[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

....and target positively identified:

The killings occurred when U.S. aircraft were called in to bomb
Taliban forces that were fighting U.S. and Afghan ground troops near
the villages of Geraani and Ganj Abad.

The civilian deaths likely came during two B-1 bomber strikes that
destroyed buildings where Taliban were believed to be hiding, the
report said.

Ground troops and the bomber crew could not determine if civilians
were also in the buildings, the report said.

"This investigation does not discount the possibility that more than
26 civilians were killed in this engagement," the report said.

http://tinyurl.com/lm6oqn

Yes, when you bomb **** you "believe" to be there sometimes it isn't.
Sometimes something else is there instead.

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing up. See
how that works?

[GeoSynch]

Jilly gasped:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing

Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 19, 6:57*pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
Jilly gasped:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing

Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.

You've never complained, Sugar. ;-)

[vinyl anachronist]

On Jun 19, 4:57�pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
Jilly gasped:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing

Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.

How Christian of you.

[Clyde Slick]

On Jun 20, 5:51*pm, vinyl anachronist
wrote:
On Jun 19, 4:57 pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:

Jilly gasped:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing

Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.

How Christian of you.

In my experience, Anglicans give the best head.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 20, 12:04*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 19, 4:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
...and target positively identified:

The killings occurred when U.S. aircraft were called in to bomb
Taliban forces that were fighting U.S. and Afghan ground troops near
the villages of Geraani and Ganj Abad.

The civilian deaths likely came during two B-1 bomber strikes that
destroyed buildings where Taliban were believed to be hiding, the
report said.

Ground troops and the bomber crew could not determine if civilians
were also in the buildings, the report said.

"This investigation does not discount the possibility that more than
26 civilians were killed in this engagement," the report said.

http://tinyurl.com/lm6oqn

Yes, when you bomb **** you "believe" to be there sometimes it isn't.
Sometimes something else is there instead.

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing up. See
how that works?

"The U.S. Central Command, which oversees operations in Afghanistan,
said a higher civilian death toll was possible and vowed to change its
tactics to reduce civilian deaths.

But it said the air strikes were an "appropriate means to destroy the
enemy threat" as it battled Taliban forces in Farah Province on May
4."

That is from your link.

Here's another story.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stori...agon-report-fa...

"The Pentagon said the May 4 incident began when Afghan security
personnel launched a poorly planned assault on a large Taliban force
and were overwhelmed by the militants.

The report estimated that at least 26 civilians and 78 militants were
killed when U.S. F-18 fighters and B-1 bombers bombed the village of
Granai, in Farah province, to help Afghan and U.S. ground personnel
who were under attack.

The Afghan government claims that more than 140 civilians were killed
that day. Washington and Kabul have feuded over the airstrike, which
has intensified resentment in Afghanistan toward the U.S.-led war
effort.
The report said at least some of the civilian fatalities were probably
caused by the U.S. military's failure to abide by its internal
guidelines for preventing civilian casualties, most notably when a B-1
crew failed to verify there were no civilians in a pair of buildings
before bombing them.
“Not applying all of that guidance likely resulted in civilian
casualties,” the report said. “We will never be able to determine
precisely how many civilian casualties resulted from this operation,
but it is inconsistent with the U.S. government's objective of
providing security for the Afghan people to conduct operations that
result in their death or wounding, if at all avoidable.”

What they never say was the necessity of the airstrikes to save US or
Afghan
security personnel. *By all accounts I've seen the Afghans were
getting their asses kicked and there wasn't sufficient US forces
available to extract them without air support.
If you have anything that provides sufficient detail for us to make a
judgement call on this, I'd like to see it.

"The Pentagon said the May 4 incident began when Afghan security
personnel launched a poorly planned assault on a large Taliban force
and were overwhelmed by the militants."

Proper Prior Planning Prevents ****-Poor Performance.

(I learned that at my Officer's Basic Course in 1989.)

Perhaps there was no way out at that point. Now go back and do an AAR.

What was supposed to happen? What happened? What lesson did we learn?

