There should have been a
rob spencer page from the beginning because he was one of the
original Felon Supporters who turned our
communications into Personal Attacks.There should have been a rob spencer
page from the beginning because he was one of the original Felon Supporters who
turned our communications into Personal Attacks. Here's how easy it is Folks ROB
SPENCER's LATEST (3-11-07) e-mail received from rob spencer... 1 Toro Wood
Chipper Model# TW 101T Never used Please contact: Tom Rossley 200 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT 06074 FOLLOWED BY... Thank you for signing up for a craigslist
account. To log in to your account, please go to: https://accounts.craigslist.org/login?ui=5157279&ip=p288kvgnq29
You will be prompted to choose a password as soon as you log in. If you
experience any problems or have any questions, please reply to this message or
email accounts@craigslist.org. Thank you for using craigslist! FOLLOWED BY... 1
Toro Wood Chipper Model# TW 101T Never used Please contact: Tom Rossley 200
Kelly Road South Windsor, CT 06074 FOLLOWED BY... 1 Toro Wood Chipper Model# TW
101T Never used Please contact: Tom Rossley 200 Kelly Road South Windsor, CT
06074 FOLLOWED BY... hartford craigslist > farm & garden > Toro Wood
Chipper Toro Wood Chipper - $300 Reply to: mailto:sale-292346840@craigslist.org?subject=Toro%20Wood%20Chipper%20-%20$300
Date: 2007-03-11, 8:39PM EDT Never used Toro Wood Chipper Please call for
details 200 Kelly Road South Windsor, CT 06074 644-1245 Ask for Tom Location:
South Windosr it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other
commercial interests PostingID: 292346840 Copyright © 2007 craigslist,
inc. terms of use privacy
policy feedback forum I already Informd rob that it's NOT
for sale. I reserve it to use it on those who make Threats on Me/Mine. How Come
he Never addresses Evidence/Testimony? Robert Spencer's own Words. EXTRA EXTRA
EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA ----- Original Message ----- From Rob Spencer To: tomnln
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:01 PM Subject: Re: Care to take a shot at the
title Rossley? See you Friday bonehead, be ready. On 11/17/06,
tomnln
Here's how easy it is Folks
ROB SPENCER's LATEST (3-11-07)
e-mail received from rob spencer...
1 Toro Wood Chipper
Model# TW 101T
Never used
Please contact:
Tom Rossley
200 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT
06074
FOLLOWED BY...
Thank you for signing up for a craigslist account.
To log in to your account, please go to:
https://accounts.craigslist.org/login?ui=5157279&ip=p288kvgnq29
You will be prompted to choose a password as soon as you log in.
If you experience any problems or have any questions, please reply to this
message
or email accounts@craigslist.org.
Thank you for using craigslist!
FOLLOWED BY...
1 Toro Wood Chipper
Model# TW 101T
Never used
Please contact:
Tom Rossley
200 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT
06074
FOLLOWED BY...
1 Toro Wood Chipper
Model# TW 101T
Never used
Please contact:
Tom Rossley
200 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT
06074
FOLLOWED BY...
hartford craigslist > farm & garden > Toro Wood ChipperToro Wood Chipper - $300
Reply to: mailto:sale-292346840@craigslist.org?subject=Toro%20Wood%20Chipper%20-%20$300Date: 2007-03-11, 8:39PM EDT
Never used Toro Wood Chipper
Please call for details
200 Kelly Road South Windsor, CT 06074
644-1245
Ask for Tom
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 292346840
I already Informd rob that it's NOT for sale.
I reserve it to use it on those who make
Threats on Me/Mine.
How Come he Never addresses Evidence/Testimony?
Robert
Spencer's own Words.
EXTRA
EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA
EXTRA
-----
Original Message -----
From Rob Spencer
To: tomnln
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: Care to take a shot at the title Rossley?
See you Friday
bonehead, be ready.
On
11/17/06, tomnln <tomnln@cox.net>
wrote:
I
got a whole box of chalk
Don't forget to bring your excuses for the Lies of officer Baker.
You know, the subject you've been Avoiding for over a year.
http://whokilledjfk.net/altgens.htm
We can add this exchange to your Resume' HERE>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/frick.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: <rob.spencer@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: Care to take a shot at the title Rossley?
> See you on Friday bonehead.
