[Andre Jute]

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
-- Anonymous

[Peter Wieck]

On Feb 16, 5:54*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
* * * * * * -- Anonymous

It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[robert casey]

Peter Wieck wrote:
On Feb 16, 5:54 pm, Andre Jute wrote:

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
-- Anonymous


It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA


Yes, but I've heard that electric eels generate enough voltage to supply
tube circuits. Don't know if it's enough current to run a power amp, or
just a pre-amp... :-)

[George M. Middius]

robert casey said:

Peter Wieck

Yes, but I've heard that electric eels generate enough voltage to supply
tube circuits. Don't know if it's enough current to run a power amp, or
just a pre-amp... :-)

Please don't interrupt Worthless Wiecky when he launches the S.S. Poor
Pitiful Me. He has drains to circle and sinkholes to fathom, and mere
hours of daylight before the crows swoop in to pluck out his eyes.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Feb, 00:08, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net
wrote:

He has drains to circle and sinkholes to fathom, and mere
hours of daylight before the crows swoop in to pluck out his eyes.

I calculate that to be about 11 AM SUndaqy, eastern time


http://gpbc.org/cgi-bin/gx.cgi/AppLo...alendarmonth#1

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Peter Wieck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 5:54 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
-- Anonymous

It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt.

Come on Peter. Lighten up. Andre's post made
me smile:-) That's a very good way to start the day.

Iain

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article
,
Andre Jute wrote:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
-- Anonymous

Timed 22.54 and the bottle truly drained.

--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Feb, 05:06, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:


Timed 22.54

Ezekial 13:11

[tubegarden]

On Feb 16, 3:54�pm, Andre Jute wrote:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
� � � � � � -- Anonymous


Hi RATs!

Give a man a walrus and a carpenter and he'll enjoy having tea and
crumpets while the stereo drives all three crazy and they then go out
and attack Cleveland, Ohio.

Happy Ears!
Al

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:
On 17 Feb, 05:06, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:


Timed 22.54

Ezekial 13:11

Ah. The sun well past the yardarm, though?

--
*Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 17, 10:06*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *Andre Jute wrote:

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
* * * * * * -- Anonymous

Timed 22.54 and the bottle truly drained.

--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career. *

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.

What a depressingly bourgeois life you lead, Plowie. At 11pm, far from
finishing the bottle, I'm just standing in front of the racks,
fondling this bottle and that, deciding which to open for an aperitif
and which for the main session. I don't go to bed until dawn.

Yours rationally,

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/

STATUTORY DECLARATION
No real corpses were harmed in the assembly of Andre Jute's golem
Peter Wieck aka Worthless Wieckless --- CE Certificate of Conformity

[Peter Wieck]

On Feb 17, 11:11Â*am, tubegarden wrote:
On Feb 16, 3:54�pm, Andre Jute wrote:

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
� � � � � � -- Anonymous

Hi RATs!

Give a man a walrus and a carpenter and he'll enjoy having tea and
crumpets while the stereo drives all three crazy and they then go out
and attack Cleveland, Ohio.

Happy Ears!
Al

An attack on Cleveland could only result in an improvement.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article
,
Andre Jute wrote:
Timed 22.54 and the bottle truly drained.

What a depressingly bourgeois life you lead, Plowie. At 11pm, far from
finishing the bottle, I'm just standing in front of the racks,
fondling this bottle and that, deciding which to open for an aperitif
and which for the main session. I don't go to bed until dawn.

And then back in the coffin before daylight?
Figures.

--
*Thank you. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

Iain Churches wrote:
Come on Peter. Lighten up. Andre's post made me smile:-)
That's a very good way to start the day.

It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's agenda.

It seriously diminshes my respect for you, Iain, that you choose to
carry on pleasantly with Andre, ignoring his many transgressions
against this newsgroup and its members.

-Henry

[Andre Jute]

Henry "Porno" Pasternack crawls back to RAT -- and
immediately disgraces himself again by making a false accusation:

The sainted Andre Jute repeated a joke:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
-- Anonymous

Worthless Wiecky aka "Peter Wieck" sent his usual dull
and pointless spite:
It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt.

Iain Churches wrote:
Come on Peter. Lighten up. Andre's post made
me smile:-) That's a very good way to start the day.

Then the pornographer and child molester Henry Pasternack accuses
Andre Jute of writing the vicious words in fact posted by Porno Pas's
own bumbuddy Worthless Wiecky:
It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's agenda.

