Re: Yet Another Roswell Thread

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 04:34:25 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian
Parker <ianparker2@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

On 9 Jul, 21:24, simberg.interglo...@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 13:01:18 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian
Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:





On 9 Jul, 20:33, simberg.interglo...@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:24:47 -0700, in a place far, far away, Ian
Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

On 9 Jul, 17:48, simberg.interglo...@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:

You obviously have something to defend. I don't know how the envelope
came to be discovered - or even if the whole story is not a pack of
lies from beginning to end. The possibilities are these.

<snip irrelevant insanity>

If you're going to actually respond do something I wrote, then include
what I wrote in your post. I have no idea what the hell "envelope"
you're talking about, or how anything I wrote has anything to do with
Roswell. Or what you fantasize it is that I "have to defend."

How about attempting to stay on topic, and respond to what I write,
instead of what the voices in your head tell you I write?

The details of the envelope is on the original website. The story is
that this lieutenant who worked at Roswell died and left a sealed
envelope which was to be opened on his death. This contained details
of the fling saucer crash, alien bodies and all the other things which
has been alleged as part of the Roswell conspiracy.

I haven't said anything about envelopes, or Roswell, you loon.

So why are you talking about it in a response to me on a completely
different subject? If you want to talk about Roswell, or any other
nutty thing, start a new topic, instead of pretending *I* brought it
up.- Hide quoted text -

Look I was responding to the original message which you do not seem to
have read - Typical.

No, you idiot. You were replying to something that I posted (though I
have no idea what, since you trimmed it all out). That's why the very
first line of your response *has my name in it* (still viewable, up at
the top).
.

Relevant Pages
Loading