On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:58:16 -0700, L.W. (Bill) ------ III wrote:

> It writes like you, therefore: you are the same coward

Peccable logic.....

> and sending it
> Shaw.ca lets them sort out you low lifes.

You think they care about your little temper tantrums and petty
complaints? Especially after reading some of your posts.



> I can't believe those posts you posted yesterday

You claimed to be keeping your chatroon free from Spam and pr0n.

I just pointed out that yet again you failed miserably. Those were
originally all posted to this group while you were around, and you did
nothing to stop it -- you just bragged about it.


> knowing you let your country down in need.


Confused again, Cooyon? That may apply to you; you should have tried
harder when you were a young spud peeler.



> I think you should commit
> suicide.
> God Bless America

Oh, that looks /so/ nice together!

I'm certain both God and the US are very pleased with it.

In fact, that should be your permanent sig.












, Bill 0|||||||0
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> "Pink Freud" <psychokiller@terminal-analysis.org> wrote in message
> news:5iYUh.85348$6m4.54713@pd7urf1no
>>
>> Since this doesn't apply to me, why do you claim to have sent it to
>> shaw.ca ??
>>
>>
>> I mean, they already think you've got several screws loose at best; this
>> will push you off into a whole new category.
>>
>> You're getting confused a lot these days, Billie.
>>
>> <miao, miao>

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:58:16 -0700, L.W. (Bill) ------ III wrote:

> It writes like you, therefore: you are the same coward

Peccable logic.....

> and sending it
> Shaw.ca lets them sort out you low lifes.

You think they care about your little temper tantrums and petty
complaints? Especially after reading some of your posts.



> I can't believe those posts you posted yesterday

You claimed to be keeping your chatroon free from Spam and pr0n.

I just pointed out that yet again you failed miserably. Those were
originally all posted to this group while you were around, and you did
nothing to stop it -- you just bragged about it.


> knowing you let your country down in need.


Confused again, Cooyon? That may apply to you; you should have tried
harder when you were a young spud peeler.



> I think you should commit
> suicide.
> God Bless America

Oh, that looks /so/ nice together!

I'm certain both God and the US are very pleased with it.

In fact, that should be your permanent sig.












, Bill 0|||||||0
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> "Pink Freud" <psychokiller@terminal-analysis.org> wrote in message
> news:5iYUh.85348$6m4.54713@pd7urf1no
>>
>> Since this doesn't apply to me, why do you claim to have sent it to
>> shaw.ca ??
>>
>>
>> I mean, they already think you've got several screws loose at best; this
>> will push you off into a whole new category.
>>
>> You're getting confused a lot these days, Billie.
>>
>> <miao, miao>

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:58:16 -0700, L.W. (Bill) ------ III wrote:

> It writes like you, therefore: you are the same coward

Peccable logic.....

> and sending it
> Shaw.ca lets them sort out you low lifes.

You think they care about your little temper tantrums and petty
complaints? Especially after reading some of your posts.



> I can't believe those posts you posted yesterday

You claimed to be keeping your chatroon free from Spam and pr0n.

I just pointed out that yet again you failed miserably. Those were
originally all posted to this group while you were around, and you did
nothing to stop it -- you just bragged about it.


> knowing you let your country down in need.


Confused again, Cooyon? That may apply to you; you should have tried
harder when you were a young spud peeler.



> I think you should commit
> suicide.
> God Bless America

Oh, that looks /so/ nice together!

I'm certain both God and the US are very pleased with it.

In fact, that should be your permanent sig.












, Bill 0|||||||0
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> "Pink Freud" <psychokiller@terminal-analysis.org> wrote in message
> news:5iYUh.85348$6m4.54713@pd7urf1no
>>
>> Since this doesn't apply to me, why do you claim to have sent it to
>> shaw.ca ??
>>
>>
>> I mean, they already think you've got several screws loose at best; this
>> will push you off into a whole new category.
>>
>> You're getting confused a lot these days, Billie.
>>
>> <miao, miao>

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:58:16 -0700, L.W. (Bill) ------ III wrote:

> It writes like you, therefore: you are the same coward

Peccable logic.....

> and sending it
> Shaw.ca lets them sort out you low lifes.

You think they care about your little temper tantrums and petty
complaints? Especially after reading some of your posts.



> I can't believe those posts you posted yesterday

You claimed to be keeping your chatroon free from Spam and pr0n.

I just pointed out that yet again you failed miserably. Those were
originally all posted to this group while you were around, and you did
nothing to stop it -- you just bragged about it.


> knowing you let your country down in need.


Confused again, Cooyon? That may apply to you; you should have tried
harder when you were a young spud peeler.



> I think you should commit
> suicide.
> God Bless America

Oh, that looks /so/ nice together!

I'm certain both God and the US are very pleased with it.

In fact, that should be your permanent sig.












