the laws of biomechanics
Frog2
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:27:29 GMT, "Bloated" <large...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I actually agree with some of this. But part of my coming here is because
> >these people are trying to get fat acceptance claiming it is none of their
> >fault they are fat. I'm here to set the record straight. Most fat people
> >are fat by choice(I do agree there are a small percentage of people who are
> >fat because of medical reasons). Rather than compare this to a dog site I
> >compare it to an abortion site or death penalty or gun control newsgroup.
> >We are opposed to fat acceptance and are just pointing out our views. I'm
> >much more opposed to fat acceptance than I am to fat people. I have little
> >or nothing against fat people, but have quite a problem with trying to make
> >me accept that they are born this way and can't change.
>
> If that is true I suggest you get your facts straight. Pointing out
> views does not mean calling people vile names and advocating suicide.
> I do not blame getting fat on anything other my habits and medication.
> I exercise. I watch what I eat. My reason for being here is to help
> people get the support to live day to day as a fat person. I resent
> that idiots will not allow people to talk to each other without being
> called names. It doesn't work.
>
> If you feel that way then address it to the person with whose views
> you disagree. Allow people to talk about their problems without being
> called names.
>
> I am a self acceptor. I believe that gaining or losing weight is an
> individual decision. I go toe to toe with the idiots because I will
> not let bullshit go unchallenged. The trolls want this group. They
> cannot have it.
>
> They are not here for challenging fat acceptance. They are here to
> hurt people. Pure and simple. They don't give a damn about any sort of
> point of view and that is why and what I fight.
oh no miss sanchez. that is where you are wrong. take a seat miss sanchez.
a nice sturdy one. that's a good girl. are you comfortable miss sanchez?
good...
YOU HAVE MEDDLED WITH THE PRIMAL FORCES OF NATURE, MISS SANCHEZ, AND I
WON'T HAVE IT! is that clear? you think you are merely seeking tolerance.
that is not the case. the fatties have taken billions of calories out of
this country and now they must give them back. it is ebb and flow, tidal
gravity. it is ecological balance. you are an old hag who thinks in terms
of morality and platitudes. there are no morals. the platitudes were lies
all along. there is no fatopia, no exit, no archipelago of misfit toys, no
afterworlds. there is only one holistic system of systems. one vast and
immane, interwoven, interactive, multi-variant, multi-national dominion of
biomechanics; brothel-dollars, orgasmic-dollars, yens, pounds, quatloos
and implants. it is the sociobiological sexual selection mechanism which
determines the totality of life on this planet. that is the stucture of
the world today. that is the atomic, and sub-atomic, and galactic
structure of things today. and you have meddled with the primal forces of
nature, miss sanchez, and you will atone. am i getting through to you,
miss sanchez?
you sit in front of your thirteen inch screen and howl about tolerance and
diversity. there is no tolerance. there is no diversity. there is only
playboy and penthouse and vivid video and disney, fox, universal studios
and sony. those are the nations of the world today. what do you think the
chinese talk about in their council of states? karl marx? they sit down
with their statistical decision theories, lineal programming charts, and
their mini-mac solutions and compute the cost-price probabilities of their
sexual transactions, just like we do. we no longer live in a world of
morals and ideologies, miss sanchez. the world is a college of copulations,
all inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of sexual economics.
the world is a market, miss sanchez, and it has been ever since the beast
man crawled out of the slime.
our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
glorified, all semen consumed.
so viddy well miss sanchez.
viddy well.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
fat kid: i've got some fudge hidden up my ass - you want some?
chaney: yeah right - i'm not falling for that one again.
John Fereira
Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from you.
John Fereira
Ithaca, NY
ja...@cornell.edu
BrendaLee
I agree, wholeheartedly.
[applaud]
It was awesome. I read it three times. :)
Big smile,
BrendaLee
>
> John Fereira
> Ithaca, NY
>ja...@cornell.edu
--
BrendaLee
Lady DreamCatcher
--------------------
http://www.cocreator.com/ehmka/
-------------------------------------
brendalee makes the world better by her presence in it.
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
when you dance with an angel the angel don't change the angel
changes you
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
mollybygolly
> will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
> deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
> for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
> will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
> glorified, all semen consumed.
> so viddy well miss sanchez.
> viddy well.
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> fat kid: i've got some fudge hidden up my ass - you want some?
> chaney: yeah right - i'm not falling for that one again.
Yeah, right. And weren't we all supposed to be flying around in
little Jetson like spaceships by now?! Dream on.
Molly
Kim
wrote:
>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2 <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
(snip)
>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>>viddy well.
>
>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from you.
Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
Although, it was nice to see a tone of civility in it.
Kim
Steve Chaney
>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>glorified, all semen consumed.
>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>viddy well.
before that happens, millions of men will get their throats slit in the
dead of night by the women they tried to force to serve them.
And I will hand out the knives.
-- Steve
===============================
gun...@surf-side.net (remove the "-" to email me)
This site is just TOO COOL for a counter!http://www.self-acceptance.org
STOP SMOKING NOW!!! ASK ME HOW!!!http://www.geocities.com/brenduh52/
"Let 'em eat eep" - Lady Veteran
Steve Chaney
John Fereira thinks that shit was genius?
And here I was, overestimating his intelligence.
John Fereira
I didn't say that I agreed 100% with every word, and I especially agree that
the subject is been beating to a pile which used to resemble a horse, but it
was well written. It was certainly better written than any of the hundreds of
forgeries that have been posted in the past couple of weeks.
Mr. Anonymous
i was once caught by my mother while masturbating to lesbian porn.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman, moron
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
--
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
Kim
wrote:
>In article <2pgkitstehteimlgn...@4ax.com>, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2
>> <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>(snip)
>>>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>>>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>>>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>>>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>>>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>>>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>>>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>>>>viddy well.
>>>
>>>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from you.
>>
>>
>>Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
>>gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
>>
>>Although, it was nice to see a tone of civility in it.
>
>I didn't say that I agreed 100% with every word,
Didn't think you did. My interp is that you liked the fact that it
had a little thought to it.
The boy ain't right. He needs to get out more.
>and I especially agree that
>the subject is been beating to a pile which used to resemble a horse,
Was that what it was once? ;)
> but it
>was well written. It was certainly better written than any of the hundreds of
>forgeries that have been posted in the past couple of weeks.
Paragraphs. It needed paragraphs.
Kim
SSunbird
> before that happens, millions of men will get their throats slit in the
> dead of night by the women they tried to force to serve them.
> And I will hand out the knives.
being the "head" woman and all
ssunbird
SSunbird
> I didn't say that I agreed 100% with every word, and I especially agree that
> the subject is been beating to a pile which used to resemble a horse, but it
> was well written. It was certainly better written than any of the hundreds of
> forgeries that have been posted in the past couple of weeks.
you could tell those were forgeries?
heh.
ssunbird
BrendaLee
Steve Chaney wrote:
>
> toad eeped:
>
> >our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
> >will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
> >deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
> >for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
> >will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
> >glorified, all semen consumed.
> >so viddy well miss sanchez.
> >viddy well.
>
> before that happens, millions of men will get their throats slit in the
> dead of night by the women they tried to force to serve them.
>
> And I will hand out the knives.
Steve, I find it odd that you automatically assumed that he meant,
or even implied, force of any kind.
If you are a woman with a man it is really in your best interests
to find out what his fantasies are and do your best to fulfill
them. I mean if you are with him I would assume pleasing him is a
part of being with him, no?
>in which all men will hold a sweet little babe;
>all erections glorified
When you read this how did you see force? I am curious. Because,
'I' did not see that at all.
Which do you think is the smarter bet for a woman?
to encourage a man's sharing of his fantasies?
or
to stifle that part of him so he goes looking for fulfillment
elsewhere?
I think fantasy is a whole other side to a man's world in which
many women are fearful to tread.
Shame too, for therein lies the richest vein of their deeper
passion....
BrendaLee <princess extraordinaire>
>
> -- Steve
>
> ===============================
>gun...@surf-side.net (remove the "-" to email me)
> This site is just TOO COOL for a counter!http://www.self-acceptance.org
> STOP SMOKING NOW!!! ASK ME HOW!!!http://www.geocities.com/brenduh52/
> "Let 'em eat eep" - Lady Veteran
--
John Fereira
>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:20:44 -0700, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2
> <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>(snip)
>>>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>>>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>>>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>>>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>>>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>>>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>>>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>>>>viddy well.
>>>
>>>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from
> you.
>>
>>Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
>>gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
>
>John Fereira thinks that shit was genius?
I said it was well written, certainly better written than any of your
forgeries.
>And here I was, overestimating his intelligence.
Someone whose life is so empty that he writes a bot to forge messages
about people he doesn't like signed by someone else he doesn't like and
then claims that he has actually accomplished something has overestimated my
intelligence. How will I live?
Matt Kennel
Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
In full-featured matrix multimedia enhancement I believe I heard Beethoven.
:Kim
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
Mr. Anonymous
FAQ for soc.support.fat-acceptance
This document contains information relevant to the newsgroup
soc.support.fat-acceptance. If you don't find what you're looking for
here, try one of the related FAQs (see question B1
for a complete list).
============================================================
Updated August 99
============================================================
Contents
SECTION A: FAQ about soc.support.fat-acceptance
A1)What is s.s.f-a's charter?
A2)How to respond to trolls on s.s.f-a
A3)How did s.s.f-a start?
A4)What are the acronyms?
A5)What are some related newsgroups?
SECTION B: Information about this FAQ
B1)Are there other related FAQs?
B2)Posting information
B3)Contributors
============================================================
============================================================
SECTION A: FAQ about soc.support.fat-acceptance
A1)What is s.s.f-a's charter?
The newsgroups line for s.s.f-a is:
soc.support.fat-acceptance
Self-acceptance for fat people. No diet talk.
The charter is:
soc.support.fat-acceptance provides a supportive forum for the
discussion of the personal and political goals of fat-acceptance
and other topics relevant to being fat.
Topics appropriate for soc.support.fat-acceptance include:
- Political activism
- Events relating to fat-acceptance
- Resources for fat people (including clothes, mail order catalogs,
etc.)
- Personal anecdotes about being fat
- Sharing complaints and peeves or triumphs and achievements
Topics considered inappropriate for soc.support.fat-acceptance include:
- Promotion or advocacy of weight loss methods. These may be
discussed in alt.support.diet.
- Personal ads. These may be posted to alt.personals.big-folks
or alt.personals.fat.
============================================================
A2)How to respond to trolls on s.s.f-a
A troll is a post intended to generate hostility and a never-ending
thread of flaming responses. A troller is a person who makes a series of
such posts.
A spam is an off-topic post (often an advertisement) to a variety of
newsgroups.
Because fatness is seen as an easy target to ridicule and fat people are
seen as easy targets for "weight loss remedies," s.s.f-a gets a lot of
such traffic.
***********************************************************
Please do not post responses to trolls, trollers, or spams.
***********************************************************
It's tempting to flame a troll, but if several people do so, the
newsgroup becomes filled with flames and people who want a positive
newsgroup may get discouraged and leave.
