For Robert

Since you've forgotten Bob Worthy's questions, I thought I'd dig 'em up for you... as a professional courtesy.

"I wasn't refering to suing someone Robert. Just prove these suppposed "lies" are untrue here on this NG. This is where the accusations are coming from and the accusations are substantiated with Public Record. Are they true or not? It is a simple question and only requires a simple answer, "Yes" or "No". Are these accusations all fabricated? Again, a simple question that requires a simple answer. Did you author the "Testimony"? Simple question, simple answer. That is what I mean by challanging these things rather than just letting them float aroung out there."

"You have a copy of the report, correct? Did Mugford being a jackass make the investigators report?"

"If you didn't fall under the DBPR, why did they do an investigation on you?"

"Excuse me, you aren't doing contract monitoring service? as you have stated in these posts, yet from your website the state has a copy of your monitoring agreement, and now you say you are billing and collecting monitoring fees payable to an address in Florida. Are you running a different set of books that the investigator may not have been privy of ?"

formatting link

The part about Robert not being home when the State Investigator came over (several times) was particularly interesting. I notice he still sells monitoring online at

formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
Frank Olson
Loading thread data ...

Fair enough, now show what you originally wrote or which parts are inaccurate

Reply to
Mark Leuck

I would but it's boring and doesn't involve felony charges

Reply to
Mark Leuck

You using the word courtesy is like Bush using the word "patriot"

-- the two have nothing in common. Nevertheless...

Which lies? You've told so many...

Which accusations?

That one's easy. Not in it's current form. Someone else edited it. The original message was a private e-mail between myself and another person. That individual placed the e-mail on a web site without my permission. I asked him to remove it and he did. However, the lengthy story posted on the MM's hate web site has little to do with what I originally wrote.

It makes no difference whether I challenge or ignore the nonsense you and the other idiots post. You continue spouting trash either way.

Now you're speaking of the false accusations made by two of Mugford's pals on his behalf. Yes, I have a copy, including the claims that I supposedly murdered someone, etc.

Mugford got his pals to do his dirty work. If he had made such accusations directly I would indeed have taken him to court. It failed miserably because the investigator found out almost immediately they were lying -- no murder even occurred, no unlicensed activity was being performed, no regulated services are or were offered within the state of Florida.

They investigated the complaint from Mugford's pals and found it was without merit.

Not in Florida.

The agreement and the services offered therein are not offered in Florida. You seem to have a hard time understanding that but it has been clearly stated on my web site for years.

The state of Florida does not regulate billing and collecting fees for services rendered outside its borders. The statute is quite specific about what is and what is not regulated.

If you believe that I am, file another bogus complaint. It'll find its way to the dust bin just as fast as your first attempt.

Care to substantiate that?

The same web pages were read by the state investigator. He found no evidence of wrongdoing. "Tsk" yourself.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Sure thing, right after you post your life story in full detail.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Can't, apparently that search breaks

"The search engine encountered the following error:$TooManyClauses. We are working to resolve this issue. Thanks for your patience. "

Must be a devious Karl Rove trick

Reply to
Mark Leuck

Go to and use the "way back machine" to pull up the original "testimony"...if you have a clue about the time frame it was posted.

Reply to
Karl Magnus

Heh... typical you'd "twist" a Google archive I didn't even write... But do go on... Prove I've lied about anything!!!

I dunno... Ask Worthy. I'm just quoting from his post.

Really?? Now that's probably the closest to the truth you've ever stated. See?? It didn't hurt!! Care to post "the Testimony" in it's original format as it appeared on the "Alpha and Omega" site?

You responding to me or Worthy (whom I've simple quoted as a professional courtesy)?

You had absolutely no qualms posting one of the individuals personal information here... How's about providing a copy of the report??

Answer the question!! "Did Mugford being a jackass make the investigator's report?" I'll bet he didn't...

(They're secretly all in cahoots, you know!!) :-))

Uh-huh... and you've since removed all links to your monitoring contract from your primary website (as well as the "buy me" buttons).