Any use of force can be justified ex post facto. Fine, that's over and
done with. What did we learn? How can we stop a cluster**** like that
again? Are we going to support, with US soldiers and equipment,
"poorly planned" assaults, and then blast them out of trouble with
CAS?

I vote no. I vote if they don't know how to plan we train then, and
that we have representation on their staffs as they do the planning
cycle to avoid this in the future.

[GeoSynch]

Boonie blathered:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing

Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.

How Christian of you.

You had stopped posting, so I was just checkin' ... to see if they had trundled
you off to sanitarium or something.

[vinyl anachronist]

On Jun 20, 5:13�pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
Boonie blathered:

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing
Sez the blowjob queen in between mouthfuls.
How Christian of you.

You had stopped posting,

Actually, I posted last.

so I was just checkin' ... to see

If I was going to reveal your identity?

if they had trundled
you off to sanitarium or something.

Nope. I just decided to emply some SEO to link your posts here to your
"Christian" endeavors. Have fun explaining it to your employers.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 21, 9:31*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 20, 4:54*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Jun 20, 12:04*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Jun 19, 4:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
...and target positively identified:

The killings occurred when U.S. aircraft were called in to bomb
Taliban forces that were fighting U.S. and Afghan ground troops near
the villages of Geraani and Ganj Abad.

The civilian deaths likely came during two B-1 bomber strikes that
destroyed buildings where Taliban were believed to be hiding, the
report said.

Ground troops and the bomber crew could not determine if civilians
were also in the buildings, the report said.

"This investigation does not discount the possibility that more than
26 civilians were killed in this engagement," the report said.

http://tinyurl.com/lm6oqn

Yes, when you bomb **** you "believe" to be there sometimes it isn't.

[GeoSynch]

The rabid Boontown Rat bares its vicious little fangs:

If I was going to reveal your identity?

Based on what you've purportedly "revealed", if this isn't some childish stunt,
you're barking up the wrong tree.

I just decided to emply some SEO to link your posts here to your "Christian"
endeavors. Have fun explaining it to your employers.

You should immediately apologize to the person and his employer that you
mistakenly believe is me. At least when Morein and Arny complained to your
employer(s), colleagues, etc., it wasn't a case of mistaken identity.

But you won't, because I've totally destroyed your "good guy" persona/facade,
dragged your questionable journalistic integrity through the mud, had you
reeling to the point where you were arguing with yourself in a post, and finally
have now exposed you as the mean, petty, vindictive, little Rat Fink that is the
essence of your core being.

Perhaps you can wheedle your charity-case doctor to pray for your atonement and
forgiveness or to knock some common-sense into that neanderthal BaBoon skull of
yours.

[Clyde Slick]

On Jun 21, 5:56*pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:



You should immediately apologize to the person and his employer that you
mistakenly believe is me.


Anybody mistaken for you certainly deserves an apology.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 21, 4:18*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 21, 10:15*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Jun 21, 9:31*am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Jun 20, 4:54*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Jun 20, 12:04*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Jun 19, 4:40*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
...and target positively identified:

The killings occurred when U.S. aircraft were called in to bomb
Taliban forces that were fighting U.S. and Afghan ground troops near
the villages of Geraani and Ganj Abad.

The civilian deaths likely came during two B-1 bomber strikes that
destroyed buildings where Taliban were believed to be hiding, the
report said.

Ground troops and the bomber crew could not determine if civilians
were also in the buildings, the report said.

"This investigation does not discount the possibility that more than
26 civilians were killed in this engagement," the report said.

http://tinyurl.com/lm6oqn

Yes, when you bomb **** you "believe" to be there sometimes it isn't.
Sometimes something else is there instead.

So you'd better know what it is exactly that you're blowing up. See
how that works?

"The U.S. Central Command, which oversees operations in Afghanistan,
said a higher civilian death toll was possible and vowed to change its
tactics to reduce civilian deaths.

But it said the air strikes were an "appropriate means to destroy the
enemy threat" as it battled Taliban forces in Farah Province on May
4."

