| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
13 Jun 2005 04:43:39 PM |
| Object: |
Earl J. Weber Running Scared!! |
On June 7th in thread "Why There Is no God - Parts 156-170 - The Why
Edition" in a.a. at 6:38pm (http://tinyurl.com/d3ubb) Earl Weber said,
"Pick one subject line on the bible or God, as I've offered to you many
times, and we will talk again. Why are you so afraid of discussion,
bud?"
Earl loves to prove himself a liar. Here he is lying about engaging in
discussion when the truth is that for over a year he's run from every
discussion I've offered him. Even more hilariously, he's also run form
every signle time I've accepted one of his challenges!
The most recent one was *precisely* what he asked for: one subject line
on the bible or God. Here's the offer I've been making him since April
30th (a week *before* he told his lie above):
"Let's discuss the issue of what God thinks of libel. Let's discuss
what God would think of someone who made false accusations of
plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would constitute
what's legally required to substantiate true accusations. Are you up
for it?"
Clearly Earl isn't up for anything. As usual, he's running away from a
challenge while lying through his teeth that it's the challenger who's
running! I've offered him variations on this challenge **AT LEAST 40
TIMES** since April 30th, and he's run away every time. No surprises
there.
But why would he run away, you ask? He has no choice. The reason he
runs so fast and so far is that if he engaged in this particular
discussion it would provide yet mroe proof of what a lousy liar he is.
In order to desperately try to hide his phenomenal cowardice, he has to
lie even about his lies. But then that is what he does best.
And this is the lying liar who lies that he never lies in his messages
on Usenet!
Now we can all see how cowardly and hypocritical he truly is.
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 07:25:37 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 02:22:11 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Tom wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:24rbb1pqjahf78nef04rltucdcg8vod1jt@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:44:42 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Because I never lie on the ng. And bud the dud knows it, and
hates it.
*****!
No, it's true, son of dud.
You're lying now Puke.
Nope, it's very true, son of dud.
Is this an assurance like the fact that the military didn't use
millimeters in 1965? I think we know the liar here and you are
putting on a first class show.
The military had these here guns in 1965 and them there bullets they shooted
were in that commie measurement.
It goes farther back than that.
In WWII, The British, and I believe, American, troops, were issued with a new
weapon, called a "Sten".( Later to become the "Sterling" SMG)
It was essentially, a simplified German Spudna(sp) .
It was inaccurate, and unstable. One of it's worst features, was an unfortunate
tendency for the trigger mechanism to jamb, if the weapon was dropped, or
knocked too hard, and it would fire off it's whole magazine, without a hand
being on it.
However, what it WOULD do, was use all that 9mm ammo that the allies were
capturing
It is always useful, when fighting a war on your enemy's territory, and faced
with poor to nonexistent, supply lines, to be able to use your enemy's own
ammunition, and equipment
I think that by that time they had switched to meters from yards for
targeting also.
The real puzzle is that it didn't happen sooner.
Every one that America was liable to fight with, (CCCP) used the metric system,
and calibrated their weapons that way.
It was inevitable, that both British and American military, would change to the
metric system.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling, Like any opinion stated here,
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 06:08:41 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 02:22:11 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Tom wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:24rbb1pqjahf78nef04rltucdcg8vod1jt@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:44:42 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Because I never lie on the ng. And bud the dud knows it, and
hates it.
*****!
No, it's true, son of dud.
You're lying now Puke.
Nope, it's very true, son of dud.
Is this an assurance like the fact that the military didn't use
millimeters in 1965? I think we know the liar here and you are
putting on a first class show.
The military had these here guns in 1965 and them there bullets they shooted
were in that commie measurement.
I think that by that time they had switched to meters from yards for
targeting also.
Not in my engineering field.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 08:14:24 AM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:bt8db1trj06i3ui11chp9878s2tptv7c7h@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 02:22:11 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Tom wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:24rbb1pqjahf78nef04rltucdcg8vod1jt@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:44:42 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Because I never lie on the ng. And bud the dud knows it, and
hates it.
*****!
No, it's true, son of dud.
You're lying now Puke.
Nope, it's very true, son of dud.
Is this an assurance like the fact that the military didn't use
millimeters in 1965? I think we know the liar here and you are
putting on a first class show.