, Bill 0|||||||0
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> "Pink Freud" <psychokiller@terminal-analysis.org> wrote in message
> news:5iYUh.85348$6m4.54713@pd7urf1no
>>
>> Since this doesn't apply to me, why do you claim to have sent it to
>> shaw.ca ??
>>
>>
>> I mean, they already think you've got several screws loose at best; this
>> will push you off into a whole new category.
>>
>> You're getting confused a lot these days, Billie.
>>
>> <miao, miao>

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:33:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> a top posting KKKlueless
netKKKop and netJerKKK wrote:

> The definition of Responsible, which you have failed:
>
>Main Entry: re·spon·si·ble
>Pronunciation: ri-'spän(t)-s&-b&l
>Function: adjective
>Etymology: Anglo-French responsable, from respuns
>1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to
>account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for
>the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were
>responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault
>to penalties
>2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : TRUSTWORTHY b :
>able to choose for oneself between right and wrong
>3 : marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible
>financial policies> <a responsible job>
>4 : politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the
>electorate if defeated by the legislature -- used especially of the British
>cabinet

You see billy I haven't failed. The only one failure is your feeble
attempt at netKKKoping. you are a total failure.

1. posting to usenet isn't an invitation for you to E-mail anyone.
2. I am not and never will be responsible for answering to you.
3. You are a feeble minded ----wit, trying to play like you are
someone special because you got a listing in the phone book. you are
a real life "Jerk..."
4. you still didn't couple the use of an *Real* E-mail address with
the claim of being responsible.
5. If I did post with a real address what would you, e-mail threats
to me, Billy?
6. IF you know how to read headers, the proper place to send a
complaint would be to my usenet provider. make sure you send the
complete headers and make sure you tell Chris your complaint is I
called you "rude" names, pointed out you are a ------- half witted
imbecilic netKKKop and I refused to give you my "real name" and "Real
E-mail" address.

PS Billy, you are still a KKKlueless netKKKopping KKKoooKKK.

>
>--
> God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in message
>news:8nl823plpn7vppgehfnlk1drd0vd2lov7s@4ax.com
>>
>> I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>> a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>> "responsible"?
>>
>> I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>> Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>> HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>> Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>> Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>> shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>> address.
>>
>> What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>> fallacy. Proud now?
>>
>>
>>
>> May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>>
>> Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>> already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>> also in the same manner.
>>
>> I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>> with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>> responsibility.
>>
>> Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

--
Bob Officer
COOSN-266-06-01986
Hammer of Thor, Sept 2005

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:33:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> a top posting KKKlueless
netKKKop and netJerKKK wrote:

> The definition of Responsible, which you have failed:
>
>Main Entry: re·spon·si·ble
>Pronunciation: ri-'spän(t)-s&-b&l
>Function: adjective
>Etymology: Anglo-French responsable, from respuns
>1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to
>account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for
>the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were
>responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault
>to penalties
>2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : TRUSTWORTHY b :
>able to choose for oneself between right and wrong
>3 : marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible
>financial policies> <a responsible job>
>4 : politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the
>electorate if defeated by the legislature -- used especially of the British
>cabinet

You see billy I haven't failed. The only one failure is your feeble
attempt at netKKKoping. you are a total failure.

1. posting to usenet isn't an invitation for you to E-mail anyone.
2. I am not and never will be responsible for answering to you.
3. You are a feeble minded ----wit, trying to play like you are
someone special because you got a listing in the phone book. you are
a real life "Jerk..."
4. you still didn't couple the use of an *Real* E-mail address with
the claim of being responsible.
5. If I did post with a real address what would you, e-mail threats
to me, Billy?
6. IF you know how to read headers, the proper place to send a
complaint would be to my usenet provider. make sure you send the
complete headers and make sure you tell Chris your complaint is I
called you "rude" names, pointed out you are a ------- half witted
imbecilic netKKKop and I refused to give you my "real name" and "Real
E-mail" address.

PS Billy, you are still a KKKlueless netKKKopping KKKoooKKK.

>
>--
> God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in message
>news:8nl823plpn7vppgehfnlk1drd0vd2lov7s@4ax.com
>>
>> I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>> a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>> "responsible"?
>>
>> I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>> Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>> HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>> Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>> Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>> shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>> address.
>>
>> What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>> fallacy. Proud now?
>>
>>
>>
>> May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>>
>> Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>> already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>> also in the same manner.
>>
>> I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>> with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>> responsibility.
>>
>> Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

--
Bob Officer
COOSN-266-06-01986
Hammer of Thor, Sept 2005

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:33:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> a top posting KKKlueless
netKKKop and netJerKKK wrote:

> The definition of Responsible, which you have failed:
>
>Main Entry: re·spon·si·ble
>Pronunciation: ri-'spän(t)-s&-b&l
>Function: adjective
>Etymology: Anglo-French responsable, from respuns
>1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to
>account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for
>the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were
>responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault
>to penalties
>2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : TRUSTWORTHY b :
>able to choose for oneself between right and wrong
>3 : marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible
>financial policies> <a responsible job>
>4 : politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the
>electorate if defeated by the legislature -- used especially of the British
>cabinet

You see billy I haven't failed. The only one failure is your feeble
attempt at netKKKoping. you are a total failure.