>
>
> tomnln wrote:
>> ps;
>>
>> You chickenshit Criminal Anti-American, Felon Supporter,
>> Blow-Hard; (emphasis on blow)
>>
>> The Only
>>
>> As far as the Rock n Roll Drummer's request for pictures?
>>
>> I will send him that picture of you,
Outlined IN CHALK.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "tomnln" <tomnln@cox.net>
wrote in message
>> news:f6b7h.821$f12.359@newsfe21.lga...
>> > You're the Chickenshit robber spent.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > <rob.spencer@gmail.com >
wrote in message
>> > news:1163726354.440915.71170@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >> Friday noon after
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> rob.spen...@gmail.com
wrote:
>> >>> Nope me solo
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> tomnln wrote:
>> >>> > Considering that it was steve barber who originally
suggested
>> >>> > coming
>> >>> > to
>> >>> > my home to teach me a lesson, Is he coming with you?
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > "SNB" <sbarber@i71.net>
wrote in message
>> >>> >
news:1163707823.154637.268470@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com ...
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > rob.spencer@gmail.com
wrote:
>> >>> > >> Get ready Dog! I'm coming!
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> Get a few pics , Rob.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >> tomnln wrote:
>> >>> > >> > Just Stop by
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > That way I can Give
>> >>> > >> > for.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > I already gave you my address.
>> >>> > >> > You were the coward who gave me a Phony
address.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > ps;
>> >>> > >> > Your Resume to Satan is
HERE>>>
>> >>> > >> > http://whokilledjfk.net/frick.htm
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Proving what a Lying Scumbucket you
are.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Remember to get Permission from your P
O to travel outta
>> >>> > >> > State.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > <
rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>> > >> >
news:1163701953.598125.148170@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >>> > >> > > I'll be in
>> >>> > >> > > make it
>> >>> > >> > > fair. I'll tie my hands behind my
back and drink a gallon of
>> >>> > >> > > metamucil.
>> >>> > >> > > Or should I just stop by?
END EXTRA
END EXTRA END EXTRA
In view of those Threats, I'll be Forced to take Defensive Actions
when this man is seen Anywhere near my property.
Rob Spencer;
ANOTHER FRICK 'n FRACK
Here it is
AGAIN spence; attached
Page 234 from Hosty's book "Assignment Oswald".
What don't you understand
about the term "intentionally omitted"?
"Spence" <rob.spencer@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:1139787347.441968.216810@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Tom's rebuttal - thus far point #2
>
> 2. Destroying Hosty's name, address, phone number
> And license plate number from Oswald's notebook.
>
> Tom has not made much of a rebuttal on this point either. A scant few
> sentences from February 6th is the most that he can muster.
>
> Tom ON:
>
> "All one needs to see is page 234 of Hosty's book "Assignment
Oswald"
>
> It specifically states "intentionally omitted".
> Tom OFF:
>
> I really must credit Jean Davidson on this one; she did all the leg
> work and found the proper documentation.
>
> Jean ON:
>
> Here's another one you should take off your list, Tom.
> 2. Destroying Hosty's name, address, phone number
> And license plate number from Oswald's notebook.<<<
> Hosty's name, address, phone number and license plate number are
> *still* in Oswald's address book, just as they always were.
> Scroll down to the last entry at the bottom of this page:
> http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol...
>
> (CE18, vol. XVI, p. 64)
> Jean OFF:
>>From February 2nd 2006 until today, Tom really has not explained his
> position or rebutted Jean's post.
ANOTHER ROB
SPENCER gem.....
But Tony, it was not the FBI that arrested him. My question
is why go
back to the rooming house at all? Why would he not have tucked the
revolver in his pants before he went to work?
Probablly a good arguement for a setup. Oz goes to the TSBD with only
his rifle and gets set up, realizes he is in trouble, goes back to the
rooming house to retrieve his revolver for protection.
I could see where this would be a logical arguement.
Rob
ANOTHER ROB
gem;
THANK YOU SPENCE;
Please read what YOU posted below
"Spence" <rob.spencer@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:1139791024.026242.59680@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Tom's rebuttal thus far - point 6
>
> 6. Lying when claiming Paper for gun bag matched TSBD paper.
>
> My initial response:
>
> Rob On:
> I'm not sure what you mean about lying. Who lied to who?
> James Cadigan tested the bag, here is his information and testimony:
>
> FBI special agent James Cadigan tested the long bag with paper that was
> taken from the depository on the day of the assassination. He concluded
> that both the paper and the tape were identical (4H97). A replica bag was
> made ten days after the assassination.