The military had these here guns in 1965 and them there bullets they
shooted
were in that commie measurement.
I think that by that time they had switched to meters from yards for
targeting also.
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 05:49:04 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 06:30:03 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1uheb19p2soshbc6ttem7u09r53bci6pet@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
Sure you did Earl, must have been nice not to have to serve in the military.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 05:55:59 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:30:03 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1uheb19p2soshbc6ttem7u09r53bci6pet@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
Sure you did Earl, must have been nice not to have to serve in the military.
Did what my country told me to do, son of dud.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 07:43:03 AM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:fhsfb1doh59cfhi3fortvjibd83qp6h135@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:30:03 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1uheb19p2soshbc6ttem7u09r53bci6pet@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
Sure you did Earl, must have been nice not to have to serve in the
military.
Did what my country told me to do, son of dud.
Yeah, you're such a patriotic *****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 05:07:34 PM |
|
|
Chicken Gumbo Lied:
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Calling Jesus a liar now? I knew you'd come around to our point of
view eventually. Let's face it, you've gone so far wrong that you're
in danger of starting to head back towards right again, so this
admission is inevitable. Maybe at some point you'll stop telling lies!
What a red letter day that will be!
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
20 Jun 2005 06:33:48 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> drained
his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 05:57:07 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:33:48 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> drained
his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
Do you have a need to know?
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 07:43:47 AM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:aisfb11ph3pinbimknarobnjve2p169kfq@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:33:48 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> drained
his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
Do you have a need to know?
He probably designed Tonka tanks :-).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 11:33:22 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 05:57:07 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> drained
his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:33:48 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> drained
his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
Do you have a need to know?
Yes, I do. I'm waiting for you to back up a single claim of yours in
this group.
1. Where did you attend college?
2. What is your degree in?
3. For whom did you work during the Vietnam era?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 08:29:48 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:33:48 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and
drunkenly proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
Do you have a need to know?
Earl is afraid to answer questions like that, just as he is afraid to tell
anybody where he went to school because of what I may do with the
information. (his words)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
21 Jun 2005 08:35:45 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
news:ga3ue.31709$J12.10527@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com:
duke wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:33:48 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:49:04 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and
drunkenly proclaimed the following
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 09:14:24 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Not in my engineering field.
Then you weren't in much of an engineering field,were you Earl?
Made weapons of war, son of dud.
What specific systems?
Do you have a need to know?
Earl is afraid to answer questions like that, just as he is afraid to
tell anybody where he went to school because of what I may do with the
information. (his words)
Like confirm what a liar, cheat, coward and moron he is?
I worked for the DoD designing weapons in the early 80's myself. I had a
security clearance (only "secret", not "top secret"). I can say where I
worked and very roughly what I worked on. I *know* dook is a lying
coward.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
"Only Sheep need a shepherd!"
-- unknown
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
23 Jun 2005 05:11:03 AM |
|
|
On 22 Jun 2005 01:35:45 GMT, Enkidu the Atheist <Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com>
wrote:
Earl is afraid to answer questions like that, just as he is afraid to
tell anybody where he went to school because of what I may do with the
information. (his words)
Like confirm what a liar, cheat, coward and moron he is?
I worked for the DoD designing weapons in the early 80's myself. I had a
security clearance (only "secret", not "top secret"). I can say where I
worked and very roughly what I worked on. I *know* dook is a lying
coward.
Only "secret"?
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
23 Jun 2005 04:15:18 PM |
|
|
Chicken Gumbo Lied:
Only "secret"?
Your cowardice, lies, and hypocrisy is no secret at all.
So hey, Chick, let's discuss the issue of of what God thinks of libel.
Let's discuss what God would think of someone who made false
accusations of plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would
constitute what's legally required to substantiate true accusations.
Are you up for it?
You begged me for it, You told me repeatedly how much you wanted it.
Now I'm giving it to you, you can't take it, can you? No surprises
there.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
28 Jun 2005 04:24:08 PM |
|
|
Chicken Gumby Lied:
On 22 Jun 2005 01:35:45 GMT, Enkidu the Atheist <Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com>
wrote:
Earl is afraid to answer questions like that, just as he is afraid to
tell anybody where he went to school because of what I may do with the
information. (his words)
Like confirm what a liar, cheat, coward and moron he is?
