Amber Frey is getting married today!!!!

Amber Frey is getting married today!!!!

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Mz_Luzer

Opelousas, LA

#2 Jul 5, 2006
heScaught wrote:
Wooohoooo!!!!
Amber is getting married today!
Congratulations to Amber, I wish her many years of married bliss. If any one DESERVES to be happy, it's Amber!
From People...
Amber Frey, Scott Peterson's former mistress and a key witness in his prosecution, will wed Robert Hernandez today, PEOPLE has learned exclusively.
"Amber Frey will be married today to Robert Hernandez," Frey's attorney, Gloria Allred, tells PEOPLE. "Mr. Hernandez works in law enforcement. The couple will be married in California and are very happy. They plan to live in the Fresno area."
http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,...
more at link.
Let's see. Beach<wink>? Topix Forums Ad Nauseum? People Magazine? Juvenile Rants? He's a real winner ladies. Grab em before he becomes someone else! ROFLMBAHO
Mz_Luzer

Opelousas, LA

#6 Jul 6, 2006
heScaught wrote:
<quoted text>
Please do Mz_E, if it's in the local's, please do. Actually, if there's a nice piece in the paper, would you pick me up a copy? Hang on to it until we do our weekend thing and I'll get it from you then!
Yes, that young woman certainly does deserve this happiness! Did you see the picture from the People article? She looked absolutely stunningly gorgeous. She's marrying a man that's in law enforcement!!!! I'm so glad she's found herself a NICE young man. I do hope that they will have another baby to complete their family.
Ya know Mz_E, Amber's nuptuals are going to get some of those jealous NG's all bent out of shape and that just makes me THAT much happier for Ambie! Yaaaaayyy Ambie, you ROCK girl!
This is the BEST news I've heard this week... and was only Wednesday when I heard it! I wonder if we could send a card of Congratulations to Amber, c/o Ms. Alred???
WooooooHoooooo, cheer go up for Amber!!!!
Sweetie, all we have to do is google it. Haven't you figured out how?
Mz_Luzer

Opelousas, LA

#7 Jul 6, 2006
heScaught wrote:
<quoted text>
We ALL see...
Swamp beast creature on the net <while big momma's boyz are out in the swamp doing that DELIVERANCE thayng on unsuspecting swamp tourists>
Big momma at home waiting for them boyz a hers to bring her home a new set of SLIGHTLY used dentures. Just creamin' her panties at the thought of having some teeth to chuff those rinds with.
Topix where the swamp stench permeates the entire cyber world.
The swamp creature that wears fugly Mary Janes, and prolly smokes maryjane too.
It wears stupid hats to makes even stupider posts...
Yep, you're a real swamp beast a'ight.
No wonder no one wants your scaled old butt. It's NO wonder them boyz o' your'n prefer the sound of them tourist's squealing like little piggies over the sound of yer bellowin'.
You really are a HOPELESS creature.
Why am I not shocked to see our "beach bum" to have the first post of the morning in this forum? uuummmmm Live on the "beach".
Beach = internet forums.
LOL
Mz_Luzer

Opelousas, LA

#12 Jul 6, 2006
heScaught wrote:
ASS you really should compose yourself before you post so you're able to say everything you want to say in 1 post. Otherwise, you're going to make Mz_Eula jealous with your quoting my posts twice.
You're not uh, <puking at the thought> coming on to me are you ASS???
Really, just look at the most recent 3 posts on this forum - all from you NoBrainScaught. Speak with consistency. LOL
taylor

AOL

#14 Jul 6, 2006
Let's see here.... We have a group of people who know each other very well, like family almost - Mz_Eula, heSnaught, Son & USAhick. They frequently get together, with their families in tow, for weekend shin digs and trips to Disneyland. YET, they didn't even know each others email addresses when they happened to "meet" up here in the SP forums. THEN, instead of calling each other on the phone (most friends who vacation together know each others phone number) they exchange email addresses here in a public forum. Sounds kind of fishy to me. Something isn't on the up and up. Eunice, help me out here, is this what you would refer to as a "bitchslap" or a "pack of lies"?
taylor