You were, "Pinky"... It doesn't take much in the way of "Brains" to figure that out... I'll bet you and the wife get up every morning and she turns to you and says "What are we going to do today?" You respond with "What we do every day. Try to take over the online alarm market" (slight departure from the cartoon "Pinky and the Brain" where "Brain" responds with "Try to take over the world!").

Uh-huh... The problem is you collect the fees *in Florida*.

Heh... sure, Robert... Sure...

You responding to me or Worthy again??

Heh... Care to notice the quotations?? How about reading the link to Google??

It's called an "oversight" on your part... You're primary business is now Bass Burglar. It's obvious to me with the number of empty image place-holders that you're really not doing much with either of the two others...

Reply to
Frank Olson

Hello my brotha. Did you advise the BBB that you are doing business under ? It must be listed along with and All must know that my brotha is a bad muthaa. ||| ||| | |

formatting link
Se my brothas BBB score card 14 complaints in 36 months.
formatting link

Reply to

If you are confused about who you are answering, I can understand, but if you are saying that I have told lies then you are terribly mistaken. I am to old for childish antics.

The accusations that you have accused people of relaying about you. No need to be coy, Robert.

Is that a big *YES* or a big *NO*? It sounds like a *Maybe* but most likely, a **I'll get back to you on that**

Challanging the nonsense with facts out weights ignoring the issue by dropping out. I don't recall spouting trash about your unless it is the kicks and giggles that you refer to. Its all harmless as you can see because you calling me an idiot doesn't bother me in the least. It is simply your favorite description for everyone pokes fun at you.

All of that for a *Yes*

All of that for a *No*

The State Attorney's office disagreed on the investigation information but that was prior to July 1, 2005. New laws closing any questions came into effect. I already sent you the legislation.

When did you move?

No, you choose to ignore the fact, as stated in the Statute, that if you enter into a contract for compensation, you are in the contracting business, which is the real issue, regardless of what the service is. You seem to want to hang your hat on the definition of what monitoring is and continue to ignore the fact that you are receiving compensation through your business activity of writing contracts. Is one that enters into contracts for compensation, not a "contractor"? You need to read the Statute in its entirety, put yourself or your business in each section and ask yourself truefully, "Does this pertain to my activity"? You will answer *Yes* to more than one section. Make sure you get the latest print of the Statute.

That you have been entering into contracts for compensation from a business location in Florida. Yes, I know.

As you interpet it. You obviously have read only one part of the Statute and Rules. I pointed this out to you many moons ago. I said then that I wasn't going to do your homework for you.

I didn't file one to begin with. Don't get so flustered.

Are you saying that I filed the complaint?

Only that the investigators were at your home at different times to never find you home and even talked with neighbors to find out about your where abouts or your return. It is hearsay but from the DBPR.

The investigator doesn't know since they only collect facts for the State Attorney office. The investigators don't know or are they expected to know every section of every statute they must deal with. It is not their job. They are investigating 61 different industries. That investigator could have been to a funeral home, then a veterinary office, then to an architects office, a land surveyors office and then three beauty shops before he got to you. It is not their job to find you guilty or innosent. And besides, your web pages were read prior to sending the investigator out and obviously, at least one State Attorney, found probable cause or they wouldn't have sent out an investigator for more information. You are probably lucky, guilty or innosent, there were questions between the State Attorneys about some interpetations. For all interested parties, did you receive anything saying your case was closed? A simple yes or no will do. Be careful, because I can get the right answer but out of professional courtesy, I'll let you give it. I don't want to be accused of spewing trash.

Reply to
Bob Worthy

You don't gotta list nuthin' with the BBB. They ain't no regulatory agency. He does have to file State Tax forms though...

Reply to
Frank Olson

Robert, speak of the past. My, my, my.

formatting link

Reply to
Joe #3

You refuse to tell everything about your past. You must be hiding something. Prove you're not.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Rants of a child

Reply to
Mark Leuck

Not in the least. I was responding to Olson. He was the previous poster. Perhaps a remedial course in Usenet would help you to understand threaded conversations.

I won't debate your age but your assertion that you don't engage in childish behavior online is a lie. That's like Sabodish pretending to be intelligent or Olson pretending to be... well, anything. Everyone knows it's not true.

Relaying? Care to be more specific?

