On 4/9/2026 5:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> wrote:
On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]>
wrote:
[ .... ]
Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be asking >>>> "why are you trying to justify Jews?".
Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?
I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy. We're
talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular culture
(of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in
harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.
You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
target of your nastiness was less than human. I suggest you reconsider
all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in
this thread.
Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on topic
in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.
Well, yeah. Touche. Damn. It's just that I have a certain level of
disdain for such people. I just do. Sorry. Not the Jews! Uggg. Anyway, sorry.
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
On 4/9/2026 12:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 5:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> wrote:
On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]>
wrote:
[ .... ]
Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be asking >>>>> "why are you trying to justify Jews?".
Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?
I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy. We're
talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular culture >>> (of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in
harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.
You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
target of your nastiness was less than human. I suggest you reconsider
all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in
this thread.
Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on topic
in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.
You go ahead and converse with the god damn pedo.
Well, yeah. Touche. Damn. It's just that I have a certain level of
disdain for such people. I just do. Sorry. Not the Jews! Uggg. Anyway,
sorry.
On 05/27/2026 01:44 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 12:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 5:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]>
wrote:
[ .... ]
Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be
asking
"why are you trying to justify Jews?".
Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?
I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy. We're >>>> talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular
culture
(of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in
harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.
You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
target of your nastiness was less than human. I suggest you reconsider >>>> all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in
this thread.
Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on topic >>>> in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.
You go ahead and converse with the god damn pedo.
Well, yeah. Touche. Damn. It's just that I have a certain level of
disdain for such people. I just do. Sorry. Not the Jews! Uggg. Anyway,
sorry.
Don't confuse argument with support.
Furthermore, save your outrage for "terrorists & traffickers" like
the "Epstein class", not so much "addled idiots who browse 4-chan".
Get some real problems. (And those aren't my problems.)
You're welcome to despise anybody you want for whatever reason,
i.e., "it's a free country", then though the "wet blanket"
approach as like "Godwin's Nazi law" (that eventually a long-enough
thread will mention the Nazis who once were simply the fascist
enemy and thus end), has that "CMT's paedo law" isn't in effect here.
We still need a good word for "loves children", in the platonic sort
of sense, idea being generally to love children and other innocent
and nice animals.
Anyways, trolls like "JG" or "PO" in their bot-like anti-socialism,
here has that anti-socialism is still having its own grounds.
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony, Olcott told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a bond reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the
evidence.
On 5/28/26 2:40 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^ >>> Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony,
Olcott told investigators he believed the material was legal because
he was God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a
bond reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of
the evidence.
as a free speech advocate i really just don't care...
and i don't buy the whole protecting the children schtick, at _all_. we actually don't give a damn about children in america, because we don't
care to give parents the time/space to be properly present and available
in a child's early life. we are actually one of the worst places in the world to raise a child.
all the insanity/menace behind pedobigotry isn't about children at all,
or we be tackling the absurdly low handing fruit like ensuring children
are raised properly, in the fucking first place...
On 5/28/2026 4:35 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 5/28/26 2:40 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^ >>>> Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott
in Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount
of child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS
tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony,
Olcott told investigators he believed the material was legal because
he was God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a
bond reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of
the evidence.
as a free speech advocate i really just don't care...
and i don't buy the whole protecting the children schtick, at _all_.
we actually don't give a damn about children in america, because we
don't care to give parents the time/space to be properly present and
available in a child's early life. we are actually one of the worst
places in the world to raise a child.
all the insanity/menace behind pedobigotry isn't about children at
all, or we be tackling the absurdly low handing fruit like ensuring
children are raised properly, in the fucking first place...
Don't you have a new child born into our world? Earth?
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony, Olcott told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a bond reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the evidence.
On 4/9/26 5:43 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 04/09/2026 12:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 10:14 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 04/09/2026 05:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:A parent loves their children, indeed. Or at least they should? Olcott,
In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote:
[ .... ]
Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be >>>>>>> asking
"why are you trying to justify Jews?".
Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?
I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy. We're >>>>> talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular
culture
(of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in >>>>> harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.
You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
target of your nastiness was less than human. I suggest you
reconsider
all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in >>>>> this thread.
Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on
topic
in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.
"Otherism" as a usual account is sometimes demonizing specters and then >>>> threatening sympathy with association, and furthermore threatening the >>>> rejection of otherism as association with the demonized, besides the
wider accounts of "otherism" and "we-think" and "in-group" types of
pecking and the like, then furthermore is the association with "thought >>>> police" and the like, here vis-a-vis "thought crimes" and "real
crimes".
So, besides "un-popular", it's a gross bludgeon.