Nope, Pasternack, it is a stupid, egotistical remark, a reminder of
the abuse one can expect from the Magnequest Scum and its relicts,
like you and Worthless Wiecky. Those are not my words, they are
Worthless Wiecky's words. You owe me an apology, Porno Pas, once
again.

Next Pasternack deepens his disgrace by abusing Iain Churches, who has
done so much to keep RAT going, for merely being civil:
It seriously diminshes my respect for you, Iain, that you choose to
carry on pleasantly with Andre, ignoring his many transgressions
against this newsgroup and its members.

-Henry

Nah, Porno Pas, you came onto RAT, you attacked me without
provocation, you continued for years in the same malicious way,
bragging that in your "zeal to flame Andre" you would "drain the glee
from his hobby", and I did nothing except stand by smiling bemusedly
while you hurled yourself hysterically against my ankles, in the
process destroying your reputation. Nothing to do with me. The same
applies to the rest of your gang, the Magnequest Scum. I publicly
warned you in advance and repeatedly that, "When I stop smiling,
someone always gets hurt. Funny thing is, it is never me." In the
event the warning proved unnecessary as I never stopped smiling. You
scumballs were so clumsily malicious, so evil in your overreactions,
that you did for yourselves without any assistance from me.

A decade or a dozen years later, here you are again, Porno Pas, and
with your first message of your new flame war, you disgrace yourself
again, falsely accusing me of words I never spoke, assaulting Iain
Churches for being a man of goodwill to all. You're a slow learner,
Pasternack, a very slow learner. Ten or twelve years after you
promised to destroy me in a fortnight, I'm still amazed at your clumsy
stupidity and your self-lacerating obduracy, and I'm still smiling.

Thanks for the giggle, Porno Pas. Hey, if you see Creepy Mike
Magnequest, tell him thanks for the money I made out of being
"victimized" by his gang, including you; over the years it turned into
a nice little seven-figure sum.

Don't blame me if the door hits you in your slack, immoral arse on
your way out.

Andre Jute
Charisma is the talent by merely existing of inducing apoplexy in
losers

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
[Deleted]

Quite a predictable response from Andre.

Now, Iain, I apologize for putting you on the spot, but I would like ask you
whether
you agree with Andre, and what you think all this says with respect to the
treatment
he deserves from the members of this group.

-Henry

[Andre Jute]

Henry "Porno" Pasternack wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote:

[Deleted]

Porno Pas deleted every word I wrote because I proved that he lied.
Again. Porno Pas doesn't retract his false accusation, he doesn't
apologise, instead he tries to use the very fact that I should defend
myself against the lies of such a notorious character assassin as
himself as an indictiment of me:

Quite a predictable response from Andre.

Here's the key phrase from my response:
"Henry Pasternack accuses Andre Jute of writing the vicious words in
fact posted by Porno Pas's own bumbuddy Worthless Wiecky"

You made a false accusation, scumball. Where's your apology?

Now on the basis of a lie Pasternack told told about me, and which I
have proved to to be a lie, Pasternack wants Iain to abuse me for
defending myself against a false accusation:

Now, Iain, I apologize for putting you on the spot, but I would like ask you
whether
you agree with Andre, and what you think all this says with respect to the
treatment
he deserves from the members of this group.

It is this vicious, irrational immorality of Pasternack, his continual
disjunction between cause and effect, between his own actions and
people's reactions, the way he blames everyone else for the ignominy
he pulls down on his own head, which make Henry Pasternack a
psychopath.

-Henry

I feel no pity for Porno Pas. He has made himself what he is out of
the most base and grubby motives. Here he had another opportunity to
say he made a mistake and to apologize, to regain some decency and
honesty. Instead he tries to blame me for his viciousness. It won't
work.

Andre Jute
Zero tolerance for child molesters

[Jon Yaeger]

Jute,

You lecturing Pasternak is a bit like Idi Amin preaching tolerance and the
virtuous life.

It's kinda funny if you appreciate irony, but it's really kinda sad when you
think that that you might yourself believe your delusions and the slander
you dish out to others.

Low regards,

Jon









in article
, Andre
Jute at wrote on 2/21/08 10:20 PM:

Henry "Porno" Pasternack wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote:

[Deleted]

Porno Pas deleted every word I wrote because I proved that he lied.
Again. Porno Pas doesn't retract his false accusation, he doesn't
apologise, instead he tries to use the very fact that I should defend
myself against the lies of such a notorious character assassin as
himself as an indictiment of me:

Quite a predictable response from Andre.

