olympics (really as back ground noise while doing other vital things).  Do gymnasts hate their bodies?  Oh the humanity! >From: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net> >To: "Bill Morgan" <billyjack1@hotmail.com>, <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >CC: <DWise1@aol.com> >Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:16:24 -0500 > >Have you noticed all of this exorcism hype?  First the Pope tries to >exorcise a woman but fails.  Next a priest is trained as an exorcist.  Then >the film The Exorcist will be re-released soon.  Coincidence?  Nah.... > >People love fiction.  It's entertaining.... > >Mark >The Liberator >E-Mail: editor@liberator.net >Web Site: http://liberator.net/ > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Bill Morgan <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >To: <editor@liberator.net>; <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >Cc: <DWise1@aol.com> >Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:08 PM >Subject: What do dogs have bad dreams about? > > >We will have a 6 foot long submarine sandwich and chips and stuff.  Please >bring a liter bottle of your choice. > > > >From: "Mark" <editor@liberator.net> > >To: <plasma@worldnet.att.net> > >CC: <DWise1@aol.com>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> > >Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > >you > >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:52:56 -0500 > > > >If it's possible for fictional characters to love... > >   ----- Original Message ----- > >   From: .. > >   To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com > >   Cc: editor@liberator.net > >   Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM > >   Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer >to > >you > > > > > >   Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and > >piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! > >   Bill > >     ----- Original Message ----- > >     From: Bill Morgan > >     To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com > >     Cc: editor@liberator.net > >     Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM > >     Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to you > > > > > >     Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many > >times > >     and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. > > > >     Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) > > > > > >     >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> > >     >To: <DWise1@aol.com> > >     >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> > >     >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now >offer > >to > >     >you > >     >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >     > > >     >Sorry, > >     >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  >Well > >if > >     >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered > >your > >     >name > >     >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional > >topic and > >     >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his > >"lifes > >     >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he > >believes > >     >in > >     >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much >is > >     >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party >will > >ever > >     >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I >believe > >in > >     >God > >     >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the > >time to > >     >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone > >if the > >     >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  >Maybe > >you > >     >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I >wish > >you > >     >all > >     >well.  Take Care, Bill B. > >     > > >     > > -----Original Message----- > >     > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > >     > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > >     > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > >     > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > >     > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now > >offer to > >     > > you > >     > > > >     > > > >     > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > >     > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > >     > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > >     > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > >     > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own >fundamentalist > >     > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at >to > >     > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > >     > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > >     > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > >     > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > >     > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > >     > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian > >values. > >     > > > >     > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is >why > >     > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > >     > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > >     > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > >     > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > >     > > said and what was going on. > >     > > > >     > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > >     > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > >     > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > >     > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > >     > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts >whereas > >     > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > >     > > examination of the facts. > >     > > > >     > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > >     > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  >He > >     > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > >     > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that >I > >     > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > >     > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > >     > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > >     > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he >provides > >     > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > >     > > order to arrive at the truth. > >     > > > >     > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > >     > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > >     > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for >examination > >     > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > >     > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > >     > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > >     > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > >     > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > >     > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to > >behave? > >     > > > >     > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > >     > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to >you > >     > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > >     > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > >     > > neither of us. > >     > > > >     > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > >     > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > >     > > > >     > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > >     > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > >     > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > >     > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > >     > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of >accusations > >     > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > >     > > made those accusations. > >     > > > >     > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > >     > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > >     > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > >     > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > >     > > there in the record. > >     > > > >     > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > >     > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > >     > > > >     > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > >     > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > >     > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > >     > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > >     > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > >     > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > >     > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > >     > > > >     > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > >     > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > >     > > > >     > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > >     > > > >     > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy > >society". > >     > > > >     > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > >     > > > >     > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > >     > > 2nd grader." > >     > > > >     > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > >     > > > >     > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > >     > > > >     > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > >     > > > >     > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > >     > > beleive in Gid". > >     > > > >     > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > >     > > world's most sinister people". > >     > > > >     > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > >     > > > >     > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > >     > > religious". > >     > > > >     > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > >     > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > >     > > to all parties for having made those accusations and >particularly > >     > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > >     > > > >     > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ > >     Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > >http://www.hotmail.com. > > > >     Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > >     http://profiles.msn.com. > > > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (rly-yh03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.35]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b4.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:03:58 -0400 Received: from lsmls01.we.mediaone.net (lsmls01.we.mediaone.net [24.130.1.20]) by rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:03:38 -0400 Received: from gunsgalore (1Cust147.tnt1.huntington-beach2.ca.da.uu.net [63.17.32.147]) by lsmls01.we.mediaone.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA06964; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <005401c023e5$19a99140$5351480c@com> From: "Media One Mail" To: "Bill Morgan" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: What do dogs have bad dreams about? Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:59:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0049_01C023AA.4ADA3200" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 ################################################ Subj: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: 21-Sep-00 16:20:55 Pacific Daylight Time From: editor@liberator.net (Mark) To: plasma@worldnet.att.net CC: DWise1@aol.com, billyjack1@hotmail.com I wouldn't bore my worst enemy with Morgan's pro-religious tripe. Mark The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: .. To: Mark Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 10:28 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Buddy!!! Come to the party!!!! Bring your family :) ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark To: plasma@worldnet.att.net Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:52 PM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you If it's possible for fictional characters to love... ----- Original Message ----- From: .. To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You! Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Morgan To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com Cc: editor@liberator.net Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected. You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat! :) >From: "Bill Bequette" >To: >CC: , >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email. Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values". You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa. I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics. Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases. I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand. Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little. I wish you >all >well. Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth. I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter. From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth. Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined. That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is. That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts. I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter. He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things. I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print. I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it. Bill steadfastly refuses. Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written? I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully. That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth. Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth. I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being. You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is. Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent. We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts. What does he think I said to insult > > his wife? What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information. Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can. As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion. About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion. Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --------------------
I wouldn't bore my worst enemy with Morgan's pro-religious tripe.
 
Mark
The Liberator E-Mail: editor@liberator.net Web Site: http://liberator.net/
----- Original Message -----
From: ..
To: Mark
Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Buddy!!! Come to the party!!!!  Bring your family :)
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net
Cc: DWise1@aol.com ; billyjack1@hotmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
If it's possible for fictional characters to love...
----- Original Message -----
From: ..
To: Bill Morgan ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Break bread and become friends!!!! It is amazing what a cup of pop and piece of pizza can accomplish! Jesus Loves You!
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Morgan
To: plasma@worldnet.att.net ; DWise1@aol.com
Cc: editor@liberator.net
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you