************************************************
While it was unknown whether the
> rolls had been changed in the four working days, Cadigan testified that
> the replica bag and the original bag were not identical but
> distinguishable by him (4H95).
***************************************************
This test showed that even though the paper
> in both the replica bag and the original bag was made by the same
> manufacturer, different rolls are distinguishable, showing the time period
> and the location from which the bag came. Cadigan also testified as to
> whether there were any marks that linked the rifle to the bag.
>
> (2)
>
> Mr. CADIGAN. I was also requested at that time to examine the bag to
> determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or
> abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle .
> . .
> Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
> Mr. CADIGAN. And I couldn't find any such markings.
> Mr. EISENBERG. Now, was there an absence of markings which would be
> inconsistent with the rifle having been carried in the bag?
> Mr. CADIGAN. No; . . .if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn't
> moved too much. I did observe some scratch marks and abrasions but was
> unable to associate them with this gun . . . There were no marks on
> this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any other rifle
> or any other given instrument.
> Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any absence of markings or absence of bulges
> or absence of creases which would cause you to say that the rifle was
> not carried in the paper bag?
> Mr. CADIGAN. No.
> . . .
> Mr. DULLES. Would the scratches indicate there was a hard object inside
> the bag . . .?
> Mr. CADIGAN. Well, if you were to characterize it that way, yes. I mean
> there were a few scratches here. What caused them, I can't say. A hard
> object; yes (4H97-8). [Emphasis added]
> Rob OFF:
>
> To Tom's credit, he did respond directly to this point:
>
> Tom On:
>
> rob;
> What you posted below is "Another Admittance" by authorities.
> "Cadigan testified
> that the replica bag and the original bag were not identical but
> distinguishable by him (4H95)."
> The words YOU chose to quote Prove my point.
> Tom Off:
>
> As we can see Tom's supporting documentation is overwhelming, two
> whole sentences!
>
>
ANOTHER
ONE....
#1 You didn't need to reprint so much of Hosty's book.
I already have it. But I hope
you notice that everything he said
was "self-serving".
I hope you noticed the Low Opinion agents
had of JEH.
You neglected to point out that 3 different
stories from 3 different
people (Hosty/Howe/Fenner) about
what that note from Oswald said.
You also neglected to point out that the destruction was a Felony No matter
WHY it was destroyed.
<rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1137594896.534253.142740@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ok let's look at these one at a time.
"1. Destroying Oswald's note to Dallas FBI Office."
I assume you are talking the note that Oz left for FBI Agent James
Hosty prior to the assassination. Hosty does admit that he destroyed
the memo. It was never admitted as evidence in the Warren Comissions
findings, but is it an indication of a conspiracy? Or was it Hosty's
attempt to cover his own bacon as well as the Bureau's.? What if this
memo was admitted into the "Official Records" I can't see it really
having any effect on the Warren Comissions findings. If the memo had
surfaced, Hosty would have been on the rack for not taking any further
actions to protect the President and probablly would have been
diciplined or fired.
A SPENCER
CLASSIC....
Ok off to the spam box
you go Bye Bye Tom
On
2/4/06, tomnln <tomnln@cox.net>
wrote:
No
need to discuss anything here under your "Secrecy Rules".
You
went public, which gives me the same right.
There
has been too much Secrecy in this case already.
-----
Original Message -----
From Rob Spencer
To: tomnln
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: ROB/TOM-1
If
you want to take the entire debate to the NG that's fine. If you want to discuss
things with me
here there are some ground rules you (and I) nee to follow.
Be nice.
Be polite
Don't shout.
Expres ideas, don't try to ram them down each other's throat
The NG is for posturing, private e-mail is for exchanging ideas
and speculation.
Agreed? NO
On
2/3/06, tomnln <tomnln@cox.net>
wrote:
Initial
caps are always used in the first word of a sentence.
See
"YAK" in your post below.
What's
this about not posting in the newsgroup?
You
already did post your replies.
Are
you trying to muffle my comments?
You
are the one who posted this in the newsgroup.
Why
can't I?
I
gave you credit for addressing the 14 points Publicly.
I
demand the same right to offer my proof.
Enough
proof has already been stifled on this subject.
For more see below.