The best way to counter the effects of trolls is to ignore them and fill
the group with on-topic, positive posts.
If you must respond to a troll, please do so by private email. If a
troll or spam is repeated and/or is particularly offensive, you can
complain to the system administrator of the original poster. For more
information on trolls and spams, please see the news.admin.net-abuse
newsgroups.
============================================================
A3)How did s.s.f-a start?
This group developed from alt.support.big-folks. There was a brief
suggestion, in early '94, that all the alt.support groups might move
over to misc.support. (Then we'd be in the big seven, and have wider
distribution and so forth.) At that time, the consensus on a.s.b-f was
to change the group's name to misc.support.fat-acceptance. It was felt
that this name would be less confusing and more descriptive. For
reasons unknown, the move to misc fizzled. So we're still here.
In September '94, Wendy Betts (w...@armory.com) began work on an RFD for
soc.support.fat-acceptance. (The soc.support hierarchy was established
since the last round of discussions.) A Call For Votes was issued on
November 14, 1994, and the group passed 163:49. The group was
newgrouped on December 22, 1994.
============================================================
A4)What do the acronyms mean?
BBWBig Beautiful Woman
BBMBig Beautiful Man
beara man who is cuddly, furry, stocky, and/or bearded;
most often used by and about gay men
FAFat Admirer, person who prefers a fat sexual/romantic
partner
NAAFANational Association to Advance Fat Acceptance
mid-sizerefers to people who are in the mid-range.
For women, this means they wear U.S. dress size
16W-26W.
super-size refers to people who are very large.
For women, this means they wear U.S. dress size 28W
and up. This division between mid-size and super-size
for women seems to arise from the face that most
retail clothing sizes for women stop at U.S. 26W.
[proposed]
FS Fat sympathizer, person who through personal growth
relates to issues of Fat Acceptance and strives to
correct abuses and discriminatory acts in day-to-day
events
============================================================
A5) What are some related newsgroups?
alt.food.fat-free and alt.food.low-fat are groups for people who want to
discuss eating low-fat or no-fat. These are good places to take
discussion on low fat eating (as a means of weight loss or otherwise).
alt.recovery.compulsive-eat is a group for people who want to discuss
ending their compulsive eating. I think they subscribe to an OA
viewpoint.
alt.sex.fat is a group for people who want to discuss issues involved in
sex with fat people. It was formed in early '94 so that a.s.b-f could
stay more or less G (or PG) rated.
alt.sex.fetish.fa is a group for fat admirers. This group mostly
carries encoded pictures of fat erotica, and discussions about them.
(Note that the word "fetish" in the title rubs many FAs the wrong way,
does nothing to promote a positive image of FAs, and implies a
separation between sex and romance that doesn't exist for many FAs.)
alt.sex.super-size is a group for people who want to discuss the issues
involved in sex with very large people. It was formed in June '95 by
Teighlor (plum...@aol.com) because she felt that super-size folks
needs weren't being adequately addressed in alt.sex.fat.
alt.sex.weight-gain is a group for people who want to discuss the
erotic aspects of feeding, being fed, or weight gain.
alt.support.big-folks is another group for discussing size-acceptance
and issues affecting large people.
alt.support.diet is a group for people who want support and discussion
of dieting and other weight loss methods. Regular posters tend not to
be very fat. This is a good place to take weight loss questions and
discussions.
alt.support.eating-disord is a group for people who want support and
discussion in dealing with eating disorders (their own and others).
alt.personals.big-folks and alt.personals.fat are groups for personal
ads by big folks or looking for big folks. These groups were formed
in July '94 to get personal ads out of a.s.b-f, to provide an easy way
for fat people and fat admirers to get in touch with one another, and
so that fat people would not have to wade through personal ads that
specify that only slender people should respond.
============================================================
============================================================
SECTION B: Information about this FAQ
B1) Are there other related FAQs?
There is some overlap in the topics covered by the FAQs. If you don't
find what you're looking for here, try the other FAQs.
The latest version of the following FAQs can be found at:
http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/~stef/Fatfaqs/
alt.support.big-folks newsgroup FAQ
soc.support.fat-acceptance newsgroup FAQ
soc.support.fat-acceptance.moderated newsgroup FAQ
Clothing for Big Folks in Canada
Clothing for Big Folks in the U.S. (parts 1 and 2)
Organizations for Big Folks
Online Resources for Big Folks
Other Resources for Big Folks
Publications for Big Folks
Resources for Dealing With the Physical Aspects of Being Fat
Size-acceptance
The following FAQs can be found at:
http://www.sover.net/~astarte/fa/faqs.html
Big Folks and Fitness
Big Folks and Health
Big Folks and Sports
Research on Big Folks
The latest versions of following FAQs can be found at the following
locations:
Clothing for Big Folks in the U.K. at
http://www.thegrapevine.co.uk/Avalanche/FAQ-UK.htm
Clothing for Big Folks in Europe at
http://www.thegrapevine.co.uk/Avalanche/FAQ-Europe.htm
Plus-Size Pregnancy Website at
http://www.teleport.com/~rvireday/plus/
You can also find (sometimes slightly older versions of) the above FAQs
(except the plus-size pregnancy FAQs) at the following locations:
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/fat-acceptance-faq/
(Note: The big-folks FAQ is listed separately at these locations.)
You can also get FAQs fromrtfm.mit.edu via anonymous FTP or via the mail
archive server. For information about the mail server, send email to
mail-...@rtfm.mit.edu
with the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
============================================================
============================================================
B2)Posting information
This document is posted bi-weekly to soc.support.fat-acceptance.
Stef Maruch (st...@cat-and-dragon.com) maintains this FAQ.
============================================================
B3)Contributors
These are the people who contributed significant chunks to the FAQ:
Sasha Wood(Sasha...@cs.cmu.edu)
Wendy Betts(w...@armory.com)
Suggestions for additions/improvements are always welcome.
Send suggestions to Stef Maruch
(st...@cat-and-dragon.com)
============================================================
Copyright 1995, 1996 by Stef Maruch (st...@cat-and-dragon.com)
Permission is granted to copy and redistribute this article in its
entirety for non-commercial, educational use only, provided that this
copyright notice is not removed or altered. No portion of this work may
be sold, either by itself or as part of a larger work, without the
express written permission of the author. This restriction covers all
publication media, including electronic media.
Kim
SPAMBGONEmbke...@yahoo.com (Matt Kennel) wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:20:44 -0700, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
>:On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
>:wrote:
>:
>:>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2 <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
>:
>:(snip)
>:>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>:>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>:>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>:>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>:>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>:>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>:>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>:>>viddy well.
>:>
>:>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from you.
>:
>:Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
>:gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
>:
>:Although, it was nice to see a tone of civility in it.
>
>Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
Seen better on alt.conspiracy.
>In full-featured matrix multimedia enhancement I believe I heard Beethoven.
Did he write "the circus theme"?
Root doot dewey dewey doot doot doot doot.
Root doot dewey dewey doot doot doot doot.
Sex controls. The state controls. Coca Cola runs the world.
Didn't Orwell speak of something similar much earlier?
Kim
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:20:44 -0700, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
> :On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
> :wrote:
> :
> :>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2 <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
> :
> :(snip)
> :>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
> :>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
> :>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
> :>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
> :>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
> :>>glorified, all semen consumed.
> :>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
> :>>viddy well.
> :>
> :>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from you.
> :
> :Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
> :gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
> :
> :Although, it was nice to see a tone of civility in it.
>
> Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
I thought it was infradead.
>
> In full-featured matrix multimedia enhancement I believe I heard Beethoven.
>
> :Kim
>
> --
> * Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
> *
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots.tos...@aol.comab...@aol.com
ab...@yahoo.comab...@hotmail.comab...@msn.comab...@sprint.com
ab...@earthlink.com
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
Nomen Nescio
i gotta tell ya.
bobbi sanchez is a cutie.
i have rarely seen a stronger and more courageous woman than her.
any man would be lucky to have her.
i think you also know this.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman, retard
Steve Chaney
>
>
>Steve Chaney wrote:
>>
>> toad eeped:
>>
>> >our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>> >will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>> >deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>> >for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>> >will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>> >glorified, all semen consumed.
>> >so viddy well miss sanchez.
>> >viddy well.
>>
>> before that happens, millions of men will get their throats slit in the
>> dead of night by the women they tried to force to serve them.
>>
>> And I will hand out the knives.
>
>Steve, I find it odd that you automatically assumed that he meant,
>or even implied, force of any kind.
Force would be absolutely necessary to make ALL women serve men in that
capacity. (Or any other.)
Deadly force, in fact.
Are you too stupid to grasp the fact that many women work to serve their
OWN desires and agendas? Just like men?
Have you ever heard of chattel?
>If you are a woman with a man it is really in your best interests
>to find out what his fantasies are and do your best to fulfill
>them. I mean if you are with him I would assume pleasing him is a
>part of being with him, no?
What about having her own interests to serve?
Steve Chaney
>In article <3b3b20e2...@207.217.77.24>,gun...@surf-side.net (Steve Chaney) wrote:
>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:20:44 -0700, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2
>> <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>(snip)
>>>>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>>>>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>>>>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>>>>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>>>>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>>>>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>>>>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>>>>>viddy well.
>>>>
>>>>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from
>> you.
>>>
>>>Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
>>>gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
>>
>>John Fereira thinks that shit was genius?
>
>I said it was well written,
Your insanity refutes itself.
That was one of the most puerile, deluded, misogynist posts since ++Albert
infested this newsgroup.
Insanity in vivid detail does not mean well written. It only means he is
totally deluded beyond hope of civilized discussion.
Do you think Mein Kampf was well written??
Well??
The only way ALL women will exist to serve men's sexual needs is if tens of
millions of freethinking and self directed women are murdered first,
because to return women to the status of chattel, as he suggests, you have
but only one effective method available: lethal force.
And when the dust settles a lot of men will be getting their dicks sliced
off in the middle of the night when the survivors go out to reclaim their
rights as women.
Of course there is the other possibility. Iran could take over the United
States. (While it's snowing in hell.)
>certainly better written than any of your
>forgeries.
You, John, are insane, just like his rantings about chattel are insane.
Is it any wonder he said he stays anonymous to avoid reprisals?
Goodgirl
"BrendaLee" <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3B2A0C91...@rochester.rr.com...
>
>
nonsense snipped again
> >
> > Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen
from you.
>
> I agree, wholeheartedly.
>
> [applaud]
>
> It was awesome. I read it three times. :)
>
> Big smile,
> BrendaLee
Let me get this straight. You agree that women are only supposed to be sex
toys?
Goodgirl
Goodgirl
"John Fereira" <ja...@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:9gd045$k5q$5...@news01.cit.cornell.edu...
> In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2
<FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
> >fat smelly hairy lesbian oinked:
> >> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:27:29 GMT, "Bloated" <large...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
Nonsense snipped
> Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from
you.
Boy are you easily pleased.
Goodgirl
Rubyfleur
Frog2 wrote:
I think that I have never, in all my life, witnessed a man so very very very
afraid of women.