AOL

#15 Jul 6, 2006
heScaught wrote:
<quoted text>
Me speak with consistency...
You speak with forked tongue.
heScaught, do you fancy yourself a prancer?
Mz_Luzer

Opelousas, LA

#19 Jul 6, 2006
taylor wrote:
Let's see here.... We have a group of people who know each other very well, like family almost - Mz_Eula, heSnaught, Son & USAhick. They frequently get together, with their families in tow, for weekend shin digs and trips to Disneyland. YET, they didn't even know each others email addresses when they happened to "meet" up here in the SP forums. THEN, instead of calling each other on the phone (most friends who vacation together know each others phone number) they exchange email addresses here in a public forum. Sounds kind of fishy to me. Something isn't on the up and up. Eunice, help me out here, is this what you would refer to as a "bitchslap" or a "pack of lies"?
You make those points very well. Nothing more necessary to say except that you have bitchslapped "them" well. BAM!
taylor

AOL

#20 Jul 6, 2006
heScaught wrote:
<quoted text>
no more than you fancy yourself an intellect...
another dumb question from the teetlor...
Let's play a word association game. I'll say a word or phrase and you tell me the first thing that comes to mind.....

Avon lady
Mz_Eula

United States

#23 Jul 12, 2006
KellBell wrote:
<quoted text>
OH! OH! OH! I've got it!!!!! If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has down on it's azz....it must be heScaught!!!!!!!
There now. Your thread is at the forefront and not buried where no one can see it. Hmmmm only 21 responses including this one.
Let me guess, Sr. Kell ... your strong point is math.
Nancy

United States

#25 Jul 12, 2006
heScaught wrote:
<quoted text>
Naw, Mz_E, it's not math....
Sister Kellbellia's strong point is infringing on others right to free speech.
Your confusing free speech with right to offend
taylor

AOL

#26 Jul 12, 2006
Pointing out something you may not have considered before exercising your right to free speech, since we're getting technical here. The phrase freedom of speech implies that you can say whatever you like whenever you like but that simply is not the case. There are still restrictions / regulations on speech. That's not to say that everyone agrees with, abides by them or doesn't challenge them once in a while, but the fact is they DO exist and are there for a reason, whether anyone agrees with them or not. And, although "I" agree with Eula to an extent that words are nothing more than what a person makes of them I also realize there are plenty of other people who would completely disagree with that statement. I DON'T however agree that "freedom of speech" is an acceptable excuse for generally behaving in a p*ss poor manner. I would suggest familiarizing yourself with the first amendment and to not rely on someone else's (even if from the outside they appear to be intelligent) interpretation. What's that old saying about the "blind leading the blind"?
Mz_Eula

United States

#27 Jul 12, 2006
Nancy wrote:
<quoted text>
Your confusing free speech with right to offend
Are you completely incapable of understanding anything?

Any "offensive" comment is ONLY offensive if it's interpreted as being so. Our individuals belief systems (culturalizations) determine that, unless we develop enough mental autonomy to become broader minded.
taylor

AOL

#28 Jul 12, 2006
Mz_Eula wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you completely incapable of understanding anything?
Any "offensive" comment is ONLY offensive if it's interpreted as being so. Our individuals belief systems (culturalizations) determine that, unless we develop enough mental autonomy to become broader minded.
OH hey! I think you might be onto something here. Maybe we could start on a small scale - children. We could teach them that it's ok to greet people by calling them mofo's. If they learn at an early age that it's "ONLY offensive if it's interpreted as being so" then it will help them to develop "broader" minds. It wouldn't be the kids fault if their kindergarten teacher took offense to being called a mofo, after all it's a word - nothing more than pulses of air. What the hell's wrong with these people anyway? You can't even paint a gigantic swastika on your house without someone acting all offended over it. They just need to grow up.
Mz_Eula

United States

#29 Jul 12, 2006
taylor wrote:
There are still restrictions / regulations on speech. That's not to say that everyone agrees with, abides by them or doesn't challenge them once in a while, but the fact is they DO exist and are there for a reason, whether anyone agrees with them or not. And, although "I" agree with Eula to an extent that words are nothing more than what a person makes of them I also realize there are plenty of other people who would completely disagree with that statement. I DON'T however agree that "freedom of speech" is an acceptable excuse for generally behaving in a p*ss poor manner. I would suggest familiarizing yourself with the first amendment and to not rely on someone else's (even if from the outside they appear to be intelligent) interpretation. What's that old saying about the "blind leading the blind"?
What ARE the restrictions and regulations on freedom of speech? Do you know that, for a fact, teetlor?

