> On Sep 26, 6:47=A0am, No_He_Can_Not <nohecan...@mail.com> wrote:
> > Principled San Diego Firefighters wrote:

> > > In article <9eb1df55-0e28-4243-ac82-
> > > d42a1d856...@y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
> > > Edmond Wollmann <AArctophi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > >> On Sep 23, 3:17 pm, Bob Officer <boboffic...@127.0.0.7> wrote:

> > >>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:32:06 +0100, in alt.astrology, "A B" <a@a>
> > >>> wrote:

> > >>>> " It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to advertise by sig=
> n,
> > >>>> circular, handbill or in any newspaper, periodical or magazine, or o=
> ther
> > >>>> publication or publications, or by any other means, to tell fortunes=
> , to
> > >>>> find or restore lost or stolen property, to locate oil wells, gold o=
> r si

> > >> lver

> > >>>> or other ore or metal or natural product, to restore lost love or fr=
> iend

> > >> ship

> > >>>> or affection, to unite or procure lovers, husbands, wives, lost rela=
> tive

> > >> s or

> > >>>> friends, for or without pay, by means of occult or psychic powers,
> > >>>> facilities or forces, clairvoyance, psychology, psychometry, spirits=
> ,
> > >>>> mediumship, seership, prophecy, astrology, palmistry, necromancy, or=
>  oth

> > >> er

> > >>>> craft, science, talismans, charms, potions, magnetism or magnetized =
> arti

> > >> cles

> > >>>> or substances, Oriental mysteries or magic of any kind or nature, or
> > >>>> numerology, or to engage in or carry on any business the advertiseme=
> nt o

> > >> f

> > >>>> which is prohibited in this Section and Subsections."

> > >>>> Blimey, what a load of legal blether.

> > >>> That's the current California law which is enforce only as a last
> > >>> resort.

> > >>>> I noticed a funny thing:
> > >>>> "It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to advertise... to l=
> ocat

> > >> e

> > >>>> oil wells, gold or silver or other ore or metal or natural product..=
> . by
> > >>>> means of... [any] other craft or science... or to engage in or carry=
>  on

> > >> any

> > >>>> business the advertisement of which is prohibited in this Section an=
> d
> > >>>> Subsections."
> > >>>> This seems to prohibit locating any kind of mineral by any means at =
> all,

> > >> =A0at

> > >>>> least in the San Diego area. =A0Does anyone know how they'd get out =
> of t

> > >> hat

> > >>>> one?

> > >>> It actually stopped any sort of "locating" which refers to dousing,
> > >>> or magical means of location except for going out and looking.

> > >>> There is a court case in the Highest California State court which
> > >>> found that Astrology, when and only when, practiced as a organized
> > >>> religious rite to be allowed under the US 1st Amendment to the
> > >>> Constitution. It did not set aside or declare the law or ordinance
> > >>> unconstitutional, as Edmond and other Astrologers would have you
> > >>> think.

> > >>> --
> > >>> Ak'toh'di

> > >> Bullshit, I have a business license from San Diego to do astrology and
> > >> have had one for years. When I first moved here in 1984 I tried to
> > >> advertise in the Tribune and they said they "didn't do those kinds of
> > >> ads" fortunately I knew someone (a client of mine in astrology) who
> > >> was a bigwig at the paper and he made them change it and I was the
> > >> first astrologer to advertise in the San Diego Union Tribune. No one
> > >> has EVER said a thing about any such idiotic laws and certainly no one
> > >> has ever enforced them, they would be laughed at.

> > > That's a constitution fighting, pro-illegal and pro-homosexual
> > > rag if there ever was one. =A0Who did you blow to get that done?

> > Astrology. Ha. That is funny. Is that not the ridiculous practice of
> > telling the future by when one was born ?

> Wrong.
> http://www.smbtech.com/e

> In article <cd6190d3-ee92-468f-ac31-6ede0acf0...@p36g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
> The True Edmond Wollmann <EHWollm...@aol.com> wrote:

> > On Oct 4, 12:49=A0pm, "A B" <a@a> wrote:
> > > "The True Edmond Wollmann" <EHWollm...@aol.com> wrote on 2nd October:
> > > On Oct 1, 11:10 am, "A B" <a@a> wrote:

> > > >> Silveen's link should be:http://www.lovestarz.com/coleman.html
> > > >> Bob Officer (and anyone else interested) would do well to have a look =
> > at
> > > >> it.
> > > >> It has a good summary of the laws about astrology and how they develop=
> > ed.
> > > >> A. B.
> > > > Don't confuse the spinics with the facts.

> > > Do you mean the website isn't fact, or Bob Officer has no facts?

> > > A. B.

> > I thought you killfiled the idiots, looks like you missed Bob and
> > Cujo.

> > Edmond H. Wollmann O.C.D.
> > Astrological Consulting http://www.smbtech.com/

> OCD noted.

> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
> > Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this charter
> > only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies. Please take
> > action.
> > Thanks
> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you are
> violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

>> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you are
>> violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

> Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> > Not Given wrote:
> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this charter
> >>> only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies. Please take
> >>> action.
> >>> Thanks

> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you are
> >> violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his writing
> without his permission.

> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/e are copies of public
> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

> http://www.smbtech.com/e

>> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>> > Not Given wrote:
>> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
>> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this
>> >>> charter only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies.
>> >>> Please take action.
>> >>> Thanks

>> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you
>> >> are violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

>> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

>> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his
>> writing without his permission.

>> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these
>> ludicrous threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/e are copies of
>> public discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent
>> Usenet braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you
>> think they are.

>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed

> You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> Comprende you hiding coward?

> > DMCA Handler wrote:

> >> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> >> > Not Given wrote:
> >> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >> >>news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
> >> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this
> >> >>> charter only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies.
> >> >>> Please take action.
> >> >>> Thanks

> >> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you
> >> >> are violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

> >> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

> >> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his
> >> writing without his permission.

> >> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these
> >> ludicrous threats. What's onhttp://www.smbtech.com/eare copies of
> >> public discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent
> >> Usenet braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you
> >> think they are.

> >>http://www.smbtech.com/e

> > You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> > material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> > they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> > Comprende you hiding coward?

> Dream on, kook.

>> > DMCA Handler wrote:

>> >> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>> >> > Not Given wrote:
>> >> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> >> >>news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
>> >> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of
>> >> >>> this charter only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my
>> >> >>> companies. Please take action.
>> >> >>> Thanks

>> >> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you
>> >> >> are violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

>> >> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

>> >> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his
>> >> writing without his permission.

>> >> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these
>> >> ludicrous threats. What's onhttp://www.smbtech.com/eare copies of
>> >> public discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent
>> >> Usenet braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you
>> >> think they are.

>> >>http://www.smbtech.com/ed

>> > You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my
>> > copyrighted material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena
>> > the admins and they can tell a judge why they think they are above
>> > Copyright laws. Comprende you hiding coward?

>> Dream on, kook.

> Are you answering officially for Hurricane electric?

>> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
>> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/ed are copies of public
>> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
>> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed

> You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> Comprende you hiding coward?

>> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>> > Not Given wrote:
>> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
>> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this charter
>> >>> only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies. Please take
>> >>> action.
>> >>> Thanks

>> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you are
>> >> violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

>> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

>> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his writing
>> without his permission.

>> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
>> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/e are copies of public
>> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
>> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed

> You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> Comprende you hiding coward?

>>DMCA Handler wrote:

>>> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
>>> > Not Given wrote:
>>> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> >> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
>>> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this
>>> >>> charter only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my
>>> >>> companies. Please take action.
>>> >>> Thanks

>>> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you
>>> >> are violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

>>> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

>>> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his
>>> writing without his permission.

>>> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these
>>> ludicrous threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/e are copies of
>>> public discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent
>>> Usenet braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you
>>> think they are.

>>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed <- Fixed

>>You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
>>material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
>>they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.

> You made a public point of making sure your "work" is archived.

> Got Logic?

> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> > DMCA Handler wrote:

> >> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
> >> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/ed are copies of public
> >> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
> >> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

> >> http://www.smbtech.com/ed

> > You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> > material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> > they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> > Comprende you hiding coward?

>      So, exactly where is your copy righted material on that page?

> On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:46:35 -0700, in alt.astrology, Edmond Wollmann
> <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> >DMCA Handler wrote:

> >> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> >> > Not Given wrote:
> >> >> "Edmond Wollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:4ACB7BA1.55D9@earthlink.net...
> >> >>> Your client continues to post off topic and in violation of this charter
> >> >>> only to defame, harass and denigrate me and my companies. Please take
> >> >>> action.
> >> >>> Thanks

> >> >> What law are you referring to? If you want to be technical, you are
> >> >> violating fraud laws Mr. Fortune Teller.

> >> > Oh yeah? WHAT laws Mr Smartass??

> >> Copyright law, according to your logic. You just replicated his writing
> >> without his permission.

> >> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
> >> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/e are copies of public
> >> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
> >> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

> >> http://www.smbtech.com/e

> >You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> >material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> >they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.

> You made a public point of making sure your "work" is archived.

> You can not pick and choose which sites archive your work.

>>>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed
>>> You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
>>> material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
>>> they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
>>> Comprende you hiding coward?
>>      So, exactly where is your copy righted material on that page?

> Ah gee, let's see Mr Genius, the parts with a copyright symbol on them?
> And anything else I wrote.

> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> > WindsorFox<[SS]> wrote:
> >> Edmond Wollmann wrote:
> >>> DMCA Handler wrote:
> >>>> That's about the level of legal argument you have with these ludicrous
> >>>> threats. What's on http://www.smbtech.com/ed are copies of public
> >>>> discourse that you willingly engaged in. Your incoherent Usenet
> >>>> braindroppings are not going to receive the protection you think they are.