Then again, a one dimension man of course could only handle one dimensional women.
Stick to your Playboy magazines and jerk off sessions, little one. You are a study
in fear. I honestly pity you.
Rubyfleur
BrendaLee
Steve Chaney wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:30 GMT, BrendaLee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Steve Chaney wrote:
> >>
> >> toad eeped:
> >>
> >> >our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
> >> >will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
> >> >deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
> >> >for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
> >> >will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
> >> >glorified, all semen consumed.
> >> >so viddy well miss sanchez.
> >> >viddy well.
> >>
> >> before that happens, millions of men will get their throats slit in the
> >> dead of night by the women they tried to force to serve them.
> >>
> >> And I will hand out the knives.
> >
> >Steve, I find it odd that you automatically assumed that he meant,
> >or even implied, force of any kind.
>
> Force would be absolutely necessary to make ALL women serve men in that
> capacity. (Or any other.)
>
> Deadly force, in fact.
>
> Are you too stupid to grasp the fact that many women work to serve their
> OWN desires and agendas? Just like men?
Look, if you want to talk then speak to me with the same respect I
give you. Or forget it.
Seriously, I am not stupid. And I will not be talked to as if I
am. You want to talk, fine,
but I will get what I give.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't NEED to talk to you. Not now not ever. So if you want me
to respond to you then you need to speak to me with respect.
Understand, you don't need to like me. There is a difference.
But you do need to speak to me with respect.
That is the way I am.
:) BrendaLee
>
> Have you ever heard of chattel?
>
> >If you are a woman with a man it is really in your best interests
> >to find out what his fantasies are and do your best to fulfill
> >them. I mean if you are with him I would assume pleasing him is a
> >part of being with him, no?
>
> What about having her own interests to serve?
>
> -- Steve
>
> ===============================
>gun...@surf-side.net (remove the "-" to email me)
> This site is just TOO COOL for a counter!http://www.self-acceptance.org
> STOP SMOKING NOW!!! ASK ME HOW!!!http://www.geocities.com/brenduh52/
> "Let 'em eat eep" - Lady Veteran
--
Steve Chaney
Are you, brenduhweecunt, too stupid to grasp the fact that many women work
to serve their OWN desires and agendas? Just like men?
Steve Chaney
wrote:
I wonder what OTHER women have to say about this?
ngm
Steve Chaney <gun...@surf-side.net> wrote in message
news:3b458431...@207.217.77.24...
>
> I wonder what OTHER women have to say about this?
>
>
> -- Steve
>
Never!
la nilo
(against force in relationships)
Nomen Nescio
i think that i have never, in all my life, witnessed a whole margaret
dumont convention.
Aaron R. Kulkis
Clue for the clueless:
Who cares?
>
> -- Steve
>
> ===============================
>gun...@surf-side.net (remove the "-" to email me)
> This site is just TOO COOL for a counter!http://www.self-acceptance.org
> STOP SMOKING NOW!!! ASK ME HOW!!!http://www.geocities.com/brenduh52/
> "Let 'em eat eep" - Lady Veteran
Lady Veteran
Hey bitch! He said WOMEN!!!!!
Nobody asked you!
When did you cut it off?
Bobbi
Meet our Mistress of Love and Light....
http://www.geocities.com/brenduh52/
I don't have the time every day to put on makeup.
I need that time to clean my rifle.
Hanriette Mantel- Comedian
The thing women have to learn is that
nobody gives you power. You got to take it.
Rosanne Arnold
Remember that amatuers build the ark and that professionals
built the Titanic.
Unknown
Promote self acceptance!
Jim Ledford
> fat smelly hairy lesbian oinked:
> you sit in front of your thirteen inch screen and howl about tolerance and
> diversity. there is no tolerance. there is no diversity. there is only
> playboy and penthouse and vivid video and disney, fox, universal studios
> and sony. those are the nations of the world today. what do you think the
> chinese talk about in their council of states? karl marx? they sit down
> with their statistical decision theories, lineal programming charts, and
> their mini-mac solutions and compute the cost-price probabilities of their
> sexual transactions, just like we do. we no longer live in a world of
> morals and ideologies, miss sanchez. the world is a college of copulations,
> all inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of sexual economics.
> the world is a market, miss sanchez, and it has been ever since the beast
> man crawled out of the slime.
> our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
> will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
> deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
> for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
> will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
> glorified, all semen consumed.
> so viddy well miss sanchez.
> viddy well.
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> fat kid: i've got some fudge hidden up my ass - you want some?
> chaney: yeah right - i'm not falling for that one again.
I'm glad I was not drinking a Dr. Pepper when I read this.
Damn Jackie, that was funny. If you and Jeem ever team up:)
Jim Ledford
Jim Ledford
> BrendaLee wrote:
> > Steve Chaney wrote:
One can find the ultimate pleasures in life when so lucky as to
find a mate where the desires of each mesh well together. For
example I was reading JeanC. and how her husband has introduced
her to the joys of shooting sports, or as I recall CowBoy action
Shooting. I can see the two of them at the reloading bench TOGETHER
enjoying themselves and their time shared. Hi JeanC.
http://www.uidaho.edu/~bjcraw/cas.htm
Jean, I love your hat, you want to sell it?
One day I really will get to buy something
hat, bicycle, picture or who knows:)
Jim Ledford
ave...@cix.co.uk
wrote:
>>Then again, a one dimension man of course could only handle one dimensional women.
>>Stick to your Playboy magazines and jerk off sessions, little one. You are a study
>>in fear. I honestly pity you.
>
>I wonder what OTHER women have to say about this?
I missed the beginning of this thread and only have seen your post,
but here's what I think based on what you quoted:
I think sexual fantasies are more fun than not having sexual
fantasies. I think a lot of guys have fun sexual fantasies when they
look at porn. I kind of envy that, because every now and then it
would be nice to get a jump-start when I'm feeling lousy, but I've
never been able to find much in commercial porn that did anything for
me. But if it works for you, I think you might as well enjoy it.
I most emphatically _don't_ think that guys who like porn are
"one-dimensional" or have any special problems about dealing women. I
know a lot of really great guys who like pornography. And most of the
guys I've met who are deeply anti-porn are usually pretty creepy,
especially where women are concerned.
And I think there's a hell of a lot more to porn than what's in
Playboy. Truth is, most of the people I know who buy Playboy buy it
to actually read the articles (which are often pretty good), but they
go elsewhere when they want real pornography.
There's a vast range of pornography out there and it treats an
amazingly wide variety of types of people as attractive - short, tall,
fat, slim hairy, shaved, young adults or much older, aggressive or shy
- all kinds. It certainly represents a far more realistic view of the
human spectrum - and human tastes - than you find in non-pornographic
media.
I think it's a lie to say that pornography is just something that
forces women to serve men. I think some women actually enjoy being in
porn and see it as a choice. I think many women - and many men - have
jobs that are far worse. I also think some women enjoy looking at
porn, too.
I think it's creepy to attack men for being interested in pornography.
There's nothing sick or abnormal about men being interested in looking
at/thinking about women and sex.
As a girl and as a woman growing up in America, I was taught to
distrust men's interest in sex, and later to assume that that interest
was something that's wrong with men, rather than to consider the
possibility that women's hostility to sexual interest was something
that's wrong with the way women are taught to look at sex. It makes
it very comfortable to sneer at men's ability to enjoy pornography.
But it's a false comfort.
I think women need to stop sneering at men and ask themselves whether
the attitudes we have about sex are fair to men - and to ourselves.
I also think that a lot of really neat guys are hot for fat women, So
there.
--
Avedon
"Framing issues as a gender war invites crossfire." - Rachael Lininger
Vapid Shell Me
wrote:
>In article <3b3b20e2...@207.217.77.24>,gun...@surf-side.net (Steve Chaney) wrote:
>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:20:44 -0700, Kim <ant...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:46:41 GMT,ja...@cornell.edu (John Fereira)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <I4XJM54U3705...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org>, Frog2
>> <FrogRe...@NoReply.Invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>(snip)
>>>>>our children, miss sanchez - or should i say other's children? heh heh -
>>>>>will live to see that perfect world in which there is no ugliness or
>>>>>deformity, no obesity or gluttony. one vast and optimized sexual market
>>>>>for whom all women will work to serve a common profit; in which all men
>>>>>will hold a sweet little babe; all fantasies catered to, all erections
>>>>>glorified, all semen consumed.
>>>>>so viddy well miss sanchez.
>>>>>viddy well.
>>>>
>>>>Damn, jackie, that was one of the finest pieces of writing I've seen from
>> you.
>>>
>>>Which isn't saying much. An obsession and indulgence no matter who
>>>gussied up is still an obsession and an indulgence.
>>
>>John Fereira thinks that shit was genius?
>
>I said it was well written, certainly better written than any of your
>forgeries.
Perhaps, it's best called "well plagarized"? It's a seque straight
out of the movie, Network. You're actually appreciating the work of
Paddy Chayefsky transmogrified into the usual Jackie topic-mold.
Vapid Shell Me
All the world's a stage...but some of us must be forgetting our own
lines...
The original:
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I
won’t have it, is that clear?! You think you have merely stopped a
business deal – that is not the case! The Arabs have taken billions of
dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back. It is ebb
and flow, tidal gravity, it is ecological balance! You are an old man
who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations!
There are no peoples! There are no Russians. There are no Arabs! There
are no third worlds! There is no West! There is only one holistic
system of systems, one vast interwoven, interacting, multi-variate,
multi-national dominion of dollars! Petro-dollars, Electro-dollars,
Multi-dollars, Reichmarks, Rubles, Yen, Pounds and Shekels! It is the
international system of currency that determines the totality of life
on this planet! That is the natural order of things today! That is the
atomic, subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have
meddled with the primal forces of nature, and you will atone! Am I
getting through to you, Mr. Beale?
We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The
world is a collage of corporations, inexorably determined by the
immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale! It
has been since man crawled out of the slime, and our children, Mr.
Beale, will live to see that perfect world in which there is no war
and famine, oppression and brutality – one vast and ecumenical holding
company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which
all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all
anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you to
preach this evangel, Mr. Beale.
And Jackie's copy:
since the beast man crawled out of the slime. our children, miss
Nomen Nescio
> matt wrote:
> >Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
>
i've seen things you... people... wouldn't believe...
> Sex controls. The state controls. Coca Cola runs the world.
down girl
> Didn't Orwell speak of something similar much earlier?
when he wrote of the anti-sex league he wasn't thinking of me
he was thinking of you
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
and what is 'big beautiful woman' if not a variant of freedom is slavery?
there's also a very interesting passage about prole women hitting the
wall
if i find my copy i think i'll type it in
incidentally, i only recently realized that julia is meant to be a vapid
fool
but then i've always been a fool for lust misspelled...
Anonymous
thanks.
Jim Ledford
> kimkunt:
> > matt wrote:
> > >Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
> >
> > Seen better on alt.conspiracy.
>
> i've seen things you... people... wouldn't believe...
>
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
yes and when verbalized for others they always reply
yeah right - i'm not falling for that one again.
