| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
29 Jan 2005 08:44:42 PM |
| Object: |
Christianity Fails Again |
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/26/oscar.passion/index.html
reveals that "Internet Christian soldiers are admitting defeat in their
battle to win a best picture Oscar nomination for "The Passion of the
Christ""
Apparently, praying for what they wanted was never considered. A clear
admission that they either have no faith or understand that (as Dan
Barker puts it) "nothing fails like a prayer".
Once again the Christians are forced to admit that this god of theirs
is useless and if they want anything done, they have to do it
themselves. So they did, and they failed in that, too.
Now instead of accepting it and sitting back with a glass of best vin
de c=E8ne, they're making whine from their sour grapes. Jennifer Giroux
(which is apprently French for "dimwit") blathers: "'Don't mess with us
because we will not consider your talent if you do anything that is
Christian,' is the message that's coming out [of Hollywood].".
Or maybe it was because the picture sucks, has no redeeming value, and
no one but a sick fanatic would delight in it anyway? Anyone who
mistakes torture for passion (even if it is purely ficitonal) needs
serious pychiatric help.
After all, it came only eighth in the list of all-time biggest
box-office draws (according to the article), and much of the income
that put it there was derived from sado-masochists who went to see it
more than once and from freebie tickets that churches and other such
groups used their tax free dollars to buy and distribute.
Only *eighth* in the list - in one of the most fanatically religious
nations on the planet. That ought to tell you something. Clearly if
there were a god who wanted this picture to be seen, we would have
known about it by now.
Besides, this list:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm
rates "Passion" as ninth, behind "Titanic", the first of each of the
two Star Wars trilogies, "Shrek 2", "E.T.", both Spider-Man movies, the
final LOTR movie. Clearly Christ is a *****-poor attraction, even
though the thought of seeing a worthless ***** like that suffer does
have some appeal.
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
30 Jan 2005 01:08:37 PM |
|
|
On 29 Jan 2005 12:44:42 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
30 Jan 2005 07:24:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:08:37 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:44:42 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
OK, we do not believe a god or gods exists.
Err.. that's it, there is nothing else left to discuss.
Like to talk about when electricity was discovered?
How about when man first learned to fly
Off topic I admit but it is more interesting that non-existent gods
don't ya know?
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
30 Jan 2005 10:23:17 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:24:16 +0000, Les Hellawell
<myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
OK, we do not believe a god or gods exists.
Ok. No skin off my back.
Err.. that's it, there is nothing else left to discuss.
That's pretty much an atheist's position - just say it, don't worry about it.
Like to talk about when electricity was discovered?
How about when man first learned to fly
Sure. Something factual for an atheist to chew on for a change.
Off topic I admit but it is more interesting that non-existent gods
don't ya know?
Not really, mine exists. Your's doesn't.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
30 Jan 2005 07:35:25 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:44:42 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
This from the liar who lies that he never lies and who, on December
18th, said: "End of conversation. I'll just talk about you, but not to
you" (http://tinyurl.com/6acnz)
This from the liar who offered me a discussion just a month ago, I
accepted, and he ran away!
This from the coward who demanded I start a global flood thread, which
I did, and he ran away.
This from the hypocrite who who insisted that he wouldn't discuss
religious matters with me again because I always whip his worthless
*****.
This from the hypocrite who has **RUN AWAY** from every single
discussion I've opened with him, particularly in thread "Running
Scriptural Circles Around Duke" started on Sep 27 2004
(http://tinyurl.com/3z47u), which was specifically to discuss
scriptural issues and Duck *****'s lie that he runs scriptural circles
round me. What happened? I ran scriptural circles around you, Duck
***** and you ran...AWAY as usual.
You have no idea what a discussion actually is. You think it's you
stating unsupported ***** and everyone else laying down, rolling
over, and agreeing with you. WRONG, *****. Get an education and
quit lying. Then I might give yout he time of day.
You're the Internet's biggest joke. Why would anyone take anything you
say seriously?
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
30 Jan 2005 10:29:32 PM |
|
|
On 30 Jan 2005 11:35:25 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
duke wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:44:42 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
This from the liar who lies that he never lies and who, on December
18th, said: "End of conversation. I'll just talk about you, but not to
you" (http://tinyurl.com/6acnz)
*****
No, your name is Puke.
End of conversation. I'll just talk about you, but not to you.
*****
Sorry, bud - you were just too crude to address me by my name. So I cut you
off.
This from the liar who offered me a discussion just a month ago, I
accepted, and he ran away!
