If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
Jan appears to be yet another casualty of religious extremism.
"Mark Thorson" wrote in message ... Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m24.aol.com Their are Jews here and there are atheists, (they are the ones who have told the group) with the exception of IIena, they have proven themselves to be liars, deceitful and insulters. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m11.aol.com That's because most every atheist and jew here has INDEED lied. They know it, yet they cover for each other. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com The group here are mostly atheists and jews, (who falsely believe they are enlightened) and need to have an argument going, thinking they can boast their ego. They tell lies, twist what is said, and IMHO are lead by Satan. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com The truth is that most debunkers on MHA who LIE through their tetth, do nothing but belittle, and are filled with hate, are atheists or jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com I repeat: The debubnker's here are atheist or jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com No, they aren't right, they are greatly deceived as Eve was when Satan debunked God's word. That was the start of debunking. Then the jews Jesus's very own people tried to debunk his words, and even debunked his miracles whch happened right before their eyes. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com Yes Jesus was a jew, his own people rejected him. They debunked all his words and works, and now debunking and lies are second nature to them. That is how Satan works. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m26.aol.com Most of the debunkers are either atheists or Jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems the Jews here have taken over this ng, with their vile false accusations and they are all filled with hate. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems to me the Jews here are trying to get even for the holocaust. When noone here was in any way involved. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m24.aol.com Their are Jews here and there are atheists, (they are the ones who have told the group) with the exception of IIena, they have proven themselves to be liars, deceitful and insulters. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m11.aol.com That's because most every atheist and jew here has INDEED lied. They know it, yet they cover for each other. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com The group here are mostly atheists and jews, (who falsely believe they are enlightened) and need to have an argument going, thinking they can boast their ego. They tell lies, twist what is said, and IMHO are lead by Satan. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com The truth is that most debunkers on MHA who LIE through their tetth, do nothing but belittle, and are filled with hate, are atheists or jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com I repeat: The debubnker's here are atheist or jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com No, they aren't right, they are greatly deceived as Eve was when Satan debunked God's word. That was the start of debunking. Then the jews Jesus's very own people tried to debunk his words, and even debunked his miracles whch happened right before their eyes. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com Yes Jesus was a jew, his own people rejected him. They debunked all his words and works, and now debunking and lies are second nature to them. That is how Satan works. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m26.aol.com Most of the debunkers are either atheists or Jews. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems the Jews here have taken over this ng, with their vile false accusations and they are all filled with hate. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems to me the Jews here are trying to get even for the holocaust. When noone here was in any way involved. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Mark Throson's repeated rant.....Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
"Skeptic" wrote in message newsqRIj.49775$TT4.38990@attbi_s22... Jan appears to be yet another casualty of religious extremism. Brandon is so eager to believe the *out of context* repeated posting of Mark Thorson. Jan has never had to make a retraction for lying and plastering those lies all over the internet. Quoting form the ORIGINAL [under the address http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...131ae 27a3b5a WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT, ALGAE Copyright Mark Thorson 1995, 1996 SBGA is the cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) known as _Aphanizomenon_flos-aquae_. Whether or not it is a good idea to eat this stuff may be judged by reviewing the scientific and medical literature. Quoting from _The_Lancet_, "Hazardous Freshwater Cyano- Bacteria (Blue-Green Algae)", June 12, 1993, volume 341, pages 1519 and 1520: "Cyanobacteria, especially members of the genera _Microcystis_, _Anabaena_, _Aphanizomenon_, and _Oscillatoria_, are common and potentially