Here's the key phrase from my response:
"Henry Pasternack accuses Andre Jute of writing the vicious words in
fact posted by Porno Pas's own bumbuddy Worthless Wiecky"

You made a false accusation, scumball. Where's your apology?

Now on the basis of a lie Pasternack told told about me, and which I
have proved to to be a lie, Pasternack wants Iain to abuse me for
defending myself against a false accusation:

Now, Iain, I apologize for putting you on the spot, but I would like ask you
whether
you agree with Andre, and what you think all this says with respect to the
treatment
he deserves from the members of this group.

It is this vicious, irrational immorality of Pasternack, his continual
disjunction between cause and effect, between his own actions and
people's reactions, the way he blames everyone else for the ignominy
he pulls down on his own head, which make Henry Pasternack a
psychopath.

-Henry

I feel no pity for Porno Pas. He has made himself what he is out of
the most base and grubby motives. Here he had another opportunity to
say he made a mistake and to apologize, to regain some decency and
honesty. Instead he tries to blame me for his viciousness. It won't
work.

Andre Jute
Zero tolerance for child molesters

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
Zero tolerance for child molesters

You're entitled to your opinion of my character. You're entitled to argue,
to flame, to call me bad names. But you don't have the right to libel me.

I am putting Iain on the spot because it pains me to watch a good man
suck up to a jackass. I don't expect Iain to like it, but he's a grown up
and he knows how to contact me if he wants to complain.

-Henry

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 22, 4:22*am, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message

Zero tolerance for child molesters

You're entitled to your opinion of my character. *You're entitled to argue,
to flame, to call me bad names. *But you don't have the right to libel me.

I don't understand why you think I accuse you, Pasternack. It is the
father of the two little girls who accused *someone*, and your own
friend and associate Robert Chernofsky aka BobC who confirmed your
guilt by naming you as the someone. Those documents were published on
RAT only a few months ago if anyone needs a refresher.

I don't understand why, if you're innocent, Porno Pas, you didn't
instantly confront the father of the two little girls and deny the
charge. (Compare for instance my firm action to confront you and slap
you down in this thread when you falsely accused me of speaking words
Worthless Wiecky vomited. And we're still waiting for you to reprimand
Worthless for the words you tried to reprimand me for... You're not
only scum, Pasternack, you're hypocritical scum.)

I don't understand why, if you're innocent, Porno Pas, in all the
intervening years you haven't prevailed on your longtime bumbuddy
Robert Chernofsky aka BobC to say he was mistaken and you're innocent
after all. It wouldn't be the first time you conspired to lie, would
it now, nor the first time Chernofsky covered up the crimes of the
Magnequest Scum, would it?

Meanwhile all we have to go on is the archive of the Sound List
(Joenet) at Harvard. Surely you understand, Pasternack, that your
unsupported word isn't worth **** after we caught you out lying on
professional matters here on RAT, and after your displays of
viciousness in your "zeal to flame Andre", and after the pornography
that flooded the single-driver conference while I was there which was
admitted by Creepy Mike LeFevre to be the work of his gang, of which
you were a member in good standing.

I am putting Iain on the spot because it pains me to watch a good man
suck up to a jackass. *I don't expect Iain to like it, but he's a grown up
and he knows how to contact me if he wants to complain.

Iain will do whatever he pleases. You, Porno Pas, are the one behaving
despicably, trying to put a third party on the spot when you've been
caught out lying and behaving with your usual despicable lack of
morality.

-Henry

Where's your apology for lying about me, scumbag?

Contemptuously,

Andre Jute
Zero tolerance for child molesters

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Feb 22, 4:22 am, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:
I don't understand why, if you're innocent, Porno Pas, you didn't
instantly confront the father of the two little girls and deny the
charge.

And I don't understand why you persist in this charade.

If you are so insistent, I propose we enlist a neutral third party to go
look at
the "Sound Practices" archives and render an opinion back to the group. I
think Iain would be a very good choice, if he would be willing to serve.

-Henry

[John Byrns]

In article
,
Andre Jute wrote:


I am putting Iain on the spot because it pains me to watch a good man
suck up to a jackass. *I don't expect Iain to like it, but he's a grown up
and he knows how to contact me if he wants to complain.

Iain will do whatever he pleases. You, Porno Pas, are the one behaving
despicably, trying to put a third party on the spot when you've been
caught out lying and behaving with your usual despicable lack of
morality.

