ROB SPENCER PAGE

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

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 Turkey .

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 Turkeys in my home are Dead ones.
>>
>> 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 Turkey day. You better not chicken out Rossley.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 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 America something to Truly be Thankful
>> >>> > >> > 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 Hartford over the Thanksgiving holiday. I'll even
>> >>> > >> > > 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.

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....

1060 W Addison St
Chicago , IL 60613

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

Hit Counter

Times