That is from your link.

Here's another story.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stori...agon-report-fa...

"The Pentagon said the May 4 incident began when Afghan security
personnel launched a poorly planned assault on a large Taliban force
and were overwhelmed by the militants.

The report estimated that at least 26 civilians and 78 militants were
killed when U.S. F-18 fighters and B-1 bombers bombed the village of
Granai, in Farah province, to help Afghan and U.S. ground personnel
who were under attack.

The Afghan government claims that more than 140 civilians were killed
that day. Washington and Kabul have feuded over the airstrike, which
has intensified resentment in Afghanistan toward the U.S.-led war
effort.
The report said at least some of the civilian fatalities were probably
caused by the U.S. military's failure to abide by its internal
guidelines for preventing civilian casualties, most notably when a B-1
crew failed to verify there were no civilians in a pair of buildings
before bombing them.
“Not applying all of that guidance likely resulted in civilian
casualties,” the report said. “We will never be able to determine
precisely how many civilian casualties resulted from this operation,
but it is inconsistent with the U.S. government's objective of
providing security for the Afghan people to conduct operations that
result in their death or wounding, if at all avoidable.”

What they never say was the necessity of the airstrikes to save US or
Afghan
security personnel. *By all accounts I've seen the Afghans were
getting their asses kicked and there wasn't sufficient US forces
available to extract them without air support.
If you have anything that provides sufficient detail for us to make a
judgement call on this, I'd like to see it.

"The Pentagon said the May 4 incident began when Afghan security
personnel launched a poorly planned assault on a large Taliban force
and were overwhelmed by the militants."

Proper Prior Planning Prevents ****-Poor Performance.

(I learned that at my Officer's Basic Course in 1989.)

Perhaps there was no way out at that point. Now go back and do an AAR.

What was supposed to happen? What happened? What lesson did we learn?

Any use of force can be justified ex post facto. Fine, that's over and
done with. What did we learn? How can we stop a cluster**** like that
again? Are we going to support, with US soldiers and equipment,
"poorly planned" assaults, and then blast them out of trouble with
CAS?

*I think we will have to accept a long learning curve in bringing the
Afghan
army up to speed. *And of course the first thing the Taliban (like
Hamas) have learned is that human shields make for excellent
propaganda.

I think a long learning curve is fine. Except we have the corporate
knowledge not to allow a "poorly planned" assault to go on with US
involvement.

If we allow that to go on that shows "poor planning" on our part.

Notice the discussion that the civilians were in those buildings with
Taliban on the roof because the Taliban put them there has fallen of
the press clippings. *The bigger the deal we make of these incidents,
the more encouragement we give the enemy to employ these tactics.

Than we'd better be doubly careful. Notice that when we blow up
civilians it always creates negative press for the US.

I do not accept that this is OK due to a "long learning curve".

*No one said it was OK. *I simply point out that all your whining
won't
change difficult circumstances and eliminate civilian casualties.
I think it actually motivates the enemy to cause more.

"Whining"?

LMAO!

I vote no. I vote if they don't know how to plan we train then, and
that we have representation on their staffs as they do the planning
cycle to avoid this in the future.

I'm sure there will be adjustments made and the likely result will be
slower response
time to incursions in remote towns and villages and less assurance
that Kabul can provide these districts the security they need.

Lesson learned in Iraq: you have to place the troops in the villages
themselves.

* The Russians had how may thousands of boots on the ground in
Afghanistan and couldn't do this. *We have half as many.
Are you pushing for a 100K+ troop deployment to Afghanistan
now?

A stupid analogy on several fronts.

Russia was not trying to build an Afghani government. Russia did not
try to minimize civilian casualties, nor were they trying to quell an
"insurgency".

Equating 100,000 Russian soldiers trying to do a different task with
what we have is not intelligent.

BTW, the fact that the Russians went to Afghanistan at all is our
fault. So is the end result (Islamists taking over the "gov't" there).
LoL.

LoL. So the reason that *we're* there is also our fault. LoL.

