Boon,

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

I think you nailed sugar on the "creepy" aspect, but I just became
aware that she's also a religious whackjob in close philosophical
kinship with Bratzi.

I suspected that sugar was a GOIA sockpuppet. Now I think it's
possible that she's a Bratzi sockpuppet. GOIA has the religious
whackjob stuff down cold, but that poor insane fool could not write
his way out of a paper bag. Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at
least write.

I'd say sugar is the creation of one or the other of them. She seems a
perfect union of them both: not quite sane, hateful, and religious.
She's a venomous little thing, isn't she?

That's our sugar! LOL!

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in message
...

> GOIA has the religious
> whackjob stuff down cold, but that poor insane fool could not write
> his way out of a paper bag.

LOL :-)

Didn't ya know that Arny is a best-selling author?
His book can be found in every hotel bedroom.
His pen-name is Gideon :-)

[Sophistic]

John tittered:

> That's our sugar! LOL!

And this is you:
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn165/ArtyGuy/Army/Edited2.jpg

[Sophistic]

John wrote:

> Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.

As can you, a bio anyways:
http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-present-9-print.html?pp=40


RE: Military Service Past and Present

Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller

Me: US Army, 1988-Present

1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National Guard
1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty

Assignments:
Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
Direction Officer
Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.

Combat Vet

Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
Drum in the winter!)

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg

[Clyde Slick]

>
> http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg

Good One!!!

>http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg

Good one!!

>http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg

Good One!!

Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 6:15*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
>
> Good One!!!
>
> >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
>
> Good one!!
>
> >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg
>
> Good One!!
>
> Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo
>
> http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg

I'm not 100% sure but I think those are Canadians.

[Clyde Slick]

On 15 Dec, 19:37, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 6:15*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
>
> > Good One!!!
>
> > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
>
> > Good one!!
>
> > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg
>
> > Good One!!
>
> > Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo
>
> >http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg
>
> I'm not 100% sure but I think those are Canadians.

ya better know fer sure, befur ya shootem.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 5:37*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:

> Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.

Oh, so *that's* where you got "Brigade 53" and "Battalion 53". LMFAO!
LOL!

Um, sugar, this is referring to duty assignments. "S-3" (pronounced
"ess three") is a job at battalion or brigade. It is the plans and
operations officer (it would be "G3" at division or above [because you
would then be on a General's staff], or "J3" in some joint
headquarters). Conrast that with S-1 (personnel), S-2 (intelligence),
S-4 (logistics), S-5 (civil-military affairs), S-6 (signal) and S-7
(information operations). They are staff positions on the command
staff.

Based in this I would anticipate that this individual is a major about
to be promoted to LTC. It would be somewhat odd for someone to jump
from a major in a staff position at a battalion right into the S-3
position at a brigade unless that individual had command experience at
the battalion level, which a major would not typically have. The S-3
position is perhaps the most critical in any unit. This must be one
very high-speed officer.

Still LOL about "Brigade 53".

[Sophistic]

No refutation, no LOL this time 'round, John.
It figures ... that "Don't ask, don't tell" policy has served you well lo these
many years.


I wrote:

> John wrote:
>
>> Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> As can you, a bio anyways:
> http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-present-9-print.html?pp=40
>
>
> RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National
> Guard
> 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> Assignments:
> Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> Direction Officer
> Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> Combat Vet
>
> Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> Drum in the winter!)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 6:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 15 Dec, 19:37, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 6:15*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
>
> > > Good One!!!
>
> > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
>
> > > Good one!!
>
> > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg
>
> > > Good One!!
>
> > > Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo
>
> > >http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg
>
> > I'm not 100% sure but I think those are Canadians.
>
> ya better know fer sure, befur ya shootem.

Radio them and ask their position.

Better yet, next time attend the mission brief or operation order.
Then you'll know for sure.

Me? I wouldn't shoot them. "Confidence is high" that those are
Canadians.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article >,
"Sophistic" > wrote:

> John wrote:
>
> > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> As can you, a bio anyways:
> http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-present-9-p
> rint.html?pp=40
>
>
> RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National
> Guard
> 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> Assignments:
> Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion
> Fire
> Direction Officer
> Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller

THERE'S a blast from the past. I conducted a run-out concert of Messiah
there in something like 1988. Appreciative audience.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 6:58*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *"Sophistic" > wrote:
> > John wrote:
>
> > > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > As can you, a bio anyways:
> >http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
> > rint.html?pp=40
>
> > RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> > Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> > Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> > 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National
> > Guard
> > 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> > Assignments:
> > Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> > Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion
> > Fire
> > Direction Officer
> > Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> > Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
>
> THERE'S a blast from the past. *I conducted a run-out concert of Messiah
> there in something like 1988. *Appreciative audience.

THnaks JeEnn for aDmoinshing that yuo DoN't supoprt oUr trOpOs. iTs'
like Now I AHve to reBkUe you LoT"s.

oh, aNd ahve a nICe ady!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 6:50*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> No refutation, no LOL this time 'round, John.

OK, you've nailed me. Nice sleuthing! LOL!

> It figures ... that "Don't ask, don't tell" policy has served you well lo these
> many years.

I'd say it's served the Army better than the previous policy, but it
isn't where it should be. Gays should be allowed to openly serve. The
Army has lost several dozen language specialists in Arabic, Farsi and
Persian, as well as other critical specialists. How would you improve
it?

Here are some examples:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/11/15/MN57382.DTL

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/23/america/NA-GEN-US-Military-Gays.php

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/27/ap/national/mainD8J4A1V06.shtml

And in other areas as well:

http://palmcenter.org/node/337

> I wrote:
> > John wrote:
>
> >> Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > As can you, a bio anyways:

So are you going to keep calling me names, or will you call me "John"
now?