Nope, you're still too crude to call me by my name.
This from the coward who demanded I start a global flood thread, which
I did, and he ran away.
Crude, bud, crude.
This from the hypocrite who who insisted that he wouldn't discuss
religious matters with me again because I always whip his worthless
*****.
But only in crude name calling.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
01 Feb 2005 07:38:49 AM |
|
|
PUKE wrote:
On 30 Jan 2005 11:35:25 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
duke wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:44:42 -0800, "Budikka666"
<budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
Hey, bud, how about a good discussion of Faith and God?
This from the liar who lies that he never lies and who, on December
18th, said: "End of conversation. I'll just talk about you, but not
to
you" (http://tinyurl.com/6acnz)
*****
No, your name is Puke.
End of conversation. I'll just talk about you, but not to y=ADou.
*****
Sorry, bud - you were just too crude to address me by my name.
Look at your hypocrisy. You calls me "bud" and then complain I don't
use your "name". What a chronic moron and hypocrite you are.
So I cut you off.
Thanks for confirming my point - that you said you wouldn't talk to me
any more, just about me (what could be more crude than that?) and now
you are disingenuously pretending you want to discuss religion. This
is proof you are a hypocrite and a liar. Thanks for admitting it.
You don't even know *how* to discuss something, so your offer was a lie
in itself.
BTW, "Duke" is not your name, so no matter what I call you, it's not
your name. Your name is Earl Webber. And as long as you're a lying,
cowardly hypocrite (all of which you've admitted), I'll call you what
you are, PUKE and Duck *****. Get it now, moron?
If you want me to address you by your screen handle, then quit lying,
quit running away from discussions and quit it with the chronic
hypocrisy. You're asking for respect, but I don't respect cowardly
lying hypocrites. Get it now?
This from the liar who offered me a discussion just a month ago, I
accepted, and he ran away!
Nope, you're still too crude to call me by my name.
Your name is coward. Thanks for admitting it - again.
This from the coward who demanded I start a global flood thread,
which
I did, and he ran away.
Crude, bud, crude.
Your name is coward. Thanks for admitting it - again.
This from the hypocrite who who insisted that he wouldn't discuss
religious matters with me again because I always whip his worthless
*****.
But only in crude name calling.
Like you've never called me names, you hypocrite. And name-calling is
nowhere near as bad as plainly and simply telling **LIES** about a
person. This you have also done repeatedly about me. Get off your
high horse, quit lying, dispense with your trademark cowardice and
hypocrisy, and maybe I'll grant you a discussion. Get it now?
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
01 Feb 2005 11:57:15 AM |
|
|
On 31 Jan 2005 23:38:49 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Sorry, bud - you were just too crude to address me by my name.
Look at your hypocrisy. You calls me "bud" and then complain I don't
use your "name". What a chronic moron and hypocrite you are.
Talk to me about that when you call me duke.
So I cut you off.
Thanks for confirming my point - that you said you wouldn't talk to me
any more, just about me (what could be more crude than that?) and now
you are disingenuously pretending you want to discuss religion. This
is proof you are a hypocrite and a liar. Thanks for admitting it.
You keep talking to me. But no discussion. There is no point. You have no
knowledge to discuss.
You don't even know *how* to discuss something, so your offer was a lie
in itself.
BTW, "Duke" is not your name, so no matter what I call you, it's not
your name. Your name is Earl Webber.
Sorry, bud, but you don't know my name.
And as long as you're a lying,
cowardly hypocrite (all of which you've admitted), I'll call you what
you are, PUKE and Duck *****. Get it now, moron?
Like I said, you are void of any knowledge to discuss.
If you want me to address you by your screen handle, then quit lying,
quit running away from discussions and quit it with the chronic
hypocrisy. You're asking for respect, but I don't respect cowardly
lying hypocrites. Get it now?
Like I said, you are void of any knowledge to discuss.
This from the liar who offered me a discussion just a month ago, I
accepted, and he ran away!
Nope, you're still too crude to call me by my name.
Your name is coward. Thanks for admitting it - again.
Like I said, you are void of any knowledge to discuss.
This from the coward who demanded I start a global flood thread,
which
I did, and he ran away.
Crude, bud, crude.
Your name is coward. Thanks for admitting it - again.
Like I said, you are void of any knowledge to discuss.
This from the hypocrite who who insisted that he wouldn't discuss
religious matters with me again because I always whip his worthless
*****.
But only in crude name calling.