harmful inhabitants of freshwater. Many species contain lipopolysaccharide endotoxins, but also, more importantly, can produce several potent hepatotoxins (microcystins) and neurotoxins (eg, anatoxins, saxitoxin)." "Whenever a diagnosis of cyanobacterial intoxication is a possibility, it is essential (in the UK) to notify the local Consultant in Communicable Disease Control. Control measures may need to be instituted as a priority to minimize the risk to others. Furthermore, early notification of potential outbreaks will facilitate proper prospective epidemiological studies, which are essential if the risks from cyanobacteria are to be properly measured." Quoting from _Journal_of_Medical_Microbiology_, "Cyanobacteria and Human Health", 1992, volume 36, page 301: "_Aphanizomenon_flosaquae_ produces neosaxitoxin, which causes paralysis by reversibly blocking sodium conductance in neurones. In addition, lipopolysaccharide endotoxins have been demonstrated in some blooms. Some algal toxins are also potent tumor promoters in animal models." "It is clear that cyanobacteria are a potential hazard to human health." Quoting from _Nature_, "Fatal Attraction To Cyanobacteria", September 10, 1992, volume 359, page 110: "The buoyant growth habit of the widely encountered toxigenic, planktonic genera such as _Microcystis_, _Anabaena_, _Aphanizomenon_, _Nodularia_ and some _Oscillatoria_ species can result in scum formation in lakes and ponds during calm weather, so that an acutely toxic dose of cyanobacterial toxins can be presented ..." Quoting from _Journal_of_Applied_Phycology_, "Anatoxin-A Concentration in _Anabaena_ and _Aphanizomenon_ Under Different Environmental Conditions And Comparison Of Growth By Toxic And Non-Toxic _Anabaena_ Strains: A Laboratory Study", 1993, volume 5, number 6, page 581: "Anatoxin-a-concentration in cells of _Anabaena_- and _Aphanizomenon_-strains and in their growth media were studied in the laboratory in batch cultures at different temperatures, light fluxes, orthophosphate and nitrate concentrations and with different nitrogen sources for growth." "The highest light flux studied did not limit the growth or decrease the level of the toxin in the cells of _Aphanizomenon_." Quoting from _Journal_of_Applied_Bacteriology_, "Cyanobacteria Secondary Metabolites--the Cyanotoxins", 1992, volume 72, pages 448 and 449: "The production of neurotoxin by _Aphanizomenon_ _flos-aquae_ was first demonstrated by Sawyer _et_al._ (1968). These neurotoxins were later shown to be saxitoxin (STX) and neosaxitoxin (NEOSTX) (LD50 i.p. mouse equals about 10 micrograms/kilogram), the two primary toxins of red tide paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP)." "Acute hepatotoxicosis involving the hepatotoxins (liver toxins) is the most commonly encountered toxicosis involving cyanobacteria. These toxins are produced by strains of species within the genera _Microcystis_, _Anabaena_, _Nodularia_, _Oscillatoria_ and _Nostoc_. In addition, chemically undefined hepatotoxins are being studied in _Cylindrospermopsis_, _Aphanizomenon_, _Gloeotrichia_ and _Coelosphaerium_. Clinical signs of hepatotoxicosis have been observed in field poisonings involving cattle, sheep, horses, pigs, ducks and other wild and domestic animals. Most laboratory studies have involved the use of mice, rats, guinea pigs, rabbits and pigs. Collectively, the signs of poisoning in these animals include weakness, anorexia, pallor of mucous membranes, vomiting, cold extremities, and diarrheoa." Quoting from Haezl DOES MARK THORSON HAVE SOME HIDDEN PURPOSE ??? copyright 1996 Haezl at Brigit's Garden It is interesting that none of the cases cited in your file reported hepatotoxicosis or weakness, anorexia, pallor of mucous membranes, vomiting, cold extremities and diarrhea as the "scientific studies" predict in your first file. It seems inconsistent to start another line of attack until the anecdotal verification of your first file is accomplished. I wonder what lies behind this vehement reaction to my original post, which had a great deal more to attack than my simple endorsement of this food? I have said a lot of things that would be more controversial. Quoting from the official FDA Complaint/Injury Report on Cell Tech, April 4, 1995, filed by Cecilia Wolyniak, Division of Emergency and Enforcement Operations [quoting a complainant]: "I believe Cell Tech's algae is a _powerful_drug_ which must be regulated by the FDA. Further, the Oregon Department of Agriculture has cited Cell Tech for rat droppings in the storage areas and for a substantial number of insect parts in the product. It is difficult to believe that the FDA would permit a company like Cell Tech to sell what I believe to be a potent drug, under the guise of the label of 'food supplements,' under DSHEA of 1994 without oversight, monitoring, control and mandated safety testing. Simple logic would dictate that in addition to efficacy safety testing, the FDA would not permit a Merck, Squibb or a Genentech to allow insect particles in their products sanctioned by the FDA or permit rat droppings in their product storage areas." I doubt that the CellTech facility is as bad as this statement would lead one to believe. It seems to me that there are