-----
Original Message -----
From Rob Spencer
To: tomnln
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 10:38 PM
Subject: Re: ROB/TOM-1
Whoooo
hang on there partner. I thought we agreed to keep our discourse to a
"gentleman's level"
Take a deep breath, it's not a shouting match.
Caps off please.
=============================================
see
above about caps
=============================================
OK here are the ground rules. You can reply to me at this e-mail address no
problem.
Let's keep it civil and discuss the issues, sarcasm off. Caps off (no
shouting)
Communications in private communication should remain private. Do not
post communication
from here to the NG, If you do you will be blacklisted and
banished to my spam folder forever.
Comprende? Feel free to blast away at me in
the NG however, no hard feelings. Agreed?
You
already posted to the newsgroup rob.
Ok down to brass tacks. What
Hosty did was indeed destruction of evidence, no question about it.
I think the Bureau ran a lot differently in those days, no e-mail, no a
ton of documentation.
Heck most agents did not have any law enforcement
experience before joining the bureau.
Most were trained accountants up until the
mid 50's Not exactly law enforcement types.
=================================================
Back
then they were accountants & Lawyers sir.
I'm sure Lawyers knew what Obstruction of Justice was.
=================================================
Yep
Hosty protected the Bureaus ass from catching a lot of flack. Self preservation
mode in
full force. But can you blame them? If word got out (and it did) that
the Bureau had any idea
that OZ even existed in their files before 11/22/63,
there would be hell to pay.
Lots of heads would roll, literally and
figuratively.
Hosty,
Howe & Fenner gave 3 different accounts of what the note said.
That is more
likely why it was destroyed.
The last thing Hoover wanted was bad publicity or anything that could link this
blunder
to the Bureau.
Hoover
was supposed to seek truth not protect the bureau.
On
2/3/06, tomnln <
tomnln@cox.net> wrote:
rob/tom1
>
1. Destroying Oswald's note to Dallas FBI Office.
> This is a favorite ploy for the Pro-Conspiracy crowd; the argument
> usually goes something like this: If he destroyed the Oswald memo, what
> else did he destroy? Show me the documents!
Don't
put words in my mouth.
> Hosty himself admitted this, does it really seem like Hosty is part of
> a grand conspiracy to kill the President or is he looking to cover his
> bacon? (Of course Tom will come back with the usual reply
> "Destruction of evidence is a felony! YAK!, but say nothing about
> Hosty's statement itself) I think It's important to look at
> Hosty's comments in context.
> For the interest of brevity, here is a link to Hosty's description of
> events:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100hostynote.html
"Hosty
himself admitted this", Says it ALL
It is admission of a felony.
WHY
refer to Movie dialogue?
WHY
refer to Hosty's remarks NOT under oath?
CYA
does NOT Decriminalize the act.
WHO
in this Country never thought there NOT be an Investigation?
Especially
Professional Law Enforcement such as Shanklin, Howe & Hosty?
REPEAT:
All of you admitted that "Hosty Admitted to Destruction of
Evidence".
Shortly
I will reply to your response to #2.
MORE
SPENCER....
You folks Sure are afraid to address Evidence/Testimony ain't
ya?
http://whokilledjfk.net/tramps.htm
<rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1153879323.168794.258410@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I'm speechless! What an honor! Tom, I would not be here today if not
> for you.
>
>
> cdddraftsman wrote:
>> It was announced today that four more top rip's will be inducted into
>> the hall of fame . Here are some of them : From: rob.spen. To :Tomln
:
>> (1) Tom after being married to Ellen all these years, you
of all
>> people should know something about putting small objects in large holes
>> (2) Estate Sale of tomln : One Dell Computer with the keys F, E,
L, O
>> and N almost worn off the keyboard (3) Rossly's Eulogy :
Officer Mike
>> Hunt, South Windsor Police Dept
>> "He had many hobbies, and he was very proud of them. He had that
rarest
>> of gifts: the ability to find the beauty and artistry in the hardcore
>> amateur farm porn he shot with his Super 8 over at Oakville Community
>> Stables." (4) Rossly's Eulogy : Neil Down South Windsor
Social
>> Services Director "He touched all of our lives. Unfortunately, he
also
>> touched several of our children."
MAY 4, 2006
10:41 A.M.
As much as I would like to
take a poke at Tom with a few one liners, he
does raise a valid point. We have an FBI agent on record saying he does
not believe the "official line" of a SBT.
ROB SPENCER;
BOOK BURNER;
If this is a warning that you're gonna Hack my website?
