Re: Stan's beef with Haddad

*** Hollywood takes a shot:

Skipper wrote:
What's particularly curious about your continuing accusations is that
you are an officer with the NYPD, correct?

It stands to reason that any normal person, particularly someone in law
enforcement, would correspond with authorities in other jurisdictions
if you truly suspected someone of being a child and/or sexual predator.
>
So why haven't you done that?
>
Haddad's easily found around Perth.

I'm sure you've checked.

A simple Google of "australian child molesters" offers a lot of links
that could be helpful.

Have you checked? Is his name on the list? If it is, I imagine the Australian authorities already know about him, wouldn't you say? But, if you have information that Raymond Haddad is a child molester, you should report it. If not, I'd say you're being a bit irresponsible in trying to imply his name might be on a list of "australian [sic] child molesters." Is that what you were implying, Lloyd? Did I misread your intent?

Or is it you have another agenda?

Yep. I've stated exactly what that agenda is. I intend to see to it that he will *never* post here without everyone knowing that he's a repulsive piece of *** who should *never* be allowed near little girls. Have someone explain those words to you. Have them do that several times until you start to comprehend them.

Thanks for re-posting the info, though. You've done a service. I guess you're just getting even with scum-boy for posting that he won't associate with the likes of you. Not that anyone else can blame him for that, mind. Although I'd say he was rather stupid if he thought he could post it while you were away and you wouldn't see it.

Now, run along back to your cult, Lloyd. Or do you have a meeting with some important Hollywood players? Either way, run along. There's a good fella.

--
Stan

In article <48a4585f$0$29516$607ed4bc@xxxxxx>, the Man
<newsNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ray Haddad wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:07:04 +0200, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and Alan Hope <usenet.identity@xxxxxxxxx> instead replied:

Jackson Pillock goes:

"\(no name\)" <spy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:XeJok.22904$Ri.16296@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: I will prudently send cat pictures. What could
be easier than that? I do not post them to a public forum for the same reason that I would
not post pix of my family. My cats are like family.
I don't believe in the cats either. Neither does UV, nor LNC. Why is this offer only open to Alan?
I'm the union rep.
The mob leader, more like it. Gather round, ye who dislike Geno!
It's time to have a go at the cat man for a while.
Compared to you, scum-boy, Gene is Mr. Popularity around here.

For those of you who are new here or who may have forgotten, this piece of shit, Ray "scum-boy" Haddad, is the shitwad who has bragged about his relationship with an 11-yr old (or 14-yr old, depending on whose math you accept) girl, a relationship most normal adults would, based on his description alone, consider inappropriate at the very least. In addition to whatever else may have occurred between them, he has written about how he provided the means for her to participate in a mostly adult usenet ng and then encouraged other adults to bother her, while admitting she was too young for such attention.

Ray "scum-boy" Haddad is also well known to be a liar, so it's possible everything he wrote about this little girl was a complete fabrication designed to give him an edge in one of his many, many usenet arguments. Nevertheless, he has insisted that every word he has written here has been the truth, and he has claimed the relationship he described with that little girl was perfectly appropriate. So, either he's telling the truth about his disgusting relationship with that little girl or he's lying about it, but defends an inappropriate relationship between an adult male and an 11-yr old (or 14-yr old) girl as acceptable. Whichever it is, he's a nauseating piece of *** who should *never* be allowed near little girls.

And this doesn't even touch upon his absurd attempts at valor thievery. All can be found in full context in the archives.

So, newbies beware of this scum.

--
Stan
.