On 1/12/05 18:07, in article , "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

The message k
from Sacha contains these words:

On 1/12/05 11:52, in article
, "La puce"
wrote:

snip
I would now urge the two of you to be really careful when responding
from now on as I might find some free time to scrutinise all your posts
from 'copyright', 'provenance', 'facts' and 'content'.

Please don't make threats.

It's getting to be a habit.Here's google's archive of one of her
earlier threats and fantasies :
snip
Janet will not get
away with it this time as she did in February 2004.


.................................................. ............................
.................................................. ................

Curious. Under her current ID, Puce has no posting history on urg
before October 05. So what on earth does she accuse me of "getting away
with" in February 04 ?

What's all that about, "Puce"? Another example of your bad memory,
dishonesty, delusions and attempts to smear me?

Or did you just forget which socks you have on ?


Oh god, not *another* one. How wearying and how terminally dull.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)