The answer is quite clear. I wrote something but not what has been posted repeatedly in this newsgroup by an idiot from NJ, commonly known as the "MM". I make no effort to hide the facts. Many years ago I did some stupid things of which I am not at all proud. I paid dearly for those mistakes, nearly lost not only my freedom but my life as well. I learned from my mistakes, grew up and changed. What happened to you?

I also spent many years trying to help others turn from the same paths I once trod. That included volunteer work counseling chemically dependant young people, prisoners and street people. I was appointed to the board of directors of one of the more successful programs for drug addicts and alcoholics. I spent almost every Sunday for more than eight years counseling and preaching in prisons. On more than one occasion I had inmates released in my custody -- something of an accomplishment since ordinarily they would have been forbidden from associating with anyone with a previous conviction.

I also built and ran a small, modestly successful central station alarm company, protecting homes and businesses throughout CT and a few other states until I sold the business a few years ago. Among my clients were state and federal judges, several policemen and countless others.

Now my business is primarily focused on online sales of alarms, home automation, structured wiring, multi-room audio/video systems, intercoms and CCTV systems. I'm also part owner of a contract software development firm.

I think you meant to say "outweighs," but that is not true in this newsgroup. Most of the idiots, including several of your pals, prefer to accept any wild claims without even bothering to check them out. That's why your buddies made the absurd assertion that I murdered someone. They read third-grade trash from Sabodish and simply accepted it as fact, then repeated it in the bogus complaint to the SA.

That is also why the complaint was so easily seen by the investigator as nothing more than a personal attack. I showed him Sabodish's web site and Mugford's Usenet posts. It took less than 10 minutes for him to see your pals for the belligerent fools they are. End of investigation. Case closed. Care to play again?

Your idea of "kicks and giggles" might be somewhat different if you were on the receiving end. You behave like a schoolyard punk, joining a few loud-mouthed bullies because you haven't the integrity to stand up and say they're wrong. Then you try to excuse your repugnant behavior saying it's all just "innocent fun."

Bullshit! The SA sent an investigator. He found no evidence of wrongdoing, period. In his report he stated that there was no reason to continue.

The state law says nothing about contracts performed outside the state of Florida by third party monitoring facilities outside the state for customers outside the state. Our legislature, your BS notwithstanding, has neither an interest in nor the legal authority to regulate such services.

You and/or the rest of the IB have been claiming for years that I was about to be shut down, that my business is failing, [insert flame-of-the-week], etc. Yet I'm still here and my business is now the largest online security business in the state. I'll be doing the same thing and more of it until I retire in a few more years.

I didn't. Read the question and the answer again.

The statute governs contracting for services performed for structures located in Florida. Try reading the whole thing some time. I did. It's really quite clear on that. Read the definition of monitoring service. Read the exceptions. After you've done some real homework -- instead of posting BS about how you wrote the law and handed it to the legislature to sign it for you or whatever other drivel you like to spout -- come back and apologize to everyone who reads this newsgroup for your deliberate misrepresentations.

The real issue is the entire statute. If you ever read (and understood) the law you'd realize how absurd your position is. The other possibility is that you already know I'm right but you're lying.

So which is it? Are you ignorant or are you lying? It's a simple question. Give me your answer.

You're being absurd. The law defines monitoring as a service performed for structures in Florida. Services rendered outside of Florida are not covered under the law. You may wish it were different but it isn't. Your claim that "new laws" are coming is irrelevant.

I read the law before I opened business in Florida. A state investigator from the DBPR knows the law much better than you. He said I don't need a license. Case closed.


Also as the Florida DBPR interprets it. They seem to know the law better than you. Perhaps that's because they enforce the law every day.

Do you think that capitalizing the words, "statute" and "rules" makes your post look official?

Many moons ago? White man speak with forked tongue, Kimosabe.

No need. Just do your own. You have your assertions to back your claims. I have the decision of the DBPR to back mine. Remember the word, "outweigh" which you tried to use earlier?

I didn't say you had. Your involvement was limited to consultation with the other morons who did the deed. Don't forget I have a printout of their e-mails conversations with you.

It is hearsay, but not from the DBPR. It was a BS post from another of the idiots in ASA -- nothing more.