Let us recall the stories we'd tell youth, or give youth to discover,
the fable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop%27s_Fables#Select_fables
Now, plenty of these fables have consequences,
and some invoke a specter like "the boogey-man"
as variously threatens irresponsibility or the unwary,
or, punishes misbehavior, and even, when that
invoking the specter, invokes the specter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf
The psycho-sexual in the psycho-logical, is an aspect
of thinking and feeling beings, largely biological.
Anyways children should be more concerned with if anybody
in their class likes them, not whether the world is full
of monsters, after them. (Nor that they'll become one.)
There is not a monster under the bed,
there is not a monster in the closet,
there is not a monster in the basement,
there is not a monster in the yard.
"The only thing to fear is fear itself."
"So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we >>>> have to fear is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror >>>> which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." -- FDR >>>>
There is not a monster in your mind.
Then, basically it's insulting to make "ad hominem" fallacy.
I read a good book a few years ago about identity and including
a chapter on otherism, and how easy it is to see through it,
I'm thinking it was an "Ian B." or so, if I don't recall,
something about "politics of identity" or "psychology of identity"
or along these lines, in the philosophy section though as about
psychology. If I recall it I'll note it here.
Anyways, we still need a word for "loves children".
Thanks for writing.
might love them too much? Oh shit, there I go again.
Try minding your own business and the old "innocent until proven
guilty", and not be sham "operant-conditioning" that is still
back on pigeons and dogs.
If your actual interests are "protecting the children", and everybody
else, from dangers real or imagined, how about investigating "ad-tech"
for billions of counts and counting of "luring", "corruption of a
minor", "child endangerment", and not even getting into slander and
libel, "identity theft", "computer crimes", and so on. The "ad-tech"
is not "social media", it's got no "safe harbor", and having
algorithm'ed itself it's poisoned itself and pierced its own veil.
Then, about what used to be "special services", these days with
the "surveillance tech" making it more like "secret stasis",
then that's also for busting surveillance tech. That and
busting all the "seals" covering all kinds of "mistakes".
Yes, let's protect the children by busting ad-tech and surveillance
tech. For example, they're liable for anything they know.
Sometimes: ignorance _is_ a defense.
idk if u've used the rest of the internet in the last decade or so,
but pedos are basically the ultimately boogieman that somehow sit below literal serial killers and mass murders on the social media hierarchy,
usenet (which i only joined last year) is the only place i've ever seen
any amount of nuance applied to subject, probably because censorship
doesn't really exist here, and therefore the discussion cannot be shaped
by the fear of people in charge
imo this is likely a reflection of an incredibly amount of systemic
sexual trauma we've received by how modern society represses sexuality during childhood, which i think is an appendage of how religion used to repress it, that somehow snuck it's way into secular society...
my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how to protect him from that during his childhood 😕
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony, Olcott
told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a bond
reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the evidence.
The requested and required *citation is missing*.
Also, there are 5 people named "Peter Olcott" on LinkedIn already (all in
the USA and Canada), although one of them could be the person described
above because the county and state match.
So, assuming that the above is true, what makes you believe that the
"olcott" posting there is the person described above?
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that
matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that
matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
On 5/28/2026 6:45 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony, Olcott >>> told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was God. >>>
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a bond >>> reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the evidence.
The requested and required *citation is missing*.
Also, there are 5 people named "Peter Olcott" on LinkedIn already (all in
the USA and Canada), although one of them could be the person described
above because the county and state match.
So, assuming that the above is true, what makes you believe that the
"olcott" posting there is the person described above?
Olcott himself knows all about it. Ask him. Its the right guy indeed.
On 5/29/26 11:07 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that
matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
the dud definitely deserves to be kicked in the nuts regardless tbh
On 5/28/2026 9:00 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 05/27/2026 01:44 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 12:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 4/9/2026 5:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote:
[ .... ]
Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be
asking
"why are you trying to justify Jews?".
Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?
I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy. We're >>>>> talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular
culture
(of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in >>>>> harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.
You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
target of your nastiness was less than human. I suggest you
reconsider
all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in >>>>> this thread.
Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on
topic
in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.
You go ahead and converse with the god damn pedo.
Well, yeah. Touche. Damn. It's just that I have a certain level of
disdain for such people. I just do. Sorry. Not the Jews! Uggg. Anyway, >>>> sorry.
Don't confuse argument with support.
Furthermore, save your outrage for "terrorists & traffickers" like
the "Epstein class", not so much "addled idiots who browse 4-chan".
Epstein? You mean perverts like a guy on this group, but on a grander
scale?
Get some real problems. (And those aren't my problems.)
You're welcome to despise anybody you want for whatever reason,
i.e., "it's a free country", then though the "wet blanket"
approach as like "Godwin's Nazi law" (that eventually a long-enough
thread will mention the Nazis who once were simply the fascist
enemy and thus end), has that "CMT's paedo law" isn't in effect here.