Jim Ledford
Kim
<nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
>kimkunt:
>> matt wrote:
>> >Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
>>
>> Seen better on alt.conspiracy.
>
>i've seen things you... people... wouldn't believe...
Like a passage of writing that is original?
VSM outed you.
>> Sex controls. The state controls. Coca Cola runs the world.
>
>down girl
Why? Thought you were a capitalist.
>> Didn't Orwell speak of something similar much earlier?
>
>when he wrote of the anti-sex league he wasn't thinking of me
>he was thinking of you
What's the phrase? You wish?
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
>and what is 'big beautiful woman' if not a variant of freedom is slavery?
Prolly the same as "all a matter of perspective".
>there's also a very interesting passage about prole women hitting the
>wall
So, of course, what you say has been said before, by """"""real"""""
writers.
>if i find my copy i think i'll type it in
Be sure to note credit where credit is due.
>incidentally, i only recently realized that julia is meant to be a vapid
>fool
Just a means to an end.
Kim
ngm
Vapid Shell Me <m...@dbtech.net> wrote in message
> >
> >I said it was well written, certainly better written than any of your
> >forgeries.
>
> Perhaps, it's best called "well plagarized"? It's a seque straight
> out of the movie, Network. You're actually appreciating the work of
> Paddy Chayefsky transmogrified into the usual Jackie topic-mold.
Damned! I *knew* it sounded familiar. We have that movie "Network"
among our video collection, and that monologue is *classic*.
As an erstwhile writer, I abhor "phoneyphuck" plagiarists, especially when
they proudly accept undeserved kudos from the audience.
la nilo
Aaron R. Kulkis
Chaney, you dumbshit...
you're not nearly as entertaining as Hitler.
Lady Veteran
So much for trolls and original thoughts.
Lady Veteran
Aaron R. Kulkis
Chaney, you dumbshit...
you're not nearly as amusing as Hitler.
Lady Veteran
<crashst...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>In article <3b2be0e9....@news.dbtech.net>,m...@dbtech.net says...
>too funny. an empty husk is this jerkie.
>
>it's appropriate that jerkie the plagiarist bot is being taken
>down by another bot. whenever jackie writes anything that
>sounds brilliant you can be sure that it was lifted in large
>measure from someone else with the serial numbers filed off.
>
>worship at the clay feet of your idol who has never been
>able to think without the aid of a movie script.
>
>crash street kidd
>crash street kidd
>
>Egor with 10,000 votes brings webcam to life! Ugly pictures and lame movies to
>download of mental head case ugly chick! View at own risk!
>http://member.newsguy.com/~whatever
Yes, it is quite the loser that claims other's achievements for their
own. Pathetic, isn't it? Hope you and yours are well.
BrendaLee
Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> kimkunt:
> > matt wrote:
> > >Actually it was the most ultraviolent thing he wrote in a very long time.
> >
> > Seen better on alt.conspiracy.
>
> i've seen things you... people... wouldn't believe...
Try me.
>
> > Sex controls. The state controls. Coca Cola runs the world.
>
> down girl
>
> > Didn't Orwell speak of something similar much earlier?
>
> when he wrote of the anti-sex league he wasn't thinking of me
> he was thinking of you
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> and what is 'big beautiful woman' if not a variant of freedom is slavery?
>
> there's also a very interesting passage about prole women hitting the
> wall
>
> if i find my copy i think i'll type it in
that would be nice.
>
> incidentally, i only recently realized that julia is meant to be a vapid
> fool
Do you think that Julia was portrayed aptly in the movie version
of the book then Anakin?
>
> but then i've always been a fool for lust misspelled...
Interesting!!
:)
BrendaLee
>
> fat kid: i've got some fudge hidden up my ass - you want some?
> chaney: yeah right - i'm not falling for that one again.
--
Steve Chaney
>In article <3b2be0e9....@news.dbtech.net>,m...@dbtech.net says...
>>
>>
>too funny. an empty husk is this jerkie.
OH
MY
GOD
He stole that from a MOVIE?!!!
I shouldn't be so surprised.
I guess I'm shocked that he got caught.
And then on the other hand not shocked at who caught him.
>it's appropriate that jerkie the plagiarist bot is being taken
>down by another bot.
KILLFILE ALL POSTS NOT CONTAINING "ihatevlad"!!!
too fucking funny.
Did you know that John Fereira and Mike Cranston actually believe I spend
hours on that stuff? I spent exactly 1 hour learning how to use pgponly
remailers, including test posts. Another hour to write the database and the
auto post code.
And you're right - what is going on now is a glorified bot that is
hijacking his ID day and night.
>whenever jackie writes anything that
>sounds brilliant you can be sure that it was lifted in large
>measure from someone else with the serial numbers filed off.
"Original thought is so 1995 or earlier." - Charlotte Lackluster.
>worship at the clay feet of your idol who has never been
>able to think without the aid of a movie script.
I am now going to go kick myself for not catching this plagiarism myself.
After all, I saw that stinking movie.
Okay, now who was the first one to actually spot and bust this act
plagiarism? Crash found the actual quote but Vapid Shell Me said which
movie and author it came from. Or was there some collaboration here?
-- Steve, he was first! No she was first! arrrarrrrrgh
Steve Chaney
wrote:
>Steve Chaney wrote:
Aaron, why did you get kicked out of school for cheating?
Maybe it was
plagiarism?
-- Steve
SSunbird
> I don't NEED to talk to you. Not now not ever. So if you want me
> to respond to you then you need to speak to me with respect.
> Understand, you don't need to like me. There is a difference.
> But you do need to speak to me with respect.
Steve -- respect a woman? Heh.
ssunbird, keep dreamin'
BrendaLee
Tis okay... I'm a dreamin kinda girl...
Hee!
BrendaOptimisticLee
Well that and I don't give up easily.
:)
Steve Chaney
>
>
>SSunbird wrote:
>>
>> BrendaLee wrote:
>>
>> > I don't NEED to talk to you. Not now not ever. So if you want me
>> > to respond to you then you need to speak to me with respect.
>> > Understand, you don't need to like me. There is a difference.
>> > But you do need to speak to me with respect.
>>
>> Steve -- respect a woman? Heh.
>>
>> ssunbird, keep dreamin'
>
>
>Tis okay... I'm a dreamin kinda girl...
Since Sunbird is a moron I will invite him to ask the following women if
they think I don't respect women:
bobbi
jet
ngm (?)
kim
enialle
rauni
rubyfleur
nubianne
debbie
amazon
aj davenport
charlene
vapid shell me (?)
oh shit, to hell with it, I'll even make it easy on you, Sunbird. To make
it remotely challenging you can even ask faith, charlotte and susegrl, too.
-- Steve, BTW the ones marked as ? indicate I believe they are women, but
I'm not sure.
"all sexual harrassment laws should be repealed"
- Jackie the Tokeman, women's rights advocate
Message-ID: <70192f81d0d807eb...@anon.xg.nu>
turtoni
> too funny. an empty husk is this jerkie.
too funny you're pot bellied bald socially retarded wall flower.
> it's appropriate that jerkie the plagiarist bot is being taken
> down by another bot.
too funny you got taken down. got SPNAK?
gonna use ondrea's face repairer to fix your fat bald head yet?
WELL???
> whenever jackie writes anything that sounds brilliant
got jealous? got jackie obession?
can't think of anything else to dreary on about?
got newsgroup parasite?
> you can be sure that it was lifted in large measure from
> someone else with the serial numbers filed off.
compared to your smoochies, pathetic years of brock stalking,
self help book quotes, the dreary whining and the creepy
way you used to stalk the ladies, what you got?
> worship at the clay feet of your idol who has never been
> able to think without the aid of a movie script.
got headcase pussy whipped control freak social retard?
good to see you and the retard clan saw sense...
looking foward to when they come back for another slapping.
turtoni - LOL.
ngm
Steve Chaney <gun...@surf-side.net> wrote in message
news:3b472219...@207.217.77.24...
Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
la nilo (ngm)
woman
SSunbird
> Since Sunbird is a moron I will invite him to ask the following women if
> they think I don't respect women:
Steve, I have read what you write.
I was around when your ex girlfriend told all about you.
I don't need someone else's opinion to form my own.
ssunbird
Sunbird
Steve Chaney wrote:
> Since Sunbird is a moron I will invite him to ask the following women if
> they think I don't respect women:
> debbie
by the way which debbie are you talking about?
sb
Sunbird
> Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
> such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
Stick around, the real Steve will come out.
sb
turtoni
>crash street kidd wrote:
>
>> too funny. an empty husk is this jerkie.
>
>too funny you're pot bellied bald socially retarded wall flower.
Says the waddling redcoat turd who fled to America to avoid being beaten to
death by angry brits.
>> it's appropriate that jerkie the plagiarist bot is being taken
>> down by another bot.
>
>too funny you got taken down.
By who, celibatus.
>got SPNAK?
Got girlfriend?
(no)
>gonna use ondrea's face repairer to fix your fat bald head yet?
>WELL???
All this anger just because he gets laid and you don't.
Pussy envy is so unbecoming.
>> whenever jackie writes anything that sounds brilliant
>
>got jealous? got jackie obession?
Spot the irony.
>can't think of anything else to dreary on about?
You'll have a lot to dreary on about after I fix your face on the 23rd.
Got noshow?
>> you can be sure that it was lifted in large measure from
>> someone else with the serial numbers filed off.
>
>compared to your smoochies, pathetic years of brock stalking,
>self help book quotes, the dreary whining and the creepy
>way you used to stalk the ladies, what you got?
He's got laid.
Which is more than you have.
>> worship at the clay feet of your idol who has never been
>> able to think without the aid of a movie script.
>
>got headcase pussy whipped control freak social retard?
You look so cute with jackie's shit all over your nose.
Got halitosis?
>good to see you and the retard clan saw sense...
>
>looking foward to when they come back for another slapping.
Show up for the fight on the 23rd for more slapping than you or your momma
can handle.
-- Steve, or don't show up and get slapped anyways.
Jim Ledford
> Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
> such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
>
> la nilo (ngm)
> woman
la nilo (ngm), steve has been posting nude pictures of women in
soc.singles. I've always considered pornographic material to be
an example of how many women have been used and disrespected.
I wonder how many of these women posed for these pictures
knowing before hand they would end up on the net? In one
picture the poor girl's eyes are glazed and she looks drugged.
Jim Ledford
ngm
Sunbird <pata...@nortelnetworks.com> wrote in message
news:3B2E54CF...@nortelnetworks.com...
Then I shall deal with it, birdy ... :)
la n.
PS: Doesn't signify that I agree with the header ....
I don't think you're a moron (at least from what
I've seen)
ngm
Jim Ledford <jim...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3B2E58D5...@bellsouth.net...
I have not looked at any of these fotos ... And to set the
record straight, you have *all* behaved badly ... including
Steve ... on this group. I would hope in "real life" that you
all are a little more grown up. Having said that, Steve
makes for a good read at times and has always treated me
respectfully.
la nilo
turtoni
monkey want a nanar?
steve,
it's funny that vald, ondrea and rauni don't post anymore
laughing in you face?
turtoni - bub bye.