That's really too funny. He can't possibly know since he only deals in facts. Have you memorized "Animal Farm" or something?

Strangely enough, the State Attorney's office, after reviewing the *facts* collected by the investigator and comparing them to the absurd allegations by Mugford's pals, determined that you are wrong. Of course, that's only *fact* so feel free to ignore it.

How sad.

His dog died?

A building collapsed on his dog???

The dog was peeing on a construction site when the building came down? That must have been really shoddy work. Where is your permit for the job?

It was a show dog? What a complicated situation. Imagine the poor inspector trying to sort out veterinary bills, make funeral arrangements for poor Lassie and contend with all those phone calls from the newspapers and lawyers wanting to offer their services.

That explains everything. If his dog had lived he probably would have arrested Sabodish for advertising services (even though no contracts have ever been signed) in the state of Georgia (after all, they _are_ right next to Florida) and then stayed for some of my world-renowned burgers. After all that trauma he must have been exhausted. :)

They never find anyone innosent.

They found probably cause to investigate. Upon investigating they determined there was no evidence of wrongdoing so they closed the matter.

I don't know anyone who is innosent. My friends say I'm incredibly lucky. I figure it's mostly just hard work.

You keep saying that but there's nothing in the investigative report and nothing in the public documentation to support it. As best I can tell, you're either repeating BS from one of the other idiots or lying. I don't care which it is.

Read the state's web site.

You're joking, right?

Then stop doing so.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Why respond to me at all?? The "original poster" which I clearly indicated I quoted was Bob Worthy. Perhaps a remedial course in Usenet would help you to understand. I even included the Google link to the original post... Sheesh!!!

There you go again!!! Flaming me *again*, when all I've done is try to be helpful...

You don't understand what "relaying" means??

In other words a big "YES".

You mean like your "claiming" I'm a "counter clerk" and work for a "small distributor in Vancouver, B. C."??

Let's see... You were at the wheel of a car when you fell asleep and crashed. A young woman who was a passenger in the car was killed. You were directly responsible for her death. I'd suggest you look up the meaning of the word "murder".

Ummmm... Sure Robert...

Post the report.

But when you're providing a contractual service as an agent and collecting the fee *in Florida* for that service, you fall under the Statute. I note Bass Burglar Alarms no longer provides that service. Co-incidence ain't it?? You get investigated for unlicensed activity and conveniently decide that providing monitoring service is no longer worthwhile... How did you put it?? It's not the "profit center" you'd thought it would be (or words to that effect).

Heh... Bob never "claimed" anything of the sort. That's always been Sabodish. As for your being the "largest online security business in the state", I sincerely doubt that.

And filling this group (and others) with your invective, lies, and misleading comments...

How about your "deliberate misrepresentations"?? Your outrageous lies?? Personal attacks??

Heh... Sure...

Really?? You should read the Google link I supplied in its entirety... None of the "idiots in ASA" posted this.

So... You won't sue Sabodish because he's "judgement proof"... What about Mugford?? According to you he's not only abused his position on the board, he's used it to personally attack you... If there was *any* truth to your absurd allegation regarding his involvement... If you had copies of the emails that were exchanged between Bob, Norm, and others concerning you... then I'd suggest you contact your attorney and file suit... These guys have far more to lose than Sabodish...

Uh-huh... And I'd suggest "Rfreshing" your web page...

formatting link

That's "rfreshing".

Post the report then... How about the emails??

Reply to
Frank Olson

wow, congrat being the "largest online security business in the state" ... hm...

John S.


formatting link
The Largest Collection Of Free Online Books On Earth!

Reply to

Robert, did you write this? All these things happened to you?

formatting link
Yet I'm still here and my business is now the largest online security business in the state.You won't sell anything if your site keeps doing this.
formatting link
You won't be around too much longer and no one will buy product from you with this rating with the BBB.
formatting link
Wow, you have a lot of room for improvement. Joe #3

Reply to
Joe #3

You are the one who keeps bringing up the "fact" that the "testimony" was altered not me

Reply to
Mark Leuck

Careful, he'll go back to sleep mode if you get to close

Reply to
Mark Leuck Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.