no closed doors, and I will take steps as soon as practical for me to visit Klamath Lake and see for myself. In the meantime we have to be aware that Alphanizomenon flos-aqua is considered a food. Like corn or spinach, or Broccoli, foods are desirable to other living things, especially if it is good food. Just think about how the restaurant industry skates on the edge of the practical as we share this planet with a lot of other life. Unlike chemicals patented by Merck, Squibb or Genetech, Alphanizomenon is a life-form that lives in a very healthy lake, is harvested and freeze-dried in an excellent facility and sold as a food. Sounds a lot more like farming than pharmaceuticals, and less prone to contamination than farming with pesticides and chemical "fertilizers". During corn-shelling time I have stood near the crib to watch the rodents scatter. If they didn't like the corn, neither would I. This leads me to wonder if you, Mr. Thorson, possibly represent the interests of some chemical industry, possibly using the methods of misdirection to further those anti-organic agendas. Just a thought. Blessed be, Haezl (Mark Thorson) wrote: In article , Haezl wrote: DOES MARK THORSON HAVE SOME HIDDEN PURPOSE ??? copyright 1996 Haezl at Brigit's Garden It is interesting that none of the cases cited in your file reported hepatotoxicosis or weakness, anorexia, pallor of mucous membranes, vomiting, cold extremities and diarrhea as the "scientific studies" predict in your first file. Quoting from "Blue-Green Algae Blues" in _Vegetarian_Times_, issue 216, August 1995, page 18: "Cell Tech distributors acknowledge that blue-green algae users can experience nausea, vomiting, tingling, and flatulence, signs the body is 'ridding itself of toxins'." I'm wondering why I never experienced any of these effects? Inconsistent? I like to think I am very consistent. Ask any SBGA dealer on the net. I wonder what lies behind this vehement reaction to my original post, which had a great deal more to attack than my simple endorsement of this food? I have said a lot of things that would be more controversial. I only noticed the one where you were hawking the algae. My statements regarding the aquisition of information from CellTech in the form of an audio tape is hardly "hawking". My statements were directed toward the consequences of having more health and energy- what we might do with it. Since my own results and my families' indicates the effectiveness of this product I thought it would be interesting to discuss these matters. Your attack sidesteps these important issues: current farming practices, "third-world" hunger, the incursion of European chauvinism in elder cultures, and what the technologically advanced nations might better spend some effort on than fighting each other. With that in mind I will not further waste any effort with mutual character assasinations, but challenge you to address some of these issues. This leads me to wonder if you, Mr. Thorson, possibly represent the interests of some chemical industry, possibly using the methods of misdirection to further those anti-organic agendas. Just a thought. Not an attack; a simple speculation. Again, just a pure poison-pen speculation with no evidence. Just a dodge to throw doubt on someone who knows the truth against which you have no defense. Currently, my work is mostly on formulation of silicone polymer systems, which is not an industry threatened by cyanobacterial products, food, drug, or otherwise. I just can't help wondering why your attack is so vehement. My agenda is entirely in he open, while the energy you are expending seems to have no purpose other than to attack. Blessed be, Haezl Aumkara Productions" wrote: Hi are you all referring to the blue-green algae that floats on rivers? If you are then I most heartily recommend DO NOT EAT IT! In australia blue-green algae periodically comes into bloom on our inland waterways and poisons... (snip) How you can recommend for people to deliberately go out and buy the stuff to eat is completely beyond me. R Of course not. The algae at issue is a particular kind from Klamath Lake in Oregon. It is harvested and subjected to as thorough examination as any other plant food- probably more. The source is pure and uncontaminated. Mr Thorson has cited some laboratory studies that indicate the possibility of some toxins in some samples (from where they were taken has not been addressed.) He also listed some statements he has collected from persons with different experiences than mine, and not cared to discuss the other issues in my original posting. It has led me to wonder why he is so vehement. Your concern is directed toward a very broad range of algaes that may have nothing to do with Alphanizomenon flos-aqua, and certainly nothing to do with Klamath Lake. I intend, as time and opportunity permits, to get more information of a first-hand kind- including the eating of Alphanizomenon as long as I continue to experience the effects of good health. I would like to add that attacks of a similar nature have been made against a number of the medicinal herbs I continue to grow and use on a similar basis. These attacks have often originated from sources at risk from the success of herbal remedies. I no personal feelings about Mr. Thorson. Blessed be, Haezl Quoting from Mark Thorson Haezl This leads me to wonder if you, Mr. Thorson, possibly represent the interests of some chemical industry, possibly using the methods of misdirection to further those anti-organic agendas. Just a thought. Not an attack; a simple speculation. A speculation with absolutely no foundation. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ From a poster: The following was posted on Cell-Tech's web page, probably as a response to your posts: "Nonetheless, to ensure that Aphanizomenon flos-aquae from Klamath Lake does not produce anatoxin-a, a specific procedure called GC/ECD (Stevens and Krieger, 1988) was performed. This test also demonstrated the absence of a neurotoxin. However, this assay is expensive and complex and is not practical as a fast assay for anatoxin-a. No laboratory offers the possibility to perform this assay on a regular basis at this point." Does this convince you that the SBGA does NOT contain this neurotoxin, anatoxin-a? Mark Thorson wrote: In article , Steve & Mary Jane Fisher wrote: Quoted from the {http://www.celltech.com} homepage Response: By isolating pieces of the information rather than presenting all relevant data, certain individuals have distorted the facts regarding Aphanizomenon flos-aquae from Klamath Lake. distorted in deed....relfections of the authors lack of knowledge. For further information about green superfood please visit: Distorted? Lack of knowledge? If there are any errors in my files, please point them out. I'll either fix them or explain why they are not errors. Please, please. Where are they? I have a standing offer to correct my files if there's anything untrue or misleading in them. Just tell me, and I'll take care of it, one way or the other. Hello, hello? Are you listening? "You still aren't home....but just maybe if I bang loud enough you will hear me this time". Please explain why the files are not errors that you are pasting and quoting and/or from where they came from and how long ago? I would like to see the hard copy print from where you are getting this information as several other readers of this newsgroup have requested. This is for public knowledge, right? I'd appreciate you sharing that. The files that you are requesting are probably for the Cell Tech Corporate office or I think you might of had your answer by now. There must be certain privacy acts that most likely every company holds. Why would the Department of Agriculture allow them to continue to operate if your files are in fact legitimate? There are hundreds of quality assurance requirements for most companies that market a product. The FDA & Dept of Agriculture have very strict & precise guidelines. *** "Hello...are you home yet?" I understand that Cell Tech is almost 15 years old and is one of the top ten multi-level marketing company's voted by consumers. This company has the best creditability & integrity of any company I have ever encountered. They are truely a company that cares about people...I would recommend them to anyone. They have Global Vision...they have a heart~! Please visit them at: {http://www.celltech.com} Be sure to visit the Response to Misinformation and Research Lab to stay informed on the best superfood on earth~! Have a Blue Green Day~! Distorted? Lack of knowledge? If there are any errors in my files, please point them out. I'll either fix them or explain why they are not errors. Please, please. Where are they? I have a standing offer to correct my files if there's anything untrue or misleading in them. Just tell me, and I'll take care of it, one way or the other. Hello, hello? Are you listening? Speaking of not listening... Mark has ignored my repeated requests for information on WHY he is posting this "information", and what his background is that allows him to make these charges, and if he represents a competitor. I also sent him email directly, asking this information, and was completely ignored. Therefore, I can only conclude that he DOES represent some competitor who would be better off if the Cell Tech products did not do well. The fact that he has chosen to HIDE this antagonistic relationship, leads me to believe that his "information" is totally suspect and without merit. Therefore, I'm going to start taking the Cell Tech products as originally planned. I wish I'd never bothered to look in this newsgroup for non-commercial information on the algae, since all I found was further commercial posts (from Mary Jane & Steve), and Mark's seemingly-commercial anti-Cell Tech dis-information. Hope you folks seeking out other alternative health solutions have much better luck than I have! Disappointedly yours, Stew Quoting from Mark Thorson: In early 1996, I got e-mail from somebody who told me how to get Cell Tech's FDA file. I did that, and some of the smaller files I post are based on that information. That's where I learned about vitamin B-12 analogs. From a poster: Okay, I'll ask again. How can I get my hands on Cell Tech's FDA file? Net search or do I have to ask for it via snail mail? I want to see more info. Quoting from Bubba: Mark Thorson wrote in : Jan wrote: [...] I note you didn't respond to Bubba's post, nor answer his