Putting pressure on innocent third parties like Iain is a typical
technique some people resort to when they are too impotent to accomplish
their goals on their own merit.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

John Byrns wrote:
Putting pressure on innocent third parties like Iain is a typical
technique some people resort to when they are too impotent to
accomplish their goals on their own merit.

Huh, that's a low blow considering all of the outlandish things Andre
is saying about me. Are you saying you agree with him that I am an
"immoral lying, scum, psychopath, child molester" and so on?

-Henry

[John Byrns]

In article ,
Henry Pasternack wrote:

John Byrns wrote:
Putting pressure on innocent third parties like Iain is a typical
technique some people resort to when they are too impotent to
accomplish their goals on their own merit.

Huh, that's a low blow considering all of the outlandish things Andre
is saying about me. Are you saying you agree with him that I am an
"immoral lying, scum, psychopath, child molester" and so on?

No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

John Byrns wrote:
No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

My complaint is against Iain, not Andre, and the pressure I'm applying
is on Iain as well. So your explanation does not follow logically from
the facts.

Andre continues to violate my legal rights by posting false and defamatory
statements against me. It is reasonable for me to express my displeasure
with Iain for his support of Andre. This is not an attack on Andre. It
is self defense.

Surely Andre's abuses are far greater than what, at worst, could be called
my rudeness. Out of consistency then, ought you not to take him to task
instead of me?

-Henry

[Jon Yaeger]

in article , Henry Pasternack at
wrote on 2/22/08 2:34 PM:

John Byrns wrote:
No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

My complaint is against Iain, not Andre, and the pressure I'm applying
is on Iain as well. So your explanation does not follow logically from
the facts.

Andre continues to violate my legal rights by posting false and defamatory
statements against me. It is reasonable for me to express my displeasure
with Iain for his support of Andre. This is not an attack on Andre. It
is self defense.

Surely Andre's abuses are far greater than what, at worst, could be called
my rudeness. Out of consistency then, ought you not to take him to task
instead of me?

-Henry



Henry,

Unfortunately, Andre's moral compass is severely broken; he has done you
wrong and certainly has no intention of admitting it or making it right.
Ever.

John has shown his unfailing alignment to Andre no matter what the
circumstances, time after time, so don't expect anything objective from him
vs. Andre.

Iain has demonstrated unwillingness to jump into the fray and get down in
the fracas with the rest of us. I don't expect him to take you up on your
offer.

West the sycophant will undoubtedly put his 2 cents in with Andre, not
grasping or comprehending the issues at hand.

Al will spout some inane distraction, and Patrick will ignore all but the
technical arguments.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Always. Don't
expect a fair trial or hearing here on RAT. You won't get one . . .

Jon

[John Byrns]

In article ,
Henry Pasternack wrote:

John Byrns wrote:
No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

My complaint is against Iain, not Andre, and the pressure I'm applying
is on Iain as well. So your explanation does not follow logically from
the facts.

OK, let me get this straight, you have a complaint against Iain because
Andre's little story brought a smile to Iain's face, is that correct, or
am I missing something here?

Andre continues to violate my legal rights by posting false and defamatory
statements against me. It is reasonable for me to express my displeasure
with Iain for his support of Andre. This is not an attack on Andre. It
is self defense.

Iain may or may not support Andre, that I wouldn't know, you seem to be
saying that because Iain liked Andre's story, that means he supports
Andre?

Surely Andre's abuses are far greater than what, at worst, could be called
my rudeness. Out of consistency then, ought you not to take him to task
instead of me?

As I have said in this forum before, from what Mike L. told me on the
telephone it is my belief that Andre is confused about which gang member
it was that sent out the "porno" emails, although my belief could be
wrong as I am basing it on second hand information from Mike. On the
other hand it appears that Andre may be spot on with respect to some of
his other complaints, so I see no reason to take him to task on those
other issues where he has apparently hit the mark.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 22, 3:55*pm, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message

...
On Feb 22, 4:22 am, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:

I don't understand why, if you're innocent, Porno Pas, you didn't
instantly confront the father of the two little girls and deny the
charge.

And I don't understand why you persist in this charade.

You're the one, Plodnick, who arrives regularly on RAT to put yourself
in my face and revive those accusations of your immoralities. I told
you a decade ago, **** out of my face and in a fortnight I won't
remember your name. The offer is still open.

If you are so insistent, I propose we enlist a neutral third party to go
look at
the "Sound Practices" archives and render an opinion back to the group. *I
think Iain would be a very good choice, if he would be willing to serve.