Steve Chaney
wrote:
So solly. Ngm has seen the real me for quite a while and doesn't like my
meaner posts. Ngm has said this openly.
But you claimed I don't respect women. I respect people when they act
respectable. I asked you to ask the MAJORITY of women on here if your claim
was valid in their opinion.
Knowing damned well you fucked up, and that you had nowhere to run with
this argument, you copped out with this "don't worry, I'll be right some
day" bullshit.
I had actually expected you to claim that the women who disagreed with you,
didn't know what disrespect of women really is. You the male knowing more
about this than any woman, of course. But noooooooOOOOOooooooo, you went
and ordered up a double lameo with cheese tactic and hid behind the weakest
fucking excuse for why you were just plain WRONG.
It's always the same with you cowards. You say something boneheaded and get
called on it and then you change the subject or declare that you were
torlling.
-- Steve
turtoni
Steve Chaney wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:21:51 -0500, Sunbird <pata...@nortelnetworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> >ngm wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
> >> such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
> >
> >Stick around, the real Steve will come out.
>
> So solly. Ngm has seen the real me for quite a while and doesn't like my
> meaner posts. Ngm has said this openly.
considering the stupid gibbering monkey posts incessantly and spams newsgroups
with it's raving usenet retarded headcasing it's a pity people like ngm enable
you.
you're a nasty little man with one fucking mountain of a chip and have been
stinking and been in hiding from usenet for over eight years.
i personally hope it's making your life more miserable to have this fucked up
obsession.
turtoni - H.T.H.
Jim Ledford
> Jim Ledford wrote:
> > ngm wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
> > > such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
> > >
> > > la nilo (ngm)
> > > woman
> >
> > la nilo (ngm), steve has been posting nude pictures of women in
> > soc.singles. I've always considered pornographic material to be
> > an example of how many women have been used and disrespected.
> >
> > I wonder how many of these women posed for these pictures
> > knowing before hand they would end up on the net? In one
> > picture the poor girl's eyes are glazed and she looks drugged.
> > Jim Ledford
> I have not looked at any of these fotos ...
don't because I think you will not be impressed.
> And to set the record straight, you have *all* behaved badly ... including
> Steve ... on this group.
I know, the teacher made me stand in the corner and stay
in during recess on the day they were playing kick the
dummy, teacher knows how much I love that game:(
> I would hope in "real life" that you
> all are a little more grown up.
Real life has some very serious penalties for LAW infractions.
I value my freedom and therefore though grumbling a bit at times
I'll take a number and stand in line.
> Having said that, Steve
> makes for a good read at times and has always treated me
> respectfully.
if a person treats you well while at the same time you are witness
to the same person treading others poorly would this effect your
view of that person? this question is not loaded and I only
seek your thoughts on the matter.
Jim Ledford
ngm
turtoni <tur...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3B2E5C31...@my-deja.com...
Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
enabling *anybody* ... just responding to the more positive posts.
You have *all* ... *ALL* ... including *you* Turtoni behaved badly.
At least I read *you* ... I don't read Jackie and NR, for instance.
But I read most of you. I quickly delete the ugly stuff that has come
out of *all* of you at times.
la n.
turtoni
>It's always the same with you cowards.
>You say something boneheaded and get called on it and then you change
>the subject or declare that you were torlling.
the only people you fool with you incessant retarded spamming the newsgroups
and i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards.
ngm can say what she likes but it's not appreciated in here.
you've pissed off so many people and been shitting in this group of years and
are pretty much "hated" by most of the regulars. aside from the hideous veteran
woman, and the retard clan which now look to have been spnaked off.
turtoni - H.T.H
ngm
> ngm wrote:
>
>
> if a person treats you well while at the same time you are witness
> to the same person treading others poorly would this effect your
> view of that person? this question is not loaded and I only
> seek your thoughts on the matter.
>
> Jim Ledford
>
I did *not* want to be caught up in this tit-for-tat
thing. I note that you are a big fan of Jackie's so,
I might ask you the same thing.
At least I have told Steve several times that I
disagree with him. I can do that with him.
Whereas when I disagree with Brenda, for
example, on something, I get pounced on.
I like people with whom I can agree and disagree
and get into some good debates. Obviously, one
needs a bit of a thick skin around here.
And geeeze ... obviously I have too much time on
my hands today to be answering all these posts ...
I've made more posts on s.s. today than I have in
two years in Usenet .. period ... :)
I hope you have a good day, Jim.
la nilo
Jim Ledford
>
> Jim Ledford wrote:
> > if a person treats you well while at the same time you are witness
> > to the same person treading others poorly would this effect your
> > view of that person? this question is not loaded and I only
> > seek your thoughts on the matter.
> >
> > Jim Ledford
> I did *not* want to be caught up in this tit-for-tat
> thing. I note that you are a big fan of Jackie's so,
> I might ask you the same thing.
ME, not really a big fan. Jackie is sometimes funny
and sometimes not. Last year we did the big flame
thingie where as, we created the understanding
Jackie has NO use for me, thinks my wife is a hag
and I am a loser for being married to her. He gets
to have his opinion and I get to have mine.
> At least I have told Steve several times that I
> disagree with him. I can do that with him.
> Whereas when I disagree with Brenda, for
> example, on something, I get pounced on.
I saw where you did say you disagreed with steve.
That was pretty cool of you.
As for dissing Jackie or BrendaLee, you will
get Flamed in return. It's just how that works.
Useful at times though, hee hee :)
> I like people with whom I can agree and disagree
> and get into some good debates. Obviously, one
> needs a bit of a thick skin around here.
Dog gone it, they had the thick skin suits on
sale last week at the same store that sells the
Buster Brown suits. I could have picked you up
one if only I had known. :)
> And geeeze ... obviously I have too much time on
> my hands today to be answering all these posts ...
> I've made more posts on s.s. today than I have in
> two years in Usenet .. period ... :)
Free time is cool and you should be allowed to use yours
as you want to. It's 92F outside right now and as soon
as it cools down some I'm going to go and plant some new
flowers in the front yard:)
> I hope you have a good day, Jim.
You also and -btw- good job on beating
the cancer. The power of ones brain is
a wonderful thing :)
Jim Ledford
Jim Ledford
> >Steve Chaney wrote:
> >It's always the same with you cowards.
> >You say something boneheaded and get called on it and then you change
> >the subject or declare that you were torlling.
>
> the only people you fool with you incessant retarded spamming the newsgroups
> and i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards.
steve, the only people you fool with your incessant retarded spamming of the newsgroups
with the i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards and newbees.
> you've pissed off so many people and been shitting in this group of years and
> are pretty much "hated" by most of the regulars. aside from the hideous veteran
> woman, and the retard clan which now look to have been spnaked off.
>
> turtoni - H.T.H
Turtoni, you had the rest of it correct enough.
Jim Ledford
turtoni
> Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
> enabling *anybody* ... just responding to the more positive posts.
chaney will use your amazing skills at finding his positive posts to fuel his
otherwise mostly idiotic contributions at playing the big puff daddy usenet
savior. including more recently his master plan for bombarding a number of
newsgroups with incessant retarded forgeries because after all he does own
usenet.
leaving aside the very fact that other people are quite capable of ignoring and
killfiling the people they don't want to read.
please don't feed this headcase with niceties. it's all be tried before. he's
not interested in making things better but prefers to wallow in the shit and
sink to the lowest levels possible.
turtoni - H.T.H.
The Danimal
> Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
> enabling *anybody*
True. Just as Jackie was cruel years before Brenda showed up, so too has
Steve been doing the Steve thing long before you arrived to cheer him.
> ... just responding to the more positive posts.
SAT analogy question:
ngm is to Stebe as:
1. fish is to bicycle
2. Bush is to Putin
3. Ledford is to Jenny
4. Brenda is to Jackie
5. None of the above, but it's still early
-- the Danimal
Hint for the dense: who has been ceaselessly attacked for "enabling" Jackie?
Grist for the mill: anyone want to dredge up a Chaney post attacking
Brenda for the heinous crime of liking Jackie? Actually you wouldn't
need a dredge.
p.s. Steve if you want to make it sting get some high-SMV cheerleading.
A laboratory curiosity or two doesn't change the course of a war.
-- the Danimal
Steve Chaney
(some nonsense)
dear turdeep:
all your pud are belong to sockpuppet.
-- Steve
ngm
The Danimal <dNmOcS...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm> wrote in message
news:3B2E6DA7...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm...
Anyway, you guys can all continue this fighting back and forth.
You obviously all get something out of it, or you wouldn't be
reading each other.
I will continue to respond to some interesting posts ... while I have
this spare time and am enjoying my recovery from my workaholic
ways ... :)
Meanwhile ... if you can do it, book 'em Danno!
la n.
Steve Chaney
>>Steve Chaney wrote:
>>It's always the same with you cowards.
>>You say something boneheaded and get called on it and then you change
>>the subject or declare that you were torlling.
>
>the only people you fool with you incessant retarded spamming the newsgroups
>and i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards.
>
>ngm can say what she likes but it's not appreciated in here.
Then come to San Bernardino and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT bitch.
You called me out.
You got the time.
You got the place.
You got the day.
I'll see you there.
Then we'll see who gets spnaked.
And to make it more enticing it'll be bare fists only. How's about that?
Then you'll understand that there is no PROBABLY in "steve can probably
take me".
All your front teeth are belong to me on the 23rd.
I'm going to make an example out of you as I mail the photos of your broken
face to Aaron, Brock, Jim Dutton, and anyone else who has entertained
fantasies of crossing my path in real life.
Ah what am I talking about - you ain't even gonna show the fuck up.
You're going to be hiding under your bed on the 23rd with all those
cockroaches as bodyguards.
Sunbird
Steve Chaney wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:21:51 -0500, Sunbird <pata...@nortelnetworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> >ngm wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
> >> such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
> >
> >Stick around, the real Steve will come out.
> So solly. Ngm has seen the real me for quite a while and doesn't like my
> meaner posts. Ngm has said this openly.
ok.
> But you claimed I don't respect women.
Correction: I have witnessed you not respecting women. at least two
that I can think of at this precise moment.
> I respect people when they act respectable.
So this is pretty much an admission then that there are times when
you consider it ok not to respect someone.
> I asked you to ask the MAJORITY of women on here if your claim
> was valid in their opinion.
No, you asked me to ask a prepared list of women that question.
> Knowing damned well you fucked up, and that you had nowhere to run with
> this argument, you copped out with this "don't worry, I'll be right some
> day" bullshit.
I have witnessed you not respecting women.
> I had actually expected you to claim that the women who disagreed with you,
> didn't know what disrespect of women really is.
nice scarecrow
> You the male knowing more
> about this than any woman, of course.
eh? is that yet another straw man you're trying to put together there?
> But noooooooOOOOOooooooo, you went
> and ordered up a double lameo with cheese tactic and hid behind the weakest
> fucking excuse for why you were just plain WRONG.
Not wrong. Eyewitness.
Pal.
