Normal Contrails: Some Sanity [Archive] - Page 6

mom_p_3

09-29-2006, 03:35 PM

Again this will have to be done in two parts as it is long.

We have the low class, crude debunkers like Reynolds that aggressively assault anyone that attempts to speak to the issue of Chemtrail's / Spraying and seems to spend his every waking moment with his debunking but there are far more dangerous people than the Reynolds types, they do the same thing that Reynolds does only they are paid government debunkers that hide behind their scientific credentials and do their dirty work, unlike Reynolds who is just a hack.

Anyone who is familiar with Mr. Thomas Schlatter and Mr. Patrick Minnus know that these two government lackey's have been deeply involved in efforts to dispel any such thing as "Chemtrail's / Spraying", Etc, they have both gone to extreme lengths in producing volumes of text that disavows the slightest possibility that anything other than normal contrail's exist in our sky's, their Government funded position on the issue is very clear to anyone who has read their work and much of what they portray in scientific terms is absolutely correct but there are also contradictions in what these gentleman put fourth when confronted with photographic evidence which proves the contradiction in point.

An example of the contradiction's would be,

Quote 1:

Mr. Thomas Schatter

"I consider these claims unfounded. There is no evidence in the meteorological literature or in photographs to support them." ( Referring to chemtrail's / spraying.)
__________________________________________________ _

Obviously Mr. Thomas Schatter has chosen a closed minded approach to addressing the issue by immediately discounting any and all photographic evidence put forth by the public and has continued to address the issue with a bias that a person can only have if they enter the issue with pre-conceived ideas of how they should respond.

There are literly hundreds of Chemtrail site with thousands of pictures of chemtrail's being made and in various stages of spreading out over hours.
__________________________________________________ _

Quote 2.

Thomas Schatter ,

"Chemtrails are laid by aircraft flying for hours in dangerous crossing patterns and in illegal proximity to each other. Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns are tell-tale signs. At least for now and unless they have to divert around thunderstorms, commercial jet aircraft fly on specific routes--wide highways in the sky."
__________________________________________________ _

So, Mr. Thomas Schatter does not believe in any way that aircraft are flying in dangerous crossing patterns and in illegal proximity to each other. Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns, he is very spific on this point but he also attrubutes this non-activity to commercial jet aircraft when the majority of reports of the chemtrail's / spraying indicate that it is being done by military type aircraft.

Ok now, one can not just discount the mountains of video and photographic images that have been taken by countless hundreds of thousands of people the world over that show and contradict Mr. Thomas Schatter's in which he disagrees that aircraft are making Chemtrails by flying for hours in dangerous crossing patterns and in illegal proximity to each other. Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns, all one has to do is look at the photographic evidence to understand that Mr. Schatter's position on the issue is skewed and, well, very much wrong.

Here are a couple of images that prove that aircraft do indeed fly in dangerous crossing patterns and in illegal proximity to each other, produce Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns that Mr. Schatter states adamantly that they never do. [ Do they or don't they? You be the judge. ]

Trail's/Furrows laid in close proximity, yes or no ?

http://www.rense.com/general52/CHOL.HTM

http://www.rense.com/general52/chemms.htm

Yes Mr. Schatter your quite correct, aircraft never make "X" in the sky, Yes or No ?

http://www.rense.com/general52/chem.htm

http://www.rense.com/general52/chemm.htm

Again Mr. Schatter, your absolutely correct, aircraft never make grid like patterns in the sky, Yes or No ?

http://www.rense.com/general51/spray.htm

http://home.nycap.rr.com/averillpark/chemtrails.htm

http://www.rense.com/general50/chmm.htm

http://www.rense.com/general47/cover.htm

Cont,...Part 2.

mom_p_3

09-29-2006, 03:36 PM

Part 2.

The only rational conclusion that a person can make when Mr. Schatter states that aircraft never fly in dangerous crossing patterns and in illegal proximity to each other make Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns is that he does indeed discount any and all photographic evidence presented via the public that would obviously counter Mr. Schatter preconceptions
on the issue of "Chemtrail's /Spraying" being conducted in our atmosphere.

I have not only viewed thousands of images like these from all over this planet, many with the same strikingly similar characteristics of aerosol spraying but I have spent countless hours observing firsthand, aircraft doing just the things that Mr. Schatter claims that they never do, how is that possible if Mr. Schatter is correct in what aircraft do and do not do, if he is the authority and we can plainly see that there is a blatant contradiction between what he claims about aircraft flight patterns and how normal contrail's differ from the chemtrail's and what we have been observing of them since the mid 90's, how then can we believe what Mr. Schatter claims ?

I would put forth the assumption that Mr. Schatter and others such as Mr. Patrick Minnus are helping to conceal and cover-up programs being conducted by our Government and or military as well as other world Governments in the area of aerosol spraying for reasons that are being tightly withheld from the public even though we can clearly see the aerosol spraying being done in our sky's.

Government officials and agencies such as NOAA, NASA and the USAF are all quick to deny and disavow any knowledge or involvement in any aerosol spraying programs or operations, so quick in fact that it makes those in the general public take even further notice of the strange Ariel activities that are taking place in the sky's around our planet in recent years.

Proof of Ariel aerosol spraying has come from [ATC] Air Traffic Control personal at various airports in recent years when called by concerned citizens when they observed massive spraying in there areas, they were usually told by ATC people that what they were seeing was a military exercise or maneuvers taking place, that's why they were seeing all of the aircraft and contrail's.

The FAA policy of telling people that they were seeing a military exercise or maneuvers has been suspended as of 2004, in it's place ATC personnel are not allowed to relate anything to the public other than what pertains to the air traffic that they are controlling, nothing is now said about military flights seen by ATC personnel, it is just no allowed.

When FAA officials have been questioned as to why they no longer allow ATC personnel to comment on military flight activities in there areas, the official response being offered is that the military is not within the control of the FAA and ATC personnel only monitor civilian flight operations.

It would seem based on these recent policy changes by the FAA with regard to public information that someone does not want the public to connect the spraying activity that they are seeing in the sky to the fact that it is the military that they are seeing doing it, according to past ATC statements to the public.

It is obvious to those who have made calls to local airports, i.e. myself included, to find out just what is going on with all of the highly unusual amounts of air traffic at times in our sky's only to be given the pat, canned answer or to be disconnected entirely or switched to the [TSA] Transportation Security Administration who have no idea of what your talking about does not speak well to the FAA or the people responsible for putting the pressure on the FAA to change prior FAA policy.
__________________________________________________ _

Quote: Mr. Thomas Schatter

"Contrails along parallel paths or criss-crossing contrails are merely indications of busy flight corridors. Many hundreds of aircraft are in the air over the United States at a given time, and many of them leave contrails. It is usually obvious at flight level but not often from the ground that the contrails are at different levels. Even if the contrails cross at the same level, the aircraft that created them were never less than a few kilometers apart".
__________________________________________________ ___

Excuse me but didn't Mr. Schatter just contradict himself as he firmly believes that aircraft do not fly as to create Parallel furrows, Xs, and grid patterns?

What can I say, yes there are hundreds of aircraft in the sky's over the country at any given time but they are not all in the sky at once in one particular area, they are usually quite spread out with the exception of heavily congested airports, the very notion that I should be able to look up at the sky in rural South Carolina, Ohio, Texas or any other state and see hundreds of aircraft filling the sky at any given time is a ludicrous and laughable statement considering just how spread out air traffic is between major airports, the exception is day's that they spray, on those day's the sky's are full of jets for hours on end. [ And people wonder why I believe that aerosol spraying is being conducted. ]

Whether or not the debunker is a Reynolds, Schlatter or a Minnus, their actions result in the same old tired hawking that there is no such thing as chemtrail's or aerosol spraying going on in our atmosphere, by Mr. Thomas Schlatter's own words he has just proved with regard to how aircraft behave just how obviously wrong he and his debunker cohorts are, they are nothing but liars, hypocrites and government mouthpieces spewing out exactly what the government wants them to say, misinformation, disinformation, anything but the truth.

As Mr. Reynolds says, "I'm just ignorant", well, in some respects I might just be that but I'm smart enough to figure out that he, Schlatter and Minnus are total liars and none of these trained dogs that belong to Big Brother can or should be trusted_ever !

mom_p_3

09-29-2006, 03:56 PM

halva

09-29-2006, 08:39 PM

He is not an idiot. He has made a decision, for reasons best known to himself, to do what he is doing. US Government policy makes it possible for him to do this.

jayreynolds

09-30-2006, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by Mom
"what really struck me was the fact that none of these trails dissipated, I've seen contrail's from planes all of my life and I have never seen one not dissipate over a few minutes, this was crazy to me, I even argued with my husband over it because I just could not believe that these planes were spraying stuff but the more I watched, the more convinced I became that they were spraying"
"After about a week of really paying attention to the planes that were flying over I found that it was quite easy to tell the normal jet contrail's from the other non-contrail's that lasted for hours"
http://www.debatebothsides.com/show...&postcount=1231
__________________________________________________ __

Mr. Reynolds are you a complete idiot, how can you read what I wrote and say that I said persistent contrail's do not exists, what part of normal contrail's dissipate over a few minutes do you not understand dim-whit!

read what I wrote, "I have never seen one not dissipate over a few minutes", in that they all dissipate you dumb ass hillbilly cracker !

Yes, "I found that it was quite easy to tell the normal jet contrail's from the other non-contrail's that lasted for hours" in that they do not dissipate like normal contrail's, how in the hell do you read that I said persistent contrail's do not exists from that, your an idiot and your just trying to piss me off, your twisting my words to suit your agenda just like the dammed Republicans do, your a lying revisionist gritz eater and I've had enough of your bullshit, go sell it to your debunker buddies, your being ignored !

Ok, let's clear up this point, 'Mom'. I previously asked you this question, which you dodged because an answer reveals your contradictory statements:
[5. What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

Further elaboratory questions would be:
How long can ordinary contrails persist?
How many minutes are "a few minutes"?

If Mom has any guts whatsoever, she will provide an answer. However, 'Mom' is a coward and won't be responsive to even basic questions about the hoax because the answers reveal it to be a simple fabrication.

For that matter, her own 'alleged' husband is also a coward.
The spineless so-called man

Rather than speaking out publicly by name about what would be illegal military activity(which he is obliged to do as a military man), he sends his cowardly wife out to speak for him!

What's wrong with your husband, 'Mom', why is he so lily-livered he can't speak for himself?