BTW, thanks for the compliment, sugar.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 4:50�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> No refutation, no LOL this time 'round, John.
> It figures ... that "Don't ask, don't tell" policy has served you well lo these
> many years.
>
>
>
> I wrote:
> > John wrote:
>
> >> Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > As can you, a bio anyways:
> >http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
>
> > RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> > Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> > Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> > 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National
> > Guard
> > 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> > Assignments:
> > Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> > Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> > Direction Officer
> > Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> > Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> > Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> > Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> > currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> > Combat Vet
>
> > Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> > Drum in the winter!)-

So you're wrong, you admit it, so you call the other guy gay. Got it,
Closet Case.

Boon

[Sophistic]

BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:

> So you're wrong,

Wrong about what?

> you admit it,

Admitted what?

> so you call the other guy gay.

He confirmed it.

> Got it,

You sure about that?

> Closet Case.

You're beginning to sound like a basket case.

[Clyde Slick]

On 15 Dec, 19:51, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 6:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15 Dec, 19:37, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Dec 15, 6:15*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
>
> > > > Good One!!!
>
> > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
>
> > > > Good one!!
>
> > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg
>
> > > > Good One!!
>
> > > > Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo
>
> > > >http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg
>
> > > I'm not 100% sure but I think those are Canadians.
>
> > ya better know fer sure, befur ya shootem.
>
> Radio them and ask their position.
>


They say they are on a training mission
to acquire advanced "sophistic"ation skills.

[Clyde Slick]

On 15 Dec, 18:37, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> John wrote:
> > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> As can you, a bio anyways:http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
>
> RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National Guard
> 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> Assignments:
> Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> Direction Officer
> Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> Combat Vet
>
> Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> Drum in the winter!)
>
> http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpghttp://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpghttp://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg

Our "Shhhhh" claims to have served in the Netherlands
that is missing from your "artyguys" resume.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 6:21�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
>
> > So you're wrong,
>
> Wrong about what?
>
> > you admit it,
>
> Admitted what?
>
> > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> He confirmed it.
>
> > Got it,
>
> You sure about that?
>
> > Closet Case.
>
> You're beginning to sound like a basket case.

In denial already? What a pussy.

Boon

[BretLudwig]

VSn'h:

>>" > It figures ... that "Don't ask, don't tell" policy has served you
well
lo=
these
> many years.

I'd say it's served the Army better than the previous policy, but it
isn't where it should be. Gays should be allowed to openly serve. The
Army has lost several dozen language specialists in Arabic, Farsi and
Persian, as well as other critical specialists. How would you improve
it?

Here are some examples:<<snip>> "<<


Now this is actually interesting. What are the ODDS a non-Middle-Eastern
immigrant American-white, black, or Oriental-would be BOTH fluent in a
Middle Eastern language, one and two, homosexual? And what are the odds
then of having SEVERAL of them?? So many that there would be an actual
correlation between homosexuality and Middle Eastern language fluency?
Because that's what it would take for that particular thing to be impacted
so whilst other MOS's/AFSCs/rates wouldn't be. What MOSs lose few or no
people? What ones lose lots? And can you break it down by gays vs.
lesbians? ((Of course few lesbians get booted out for lesbianism whilst
many more male homosexuals do, because in general the donut bumpers are
very discreet about the actual deed and specifics of whom and where. And
because lesbians are in fact the core of certain staff jobs, as is well
known. They are great workers and don't get knocked up or implicate male
superiors in scandal.))

Of course, they may not be non-Middle-Eastern, but Middle Eastern
themselves. That opens up several new and different cans of worms all of
its own.

See, this is exactly the kind of pattern a guy like Steve Sailer finds
and roots out like a bloodhound. That's why he's interesting and so many
of you chumps are not. He'd be on this like a cat in a catnip bush.


--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html

[Sophistic]

Marc 'we don't need no stinkin' credibility' Phillips badgered:

>> > So you're wrong,

> > Wrong about what?

>> > you admit it,

> > Admitted what?

>> > so you call the other guy gay.

> > He confirmed it.

>> > Got it,

> > You sure about that?

>> > Closet Case.

> > You're beginning to sound like a basket case.

> In denial already? What a pussy.

Unable to substantiate a single statement made above, BaBoon instead bogeyed,
which - as of late - has been par for the course for him.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 8:42�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Marc 'we don't need no stinkin' credibility' Phillips badgered:
>
> >> > So you're wrong,
> > > Wrong about what?
> >> > you admit it,
> > > Admitted what?
> >> > so you call the other guy gay.
> > > He confirmed it.
> >> > Got it,
> > > You sure about that?
> >> > Closet Case.
> > > You're beginning to sound like a basket case.
> > In denial already? �What a pussy.
>
> Unable to substantiate a single statement made above, BaBoon instead bogeyed,
> which - as of late - has been par for the course for him.

The whole thing went over your head. A smart man would admit it. But
it seems like you're eager to clasp onto any little detail to try to
attack. It's not something a man with a satisfying life would do.

So, how bad are things at home?

Boon

[Sophistic]

BaBoon oogah-boogah-ed:

> The whole thing went over your head.

Nice attempted deflection, which is about all you can do anymore.

You've gotten sooooo shredded as of late that you've degenerated into arguing
with yourself:

"You haven't provided any proof"

"I've provided plenty of proof"

Haha, that was priceless.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 8:51�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> BaBoon oogah-boogah-ed:
>
> > The whole thing went over your head.
>
> Nice attempted deflection, which is about all you can do anymore.
>
> You've gotten sooooo shredded as of late that you've degenerated into arguing
> with yourself:
>
> "You haven't provided any proof"
>
> "I've provided plenty of proof"
>
> Haha, that was priceless.

I don't think you have any substance there, either. You're just
glomming onto whatever debris you can find, hoping it will be worth
something.

I haven't been "shredded of late." Who's doing the shredding, you?
You're an anonymous Usenet asshole who has alienated everyone here.
Arny even dissed you this morning. That must have hurt. You've been
behind the learning curve from the beginning. Let's see...you didn't
know who Jenn was (most of us do), and you didn't know I was an editor/
writer of a music and audio magazine. So when you made your
supposedly revelatory comments to the group, you looked like an
ignorant douche. I mean honestly...did you think you came off looking
good? Do you think you hurt anyone's credibility? Really, CISG?
Really! And you really screwed up "outing" Shhh!