We still need a good word for "loves children", in the platonic sort
of sense, idea being generally to love children and other innocent
and nice animals.
Anyways, trolls like "JG" or "PO" in their bot-like anti-socialism,
here has that anti-socialism is still having its own grounds.
On 5/28/2026 6:45 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in
Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes.
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony, Olcott >>> told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was
God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a bond >>> reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the
evidence.
The requested and required *citation is missing*.
Also, there are 5 people named "Peter Olcott" on LinkedIn already (all in
the USA and Canada), although one of them could be the person described
above because the county and state match.
So, assuming that the above is true, what makes you believe that the
"olcott" posting there is the person described above?
Olcott himself knows all about it. Ask him. Its the right guy indeed.
On 5/29/26 11:07 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that
matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
the dud definitely deserves to be kicked in the nuts regardless tbh
On 05/29/2026 11:12 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 5/29/26 11:07 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that
matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
the dud definitely deserves to be kicked in the nuts regardless tbh
I stopped counting after about 134.
If your wife, if you have one, or girlfriend, or other side, readsthis they might wonder why you are so interested in Nick and that you've
On 6/3/2026 9:19 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 05/29/2026 11:12 AM, dart200 wrote:On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends. I've been
On 5/29/26 11:07 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that >>>>> matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room
she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
the dud definitely deserves to be kicked in the nuts regardless tbh
I stopped counting after about 134.
an informant and lurker here since 1995 and I can't ever recall anyone
talking about their significant other perv. Until Nick joined about two years ago.
Nobody does that on absfg - they would get totally trashed! For the
simple reason that their significant others, if they have one, are
probably reading this board as you key in your query.
If your wife, if you have one, or girlfriend, or other side, readsthis they might wonder why you are so interested in Nick and that you've been discussing and counting rumors about the perv on met on a Usenet
chat room - you might get a response from Nick.
PS: It kind of looks like you did some major snipping, changed the
Subject line, cross-posted to four unrelated boards, deleted every
comment, including Nick's, and failed to include any "tech talk" about
any "Libs", whatever that is.
On 6/3/26 10:09 AM, Dude wrote:
On 6/3/2026 9:19 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 05/29/2026 11:12 AM, dart200 wrote:On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends. I've been
On 5/29/26 11:07 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 8:57 PM, Dude wrote:
[...]
On this board, we do not discuss our wives, or girl friends for that >>>>>> matter. If Rita finds out I've been talking abut her on a chat room >>>>>> she'd probably kick me in the nits!
Ouch!
the dud definitely deserves to be kicked in the nuts regardless tbh
I stopped counting after about 134.
an informant and lurker here since 1995 and I can't ever recall anyone
woops u weren't suppose to leak that one dud!
talking about their significant other perv. Until Nick joined abouttwo years ago.
9 mos ago but ok dud, we get it:
u have dementia already u old fart
Nobody does that on absfg - they would get totally trashed! For the
simple reason that their significant others, if they have one, are
probably reading this board as you key in your query.
If your wife, if you have one, or girlfriend, or other side, readsthis they might wonder why you are so interested in Nick and that
you've been discussing and counting rumors about the perv on met on a
Usenet chat room - you might get a response from Nick.
PS: It kind of looks like you did some major snipping, changed the
Subject line, cross-posted to four unrelated boards, deleted every
comment, including Nick's, and failed to include any "tech talk" about
any "Libs", whatever that is.
On 05/28/2026 09:15 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 6:45 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
On 5/28/2026 4:20 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
[Olcott] is strange. A low life pedo, and thinks he is god.^^^^
Nothing to be joking about. Cite evidence or retract.
(No F'up2 this time.)
The 2015 Case (Nebraska)
Court documents from April 2015 detail the arrest of a Peter Olcott in >>>> Sarpy County, Nebraska. Investigators found a significant amount of
child pornography, including boxes of photos, magazines, and VHS tapes. >>>>
The "God" Claim: According to court records and police testimony,
Olcott
told investigators he believed the material was legal because he was
God.
Defense: His legal representation argued at the time that the images
were legal as defined by the Supreme Court, though a judge denied a
bond
reduction due to the severity of the charges and the nature of the
evidence.
The requested and required *citation is missing*.
Also, there are 5 people named "Peter Olcott" on LinkedIn already
(all in
the USA and Canada), although one of them could be the person described
above because the county and state match.
So, assuming that the above is true, what makes you believe that the
"olcott" posting there is the person described above?
Olcott himself knows all about it. Ask him. Its the right guy indeed.
It sounds kind of familiar, doing a crime then claiming non-culpability.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,123 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 34:59:41 |
| Calls: | 14,371 |
| Files: | 186,380 |
| D/L today: |
1,138 files (331M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,540,621 |