1. posting to usenet isn't an invitation for you to E-mail anyone.
2. I am not and never will be responsible for answering to you.
3. You are a feeble minded ----wit, trying to play like you are
someone special because you got a listing in the phone book. you are
a real life "Jerk..."
4. you still didn't couple the use of an *Real* E-mail address with
the claim of being responsible.
5. If I did post with a real address what would you, e-mail threats
to me, Billy?
6. IF you know how to read headers, the proper place to send a
complaint would be to my usenet provider. make sure you send the
complete headers and make sure you tell Chris your complaint is I
called you "rude" names, pointed out you are a ------- half witted
imbecilic netKKKop and I refused to give you my "real name" and "Real
E-mail" address.

PS Billy, you are still a KKKlueless netKKKopping KKKoooKKK.

>
>--
> God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in message
>news:8nl823plpn7vppgehfnlk1drd0vd2lov7s@4ax.com
>>
>> I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>> a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>> "responsible"?
>>
>> I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>> Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>> HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>> Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>> Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>> shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>> address.
>>
>> What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>> fallacy. Proud now?
>>
>>
>>
>> May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>>
>> Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>> already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>> also in the same manner.
>>
>> I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>> with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>> responsibility.
>>
>> Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

--
Bob Officer
COOSN-266-06-01986
Hammer of Thor, Sept 2005

 

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:33:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> a top posting KKKlueless
netKKKop and netJerKKK wrote:

> The definition of Responsible, which you have failed:
>
>Main Entry: re·spon·si·ble
>Pronunciation: ri-'spän(t)-s&-b&l
>Function: adjective
>Etymology: Anglo-French responsable, from respuns
>1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to
>account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for
>the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were
>responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault
>to penalties
>2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : TRUSTWORTHY b :
>able to choose for oneself between right and wrong
>3 : marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible
>financial policies> <a responsible job>
>4 : politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the
>electorate if defeated by the legislature -- used especially of the British
>cabinet

You see billy I haven't failed. The only one failure is your feeble
attempt at netKKKoping. you are a total failure.

1. posting to usenet isn't an invitation for you to E-mail anyone.
2. I am not and never will be responsible for answering to you.
3. You are a feeble minded ----wit, trying to play like you are
someone special because you got a listing in the phone book. you are
a real life "Jerk..."
4. you still didn't couple the use of an *Real* E-mail address with
the claim of being responsible.
5. If I did post with a real address what would you, e-mail threats
to me, Billy?
6. IF you know how to read headers, the proper place to send a
complaint would be to my usenet provider. make sure you send the
complete headers and make sure you tell Chris your complaint is I
called you "rude" names, pointed out you are a ------- half witted
imbecilic netKKKop and I refused to give you my "real name" and "Real
E-mail" address.

PS Billy, you are still a KKKlueless netKKKopping KKKoooKKK.

>
>--
> God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
>"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in message
>news:8nl823plpn7vppgehfnlk1drd0vd2lov7s@4ax.com
>>
>> I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>> a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>> "responsible"?
>>
>> I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>> Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>> HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>> Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>> Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>> shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>> address.
>>
>> What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>> fallacy. Proud now?
>>
>>
>>
>> May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>>
>> Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>> already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>> also in the same manner.
>>
>> I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>> with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>> responsibility.
>>
>> Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

--
Bob Officer
COOSN-266-06-01986
Hammer of Thor, Sept 2005

 

What is we call it when we clean up an area, guy-bashing, too bad they
changed it from a dollar fine, to a hate crime.
I think the Bible has a cure: Cain killed his brother Abel and fixed
his family.
God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/


"Cujo DeSockpuppet" <cujo@insurgent.org> wrote in message news:f01mt4
>
> No, I mean I'm a lesbian, you homophobic derelict. Have another Pink Lady,
> your liver will thank you for it.
>
> PS: You're also a top poasting ----weasel. HTH. HAND. FOAD.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

What is we call it when we clean up an area, guy-bashing, too bad they
changed it from a dollar fine, to a hate crime.
I think the Bible has a cure: Cain killed his brother Abel and fixed
his family.
God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/


"Cujo DeSockpuppet" <cujo@insurgent.org> wrote in message news:f01mt4
>
> No, I mean I'm a lesbian, you homophobic derelict. Have another Pink Lady,
> your liver will thank you for it.
>
> PS: You're also a top poasting ----weasel. HTH. HAND. FOAD.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com