So you think you're hot ****? Really? You're the only one.

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 8:21*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:

> > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> He confirmed it.

He did?

[Sophistic]

Sgt Schultz nose nuttingh:

> > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:

>> > so you call the other guy gay.

> > He confirmed it.

> He did?

Implicitly with that long-winded defense of "Don't ask, don't tell."

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:09�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Sgt Schultz nose nuttingh:
>
> > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
> >> > so you call the other guy gay.
> > > He confirmed it.
> > He did?
>
> Implicitly with that long-winded defense of "Don't ask, don't tell."

So if a person defends the rights of gays, that makes them gay? Tell
us, CISG... how close are you to sticking agun in your mouth and
ending it all?

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 8:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 15 Dec, 18:37, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > John wrote:
> > > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > As can you, a bio anyways:http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
>
> > RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> > Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> > Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> > 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National Guard
> > 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> > Assignments:
> > Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> > Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> > Direction Officer
> > Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> > Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> > Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> > Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> > currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> > Combat Vet
>
> > Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> > Drum in the winter!)
>
> >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpghttp://i304.phot...
>
> Our "Shhhhh" claims to have served in the Netherlands
> that is missing from your "artyguys" resume.

Um, close, Clyde. I served with (IOW deployed alongside) the Dutch
Army and was made an honorary member of one of their units. I never
served in the Netherlands.

And I have *never* been in "Brigade 53". Ever. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 8:37*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 15 Dec, 19:51, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 6:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On 15 Dec, 19:37, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Dec 15, 6:15*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpg
>
> > > > > Good One!!!
>
> > > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n.../Army/FL21.jpg
>
> > > > > Good one!!
>
> > > > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...Army/Shoot.jpg
>
> > > > > Good One!!
>
> > > > > Hey I found an actual working link to your military photo
>
> > > > >http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/2949/pictureviakapsifirr7.jpg
>
> > > > I'm not 100% sure but I think those are Canadians.
>
> > > ya better know fer sure, befur ya shootem.
>
> > Radio them and ask their position.
>
> They say they are on a training mission
> to acquire advanced "sophistic"ation skills.

It didn't appear to me that they were pounding their tallywhackers,
but I could be wrong.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:06�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 8:21�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
> > > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> > He confirmed it.
>
> He did?

I bet you're glad CISG isn't your next door neighbor. He'd stop by
one rainy night and visit you in your garage while you're working
out. He'd try to kiss you. You'd tell him, "Hey...you have the wrong
idea."

Fifteen minutes later your brains will be sprayed all over your
kitchen wallpaper.

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 11:05*pm, Boon > wrote:

> Really! *And you really screwed up "outing" Shhh!

Now he's got Clyde wondering if sugar is onto something.

I think sugar should clear this whole mess up. He should just call Ft.
Drum and ask to speak with the CO of "Battalion 53".

(Don't tell sugar, Boon, but I heard some scuttlebutt that "Battalion
53" was tranferring to Area 51. He'd therefore better make that call
soon!) LOL!

[Sophistic]

Marc 'deflect! deflect! deflect!' Phillips reflected:

> I don't think you have any substance there, either. You're just glomming onto
> whatever debris you can find, hoping it will be worth something.

You've made ridiculously-seeming unsubstantiated claims, wound up arguing with
yourself, and even took such a humiliating shellacking from the Kroo this
morning that you were reduced to playing the old pederasty card., which is
always your last-ditch supposed trump card.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 11:09*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Sgt Schultz nose nuttingh:
>
> > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
> >> > so you call the other guy gay.
> > > He confirmed it.
> > He did?
>
> Implicitly with that long-winded defense of "Don't ask, don't tell."

Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving openly in the
military, and because I think that the "DADT" policy hurts rather than
enhances our military readiness, I am therefore gay.

Have you ever had a course called "Introductory Logic", sugar? LOL!

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:19�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 11:05�pm, Boon > wrote:
>
> > Really! �And you really screwed up "outing" Shhh!
>
> Now he's got Clyde wondering if sugar is onto something.
>
> I think sugar should clear this whole mess up. He should just call Ft.
> Drum and ask to speak with the CO of "Battalion 53".
>
> (Don't tell sugar, Boon, but I heard some scuttlebutt that "Battalion
> 53" was tranferring to Area 51. He'd therefore better make that call
> soon!) LOL!

I'm sure CISG knows a thing or two about Area 51. He's been dreaming
about being anally probed by aliens since he was a kid. You see, if
you're violated by an alien, that doesn't mean you're gay. It's the
perfect solution for him!

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 11:15*pm, Boon > wrote:
> On Dec 15, 9:06 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 8:21 pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
> > > > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> > > He confirmed it.
>
> > He did?
>
> I bet you're glad CISG isn't your next door neighbor. *He'd stop by
> one rainy night and visit you in your garage while you're working
> out. *He'd try to kiss you. *You'd tell him, "Hey...you have the wrong
> idea."
>
> Fifteen minutes later your brains will be sprayed all over your
> kitchen wallpaper.

Do I get to "sleep" with his son first?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 10:08*pm, "BretLudwig" > wrote:

> What MOSs lose few or no people? What ones lose lots? And can you break it down by gays vs.
> lesbians?

No. If you look at the links I provided apparently about 10,000 have
been discharged as a result of DADT. Of those 10,000 a few dozen have
been in linguistics. The others come from other MOS fields, including
combat arms, nuclear security and other support branches.

You and 2pid are so intent on breaking things down to some imaginary
black-or-white question (no pun intended, considering where the
question came from) that you invariably miss the overall point.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:20�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Marc 'deflect! deflect! deflect!' Phillips reflected:
>
> > I don't think you have any substance there, either. �You're just glomming onto
> > whatever debris you can find, hoping it will be worth something.
>
> You've made ridiculously-seeming unsubstantiated claims, wound up arguing with
> yourself, and even took such a humiliating shellacking from the Kroo this
> morning that you were reduced to playing the old pederasty card., which is
> always your last-ditch supposed trump card.