He reveals himself to be an abject coward(if he even exists) at best, hiding behind a woman's skirt.

halva

09-30-2006, 11:03 AM

Hiding behind a woman's skirt.

jayreynolds

09-30-2006, 01:11 PM

Hiding behind a woman's skirt.
Exactly, Wayne. The man must be exactly such a coward. Either that or he's part of the conspiracy himself, for after all, how could a brave American 'master sergeant' have knowledge of illegal government activity and simply keep quiet about it, even going so far as to reenlist for Iraq a second time? If what 'Mom' were saying is true, the man is really just about 'getting the paycheck', keeping his mouth shut, and doing whatever Bush tells him to do! Not a patriotic man at all, really just a low-level paid Government sheople-shill.

...................and sending his wife out to act like some sort of chemmie nutcase. What is she going to do next, try and tell us "Pollution is good", or say we should debate the legalization of geoengineering?

If she starts anything along that vein, we'll know for sure she is just another Wayne Hall 'fifth column disinfo agent' like you!!!!!

jayreynolds

09-30-2006, 01:44 PM

Anyone who is familiar with Mr. Thomas Schlatter
Here is the article 'Mom' is referring to:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020806155013/http://www.weatherwise.org/qr/qry.chemtrail.html

I found it a sound refutation of most chemmie claims. It was written in 2000, and during the six years that have elapsed since it's publication, thousands of well educated meteorologists, atmospheric scientists, and pilots have proven themselves qualified.

Why can no chemmie ever make the grade?

Are they all such morons as "Mom", Wayne Hall, and the rest?

Could be...........!

jayreynolds

09-30-2006, 01:50 PM

Ok, let's clear up this point, 'Mom'. I previously asked you this question, which you dodged because an answer reveals your contradictory statements:
5. What are ordinary contrails, how are they formed, and what determines whether they persist, or not?

Further elaboratory questions would be:
How long can ordinary contrails persist?
How many minutes are "a few minutes"?

If Mom has any guts whatsoever, she will provide an answer. However, 'Mom' is a coward and won't be responsive to even basic questions about the hoax because the answers reveal it to be a simple fabrication.

For that matter, her own 'alleged' husband is also a coward.
The spineless so-called man

Rather than speaking out publicly by name about what would be illegal military activity(which he is obliged to do as a military man), he sends his cowardly wife out to speak for him!

What's wrong with your husband, 'Mom', why is he so lily-livered he can't speak for himself?

He reveals himself to be an abject coward(if he even exists) at best, hiding behind a woman's skirt.

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

halva

09-30-2006, 02:22 PM

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????
Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

Eh, "MOM"?

Eh, 'MOM'? Too much of a coward to respond?????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????

jayreynolds

09-30-2006, 04:04 PM

mom_p_3

09-30-2006, 07:59 PM

I was at a friends home today and we were talking about chemtrails, global warming and stuff like that and we looked at 'Debate Both Sides' so I could show my friend what was going on with the post, well, we could not believe the latest Reynolds crap and that little worm Halve joining in, below is just some of the vile crap that was written about me and my husband, I was ignoring this Reynolds and Halva but I have no choice but to respond to their attack, calling me names is one thing but calling my husband a COWARD while he is in Iraq fighting for our rights is far beyond lowlife, please read the following and judge for yourself just who the real "coward's" are here.
________________________________________________

Quote: Reynolds

"If Mom has any guts whatsoever, she will provide an answer. However, 'Mom' is a coward and won't be responsive to even basic questions about the hoax because the answers reveal it to be a simple fabrication.

For that matter, her own 'alleged' husband is also a coward.
The spineless so-called man

Rather than speaking out publicly by name about what would be illegal military activity(which he is obliged to do as a military man), he sends his cowardly wife out to speak for him!

What's wrong with your husband, 'Mom', why is he so lily-livered he can't speak for himself?

He reveals himself to be an abject coward(if he even exists) at best, hiding behind a woman's skirt."
_________________________________________________

Quote: Halva

"Hiding behind a woman's skirt"
__________________________________________________

COWARD?

Let me tell you two worthless pieces of cow dung something, you two smug know it all asses sit at your computers offering your vile venom to anyone that comes along with an opinion differing from your own, you two obnoxious little boy's think your somehow so much smarter and better than everyone else, elitist are what you are, spoiled little brats pretending to be big bad men through your computers, Ha, your both pathetic jokes of the male species, real men do not attack and abuse women but then I never heard anyone say that a socially inept, redneck, hillbilly, dumb ass cracker or a piss ant Greek pass for men !

COWARD?

My husband is no coward you dirt bag's, he is in Iraq someplace, I don't even know where he is, they won't let him say for security reasons, the last time I had contact with him he had just been out in some crap hole called Al Najaf with thirty other solders getting shot at, I won't hear from him again until after he returns from his operations and gets back to Baghdad, so, while my husband out in Iraq someplace getting shot at with other solders, you two big brave A-Holes are sitting safe and sound behind you computers calling him a coward, what gives you two low life's the right?

COWARD?

Have either one of you social misfits ever served in the military, stupid question on my part, of course you haven't, what was I thinking, your both a couple of bottom feeders that could not possibly understand why someone would choose a career in the military as my husband has, your both far to selfish and full of yourselves to understand what service to country is and what it means to really love your country enough to fight for it, you two pathetic excuses for what passes as human obviously do not love anything, your far to full of hate to comprehend such values.

COWARD?

I'll have you two want to be's that will never be anything know that my husband was an instructor at Fort Drum prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq, he was called up at forty years old to go and fight in Iraq, he did not want to do it because he did not believe Bush or the reasons that were given to go to war with Iraq but he's a solder so he followed his orders, he's still following his orders even if he does not agree as to the reasons why we are in Iraq, as long as my husband is in the military he feels duty bound to follow orders and that's not the same as blindly doing Bush's bidding, my husband detest Bush but loves being in the Army, on his last deployment (Not reenlistment stupid) he said just before he left for Iraq that he thought things were going to get a lot worse over there and he didn't want to babysit a civil war and he hoped that the troops would be pulled if that happened but he also said that Bush was pigheaded stubborn and might just let them all rot in Iraq and it might take another president to get us out of Iraq.

COWARD?

No, my husband is no coward, he's a solder doing what he took an oath to do, protecting the United States from enemy's, both foreign and domestic while REAL COWARDS like you two sit all comfy at you computers and belittle the solders wife, how ver brave of you, you must be quite proud of yourselves.

Coward, take a look in the mirror if your looking for a coward, the coward will be that sorry ass puke looking back at you !

Well, Mr. Reynolds, I will not be staying around Debate Both Sides, you and your little Greek friend have shown me quite clearly just what kind of people ( more like animals ) reside at this forum and you will just have to excuse me if I do not want to stick around and be constantly abused by the resident attack dog's, so, you can brag now that you have "WON" , triumphed yet again over a chemmie, another great conquest to your credit to inflate your already huge ego, yes you have "WON", just what you've won I'm not sure of, perhaps getting me to leave this forum but at what cost, you did so by calling a brave American solder a COWARD who by no fault of his own is currently deployed to Iraq and can not be here to defend himself from your accusations.

Please don't take this as a threat but I can not help but wonder how the entire 110th Mountain Division or for that matter everyone in the military serving in Iraq is going to react to your thoughts that they are just COWARDS when I e-mail this post to my husband at battalion headquarters in Baghdad, on that note Mr. Reynolds / Halva, good by and good luck, something tells me your both going to need it.

Please, to all who read this, SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, THEY DESERVE BETTER THAN TO BE CALLED COWARDS BY THE LIKES OF JAY REYNOLDS AND HIS ILK, thank you.

halva

09-30-2006, 09:08 PM

It is Reynolds' own supposed reference group that he has been systematically destroying and dismantling for the last years. Who over here in Europe or elsewhere in the world has heard of this little creep?

As I understand, it is a milieu containing men of violence also. I assume this individual knows what he is doing with his single-minded concentration on destroying the popular base that has so far sustained the politicians he identifies with.

Reiterating.

halva

09-30-2006, 09:34 PM

I have been trying to work out for a long time to work out how it can be made impossible for people to behave as Reynolds does.

Under present American and international law and the dogma of "freedom of speech" it is not illegal.

I exchange thoughts on this and related subjects with Rosalind Peterson at:
http://www.enouranois.gr/english/reportazenglish/rosalin_peterson.htm

Trying to deal with this problem at the institutional level is a preferable response in my opinion to exacting personal revenge against Reynolds.

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 06:09 AM

Reynolds Wrap also said Swampgas is Mom.
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=1#1159671468

No, socrates, I said Swampgas was 'Arcturus' who posted here awhile back while at the same time he was denying it and lying to his friends about it. When I 'outed' him he was so humiliated he quit and never returned.
Remember what happened to Swampgas when he came around posing as Arcturus???
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=529799&postcount=362
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=529845&postcount=363
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=530840&postcount=389

Whatever happened to 'Arcturus', anyways? Just disappeared...............

This all took place in the context of yet another case of 'multiple personality disorder' when Lou Aubuchont was posing at CTC under the pseudonym/multiple ID of 'Tracker' making false accusations against me. Here is the context of that farrago:
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=34301&page=9&pp=40
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=34301&page=10&pp=40
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=34301&page=11&pp=40

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 06:23 AM

Lou Aubuchont, prepare yourself to be exposed!

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 06:53 AM

The phenomenon of chemmies using multiple ID has long been a hallmark of the hoax. From it's inception, hoax promoters have always resorted to this deception in order to create false impressions of their numbers, tom reenter discussions when their previous postings have been debunked, and whenever they simply 'need a friend' when they have none.

This 'cancer' of multiple ID postings typifies chemmies, who are seldom genuinely honest, have pathological problems with telling the truth, and in some cases are genuinely unstable.

During the time I have been observing this, I have found that multiple ID posters, especially those with little ability writing their fictions, usually expose themselves once a sufficient body of their writing exists to be examined and compared with previous writing under another name.

Patterns of writing style, particular phrases, idiosyncratic spelling and grammatical errors all emerge when people write, no matter how hard one might try to disguise them. All of us 'return to the well' when we write, and our writings reflect commonalities even if we try to disguise them.

These hallmarks usually go unnoticed by the writer, yet this medium of messageboards, where a body of writing is archived, coupled with search features, allows one to make comparisons between the particular styles and emerge with talltale evidence which reveals the true identity of the multiple ID poster.

