| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Craig
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 12:30 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | It's a government office. Go Visit. Lazy git, aren't you? |
Better still would be that since you are the one making the assertion and it being your job to supply your proof maybe you should go get them pictures and scan them and put them up somewhere I might give them some study to see if I can spot whatever you fancy to be there.
Are you trying to covince me that there is evidence in government hands that just anyone can go look at and you have not already got copies to shout about from the rooftops? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: | | Greenhat wrote: | | It's a government office. Go Visit. Lazy git, aren't you? |
Better still would be that since you are the one making the assertion and it being your job to supply your proof maybe you should go get them pictures and scan them and put them up somewhere I might give them some study to see if I can spot whatever you fancy to be there.
Are you trying to covince me that there is evidence in government hands that just anyone can go look at and you have not already got copies to shout about from the rooftops? |
I'm in South East Asia. I saw the photos as part of briefings while serving on active duty in Special Forces. The photos exist.
Notice you still don't want to discuss the opinions of Robert Howard, Nick Rowe, General Charnchai (or his eyewitness account) or Mark Smith.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Craig wrote: | | Greenhat wrote: | | It's a government office. Go Visit. Lazy git, aren't you? |
Better still would be that since you are the one making the assertion and it being your job to supply your proof maybe you should go get them pictures and scan them and put them up somewhere I might give them some study to see if I can spot whatever you fancy to be there.
Are you trying to convince me that there is evidence in government hands that just anyone can go look at and you have not already got copies to shout about from the rooftops? |
I'm in South East Asia. I saw the photos as part of briefings while serving on active duty in Special Forces. The photos exist.
Notice you still don't want to discuss the opinions of Robert Howard, Nick Rowe, General Charnchai (or his eyewitness account) or Mark Smith. |
I notice that you are quite ready with the spurious accusation of what one does not want to do. There are multitudes of people with opinions and I would not have time to discuss them all and that would not have a lot to do with what I might want or not want to do.
LOL - I even feel like I let myself get suckered into "defending" Kerry now and again. Weakness on my part, that.
I am more interested in dealing with some ******** not all ********. There are probably some accusations against Kerry that are valid enough or to some degree of valid enough. I find it fascinating that there be such determination to put the absolute worst slant to any of it though.
Hell, if Kerry were having a jury trial in relation to all this there would be first hand witnesses speaking for him - well, one who he once threatened to have court martialed speaking against him.
Then there would be witnesses who would pretty much nullified, who speak against him now, for sake of documentation that their evaluations then put lie to the current claims. What are they going to say about better memory now that they thought it over for thirty some years?
Most folks would not even be allowed to witness for sake of not knowing squat but what they read or heard.
Hey! That might be fun game to play. Folks been carrying on about all sorts of proof of stuff - would it not fun to set it all up like it were a jury trial with actors who might be somewhat schooled in law to prosecute and defend ....
LOL - silly fantasy. Please to excuse my indulgence to have any idea that such a thing might stand a chance to be carried on in a rational manner.
Don't seem to have any eyewitnesses in this forum anyway. Lotta persecution and defense "lawyers" and the Judge would be the bailiff I suppose. - Administrator would decide who be held in contempt of court or is disruption who should be removed.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Do you always write in such a convoluted and non-logical manner? Just curious.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Do you always write in such a convoluted and non-logical manner? Just curious. |
Have you ceased to pursue unwholesome intimate relations with your neighbors dog?
I have noticed a number of times that I might post in some manner or another and some bozo will carry on as if that it my whole manner of presentation.
So, unless you have quit licking your neighbors dogs balls don't be asking me them "Have you stopped beating your wife yet" sort of questions.