Like you've never called me names, you hypocrite. And name-calling is
nowhere near as bad as plainly and simply telling **LIES** about a
person. This you have also done repeatedly about me. Get off your
high horse, quit lying, dispense with your trademark cowardice and
hypocrisy, and maybe I'll grant you a discussion. Get it now?
Like I said, you are void of any knowledge to discuss.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
01 Feb 2005 10:52:36 PM |
|
|
PUKE wrote:
You keep talking to me. But no discussion.
There is no point. You have no
knowledge to discuss.
50 unanswered questions prove you wrong - as usual.
A hundred threads from which you ran whimpering prove you wrong as
usual.
You cannot hide your catastrophic ignorance, your colossal
incompetence, your monumental impotence by piling ever more lies on top
of the ones already documented. You're a coward and a loser.
The reason you won't discuss matters, (apart from the documented fact
that you have absolutely no idea what a discussion is, and apart from
the documented fact that you cannot support a single claim you make) is
that you get your ***** kicked every time you try to take me on. This
was proven long before I started calling you names. The **REASON I
STARTED** calling you names was because of your cowardice, lies, and
incompetence. Go back and check the records, it will prove I'm right
and you're just a snivelling little coward with nothing but sour grapes
for lunch.
Rest of your baby whining trashed. Now go lick your wounds and think
of yet more lies and straw men to pile up because it is an absolute
fact of life that you cannot touch me or even come close when it comes
to actually opening a topic and prevailing in it. That much has been
proven in a hundred threads.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
02 Feb 2005 11:25:51 AM |
|
|
On 1 Feb 2005 14:52:36 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
50 unanswered questions prove you wrong - as usual.
A hundred threads from which you ran whimpering prove you wrong as
usual.
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted. And then your were all
downhill.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
03 Feb 2005 03:32:44 PM |
|
|
PUKE wrote:
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted.
The questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarised.
I have specifically told you this on many occasions.
I also specifically told you that you did not understand the comment I
made which is your only "evidence" supporting your lie.
I have proven the questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarized.
You've admitted that you lied.
Are you going to withdraw these comments and issue a public apology or
am I going to have to call my lawyer again?
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
03 Feb 2005 08:54:17 PM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
PUKE wrote:
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted.
The questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarised.
I have specifically told you this on many occasions.
I also specifically told you that you did not understand the comment I
made which is your only "evidence" supporting your lie.
I have proven the questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarized.
You've admitted that you lied.
Are you going to withdraw these comments and issue a public apology or
am I going to have to call my lawyer again?
Budikka
That would be fun.
Sue him and demand either $10,000.00 or a public apology and that he bring
his alleged priest friend on-line to comment on his posts.
I suspect you'd be up 10 grand after the court found him in contempt for not
paying it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
03 Feb 2005 11:29:26 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 20:54:17 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Are you going to withdraw these comments and issue a public apology or
am I going to have to call my lawyer again?
Budikka
That would be fun.
Sue him and demand either $10,000.00 or a public apology and that he bring
his alleged priest friend on-line to comment on his posts.
She would have to reveal who she stole her comments from.
I suspect you'd be up 10 grand after the court found him in contempt for not
paying it.
Remember, mikey, the word is that it'll be harder on Christians that fell than
non-Christians.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 11:04:07 AM |
|
|
PUKE wrote:
She would have to reveal who she stole her comments from.
EITHER SUPPORT YOUR LIE OR WITHDRAW IT. I WILL NOT TOLERATE YOU
SPREADING YOUR LIES ANY MORE. WITHDRAW OR GET YOUR LYING ***** SLAMMED
IN COURT. THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 12:38:48 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 20:54:17 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Are you going to withdraw these comments and issue a public apology
or am I going to have to call my lawyer again?
Budikka
That would be fun.
Sue him and demand either $10,000.00 or a public apology and that he
bring his alleged priest friend on-line to comment on his posts.
She would have to reveal who she stole her comments from.
You are the one who would be sued and all she would have to do is show what
she said. You would have to sue her if you thought that she "stole" her
comments.
That would be fun to watch also.
But you'd have to come out of your hiding place and you will not so that.
I suspect you'd be up 10 grand after the court found him in contempt
for not paying it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 11:54:18 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:38:48 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
She would have to reveal who she stole her comments from.
You are the one who would be sued and all she would have to do is show what
she said. You would have to sue her if you thought that she "stole" her
comments.
Who would she sue?
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
05 Feb 2005 01:42:59 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:38:48 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
She would have to reveal who she stole her comments from.