> It's always the same with you cowards. You say something boneheaded and get
> called on it and then you change the subject or declare that you were
> torlling.
True cowardice is not owning up to one's own worst actions. You use
strong language to emphasize a weak point. If it weren't so pathetic
it would be lame.
sunbird
turtoni
Steve Chaney wrote:
> turdboy trembled in fear of my king dong:
>
> >>Steve Chaney wrote:
> >>It's always the same with you cowards.
> >>You say something boneheaded and get called on it and then you change
> >>the subject or declare that you were torlling.
> >
> >the only people you fool with you incessant retarded spamming the newsgroups
> >and i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards.
> >
> >ngm can say what she likes but it's not appreciated in here.
>
> Then come to San Bernardino and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT bitch.
damn thats one big fat ass.
> You called me out.
and you cowarded out. lol.
> You got the time.
> You got the place.
> You got the day.
>
> I'll see you there.
>
> Then we'll see who gets spnaked.
>
> And to make it more enticing it'll be bare fists only. How's about that?
i asked you for a fair fist and the coward that you are said you'd bring guns coz
this scrawny limey can kick your ass to hell and back. lol.
if you want to change you tune. then you can fly your big fat cowardily ass up to
see me. why would i bother to waste my time coming down then when you've been
hiding out from usenet for at least eight years and only just recently dared to
show some crappy picture. lol you're a renouned coward and lair... H.T.H.
> Then you'll understand that there is no PROBABLY in "steve can probably
> take me".
>
> All your front teeth are belong to me on the 23rd.
>
> I'm going to make an example out of you as I mail the photos of your broken
> face to Aaron, Brock, Jim Dutton, and anyone else who has entertained
> fantasies of crossing my path in real life.
>
> Ah what am I talking about - you ain't even gonna show the fuck up.
>
> You're going to be hiding under your bed on the 23rd with all those
> cockroaches as bodyguards.
yeah yeah headcase. like you're gonna ever show. lol.
turtoni - dance, monkey, dance. laughing at you steve. :-)
Sunbird
> p.s. Steve if you want to make it sting get some high-SMV cheerleading.
> A laboratory curiosity or two doesn't change the course of a war.
that was actually funny. congratulations, d'an
sunbird
Sunbird
> And to make it more enticing it'll be bare fists only. How's about that?
> Then you'll understand that there is no PROBABLY in "steve can probably
> take me".
> All your front teeth are belong to me on the 23rd.
> I'm going to make an example out of you as I mail the photos of your broken
> face to Aaron, Brock, Jim Dutton, and anyone else who has entertained
> fantasies of crossing my path in real life.
what a complete idiot. what a display of utter childish tantrum.
sunbird
Chris Belway
> crash street kidd wrote:
>
>> too funny. an empty husk is this jerkie.
>
> too funny you're pot bellied bald socially retarded wall flower.
>
>> down by another bot.
>
> gonna use ondrea's face repairer to fix your fat bald head yet?
> WELL???
>
>
> got jealous? got jackie obession?
>
>> you can be sure that it was lifted in large measure from
>> someone else with the serial numbers filed off.
>
> compared to your smoochies, pathetic years of brock stalking,
> self help book quotes, the dreary whining and the creepy
> way you used to stalk the ladies, what you got?
>
>> able to think without the aid of a movie script.
>
> got headcase pussy whipped control freak social retard?
>
> looking foward to when they come back for another slapping.
>
>
While I haven't been the one to jump on the bandwagon as you have, hell I
thought crash had wit and potential, I just liked this post.
Butt you forgot one thing in this post
NO CHANEY POSTS IN SOC.SINGLES, DORK!!!
========================================================================
Steatopygias's 'R' Us. doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. tbtw#6. s.s.m#8. There ain't no more
If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is,
"God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell
him is, "Probably because of something you did." - Jack Handey
========================================================================
Chris Belway
> Steve Chaney wrote:
>
>> Since Sunbird is a moron I will invite him to ask the following women if
>> they think I don't respect women:
>
>
> I was around when your ex girlfriend told all about you.
>
> I don't need someone else's opinion to form my own.
Sunbird, Steve's changed.
He's a great guy.
He's got a self-acceptance website where the message boards are the
primary reason for the website's existence.
You can read all 10 000 of these messages athttp://www.self-acceptance.org
OUT
S.T. Pickrell
> ngm can say what she likes but it's not appreciated in here.
>
> you've pissed off so many people and been shitting in this group of
> years and are pretty much "hated" by most of the regulars. aside from
> the hideous veteran woman, and the retard clan which now look to have
> been spnaked off.
Hate is a strong word. However I do believe Chaney is not a very
good flame warrior. Look at how well ssfa has been defended.
Shawn
Steve Chaney
>ngm wrote:
>
>> Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
>> enabling *anybody* ... just responding to the more positive posts.
>
>chaney will use your amazing skills at finding his positive posts to fuel his
>otherwise mostly idiotic contributions at playing the big puff daddy usenet
>savior.
I already made the toad-eep man yell "please kill(file) me" on soc.singles.
What more proof do you need?
>including more recently his master plan for bombarding a number of
>newsgroups with incessant retarded forgeries because after all he does own
>usenet.
Don't forget to add that you said I pick on anonymous cowards because as
you said anonymous cowards have no recourse against me.
>leaving aside the very fact that other people are quite capable of ignoring and
>killfiling the people they don't want to read.
"please ....k-k-kill(file) me." - tokeman, "Aliens"
>please don't feed this headcase with niceties. it's all be tried before. he's
>not interested in making things better but prefers to wallow in the shit and
>sink to the lowest levels possible.
ngm YOU MUST HATE ME BECAUSE TURTONI HAS DESIGNATED ME THE GRAND KLEAGLE
AND IF YOU DON'T HE WILL NOT SHOW UP ON THE 23RD.
-- Steve
"anybody that takes usenet to seriously deserves to be beaten to death."
Turtoni, Message-ID: <3ABAEE64...@my-deja.com>
Steve Chaney
Okay - if you manage to get laid by some high smv chick.
Deal?
Steve Chaney
name:
>
>
>Steve Chaney wrote:
>
>> turdboy trembled in fear of my king dong:
>>
>> >>Steve Chaney wrote:
>> >>It's always the same with you cowards.
>> >>You say something boneheaded and get called on it and then you change
>> >>the subject or declare that you were torlling.
>> >
>> >the only people you fool with you incessant retarded spamming the newsgroups
>> >and i'm the good guy morally superior in all of this are retards.
>> >
>> >ngm can say what she likes but it's not appreciated in here.
>>
>> Then come to San Bernardino and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT bitch.
>
>damn thats one big fat ass.
Get your ass off my foot.
>> You called me out.
>
>and you cowarded out. lol.
Message-ID? I told you I would show up.
You're the one who isn't going to show.
>> You got the time.
>> You got the place.
>> You got the day.
>>
>> I'll see you there.
>>
>> Then we'll see who gets spnaked.
>>
>> And to make it more enticing it'll be bare fists only. How's about that?
>
>i asked you for a fair fist and the coward that you are said you'd bring guns coz
>this scrawny limey can kick your ass to hell and back. lol.
You miserable coward. You said you were coming to SB to face me. Now you're
welching. To keep you from welching I dropped the guns and you're STILL
WELCHING.
>if you want to change you tune. then you can fly your big fat cowardily ass up to
>see me. why would i bother to waste my time coming down then when you've been
>hiding out from usenet for at least eight years and only just recently dared to
>show some crappy picture.
A picture which made you flinch publicly. HTH
The reason why you're so scared to show up on the 23rd is because you saw
the truth in that picture
that your face was going to be rearranged whether I came armed or not.
>> Ah what am I talking about - you ain't even gonna show the fuck up.
>>
>> You're going to be hiding under your bed on the 23rd with all those
>> cockroaches as bodyguards.
>
>yeah yeah headcase. like you're gonna ever show. lol.
I'll be there waiting for you. The problem is, YOU aren't going to show.
- Steve, hide turdboy, hide among the cockroaches, they'll protect you
Steve Chaney
wrote:
The cowardly bitch challenged me. He said he was coming to San Bernardino
to whup my ass.
I took up his challenge. Now I have told him I won't even be armed.
What scared him away is he saw my picture and publicly flinched and
admitted I could probably take him down.
Which means he knows his face is going to get rearranged.
Let his June 23rd noshow be a lesson to anyone else who challenges me to a
fight.
Frans Buijsen
> turdeeped:
> >too funny you're pot bellied bald socially retarded wall flower.
>
> death by angry brits.
As long as he stayed out of the Red Light District at, say, 4 AM on a
Sunday morning, that was not particularly likely to happen.
Face it, Chaney, Ian's lived in many places in the world. He knows his
way around in the city (don't know about the countryside). He's
currently making mega-bucks in the very competitive NYC environment,
whereas you are considering ways to get out of the slums.
Maybe you shouldn't be making jokes on others' social circumstances
here.
Hint: it's better to praise the people you like for what they have
accomplished than to disparage those you dislike. Especially if you're
having to make things up for the latter case.
> >> it's appropriate that jerkie the plagiarist bot is being taken
> >> down by another bot.
I praise La Nilo for identifying that that excellent OPR.
>
> By who, celibatus.
>
>
> >got SPNAK?
>
> Got girlfriend?
> (no)
You seem to operate under the odd assumption that everybody posts their
entire private life to Usenet, especially if it gives them bragging
power. This is odd.
--
Frans Buijsen
A woman, a dog, and a walnut tree; the more you beat them the better
they be. -- Tomas Hallin
Steve Chaney
"Please...k-k-kill(file) me now." - Tokeman, soc.singles
turtoni
Steve Chaney wrote:
> Turdeeped:
>
> >ngm wrote:
> >
> >> Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
> >> enabling *anybody* ... just responding to the more positive posts.
> >
> >chaney will use your amazing skills at finding his positive posts to fuel his
> >otherwise mostly idiotic contributions at playing the big puff daddy usenet
> >savior.
>
> I already made the toad-eep man yell "please kill(file) me" on soc.singles.
> What more proof do you need?
got jackie obession? got a life?
no.
> >including more recently his master plan for bombarding a number of
> >newsgroups with incessant retarded forgeries because after all he does own
> >usenet.
>
> Don't forget to add that you said I pick on anonymous cowards because as
> you said anonymous cowards have no recourse against me.
indeed. and being the retard that you are you think it's something to be proud of.
your not in any way the good guy you make out to be. you've been kicked around
usenet for years and years with you idiotic posting's and will try anything to get
back at people that have called you out.
> >leaving aside the very fact that other people are quite capable of ignoring and
> >killfiling the people they don't want to read.
>
> "please ....k-k-kill(file) me." - tokeman, "Aliens"
>
> >please don't feed this headcase with niceties. it's all be tried before. he's
> >not interested in making things better but prefers to wallow in the shit and
> >sink to the lowest levels possible.