You are beginning to impress me as a not very honest nor honorable person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig wrote: |
I notice that you are quite ready with the spurious accusation of what one does not want to do. There are multitudes of people with opinions and I would not have time to discuss them all and that would not have a lot to do with what I might want or not want to do. |
Excessive and confusing rhetoric. Run-on sentence. Possible logical inconsistencies. Failure to deal with the subject presented.
| Quote: | | LOL - I even feel like I let myself get suckered into "defending" Kerry now and again. Weakness on my part, that. |
Hanging clause. Confusion of primary topic (is the first sentence about being "suckered in" or about "feel"?). Are you British?
| Quote: | | I am more interested in dealing with some Bullcrap not all Bullcrap. There are probably some accusations against Kerry that are valid enough or to some degree of valid enough. I find it fascinating that there be such determination to put the absolute worst slant to any of it though. |
First sentence has no point. Second sentence is repetitive.
| Quote: | Hell, if Kerry were having a jury trial in relation to all this there would be first hand witnesses speaking for him - well, one who he once threatened to have court martialed speaking against him.
Then there would be witnesses who would pretty much nullified, who speak against him now, for sake of documentation that their evaluations then put lie to the current claims. What are they going to say about better memory now that they thought it over for thirty some years? |
Don't understand Officer Evaluations, do you? Last sentence doesn't make sense. Clause starting with "for sake" doesn't make sense.
| Quote: | | Most folks would not even be allowed to witness for sake of not knowing squat but what they read or heard. |
Whole sentence doesn't make sense. Do you understand the use of "for sake"?
| Quote: | | Hey! That might be fun game to play. Folks been carrying on about all sorts of proof of stuff - would it not fun to set it all up like it were a jury trial with actors who might be somewhat schooled in law to prosecute and defend .... |
And how does "somewhat" modify "schooled"? What is the need? "Would it not fun"? What is this? Stream of consciousness?
| Quote: | LOL - silly fantasy. Please to excuse my indulgence to have any idea that such a thing might stand a chance to be carried on in a rational manner.
Don't seem to have any eyewitnesses in this forum anyway. Lotta persecution and defense "lawyers" and the Judge would be the bailiff I suppose. - Administrator would decide who be held in contempt of court or is disruption who should be removed. |
"who be held"? "is disruption"?
Where are you from?
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Greenhat"] | Craig wrote: |
<deleted netcop ******** commonly used by ******** as last resort when unable to deal with the issue>
|
Oops - nothing left.
Does someone need an English Lit. degree to talk to you?
You must not frequent Usenet - or maybe you just adopt what you learn that is much considered bad manners, bad form and only would be appreciated much by folks whose sphincters you reciprocate to keep well lubricated with saliva.
Have you checked out the atrocious spelling and grammar and syntax of some of your fellows? I wonder if your little outburst might have made them blush |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, Craig, I do not "do" usenet. And how you write is a direct reflection of how you communicate. You communicate poorly because you write poorly.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Greenhat wrote: | | Sorry, Craig, I do not "do" Usenet. And how you write is a direct reflection of how you communicate. You communicate poorly because you write poorly. |
That is your best and last argument then.
Myself would think that it is you who do not understand because you are self determined stupid in relation to your own prejudiced bigotry.
I would suggest that you try Usenet for awhile. There are intelligent people enough who might educate you that your attacks on someones spelling or sentence structure does not impress a lot of folks to anything other than your being an arrogant ass who has competed and lost to someone who has not thought a whole lot more of you than as some silly lap dog humping his pant leg.
But is English all you took in school? Did you not take any philosophy or debate sort of things? I only lightweight delved into formal debate and probably should have gotten deeper into it - but guy just has to limit his priorities somewhere.
I must thank you for the laugh though. Your last responses have been amusing how easy it is to aid you in leading yourself to deterioration to such as you have reached and as last ditch act of desperation you don't only attack the messenger but you attack how the message is worded.
Well, maybe I be kind a dumb. But then it is always easier for the more intelligent to talk down to the dumb and for the more intelligent to reason out what the dumb might mean.
So shucks! - Should I try to use mostly one and two syllable words with you?
Me craig. You dumb. You go back under porch and lick you balls now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