You are the one who would be sued and all she would have to do is
show what she said. You would have to sue her if you thought that
she "stole" her comments.
Who would she sue?
Nobody of any importance, except to himself. That is the "you" referred to
above.
Even if you are not the Earl Weber we think you are if you think you can
remain anonymous you are more ignorant than we think you are.
You slandered and have established a long trail of such actions.
It would be a slam dunk. If you could not afford a good attorney you would
loose and if you could afford a very good attorney it would be evidence
that you have deep pockets and juries like to take money from people like
you.
You would be like the spokesman for McDonalds in the spilled coffee case.
The jury initially though they were wasting their time and though the
woman's action was just plain stupid. After that arrogant ***** finished
testifying the jury turned on McDonalds and made the award.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
05 Feb 2005 04:40:47 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 01:42:59 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Who would she sue?
Nobody of any importance, except to himself. That is the "you" referred to
above.
Even if you are not the Earl Weber we think you are if you think you can
remain anonymous you are more ignorant than we think you are.
Haahaahaahaahaa.
You slandered and have established a long trail of such actions.
It would be a slam dunk. If you could not afford a good attorney you would
loose and if you could afford a very good attorney it would be evidence
that you have deep pockets and juries like to take money from people like
you.
Say what?
You would be like the spokesman for McDonalds in the spilled coffee case.
The jury initially though they were wasting their time and though the
woman's action was just plain stupid. After that arrogant ***** finished
testifying the jury turned on McDonalds and made the award.
They probably borrowed the OJ jury, the dummest jury in the history of the
world, nah, the universe. That jury was so dumb they couldn't even be told that
coffee at atmospheric conditions cannot possible exists at temperatures greater
than 212F, much less 300F+. And they bit just like at the OJ trial.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
07 Feb 2005 09:15:18 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
They probably borrowed the OJ jury, the dummest jury in the history
of the
world, nah, the universe. That jury was so dumb they couldn't even
be told that
coffee at atmospheric conditions cannot possible exists at
temperatures greater
than 212F, much less 300F+. And they bit just like at the OJ trial.
This from the hypocrite who thinks it possible that the entire world
flooded. Duck ***** will out.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
03 Feb 2005 11:27:40 PM |
|
|
On 3 Feb 2005 07:32:44 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted.
The questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarised.
I have specifically told you this on many occasions.
Nobody believes you. You previously admitted otherwise.
I also specifically told you that you did not understand the comment I
made which is your only "evidence" supporting your lie.
Say what?
I have proven the questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarized.
You've admitted that you lied.
Proven what?
Are you going to withdraw these comments and issue a public apology or
am I going to have to call my lawyer again?
Budikka
Haahaahaahaahaahaa.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 11:13:47 AM |
|
|
PUKE wrote:
Nobody believes you.
Nobody believes *you*. You're a documented liar.
You previously admitted otherwise.
This is also a lie. You've been informed of this many times and I've
proven it more than once.
Your lie that I admitted it is based on a predictable misunderstanding
of yours, and *nothing else*, and this has been epxlained to you many
times.
Your lie that I admitted it is not a defense in a court of law.
You are the one making the accusation. In court, **YOU** are the one
who will have to provide evidence to support your claim. Whining that
I admitted it, even if it *were* true, is not evidence of plagiarism.
You need to understand this. I've told you repeatedly to consult a
lawyer on this if you do not believe mem, because your misunderstand
will collapse on you like a ton of bricks in court. Your mindless
blather, ***** and lies approach will not stand up in a court of law
and you will not be able to run away to another court, like you
typically run away to another thread when your ***** is getting whipped
on Usenet. This is the real world, and you need to face it for once in
your life.
I also specifically told you that you did not understand the comment
I
made which is your only "evidence" supporting your lie.
Say what?
Obviously you don't understand that you'e so far out of your depth here
it's pathetic.
I have proven the questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarized.
You've admitted that you lied.
Proven what?
Er, that the questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarized. Can't
you read?
My lawyer has been called. You'll be hearing from me again on this
topic.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 12:34:37 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 07:32:44 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted.
The questions were neither borrowed nor plagiarised.
I have specifically told you this on many occasions.
Nobody believes you. You previously admitted otherwise.
Nobody is that stupid so this must be another lie.
I believe him and so will many others.
Your comments and opinions about me will not change that fact.
Others will support him and *NOBODY* will or ever has supported you Earl.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
02 Feb 2005 06:16:06 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 1 Feb 2005 14:52:36 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
50 unanswered questions prove you wrong - as usual.