Further, if there ARE people who disagree that words are only what we
interpret them to be, then how can those very people communicate via verbal communication (speech) WIHTOUT realizing that meanings of words are given and not inherent? Thus, since word meanings are GIVEN and not inherent, then anyone using verbal communication (language) as a mode of communication will already understand that said person's verbage will be based on common understandings of meaning for each "word."
taylor

AOL

#30 Jul 12, 2006
Mz_Eula wrote:
<quoted text>
Further, if there ARE people who disagree that words are only what we
interpret them to be, then how can those very people communicate via verbal communication (speech) WIHTOUT realizing that meanings of words are given and not inherent? Thus, since word meanings are GIVEN and not inherent, then anyone using verbal communication (language) as a mode of communication will already understand that said person's verbage will be based on common understandings of meaning for each "word."
And any person who communicates with others knows that the "common" meanings of certain words are negative and are apt to (eventually if not immediately) provoke a negative response from the reader or listener. Of course sometimes this tactic is intentionally used to get desired results, as in the case of a cyberpath. I'm sure there are other instances where it is used productively... let me get back with you on that.
USAHICK

AOL

#31 Jul 12, 2006
taylor wrote:
<quoted text>
And any person who communicates with others knows that the "common" meanings of certain words are negative and are apt to (eventually if not immediately) provoke a negative response from the reader or listener. Of course sometimes this tactic is intentionally used to get desired results, as in the case of a cyberpath. I'm sure there are other instances where it is used productively... let me get back with you on that.
Take your time......
Mz_Eula

United States

#32 Jul 12, 2006
Nancy wrote:
<quoted text>
Your confusing free speech with right to offend
Offense - something with subjective meaning. Anyone who is offended by anything is only offended because of her/his own belief system.

It's not a hard concept to grasp.
USAHICK

AOL

#33 Jul 12, 2006
Mz_Eula wrote:
<quoted text>
Offense - something with subjective meaning. Anyone who is offended by anything is only offended because of her/his own belief system.
It's not a hard concept to grasp.
I wonder why Nancy is offended? I'm very sorry. I wish I could help. I probably can't though.
Nancy

United States

#35 Jul 13, 2006
Mz_Eula wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you completely incapable of understanding anything?
Any "offensive" comment is ONLY offensive if it's interpreted as being so. Our individuals belief systems (culturalizations) determine that, unless we develop enough mental autonomy to become broader minded.
This statement is only your own opinion, your INTERPRETATION that's what I understand
Nancy

United States

#36 Jul 13, 2006
Mz_Eula wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you completely incapable of understanding anything?
Any "offensive" comment is ONLY offensive if it's interpreted as being so. Our individuals belief systems (culturalizations) determine that, unless we develop enough mental autonomy to become broader minded.
The english language is made so one person understands what another person is saying, and what is their intent.....each word is not open for interpretation, or just SOUNDS coming out of your mouth,(like if I wanted a drink, I would walk in a bar and what....ring a bell?) unless your a dog or a cat....I can say to my cat....oh aren't you just an ugly little puke, and he surely does not know what I'm saying, and he was not meant to. He is not a human

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Scott Peterson Trial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News David Temple 48 Hours Mystery (Dec '08) Aug 8 Teresa 103
I don't think Scott did this (May '09) Jun '15 dobby 7
News Scott Peterson family asking for donations (Jul '09) Apr '15 tom wingo 64
Scott Peterson's email address in prison (Oct '07) Apr '15 Tamara 97
News Jodi Arias (Jun '13) Mar '15 Jinx 6
News Laci's mom outraged over Scott Peterson's blog (Jul '08) Aug '14 Stedenko 3,068
News Sandusky Trial: TV Legal Analyst Beth Karas Say... (Jun '12) Jul '14 dutfan 2
More from around the web