That's what YOU want to believe, not what really happened. You see,
Arny has called me a liar on literally hundreds of occasions without
ever once proving I lied. Whenever I ask him to show where I lied, he
runs away. The Google archive is loaded with these instances. It's
also loaded with proof that Arny has lied.

I can't be "shellacked" by someone with a paranoid/narcissistic
personality disorder. When I do provide proof to Arny, he refuses to
acknowledge it because it doesn't fit into his mental construct. So
he runs away or tries to pretend it didn't happen. The overwhelming
majority of people here will agree with this. Arny is mentally unable
to shellack anyone. It's strange that you would think he could.

But that brings up a whole 'nother can of worms. Your cannot
"shellack" anyone either. In fact, your presence here is tantamount
to a little dog that keeps barking and nipping at everyone's heels
only to get kicked repeatedly in the face. It doesn't stop you from
barking, but you're starting to spit bloody teeth onto on the ground.

I can't think of anything you've been right about. Not one thing.
You made a foolish comment about me peddling old columns to JA. Since
most of the people here know me and who I am, I'm sure you looked
pretty ridiculous to almost everyone here. After you found out you
made a big blunder, you didn't stop, you didn't apologize...you just
tried something else. And after that, you'll try something else. It
won't end, unless I end it. So here you go:

"If you don't believe me, then **** you."

That's it! That's all you get. My credibility would suffer if I
jumped through hoops to try to prove things to you. But hey, just
**** off. No one takes you seriously, no one thinks you're damaging
anyone's credibility. I can tell you "If you don't believe me, then
**** you" all day long. It doesn't affect my reputation a bit.

I can't imagine why another human would want to remain here after such
abuse, but you do. I'm not sure if you have a personality order yet,
but you do have a masochistic side. But you're not worthy to be my
bitch.

Boon

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:23�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 11:15�pm, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 9:06 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Dec 15, 8:21 pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
> > > > > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> > > > He confirmed it.
>
> > > He did?
>
> > I bet you're glad CISG isn't your next door neighbor. �He'd stop by
> > one rainy night and visit you in your garage while you're working
> > out. �He'd try to kiss you. �You'd tell him, "Hey...you have the wrong
> > idea."
>
> > Fifteen minutes later your brains will be sprayed all over your
> > kitchen wallpaper.
>
> Do I get to "sleep" with his son first?-

Depends. Will you bring me back some of that pharmaceutical grade
weed?

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 15, 11:20*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Marc 'deflect! deflect! deflect!' Phillips reflected:
>
> > I don't think you have any substance there, either. *You're just glomming onto
> > whatever debris you can find, hoping it will be worth something.
>
> You've made ridiculously-seeming unsubstantiated claims, wound up arguing with
> yourself, and even took such a humiliating shellacking from the Kroo this
> morning that you were reduced to playing the old pederasty card., which is
> always your last-ditch supposed trump card.

A serious question sugar: what would you do if you didn't think you
were gay and than had somebody "prove" you were and to top it off
found out that you'd been serving in an imaginary unit called
"Battalion 53"?

Were we just speaking of unsubstantiated claims and ass-thumpings,
sugar?

LOL!

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 9:53�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 11:20�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > Marc 'deflect! deflect! deflect!' Phillips reflected:
>
> > > I don't think you have any substance there, either. �You're just glomming onto
> > > whatever debris you can find, hoping it will be worth something.
>
> > You've made ridiculously-seeming unsubstantiated claims, wound up arguing with
> > yourself, and even took such a humiliating shellacking from the Kroo this
> > morning that you were reduced to playing the old pederasty card., which is
> > always your last-ditch supposed trump card.
>
> A serious question sugar: what would you do if you didn't think you
> were gay and than had somebody "prove" you were and to top it off
> found out that you'd been serving in an imaginary unit called
> "Battalion 53"?
>
> Were we just speaking of unsubstantiated claims and ass-thumpings,
> sugar?
>
> LOL!

It's weird that CISG thinks that Arny's pederasty is a "supposed trump
card" and not the sickening thing it is. Despite the fact that Arny
has gone into the Google archives and tried to remove most of his
incriminating posts, most of us still remember what he did and said
vividly. And back then, it was pretty easy to look at someone who
sided with Arny and wonder, "Do you think this is okay? Do you think
Arny was justified? Why do you want to allow someone into this group
who has been storing child pornography on his hard drive for three
years and describing its graphic content to everyone else on the
group?"

So here we have CISG, who trivializes the fact that Arny did these
things. Combined with the homophobia, I think we're starting to see
just how messed up this guy really is.

Boon

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article >,
"Sophistic" > wrote:

> Sgt Schultz nose nuttingh:
>
> > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
>
> >> > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> > > He confirmed it.
>
> > He did?
>
> Implicitly with that long-winded defense of "Don't ask, don't tell."

lol

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> I'm sure CISG knows a thing or two about Area 51. He's been dreaming
> about being anally probed by aliens since he was a kid. You see, if
> you're violated by an alien, that doesn't mean you're gay.

Conventional wisdom on this subject is that the "alien probe" story is a
smokescreen for getting buggered by Uncle Sleazeball.

But getting back to the point, we in the LGBT community are satisfied with
Stynchie's claims that he's on your team. You may well reject everything
Blobbo says on the basis that he's a super-duper-mega loser, but on this
point, our team is fully staffed.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving openly in the
> military, and because I think that the "DADT" policy hurts rather than
> enhances our military readiness, I am therefore gay.
>
> Have you ever had a course called "Introductory Logic", sugar? LOL!

Don't confuse Stynchie. He's only 12 credits away from earning his "Ms.
Debating Trade" degree.