Posting under multiple ID's is a dishonest tactic which most people deplore, because it is basically a falsehood employed to gain advantage, a disguise to hide behind, it reveals a person who has little regard for truth or fundamental fairness and usually one who has low self esteem. For that reason, multiple ID posting is ordinarily a bannable offense at mesageboards and one who consistently engages in the tactic deserves to be exposed and even derided.

I will now present evidence which will make it unmistakable to any reader that the poster known as 'Mom_p_3' is actually Lou Aubuchont 'hiding behind a woman's skirt', as my buddy Wayne Hall has reiterated. What will be revealed is yet another case against Aubuchont and his buddies, some of whom share the malady of multiple ID posting disorder.

You be the judge

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 07:35 AM

The Case Against Lou Aubuchont- 'Drag Queen'

Below I present evidence against Lou Aubuchont, deviant Drag Queen/female impersonator and multiple ID poster.

This is done so that those who consider him an ally can see the true nature of the man, an ignorant self-deceived liar who has absolutely no qualms about deceiving even those who consider him a friend and an ally, and a bitter, self loathing pervert who will resort to fabrications of himself as a woman or any number of other identities to accomplish his lies.

The following resources are used:
A listing of Aubuchont's postings as 'Altitudelou' at this messageboard, where his 'Karma level' is rated -zero-(0):
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?action=viewprofile&user=altitudelou

A listing of Aubuchont's postings at 'Chemtrailcentral':
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/search.php?search_author=Louis+Aubuchont

A listing of Aubuchont's postings as 'Mom_p_3':
http://www.debatebothsides.com/search.php?searchid=245684

Background
Lou Aubuchont is a poorly educated and ignorant man. Even though he has begun to use a spell-checker on his postings, that tool is notoriously unable to detect and correct homonyms, words that are pronounced the same, yet spelled differently. His writings unmistakably display
this fault in virtually every sentence, and are replete with erroneous usage of your/you're, there/their among many others. Aubuchont is, however, aware of this, and goes so far as to 'salt' his writings with deliberate misspellings to make it appear he has not used spellcheck.

When he posts as a multiple ID, he frequently embellishes his fictions with information which might appear on the surface to support his 'multiple', yet when carefully examined these refences turn out to be mistakes.(remember the 'dogwood' fiasco, when Aubuchont, posting as 'Tracker' at CTC, falsely claimed to have seen dogwood trees in bloom in the DC while it was one month too early for them)

When he posts as a multiple ID poster, Aubuchont also peppers his writing with overuse of particular phrases which he evidently cannot help but repeat. These might be considered simply common phrasal usage, yet because of particular misspellings in those phrases, it becomes obvious that it is actually Aubuchont merely making the same mistake over and over.

Lou Aubuchont isn't the brightest bulb on the string, and simply cannot help but make these same mistakes over and over, and over, and over..........
In his ignorance, he reveals who he really is.

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 08:16 AM

Exhibit#1

The same Day Aubuchont began debate with me on this thread at debatebothsides, he could not contain his glee and posted this gloating thread at 'Gastronomous Cafe':
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306

Ironically, though he has repeatedly asked others to ignore me, he deliberately directs his readers to do the exact opposite.
I know what you mean about "Not" joining Debate Both Sides, I could not be there with that freak Reynolds, I'm just to much of a triple AAA personality to hang out at a forum that he calls home, I'd end up going looking for him and I own a number of firearms.

It is well known that criminals 'return to the scene of the crime', and Aubuchont, who has low self esteem over his ignorance and stupidity, is unable to resist crowing over his latest exploit in a lame attempt to boost himself.

In the above referenced thread, within the first paragraph, he repeats a misspelling of the world's foremost contrail researcher's name, Dr. Patrick Minnis, as "Dr. Patrick Minnus", a mistake also made by 'Mom_P_3'.
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=1#1159569306

Exhibit #2
In the above referenced thread, you will also find this posting by Aubuchont, who mistakenly uses the phrase "put fourth" rather than "put forth":
"Even though I'm a bit of a redneck at heart I agree with your thoughts, we should strive to be better, not worse, the Reynolds types put fourth the worst, I'd like to think that we can do better that, as you said, we are not all thugs here in America."
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?
board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=1#1159677214

Here we find 'Mom_p_3' making the exact same mistake:
"there are also contradictions in what these gentleman put fourth when confronted with photographic evidence which proves the contradiction in point."
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=642649&highlight=put+fourth#post642649

Here we find Aubuchont making the exact same mistake at CTC:
"I have been researching recent weather modification bill's,specifically S.517, the Weather Modification Research and Technology Transfer Authorization Act, put fourth by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas"
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/msg91491.html#91491

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 08:43 AM

Exhibit #3
Here we find 'mom_p_3' mistakenly yet consistently adding an apostrophe to the word "chemtrails", rendering it as "chemtrail's". This exact same mistake is displayed throughout practically all of her postings within this thread:
we can plainly see that there is a blatant contradiction between what he claims about aircraft flight patterns and how normal contrail's differ from the chemtrail's and what we have been observing of them since the mid 90's, how then can we believe what Mr. Schatter claims ?
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=642652&highlight=chemtrail%27s#post642652

See also other postings by Mom_p_3:
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=642649&highlight=chemtrail%27s#post642649
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=642409&highlight=chemtrail%27s#post642409
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=641979&highlight=chemtrail%27s#post641979

Here we find Aubuchont making the exact same mistake at many different messageboards over the years:
I can not say with certainty that the jets are spraying "Chemtrail's" over
the north east United States this day 3/16/04 as I have been unable to view
them
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:sR47GJ40nzQJ:radarmatrix.proboards2 9.com/index.cgi%3Fboard%3DChemtrails%26action%3Ddisplay% 26thread%3D1081782786%26page%3D1+%22chemtrail%27s% 22+aubuchont&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3

I observr aircraft spraying Chemtrail's over Maine and New Hampshire quite often and the ones that fly directly overhead or close by can be heard,
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/303436.shtml

the first time that I saw the "Chemtrail's" being made, my first thought was, "What in the hell is that?"
http://farshores.7.forumer.com/a/origin-of-the-word-chemtrail_post19.html

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 09:22 AM

Exhibit #4

But what of all these commonalities between Aubuchont and Mom_p_3's writings, you might ask? Why shouldn't we simply believe what she has told us about herself, she says her husband is an Army man, why shouldn't we take her word for that? But is what she has written about her alleged 'husband' factual?

Consider what she has written:
Mr. Reynolds, as I said when I started this, I don't know everything and I'll be the first to admit that but my husband is deployed to Iraq for the second time in two years, he is a master sergeant with the 110th Mountain Division / Security Force,
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=640986&postcount=1231

Please don't take this as a threat but I can not help but wonder how the entire 110th Mountain Division or for that matter everyone in the military serving in Iraq is going to react to your thoughts
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=643673&postcount=1263

The truth is, there is no such 110th Mountain Division.!!!
There is, however, a 10th Mountain Division.

It is unbelievable that a woman whose own husband is a member of that distinguished unit would not know the difference. That particular Division is so well known, and if, as the poster claims, her husband is a longtime member, such a glaring mistake would be unthinkable. The unit number would have been used in conversation, addresses, and depicted on the Unit's shoulder patch are a pair of crossed bayonets depicting the Roman Numeral "X", not 110th!
http://www.drum.army.mil/sites/local/

Even the reference by Mom_p_3 to her husband's rank as an uncapitalized "master sergeant", is an unthinkable insult no genuine soldier's wife would make.

This shows that the writer claiming to be Mom_p_3 isn't the wife of a soldier at all, and is just Aubuchont "hiding behind a woman's skirt", a Drag Queen, a Female Impersonator!

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 09:40 AM

Exhibit #5

Yet another commonality between the writing of Mom_p_3 and Aubuchont is the use of the particular phrase "chemtrail's / spraying" Of particular note is that in each instance, Aubuchont adds both the erroneous apostrophe as well as an unneccesary space on either side of the forward slash:
"We have the low class, crude debunkers like Reynolds that aggressively assault anyone that attempts to speak to the issue of Chemtrail's / Spraying "
"Referring to chemtrail's / spraying"
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=642649&highlight=chemtrail%27s+spraying#post642649

"is that person just as fictious as your opinion that there is no such thing as chemtrail's / aerosol spraying now going on worldwide?"
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=640986&postcount=1231

And the usage of the exact same phrase by Aubuchont:
"they just don't get it but Maybe there is hope when even the tourist start noticing the Chemtrail's / spraying. "
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/msg81334.html#81334

"At this posting time, the Chemtrail's / Spraying that I am seeing remains over New Hampshire, no spraying over us here in Maine, we have crystal clear blue, cloudless sky's, so far, but the day isn't over yet."
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/msg80990.html#80990

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 09:41 AM

Is any of this starting to sink in, people????

I can practically see the veins pulsating on Loopy Lou's neck.
Feel the heat, Lou?
More later..................

halva

10-01-2006, 10:12 AM

I have been trying to work out for a long time to work out how it can be made impossible for people to behave as Reynolds does.

Under present American and international law and the dogma of "freedom of speech" it is not illegal.

I exchange thoughts on this and related subjects with Rosalind Peterson at:
http://www.enouranois.gr/english/re...in_peterson.htm

Trying to deal with this problem at the institutional level is a preferable response in my opinion to exacting personal revenge against Reynolds.

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 10:21 AM

We play by the rules.

For Reynolds to go to sites as himslef is easy. He is belligerent, unimaginative, confrontational, and hates the Constitution and Decency. It is easy for him to be himself.

Now, I know some people here have gone to these sites posing as them, so the process has already started. Perhaps, halva, you are fighting too clean. Maybe we should take Vox's advice, and start causing conflicts in their ranks. Just a Thought....
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=1#1159716132

Yes, it's easy when you simply be yourself, Swampy. It is hard for your people to pose as others and fabricate lies like you did when you posed as 'Arcturus', or Lou Aubuchont as 'Tracker' or 'Mom_p_3'. The hardest part about lying is that you can't defeat the truth when it catches up to you, and you go down HARD.