Bill, good point, I offered to meet Mr Wise for food and drink many times and have been rejected.  You know how much I hate typing. Mr Wise, lets meet and eat!  :) >From: "Bill Bequette" <plasma@worldnet.att.net> >To: <DWise1@aol.com> >CC: <editor@liberator.net>, <billyjack1@hotmail.com> >Subject: RE: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to >you >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 16:27:55 -0700 > >Sorry, >I didn't see the explanation below when I sent the other email.  Well if >Bill does not agree with your viewpoint or seems to have slandered your >name >it may be because discussions about religion are a very emotional topic and >even if you were correct you could not ask him to relinquish his "lifes >values".  You may be asking him to relinquish everything that he believes >in >i.e. his entire personality and vice versa.  I don't believe much is >accomplished in discussing religion, or politics.  Neither party will ever >agree with the other in most cases.  I am not refuting that I believe in >God >by the above or that you or Bill are correct(I just don't have the time to >review all your emails) just that some issues are better left alone if the >goal is to convert the other based on the discussion at hand.  Maybe you >should all get together and have a pizza and chill a little.  I wish you >all >well.  Take Care, Bill B. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DWise1@aol.com [mailto:DWise1@aol.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 2:56 PM > > To: plasma@worldnet.att.net > > Cc: dwise1@aol.com; editor@liberator.net; billyjack1@hotmail.com > > Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to > > you > > > > > > Bill B., I understand that Bill Morgan (Bill M.) is your friend, > > but I would hope that that friendship would not prevent you from > > seeking the truth.  I am not asking you to side with me against > > your friend, but rather that you side with the cause of > > determining the truth of this matter.  From my own fundamentalist > > Christian training, I remember being taught that Christians at to > > serve the God of Truth, which Bill has echoed in his published > > writings by telling proselytization trainees that they serve > > Truth.  Unless fundamentalist Christian thought has changed > > radically in the past few decades (besides the heavy > > politization), I would expect you to also want to serve Truth. > > That is all that I ask, that you honor and apply those Christian values. > > > > In order to serve Truth, the facts must be examined.  That is why > > I had CC:'d all those messages to you, so that you could learn > > something about what the situation here really is.  That is also > > why I told you where you could find copies of the correspondence > > between Bill and me, so you could see for yourself what had been > > said and what was going on. > > > > Bill misled you to believe that this was a disagreement over > > world-views and that I was closing my eyes to the facts.  I am > > truly sorry to have to tell you this, but Bill lied to you. > > World views had not had a chance to enter into the discussion. > > And I have steadfastly insisted that we examine the facts whereas > > Bill has steadfastly refused to and is willfully preventing our > > examination of the facts. > > > > No, what the disagreement is over is that Bill has > > libelled/slandered me and I am trying to resolve that matter.  He > > has made several false accusations against me, saying that I had > > said or that I believe various horrible things.  I am sure that I > > had never said such things to Bill or about Bill in print.  I > > have repeatedly asked Bill to substantiate his accusations, at > > the very least he needs to tell me what I had said, as close as > > he can remember it.  Bill steadfastly refuses.  Until he provides > > that information, we cannot know which messages to examine in > > order to arrive at the truth. > > > > In order to arrive at the truth in this matter, we need to > > examine the facts, ie, what does Bill think I had said and what > > had I actually written?  I have repeatedly called for examination > > of the facts and Bill has steadfastly ignored those requests. > > Since I find it impossible to believe that he could have missed > > over 20 very clear requests (about 27 now, if we include > > references to those requests), Bill must be withholding his > > information willfully.  That would mean that Bill is willfully > > opposing the Truth.  Is that how a Christian is supposed to behave? > > > > As I said, I am not asking you to side with me against Bill, but > > rather that you side with the Truth.  I have just repeated to you > > what I see the situation as being.  You can read the actual > > transcript to see whether I am being truthful or Bill is.  Or > > neither of us. > > > > In either case, we still need to resolve this matter. > > Unfortunately, Bill is being intransigent.  We need help. > > > > The actual role that I would like you to take is to try to > > convince Bill to relinguish his information so that we can > > finally examine the facts.  What does he think I said to insult > > his wife?  What "very nasty names" does he think I called him? > > At the end of this message, I will repeat the list of accusations > > Bill made against me; at least he confirmed that he had indeed > > made those accusations. > > > > If you are unsuccessful in that endeavor, then at least try to > > get Bill to explain to you why he refuses to divulge that > > information.  Please remind him that if I had truly done the > > things that he had accused me of, then we would find them right > > there in the record. > > > > Then if he refuses to give you that explanation, please ask he > > why he is afraid to have the facts examined in this case. > > > > Personally, I believe that Bill Morgan sees this mess as one big > > "rabbit trail" that he wants to milk for all that he can.  As > > long as we are mired in this mess, we cannot have a meaningful > > discussion.  About three years of correspondence with Bill has > > taught me that he is very evasive and will do almost anything he > > can to avoid having a meaningful discussion.  Even break one of > > the Ten Commandments by bearing false witness. > > > > A list of a few of the false accusations Bill Morgan has made > > against me and refuses to substantiate follows: > > > > 1. Having conducted "bigoted attacks on [him] and [his] wife" > > > > 2. Thinking he is "some evil wicked person out to destroy society". > > > > 3. Thinking he is "wacked for beleiving in God". > > > > 4. "[P]ersonally insulting [him] on the level of a name calling > > 2nd grader." > > > > 5. "[I]nsulting [his] wife and [him]. > > > > 6. That my wife and I had labelled him and his wife as evil. > > > > 7. Calling him "very nasty names." > > > > 8. That I had told him "what [my] wife thought of those who > > beleive in Gid". > > > > 9. That I would think he and his wife "are evil and wicked, the > > world's most sinister people". > > > > 10. That I refuse to meet him because of his beliefs. > > > > 11. That I sent electronically "many nasty words that were anti > > religious". > > > > Bill needs to either substantiate these accusations or else > > acknowledge that they are false and offer a most sincere apology > > to all parties for having made those accusations and particularly > > for having prevented the timely resolution of this matter. > > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye02.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.3) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:20:55 -0400 Received: from uucphost.mcs.net (kitten2.mcs.com [192.160.127.90]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:20:27 -0400 Received: from liber8r (liber8r.pr.mcs.net [199.3.42.5]) by uucphost.mcs.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA25220; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:20:20 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from editor@liberator.net) Message-ID: <002801c02422$bb76ffc0$052a03c7@liber8r> From: "Mark" To: Cc: , References: <006601c0231a$76db9dc0$716a480c@com> <001601c02366$48dc3000$052a03c7@liber8r> <003101c023e1$f86ed240$5351480c@com> Subject: Re: Bretheren and Fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:21:54 -0500 Organization: n/a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0025_01C023F8.D1CFEC20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ################################################