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Dec, 00:14, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 8:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15 Dec, 18:37, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > John wrote:
> > > > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > > As can you, a bio anyways:http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
>
> > > RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> > > Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> > > Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> > > 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National Guard
> > > 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> > > Assignments:
> > > Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> > > Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> > > Direction Officer
> > > Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> > > Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> > > Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> > > Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> > > currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> > > Combat Vet
>
> > > Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> > > Drum in the winter!)
>
> > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpghttp://i304.phot....
>
> > Our "Shhhhh" claims to have served in the Netherlands
> > that is missing from your "artyguys" resume.
>
> Um, close, Clyde. I served with (IOW deployed alongside) the Dutch
> Army and was made an honorary member of one of their units. I never
> served in the Netherlands.
>
> And I have *never* been in "Brigade 53". Ever. LOL!-

that is something I can actually beleive.

[Boon]

On Dec 15, 10:32�pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Boon said:
>
> > I'm sure CISG knows a thing or two about Area 51. �He's been dreaming
> > about being anally probed by aliens since he was a kid. �You see, if
> > you're violated by an alien, that doesn't mean you're gay.
>
> Conventional wisdom on this subject is that the "alien probe" story is a
> smokescreen for getting buggered by Uncle Sleazeball.
>
> But getting back to the point, we in the LGBT community are satisfied with
> Stynchie's claims that he's on your team. You may well reject everything
> Blobbo says on the basis that he's a super-duper-mega loser, but on this
> point, our team is fully staffed.

We don't want him either. I guess that leaves bestiality, although I
suspect asexuality is a better description of CISG's "lifestyle
choice."

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 12:42*am, Boon > wrote:
> On Dec 15, 10:32 pm, George M. Middius >
> wrote:
>
> > Boon said:
>
> > > I'm sure CISG knows a thing or two about Area 51. He's been dreaming
> > > about being anally probed by aliens since he was a kid. You see, if
> > > you're violated by an alien, that doesn't mean you're gay.
>
> > Conventional wisdom on this subject is that the "alien probe" story is a
> > smokescreen for getting buggered by Uncle Sleazeball.
>
> > But getting back to the point, we in the LGBT community are satisfied with
> > Stynchie's claims that he's on your team. You may well reject everything
> > Blobbo says on the basis that he's a super-duper-mega loser, but on this
> > point, our team is fully staffed.
>
> We don't want him either. I guess that leaves bestiality, although I
> suspect asexuality is a better description of CISG's "lifestyle
> choice."

He could talk to 2pid and see what the stray mongrel market is like.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 12:32*am, George M. Middius >
wrote:

> But getting back to the point, we in the LGBT community are satisfied with
> Stynchie's claims that he's on your team. You may well reject everything
> Blobbo says on the basis that he's a super-duper-mega loser, but on this
> point, our team is fully staffed.

I'm with 2pid on this one. We should vote and follow the "will of the
people".

If the "will of the people" can take rights away from the GLBT
community, perhaps it can also force sugar on you as well.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 12:07*am, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *"Sophistic" > wrote:
> > Sgt Schultz nose nuttingh:
>
> > > > BaBoon slipped on a banana peel:
>
> > >> > so you call the other guy gay.
>
> > > > He confirmed it.
>
> > > He did?
>
> > Implicitly with that long-winded defense of "Don't ask, don't tell."
>
> lol

Also funny: saying "DADT doesn't go far enough" is a "defense of
DADT".

Sugar has himself a faulty thesaurus. That must be it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 12:39*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 16 Dec, 00:14, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 8:43*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On 15 Dec, 18:37, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > > John wrote:
> > > > > Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at least write.
>
> > > > As can you, a bio anyways:http://hdforums.com/forum/off-topic/9199-military-service-past-and-pr...
>
> > > > RE: Military Service Past and Present
>
> > > > Dad: US Navy, Air Traffic Controller
>
> > > > Me: US Army, 1988-Present
>
> > > > 1988-1993: Enlisted, Cannon Crewmember (13B), New Hampshire Army National Guard
> > > > 1993-Present, Commissioned Officer, Field Artillery, Active Duty
>
> > > > Assignments:
> > > > Camp Hovey Korea- Company Fire Support Officer
> > > > Fort Bragg, NC- Platoon Fire Direction Officer, Platoon Leader, Battalion Fire
> > > > Direction Officer
> > > > Fort Campbell, KY- Battalion Fire Support Officer, Battery Commander
> > > > Fort Irwin, CA- Observer/Controller
> > > > Indianapolis, IN- Operations Officer for an Army Recruiting Battalion
> > > > Fort Drum, NY- Deputy Fire Support Coordinator, Brigade Fire Support Officer,
> > > > currently the Battalion S3, soon to be Brigade S3.
>
> > > > Combat Vet
>
> > > > Here are some photos of our training down in Florida (yes, even we leave Fort
> > > > Drum in the winter!)
>
> > > >http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/n...my/Edited2.jpghttp://i304.phot...
>
> > > Our "Shhhhh" claims to have served in the Netherlands
> > > that is missing from your "artyguys" resume.
>
> > Um, close, Clyde. I served with (IOW deployed alongside) the Dutch
> > Army and was made an honorary member of one of their units. I never
> > served in the Netherlands.
>
> > And I have *never* been in "Brigade 53". Ever. LOL!
>
> that is something I can actually beleive.

Nobody else has, either. It's a very, very "elite" unit.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 12:18*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Shhhh! said:
>
> > > But getting back to the point, we in the LGBT community are satisfied with
> > > Stynchie's claims that he's on your team. You may well reject everything
> > > Blobbo says on the basis that he's a super-duper-mega loser, but on this
> > > point, our team is fully staffed.
>
> > I'm with 2pid on this one. We should vote and follow the "will of the
> > people".
>
> > If the "will of the people" can take rights away from the GLBT
> > community, perhaps it can also force sugar on you as well.
>
> Hmph. Just don't try to get anybody to marry him, though.

I'm afraid this would be one of those "no backs, no gives, no trades"
transactions.

[Sophistic]

BaBoon goes apeguano:

>So here you go:

> "If you don't believe me, then **** you."