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 01:35 PM

Exhibit #6

In this exhibit, one finds Mom_p_3 misspelling Wayne Hall's moniker "Halva" as "Halve":
was at a friends home today and we were talking about chemtrails, global warming and stuff like that and we looked at 'Debate Both Sides' so I could show my friend what was going on with the post, well, we could not believe the latest Reynolds crap and that little worm Halve joining in
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=643673&highlight=halve#post643673

Here we have Aubuchont making the exact same mistake:
Socrates & Swampgas,
I've shied away from Halve / Wayne too, as I said, I don't know what's got into him but he seems like he's off the tracks lately, talking pure crap that no one wants to hear or be part of
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=1#1159584295

Arcturus

10-01-2006, 02:19 PM

Wow, Wayne! I didn't expect so much help from you. Did you finally figure out who was posting as "Mom"?

Won't 'Socrates' be surprised when he discovers what kind of posers he's hanging out with?

Remember what happened to Swampgas when he came around posing as Arcturus???
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=529799&postcount=362
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=529845&postcount=363
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=530840&postcount=389

Whatever happened to 'Arcturus', anyways? Just disappeared...............

It's really not that difficult to figure out who "Mom" really is, unmistakable(hint), even?

Hey Reynolds, I am still here. Been busy

Your friend Lib or Lulu still giving out IPs?

You also seem pretty busy trying to point out people's spelling error.

Must be that since the government admits to an aerosol mitigation project that you are getting pretty desperate.

Arcturus is also here as some other people, so keep your ear to the track.

You never know who you are befriending.

This "mom" is reaming you out

Good Show Mom...

See you in a few months...

jayreynolds

10-01-2006, 03:40 PM

Must be that since the government admits to an aerosol mitigation project that you are getting pretty desperate.
Oh, really? If you have evidence that "the government admits to an aerosol mitigation program", why are you keeping it a secret from Mom_p_3/Aubuchont? When asked, he couldn't come up with any evidence whatsoever!

Arcturus is also here as some other people, so keep your ear to the track.

This an admissin that you are in violation of the proscription against multiple ID's here at debatebothsides, Rule #6. Earlier today you claimed that you follw the rules, and now you admit to deception and breaking them. What's up with that?

Typical of your sort of people.

Do your worst, it still won't be good enough. In the meantime, you'll be making my points for me, giving me plenty of free publicity, and wasting your time in a futile atempt to fight with puny lies what the truth can destroy with ease.

Bring it on, by all means!

halva

10-02-2006, 12:49 AM

jayreynolds

10-02-2006, 07:16 AM

.
Thanks, Wayne for your small contribution here towards establishing meaningful dialogue!

In other matters, I have become aware that Mom_p_3 appears unwilling to be responsive, and perhaps that is my fault. In an effort to reestablish dialogue, I must put fourth a few comments clarifying my position.

First, perhaps the twenty similarities between the wordings of posts by Lou Aubuchont and Mom_p_3 were simply accidental, just a large number of coincidences happening simultaneously. Maybe stranger things have happened, and though it may sound far fetched to believe that such a large number of congruencies wherein the exact same mistakes were made by two separate people, I suppose that it might happen every once in awhile.

Secondly, Mom_p_3 appears to have misunderstood my meaning when I called her husband a coward. I fully support the war on terrorism and the troops fighting to maintain our rights. I may have misunderstood Mom_p_3's true feelings, mainly because I did not understand why she would make these two rather disparate remarks about her husband:
"I want him and all of them back home where they belong, not fighting Bush's trumped up fake war"
"Mr. Reynolds, my husband is doing far more than "working" as an MP, he is putting his life on the line for everyone in this country, even a low life scumbag like you, how dare you take cheep shots at someone who has the integrity and courage to stand up for your rights, someone willing to die to protect those rights, you are truly a sad piece of work Mr. Reynolds !"

In my mind, I found these two comments mutually exclusive. How can a man first of all willingly agree to fight in a "trumped up fake war", and yet maintain that he "has the integrity and courage to stand up for your rights, someone willing to die to protect those rights"?

Maybe, however, I was wrong.

Perhaps I might not want to have a man in my unit protecting my back who believes he is waging "Bush's trumped up fake war", yet perhaps this is exactly the sort of man our military really needs!

A man who is willing to die for something he doesn't believe in, willing to 'soldier on' and just collect his paycheck in an "illegal trumped up fake war" so that his wife can have quality internet time, and willing to keep his mouth shut about the chemtrail's / spraying and let the Uniform Code of Military Justice be damned. When you look at the totality of it all, such a man is a shoe-in for Donald Rumsfeld's dream team, a true mercenary. After all, if John Kerry was able to witness Vietnam atrocities, collect his medals and paychecks, and never say a word about it while on active duty, why should Mom_p_3's wife behave any differently!

Come to think of it, maybe my buddy Wayne shares some of the same attributes. Wayne is willing to concede that he has no proof of spraying, he is actively promoting the "pollution is Good" notion, and he is even asking for the leaglization of chemtrails geoengineering, so I guess 'fifth column' may not be such bad people after all.

Lastly, perhaps I made far too big a case of Mom_p_3's misapplication of her husband's unit as the "110th Mountain Division". I have been following Lou Aubuchont's postings carefully, as you can imagine! Lou seems desperate to find anything that might bolster his case that he isn't really Mom_p_3, and the best he was able to come up with looks pretty convincing. Lou has uncovered the fact that within the 10th Mountain Division there is indeed a 110th Military Intelligence Battalion.
Mom explained in her post "my husband was an instructor at Fort Drum prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq, he was called up at forty years old to go and fight in Iraq", no doubt he was with the 10th Mountain Division stationed at Fort Drum as an instructor and when he was called active to go to Iraq he was probably attached to the110th Military Intelligence Battalion in a security force role, being in the military I can understand how various activation's work and it is not uncommon for what is called "loose personnel" to be reassigned to a particular unit or duty station
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=2#1159747183

Well, considering that Lou has always claimed he was a member of 'Naval Intelligence', maybe he has finally gotten something write. It had to happen sometime. I had believed that the big clincher in my case was Mom_p_3's mistake about her husbands unit, but considering the information found by Lou, perhaps I have been making a tempest in a teacup.

So, Mom, maybe it's time you and I bury the hatchet. Maybe there is some common ground after all. Please let me know the real facts that Swampgas said about how "the government admits to an aerosol spraying program", and explain to us some more about your husband's duties as an instructor with the Battalion. If he is truly doing what you say he is in al Najaf, he is indeed fighting the good fight, and may not be a simple coward after all.

I can understand that sometimes I go off half-cocked, maybe I deserve to get 'reamed out'.
Let me know,
Jay

halva

10-02-2006, 08:54 AM

I have been trying to work out for a long time to work out how it can be made impossible for people to behave as Reynolds does.

Under present American and international law and the dogma of "freedom of speech" it is not illegal.

I exchange thoughts on this and related subjects with Rosalind Peterson at:
http://www.enouranois.gr/english/re...in_peterson.htm

Trying to deal with this problem at the institutional level is a preferable response in my opinion to exacting personal revenge against Reynolds.

jayreynolds

10-02-2006, 02:29 PM

mom_p_3

10-02-2006, 09:14 PM

Mr. Reynolds, I was not planing on ever responding to anything that you have to say because not since my oldest son stole my car have I been so angry at a person and I don't mind saying one little bit that I find your manner infuriating to put it mildly, but since you seem, for the moment at least somewhat apologetic for your behavior I will attempt to reign in my own anger and respond to your post, item by item.

JR.

"In other matters, I have become aware that Mom_p_3 appears unwilling to be responsive, and perhaps that is my fault. In an effort to reestablish dialogue, I must put fourth a few comments clarifying my position".

"First, perhaps the twenty similarities between the wordings of posts by Lou Aubuchont and Mom_p_3 were simply accidental, just a large number of coincidences happening simultaneously. Maybe stranger things have happened, and though it may sound far fetched to believe that such a large number of congruencies wherein the exact same mistakes were made by two separate people, I suppose that it might happen every once in awhile."

mom.

I have read quite a few post by Mr. Aubuchont, mostly at Chemtrail Central as well as at the gastronamus site and I have to tell you that I am flattered that you could mistake my writing for his, I did not even think that I had any particular writing style, as I said in my first post to this science in the new section, I am more of a reader than a writer, I think any similarities between my writing and Mr. Aubuchont's are minor at best and I think that you tend to look for boggy men where there are none.

JR.

"Secondly, Mom_p_3 appears to have misunderstood my meaning when I called her husband a coward. I fully support the war on terrorism and the troops fighting to maintain our rights. I may have misunderstood Mom_p_3's true feelings, mainly because I did not understand why she would make these two rather disparate remarks about her husband:"

MOM.

Mr. Reynolds, I did not misunderstand you, you were quite clear when you said, " For that matter, her own 'alleged' husband is also a coward. The spineless so-called man" also " He reveals himself to be an abject coward (if he even exists) at best, hiding behind a woman's skirt.", how could I possibly misunderstand those hateful, mean spirited, ignorant words that you wrote Mr. Reynolds?

And why change your tune now, could your change of mind possibly have anything to do with the fact that hundreds if not thousands of service personnel are going to read the thread in which you called my husband a COWARD?

Don't worry about that, I'm sure nothing will come of it. (maybe)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom_p_3
"I want him and all of them back home where they belong, not fighting Bush's trumped up fake war"

I want my husband home Mr. Reynolds, I want to see him back at Fort Drum doing what he loves to do, being an instructor, I want to see all of our troops back home and doing what they love, is that so hard for you to understand Mr. Reynolds?

My husband does not believe in this war in Iraq, he does believe in the war on terrorism but for now he is there in Iraq, doing his job and he does not question his job, he will do it regardless of where he is sent because he is a solder, please don't tell me that I have to explain someone's patriotism to you, my husbands feelings and thoughts run deep on this war but he is a solder above all else and if he is ordered to, he will defend this country at the gates of hell itself regardless of his personal feelings, that's just the kind of man that he is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom_p_3
"Mr. Reynolds, my husband is doing far more than "working" as an MP, he is putting his life on the line for everyone in this country, even a low life scumbag like you, how dare you take cheep shots at someone who has the integrity and courage to stand up for your rights, someone willing to die to protect those rights, you are truly a sad piece of work Mr. Reynolds !"

JR.

"In my mind, I found these two comments mutually exclusive. How can a man first of all willingly agree to fight in a "trumped up fake war", and yet maintain that he "has the integrity and courage to stand up for your rights, someone willing to die to protect those rights"?

mom.

Mr. Reynolds, do you believe that a person in the military should refuse an order to go and fight in a war based on what they might think?