I remind you that it's a Federal Offense.
Not that you would be above committing a Crime.
May this serve as a warning to Humans that you're nothing more than a Nazi
Book Burner.
Only a Terrorist would NOT want Official Government Records made Public.
You "DO" live up to my expectations of you robber spence.
This threat from you belongs on my website so others can see Exactly what
you are.
http://whokilledjfk.net/
<rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1155037764.569361.190040@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If you ever wanna know what the Official Records say......Go Here.
>
> Not for long
>
>
HEHEHEHE For you to find out! You never know when those pesky
things
will bite!
tomnln wrote:
> If this is a warning that you're gonna Hack my website?
> I remind you that it's a Federal Offense.
>
> Not that you would be above committing a Crime.
>
> May this serve as a warning to Humans that you're nothing more than a Nazi
> Book Burner.
>
> Only a Terrotist would NOT want Official Government Records made Public.
>
> You "DO" live up to my expectations of you robber spence.
>
> This threat from you belongs on my website so others can see Exactly what
> you are.
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/
>
>
>
> <rob.spencer@gmail.com>
wrote in message
> news:1155037764.569361.190040@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > If you ever wanna know what the Official Records say......Go Here.
> >
> > Not for long
> >
Because I beat
the snot out of robb spencer on evidence/testimony, HERE is what he Resorts to.
WARNING: The
website link contains FILTH that Exemplifies Robb Spencer's character
(top line
is my reply to him)
(top line Your
Your dad
has More Hair than you do???
<rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1155258062.457571.118140@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Maybee Tyree is his stage name
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAXEkJEw4KM
>
robb's
commitment to Porno; Rather than discuss Evidence/Testimoiny
You NEED to spend time in the 26 volumes sicky.
http://whokilledjfk.net/
<rob.spencer@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1155263194.044134.63810@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UanhzdnIk-I
>
HEEEEERE'S ROBBO,
From newsgroup
Due to advise I recieved today from Steve Barber's counsel, I
regret to
inform everyone that the publication of NUTSACK!.com will be delayed
indefinately.
I can neither confirm nor deny any pending civil and/or criminal
actions brought against Mr. Rossley by Steve Barber, but suffice it to
say I have been contacted by persons representing Mr. Barber.
YEAH; Some Asshole lawyer who travels with his own ambulance! ! !
MARRIED??
<rob.spencer@gmail.com>
wrote in message
> news:1154019403.366722.178880@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > I'm not married! NUTSACK!
> >
NOT MARRIED??
<rob.spencer@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:1154035430.804591.64070@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>A Single Guy (wink wink) would know all about Sheep Farms Pervert.
>
> How dare you! I'm a married man you idiot!
>
I hear that
Drugs can have an awful effect on the Memory.
Somehow, this
guy Forgets where he lives.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Photo_shows/Rochester16Aug05/Rob2.html
as opposed
to....
Stop by any time!
Here is why
robbo uses personal attacks;
The following exchange between he & I Prove he knows there was a conspiracy.
That makes him a Criminal.
********************************
That really would be an issue for the courts. Police
would be able to gather
whatever evidence that lended creedence to their case. I'n not a lawyer, so
I couldn;t tell you this for sure, but I have read about numerous judges
throwing out cases beacuse of faulty evidence that the police have brought,
paraffin being only one of them.
I think the fact that LHO tested positive on his hands but negative on his
cheek would only have served to bolster his defense in the event of a
subsequent trial. A good defense attorney woud have made note of this if the
prosecution intended to use it as evidence.
I do have access to a fairly large law library, maybe there I can cite some
case law where a judge has thrown out that evidence.
Rob
On 1/28/06, tomnln <tomnln@cox.net>
wrote:
rob;
I appreciate your claim.
Can you please give me a Citation that any police dept. Discarded the use
of paraffin tests
Because they are "Unreliable"?
***************************************************************************************
HERE IS MORE FROM ROBBO;
But Tony, it was not the FBI that arrested him. My question is why go
back to the rooming house at all? Why would he not have tucked the
revolver in his pants before he went to work?
Probablly a good arguement for a setup. Oz goes to the TSBD with only
his rifle and gets set up, realizes he is in trouble, goes back to the
rooming house to retrieve his revolver for protection.
I could see where this would be a logical argument.
Rob
Contact Information tomnln@cox.net
Page Visited
Times