>That's it!

Hysterical histrionics, bellicose bluster, all thinly-disguised distractions
from having to make good on claim made when called to account.

I wonder how many prestigious audio manufacturers would risk having their brand
tarnished by advertising in a publication known to have a mental-defective
writer on staff named Marc Phillips, due, in part, to all that neurotoxic
aspartame-laced diet soda you've been endlessly swilling over the years.

I certainly wouldn't want to give old Bob Morein any funny ideas.

[Sophistic]

Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:

> Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...

It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.

A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.

And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.

You are an idiot.
40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
(it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
gay.

that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
whether or not they are gay.

I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
that means you are an idiot.

[Sophistic]

Art Sackmanured:

> I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> that means you are an idiot.

You're too feebleminded to waste time arguing with.

[Clyde Slick]

On 16 Dec, 22:25, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Art Sackmanured:
>
> > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > that means you are an idiot.
>
> You're too feebleminded to waste time arguing with.

you are too busy playing drum major at the idiots parade

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Clyde Slick said:

> > > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > > that means you are an idiot.
> >
> > You're too feebleminded to waste time arguing with.
>
> you are too busy playing drum major at the idiots parade

Stynchie is depressed because Arnii isn't sticking up for him:

http://tinyurl.com/aejo4

[Sophistic]

Pudge the Gimp minced:

> [GeoSynch the Great(est)] is...

Were you secretly chortling while penning that seemingly heartful paean to trots
yesterday, 'lil Georgie?

[Boon]

On Dec 16, 6:17�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> BaBoon goes apeguano:
>
> >So here you go:
> > "If you don't believe me, then **** you."
> >That's it!
>
> Hysterical histrionics, bellicose bluster, all thinly-disguised distractions
> from having to make good on claim made when called to account.

That was a little too predictable. My other choice would be to supply
the information to you, have you try to discredit it for some arcane
reason or another, and then ask me to do something else. But that's
part of your game, isn't it? By getting people to respond to you,
you're fulfilling a need to get the recognition you lack in real
life. I'm merely stopping here because it would require effort on my
part to fulfill your request. Unless you're an actual advertiser, I
see no need to comply.

Heck, you're not even a reader. So you simply don't count.

>
> I wonder how many prestigious audio manufacturers would risk having their brand
> tarnished by advertising in a publication known to have a mental-defective
> writer on staff named Marc Phillips,

I'm reviewing a pair of speakers right now where the manufacturer
requested me by name. I guess he didn't get your memo.

due, in part, to all that neurotoxic
> aspartame-laced diet soda you've been endlessly swilling over the years.

I really feel honored (and a little creeped out) that you're so
concerned with my health. Will you be needing to examine samples of
my feces next? Give me your name and address and I'll ship it right
out!

>
> I certainly wouldn't want to give old Bob Morein any funny ideas.

I think Bob learned his lesson. He's "uncommonly smart," unlike you.

Boon

[Boon]

On Dec 16, 7:25�pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Art Sackmanured:
>
> > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > that means you are an idiot.
>
> You're too feebleminded to waste time arguing with.

No, Art had a great point and made you look really dumb. I can see
why you ran away.

Boon

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article >,
"Sophistic" > wrote:

> Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you
> well
> lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit,
> it
> doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> response complete with links and all.

A thinking human being would understand that normal people can have
strong opinions or "give a whit" about and have thought through issues
that "don't mean anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.
But I may be presuming too much.

[Boon]

On Dec 16, 10:29�pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> �"Sophistic" > wrote:
> > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you
> > well
> > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit,
> > it
> > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > response complete with links and all.
>
> A thinking human being would understand that normal people can have
> strong opinions or "give a whit" about and have thought through issues
> that "don't mean anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person. �
> But I may be presuming too much.

I, for example, believe that it's wrong for one human being to
interfere with another human being's right to be happy if it doesn't
affect them directly. That's called a principle. It's clear that
CISG doesn't have any of those.

Boon

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 8:17*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> BaBoon goes apeguano:
>
> >So here you go:
> > "If you don't believe me, then **** you."
> >That's it!
>
> Hysterical histrionics, bellicose bluster, all thinly-disguised distractions

"Brigade 53" is wondering whether you'll be supporting thier Christams
party this year.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 10:06*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Pudge the Gimp minced:
>
> > [GeoSynch the Great(est)] is...
>
> Were you secretly chortling while penning that seemingly heartful paean to trots
> yesterday, 'lil Georgie?

While I await your response from the CO of "Battalion 53". You called
him, right?

Am I going to get a good OER or what?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 8:41*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.

What, that I am an advocate of rights for gays, sugar? You should have
just asked. Anybody on RAO could have told you that. It's not a
secret.

There I said it: I am a strong advocate of rights for gays. LOL!

> A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt..

I also am a strong advocate of rights for blacks and other minorities.
I also believe in equality for women. There. I said it. I have proven
to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am a black woman. LOL!

> And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.

Um, OK, sugar.

And since you didn't deny that you'd never had Introductory Logic, you
have proven beyond all doubt why you don't undertand it. As I've said
before, the only one impressed with your "intelligence" is you.

LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 9:25*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Art Sackmanured:
>
> > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > that means you are an idiot.
>
> You're too feebleminded to waste time arguing with.

Here we have sugar surrendering. I can't blame him. He's been getting
kicked around a lot recently. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 10:06*pm, "Sophistic" > wrote:
> Pudge the Gimp minced:
>
> > [GeoSynch the Great(est)] is...
>
> Were you secretly chortling while penning that seemingly heartful paean to trots
> yesterday, 'lil Georgie?

Please leave George alone. He's helping "Brigade 53" prepare for
deployment. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 17, 12:29*am, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *"Sophistic" > wrote:
> > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you
> > well
> > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit,
> > it
> > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > response complete with links and all.
>
> A thinking human being would understand that normal people can have
> strong opinions or "give a whit" about and have thought through issues
> that "don't mean anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person. *
> But I may be presuming too much.