questions. Bubba is a twit that asks questions I've already answered. If he can't be bothered to read the earlier postings, why should I respond to him? I'm a twit?!?!? Mark, YOU are the one who posted to several Usenet newsgroups (over a period of several years) the completely speculative piece of crap titled "AN ANATOXIN-A PRIMER." Here they are again. Mark, did you make the following post to Usenet?: Yes, I posted the retraction. Mark, what's the difference between lying AND making a suggestion that has no basis? To be a lie, a statement would have to be untrue, would it not? I'm not aware of any untrue statements I have made about the algae. I've asked you to post an example of such a statement, and it appears that you are also unaware of any such statement. From: Mark Thorson ) Subject: An Anatoxin-a Primer Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative, sci.med.nutrition Date: 1995/11/11 [...] [The test described in this paper was first presented at a conference in Seattle in 1986. This test is almost 10 years old. A spokesman for Cell Tech cited the An and Carmichael (1994) paper as a testing protocol that is currently performed on SBGA. Cell Tech isn't slow to adopt new technology. So why isn't this testing protocol performed on SBGA? Could it be that anatoxin-a is the active ingredient, and that eliminating anatoxin-a from SBGA would be like taking the nicotine out of tobacco?] [...] "So why isn't this testing protocol performed on SBGA?" At the time you wrote this statement, was Cell Tech using this testing protocol? Why don't you give us YOUR definition of the word "lie"? At the least, I would consider it necessary for the statement to be untrue. I haven't decided whether other qualifiers would also be necessary for an untrue statement -- for example if someone would have to know that a statement was untrue when it was made. Even taking the broader definition (the form that includes all untrue statements, either with or without knowledge), I don't believe I have ever lied about the algae. I've asked you to post an example of such a statement, and it appears that you are also unaware of any such statement. Did you ever lie or make ANY incorrect statement with respect to the testing protocols used by Cell Tech or were there any other incorrect statements in your posts with respect to EITHER the algae OR Cell Tech? If not, then why did you make the following retraction?: "The Anatoxin-a Primer implied that Super Blue Green Algae from Klamath Lake, produced by Cell Tech, contains anatoxin-a (a neurotoxin I characterized as addictive), and that Cell Tech deliberately avoids testing for this toxin because anatoxin-a is responsible for the effects reported by SBGA users. I have since been advised that Cell Tech conducts regular tests that would disclose anatoxin-a, and that this toxin has never been found in Super Blue Green Algae. I had no basis for the suggestions I made in the Anatoxin-a Primer, and I hereby retract it in full." Isn't it true that you claimed that Cell Tech did NOT test for anatoxin-a, but that claim was false? [...] -- Bubba "When you got nothin', you got nothin' to lose." - Bob Dylan Your lies are WELL PROVEN, LOSER Mark Thorson. What's more, you continue to tell them. "Mark Thorson" Repeatedly lied: Nothing in the retraction says that any of my statements were false, and certainly not lies. There were absolutely no false statements in anything I said about the algae, and Jan knows that. I've asked her to cite an example of a false statement made by me, and she can't do it. One individual was responsible for a great deal of miscommunication regarding anatoxin-a, information which is still accessible on many Internet sites. Cell Tech sued Mark Thorson for posting defamatory statements about Cell Tech, its products and its personnel to various Internet or Usenet news groups. Cell Tech's lawsuit against Mr. Thorson has now been settled. As part of the settlement agreement, Mr. Thorson has posted the Retraction Statement that appears below. Although he did retract the allegations that he had been widely circulating, we all know that one cannot, with a single correct statement, undo all the harm done by many mis-statements that continue to circulate. The following is a retraction statement that Mark Thorson has posted to various newsgroups: Subject: Retraction of Anatoxin-a Primer During the last several years, I have from time to time posted to this and other newsgroups a file of information called "An Anatoxin-a Primer." I now retract the statements made in the Anatoxin-a Primer. The Anatoxin-a Primer implied that Super Blue Green Algae from Klamath Lake, produced by Cell Tech, contains anatoxin-a (a neurotoxin I characterized as addictive), and that Cell Tech deliberately avoids testing for this toxin because anatoxin-a is responsible for the effects reported by SBGA users. I have since been advised that Cell Tech conducts regular tests that would disclose anatoxin-a, and that this toxin has never been found in Super Blue Green Algae. I had no basis for the suggestions I made in the Anatoxin-a Primer, and I hereby retract it in full. Mis-state to state incorrectly : give a false account of False intentionally untrue lie untrue with intent to deceive =========== Cell Tech says: ****That does not mean that you present the truth.