> >>>> http://www.smbtech.com/ed
> >>> You are an idiot, a liar and a fraud. They cannot house my copyrighted
> >>> material, and if they do not remove it I will subpoena the admins and
> >>> they can tell a judge why they think they are above Copyright laws.
> >>> Comprende you hiding coward?
> >>      So, exactly where is your copy righted material on that page?

> > Ah gee, let's see Mr Genius, the parts with a copyright symbol on them?
> > And anything else I wrote.

>     I saw no copy right symbols on that page at all, how about you drop
> the petty insults and be specific?

> For being so ignorant, you sure are condescending.

>> And no, "anything you wrote" meaning
>> Usenet posts are not a copy right violation.

> WRONG! ANYthing I write is copyrighted automatically and strengthened
> with my copyright notice.

> WRONG!

>> Like I have said before you myself and others stupid and profess
>> all this massive knowledge and intelligence, but you still have yet to
>> consult a lawyer apparently.

> The lawyer Steve Burnette puts forth must not know diddly-squat about
> copyright, and negotiating in bad faith and further malgning me
> asserting that I am putting forth a DMCA in bad faith (when we have not
> even addressed the defamation inherent IN the copyright violation) to
> try to make me look like I don't know what I am talking about HELPS me
> in court.
> I will respond to them, and it will be detailed and they will continue
> their smart-assness and defamatory approach at their own peril.
> PS I was consulting lawyers when you were shitting your diapers.

> > For being so ignorant, you sure are condescending.

>      You certainly are obnoxious for someone who is wrong most of the time.

> > I am not going to
> > explain the whole of it, because I don't have to.

>     Because you can not. If you could you would.

> > If you go to the links
> > at the left of his so-called site, and go to the pages, you will see
> > posts of mine with copyright symbols on them.

>      Ah, I didn't think you were that ignorant. Putting a copy right
> symbol in your sig on a Usenet post does not copy right it. You've been
> told that. Spend your money if you like but you'll never win that one,
> it's already been tried.

> > Now let me explain the simplest of copyright rules for you and the other
> > youngsters here.

>     I am older than you, and I was on Usenet before you knew what a
> computer was.

> > No copyrights are lost by posting to usenet.

>      No, they are not even started. You can not copy right a Usenet post.

> > Because there has always been this myth I started years ago placing a
> > copyright symbol on my posts, which STRENGTHENS my copyrights.
> > Because I am a published author and use much of the material I developed
> > over the years from usenet interactions, the work is valuable to my
> > work.

>     Good luck with that, I still say you are going to be wasting your money.

> > Because I OWN a publishing company and I place my SAN on my posts, THAT
> > strengthens my copyrights.

>     IMHO the only reason you own a "publishing company" is that is the
> only way you could get anything of yours published. And no, putting that
> on your Usenet posts is meaningless. Better people than you have tried it.

> >> And no, "anything you wrote" meaning
> >> Usenet posts are not a copy right violation.

> > WRONG! ANYthing I write is copyrighted automatically and strengthened
> > with my copyright notice.

>      Uh-huh. You had a lawyer tell you that? I mean one who is actually
> familiar with both copy rights AND Usenet?

> >> If in fact that is what you
> >> truly mean, then I can assure you that is why you have up until now been
> >> ignored. You can not copy right a Usenet post, if you did it would be
> >> your news server from where it was sent that would be in violation
> >> first.

> > WRONG!

> >> Like I have said before you myself and others stupid and profess
> >> all this massive knowledge and intelligence, but you still have yet to
> >> consult a lawyer apparently.

> > The lawyer Steve Burnette puts forth must not know diddly-squat about
> > copyright, and negotiating in bad faith and further malgning me
> > asserting that I am putting forth a DMCA in bad faith (when we have not
> > even addressed the defamation inherent IN the copyright violation) to
> > try to make me look like I don't know what I am talking about HELPS me
> > in court.
> > I will respond to them, and it will be detailed and they will continue
> > their smart-assness and defamatory approach at their own peril.
> > PS I was consulting lawyers when you were shitting your diapers.

>     Yeah, by all means keep us posted. If you win I will start copy
> righting all of my posts too.

>> For the last time, idiot--WRONG, YOU ARE WRONG. Repeating the same
>> SHIT over and over does NOT make you right. You are obviously a
>> SPINIC.

> It's difficult to explain something to an idiot of Windbag's dimensions,
> isn't, Ed?

> The obnoxious (but also extremely funny) thing about our Windbag here is: he
> can't get enough of hearing himself talking. He *obviously* is impressed by
> himself! ROTFLOL

>> For the last time, idiot--WRONG, YOU ARE WRONG. Repeating the same
>> SHIT over and over does NOT make you right. You are obviously a
>> SPINIC.

>     I agree, your continued parroting of it does not make you correct.

>> EHWollmann wrote:

>>> For the last time, idiot--WRONG, YOU ARE WRONG. Repeating the same
>>> SHIT over and over does NOT make you right. You are obviously a
>>> SPINIC.

>>     I agree, your continued parroting of it does not make you correct.

> maybe you should try parroting the exact opposite?