Our military would be in shambles within a week if everyone serving had that opinion, you obviously just don't understand how things work in the military, I'm not saying that's bad, you just don't have that knowledge, you can't get it from reading on the internet, it's something that you have to live and experience, much like your experience sailing and all down in the Caribbean, I would be lost without a clue in an environment like that.

As I said above, my husband has feelings about the war in Iraq but his feelings take second place to his being a solder, doing his job and following his orders, which by the way do not come from Bush.

JR.

"Maybe, however, I was wrong."

mom.

Yes Mr. Reynolds, you were wrong, you are wrong in your thinking because your not the one being shot at, are you?

I think that you might have a far different opinion if you were the one warring kevlar and a helmet and under constant attack day and night.

JR.

"Perhaps I might not want to have a man in my unit protecting my back who believes he is waging "Bush's trumped up fake war", yet perhaps this is exactly the sort of man our military really needs!"

mom.

You need to get past the "Bush's trumped up fake war" hang-up that you seem to have and try to understand that active duty service personnel have no choice but to follow orders or face at the least brig time and at the worst a Court Martial, both being incentives to keep your mouth shut and follow orders no matter what "you" think.

JR.

"A man who is willing to die for something he doesn't believe in, willing to 'soldier on' and just collect his paycheck in an "illegal trumped up fake war" so that his wife can have quality internet time, and willing to keep his mouth shut about the chemtrail's / spraying and let the Uniform Code of Military Justice be damned. When you look at the totality of it all, such a man is a shoe-in for Donald Rumsfeld's dream team, a true mercenary. After all, if John Kerry was able to witness Vietnam atrocities, collect his medals and paychecks, and never say a word about it while on active duty, why should Mom_p_3's wife behave any differently!"

mom.

Mr. Reynolds, it's not about a man "or a woman" being willing to die for something that they do not believe in, it's not about just collecting a pay check in an illegal trumped up fake war even if it is an illegal trumped up fake war, for the career service person it is about "soldering on" as you put it because that's exactly what they do, it's not just a job or a career, it's a way of life, a solders life, a Marine's life, a Sailors life, etc, do you see what I'm getting at all?

My husband could have chosen a career outside of the military and probably made far more money that he has being in the military but he wanted to be in the military, that's all that he has ever wanted to do and I can't see him doing anything else to tell the truth, it takes both of our incomes for us to be able to live and afford to send our boys to school, my husband does not as you so smugly say "collect his paycheck in an "illegal trumped up fake war" so that his wife can have quality internet time", why are you so bitter and condescending Mr. Reynolds, did you have a bad childhood or something?

JR.

"After all, if John Kerry was able to witness Vietnam atrocities, collect his medals and paychecks, and never say a word about it while on active duty, why should Mom_p_3's wife behave any differently!"

mom.

I assume that you meant to say " After all, if John Kerry was able to witness Vietnam atrocities, collect his medals and paychecks, and never say a word about it while on active duty, why should Mom_p_3's (wife) husband behave any differently?"

If your trying to say that my husband is observing or taking part is atrocities in Iraq or covering something like that up, your very wrong again but then you do not know my husbands character or how serious he is when it comes to "being by the book", sometimes it's even to much for me and I run him off until he can leave the Army at the front door.

JR.

"Come to think of it, maybe my buddy Wayne shares some of the same attributes. Wayne is willing to concede that he has no proof of spraying, he is actively promoting the "pollution is Good" notion, and he is even asking for the (leaglization) of chemtrails geoengineering, so I guess 'fifth column' may not be such bad people after all."

MOM.

I don't know this Wayne or Halva person, I have seen his post all over the place, he seems to like to talk and talk, I can't follow his rambling's so I don't pay much attention to him, he got me angry right off the bat when I started to post here by telling me to go someplace else, I don't like you friend Wayne much, he is to "out there" for me.

JR.

"Lastly, perhaps I made far too big a case of Mom_p_3's misapplication of her husband's unit as the "110th Mountain Division". I have been following Lou Aubuchont's postings carefully, as you can imagine! Lou seems desperate to find anything that might bolster his case that he isn't really Mom_p_3, and the best he was able to come up with looks pretty convincing. Lou has uncovered the fact that within the 10th Mountain Division there is indeed a 110th Military Intelligence Battalion."

Cont,...

mom_p_3

10-02-2006, 09:15 PM

MOM.

Saying that my husband was with the110th Mountain Division was stupid on my part, he was an instructor with the 10th Mountain Division for nearly five years until the call up, then he was reassigned to the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion." and Mr. Aubuchont was correct, my husband was reassigned as part of the 10th Mountain Division Security Force attached to the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion, I know that sounds complicated and to someone not in the military it probably is but it's just part of a call up.

Mr. Reynolds, again, I think that you read far to much into what other people's motives are, as you have with Mr. Aubuchont, I have viewed his recent post at gastronamus and I don't see him as being very animated over your accusations that "He" is me posting here at Debate Both Sides, you however seem quite, excuse me, but crazy as you think I am some other people as well, what is your problem anyway, that's really strange behavior for a man your age.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aubuchont
Mom explained in her post "my husband was an instructor at Fort Drum prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq, he was called up at forty years old to go and fight in Iraq", no doubt he was with the 10th Mountain Division stationed at Fort Drum as an instructor and when he was called active to go to Iraq he was probably attached to the110th Military Intelligence Battalion in a security force role, being in the military I can understand how various activation's work and it is not uncommon for what is called "loose personnel" to be reassigned to a particular unit or duty station
http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/...ge=2#1159747183

JR.

"Well, considering that Lou has always claimed he was a member of 'Naval Intelligence', maybe he has finally gotten something (write) right. It had to happen sometime. I had believed that the big clincher in my case was Mom_p_3's mistake about her husbands unit, but considering the information found by Lou, perhaps I have been making a tempest in a teacup."

mom.

Mr. Reynolds, your a very sarcastic and crass individual but I did not come here to talk about my husband or his duty's in the Army, this thread is not about my husband or the Army, the topic was supposed to be about chemtrail's but you have made it about everything but and me proving that I am who I say that I am, I don't know if that's from your years of debunking the chemtrail folks or what but it's obvious that your not right, you come out straight away attacking anyone that wants to discuss the spraying issue and people reasonably think your some kind of a lunatic, not only that but your mouth gets you in trouble.

JR.

"So, Mom, maybe it's time you and I bury the hatchet. Maybe there is some common ground after all. Please let me know the real facts that Swampgas said about how "the government admits to an aerosol spraying program", and explain to us some more about your husband's duties as an instructor with the Battalion. If he is truly doing what you say he is in al Najaf, he is indeed fighting the good fight, and may not be a simple coward after all."

MOM

Mr. Reynolds, I am not going to go into "the government admits to an aerosol spraying program" according to Swampgas, you can read as well as anyone, maybe, you seem to read into what people write just what you want to and twist their words into your own, that's a real bad habit that will catch up with you eventually and not in a good way.

I have explained all that I am going to with regard to my husband and what he is doing, I will only say that you need to improve your reading skills as I said that my husband had been out to Al Najaf, not that he is out in Al Najaf, I never know where he is until after they come back from a mission or a sweep, I hear from my husband about every ten to fourteen days and there is only so much he is allowed to tell me about what he has been doing, security and all that.

JR.

"I can understand that sometimes I go off half-cocked, maybe I deserve to get 'reamed out'.
Let me know,
Jay"
Cont,...

MOM.

Mr. Reynolds, I grew up on the streets of Baltimore Maryland and I have known a lot of people that went of half- cocked, most of them are dead now or guest of the state prison system so your very lucky if all you end up getting for your half-cocked outburst is " reamed out " as you put it.

If that was your idea of an apology to me for you "COWARD" remarks, then I guess it will have to do but I must tell you that I already e-mailed your thoughts and words about me and my husband to him in Iraq, he will get it as soon as he gets back from whatever it is that he is doing this time out, I also posted your thoughts at a couple of military forums, I'm sure the readers will find your comments more that interesting.

Like the old saying goes Mr. Reynolds, "you can't put the bullet back in the gun once it's been fired", you have had your shot Mr. Reynolds, now it's my turn.

halva

10-02-2006, 11:09 PM

"and now for something completely Different"
Take a powder before you read these four pages, Wayne:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11818067/the_low_post_the_hopeless_stupidity_of_911_conspir acies

Humouring Reynolds just this once, because it would be/will be boring just to keep reposting my recommendation to people to go elsewhere. Reynolds has managed to get "Mom" back here, so who am I try to adopt the "above the fray" stance?

The key point in the anti-9/11 Truth Movement rave that he posted is a familiar trope:

"I have two basic gripes with the 9/11 Truth movement. The first is that it gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration. I have no doubt that every time one of those Loose Change dickwads opens his mouth, a Republican somewhere picks up five votes. In fact, if there were any conspiracy here, I'd be far more inclined to believe that this whole movement was cooked up by Karl Rove as a kind of mass cyber-provocation, along the lines of Gordon Liddy hiring hippie peace protesters to piss in the lobbies of hotels where campaign reporters were staying."

Of course this leaves out of account other factors such as the institutionalisation of election fraud through computerization, but the argument that multi-party democracy based on franchising people as abstract individuals can make it possible for the styles of government being practised in the United States and globally to "work" is not something I would argue with.

Not content with getting us foaming at the mouth at his assertions on chemtrails, Reynolds would like to get us reacting the same way about 9/11. Well, in both cases I think the relevant developments are going on off the radar screen both of "Rolling Stone" and of Reynolds.

But of course I have no proof.

jayreynolds

10-03-2006, 11:52 AM

Exhibit #7

Saying that my husband was with the110th Mountain Division was stupid on my part, he was an instructor with the 10th Mountain Division for nearly five years until the call up, then he was reassigned to the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion." and Mr. Aubuchont was correct, my husband was reassigned as part of the 10th Mountain Division Security Force attached to the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion, I know that sounds complicated and to someone not in the military it probably is but it's just part of a call up. Like the old saying goes Mr. Reynolds, "you can't put the bullet back in the gun once it's been fired",

Above we find 'Mom_p_3'(aka. Lou Aubuchont) agreeing with himself and affirming with a positive statement of 'fact' that 'she' now claims 'her' husband is assigned to "the 10th Mountain Division Security Force attached to the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion".

Liars, when caught in a lie which can be provenly demonstrated as false have a choice to make. They can stop lying or they can choose to fabricate yet another prevarication in order to try and establish that their lie was just a plausible error. In the above case, Aubuchont chose the latter course, he likely 'googled' "110th" and did indeed find that a 110th Military Intelligence Battalion did indeed exist.