***** *****but you are being *****untruthful******* ***Mark Thorson,it is disappointing to find that he is not truly looking for answers*** ************** (as he has received the answers*** many times)***** *** Mr. Thorson knows this but has also refused to accept**** (as proven he is still doing it) ***intent slanderous*** ***Mr. Thomson is well aware that Super Blue Green Algae does not contain any neurotoxin as he was actually involved with a court case in which the plaintiff against Cell Tech claimed there were neurotoxins in the algae.*** *** Mr. Thomson is also well aware that the case was dropped because noneurotoxins whatsoever were ever found after two years of testing by the mostreputable scientists in algal toxicology throughout the world**** ****Mr.Thorson's intent to create alarm and public panic regarding the microcystinissue demonstrates a lack of knowledge or slanderous intent.*** In light of the information shared above, the focus on microcystin in blue-green algaecertainly appears to be a ***vicious obsession.*** ***Why Mr. Thorson spends so much lime and energy bashing Cell Tech and SuperBlue-Green Algae remains a mystery to me and many other scientists who have the background to properly interpret the scientific literature***. **** He does not appear to be interested in discovering the truth*** since it has been conveyed to him ***many times**** and out of the court case mentioned above, he knows that there is no neurotoxin whatsoever present in Super Blue-Green Algae. In addition, ****Mr. Thorson makes a concerted and unsolicited effort to track down and forward his postings to anyone he suspects to be interested or involved with Super Blue Green Algae. I suppose that this is an unfortunate side to freedom of speech which, when coupled with the power of the internet, allows someone to spread *** **erroneous statements*** ============ Mark Thorson (NOTETHE DATE*AFTER* ,Mark had already admitted he had LIED, HE GOES, right back to LYING AGAIN! Oct 9, 7:13 pm *2004* wrote: Nowhere in that posting do I post your "private address and phone number". In that posting, you posted a link that says at the top Switchboard *People Results* Nowhere in that posting do I post your "private address and phone number". I merely posted the URL to a database that had your PUBLIC information in it, the same information anyone could have found in a phone book. No private information is in the database at switchboard.com. Nowhere in that posting do I post your "private address and phone number". In that posting, you posted a link that says at the top Switchboard *People Results* It says that every time a new search is done. When you follow the link, a new search is performed. I did not post any search results, only the link. Your assertion that I posted search results is false. You can't. Your assertion that I posted your address is false Why are you unable to back up your accusation against me with EVEN ONE example of one of these lies you claim I told. At the time I posted it, three J. Drew's showed up in Bloomington, That was a people's results page and NOT the URLto a database that had your PUBLIC information. No, it was not a link to results. A new search is performed each time the link is followed. If a link to the results of a search I had performed was posted, it would still be possible to see those results by following the link. But it isn't. A new search is performed each time. From: Mark Thorson ) Subject: Admitting when one is wrong View this article only Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-05-26 21:30:10 PST Karuna wrote: Is this what happened? Mark (Thorson): In July 2001 someone suggested to you, here on mha, that another poster was most likely female and also might be apprehensive about being harrassed by others on the 'net. You responded by posting a linked access to several names and phone numbers, one of which might be that person, thereby *inviting* such harrassment. Is that true? **"Inviting" is your characterization, but I did post the link to switchboard.com, which was a simple search that yielded several names, any or none of which could have been Jan, which came from a public database.*** **And if Jan had said it that way, I would not have disputed the accuracy of what she said, except in the area of intent. *** It was more of an impulse*** decision, triggered by the previous posting in the thread ***It was as though a finger-shaped holes suddenly appeared in front of me.** ****I couldn't resist sticking my finger in it.**** At the time, it didn'tseem like a big deal, because it was just like calling up information on the phone. But I see now that it doesn't look any different than encouraging harassment, so I agree that I shouldn't have done it. On this one point, Jan, I apologize. I do not wish any third party to harass you. ================ "Mark Thorson" wrote in message ... Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m24.aol.com Their are Jews here and there are atheists, (they are the ones who have told the group) with the exception of IIena, they have proven themselves to be liars, deceitful and insulters. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m11.aol.com That's because most every atheist and jew here has INDEED lied. They know it, yet they cover for each other. Proven over and over to be the absolute truth. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com The group here are mostly atheists and jews, (who falsely believe they are enlightened) and need to have an argument going, thinking they can boast their ego. They tell lies, twist what is said, and IMHO are lead by Satan. Correct. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com The truth is that most debunkers on MHA who LIE through their tetth, do nothing but belittle, and are filled with hate, are atheists or jews. True, and they owe apologies. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m19.aol.com I repeat: The debubnker's here are atheist or jews. That should read debunkers. Yes, it most certain is ture. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com No, they aren't right, they are greatly deceived as Eve was when Satan debunked God's word. That was the start of debunking. Then the jews Jesus's very own people tried to debunk his words, and even debunked his miracles whch happened right before their eyes. Thanks for posting this truth. However, there is NO hatred in telling the truth. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m15.aol.com Yes Jesus was a jew, his own people rejected him. They debunked all his words and works, and now debunking and lies are second nature to them. That is how Satan works. Correct. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...mb-m26.aol.com Most of the debunkers are either atheists or Jews. This was already posted. You see Mark Thorson's problem is not knowing when to shut up. They is the reason he made a retraction. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems the Jews here have taken over this ng, with their vile false accusations and they are all filled with hate. Yes, and Mark Thorson just proved it. Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...0mb-mf.aol.com It seems to me the Jews here are trying to get even for the holocaust. When noone here was in any way involved. Absolutely correct. NO hatred. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
On Apr 2, 1:40*pm, Mark Thorson wrote:
Quoting from this ORIGINAL posting from Jan Drew:http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20...00000180%40mb-... Their are Jews here and there are atheists, (they are the ones who have told the group) with the exception of IIena, they have proven themselves to be *liars, deceitful and insulters. Looks like you need to take this up with the Pope---I just read this article a few minutes ago. How disgusting---people accusing people of this and that, all of the while wanting free speech.....if one group gets it, I guess everyone group should have it..... I guess the Pope just got accused of this and that too. http://www.ejpress.org/article/news/25502 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Mark Throson's repeated rant.....Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
"Jan Drew" wrote in message et... "Skeptic" wrote in message newsqRIj.49775$TT4.38990@attbi_s22... Jan appears to be yet another casualty of religious extremism. Skeptic is so eager to believe the *out of context* repeated posting of Mark Thorson. Jan has never had to make a retraction for lying and plastering those lies all over the internet. Why do you talk about yourself in the 3rd person? Your comments about jews and atheists are disturbing no matter what context you put them in. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Mark Throson's repeated rant.....Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
"Skeptic" wrote in message news:nHeJj.51493$TT4.3026@attbi_s22... "Jan Drew" wrote in message et... "Skeptic" wrote in message newsqRIj.49775$TT4.38990@attbi_s22... Jan appears to be yet another casualty of religious extremism. Skeptic is so eager to believe the *out of context* repeated posting of Mark Thorson. Jan has never had to make a retraction for lying and plastering those lies all over the internet. Why do you talk about yourself in the 3rd person? Your comments about jews and atheists are disturbing no matter what context you put them in. Truth brings unrest to the guilty. It is noted you are silent about Mark's blatant lies. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Part 2: Mark Throson's repeated rant.....Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews
In misc.health.alternative Jan Drew wrote:
: Truth brings unrest to the guilty. Is that why you refuse to read the passage from Leviticus that I have cited to you on a number of occasions? ----- Richard Schultz Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Part 1: Jan Drew's Hatred For Jews | Mark Thorson | Kids Health | 17 | April 4th 08 01:39 AM |
*Newsflash* Hallowell & Ratey support Jan Drew's position on alternate treatments for ADD | Raving Loonie | Kids Health | 9 | August 13th 06 02:29 AM |
causes of hatred | Hunter | General | 0 | October 16th 05 04:58 PM |
causes of hatred | Hunter | Kids Health | 0 | October 16th 05 04:58 PM |
Drew's Solution to The Dave's concept | Bob Whiteside | Child Support | 213 | July 11th 03 10:57 AM |