I worked for the DoD designing weapons in the early 80's myself. I had a
security clearance (only "secret", not "top secret"). I can say where I
worked and very roughly what I worked on. I *know* dook is a lying
coward.
Only "secret"?
It's no secret that I'm still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up
with the latest two in a long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Are you going to **LIE** that I plagiarised these as well, just so you
have a fake excuse for your cowardice in addressing them?
#1 is from the Weber Intelligence Test Series. The series is stalled
at question #1 because you couldn't even answer that. The only
conclusion we can offer is that you lost your WITS:
Consider the case of a true Christian. This Christian believes in god
without any shadow of a doubt. Out of curiosity, this Christian reads
a book which claims there is no god. This Christian has a friend who
asks the Christian what she is reading. She responds, "This book
insists there is no god."
Is the Christian insisting there is no god, or is the Christian merely
reporting that the book insists there is no god?
Now let's put that exact scenario into the A/B choice I originally gave
you:
1. The Christian insisted there is no god.
2. The Christian said the book insisted there is no god.
Answer the following question:
Are propositions 1 and 2 above
A. Different ways of saying precisely the same thing, or
B. Saying two different things
Select either only A or only B as your answer and tell me which of the
two you have chosen.
Or:
This is the discussion *you* demanded I start. I started it and **YOU
RAN AWAY** 160+ times:
Let's discuss the issue of what God thinks of libel. Let's discuss
what God would think of someone who made false accusations of
plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would constitute
what's legally required to substantiate true accusations.
If you don't understand the two questions, it's okay to ask for help.
Or you can just run away like you always do.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
28 Jun 2005 04:59:42 AM |
|
|
Still waiting on you finding the guts. Now it's *two* questions you've
run from lately. See how these things are multiplied by your
cowardice?
Consider the case of a true Christian. This Christian believes in god
without any shadow of a doubt. Out of curiosity, this Christian reads
a book which claims there is no god. This Christian has a friend who
asks the Christian what she is reading. She responds, "This book
insists there is no god."
Is the Christian insisting there is no god, or is the Christian merely
reporting that the book insists there is no god?
Now let's put that exact scenario into the A/B choice I originally gave
you:
1. The Christian insisted there is no god.
2. The Christian said the book insisted there is no god.
Answer the following question:
Are propositions 1 and 2 above
A. Different ways of saying precisely the same thing, or
B. Saying two different things
Select either only A or only B as your answer and tell me which of the
two you have chosen.
Or:
Let's discuss the issue of what God thinks of libel. Let's discuss
what God would think of someone who made false accusations of
plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would constitute
what's legally required to substantiate true accusations.
If you don't understand the two, it's okay to ask for help.
Or you can just run away like you have done over 160 times already.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
01 Jul 2005 06:57:45 PM |
|
|
Still waiting on you finding the guts. Now it's *two* questions you've
run from lately. See how these things are multiplied by your
cowardice?
Consider the case of a true Christian. This Christian believes in god
without any shadow of a doubt. Out of curiosity, this Christian reads
a book which claims there is no god. This Christian has a friend who
asks the Christian what she is reading. She responds, "This book
insists there is no god."
Is the Christian insisting there is no god, or is the Christian merely
reporting that the book insists there is no god?
Now let's put that exact scenario into the A/B choice I originally gave
you:
1. The Christian insisted there is no god.
2. The Christian said the book insisted there is no god.
Answer the following question:
Are propositions 1 and 2 above
A. Different ways of saying precisely the same thing, or
B. Saying two different things
Select either only A or only B as your answer and tell me which of the
two you have chosen.
Or:
Let's discuss the issue of what God thinks of libel. Let's discuss
what God would think of someone who made false accusations of
plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would constitute
what's legally required to substantiate true accusations.
If you don't understand the two, it's okay to ask for help.
Or you can just run away like you have done over 160 times already.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 12:52:10 PM |
|
|
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions. Are you going to
**LIE** that I plagiarised these as well, just so you have a fake
excuse for your cowardice in addressing them?
#1 is from the Weber Intelligence Test Series. The series is stalled
at question #1 because you're so scared of me that you daren't answer
in the format requested. The only conclusion you leave us is that you
lost your WITS:
Consider the case of a true Christian. This Christian believes in god
without any shadow of a doubt. Out of curiosity, this Christian reads
a book which claims there is no god (It's called "Why I am not a
Christian" By Bertrand Russell, BTW). This Christian has a friend who
asks the Christian what she is reading. She responds, "This book
insists there is no god."