However, as has been seen in the past, Aubuchont is just another dim bulb in dark room, he didn't actually confirm his 'facts'. chemmie morons are notorious for their failure to use due diligence in confirming their stories.

Ironically, Aubuchont recently mused the following:
From experience I know that Reynolds can be set up easily, he just reacts to what he reads in a linear thinking mode, no secondary thought process at all involved, he just reads and then barges in like a charging bull bent on a kill when it is in fact he who is being set up for the kill, he does not consider what the other person might be trying to accomplish with their writing.

Sorry to burst your bubble of euphoria, Lou. It is YOU who have been set-up.

The set up, and the sole reason for my last posting directed at you was to get your pseudonym, 'Mom_p_3' to "agree" with the error you made at Gastronomous when you fabricated the 'plausible error' that someone could plausibly be present today in Iraq serving with the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion!

jayreynolds

10-03-2006, 12:34 PM

Exhibit #7(continued)

When dealing with a liar who is unrepentant and 'sticking to his story', it is imperative that you always ask him questions for which you already know the answer.

Lou aubuchont was set up in exactly this way. He swallowed the hook deep down inside and cannot extract it now. He has told his story and is sticking to it.

Ironically, 'Mom_p_3'(aka Lou Aubuchont) just posted the following:
Like the old saying goes Mr. Reynolds, "you can't put the bullet back in the gun once it's been fired"

Yes, dear readers, it it now time to drop the other shoe.

THE 110th MILITARY INTELLIGENCE BATTALION NO LONGER EXISTS. IT WAS DEACTIVATED TWO YEARS AGO!

But don't take my word for it.

Go to the !0th Mountain Division website and search for it:
http://www.drum.army.mil/sites/tenants/

You will not find it anywhere.

What you will find, however, is this reference:
THE HISTORY OF 1st BRIGADE SPECIAL TROOPS BATALLION
Timeline
Deactivation of 110th Military Intelligence Battalion and Activation of 1st BSTB - 20 Sep 04
http://www.drum.army.mil/sites/tenants/division/1BCT/1BSTB/index.htm

But don't take that for proof, have a gander at the Ft. Drum newspaper:
9/30/2004
The 10th Mountain Division (LI) officially transformed into the modular format the Army is evolving into during a ceremony Monday at Sexton Field. As part of the ceremony, seven units were inactivated and 13 units were activated.

The seven units inactivated were as follows: Division Support Command; 3rd Battalion, 62nd Air Defense Artillery Regiment; 110th Military Intelligence Battalion; 10th Signal Battalion; 41st Engineer Battalion; 10th Forward Support Battalion and 710th Main Support Battalion.
http://www.drum.army.mil/sites/postnews/blizzard/blizzard_archives/hnews.asp?id=1&issuedate=9-30-2004

But don't take the 'Blizzard's' word for it, check Wikipedia:
As part of the Army's modular transformation, the divisional structure saw much change during 2004 and 2005. Division Support Command; 3rd Battalion, 62nd Air Defense Artillery Regiment; 110th Military Intelligence Battalion; 10th Signal Battalion; 41st Engineer Battalion; 10th Forward Support Battalion and 710th Main Support Battalion were all deactivated September 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10th_Mountain_Division

And lastly, don't take any website as proof. Do as I did and actually make a telephone call for yourself to confirm the facts I have presented above, call the Ist Brigade Special Troops Battalion at (315) 772-8160. When I did this, the soldier who answered confirmed that the 110th Military Intelligence Battallion "NO LONGER EXISTS"!!!! She asked for my name and likely will remember that Jay Reynolds called with the question this morning.

Lou Aubuchont, several days ago I told you to "Prepare yourself to be exposed".
Rather than stand for the truth and admit your lies, you chose to compound the lies and now you find yourself faced with the naked truth. No one can help you out of the mess you have gotten yourself into. 'socrates' at Gastronomus recently wrote:
As I wrote before, it doesn't matter who makes the posts. It matters most what is in the posts.
Well, what do you think 'socrates' finds in your post, Lou?
Confirmable facts, or damnable lies?
What sort of man "hides behind a woman's skirt"?
What sort of man impersonates a woman?
What can everyone now judge Lou aubuchont to really be?

You have been exposed, but there is much much more.
I always hold extra cards up my sleeve, ready to be played.
Do you want to stay in the game?

Will you now blame me for your coming here and screwing yourself?
No, you have only yourself to blame.
You came here asking for it, and you got the whole enchilada.

Will you now come clean and admit what you have done?
Will you sullenly slink back into whatever dark place your pitiful excuse for skin resides?
Are you simultaneously a liar, a coward, and a fool?

Choices, Lou, always choices.
Which path will you choose now?

halva

10-03-2006, 01:50 PM

Any comments, Mom?

A few years ago there was an eccentric and really not very useful participant here called Gaiacomm, also known as Dr. Judah Ben-Hur, whom one of Reynolds then hangers on decided was really an employee in a native American reservation called Lance Haubrick. It happens that a former acquaintance of mine has spoken on the telephone with Judah Ben-Hur and I, to check out Reynolds' misinformation, made the retrospectively embarrassing move of finding and telephoning the unsuspecting and quite uninvolved Lance Haubrick. He and Gaiacomm are clearly not the same person. Reynolds will tell you to his day that Gaiacomm is/was really Lance Haubrick.

What can one do with such a person as this Reynolds? To check the reliability of his information requires involving other people in situations of madness that we have no right to implicate them in. Similarly now with Louis Aubuchont.

halva

10-03-2006, 01:58 PM

And the "moderators" here will not do anything about this. They were however prepared to act on a complaint against a participant here called Jim Phelps, whose only crimes were his lack of psychological subtlety and bullying personality, eccentric opinions and what could reasonably described as anti-Jewish prejudices (shared by numerous unexpelled posters at Debate Both Sides). Phelps never posted deliberate lies.

jayreynolds

10-03-2006, 03:36 PM

Phelps never posted deliberate lies.
Oh, really? Try these whoppers on for size..............
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=398993&postcount=1

mom_p_3

10-03-2006, 07:05 PM

Mr. Reynolds, you are obviously a man in need of professional mental help, everything that I stated about my husband was the truth, now your trying to lie and twist information that your finding on the internet in order to make people believe that I am Mr. Aubuchont, you are a despicable low life and I am sorry for believing that you might have a compassionate bone in you sorry ass body.

On top of that, since your so obsessed on keeping track of what Mr. Aubuchont has to say about you, he has said nothing lately at http://gastronamus.proboards27.com, his last post that I saw was as follows.

http://gastronamus.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=aerosol&action=display&thread=1159569306&page=2

posted by swampgas

Lou, halva, and Socrates.

Please Stop

As I said, I don't censor, but this bickering is looking mighty boring.

Do you guys want me to set up an invisible fight club? I am anyway, and I'll see if you all want to go there.

I'm serious, I think you should all hash this out in private, and we can all go there to express our grievances.
__________________________________________________

Yes Swamp, I agree, emotions have been running high lately, I have not been helping the cause by letting my emotions overrule my brain, perhaps Wayne is correct in that we should just forget about Reynolds BS over at DBS and keep our own house, something which just I just told Wayne that he should do with regard to DBS, I guess I should set the example and take my own advise and not discuss what goes on at DBS here.

Starting now I will confine my post to relevant topics here and forgo any further discussion with regard to what's going on at DBS or any other forum.
__________________________________________________ _

This from a man that you claim is me, but then you thought that I was "Swampgas" and "Socrates" before I was Mr. Aubuchont, seems you have a long history of doing just this thing, why are you so paranoid Mr. Reynolds, why do you accuse others of being anyone other than who they say they are, do you know how insane that makes you look to anyone who reads these threads?

Now Mr. Reynolds, it would appear that the people at http://gastronamus.proboards27.com really don't care all that much about you or what your saying, from what I can see there has been something going on with Halva there and you are just a side issue, that's obvious in Mr. Aubuchont's post when he says " perhaps Wayne is correct in that we should just forget about Reynolds BS over at DBS and keep our own house, something which just I just told Wayne that he should do with regard to DBS".

Mr. Reynolds, I don't care what you think anymore, you talk like some kind of a machine that's programmed, it's obvious to me that your an obsessed and sick minded individual that only cares about who you can hurt next, I have seen as much in your writing over and over again but there is nothing like experiencing it first hand and as far as I can tell Mr. Reynolds, everything bad that people say about you, is very true.

To continue any further dialogue with you would be a useless exercise into your sick perversion of attacking those who believe in the chemtrail spraying, therefor, your going back on my IGNORE LIST, permanently!

halva

10-03-2006, 10:53 PM

His wife Karen must be ignorant of what he does with his time, or else be an absolute apathetic doormat.

halva

10-03-2006, 11:11 PM

http://obituaries.sastandardtimes.com/obit.cfm?ID=6115

I leave for a few days to find your above posting.
There is no relevance to posting my mother's recent obituary within this thread, Wayne Hall.

Perhaps you derive some warped pleasure at the knowledge?
Maybe you felt you could inflict some personal pain upon me or my family by introducing the subject here?
If so, you are wrong Wayne.
You exert no power over me by this act.
You only show your true colors and your desperation for all to see.

What's next, will you post other people's obituaries here in a futile attempt to convince them of your hoax?

What a complete imbecile you are!

Reynolds has long prided himself on being different from many "chemmies" to the extent that he posts in his own name. He is an identifiable person, from an identifiable family, with an identifiable address.

Normally this would indeed be something praiseworthy.

But in the case of Reynolds, the implication of this family in his activities involves a sharing of disgrace.

Reynolds claims the right to be offended at my posting his mother's obituary notice.

I have more proof of the existence of chemtrails than he has proof of his respect for the memory of his mother.

halva

10-03-2006, 11:16 PM

It also reflects as badly as possible on the quality of American society that such a situation can continue, year after year.

mom_p_3

10-03-2006, 11:32 PM

When Reynolds says that "Yes, dear readers, it it now time to drop the other shoe".

""THE 110th MILITARY INTELLIGENCE BATTALION NO LONGER EXISTS. IT WAS DEACTIVATED TWO YEARS AGO!"",

He offers a link that he knows does not give a definitive account of military assets currently committed to the Iraq war, he is selectively giving information with which he can twist and distort my post with, he is a liar and a con artist who will deceive without hesitation if it serves his agenda.