A hundred threads from which you ran whimpering prove you wrong as
usual.
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted. And then your
were all downhill.
"was gutted"
"Your" what "were" downhill?
This man claims a university education.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 11:16:05 AM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
duke wrote:
On 1 Feb 2005 14:52:36 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
50 unanswered questions prove you wrong - as usual.
A hundred threads from which you ran whimpering prove you wrong as
usual.
The first of your "borrowed" questions were gutted. And then your
were all downhill.
"was gutted"
"Your" what "were" downhill?
This man claims a university education.
He claims to be a mechanical engineer. The mechanical I believe - as
in knee-jerk response mechnical. The engineer? Well he can engineer
lies - but they're pretty pathetic ones.
B.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
04 Feb 2005 11:57:00 PM |
|
|
On 4 Feb 2005 03:16:05 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
He claims to be a mechanical engineer. The mechanical I believe - as
in knee-jerk response mechnical. The engineer? Well he can engineer
lies - but they're pretty pathetic ones.
No lies, bud.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
05 Feb 2005 04:06:53 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
No lies, bud.
Over 16 documented lies prove you a liar. That's a fact. Keep
running, coward.
And I'm still waiitng for your apology - that is, if you want to prove
you're a christian.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
05 Feb 2005 04:42:07 PM |
|
|
On 4 Feb 2005 20:06:53 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Over 16 documented lies prove you a liar. That's a fact.
The facts is that you don't know the first thing about God or the bible, plabud.
And I'm still waiitng for your apology - that is, if you want to prove
you're a christian.
Budikka
I always tell the truth, plabud.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
06 Feb 2005 11:40:04 AM |
|
|
PUKE LIED:
On 4 Feb 2005 20:06:53 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
Over 16 documented lies prove you a liar. That's a fact.
The facts is that you don't know the first thing about God or the
bible, plabud.
I notice you haven't denied your sixteen lies. Instead, you try to
change the topic. That's an admission that you're a liar as well as a
coward. Now we have it in black and white.
I always tell the truth, plabud.
You want to prove it, I'll be happy to discuss plagiarism in a new
thread, you lying cowardly hypocrite. Then we'll see who's telling the
truth and whose lying. Meanwhile, expect to hear from my lawyer if
that apology doesn't get posted by the end of this month. Your time is
running out. Judgement is coming down on you and it's going to hit you
so hard you won't know what era it is.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity Fails Again |
06 Feb 2005 07:33:37 PM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
PUKE LIED:
On 4 Feb 2005 20:06:53 -0800, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
Over 16 documented lies prove you a liar. That's a fact.
The facts is that you don't know the first thing about God or the
bible, plabud.
I notice you haven't denied your sixteen lies. Instead, you try to
change the topic. That's an admission that you're a liar as well as a
coward. Now we have it in black and white.
I always tell the truth, plabud.
You want to prove it, I'll be happy to discuss plagiarism in a new
thread, you lying cowardly hypocrite. Then we'll see who's telling
the truth and whose lying. Meanwhile, expect to hear from my lawyer
if that apology doesn't get posted by the end of this month. Your
time is running out. Judgement is coming down on you and it's going
to hit you so hard you won't know what era it is.
Budikka
Someone identifies you as Earl Weber of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, but you
insist
your name is "duke lebourgeois." Since we are on Usenet, and that is the
identity you have assumed, you haven't lied.
Alan discovers certain details concerning an Earl Weber of Baton Rouge,
Louisiana -- using techniques freely available to anyone who knows his way
about the internet. He posts some of those details. Since they are
deliberately incomplete, they are not enough to allow a passing psychopath
to send a letter bomb to this Earl Weber of Baton Rouge. But you take
umbrage, as if the incomplete personal details could, somehow, have an
impact on /your/ existence.Again, you haven't lied.
Perhaps you are merely voicing your concern over the privacy and safety of
Earl Weber of Baton Rouge. This seems uncharacteristically altruistic of
you, but stranger things have happened.
Alan poses a rhetorical question: Should he provide the credit history of
this Earl Weber of Baton Rouge?
"duke lebourgeois" responds as if he has just been the recipient of a
personal
threat. And still you haven't lied.
4/23/04. Duke has changed ISP's again.
His new email name is duckgumbo. Gumbo is pretty much a southern thing. His
new ISP is cox.com and they offer service in Baton Rouge....
EARL J WEBER
1**** ********* Ave
BATON ROUGE, LA 70816
225-***-****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