My point remains, when the **** hits the fan and boots on the ground
need CAS to save their asses, they should get it. *The other thing to
consider is if we have a Nato unit get overrun and air support is
denied or delayed because we can't get "eyes on target" etc, our
western Euro allies won't remain in this fight.

We know that the Taliban uses human shields. We know that the Afghans
need help and training in mission planning. (To blame our
participation in a mission because it wasn't planned well is weak IMO.
We're the trainers there.)

*Who's doing the blaming? *YOU!

Um, 2pid, if that's the case so be it.

After all, it is our fault. LoL.

Unless you advocate putting our soldiers and equipment at risk by
participating in "poorly planned" operations and then having to
extricate them with CAS, human shields be damned. LoL.

And according to you our Euro allies don't fight anyway.

Some don't.

Germany specifically. According to you. LoL.

[vinyl anachronist]

On Jun 21, 2:56�pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
The rabid Boontown Rat bares its vicious little fangs:

If I was going to reveal your identity?

Based on what you've purportedly "revealed", if this isn't some childish stunt,
you're barking up the wrong tree.

You're not quite grasping the point here. It doesn't matter who you
are at this point. It's that you're using "GeoSynch."


I just decided to emply some SEO to link your posts here to your "Christian"
endeavors. Have fun explaining it to your employers.

You should immediately apologize to the person and his employer that you
mistakenly believe is me.

There is no such person. Again, this is flying over your head.

At least when Morein and Arny complained to your
employer(s), colleagues, etc., it wasn't a case of mistaken identity.

Neither is this. I'm not complaining or reporting anything to anyone.
I just can't believe that a big-time computer guy like you hasn't
figured this out yet.


But you won't, because I've totally destroyed your "good guy" persona/facade,
dragged your questionable journalistic integrity through the mud, had you
reeling to the point where you were arguing with yourself in a post, and finally
have now exposed you as the mean, petty, vindictive, little Rat Fink that is the
essence of your core being.

That's an incredible fantasy. What you fail to remember is that you're
an anonymous Usenet asshole, and no one pays attention to people like
you anymore.


Perhaps you can wheedle your charity-case doctor to pray for your atonement and
forgiveness or to knock some common-sense into that neanderthal BaBoon skull of
yours.

Wow, it looks like I hit a nerve. I'll keep going then. Thanks for the
confirmation.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 21, 9:32*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 21, 6:56*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

I do not accept that this is OK due to a "long learning curve".

*No one said it was OK. *I simply point out that all your whining
won't
change difficult circumstances and eliminate civilian casualties.
I think it actually motivates the enemy to cause more.

"Whining"?

Yeah, like that.

Duh.

Try "Professional criticism".

LMAO!

See?

Remember, 2pid, I have never said CAS is not appropriate ever. That
would be you trying to frame my argument for me (and getting it
wrong). LoL.

Lesson learned in Iraq: you have to place the troops in the villages
themselves.

* The Russians had how may thousands of boots on the ground in
Afghanistan and couldn't do this. *We have half as many.
Are you pushing for a 100K+ troop deployment to Afghanistan
now?

A stupid analogy on several fronts.

Russia was not trying to build an Afghani government.

*LoL.

LoL.

They were asked in to the country by the "gov't".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

"The Soviet war in Afghanistan (also known as the Soviet–Afghan War or
the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan) was a nine-year conflict involving
Soviet Union forces supporting the Marxist People's Democratic Party
of Afghanistan (PDPA) government against the mujahideen resistance."

Maybe you should say they weren't trying to build a popular Afghani
government.

The "gov't" already existed, dum-dum. That's why the Russians went in.
They were asked to come in. LoL.

*Russia did not
try to minimize civilian casualties, nor were they trying to quell an
"insurgency".

*What do you think the Mujahadeen were?

The civil war continued in Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal.
The Soviet Union left Afghanistan deep in winter with intimations of
panic among Kabul officials. The Afghan mujahideen were poised to
attack provincial towns and cities and eventually Kabul, if necessary.