I believe, in fact, that one big problem that the US faces is that
there are too many people who 'think' like sugar does: "If it doesn't
affect me, why should I care?"

The early fathers of the US assumed active participation and an
intelligent, informed electorate. People like 2pid and sugar should
not be allowed to vote as they do not meet either criteria.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 16, 9:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> > are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> > And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.
>
> You are an idiot.
> 40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
> (it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
> gay.
>
> that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
> whether or not they are gay.
>
> I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> that means you are an idiot.

Um, Clyde, I agree with you here, but sugar is exemplifying the "you
can't be an officer because you don't think like one" train of
thought.

It's a dangerous line of reasoning. Remove "straight male" from
sugar's argument and insert "Army officer" to see how it works.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 01:29, Jenn > wrote:


>
> A thinking human being would understand that normal people can have
> strong opinions or "give a whit" about and have thought through issues
> that "don't mean anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person. *
> But I may be presuming too much.


If you mean that you are presuming that Sophistic is
a thinking human being, you indeed are presuming too much.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 06:56, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:


>
> I also am a strong advocate of rights for blacks and other minorities.
> I also believe in equality for women. There. I said it. I have proven
> to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am a black woman. LOL!
>


Sophistic will be calling you brown sugar from now on.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 07:24, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 16, 9:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> > > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> > > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > > response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> > > are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> > > And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.
>
> > You are an idiot.
> > 40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
> > (it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
> > gay.
>
> > that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
> > whether or not they are gay.
>
> > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > that means you are an idiot.
>
> Um, Clyde, I agree with you here, but sugar is exemplifying the "you
> can't be an officer because you don't think like one" train of
> thought.
>

no, he did not.


> It's a dangerous line of reasoning. Remove "straight male" from
> sugar's argument and insert "Army officer" to see how it works.-


it would go like this:
If one supports rights for officrs, on must be an officer.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message


> A thinking human being would understand that normal
> people can have strong opinions or "give a whit" about
> and have thought through issues that "don't mean
> anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.

Jenn, you do realize that this sentence is more than a little convoluted?

> But I may be presuming too much.

Presuming normal adult intelligence in the Middiot camp would a good example
of that.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>
> > A thinking human being would understand that normal
> > people can have strong opinions or "give a whit" about
> > and have thought through issues that "don't mean
> > anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.
>
> Jenn, you do realize that this sentence is more than a little convoluted?

Yep, the dangers of posting at the end of a terribly stressful 14 work
day. I believe that readers got the point, however.

[Boon]

On Dec 17, 7:28�am, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
> �"Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>
> > > A thinking human being would understand that normal
> > > people can have strong opinions or "give a whit" about
> > > and have thought through issues that "don't mean
> > > anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.
>
> > Jenn, you do realize that this sentence is more than a little convoluted?
>
> Yep, the dangers of posting at the end of a terribly stressful 14 work
> day. �I believe that readers got the point, however.

14 hour work day? That's nothing! Arny spends at least 18 hours a
day on his "Usenet career."

Boon

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 11:02, Boon > wrote:
> On Dec 17, 7:28 am, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >
>
> > > > A thinking human being would understand that normal
> > > > people can have strong opinions or "give a whit" about
> > > > and have thought through issues that "don't mean
> > > > anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.
>
> > > Jenn, you do realize that this sentence is more than a little convoluted?
>
> > Yep, the dangers of posting at the end of a terribly stressful 14 work
> > day. I believe that readers got the point, however.
>
> 14 hour work day? *That's nothing! *Arny spends at least 18 hours a
> day on his "Usenet career."
>
> Boon

We once figured out that Clerkie was making about $2.00 per
hour as an audio writer. Do you think that Arny is
doing any better in his Usenet career?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> I believe, in fact, that one big problem that the US faces is that
> there are too many people who 'think' like sugar does: "If it doesn't
> affect me, why should I care?"

You can thank the GOP for cementing that attitude into national politics.

> The early fathers of the US assumed active participation and an
> intelligent, informed electorate.

Yes, except for the part where only certain people were enfranchised in the
beginning. (Blobbo would probably call the 18th century "the good old days
when voters were men and men were white christians".)

> People like 2pid and sugar should
> not be allowed to vote as they do not meet either criteria.

In a perfect world, we'd have an enlightened eugenics program that would
have prevented the existence of slope-brows like those two.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> > Yep, the dangers of posting at the end of a terribly stressful 14 work
> > day. I believe that readers got the point, however.
>
> 14 hour work day? That's nothing! Arny spends at least 18 hours a
> day on his "Usenet career."

If iron knees killed, loT"s!

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 12:25, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Shhhh! said:
>
> > I believe, in fact, that one big problem that the US faces is that
> > there are too many people who 'think' like sugar does: "If it doesn't
> > affect me, why should I care?"
>
> You can thank the GOP for cementing that attitude into national politics.
>


Not really, they rely on non gunowners to support
the right to bear arms and people who don't
bear children (men) to protect a fetus' right to life

Its just a different set of rights they believe
are important.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 12:26, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Boon said:
>
> > > Yep, the dangers of posting at the end of a terribly stressful 14 work
> > > day. I believe that readers got the point, however.
>
> > 14 hour work day? *That's nothing! *Arny spends at least 18 hours a
> > day on his "Usenet career."
>
> If iron knees killed, loT"s!

my irony kness feel very rusty, but so far, its not killin me.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 17, 8:27*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 07:24, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 16, 9:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > > > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> > > > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > > > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> > > > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > > > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > > > response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> > > > are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> > > > And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.
>
> > > You are an idiot.
> > > 40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
> > > (it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
> > > gay.
>
> > > that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
> > > whether or not they are gay.
>
> > > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > > that means you are an idiot.
>
> > Um, Clyde, I agree with you here, but sugar is exemplifying the "you
> > can't be an officer because you don't think like one" train of
> > thought.
>
> no, he did not.

Yes, he did.