Is the Christian insisting there is no god, or is the Christian merely
reporting that the book insists there is no god?
Now let's put that exact scenario into the A/B choice I originally gave
you:
1. The Christian insisted there is no god.
2. The Christian said the book insisted there is no god.
Answer the following question:
Are propositions 1 and 2 above
A. Different ways of saying precisely the same thing, or
B. Saying two different things
Select either only option A or only option B as your answer and tell me
which of the two you have chosen.
Or:
This is the discussion *you* demanded I start. I started it and **YOU
RAN AWAY** 160+ times:
Let's discuss the issue of what God thinks of libel. Let's discuss
what God would think of someone who made false accusations of
plagiarism and let's discuss what God might think would constitute
what's legally required to substantiate true accusations.
If you don't understand the two questions, it's okay to ask for help.
Or you can just run away like you always do.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 12:54:34 PM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever
gets through.
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one. I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Katt" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 04:17:34 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:uJeye.9990$H64.7210@trnddc07...
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever gets
through.
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one. I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
I have to agree, DanielSan: when Budikka writes on any other issue the
result is *rivetingly fascinating*. This 'duke' is a waste of her time and
talent -- and, indeed, he probably sees his ability to waste her time as
*his contribution to the 'cause'*...!
Katt.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 07:50:47 PM |
|
|
"Katt" <workcomputer@dfhu.net> wrote in message
news:OHhye.26401$%O1.14959@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:uJeye.9990$H64.7210@trnddc07...
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever
gets
through.
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one. I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
I have to agree, DanielSan: when Budikka writes on any other issue the
result is *rivetingly fascinating*. This 'duke' is a waste of her time and
talent -- and, indeed, he probably sees his ability to waste her time as
*his contribution to the 'cause'*...!
Katt.
Budikka is male.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Katt" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 10:13:45 PM |
|
|
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:LtqdndBnaabCRFTfRVn-qA@comcast.com...
Budikka is male.
Really?!? Someone so clever and well-informed and fearless and logical is
.... *male*...??? Are you *sure*..?!?
*Wow*!!
:-)
Katt.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
04 Jul 2005 10:36:01 PM |
|
|
"Katt" <workcomputer@dfhu.net> wrote in message
news:JVmye.15778$iT1.13610@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:LtqdndBnaabCRFTfRVn-qA@comcast.com...
Budikka is male.
Really?!? Someone so clever and well-informed and fearless and logical is
... *male*...??? Are you *sure*..?!?
*Wow*!!
:-)
Katt.
Yep. Unless he'sbeen misleading us all these years - which
I seriously doubt. They do happen... occasionally (down,
guys. I'm just kidding.)
Mickey
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
05 Jul 2005 06:56:18 PM |
|
|
Michelle Malkin wrote:
"Katt" <workcomputer@dfhu.net> wrote in message
news:JVmye.15778$iT1.13610@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:LtqdndBnaabCRFTfRVn-qA@comcast.com...
Budikka is male.
Really?!? Someone so clever and well-informed and fearless and logical is
... *male*...??? Are you *sure*..?!?
*Wow*!!
:-)
Katt.
Yep. Unless he'sbeen misleading us all these years - which
I seriously doubt. They do happen... occasionally (down,
guys. I'm just kidding.)
Mickey
Mickey, you of all people ought to understand that gender is
immaterial, especially online. Besides, if I *am* male, why spoil the
joke on Duke's complete cluelessness?
B.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
05 Jul 2005 07:30:19 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <JVmye.15778$iT1.13610@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, Katt
pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare proclaimed:
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:LtqdndBnaabCRFTfRVn-qA@comcast.com...
Budikka is male.
Really?!? Someone so clever and well-informed and fearless and logical is
... *male*...??? Are you *sure*..?!?
*Wow*!!
:-)
Hey!
Guys, I think we've been insulted!
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
05 Jul 2005 07:29:51 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <OHhye.26401$%O1.14959@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, Katt
pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare proclaimed:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:uJeye.9990$H64.7210@trnddc07...
