pregnancy

pregnancy tests available at http://
www.earlypregnancytests4u.co.uk

Early Pregnancy Tests 4 U provide two types of dependable early-
detection pregnancy tests: the pregnancy test strip and the midstream
pregnancy test. We also provide Ovulation Tests allowing you to
predict when you ovulate. These also come in both the above types.
All
tests comply both to British standards and American FDA standards.


Our tests are upto five times more sensitive than the cheaper
versions
sold by high street chemist chains and stores. Thus allowing you to
find out if you are pregnant sooner with the pregnancy tests and to
pinpoint your ideal time to concieve with the ovulation tests.

On Mar 8, 10:48 pm, "davidrsalsbury"
<d...@earlypregnancytests4u.co.uk> wrote:
> pregnancy tests available at http://www.earlypregnancytests4u.co.uk
>
> Early Pregnancy Tests 4 U provide two types of dependable early-
> detection pregnancy tests: the pregnancy test strip and the midstream
> pregnancy test. We also provide Ovulation Tests allowing you to
> predict when you ovulate. These also come in both the above types.
> All
> tests comply both to British standards and American FDA standards.
>
> Our tests are upto five times more sensitive than the cheaper
> versions
> sold by high street chemist chains and stores. Thus allowing you to
> find out if you are pregnant sooner with the pregnancy tests and to
> pinpoint your ideal time to concieve with the ovulation tests.

Pregnancy test using broadband thats original, I could never CONCIEVE
of such a thing.

SB

"sb" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...

> Pregnancy test using broadband thats original, I could never CONCIEVE
> of such a thing.
>
> SB
>

Well of course not. The word does not exist ! 'CONCIEVE'

'i' before 'e' except after 'c'

Conceive..............

"davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:


>pregnancy t

<Pointless spam snipped>


but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:


(E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed)

(E-Mail Removed)


(E-Mail Removed)


(E-Mail Removed)

On Mar 8, 11:44 pm, "Geoff Marks" <private7...@nospam.net> wrote:
> "sb" <skanbus...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>
> > Pregnancy test using broadband thats original, I could never CONCIEVE
> > of such a thing.
>
> > SB
>
> Well of course not. The word does not exist ! 'CONCIEVE'
>
> 'i' before 'e' except after 'c'
>
> Conceive..............

Oh dear, I think you have got it (clue - read original post)

SB

"Anti Spammer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:
>
>
>>pregnancy t
>
> <Pointless spam snipped>
>
>
> but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:
>
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
>
> (E-Mail Removed)


I'm sorry. I missed that. Could you repeat it please?

(kim)

"kim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
> "Anti Spammer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:
>>
>>
>>>pregnancy t
>>
>> <Pointless spam snipped>
>>
>>
>> but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:
>>
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>>
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>
>
> I'm sorry. I missed that. Could you repeat it please?
>
> (kim)

Didn't he say

(E-Mail Removed)

or was it

(E-Mail Removed)

or

maybe

(E-Mail Removed)

dennis@home wrote:

>>> "davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>pregnancy t
>>>
>>> <Pointless spam snipped>
>>>
>>>
>>> but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:

I can understand your feelings but please reconsider this method of
retaliation. Deliberately feeding spambots makes *you* a spammer too. Sadly
it does not deter most spammers as they usually have adequate ways of
protecting themselves.

The cost is usually borne by innocent folks and already overburdened
mailservers. I guess you have yet to be a victim of your practice.

Ridiculing the original is often more effective. Google glues it to them
forever ;-)

Stuart

"Stuart" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:45f13512$0$2462$(E-Mail Removed)...
> dennis@home wrote:
>
>>>> "davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>pregnancy t
>>>>
>>>> <Pointless spam snipped>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:
>
> I can understand your feelings but please reconsider this method of
> retaliation. Deliberately feeding spambots makes *you* a spammer too.
> Sadly
> it does not deter most spammers as they usually have adequate ways of
> protecting themselves.
>
> The cost is usually borne by innocent folks and already overburdened
> mailservers. I guess you have yet to be a victim of your practice.
>
> Ridiculing the original is often more effective. Google glues it to them
> forever ;-)
>
> Stuart

I suppose I could just post (E-Mail Removed)

It's address is a bit odd..

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 23:56:53 +0000, [Anti Spammer] said :-

>"davidrsalsbury" the useless spammer wrote:
>
>
>>pregnancy t
>
><Pointless spam snipped>
>
>
>but here is an address for the spam bots as you love spam so much:
>

<pointless emails snipped>

Spam bots do not work that way, they do not look at posted bodies,
only the headers.