Hypocrisy????
"Truth" by Mike Newson on OmaHamou.com
--- lol, as if he/she ever had the truth in them in regards to Oma, what they think they have is certainly nothing, just like they are nothing
(Oh and before I start, in case any one noticed --- "Sock puppet" was a Mike Pyles and Rob phrase on Legends...)
Oh? Public Record? But the "public record" record banner is a Bob/Rob banner, is that why you are so set in all the old stories? And all the Old Questions? Are you Bob? Or just one of the little "et. al.'s like Rob? So closely tied to him that there is no practical difference.? As you have stated before that Bob is such a good person and as he is in the public lime light even more so than Oma has been, then I am sure that you would not have any problem answering these questions for us?
So why did Bob continue to do business as usual using his corporate name when the State of Texas had removed the rights to it?
So why is that Bob was OK with using a “Dog” as his Content Director and deceiving his clients into thinking that he had more talent on his team than he did?
So why is that Bob was OK with using Rob's name and deceiving his clients into thinking that he had more talent on his team than he did? And even more so why was Rob OK with Bob using his name to deceive others if he had nothing to do with Pallasart in that position as he has stated.
So why is it OK for Bob to say that he is going to have the Red Mafia who he personally knows "Shred Oma to Pieces" (was that a euphemism for Murder her)?
So why is it OK for Bob to have lied to the courts?
So why is it OK for Bob to have lied to the police?
So why was it OK for Bob to have financial problems and get a court judgment against him from the city of Austin?
So why was it OK for Bob to ask for donations but not give them to the Alexander Palace or to Father Markell's church?
Is this not all Public Record, so we should be demanding of Bob the same explanations that you seem to see fit to ask of Oma, and as you and Bob seem to feel that her marital status and children are open public subjects should we ask the same of Bob or yourself?
It seems to me that what "they"demand of Oma is calling the Kettle black. It is NOT OK for Oma but it is Ok for Bob --- Come again? That Oma once almost twenty years ago (can you believe it is that long ago!)had some problems with witting a few bad checks does not make her a life time hardened violent criminal. She made restitution, and paid her debt to society. That is a old chapter of her life.
We know that exciting things were happening to her afterwards, or she would not have talked the Government of Russia and the R.O.C. into signing those contracts with her. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would never have been invited by both the U.S. and Russian government to participate in the second historic energy summit. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would not not have lived in Russia for all that time, nor had the money for those certified checks that were just published. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would not have spent those millions on a “fake project” (as Bob, et. al. claim), nor could she have racked up all the debt that Bob keeps pointing to if there was not a project and a good valid one… (So valid that Bob was conspiring with a Russian to take it over!) and yet "they"say in the next breath that she had no project... Bob could not have kept her script if there was not one. If there was one then that in and of itself is evidence that there was a project. And it goes on and on and on!
So the BIG question is, why was it that AFTER she met Bob did all this fall apart??????
As to why they keep asking the same things over and over again, could it be that they are indeed following the admonition of Hitler? Is that why they won’t change what the say? Or is it like Rusophile said, is it the lawyer Rob who is trying to trip her up? Remember what Hitler’s creed was? “His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”
Oh and where is that URL that existed and had been seen? You know the one that shows by its absence that it, like all the rest of your claims against Oma, is/are nothing, as you have nothing, other than a desire to hurt Oma.
--- lol, as if he/she ever had the truth in them in regards to Oma, what they think they have is certainly nothing, just like they are nothing
(Oh and before I start, in case any one noticed --- "Sock puppet" was a Mike Pyles and Rob phrase on Legends...)
Oh? Public Record? But the "public record" record banner is a Bob/Rob banner, is that why you are so set in all the old stories? And all the Old Questions? Are you Bob? Or just one of the little "et. al.'s like Rob? So closely tied to him that there is no practical difference.? As you have stated before that Bob is such a good person and as he is in the public lime light even more so than Oma has been, then I am sure that you would not have any problem answering these questions for us?
So why did Bob continue to do business as usual using his corporate name when the State of Texas had removed the rights to it?
So why is that Bob was OK with using a “Dog” as his Content Director and deceiving his clients into thinking that he had more talent on his team than he did?
So why is that Bob was OK with using Rob's name and deceiving his clients into thinking that he had more talent on his team than he did? And even more so why was Rob OK with Bob using his name to deceive others if he had nothing to do with Pallasart in that position as he has stated.
So why is it OK for Bob to say that he is going to have the Red Mafia who he personally knows "Shred Oma to Pieces" (was that a euphemism for Murder her)?
So why is it OK for Bob to have lied to the courts?
So why is it OK for Bob to have lied to the police?
So why was it OK for Bob to have financial problems and get a court judgment against him from the city of Austin?
So why was it OK for Bob to ask for donations but not give them to the Alexander Palace or to Father Markell's church?
Is this not all Public Record, so we should be demanding of Bob the same explanations that you seem to see fit to ask of Oma, and as you and Bob seem to feel that her marital status and children are open public subjects should we ask the same of Bob or yourself?
It seems to me that what "they"demand of Oma is calling the Kettle black. It is NOT OK for Oma but it is Ok for Bob --- Come again? That Oma once almost twenty years ago (can you believe it is that long ago!)had some problems with witting a few bad checks does not make her a life time hardened violent criminal. She made restitution, and paid her debt to society. That is a old chapter of her life.
We know that exciting things were happening to her afterwards, or she would not have talked the Government of Russia and the R.O.C. into signing those contracts with her. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would never have been invited by both the U.S. and Russian government to participate in the second historic energy summit. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would not not have lived in Russia for all that time, nor had the money for those certified checks that were just published. We know that exciting things were happening to her or she would not have spent those millions on a “fake project” (as Bob, et. al. claim), nor could she have racked up all the debt that Bob keeps pointing to if there was not a project and a good valid one… (So valid that Bob was conspiring with a Russian to take it over!) and yet "they"say in the next breath that she had no project... Bob could not have kept her script if there was not one. If there was one then that in and of itself is evidence that there was a project. And it goes on and on and on!
So the BIG question is, why was it that AFTER she met Bob did all this fall apart??????
As to why they keep asking the same things over and over again, could it be that they are indeed following the admonition of Hitler? Is that why they won’t change what the say? Or is it like Rusophile said, is it the lawyer Rob who is trying to trip her up? Remember what Hitler’s creed was? “His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”
Oh and where is that URL that existed and had been seen? You know the one that shows by its absence that it, like all the rest of your claims against Oma, is/are nothing, as you have nothing, other than a desire to hurt Oma.
Sources: http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html & http://omahamou.com/oma/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=25&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=120
posted by Sandman at 8:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home