Don't Vote

[bobevenson]

No, I'll taunt them into suing me, and then I'll get their Tide division, O my brothers in tribulation!

Why would the FBI sue you?

I'm talking about Procter & Gamble, not the FBI. A crazed FBI agent once called me on the telephone, but they've never had the balls to ever contact me again, O my brothers in tribulation!

[bobevenson]

Do people normally believe you? Is it just us that don't?

What don't you believe?

[John]

Do people normally believe you? Is it just us that don't?

What don't you believe?

Any of it really but specifically whether the accusations of Satanism linked to the old P&G logo or the company itself or that they're afraid to sue you because you have some sort of information and they're afraid you'll reveal it. At least, that's what I think you're claiming.

When you tell other people this do they tend to believe you or are they sceptical?

Also, when you tell people you've been the victim of a P&G / FBI conspiracy do you provide any evidence of this or do you just expect people to take your word for it? Either way, do they generally believe you?

[bobevenson]

Do people normally believe you? Is it just us that don't?

What don't you believe?

Any of it really but specifically whether the accusations of Satanism linked to the old P&G logo or the company itself or that they're afraid to sue you because you have some sort of information and they're afraid you'll reveal it. At least, that's what I think you're claiming.

When you tell other people this do they tend to believe you or are they sceptical?

Also, when you tell people you've been the victim of a P&G / FBI conspiracy do you provide any evidence of this or do you just expect people to take your word for it? Either way, do they generally believe you?

P&G has never sued me because they know I'll bring to light their illegal involvement with the FBI. The Cincinnati Enquirer business reporter was convinced of this illegal involvement, and wanted to do an investigative story, but the paper wouldn't let her due to the fact that P&G has such great influence in Cincinnati. But P&G and the FBI don't scare me, and if you don't believe that, just contact P&G and tell them I want to be sued, in fact I challenge them to sue me.

[John]

I didn't ask you that. I asked you whether people normally believe you when you tell them this tale.

[bobevenson]

I didn't ask you that. I asked you whether people normally believe you when you tell them this tale.

How the fuck should I know if people believe me, and who the fuck cares? I can tell you one thing, Procter & Gamble believes me. Let me tell you a little story. A retired guy in a trailer park in California ran a little newspaper for the residents of his trailer park. He got something in the mail related to P&G's satanic rumor problem. He thought it was amusing, and included it his paper. Apparently, somebody at the trailer park contacted P&G, but P&G didn't say anything to the guy. The first thing he knew about it was when the media contacted him for his reaction to a million-dollar libel suit that P&G had just filed against him.
He was scared shitless, and said, "Maybe they're just trying to scare me. Well, they have." Here's a guy who didn't have anything against P&G, and would have certainly run a retraction if P&G had asked him to. On the other hand, I was their worst nightmare come true, and they would have liked to sue me for a zillion dollars, but were too scared to even ask me to stop distributing "That Infamous Logo".

[John]

I asked whether other people tended to believe you because you give the impression of thinking us to be unreasonable for doubting you. I was curious to know whether you accepted that most people won't believe a story like this on the internet unless there's very strong evidence even if it was true. For example, if I'd told you that I'd once defeated Mike Tyson in a behind closed doors boxing match and that Tyson was terrified of me I wouldn't expect you to believe it even if it were true.

Anyway, who was the guy they tried to sue? When did it happen? Without evidence it's just a rumour.

Some people no doubt still think P&G's president admitted it all on Donohue in 1994.

[bobevenson]

I asked whether other people tended to believe you because you give the impression of thinking us to be unreasonable for doubting you. I was curious to know whether you accepted that most people won't believe a story like this on the internet unless there's very strong evidence even if it was true. For example, if I'd told you that I'd once defeated Mike Tyson in a behind closed doors boxing match and that Tyson was terrified of me I wouldn't expect you to believe it even if it were true.

Anyway, who was the guy they tried to sue? When did it happen? Without evidence it's just a rumour.

Some people no doubt still think P&G's president admitted it all on Donohue in 1994.

Look, the letter from Patricia Gallagher at the Cincinnati Enquirer shows that she believed me, and had enough evidence to do an investigative story. I don't give a flying fuck whether you or other people believe me or not. Ask yourself a simple question, dope, why hasn't P&G sued me? You don't have to be Albert Einstein to come up with the answer. But you do need a modicum of common sense.

[John]

I asked whether other people tended to believe you because you give the impression of thinking us to be unreasonable for doubting you. I was curious to know whether you accepted that most people won't believe a story like this on the internet unless there's very strong evidence even if it was true. For example, if I'd told you that I'd once defeated Mike Tyson in a behind closed doors boxing match and that Tyson was terrified of me I wouldn't expect you to believe it even if it were true.

Anyway, who was the guy they tried to sue? When did it happen? Without evidence it's just a rumour.

Some people no doubt still think P&G's president admitted it all on Donohue in 1994.