> > It's a dangerous line of reasoning. Remove "straight male" from
> > sugar's argument and insert "Army officer" to see how it works.-
>
> it would go like this:
> If one supports rights for officrs, on must be an officer.

The point is making assumptions on what some particular group
("straight males" or "Army officers") has to think or behave like.

"An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
this way.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 17, 8:36*am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
>
>
> > A thinking human being would understand that normal
> > people can have strong opinions or "give a whit" about
> > and have thought through issues that "don't mean
> > anything" or don't "affect in any way" that person.
>
> Jenn, you do realize that this sentence is more than a little convoluted?

Poor GOIA has steam coming out of its ears.

> > *But I may be presuming too much.

> Presuming normal adult intelligence in the Middiot camp would a good example
> of that.

If you cannot understand something, best to leave it a lone, GOIA.

Take life, for example. It seems to confuse you.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 18:42, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 8:27*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 17 Dec, 07:24, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On Dec 16, 9:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > > > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > > > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > > > > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> > > > > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > > > > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> > > > > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > > > > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > > > > response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> > > > > are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> > > > > And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.
>
> > > > You are an idiot.
> > > > 40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
> > > > (it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
> > > > gay.
>
> > > > that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
> > > > whether or not they are gay.
>
> > > > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > > > that means you are an idiot.
>
> > > Um, Clyde, I agree with you here, but sugar is exemplifying the "you
> > > can't be an officer because you don't think like one" train of
> > > thought.
>
> > no, he did not.
>
> Yes, he did.
>
> > > It's a dangerous line of reasoning. Remove "straight male" from
> > > sugar's argument and insert "Army officer" to see how it works.-
>
> > it would go like this:
> > If one supports rights for officrs, on must be an officer.
>
> The point is making assumptions on what some particular group
> ("straight males" or "Army officers") has to think or behave like.
>
> "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> this way.-

that wasn't sugar's argument.

anwya, you are a hypocrite, as you ascribe'that swame reasoning
to republicans and conservatives.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Clyde Slick said:

> > "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> > officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> > believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> > this way.-
>
> that wasn't sugar's argument.

Wuz too.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 17, 7:32*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 18:42, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 8:27*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > On 17 Dec, 07:24, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Dec 16, 9:20*pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 16 Dec, 21:41, "Sophistic" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Sgt. Schultz still nose nuttingh:
>
> > > > > > > Ah, so because I have no problem with gays serving...
>
> > > > > > It was a deceptively simple statement "Don't ask, don't tell has served you well
> > > > > > lo these many years," that flushed out the response sought.
>
> > > > > > A straight male would have responded along the lines of 'I don't give a whit, it
> > > > > > doesn't mean anything to me or affect in any way,' but only an
> > > > > > intensely-interested advocate, i.e., a homo, would provide such a lengthy
> > > > > > response complete with links and all. Whether you realized it (or not) then or
> > > > > > are willing to admit it (or not) now, but you confirmed it beyond a doubt.
>
> > > > > > And you can stick that in your personal sperm bank, sugar.
>
> > > > > You are an idiot.
> > > > > 40 some percent of Californians voted for gay marriage
> > > > > (it is well known I oppose it), that does not mean that they are all
> > > > > gay.
>
> > > > > that someone takes a gay rghts position has nothing to do with
> > > > > whether or not they are gay.
>
> > > > > I have seen you take a number of pro idiot positions, i guess
> > > > > that means you are an idiot.
>
> > > > Um, Clyde, I agree with you here, but sugar is exemplifying the "you
> > > > can't be an officer because you don't think like one" train of
> > > > thought.
>
> > > no, he did not.
>
> > Yes, he did.
>
> > > > It's a dangerous line of reasoning. Remove "straight male" from
> > > > sugar's argument and insert "Army officer" to see how it works.-
>
> > > it would go like this:
> > > If one supports rights for officrs, on must be an officer.
>
> > The point is making assumptions on what some particular group
> > ("straight males" or "Army officers") has to think or behave like.
>
> > "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> > officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> > believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> > this way.-
>
> that wasn't sugar's argument.
>
> anwya, you are a hypocrite, as you ascribe'that swame reasoning
> to republicans and conservatives.

I wasn't aware that straight males and Army officers had published a
platform. My bad.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 21:05, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Clyde Slick said:
>
> > > "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> > > officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> > > believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> > > this way.-
>
> > that wasn't sugar's argument.
>
> Wuz too.

[Clyde Slick]

On 17 Dec, 21:05, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Clyde Slick said:
>
> > > "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> > > officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> > > believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> > > this way.-
>
> > that wasn't sugar's argument.
>
> Wuz too.

nope, he said if you support rights for a group,
you must be a member of that group

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Dec 18, 6:03*am, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 17 Dec, 21:05, George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > Clyde Slick said:
>
> > > > "An Army officer would believe the things that you do." "An Army
> > > > officer wouldn't behave in this way." "A straight white male would
> > > > believe this..." etc. They're exactly identical lines of argument in
> > > > this way.-
>
> > > that wasn't sugar's argument.
>
> > Wuz too.
>
> nope, he said if you support rights for a group,
> you must be a member of that group

And if you don't act or believe in a certain way, you aren't a member
of that group.

So tell me the difference? (Hint: none)

[John[_45_]]

On Dec 15, 10:04*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> I think you nailed sugar on the "creepy" aspect, but I just became
> aware that she's also a religious whackjob in close philosophical
get some giggles on this aspartame stuff

http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i45352

> kinship with Bratzi.
>
> I suspected that sugar was a GOIA sockpuppet. Now I think it's
> possible that she's a Bratzi sockpuppet. GOIA has the religious
> whackjob stuff down cold, but that poor insane fool could not write
> his way out of a paper bag. Bratzi, the hate-mongering Nazi, can at
> least write.
>
> I'd say sugar is the creation of one or the other of them. She seems a
> perfect union of them both: not quite sane, hateful, and religious.
> She's a venomous little thing, isn't she?
>
> That's our sugar! LOL!