>
> ngm YOU MUST HATE ME BECAUSE TURTONI HAS DESIGNATED ME THE GRAND KLEAGLE
> AND IF YOU DON'T HE WILL NOT SHOW UP ON THE 23RD.
i won't be there. why should i waste my time when you keep chopping and changing
your tune with the guns and have demostrated that you constantly lie and are a
coward.
but if you want to visit me...
btw nice of you to post arrons personal information today.
you're sick dude.
turtoni - you need help... push away...
Steve Chaney
wrote:
>
>
>Steve Chaney wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 14:21:51 -0500, Sunbird <pata...@nortelnetworks.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >ngm wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
>> >> such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
>> >
>> >Stick around, the real Steve will come out.
>
>> So solly. Ngm has seen the real me for quite a while and doesn't like my
>> meaner posts. Ngm has said this openly.
>
>ok.
>
>> But you claimed I don't respect women.
>
>Correction: I have witnessed you not respecting women. at least two
>that I can think of at this precise moment.
>
>> I respect people when they act respectable.
>
>So this is pretty much an admission then that there are times when
>you consider it ok not to respect someone.
Patrick,
you have abject stupidity
down PAT.
>> I asked you to ask the MAJORITY of women on here if your claim
>> was valid in their opinion.
>
>No, you asked me to ask a prepared list of women that question.
I threw in your friends to help you. What more do ya want?
Steve Chaney
>
>Steve Chaney <gun...@surf-side.net> wrote in message
>news:3b472219...@207.217.77.24...
>
>Yeah, I'm a woman ..... and if I thought you didn't respect me as
>such, I wouldn't be answering your posts ... ;^>
The sad part is that certain people don't realize that I respect you
despite your objections to the more brutally hard core posts I make.
A little bit of history on Sunbird: he was around when I was fighting an
equally brutal flamewar based on my hatred of male bashing. Along the way I
also mentioned a lot of instances where the law unfairly favors women.
I battled Mike Cranston right into the dirt over alimony, a subject he
fears and loathes to cross paths with me about anymore (especially after
enialle, a woman, basically said alimony is for losers).
I expressed a deeply rooted loathing of how men are expected, in a divorce,
to leave the house they bought (or even helped buy), and be homeless while
the woman gets to live in or keep the house, before the place was divided
up in divorce court. Bunk that. Nobody kicks me out of a house I paid for,
in part much LESS in full. You're gonna need the US Marines to enforce that
one on me.
I've seen plenty of men get hit with large objects by women and then when
they called the cops, the cops HAULED THE GUY OFF TO JAIL even though he
never once touched her and she admitted he didn't. Or the cops walked away,
thinking a woman can't do nobody no harm, and then BOOM! one day he's
laying out dead in the living room with a bullet in his head. I've seen
women SLAP guys just for saying something she didn't like. Now if he
slapped her back? That's 10 years, buddy. Equal rights my ass. There is but
one and only one justification for laws like this: women are given special
and preferential treatment by the law.
A woman shook her baby to death and her boyfriend (the father of the baby)
beat her senseless in a fit of rage when he couldn't get his child to
breathe. (The poor infant's neck was broken.) She pleaded down to
involuntary manslaughter or some weak assed watered down charge. They
slapped him with assault. She may be out in a year, tops. He'll spend 40
lifetimes in jail. The judge is gonna throw the book at him.
There was the Shannon Faulkner issue, and of course the constant flood of
male bashing rhetoric that kept inundating the newsgroup like the sludge
from clogged sewers.
Susan Smith accuses a black man of stealing her car and her kids. Had they
FOUND a black man that looked like the suspect she described, he would be
swinging from a tree. She turns out to be a fucking cold blooded murderer,
and a liar to boot, and what does she get? 30 years. No doubt 15 with good
behavior. She'll be out on the lecture circuit in 15 years, preaching about
the evils of child molesting fathers and how her daddy and her evil
childfree-wannabe boyfriend FORCED her to strap her kids in the back seat
of her car and send it into the river while they cried mommy mommy until
the water shut them up once and for all. I bet she watched to make sure
they drowned. BTW the poor kids' names were Alex and Michael.
Can you imagine what a man would have gotten if he had done this to his
kids? He'd be lucky to make it to trial. (Kinda like that fictional black
man.)
I challenged soc.singles to tell me how any of this could POSSIBLY be
considered to be "equal protection" under the 14th Amendment to the US
Constitution. People claimed these things did not really happen, I was just
making it up, they accused me of hating women, of being a misogynist, and
so on. Anything but addressing the facts of what happened.
Then I guess the manhaters and their enablers took one too many nagasaki
bombs when I posted quotes from two published and widely available books at
the time, which documented what at least two popular women writers thought
about men. (And it wasn't purdy.)
Just after that, Charlotte Blackmer started addressing male bashing women
posts telling them to go browse Good Vibrations and shut the fuck up. (I
forgot the URL but if you find their website and plug it into Deja and
restrict to soc.singles, it will bring up Charlotte's post. You can look
about the very WEEK before that and find my final barrages against male
bashing.)
Now at the same time, Aaron Kulkis was just entering the newsgroup and at
the time I was stupid enough to back him up because he was hell bent upon
taking on the feminists, who were ALL cheering on the male bashers and the
child murderers, etc., just to spite me. I didn't razz him on his American
Woman bashing kick until I realized that by enabling this guy I had helped
create a monster, a minion of Satan, and once he felt comfortable here
ALL OF SOC.MEN came to party.
All I wanted was the anti-male sentiment and coddle-the-female-murderers
crowd to go away. This was not an endorsement of what soc.singles is
plagued with today: an endless tirade of woman bashing.
The same self righteous dweebs who butted heads with me and accused me for
years of being misogynist, don't even fucking FLINCH when the tokeman
plagiarizes the movie Network and portrays the future of womankind as a
hell in which women are nothing but slave chattel. These morally spineless
cowards - with the sole exception of Mike - didn't even utter a peep when
he talks about abolishing sexual harassment laws. The same dickheads who
called ME a misogynist, don't have any problem with women being called the
"weaker sex."
It took a fucking year for me to get Shawn Pickrell to admit Aaron Kulkis'
bashing of American women was nutcase behavior.
But the worst part of it all is, the same people who told me Aaron Kulkis
was a kook and I was making myself look bad by supporting him, are now
praising him as a fucking war hero and an astronaut and even chummying up
to that hopelessly celibate twice-sued freak of nature that bragged so long
and hard about stalking a woman to two jobs and getting her fired.
And you know what? I read the Tokeman's plagiarism and considered what I
would do if his world came to pass. Women being forced into sex against
their will en masse. Women denied any and all jobs because they won't
consent to sex with the boss. Women being openly harassed for being ugly or
fat. It reminds me of what older black men tell me about the 1950's when
they had to face the Klan. And I think
what would the black panthers do.
what would Nat Turner do.
I know what I would do. I would start passing out guns, ammo, and knives.
Especially knives. For those wives who are a victim of tokeman's
plagiarized fantasy.
See, I knew a woman whose husband would tie her up and rape her. She
dreaded the days when he decided he wasn't going to sleep around on her. I
saw the aftermath when she would come to our group meetings looking for
help with her PC. She finally knocked him out one day with a wrought iron
pan, and when he tried to accuse her of hitting him over the head, the cops
heard her side of the story, charged him with domestic assault, and hauled
his ass away, and I didn't weep for the guy at all. She's still recovering
from her marriage to this bastard. I think she is doing okay. If she had
used a knife instead of a pan, I would testify in her defense. I offered
her my number if she needed a witness regarding someone who at least saw
her during her worst days of post-rape trauma.
But rest assured, this and other horrors will be the end consequence of the
tokeman's world if it were ever to come true.
Now you probably don't consider me as much a misogynist as a crazy ranting
dude but oh well. Let the tokeman be a warning to you that the price of
your freedom as a woman, is eternal vigilance. And a really sharp set of
Ginsus.
Nomen Nescio
just because he fails society's minimum mental and physical stature
requirements.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman, idiot
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
Steve Chaney
<f.bu...@cable.a2000.nl> wrote:
>(gun...@surf-side.net):
>> turdeeped:
>> >too funny you're pot bellied bald socially retarded wall flower.
>>
>> Says the waddling redcoat turd who fled to America to avoid being beaten to
>> death by angry brits.
>
>Hint: it's better to praise the people you like for what they have
>accomplished than to disparage those you dislike. Especially if you're
>having to make things up for the latter case.
If I said that he called me out for a fight and then he didn't show up on
the 23rd and I was there as I promised I'd be
would this be a lie?
>You seem to operate under the odd assumption that everybody posts their
>entire private life to Usenet, especially if it gives them bragging
>power. This is odd.
I falsely claimed turdboy got dumped.
Turdboy then admitted he and his girlfriend didn't see eye to eye and they
broke up.
IOW:
She dumped him.
Can I call it or can I call it?
-- Steve, I can't bloody go around claiming I saw it in my dreams, now can
I?
turtoni
Steve Chaney wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:34:41 -0500, Sunbird <pata...@nortelnetworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Steve Chaney wrote:
> >
> >
> >> And to make it more enticing it'll be bare fists only. How's about that?
> >> Then you'll understand that there is no PROBABLY in "steve can probably
> >> take me".
> >
> >> All your front teeth are belong to me on the 23rd.
> >
> >> I'm going to make an example out of you as I mail the photos of your broken
> >> face to Aaron, Brock, Jim Dutton, and anyone else who has entertained
> >> fantasies of crossing my path in real life.
> >
> >what a complete idiot. what a display of utter childish tantrum.
>
> The cowardly bitch challenged me. He said he was coming to San Bernardino
> to whup my ass.
no. i asked you out for a fair fist fight. you suggested the location and i
agreed.
then you said you wouldn't show without your guns.
> I took up his challenge. Now I have told him I won't even be armed.
you won't be there super chicken. lol. and then spin that as some kind of victory.
> What scared him away is he saw my picture and publicly flinched and
> admitted I could probably take him down.
yeah when anybody shows you a little compassion you shit in their faces as per
usual. if you and me ever get together i'll put you in hospital and that's a
promise.
> Which means he knows his face is going to get rearranged.
monkey boy posting from under his bed again?
only dared show some crappy picutre recently after eight years?
pissing your pants?
did it take a lot of balls to post that anonymously wimpering coward?
how about an address too?
LOL.
> Let his June 23rd noshow be a lesson to anyone else who challenges me to a
> fight.
LOL. chabby is the big man on usenet. got loser real life? thought so.
turtoni - it must suck to be you.
ngm
Sheesh .... this is all very sad ... all very sad .... Because you are all
intelligent people and I have even seen some clever and amusing
flames.
I couldn't help but peek at a post Jackie directed at me, implying
that I am here as some sort of a.r.c. vengeance. Now *that* is
pathetic. I haven't participated in a.r.c. for a couple of years. The
last time I did, it was to spout off at the participants for the same
childish behaviour, and then I stopped participating. I don't know
what has happened since then, but I think a.r.c. has been driven
undergrown. Recently they tried to get it resurrected, but everybody
disappeared.
Jackie seems to think I have singled out Brenda, but not at all.