If the mujahadeen were "insurgents" then so were confederate soldiers
in our Civil War.

Equating 100,000 Russian soldiers trying to do a different task with
what we have is not intelligent.

Do you know what brought about the downfall of the Tariki gov't in
Afghanistan?

"In 1978 the Taraki government initiated a series of reforms,
including modernization of the civil and especially marriage law,
aimed at "uprooting feudalism" in Afghan society.[11] The government
brooked no opposition to the reforms[9] and responded with violence to
unrest."

*Changes to marriage laws to eliminate feudalism.

It appears they didn't want that.

BTW, the fact that the Russians went to Afghanistan at all is our
fault.

*Carter's fault you mean. *We had every reason to go in when the
ambassador was killed.

And fund Islamists?

LOL! No wonder you like Rush and Michelle and the rest. LMAO!

So is the end result (Islamists taking over the "gov't" there).

Islamists were going to take over the gov't if the Russians hadn't
gone in. *Now we're just filling the Russian role and hopefully doing
a better job but in the end, I think the outcome will be the same.

You sound like such a defeatist. LoL.

LoL.

LoL. So the reason that *we're* there is also our fault. LoL.

*Why do I get the impression that self-loathing makes you actually
feel better
about yourself?

LOL!

History bothers you, doesn't it.

My point remains, when the **** hits the fan and boots on the ground
need CAS to save their asses, they should get it. *The other thing to
consider is if we have a Nato unit get overrun and air support is
denied or delayed because we can't get "eyes on target" etc, our
western Euro allies won't remain in this fight.

We know that the Taliban uses human shields. We know that the Afghans
need help and training in mission planning. (To blame our
participation in a mission because it wasn't planned well is weak IMO.
We're the trainers there.)

*Who's doing the blaming? *YOU!

Um, 2pid, if that's the case so be it.

After all, it is our fault. LoL.

*That appears to be the only thing that makes you happy.
No matter what, it's our fault.

It probably is easier just to ignore it. LoL.

So let's see: you advocate getting US soldiers involved in poorly
planned missions and the extricating them without regard to civilian
casualties or the propaganda nightmare you then hand to your
adversary.

OK, got it.

Unless you advocate putting our soldiers and equipment at risk by
participating in "poorly planned" operations and then having to
extricate them with CAS, human shields be damned. LoL.

*You're making Obama's war appear hopeless. *What are we fighting
for again? *Well, no matter, whatever it is, it's our fault.

No, I'm making 2pid's arguments look stupid.

[GeoSynch]

Buffoon's a few slender strands from completely losing grip of reality:

If I was going to reveal your identity?

Based on what you've purportedly "revealed", if this isn't some childish
stunt, you're barking up the wrong tree.

You're not quite grasping the point here. It doesn't matter who you are at
this point. It's that you're using "GeoSynch."

So, it was childish stunt. So, now we all know: you're so full of it, it's
seeping out your eyeballs. So thoroughly discredited, you're now reduced to the
most ridiculous face-saving, clumsily inept machinations.

I just decided to emply some SEO to link your posts here to your
"Christian" endeavors. Have fun explaining it to your employers.

You should immediately apologize to the person and his employer that you
mistakenly believe is me.

There is no such person. Again, this is flying over your head.

IOW, you knowing lied and continued to build up that lie and now it's blown
apart in your face.

At least when Morein and Arny complained to your employer(s), colleagues,
etc., it wasn't a case of mistaken identity.

Neither is this. I'm not complaining or reporting anything to anyone.

An admission of your previously claim to have snitched - to someone named Dennis
at a Christian entertainment company - was also, in fact, an outright lie.

I just can't believe that a big-time computer guy like you hasn't figured this
out yet.

What is undeniable is that you have a compulsion to turn into a crazy liar. Just
wind you up a little and you quickly proceed to get crazier and crazier.

But you won't, because I've totally destroyed your "good guy"
persona/facade, dragged your questionable journalistic integrity through the
mud, had you reeling to the point where you were arguing with yourself in a
post, and finally have now exposed you as the mean, petty, vindictive,
little Rat Fink that is the essence of your core being.