I don't need interpretation. Your own friend and associate in crime
Robert Chernofsky aka BobC confirmed your guilt. That's enough for me
to make up my mind.

Unsigned out of contempt

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 22, 4:22*pm, Henry Pasternack wrote:
John Byrns wrote:
Putting pressure on innocent third parties like Iain is a typical
technique some people resort to when they are too impotent to
accomplish their goals on their own merit.

Huh, that's a low blow considering all of the outlandish things Andre
is saying about me. *Are you saying you agree with him that I am an
"immoral lying, scum, psychopath, child molester" and so on?

-Henry

You didn't consider those things, and more, so outlandish when the
your buddies in the Magnequest Scum were saying them about me. The
difference is of course that no one could prove them against me
whereas you, Henry Pasternack, have proved them against yourself by
your own actions and out of your own mouth. Oh, and you're also a
thief.

Unsigned out of contempt

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 22, 6:49*pm, John Byrns wrote:
In article ,
*Henry Pasternack wrote:

John Byrns wrote:
Putting pressure on innocent third parties like Iain is a typical
technique some people resort to when they are too impotent to
accomplish their goals on their own merit.

Huh, that's a low blow considering all of the outlandish things Andre
is saying about me. *Are you saying you agree with him that I am an
"immoral lying, scum, psychopath, child molester" and so on?

No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent. *
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

Now that's cruel, John. Plodnick assaulted me without provocation for
several years in aid of his friend Creepy Mike Magnequest's profits.
In the process Porno Pas publicly committed immoral acts and bragged
about them. He stands condemned out of his own mouth. There are no
merits to Porno Pas's case. All he can do is sneak away, or make a
full retraction and apology and offer to do community service until he
dies. All the rater in Denial will not was him clean.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/

Andre Jute
Standing tall for truth

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 22, 10:42*pm, John Byrns wrote:
In article ,
*Henry Pasternack wrote:

John Byrns wrote:
No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

My complaint is against Iain, not Andre, and the pressure I'm applying
is on Iain as well. *So your explanation does not follow logically from
the facts.

OK, let me get this straight, you have a complaint against Iain because
Andre's little story brought a smile to Iain's face, is that correct, or
am I missing something here?

Here's the joke I told which Iain smiled at, that Pasternack now wants
Iain to decry:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."
This whole affair is nuts. Pasternack, a disgraced apparatchik of the
Magnequest Mob, driven out for their assaults on free speech, now
wants to tell people whose jokes they can smile at!

Andre continues to violate my legal rights by posting false and defamatory
statements against me. *It is reasonable for me to express my displeasure
with Iain for his support of Andre. *This is not an attack on Andre. *It
is self defense.

Iain may or may not support Andre, that I wouldn't know, you seem to be
saying that because Iain liked Andre's story, that means he supports
Andre?

GUBU. It is an acronym we have in Ireland for "grotesque,
unbelievable, bizarre and unprecedented". Please, friends, don't laugh
at my jokes. Pasternack will try to hang you for it!

Surely Andre's abuses are far greater than what, at worst, could be called
my rudeness. *Out of consistency then, ought you not to take him to task
instead of me?

As I have said in this forum before, from what Mike L. told me on the
telephone it is my belief that Andre is confused about which gang member
it was that sent out the "porno" emails, although my belief could be
wrong as I am basing it on second hand information from Mike. *

Creepy Mike's confession doesn't really matter. There is a huge amount
of other evidence, including my own trace of some of the pornographic
materials right to Pasternack's server, the trace by the father of the
two little girls ditto, the finger pointed by BobC (Robert
Chernofsky) directly at Pasternack by name, Pasternack's presence on
the single driver conference prancing about gloating after those
pornographic posts appeared which indicates that if he didn't sent
those particular pieces of nastiness (and my trace says he did), he at
least knew from the other gang members about them, which makes him
equally guilty, and so on. There is much, much more than enough to
condemn Pasternack before a jury in any democracy.

On the
other hand it appears that Andre may be spot on with respect to some of
his other complaints, so I see no reason to take him to task on those
other issues where he has apparently hit the mark.

Any single one of the charges against Pasternack is enough to get him
ostracised in any decent society. The point is that he has admitted to
most of the charges by bragging about them. For instance, Pasternack
stole my copyright property, the so-called Timmie materials, for his
own netsite. The only thing Pasternack now denies is the child
molestation, but he consistently refuses to bring Chernofsky, his bum
buddy, to RAT to retract his (Chernofsky's) accusation against
Pasternack. That, I think, tells the entire story in a nutshell.

Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, *http://fmamradios.com/

I don't know why we have to waste our time over and over over on this
disgraced jerk Pasternack. He has had a fair hearing, several times
already. Each time Pasternack ran away because the evidence is
overwhelming.

Andre Jute
Let's get back to negative feedback, even

[Andre Jute]

The garage vermin Jon Yaeger wrote:

in article , Henry Pasternack at
wrote on 2/22/08 2:34 PM:

John Byrns wrote:
No, I am simply decrying the fighting technique of dragging innocent
third parties into the fray to increase the pressure on your opponent.
If you must fight with Andre please do it based on the merit or lack
thereof of what he is saying.

My complaint is against Iain, not Andre, and the pressure I'm applying
is on Iain as well. So your explanation does not follow logically from
the facts.

Andre continues to violate my legal rights by posting false and defamatory
statements against me. It is reasonable for me to express my displeasure
with Iain for his support of Andre. This is not an attack on Andre. It
is self defense.

Surely Andre's abuses are far greater than what, at worst, could be called
my rudeness. Out of consistency then, ought you not to take him to task
instead of me?

-Henry



Henry,

Unfortunately, Andre's moral compass is severely broken; he has done you
wrong and certainly has no intention of admitting it or making it right.
Ever.

Bull****. Henry Pasternack ten years ago tried to assassinate my
character for the basest of mercenary motives, the profits of Creepy
Mike LaFever of Magnequest; it was a pure hatchet job: I had done
nothing to Pasternack, who didn't even know who I was; Creepy Mike
just pointed Pasternack at me, a total stranger. like he would a dog.
Pastennack tried for years to smear me. In the process he committed
immoralities and crimes, and bragged about them. I did absolutely
nothing except keep score. I'm still keeping score. All that has
changed is that now Pasternack is trying to blame me for the way he
wrecked his own reputation. It won't wash.

John has shown his unfailing alignment to Andre no matter what the
circumstances, time after time, so don't expect anything objective from him
vs. Andre.

John was there at the beginning. He saw what happened and made up his
own mind.

Iain has demonstrated unwillingness to jump into the fray and get down in
the fracas with the rest of us. I don't expect him to take you up on your
offer.

And why should Iain permit himself to be tainted by Pasternack's
crimes?

West the sycophant will undoubtedly put his 2 cents in with Andre, not
grasping or comprehending the issues at hand.

West instinctively chooses the moral side. Notice how he knew
instantly that Yaeger and Worthless Wiecky are scum.

Al will spout some inane distraction, and Patrick will ignore all but the
technical arguments.

Yup. Pasternack's disgrace and punishment is for his assault on free
speech. Al and Patrick have a right to choose their own reaction to
whatever happens on RAT.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Always. Don't
expect a fair trial or hearing here on RAT. You won't get one . . .

The Magnequest Scum, Henry Pasternack second in command, for years
didn't give me a fair hearing. Pasternack by contrast has had umpteen
opportunities to clear his name. All that is required is for him to
bring Robert Chernofsky to RAT to say that he was mistaken, it wasn't
Pasternack, and to bring the father of the two little girls to say he
retracts the accusation against Pasternack. I've said that five or six
times in this thread now, but Pasternack and his little bumbuddy, the
garage vermin Jon Yaeger, just ignore it, because they know Pasternack
has no hope of fulfilling these conditions, that even Pasternack's
other bumbuddy Robert Chernofsky will no longer lie to save
Pasternack's ass -- and who knows when that poisonmouth, Creepy Mike
LaFevre, doesn't undo all their lies by confessing all, yet again.

Jon

You're batting on a lost wicket, Yaeger. You did better when you
compared Pasternack to Idi Amin, who is now dead. Pasternack is a
ghost. His attempt to assassinate my character merely reflected as a
thorough demolition of his own character. Pasternack made a permanent
job of wiping his own reputation, just about the only thing poor
incompetent Pasternack did right in his entire miserable life. There
is no way back for Pasternack. He's finished. He just won't lie down
so I can nail the lid on his coffin. But I'm in no hurry; I never was;
in time all things come to those who stand tall for truth.

Andre Jute
Darwin's little helper

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
[Deleted]

Byrns, I am saying to you that you have no moral authority whatsoever
to criticize me when you refuse to hold Andre accountable for his out-
rageous abuses of this newsgroup.