I recall my last hurrah on a.r.c., directing my comments of
disgust at childish behaviour to such people as: Enaille, Rauni,
Faith, Brenda, Lurker Above, Charlene, and a few more. It
would stand to reason, then, that I would be in s.s. flaming the
hell out of Enaille, Faith, Rauni, Charlene, etc., but the past is
the past. I *really* gave Faith hell over in a.r.c. for her
participation in that stupid war, but - as far as I'm concerned -
she and I are cool and don't hold grudges. I may still disagree
with her at times, and she with me, but it's no big deal. Brenda
has a thinner skin, and I'm just going to ignore her. I think
that some of her thoughts are off the wall, and I feel I have a
right to say so or dialogue about it, but obviously that is tabu
around here. Fair enough. I have also really liked some of her posts.
What is it going to take to start over again with you guys in
order to see some good debates/discussions happening?
Anyway, carry on ..... :)
la n.
The Danimal
> Anyway, you guys can all continue this fighting back and forth.
> You obviously all get something out of it, or you wouldn't be
> reading each other.
The alliances are more fascinating than the fighting.
It's funny to watch people mend fences after years of mutual hatred
when circumstances force one of them to compromise some previously
held view. For example, after a middle-aged guy marries an even older
woman he tends to find it prudent to deny SMV theory and to ally
himself with anyone else still in denial about it, no matter how
disgracing such an alliance necessarily is.
Side question: is there any instance of two low-SMV people settling
for each other while actually admitting it? Or is humility so dead
and gone that anybody in a relationship must believe s/he is
the most attractive person not only alive but even in theory to
her/his partner?
You claimed that Jackie's vicious verbal attacks on you caused
you no pain. And yet you defend the equally cruel and vicious
Steve while missing no chance to toss in your digs at Jackie.
As far as I can tell your different reactions to these two
men result from the different ways they have treated you. This
suggests that despite your denials you are pretty much human:
you tend to treat people who favor you with favor in return,
and you attack people who attack you, reflecting the differences
in pleasure and pain various people cause you.
Do you judge people solely on the basis of what they write to
you and not to others? I.e., is there *ANYTHING* Steve could
write to anyone else that could distance you from him? If there
is, you might want to mention it now and spare Toller Cranston
the need to write you six thousand letters. Does the pain
Steve has caused others have any effect on the pleasure you get
from him? Or are you utterly unconcerned about that?
This is exactly what people have accused Brenda of doing: callously
ignoring all the pain Jackie causes others and focusing with
tunnel vision on the pleasure she gets from the kind words he writes
to her. It fascinates me how you and Brenda can be so alike in your
tyrant acceptance.
Did you know people who have been deeply hurt by Jackie
have compared Brenda to Eva Braun? Granted, that's a bit overblown,
but no hyperbole is too turgid for usenet. It's also required by,
I think, Godwin's Law.
Do you think that what the real Eva Braun did was wrong? (not rhetorical)
Next thing you know people will exhibit a grudge against Hitler's
beloved Alsatian dog Blondi.* What was the matter with that damned
dog anyway, remaining loyal to the second most evil man alive at the
time? (Sorry, Adolf, I think your pal Joe Stalin beat you for top honors,
and not just on the basis of body count but also for being better
at surviving to perpetuate evil longer, and of course for cleverly
harnessing the resources of the West to enslave millions more.)
> I will continue to respond to some interesting posts ...
Did I merely bore you or do you concede SPNAK?
-- the Danimal
*Beware of dog lovers. Many are genocidal.
Steve Chaney
>Steve Chaney wrote:
>
>> Turdeeped:
>>
>> >ngm wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ohhhh ..... geeeze .... there's that word "enabling" again .... I'm not
>> >> enabling *anybody* ... just responding to the more positive posts.
>> >
>> >chaney will use your amazing skills at finding his positive posts to fuel his
>> >otherwise mostly idiotic contributions at playing the big puff daddy usenet
>> >savior.
>>
>> I already made the toad-eep man yell "please kill(file) me" on soc.singles.
>> What more proof do you need?
>
>got vlad obession?
Indeed you do.
>> >including more recently his master plan for bombarding a number of
>> >newsgroups with incessant retarded forgeries because after all he does own
>> >usenet.
>>
>> Don't forget to add that you said I pick on anonymous cowards because as
>> you said anonymous cowards have no recourse against me.
>
>indeed. and being the retard that you are you think it's something to be proud of.
it is
in the context of thejungle
cowardice is punishable by death.
Re-read Jackie's Gospel of TheJungle. It's on the first chapter, first
verse.
>your not in any way the good guy you make out to be. you've kicked around
>usenet for years and years
And I'm gonna keep kicking.
>back at people that have called you out.
Then you call me out and then hide in a puddle of your own piss hoping I
won't see you, haul you out from under your pussy assed roach infested bed,
beat your cockroach bodyguards to death, and then beat you like a drum.
>> ngm YOU MUST HATE ME BECAUSE TURTONI HAS DESIGNATED ME THE GRAND KLEAGLE
>> AND IF YOU DON'T HE WILL NOT SHOW UP ON THE 23RD.
>
>i won't be there.
Got cowardice?
>why should i waste my time when you keep chopping and changing
I changed nothing. You had the place. You had the day and time. And I
promised I'd show. You found out I was going to take you apart and then
conveniently plant daisies right over you at the mortuary. Quick ten second
disposal of your miserable cowardly racist lily livered ass made
embarrassingly easy.
Then you saw my picture and flinched.
THAT's what changed. Your ego imploded and so did your courage.
>your tune with the guns and have demostrated that you constantly lie and are a
>coward.
Hey bitch. I told you I ain't bringing any guns. You called me out. I
agreed to meet. You got scared shitless and now you're running.
What you're scared of is facing the music for calling me a fucking nigger,
bitch. You knew it was coming. So why the fuck did you even challenge me
when you knew you were going to lose an extra five front teeth for that
nigger remark?
You knew your face was going to get lit up in style. That's why you
welched. And just as I predicted, you never intended to show up in the
first place.
>but if you want to visit me...
If I decide to visit you, Ian, you won't ever see it coming.
>btw nice of you to post arrons personal information today.
>
>you're sick dude.
That wasn't me. However, with all the people Aaron Kulkis has threatened
with murder, he should be quite shocked that someone doesn't do him a
drive-by.
>turtoni - you need help... push away...
After you, welchboy.
Public <Anonymous_Account>
fat bashers have no life.
hth
anonymous fat bashers are cowards who have no life.
hth 2.0.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman, total fucking loser
S.T. Pickrell
> i won't be there. why should i waste my time when you keep chopping and changing
> your tune with the guns and have demostrated that you constantly lie and are a
> coward.
And to think he'll still call you a no-show later on.
Shawn
ngm
The Danimal <dNmOcS...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm> wrote in message
news:3B2E8278...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm...
> ngm wrote:
> > Anyway, you guys can all continue this fighting back and forth.
> > You obviously all get something out of it, or you wouldn't be
> > reading each other.
>
> The alliances are more fascinating than the fighting.
> It's funny to watch people mend fences after years of mutual hatred
> when circumstances force one of them to compromise some previously
> held view. For example, after a middle-aged guy marries an even older
> woman he tends to find it prudent to deny SMV theory and to ally
> himself with anyone else still in denial about it, no matter how
> disgracing such an alliance necessarily is.
>
> Side question: is there any instance of two low-SMV people settling
> for each other while actually admitting it? Or is humility so dead
> and gone that anybody in a relationship must believe s/he is
> the most attractive person not only alive but even in theory to
> her/his partner?
Danno Danno Danno .... this smv businsess is *your* territory.
I could never even *begin* to give you the correct answer ... :)
>
> You claimed that Jackie's vicious verbal attacks on you caused
> you no pain. And yet you defend the equally cruel and vicious
> Steve while missing no chance to toss in your digs at Jackie.
> As far as I can tell your different reactions to these two
> men result from the different ways they have treated you. This
> suggests that despite your denials you are pretty much human:
> you tend to treat people who favor you with favor in return,
> and you attack people who attack you, reflecting the differences
> in pleasure and pain various people cause you.
The thing is ... I *don't* defend Steve's behaviour ... in fact,
I have even stuck up for Brenda, or at least agreed with her
when she was calling Steve on his stuff.
It is really hard to discuss this issue with you guys since you
have such selective attention ... sheesh ....
Jackie is a troll who has been trolling all of usenet for many
years, and I have *never* paid much attention to him. An
anonymous entity on usenet has no power to hurt me.
But *now* you have said something interesting. You have
said that some people have actually been hurt by Steve's
statements. That is interesting. I would like to know who
those people would be. You all seem to enjoy inflicting
"hurt" on each other. If *I* have hurt anybody, I hope
they will speak up and let me know, because that is not
my intention. If anybody has been hurt by Steve, I wish
they would say so, and I would listen. To me, it just all
seems like a game to you guys.
>
> Do you judge people solely on the basis of what they write to
> you and not to others? I.e., is there *ANYTHING* Steve could
> write to anyone else that could distance you from him? If there
> is, you might want to mention it now and spare Toller Cranston
> the need to write you six thousand letters. Does the pain
> Steve has caused others have any effect on the pleasure you get
> from him? Or are you utterly unconcerned about that?
What do you mean "distance myself from him". You guys
talk to him more than *I* do ... :)
And, again, if somebody is feeling the pain inflicted by Steve,
they need to let me know. Otherwise, as I said, it all seems
to be a big game to you guys. I'm truly sorry if people are
feeling hurt. I know that the hurt can be *real* when it is
taken to real life. I hate that kind of shit!
>
> This is exactly what people have accused Brenda of doing: callously
> ignoring all the pain Jackie causes others and focusing with
> tunnel vision on the pleasure she gets from the kind words he writes
> to her. It fascinates me how you and Brenda can be so alike in your
> tyrant acceptance.
>
> Did you know people who have been deeply hurt by Jackie
> have compared Brenda to Eva Braun? Granted, that's a bit overblown,
> but no hyperbole is too turgid for usenet. It's also required by,
> I think, Godwin's Law.
>
> Do you think that what the real Eva Braun did was wrong? (not rhetorical)
>
> Next thing you know people will exhibit a grudge against Hitler's
> beloved Alsatian dog Blondi.* What was the matter with that damned
> dog anyway, remaining loyal to the second most evil man alive at the
> time? (Sorry, Adolf, I think your pal Joe Stalin beat you for top honors,
> and not just on the basis of body count but also for being better
> at surviving to perpetuate evil longer, and of course for cleverly
> harnessing the resources of the West to enslave millions more.)
Well, I think you got the wrong number, but you're still an
interesting read ... :)
>
> > I will continue to respond to some interesting posts ...
>
> Did I merely bore you or do you concede SPNAK?
Actually, Danno, you're challenging my brain cells, and that
is a good thing. Because my cognitive skills are lacking as
a result of chemotherapy, and I am having to do cognitive
exercises of various types to sharpen my brain before
returning to work. It's kind of fun jousting with you.
>
> -- the Danimal
>
> *Beware of dog lovers. Many are genocidal.
Okayeee .........
la n.
[8]ページ先頭