Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom

From: Scott Hedrick (dinehnm_at_KILLALLSPAMMERSyahoo.com)
Date: 07/06/04 

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 22:45:21 -0400

"LaDonna Wyss" <hpywife927@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4821518f.0407051142.3056e0e5@posting.google.com...
> OK, I'm on limited time at the moment

Now she's paranoid- what, you think NASA's out to get you?

so I will have to go
> point-by-point later this evening when my roommate isn't here.

Hiding from your roommate, eh?

> However, I do have points off the top of my head:

Among other things.

> 1. WHY are you raising questions from weeks ago?

You have a tremendous backlog of questions to answer already, such as the
names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement personnel you spoke to about
Apollo 1.

> 2. You've provided NO documentation that the RCS itself was being
> simulated.

Whoopty doo. *You* haven't provided any documentation to support your claim
that you have "teammates".

> Where was the burn damage to the cryo stir
> switch on Apollo 13?

Where are the names and jurisdictions for the law enforcement personnel you
spoke to about Apollo 1?

>There WAS none.

Sounds like a confession. Are you admitting you lied about talking to any
law enforcement personnel about Apollo 1?

>Because THAT'S NOT WHERE
> THE PROBLEM WAS!

*You're* problem is obvious. You'd breath much easier if your nostrils were
on the OUTSIDE of your rectum.

>Yes, the S-11
> switch ultimately caused the problem,

Prove it.

> Do you not understand basic electricity?

YOU don't. If you did, you'd have answered at least some of rk's questions
long ago, instead of pretending they don't exist.

> Daniel, you said yourself you do not know about this particular realm
> of investigation.

He certainly doesn't seem to be familiar with the style of investigation you
use in your fanstasy realm.

 Why in the world would you spend a week reading the
> Review Board Report and then assert yourself as a fire expert?

You've asserted yourself as an expert in a lot more places with a lot less
research. Whine, whine, whine...

  Why
> don't you do what I have done, and interview electricians,
> technicians, engineers, etc., and then get back to me in six months or
> so?

Such as? Names, please.

> You are asserting theories that have no basis in FACT.

Just like you.

 You are
> ASSUMING

Daniel! Run away! She's asking for sex again!

> No such evidence is
> available

The names and jurisdictions of the law enforcement personnel you spoke to
about Apollo 1, that is...

> It's like Scott has said more than once--if someone shorts your
> ignition switch, and your car goes up in flames, can you say that
> because the fire started in the battery the ignition switch was not
> the problem?

Liar! I've *never* said that.

> I specifically referenced those statements.
> Where are they?

If you referenced them *you* should know.

>The truth is NEVER
> EVER as bad as the lies, questions, suspicions, and cover-ups.

Why then do you prefer the lies?

> But as an investigative reporter told me not long ago on
> the telephone, the cover-up is ALWAYS worse than the lie.

Cite, please. You have the proper form.

Quantcast