Look, the letter from Patricia Gallagher at the Cincinnati Enquirer shows that she believed me, and had enough evidence to do an investigative story. I don't give a flying fuck whether you or other people believe me or not. Ask yourself a simple question, dope, why hasn't P&G sued me? You don't have to be Albert Einstein to come up with the answer. But you do need a modicum of common sense.

Just rumour and bits of information that don't substantiate anything in your claim is all you can offer. There's nothing in the letter that let's us know that Satanism or P&G's logo had anything to do with the story you were pushing so common sense would dictate than when someone tells you an outlandish story you remain sceptical unless they can substantiate it. You can't do that and even when you throw in other stories to provide weight to your story you can't substantiate them either so on the balance of probability you're being less than truthful or you believe what you're saying but it isn't actually true.

You've claimed to have information on Satanic links between a multinational corporation that's lead to you being the victim of an FBI conspiracy and a while back you also told us that your were back to square one as a result of billionaire Dean Metropoulos' takeover of the company and how you were annoyed that now you'd have to deal with him directly. You seem to have a lot of contact with powerful people and organisations, and maybe you do, but a deluded paranoid would probably make very similar claims and if I have to decide which I think you are I think it more likely you're the latter. You may not be but if you want me to apply common sense it's the most probable conclusion.

You're no doubt convinced you're right and that I just can't see the blindingly obvious but that's part and parcel of being deluded but if you really do believe all the stuff you've written on your Ouzo website then I seriously think you need some professional help.

[bobevenson]

If you really do believe all the stuff you've written on your Ouzo website then I seriously think you need some professional help.

I guess the Spiritual Counterfeits Project needs some professional help, huh??? I guess Encyclopaedia Britannica needs some professional help, huh??? I guess the Cincinnati Library needs some professional help, huh??? I guess evereybody but you needs some professional help, huh???

[John]

The Spiritual Counterfeits Project answered you by writing "Your argument is fascinating, tightly-reasoned, for sure. But I have to wonder, is it true? And a further question comes to mind, if it is, so what?" They then go one to state their position that "God has spoken plainly in his Word and through the Word, who is Jesus Christ" because they reject your mystical mumbo-jumbo.

The letters from the Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Cincinnati Library are primarily about the origins of the term "Queen of the West" and whatever else you suggested to Britannica they ended with "I cannot, as you suggested in your letter of September 6, recommend that the discussion be revised on the basis of statements in the Book of Revelation." Once again you provide proof that one of them has rejected your mystical mumbo-jumbo and the other is a letter that doesn't address the points you claim it does.

I can't imagine that any rational person would agree with you that the letters you refer to endorse your position and if you think they do then you probably do need some sort of help.

[Arising_uk]

I'm talking about Procter & Gamble, not the FBI. A crazed FBI agent once called me on the telephone, but they've never had the balls to ever contact me again, O my brothers in tribulation!

Then you should sue them or at least complain to the higher authorities.

Although my guess is they just wrote you off as another kook and you are deluded about why they have not re-contacted you.

[Arising_uk]

... but were too scared to even ask me to stop distributing "That Infamous Logo".

Mainly I suspect because you put a disclaimer at the bottom and their lawyers said it won't be worth it.

From what we see over here American libel suits always name exorbitant sums.

[Arising_uk]

... I challenge them to sue me.

Fairly easy I guess, take the disclaimer of the bottom of your piece or just accuse them of being in league with 'Satan'. Although given that they've had to abandon that logo due to fruit-loops like you and the fact that they live in a god-bothering society I guess they don't want the issue raised all over again as it hurts business.

[bobevenson]

The Spiritual Counterfeits Project answered you by writing "Your argument is fascinating, tightly-reasoned, for sure. But I have to wonder, is it true? And a further question comes to mind, if it is, so what?" They then go one to state their position that "God has spoken plainly in his Word and through the Word, who is Jesus Christ" because they reject your mystical mumbo-jumbo.

The letters from the Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Cincinnati Library are primarily about the origins of the term "Queen of the West" and whatever else you suggested to Britannica they ended with "I cannot, as you suggested in your letter of September 6, recommend that the discussion be revised on the basis of statements in the Book of Revelation." Once again you provide proof that one of them has rejected your mystical mumbo-jumbo and the other is a letter that doesn't address the points you claim it does.

I can't imagine that any rational person would agree with you that the letters you refer to endorse your position and if you think they do then you probably do need some sort of help.

I was the one who corrected the great Encyclopaedia Britannica's error on the identification of the beast with the name/number 666, not Billy Graham or the Pope. After 160 years of historians trying to figure out where Cincinnati's Queen City name came from, I discovered it in 20 minutes. The Spiritual Countefeits Project was blown away by "The Ouzo Prophecy," and don't try to dismiss that fact because it just makes you look stupid. The bottom line is that I know more about the book of Revelation, Cincinnati and Procter & Gamble than anybody who has walked the face of the Earth, O my brothers in tribulation!