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever
gets through.
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one. I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
I have to agree, DanielSan: when Budikka writes on any other issue the
result is *rivetingly fascinating*. This 'duke' is a waste of her time and
talent -- and, indeed, he probably sees his ability to waste her time as
*his contribution to the 'cause'*...!
Maybe so but sometimes people need a diversion. I, myself, toy with trolls
around here when I'm stressed and not up to anything serious...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
05 Jul 2005 06:52:08 PM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever
gets through.
I don't expect him to answer *honestly*. I expect him to do precisely
what he does, thereby exposing him for the liar, hypocrite and coward
that he is. Aren't we allowed to have fun in a.a.? Besides, if you've
kill-filed me, why do you care?
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one.
I don't badger him any more than he badgers me. Is it me always going
into "his" threads and attacking him, or is it far more often him
coming into "my" threads and attacking me? Besides, *you* don't have
to deal with his despicable libel. I do. And do you think for a
minute if I left him alone he would reciprocate? No! He'd try to make
mileage out of that, too.
I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
Of course there are. Do you think this is *all* I do?! Unlike Hurl, I
have a life IRL that's much more important thant his one, but I do
sometimes want to take a break from it and go online. It so happens
that this week I have a lot of free time, so I'm taking advantage of
it. Come the weekend, I will be a lot less active again online.
B.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Earl J. Weber Running Naked in a Bath House |
06 Jul 2005 02:04:33 AM |
|
|
Budikka666 wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
Budikka666 wrote:
Still waiting on your cowardly ***** catching up with the latest two in a
long, long, LONG line of unanswered questions.
Why do you even expect duke to answer you? The discussion is awfully
one-sided where it comes to duke. He is a brick-wall. Nothing ever
gets through.
I don't expect him to answer *honestly*.
And you expect him to answer you at all? :-)
I expect him to do precisely
what he does, thereby exposing him for the liar, hypocrite and coward
that he is.
We all know that duke is a liar, hypocrite and coward. He makes himself
out to be one in nearly every post he makes. Duke does your job for
you. :-)
Aren't we allowed to have fun in a.a.?
Sure. However, trying to get duke to respond when you know that he
won't in the way that you want him to is annoying to others. However,
if you can forget the stupid little jibes that duke does, you can corner
him much better by using his own religion against him.
Besides, if you've
kill-filed me, why do you care?
I unkillfiled you when I noticed that people responding to you and you
were posting some really good stuff.
Your constant badgering of him, when you know he refuses to answer, only
makes you look like the argumentative one.
I don't badger him any more than he badgers me.
Duke badgers me as well. Be the bigger man. :-)
Is it me always going
into "his" threads and attacking him, or is it far more often him
coming into "my" threads and attacking me?
He does the same to me.
Besides, *you* don't have
to deal with his despicable libel. I do.
It's not really libel. Libel is writinng lies about someone in order to
harm the postee's reputation. Since no one believes duke, your
reputation remains unharmed.
Remember, Bud, this is USENET, not real life. No one knows who you are.
No one knows who I am. Your reputation remains intact. You are a
real smart guy, Bud. Don't let duke's idiocy harm that. Everyone knows
what kind of "person" duke is. He can't harm your reputation.
And do you think for a
minute if I left him alone he would reciprocate? No! He'd try to make
mileage out of that, too.
So what?
I agree with you 100%,
budikka. But, honestly. There are better things to do than argue with
duke. ;-)
Of course there are. Do you think this is *all* I do?!
Firstly, chill. :-) I know there are other things that you do, just as
there are other things that I do.
Unlike Hurl, I
have a life IRL that's much more important thant his one, but I do
sometimes want to take a break from it and go online.
I think duke has a life IRL away from this one, too. Your dislike for
duke causes you to lie about him like he lies about you. Like I said
above, be the bigger man. Don't lie about him. You can ***** off duke
more if you tell the truth about him, such as him not even knowing his
religion.
(I got duke several times on his own religion. Even though he refuses
to acknowledge the mistake, he knows that he made the mistake.)
It so happens
that this week I have a lot of free time, so I'm taking advantage of
it. Come the weekend, I will be a lot less active again online.
I don't want you to be less active, but these repeated questions about
libel, when it really isn't such is a bit ingratiating. :-)
B.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