The following is a detailed list of active duty military assets currently serving in the Iraq war as of 2005, it is the most recent information currently available that I could find.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_toe_050301.htm

Please scroll down to "10th Mountain Division / U/I Co, 110th Military Intelligence BN and you will see that as of 2005 the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion, part of the 10th Mountain Division was still very much active in spite of Reynolds claims that as of two years ago (2004) the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion was deactivated, if true, then why is the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion still listed active duty as of 2005.

I have been around the Army long enough to know that when a unit, let alone a whole BATTALION is deactivated the date of the deactivation is logged and usually the information as to why the deactivation and any further information relevant to the formation of other assets stemming from the deactivation are listed as well, reformulation of existing assets does not count as the Army is always repositioning assets, Reynolds just does not get it, obviously he never will.

Reynolds offers a link to no information at all, I offer a link to the most up to date information of military assets committed to Iraq with the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion listed as active as of March 2005, let the readers be the judge of just who the LIAR is here, the DECIEVER, the OBSESSED LUNATIC !

I REST MY CASE !

mom_p_3

10-04-2006, 12:31 AM

Reynolds says that the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion does not exist as of 2004, then I guess Pfc. Joshua Kesner and Spc. Ryan McClung, both with Company D, 110th Military Intelligence Battalion as of 1/27/05 don't exist either according to what Reynolds thinks, what a DICK that guy is !

Why can't Reynolds find information like this, it was news, it's easy to find, that is, unless you don't want to find it for some reason, Hmmmmm !

Jan 27, 2005

Commandos Help Save Life of Contractor .

http://www.drum.army.mil/sites/postnews/blizzard/blizzard_archives/hnews.asp?id=3&issuedate=1-27-2005

By Spc. Brian Schroeder, 10th Mountain Division Public Affairs

CAMP LIBERTY, Baghdad – Imagine driving to work on a busy highway, just like any other day. The bumper-to-bumper traffic is just as frustrating as trying to find a good song on the radio. You look up and see the traffic clearing up ahead of you. Then, all of a sudden, the vehicle in front of you drifts off the road and rolls into a ditch. Would you stop and help the person trapped inside the car or would you keep driving?

Pfc. Joshua Kesner and Spc. Ryan McClung, both with COMPANY D, 110TH MILITARY INTELLIGENCE BATTALION , were faced with a similar situation Jan. 9. The decision they made that day saved one man’s life.

halva

10-04-2006, 01:02 AM

jayreynolds

10-04-2006, 05:05 AM

Reynolds says that the 110th Military Intelligence Battalion does not exist as of 2004, then I guess Pfc. Joshua Kesner and Spc. Ryan McClung, both with Company D, 110th Military Intelligence Battalion as of 1/27/05 don't exist either according to what Reynolds thinks, what a DICK that guy is .

The best Lou can do is to find an article written a year and nine months ago?
And lastly, don't take any website as proof. Do as I did and actually make a telephone call for yourself to confirm the facts I have presented above, call the Ist Brigade Special Troops Battalion at (315) 772-8160. When I did this, the soldier who answered confirmed that the 110th Military Intelligence Battallion "NO LONGER EXISTS"!!!! She asked for my name and likely will remember that Jay Reynolds called with the question this morning.

Oh, and maybe Lou, who claims to have been in the Navy, why he wrote this:
You need to get past the "Bush's trumped up fake war" hang-up that you seem to have and try to understand that active duty service personnel have no choice but to follow orders or face at the least brig time and at the worst a Court Martial, both being incentives to keep your mouth shut and follow orders no matter what "you" think.

Go to any Army base and ask where the "BRIG" is located, and they will immediately wonder why a Navy man is loose on their base.

You see, the Army doesn't have any "BRIG", that is a navy term for a military jail.

The Army has a "STOCKADE" for that purpose.

BUSTED!!

halva

10-04-2006, 07:10 AM

jayreynolds

10-04-2006, 07:28 AM

"Jay Reynolds" has brought disgrace upon a family of which he claims to be a member.

Could he kindly bring here at least one member of that family - preferably wife Karen but another member would also be suitable - to testify that the "Jay Reynolds" posting here at this list is the Jay Reynolds of their family.

If he cannot do this the only conclusion must be that this "Jay Reynolds" of Debate Both Sides is a hoaxer who has appropriated the identity of a person enjoying the respect of the Reynolds family of San Angelo, Texas.

he-he-he.

So, you've been arguing for years with somebody who doesn't exist, huh, Wayne?

What does that make you?

No members of my family are interested in contacts with chemmies.
Leave them alone and do not attempt to harrass them in any way whatsoever.

halva

10-04-2006, 08:29 AM

Reynolds has long prided himself on being different from many "chemmies" to the extent that he posts in his own name. He is an identifiable person, from an identifiable family, with an identifiable address.

Normally this would indeed be something praiseworthy.

But in the case of Reynolds, the implication of this family in his activities involves a sharing of disgrace.

Reynolds claims the right to be offended at my posting his mother's obituary notice.

I have more proof of the existence of chemtrails than he has proof of his respect for the memory of his mother.

jayreynolds

10-04-2006, 08:57 AM

I have more proof of the existence of chemtrails than he has proof of his respect for the memory of his mother.
You're sick, Wayne.
Get yourself some help.

My family isn't involved in chemtrails at all, they really don't care about chemmies, and the only reason why you bring them up is because of your own failures and those of your associates. At the present time you have become an outcast even among the people who share your false beliefs, and so you are lashing about aimlessly searching for an object to vent your frustration on. It won't help you or your cause any, though, and you won't end up feeling any better. You'll just look even more like a sick frustrated puny little bastard, and feel even worse.

I'm giving you some sound advice. Think about it.

halva

10-04-2006, 09:14 AM

halva

10-04-2006, 09:20 AM

There are no reasons why I should make such demands of him myself. After all I do not belong in the social and political milieu that he is wrecking. I am not even an American.

jayreynolds

10-04-2006, 11:53 AM

I will leave it to others to make the demands of Reynolds that he habitually makes of anyone who attempts to break into his autism: summonses to the wives of servicemen in war zones to bring their husbands to this thread to face charges of cowardice from the Grand Inquisitioner.
Wayne, it was Lou who fabricated a "husband" after he became a female impersonator, and declared on this messageboard:

Mr. Reynolds, as I said when I started this, I don't know everything and I'll be the first to admit that but my husband is deployed to Iraq for the second time in two years, he is a master sergeant with the 110th Mountain Division / Security Force, I can tell you that he does know something and if my husband says that the government is spraying stuff into our sky's then it's a fact"

Wayne, this is a debate forum, and when one person quotes another person as a reference to fact, the opposition has every right to demand to see the alleged "facts".

All we got were lie upon lie.

All reference to Lou's embarrassment is moving swiftly downwards at Gastronomus as fast as they can push it, and everyone over there is holding their nose over the whole matter. No matter what either of you do, your personal reputations will never be the same, you have both effectively been emasculated if not altogether neutered, and will always carry the stigma.

Actually, one wonders why YOUR PEOPLE never seem interested enough in these "facts" to ask for them. In the final analysis, you know why.

This hoax would have burned itself out long ago if chemmies had abandoned the "Big Tent" policy of tolerating every nincompoop crackpot, rumormonger and fake "whistleblower that comes along. But that would require serious thought, critical judgements and honesty, all attributes severely lacking among your peers.

Perhaps, Wayne, you are only interested in promoting hoaxers like David Stewart, "Dr. Judah Ben Hur", Jim Phelps and Rosalind Peterson types whose only purpose has been to provide amusement and ammunition for debunkers, or rabbit holes for less intelligent chemmies to fall into!

Who has paid you and how well for your work these long years?

Your latest dismal 'lamentation' at your website is designed solely to demoralize anyone even considering becoming involved. It reflects a totally uninspiring absence of hope, a victim mentality, and is in effect a dying gasp of a failed hoax.
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showpost.php?p=646609&postcount=7771

halva

10-04-2006, 01:29 PM

It doesn't look as if anyone is interested in responding. All the better. For no-one to respond here and no-one anywhere else to come here or pay any attention to irrelevant psychotic ravings.. The text at Enouranois was not written by me. Everyone has his style. Diversity is a strengthening factor, making possible a creative division of labour..

mom_p_3

10-04-2006, 03:18 PM

Quote, Halva

"It doesn't look as if anyone is interested in responding. All the better. For no-one to respond here and no-one anywhere else to come here or pay any attention to irrelevant psychotic ravings.. The text at Enouranois was not written by me. Everyone has his style. Diversity is a strengthening factor, making possible a creative division of labour."
__________________________________________________ __

Why should I respond to your post Halva, didn't you tell me to go someplace else when I first posted here and that I was just wasting my time here.

Was I wrong in thinking that you were taking that Cretan Reynolds side in attacking me and my husband?

I know that we live in different country's and that our cultures are somewhat different but I thought common decency among people was universal, perhaps because of our cultural differences, I over reacted to your initial post, if so, I apologize for my lack of understanding and remarks to you.

I'm done with that moron Reynolds BS, he can rant and rave all that he likes for all I care, all that he wants to do is attack people for what they believe in, whether it's chemtrail's or their being put in a position to fight in a war that they don't believe in, he can use this thread as he pleases but others are not supposed to use it outside the definitions that he establishes, he acts just like the right wing Bush A-holes in Washington that are making up the rules as they go along, he is just like them in so many ways.

Quote, Reynolds

"This is the science forum, not the conspiracy forum"
___________________________________________

Obviously Reynolds can make this forum about anything that he sees fit to as he goes on his personal attacks of anyone that comes here wanting to discuss chemtrail's, which by the way "IS" a conspiracy theory based on the strange formation of persistent contrail's that people have been observing being made in our sky's since the nineties, so, in fact, this "IS" a conspiracy forum and it is not Reynolds private forum that was established just so he can attack people who have a different opinion from his.

Now that I have personally interacted with him, I can plainly see that he is fanatically obsessed to the point of lunacy in dismissing anyone's ideas with regard to the spraying of the chemtrail's and he will go to any length in doing that even if it involves lying, character assassination and the use of threats, I see now why he is banned at so many forums and web sites that are trying to address the chemtrail spraying issue.

Fortunately, Debate Both Sides has an "Ignore" option that enables the user to ignore the fanatically obsessed lunatics like Reynolds.