That's an incredible fantasy. What you fail to remember is that you're an
anonymous Usenet asshole, and no one pays attention to people like you
anymore.

Your compulsive posting actions belie your rote words, but that would be
expected from an irredeemable prevaricator.

Perhaps you can wheedle your charity-case doctor to pray for your atonement
and forgiveness or to knock some common-sense into that neanderthal BaBoon
skull of yours.

Wow, it looks like I hit a nerve. I'll keep going then. Thanks for the
confirmation.

I was beginning to feel a pang of guilt prodding you down the 'Usenet Pscho'
road previously traversed by McCarty and Morein, but your recent behavior
suggests you're more than willing to traipse down that path on your own accord.
That travel will eventually lead Marc Philips into a straightjacket and padded
cell. Bon voyage, Boonie.

[vinyl anachronist]

On Jun 21, 10:21�pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
Buffoon's a few slender strands from completely losing grip of reality:

If I was going to reveal your identity?
Based on what you've purportedly "revealed", if this isn't some childish
stunt, you're barking up the wrong tree.
You're not quite grasping the point here. It doesn't matter who you are at
this point. It's that you're using "GeoSynch."

So, it was childish stunt.

It was a childish stunt to use a proprietary term used by a Christian
company to attack people anonymously on the Internet, yes.

So, now we all know: you're so full of it, it's
seeping out your eyeballs.

Who's this "we"? No one pays attention to your little shenanigans. If
it wasn't for Shhh! and I, you'd be posting in a vacuum. And we're
both getting pretty bored with your one-note approach to being an
anonymous Internet asshole.

So thoroughly discredited, you're now reduced to the
most ridiculous face-saving, clumsily inept machinations.

I haven't been thoroughly discredited. You are an anonymous asshole on
the Internet, which are a dime a dozen. You really have no effect on
the real world. You're living in this fantasy world where you're
attacking people and ruining them and blah blah blah, but in reality
you're just masturbatiing online.


I just decided to emply some SEO to link your posts here to your
"Christian" endeavors. Have fun explaining it to your employers.
You should immediately apologize to the person and his employer that you
mistakenly believe is me.
There is no such person. Again, this is flying over your head.

IOW, you knowing lied and continued to build up that lie and now it's blown
apart in your face.

That sounds like the lament of a true Drama Queen. Nothing here has
ever "blown up in my face." Even Arny's little stunt had absolutely no
effect in the real world, except that one more person in the audio
world knows he's a nut.

How can you affect my real life when you make everything up? Do you
really believe that you can go on the Internet anonymously and make up
lies about perfect strangers and their families and have this huge
audience cheer you on? Where are those people? No one here sees them.
They're in your imagination. Like I've said on numerous occasions,
almost everyone here either ignores you or teases you. You're deluded
if you think you're making some kind of impact.


At least when Morein and Arny complained to your employer(s), colleagues,
etc., it wasn't a case of mistaken identity.
Neither is this. I'm not complaining or reporting anything to anyone.

An admission of your previously claim to have snitched - to someone named Dennis
at a Christian entertainment company - was also, in fact, an outright lie..

I never said I snitched to someone named Dennis. See, you can't help
but make things up. That's why no one takes you seriously.


I just can't believe that a big-time computer guy like you hasn't figured this
out yet.

What is undeniable is that you have a compulsion to turn into a crazy liar. Just
wind you up a little and you quickly proceed to get crazier and crazier.

No, not really. What you don't understand is that we're not lying to
you...we're making fun of you. Just look at the dynamics here from an
objective viewpoint if you can (I think you're way too deluded to do
that, but I'll pretend for a moment). No one here likes you. No one
here wants you to be here. No one here agrees with you. Shhh! and I
are egging you on because we're winding YOU up.

So if I tell you something and you start jumping up and down and
screaming--like you're doing right now--then I've achieved my
objectives.