No go away and leave me alone, you slimy little dog, you.

-Henry

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
...
Unfortunately, Andre's moral compass is severely broken; he has done you
wrong and certainly has no intention of admitting it or making it right.
Ever.

Andre is a raving nutcase. There is no place for him in a civil
discussion group.

John has shown his unfailing alignment to Andre no matter what the
circumstances, time after time, so don't expect anything objective from
him vs. Andre.

Byrns never fails to arrive, like Custer's Cavalry, whenever his
mentor finds himself in hot water, or if there is any possibility that
Pasternack blood might be in the water. He does so with the
reliability of a Swiss railroad watch. What a prick Byrns is.

* * * * *

With respect to the original two-sentence comment of mine that
sparked all this Jutish acrimony, the idea of Jute wielding an electric
prod as a RAT social policy is just too close to the ugly truth to
be funny at all. Peter clearly understood that; perhaps Iain, in
trying so hard to be civil, overlooked the offensive undertones
of Jute's unfunny "joke".

-Henry

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 23, 12:47 am, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:
"John Byrns" wrote in message

...

[Deleted]

Byrns, I am saying to you that you have no moral authority whatsoever
to criticize me when you refuse to hold Andre accountable for his out-
rageous abuses of this newsgroup.

The "outrageous abuses of this newsgroup" were perpetrated my the
Magnequest Scum, Second Maximum Cigarogem Henry Pasternack. They
promised to expel me or to wreck RAT in trying. Their motive was the
profits of Michael LaFever's Magnequest windery; they tried to take
over RAT as the exclusive property of Magnequest. When it started, I
was an obscure lurker; Pasternack didn't even know who I was; LeFevre
pointed Pasternack at me like a terrier at this prey. Pasternack for
this despicable motive, and for the popularlty of these despicable
friends, sold his soul, wrecked RAT -- and, as I had publicly and
repeatedly warned him would happen, wrecked his own reputation as well
by his hysterical escalation of assaults on me. The child molestation
came about because the father of the two little girls, whom Pasternack
didn't even know, built one of my amplifier designs, and thus was
considered fair game by the Magnequest Scum. There is no excuse for
involving third parties, there is no excuse for involving the children
of total strangers.

The only guilty party here is Henry Pasternack.

No go away and leave me alone, you slimy little dog, you.

Here's the real Henry Pasternack. He complains that I call him scum
but he calls John Byrns "slimy" and a dog. Ugh! You're an ingrate,
Pasternack. For years John gave you such shreds of respectability as
you managed to maintain by condescending to discuss electronics with
you when, if it were up to me, you would have been out in the cold
immediately. And this abuse is how you reward his generosity?

-Henry

With utmost contempt for a fool and an ingrate,

Andre Jute
I have a perfect memory, and Google on a speedkey

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 23, 1:13*am, "Henry Pasternack" wrote:
"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message

...

Unfortunately, Andre's moral compass is severely broken; he has done you
wrong and certainly has no intention of admitting it or making it right.
Ever.

Andre is a raving nutcase. *There is no place for him in a civil
discussion group.

Notice that the child molester, liar, thief and false accuser Henry
Pasternack never addresses the evidence against him. All he ever does
is attempt character assassination.

John has shown his unfailing alignment to Andre no matter what the
circumstances, time after time, so don't expect anything objective from
him vs. Andre.

Byrns never fails to arrive, like Custer's Cavalry, whenever his
mentor finds himself in hot water, or if there is any possibility that
Pasternack blood might be in the water. *He does so with the
reliability of a Swiss railroad watch. *What a prick Byrns is.

Another silly attempt at character assassination.

* * * * ** * ** * ** * **

With respect to the original two-sentence comment of mine that
sparked all this Jutish acrimony, the idea of Jute wielding an electric
prod as a RAT social policy is just too close to the ugly truth to
be funny at all.

Here is the joke that calls forth such excessive and passionate
language:
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; give a man a fully
charged electric eel and he'll never bother you for anything else ever
again."

*Peter clearly understood that;

Let's see what Worthless Wiecky said in his derivative, wannabe-
pompous style that only highlights his semi-literacy:
"It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt."

When he thought I said that, Pasternack condemned the words:
"It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's
agenda."

But now that poor incompetent, clumsy Pasternack has discovered he
misattributed the words, that they were actually written not by me but
by Worthless Wiecky, suddenly they are not "stupid and egotistical",
oh no, they are insightful: "Peter clearly understood..." ROTHFLOL.

perhaps Iain, in
trying so hard to be civil, overlooked the offensive undertones
of Jute's unfunny "joke".