I can't and won't comment on his family or what they might feel with regard to his debunking life, that's their problem, his family is none of my business, I can respect that much as a mother and a wife, some things should be left to family, even his.

From now on my post will be made without interference by Reynolds, he can not inject himself into my thinking or my post, he is being ignored as he should be.

halva

10-04-2006, 10:08 PM

Quote, Halva

"It doesn't look as if anyone is interested in responding. All the better. For no-one to respond here and no-one anywhere else to come here or pay any attention to irrelevant psychotic ravings.. The text at Enouranois was not written by me. Everyone has his style. Diversity is a strengthening factor, making possible a creative division of labour."
__________________________________________________ __

Why should I respond to your post Halva, didn't you tell me to go someplace else when I first posted here and that I was just wasting my time here.

I am glad that you are responding, but I was not expecting it. The time is long past since I invited anyone to come here, to pay attention to what is happening here, or since I thought that any good could come of anyone talking to Reynolds. However, I am not going myself to leave this forum of my own accord. Your putting Reynolds on ignore is a solution of sorts. I have done it myself at times.

Was I wrong in thinking that you were taking that Cretan Reynolds side in attacking me and my husband?

Yes, you were. And leave Crete and Cretans out of it. :) They have no responsibility for Reynolds. Just because in ancient times a Cretan said that all Cretans are liars, that doesn't mean that all liars are Cretans.

I know that we live in different country's and that our cultures are somewhat different but I thought common decency among people was universal, perhaps because of our cultural differences, I over reacted to your initial post, if so, I apologize for my lack of understanding and remarks to you.

Thank you. The situation here is so far outside the experience of most people that it is not surprising to see people misreading the signals. You see that I did the same with you, suspecting that Reynolds or some last remnant of his former group of hangers on had posted your message.

I'm done with that moron Reynolds BS, he can rant and rave all that he likes for all I care, all that he wants to do is attack people for what they believe in, whether it's chemtrail's or their being put in a position to fight in a war that they don't believe in, he can use this thread as he pleases but others are not supposed to use it outside the definitions that he establishes, he acts just like the right wing Bush A-holes in Washington that are making up the rules as they go along, he is just like them in so many ways.

Quote, Reynolds

"This is the science forum, not the conspiracy forum"
___________________________________________

Obviously Reynolds can make this forum about anything that he sees fit to as he goes on his personal attacks of anyone that comes here wanting to discuss chemtrail's, which by the way "IS" a conspiracy theory based on the strange formation of persistent contrail's that people have been observing being made in our sky's since the nineties, so, in fact, this "IS" a conspiracy forum and it is not Reynolds private forum that was established just so he can attack people who have a different opinion from his.

Now that I have personally interacted with him, I can plainly see that he is fanatically obsessed to the point of lunacy in dismissing anyone's ideas with regard to the spraying of the chemtrail's and he will go to any length in doing that even if it involves lying, character assassination and the use of threats, I see now why he is banned at so many forums and web sites that are trying to address the chemtrail spraying issue.

Fortunately, Debate Both Sides has an "Ignore" option that enables the user to ignore the fanatically obsessed lunatics like Reynolds.

I can't and won't comment on his family or what they might feel with regard to his debunking life, that's their problem, his family is none of my business, I can respect that much as a mother and a wife, some things should be left to family, even his.

From now on my post will be made without interference by Reynolds, he can not inject himself into my thinking or my post, he is being ignored as he should be.

Under the principle of the burden of proof resting on the plaintiff, it is Reynolds responsibility to prove that chemtrails don't exist, not our responsibility to prove that they exist. Reynolds is complaining a thousand times more about "chemmies" than some "chemmies", realising that chemtrails are just part of a wider problem, are complaining about chemtrails.

jayreynolds

10-05-2006, 07:51 AM

I'm wondering if Lou dons panties and bra when he writes drag queen posts as 'Mom_p_3'?

How does it feel to be outed as a "man" who makes transvestite postings, Lou?

Real proud of yourself?

Everybody knows.................

"Busted, down on Bourbon Street;
Set up, like a bowling pin.
Knocked down, it gets to wearin' thin.
They just wont let you be, oh no.

Sometimes the light's all shinin' on me;
Other times, I can barely see.
Lately it occurs to me ...
What a long, strange trip it's been."
-J Garcia, et al.

jayreynolds

10-05-2006, 08:00 AM

Under the principle of the burden of proof resting on the plaintiff, it is Reynolds responsibility to prove that chemtrails don't exist, not our responsibility to prove that they exist.

Sorry, Wayne, the situation isn't like that at all.

It is you who took the plaintiff affirmative position that, "It is time for there to be exposure, and honest public debate, about what is ALREADY being done by the proponents of geoengineering 'solutions'."

You did this in your very first posting here at DBS, and it's futile to try and deny the record:
http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?t=397

You lost that debate straightaway yet have been held here squirming like a worm ever since, trying to escape yet always drawn back like a moth to a flame. I'm not finished with you yet and you have many lessons to learn in the harshest possible fashion that I can muster. Along the way you have been of great assistance to me, however. Thanks for working so hard to help me accomplish my goals, old bean!

halva

10-05-2006, 01:46 PM

I told you after some months of persisting in the position that you describe that I can't prove TO YOU that chemtrails exist.

And I don't have to.

I originally came to this forum for reasons related to a response of Arianna Huffington to "The Pentagon Report" on global warming. If Arianna Huffington ever paid any attention to what was being posted here, she - for reasons not yet clarified, which to be quite frank I could no longer give a damn about, because Schwarzenegger was a better candidate than her anyway - decided long ago to abandon this forum and leave it to its own devices.

So any appeal to historical reasons for people's originally coming here is quite irrelevant. Neither I nor anyone else are under any obligation to prove to you that chemtrails exist. Chemmies are YOUR problem. You are complaining about them. You are the plaintiff. You have to prove that the object of their concern does NOT exist.

mom_p_3

10-05-2006, 07:49 PM

Quote, Halva

"Chemmies are YOUR problem. You are complaining about them. You are the plaintiff. You have to prove that the object of their concern does NOT exist".
____________________________________________

'Chimmies are Reynolds problem" not Chemtrail's !

Wow, you sure have that right Halva, it seems that Reynolds spends his every waking moment bashing and trash talking anyone who thinks that the chemtrail's are real, he gets so caught up in his personal attacks that he doesn't even mention the chemtrail's, all he dose is rant and attack, obviously all that he cares about is the attack and not the real issue of chemtrail's.

Quote, Halva

"I told you after some months of persisting in the position that you describe that I can't prove TO YOU that chemtrails exist."
_____________________________________________

Halva, what do you think of all of the photographic evidence that's been gathered since these chemtrail's started showing up back in the late 90's, I know that Reynolds says that they have always been around and on that point he is half right, normal contrail's have been around since planes could fly high enough so contrail's form but it was only as of the 90's that we started seeing the mass spraying of areas of the sky, the strange X's, tic-tac-toe trail's, grid's made of trail's, the white out type conditions from the trail's, we did not see this kind of activity before the mid to late 90's, obviously something changed and lots of it has been caught on film and video.

Reynolds and the paid government scientist would like to say that all of this photographic evidence is not evidence at all but I disagree, today photographic evidence is used in just about every discipline of science that exist and it is used widely in crime scene forensics, courts of law, on and on and in spite of what the paid government mouthpieces and the Reynolds types say in discounting the photographic evidence, I believe that there is more than enough of it to convince most people that there is something to this spraying that's going on.

I think people believe what they can see more than what the Reynolds debunkers or government paid scientist types tell them they are seeing.

mom_p_3

10-05-2006, 07:54 PM

AND,

Our Republican politicians here in the U.S. are in big trouble because they are the party of corruption and lies, the people are sick and tired of there using ways and being lied to and used, the people are waking up and realize that we need to change the direction that the Republicans have been taking us in, there is going to be a mid term election in a few weeks that most people feel will take the Republicans out of their position of power in the House and Senate, if this is accomplished the Democrats will take control and there will be many changes coming, one will be more openness by our politicians to address this spraying issue.

There are a number of well respected people just waiting in the wings, ready to start knocking on Senators and Congressman's doors with petitions of the people asking that the chemtrail issue be addressed at the congressional level, with the Republicans out the chances of the truth of this spraying coming out will be much better but we must wait for the Democrats to gain control before we can start our door to door campaign of the politicians.

jayreynolds

10-05-2006, 08:27 PM

Halva, what do you think of all of the photographic evidence that's been gathered since these chemtrail's started showing up back in the late 90's, I know that Reynolds says that they have always been around and on that point he is half right, normal contrail's have been around since planes could fly high enough so contrail's form but it was only as of the 90's that we started seeing the mass spraying of areas of the sky, the strange X's, tic-tac-toe trail's, grid's made of trail's, the white out type conditions from the trail's, we did not see this kind of activity before the mid to late 90's, obviously something changed and lots of it has been caught on film and video.

Reynolds and the paid government scientist would like to say that all of this photographic evidence is not evidence at all but I disagree, today photographic evidence is used in just about every discipline of science that exist and it is used widely in crime scene forensics, courts of law, on and on and in spite of what the paid government mouthpieces and the Reynolds types say in discounting the photographic evidence, I believe that there is more than enough of it to convince most people that there is something to this spraying that's going on.

I think people believe what they can see more than what the Reynolds debunkers or government paid scientist types tell them they are seeing.

Hey, Lou, don't argue with me, EVEN YOUR OWN CHEMKOOKS AT 'GASTRONOMOUS SAY THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!!

THEY HAVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE AS FAR BACK AS THE 1960's AND BEYOND!!!!!!!

WHY CAN"T YOUR PEOPLE GET THEIR STORIES STRAIGHT!!!!

DON'T ARGUE WITH ME WHEN EVEN YOUR OWN PEOPLE DISAGREE!!!!
Dan, absolutely not. I am totally convinced of this. A number of my old 35 mm kodachrome slides prove this. On two days, back in April of 1965, I took a series of shots in northern Westchester County of a massive spraying operation. I always fondly took these sets of photos as nothing more than two "lazy, hazy" days back in April of 1965... that was, until I discovered the spraying that was going on four years ago. Then I re-examined these photos, and quickly realized that what I was observing was nothing less than a massive spraying operation taking place back in the spring of 1965... a sky that was quickly being transformed into a chemical soup, laced and infested with expanding trails, back in 1965. Also, I checked out some of our old family vacation slides from the summers of 1958 and 1959 at the seashore