But you won't, because I've totally destroyed your "good guy"
persona/facade, dragged your questionable journalistic integrity through the
mud, had you reeling to the point where you were arguing with yourself in a
post, and finally have now exposed you as the mean, petty, vindictive,
little Rat Fink that is the essence of your core being.
That's an incredible fantasy. What you fail to remember is that you're an
anonymous Usenet asshole, and no one pays attention to people like you
anymore.

Your compulsive posting actions belie your rote words, but that would be
expected from an irredeemable prevaricator.

My compulsive posting? Please. I'm the one who, according to Arny,
leaves for extended periods of time without explanation. That's hardly
compulsive. You, however, continue to post on a group where you're not
wanted. You've been doing it for years. That's not normal behavior.
That's...well, compulsive.

Remember, you can't project your feelings onto others and say it's an
IKYABWAI when they point it out to you.


Perhaps you can wheedle your charity-case doctor to pray for your atonement
and forgiveness or to knock some common-sense into that neanderthal BaBoon
skull of yours.
Wow, it looks like I hit a nerve. I'll keep going then. Thanks for the
confirmation.

I was beginning to feel a pang of guilt prodding you down the 'Usenet Pscho'
road previously traversed by McCarty and Morein, but your recent behavior
suggests you're more than willing to traipse down that path on your own accord.

There's that drama again. Now I know why Shhh! calls you
Sugar...you're certainly possess a hysterical personality. What you
don't realize is that the damage is being done without either of us
leaving the group. I haven't contacted anyone outside of the group.
All I've done is steered the exchange toward certain SEO keywords.
You've done most of the work. Let the chips fall where they may.

That travel will eventually lead Marc Philips into a straightjacket and padded
cell. Bon voyage, Boonie.

Bon voyage, Drama Queen! LoL!

[GeoSynch]

Marc Philips spewed the usual:

So, it was childish stunt.

It was a childish stunt

Speaking of childish stunts, I wonder if Arny or Morein ever contacted Child
Protective Services in Washington state to alert them your erratic behavior as a
'Usenet Psycho' placing at risk the safety of the children in your custody,
particularly the "special needs" one.

So, now we all know: you're so full of it, it's seeping out your eyeballs.

Who's this "we"?

Merely anybody capable of reading and comprehending.

So thoroughly discredited, you're now reduced to the most ridiculous
face-saving, clumsily inept machinations.

I haven't been thoroughly discredited.

Sure, why not, a compulsive pathological liar is unable to assess the damage
they inflict upon their credibility, so they continue blithely lying, as do you.

IOW, you knowing[ly] lied and continued to build up that lie and now it's
blown apart in your face.

Nothing here has ever "blown up in my face."

You lie like a rug, get caught at it, then go the tired old debating trade
tactic of obfuscation by compounding it with even more lies.

An admission of your previously claim to have snitched - to someone named
Dennis at a Christian entertainment company - was also, in fact, an outright
lie.

I never said I snitched to someone named Dennis.

Yes, you implied precisely that, but now more of the tired old debating trade
tactic of obfuscation.

What is undeniable is that you have a compulsion to turn into a crazy liar.
Just wind you up a little and you quickly proceed to get crazier and
crazier.

No, not really.

Yes, really, doesn't take much effort at all.

No one here wants you to be here.

Neither you nor the other two stooges owns or moderates rao, so the three of you
can all go sit collectively on a corkscrew.

No one here agrees with you. Shhh! and I are egging you on because we're
winding YOU up.

Paucity of originality, spouting regurgitated pap, intellectually bankrupt,
bereft of fresh ideas and a pathological liar to boot.

You're just trolling to nick snappy creative writing and clever turns-of-phrase
to incorporate into that otherwise dull, plodding writing style you eke out a
meager living with.

[vinyl anachronist]

On Jun 22, 8:33�pm, "GeoSynch" wrote:
Marc Philips spewed the usual:

So, it was childish stunt.
It was a childish stunt

Speaking of childish stunts, I wonder if Arny or Morein ever contacted Child
Protective Services in Washington state to alert them your erratic behavior as a
'Usenet Psycho' placing at risk the safety of the children in your custody,
particularly the "special needs" one.