Nah, my joke is in the best tradition of the Chicago School, straight-
up monetarism, and the libertarian aspects of the Constitution.
Laughing is to personal choice, which is also in the best tradition of
the principles mentioned. Only a quarterwit like Pasternack would even
try to impose lowest common denominator political correctness on a
joke.

Pasternack is puffing smoke to cover his embarrassment at making a
newbie mistake in attribution. But nobody can blow enough smoke to
cover the flame war poor Pasternack blew up on a dumb
misunderstanding. This has been the perfect example of the selfishness
and disruption of threads either amusing or working for which we ran
the Magnequest Scum, including Pasternack, out of RAT on a rail.

-Henry

Hey, Plodnick, will you be staying on RAT long? We can always use a
clown for a giggle. Come on, don't run away now. We promise to treat
you with all the respect you deserve. Really.

Andre Jute
Ringmaster

[News Client]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message ...
Let's see what Worthless Wiecky said in his derivative, wannabe-
pompous style that only highlights his semi-literacy:
"It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt."

When he thought I said that, Pasternack condemned the words:
"It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's
agenda."

The remarks in my first post were in reference to your "joke" about
the eel. I can't imagine where you got the idea I was talking about
Peter's response. More sleep and less alcohol would improve your
mental faculties.

You often describe yourself as the enforcer of social policy on the
newsgroup, and express pride and satisfaction in humiliating and
driving away people you think are bothersome. It seems to me
your fish joke was just another way of saying the same thing. I
agree with Peter that it was a "pretentious, posturing post."

-Henry

[Andre Jute]

On Feb 23, 4:59*am, "News Client"
wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in ...
Let's see what Worthless Wiecky said in his derivative, wannabe-
pompous style that only highlights his semi-literacy:
"It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt."
When he thought I said that, Pasternack condemned the words:
"It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's
agenda."

The remarks in my first post were in reference to your "joke" about
the eel. *I can't imagine where you got the idea I was talking about
Peter's response. *More sleep and less alcohol would improve your
mental faculties.

You often describe yourself as the enforcer of social policy on the
newsgroup, and express pride and satisfaction in humiliating and
driving away people you think are bothersome. *It seems to me
your fish joke was just another way of saying the same thing. *I
agree with Peter that it was a "pretentious, posturing post."

-Henry

You're getting to be a bore, Plodnick. You've had as much of my time
as you're entitled to. Address your ludicrous remarks to Bret Ludwig.
As far as you're concerned, Mr Ludwig is my representative on earth.
He can cut his teeth as a flame warrior on your hide.

Andre Jute
My magisterium cometh. There will be no child molesters in it.

[Henry Pasternack[_2_]]

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
As far as you're concerned, Mr Ludwig is my representative on
earth. He can cut his teeth as a flame warrior on your hide.

I don't think Bret is as outraged by me as you are...

-Henry

[Jon Yaeger]

in article
, Andre
Jute at wrote on 2/23/08 12:17 AM:

On Feb 23, 4:59*am, "News Client"
wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in
.
..
Let's see what Worthless Wiecky said in his derivative, wannabe-
pompous style that only highlights his semi-literacy:
"It is better to sit on one's fingers and be remembered as a
pretentious, posturing, lying fool than to make a pretentious,
posturing post and remove all doubt."
When he thought I said that, Pasternack condemned the words:
"It was a stupid, egotistical remark, and an all-too truthful reminder
of the abuse anyone can expect who doesn't capitulate to Jute's
agenda."

The remarks in my first post were in reference to your "joke" about
the eel. *I can't imagine where you got the idea I was talking about
Peter's response. *More sleep and less alcohol would improve your
mental faculties.

You often describe yourself as the enforcer of social policy on the
newsgroup, and express pride and satisfaction in humiliating and
driving away people you think are bothersome. *It seems to me
your fish joke was just another way of saying the same thing. *I
agree with Peter that it was a "pretentious, posturing post."

-Henry

You're getting to be a bore, Plodnick. You've had as much of my time
as you're entitled to. Address your ludicrous remarks to Bret Ludwig.
As far as you're concerned, Mr Ludwig is my representative on earth.
He can cut his teeth as a flame warrior on your hide.

Andre Jute
My magisterium cometh. There will be no child molesters in it.


Damn Jute, YOU are a tired bore. Go back into your coffin before the sun
comes up.