Re: DrPostman: Degenerate Mother Insultor

From: Aratzio (a6ahlyv02_at_sneakemail.com)
Date: 09/23/04 

Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 20:50:49 -0700

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 03:41:07 GMT, Rudolph_X <nospam@please.net> got
double secret probation because:

>
>
>Wally Anglesea™ wrote:
>
>>On 22 Sep 2004 07:15:07 -0700, judoka_61@hotmail.com (Pietro
>>Sommavilla) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>DrPostman <Looky@mysig.foremail> wrote in message news:<r1kvk0th8ko4ujubj54h6iqocsm5gq3oo2@4ax.com>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 20 Sep 2004 23:47:11 -0700, judoka_61@hotmail.com (Pietro
>>>>Sommavilla) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Wally Anglesea? <wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote in message news:<3epuk0h2ua80t2nujovo4m29jch1virg27@4ax.com>...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 20 Sep 2004 06:47:14 -0700, judoka_61@hotmail.com (Pietro
>>>>>>Sommavilla) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>DrPostman <Looky@mysig.foremail> wrote in message news:<52nsk05j94gq3k4t826g84hqbi0bnueuhl@4ax.com>...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 00:48:41 GMT, Rudolph_X <nospam@please.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>DrPostman: Degenerate Mother Insultor
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Beware: Your mother could be his next victim.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Your mother was the first victim.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.geocities.com/bobolaurel/list.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>cool. I made another kook lits o' haet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And simply because I showed Pietro that polaroids can be altered. Go
>>>>>>figure
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Tell me again ..anglesea tell me how some *instant pictures can be
>>>>>alterate by photoshop.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>No one has ever posted that. You are almost too stupid for words, but
>>>>you do keep trying.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Realy ?
>>>
>>>I was talking about the the Caponi's case and his instant picturers;
>>>while you start to say:
>>>http://www.geocities.com/judoka1961/postdata9.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Pietro, you are one dumb, blabbering, repetitive, deliberately
>>ignorant,cowardly, obsessive, fucked in the head kook.
>>
>>As has been explained to you dozens of times, and I'm going to
>>clue-by-four you again.
>>
>>The crap photo's you present are USELESS as evidence of anything other
>>than your obsessed stupidity.
>>
>>1: ANY image can be altered once it's scanned it.
>>
>>
>NOT IF THERE IS A LOCK ON IT. DUMBASS. YOU NEED AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THE
>FILE. MANY IMAGE FILES CAN BE PASSWORD PROTECTED.
>

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

And how long would do you think it takes to break a passworded file?
What a moron, are you always this stupid? Does it hurt to get out of
bed and miss the floor every morning?

>>So how the *** did the images end up on webpages? Is there some NEW
>>technology that we are all not aware of that allows photographs to
>>appear on webpages without them being scanned into a computer? If
>>there is, please explain this amazing technology.
>>
>>2: Polaroids can be altered WITHOUT any computer technology
>>whatsoever, and it's done regularly.
>>
>>
>>
>BUT THOSE CAN BE EASILY DETECTED AS BEING TAMPERED WITH. SURE YOU CAN
>DRAW A MOUSTACH ON A PERSONS FACE, BUT IT IS PLAIN TO SEE, IF ITS BEEN
>TAMPERED WITH.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That is why now days even the experts at trials cannot agree about the
veracity of any photo.

>
>>3: If the originals are confiscated, HOW THE *** are there any images
>>at all?
>>
>>
>>
>IMAGE FILES CAN EASILY BE COPIED BY ANY MORON, EVENS ONE LIKE YOU.

But only MORONS like you think they cannot be tampered with. Pixel, by
pixel by pixel...

'Ratz

Quantcast