As an advocate for special needs children in our county, I think I've
already proven myself as a caring and devoted parent in our community.
Don't you wish that your deluded fantasy of me and the real me were at
least a little similar?


So, now we all know: you're so full of it, it's seeping out your eyeballs.
Who's this "we"?

Merely anybody capable of reading and comprehending.

Anyone capable of reading and comprehending realizes that you're
attacking people anonymously on Usenet, which makes you a coward.
Anyone who sees your homophobic and sexist rants will know you're a
hate-mongering coward who's still in the closet. And everyone who sees
that you hang out here while universally unwanted and despised will
know that you're a hate-mongering coward with a personality disorder
who's still in the closet.

Is that the "we" you're talking about? Because that's the "we" that
exists here.


So thoroughly discredited, you're now reduced to the most ridiculous
face-saving, clumsily inept machinations.
I haven't been thoroughly discredited.

Sure, why not, a compulsive pathological liar is unable to assess the damage
they inflict upon their credibility, so they continue blithely lying, as do you.

That's still a hell of a fantasy. Repeating it over and over won't
make it come true, however. It will get you diagnosed with a
personality disorder, though.


IOW, you knowing[ly] lied and continued to build up that lie and now it's
blown apart in your face.
Nothing here has ever "blown up in my face."

You lie like a rug, get caught at it, then go the tired old debating trade
tactic of obfuscation by compounding it with even more lies.

That's your fantasy. In the real world, you make up endless lies about
me. Hmm..I abandoned my children, I'm divorced, both my son and I
suffer from mental retardation. I can't think of a single time you've
told the truth about me.

And you call ME a liar? LoL!


An admission of your previously claim to have snitched - to someone named
Dennis at a Christian entertainment company - was also, in fact, an outright
lie.
I never said I snitched to someone named Dennis.

Yes, you implied precisely that, but now more of the tired old debating trade
tactic of obfuscation.

Wrong. I never said I snitched to Dennis. I never implied it. Not
once. Your fantasy version of me did, however. Maybe you should ask
that guy about it.


What is undeniable is that you have a compulsion to turn into a crazy liar.
Just wind you up a little and you quickly proceed to get crazier and
crazier.
No, not really.

Yes, really, doesn't take much effort at all.

Non-response noted.


No one here wants you to be here.

Neither you nor the other two stooges owns or moderates rao, so the three of you
can all go sit collectively on a corkscrew.

That sounds like something a ten-year-old would say. "Oh yeah? Well
you can't make me leave! I'm sitting right here and I'm not moving!"

Let's see...you go onto a discussion group anonymously and attack
others and tell lies about them and their families. Almost everyone
killfiles you or ignores you immediately. The two people who pay
attention to you constantly humiliate you, outsmart you and underline
the fact that you're mentally unstable. When it gets too much to
handle, you leave for a few months. Then you return once you think the
coast is clear.

Normally people don't act like that. People with productive lives
don't do that. People with fulfilling interpersonal relationships
don't do that. The current mental health literature states that people
who lash out angrily at strangers tend to be individuals with few
friends, troubled family relationships, unfulfilling jobs with no
chance for advancement and no romantic relationships. You fit that
pathology to a T.


No one here agrees with you. Shhh! and I are egging you on because we're
winding YOU up.

Paucity of originality, spouting regurgitated pap, intellectually bankrupt,
bereft of fresh ideas and a pathological liar to boot.

Flipping through the Word-a-day calendar again? Does that ever really
impress anyone? You rarely back up your inappropriate (and sporadic)
flowery language with actual examples.


You're just trolling to nick snappy creative writing and clever turns-of-phrase
to incorporate into that otherwise dull, plodding writing style you eke out a
meager living with.

Wow...so that's it. You're jealous of me. That explains everything,

Tell you what...send me some of your writing care of the magazine and
we'll take a look at it. I'll have Ben Fong-Torres personally evaluate
it. Let's see who's dull and plodding.

Or have we already turned you down, and that's why you're stalking me?